as Chairman, presented the Report of the Select Committee on Irrigation Matters.

Report and proceedings to be printed and considered.

as Chairman, presented the Report of the Select Committee on the subject of the Development Schemes Bill, reporting that the Committee had been unable to complete its inquiry.

Report, proceedings and evidence to be printed.

Order! Before putting clause 1, I just want to point out that the principle contained in this Bill, viz. that full legislative power with regard to South West Africa is conferred upon the State President, has already been accepted at the Second Reading, and consequently I can only allow discussion of the details of the clauses. In accordance with the practice of this House I shall, however, allow one member of each Opposition party to state his party’s standpoint on the principle briefly.

Clause 1:

Mr. Chairman, I wish to move the amendment standing in my name on the Order Paper, as follows—

The object of this amendment is to incorporate in the Bill the intention set out in the long tide. I believe it is necessary because of the Appellate Division’s decisions dealing with the interpretation of Acts. I am going to refer to only one, namely that of Bhyat v. the Commissioner for Immigration, 1932, S.A. Law Reports (A.D.) p. 129. It states that it is now settled law that in the process of ascertaining intention, it is permissible to have regard to the Act. However, it is only where a section is ambiguous that he may refer to the title to see what the legislature intended the actual scope of the section to be. I believe this legislation would be more artistic if we were to incorporate the words of the long title into the clause.

I should like to draw attention to the fact that the marginal note is incorrect. I understand we do not have to amend that. It can be done by the officials, as it is not part of legislation.

Mr. Chairman, in my opinion there is substance in the argument of the hon. the Leader of the Opposition, and for that reason I am prepared to accept his amendment. As far as the marginal note is concerned, that is a matter which will be rectified by the officials. It is not necessary to move an amendment in that connection. It is an error which unfortunately slipped in, and it will be set right.

Mr. Chairman, I move the amendment printed in my name on the Order Paper, as follows—

The effect of the clause as it is before us at the moment is of such a nature that the State President can use the powers to be given to him in order also to repeal subsections (6) and (7) of section 38, which are not being repealed in terms of this Bill. We accept that this is an extraordinary piece of legislation to meet extraordinary circumstances, as the hon. the Prime Minister has pointed out. I think he would have preferred to have dealt with this matter in a different way if he had had a choice. I do not believe it is contemplated that the safeguards contained in subsection (6) and (7) should be included in the laws which could be amended or repealed. Those safeguards are, firstly, that the proclamations which are issued under subsection (1) must be laid on the Tables of the Senate and of the House of Assembly within the period customary for this type of provision and, secondly, that certain powers are given to the Senate and the House of Assembly in terms of which they may disapprove of proclamations. That may in some cases, of course, be quite an academic issue, because certain proclamations will be irrevocable. Nevertheless, it is a safeguard Parliamentary practice does require.

Mr. Chairman, I accept that the hon. member for Yeoville wants to be helpful in this regard, and under those circumstances I am prepared to accept his amendment.

Amendments agreed to.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

House Resumed:

Bill reported with amendments.

Third Reading

Mr. Speaker, I move subject to Standing Order No. 56—

Mr. Speaker, this is legislation designed to give rapid and immediate effect to the results of what we hope will be consensus in respect of the resolution of the problem of South West Africa, a problem which has been so worrying for such a long time. I am sure that in the efforts to find a solution, the people of all races in South West Africa, who have been working together so co-operatively, have the good wishes of everybody. I am sure, too, that the hon. the Prime Minister appreciates the gravity of this problem and the tremendous necessity for a quick solution, because of the results it may have in other diplomatic spheres, quite apart from bringing, we hope, peace and happiness to several hundreds of thousands of people who have been under the mandateship of South Africa for a long time, certainly under its control for many, many years. It is in this spirit that we have raised no objection to this Bill and shall support the Third Reading.

Mr. Speaker, …

We want Hany! We want Harry!

Order!

Mr. Speaker, I feel obliged to comment briefly on the reference made by the hon. the Prime Minister in his Second Reading speech to an article which appeared in a recent issue of Deurbraak. That article was written by Mr. Serfontein. He is also the author of the book Namibia? I want to eliminate any misunderstanding by making it perfectly clear that the article reflects Mr. Serfontein’s own opinion and not that of the PRP. [Interjections.] Many hon. members have copies of Deurbraak. The object of this publication is not to state party-political opinions. Where party opinions are stated, there is a formula as to how this is to be done. In this recent issue, for example, one finds on the back page: “PRP se standpunt: Meerder-heidsregering is ’n simplistiese slagspreuk”. Deurbraak is a publication in which opinions may be aired in the interests of open discussion.

The object of the publication is to afford experts, authorities and other people who want to comment on matters in various spheres, the opportunity to state their opinions on current affairs. People who want to criticize some party, may do so in the columns of this journal. In this particular issue, for example, one has articles by Prof. Jan Moolman, Dr. Allen Boesak and Prof. F. A. van Jaarsveld. They are not spokesmen for the PRP. Letters are also published in the magazine. I want to make particular reference to the article by Mr. Hennie Serfontein which is extremely critical of the PRP. Criticism is expressed throughout the article on the attitude of the PRP and our opinion that the Turnhalle has made and is capable of making a major contribution to the independence of South West Africa. In the article he says—

Order! The hon. member has made his point clear, and I do not think he need pursue the matter.

Mr. Speaker, then I presume that this House accepts that this is not the standpoint of the PRP but that of the writer of the article. [Interjections.]

†Mr. Speaker, none of us will deny that this piece of legislation is far-reaching. It involves us all in a situation of great emotion. This Bill will pave the way to the ending of a unique association between the sovereign South Africa and the people of South West Africa, an association extending back over 60 years. By the end of next year we will see the end of the direct association between this Parliament and South West Africa when the six representatives of South West African constituencies will leave this Parliament.

The Second Reading debate revealed that there were differences of opinion over the handling of the situation in the past and the policies that had been applied. I want to make it quite clear that once this Bill has been passed—and it is about to be passed—the formal machinery for independence for South West Africa will have been set in motion and that this process will become irreversible. In these circumstances, once this Bill is passed, past differences over the handling of South West Africa or the policies applied in the past will become less important than the future prospects of a peaceful and independent South West Africa. I hope that this will be the situation once this Bill is passed.

We acknowledge that on the shoulders of the executive—especially because this legislation removes the jurisdiction of this Parliament for all practical purposes—rests a very heavy responsibility, a responsibility which embraces not only independence for South West Africa, but could also affect the question of peace for all of us in Southern Africa. There are going to be difficult issues that will have to be resolved. We have mentioned a few of them, e.g. the issue of citizenship, etc. Nevertheless, I want to express the view, on behalf of those in these benches, that despite the differences we have with the Government on issues relating to policies inside South Africa, we hope, in the light of the fact that we are in the irrevocable process of moving towards independence for South West Africa, that in consultation with the people of South West Africa and in co-operation with those in the West who are trying to help us, the executive is going to find it possible to take the preliminary steps to lead South West Africa to independence before the end of next year.

We remain jealous of this Parliament. I believe all members of Parliament do. In spite of the fact that South African sovereignty—in the formal sense—does not extend over South West Africa, we are the sovereign Parliament of this country and this country is going to remain the administrative power in South West Africa until South West Africa attains independence. We are pleased that the hon. the Prime Minister has accepted an amendment on a matter raised by me during the Second Reading debate. It will have the effect that reports will come to Parliament and that Parliament will have the right to disapprove. We realize, however, that there are practical obstacles, should final decisions be taken prior to the meeting of Parliament. We also note the statement the hon. the Prime Minister made in replying to the hon. member for Simonstown. He said that he anticipated that any final legislation leading to the independence of South West Africa, would indeed come to this House. We believe that would be an appropriate procedure and we hope that what the hon. the Prime Minister said he believed was the case would in fact be the case.

During the Second Reading debate we indicated that we want to see the peoples of the South West African territory independent, we want to see the peoples of South West Africa living at peace with one another, and we hope that they will also be living at peace with their neighbours in Southern Africa. We support the Third Reading of the Bill.

Mr. Speaker, as we indicated yesterday, we regard the Bill as a delicate matter. We ourselves would have preferred an entirely different Bill and an entirely different end to the administration of South West Africa by South Africa. We can think of many other ways in which the administration of South West Africa by South Africa could have ended on a note more beneficial to the people of South West Africa. We would like to place on record our appreciation of the work that has been done by all the delegates of all the racial groups in South West Africa during the Turnhalle conference. We regret very much that the proposal of the Turnhalle, that there should be an interim Government, has not been able to be accepted. We would, however, like to record our appreciation of the excellent work done by those people. In the third place we would like to place on record, during this Third Reading debate, our appreciation of the administration by our country of the territory of South West Africa. Furthermore we hope, as the hon. the Prime Minister indicated yesterday, that there will be an opportunity for the final constitution for South West Africa to be brought back to Parliament for approval.

Sir, we support the Bill and we wish the peoples of South West Africa all success for the future.

Mr. Speaker, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition quite correctly stated that there should now be a quick solution to this problem. I might add in passing that I stressed that very firmly myself when I had discussions with the five Western Powers. I can give the House the assurance that if there is any dragging of feet, it will not be through a fault on the part of South Africa. On the contrary, we will at all times insist that matters be expedited.

*With regard to the hon. member for Sea Point, Mr. Speaker, you will allow me to make a single reference in reply to his defence with regard to the article by Serfontein. Now the hon. member has dissociated himself from Serfontein. For the sake of Parliament, I am pleased that he has done so. Nevertheless, the question occurs to me whether this publication of the PRP has space available for every subverter of South Africa to state his point of view. [Interjections.] Is there no obligation on the editor or on the party not to make their publication available to traitors, if I may put it that way?

As regards the hon. member’s further point of view, I think the hon. member has reflected on his outburst of yesterday. Just see how smoothly things went today, and that with a very tricky amendment. For what it may be worth, I put the following suggestion to the hon. member, that he should seriously ask himself, when it comes to such delicate matters, whether he is temperamentally and otherwise equipped to deal with them or whether there are not other hon. members of his party capable of dealing with the matter more fruitfully. [Interjections.]

Harry!

I thank hon. members for their contributions and support. I thank the hon. member for Simonstown and all other members who conveyed their good wishes to the peoples of South West Africa. I gladly associate myself with them. I am grateful for the fact that the whole House has given its blessing to this step and that I shall henceforth have the support of all four Opposition parties. It gladdens me that the people of South West Africa, too, may have that knowledge now.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a Third Time.

Mr. Speaker, I move—

Agreed to.

Mr. Speaker, I move—

Agreed to.

Mr. Chairman, may I ask for the privilege of the half hour.

In the course of this discussion we on this side of the House will give the hon. the Minister and his department credit where credit is due to them and also to local authorities where they have co-operated in matters of housing. At the same time we will criticize where we believe criticism is warranted. Under this vote we deal with the basic needs of Whites, Coloureds and Indians, needs which are the responsibility of the hon. the Minister. We shall have to deal with difficult problems, problems which are made more difficult by financial stringency which pertains today. I have known the hon. the Minister long enough and know him well enough to ask him this afternoon to deal with these matters in a similar way, and not to overreact to criticism, as he did when dealing with a previous debate last Friday, when there was criticism of certain aspects of the work of his department relating to Indians.

You can trust me to respond to responsibility on your part.

I trust the hon. the Minister will respond to my responsibility.

I wish to deal first of all, by way of a series of questions to the hon. the Minister, with the position of the squatters, particularly at Modderdam Road. I do not propose to discuss the issue of squatters as I believe we have had adequate opportunity during the session to air our views on this particular problem. In February this year the estimate of the University of Stellenbosch was that there were some 200 000 Black and Brown squatters in the Cape Peninsula area. The report of the Secretary of the Department confirms that there were 21 700 squatter shacks in existence. I think the country expects from the hon. the Minister what I might term a progress report, to indicate to us and the country how many Blacks and how many Coloureds have been rehoused from the squatter camps, particularly from Modderdam Road. I ask him to deal with the Black situation, because he will know from the demolition of shacks how many squatters have been rehoused. I ask this because we have had silence from the hon. Ministers responsible for the rehousing of Blacks. We want to know how many shacks have been demolished and we would also like him to indicate to us what progress has been made with regard to the core housing schemes to which he referred earlier this session, which are to provide an emergency plan for housing. I shall leave the squatter question at that with those questions, and I hope that the hon. the Minister will deal with them in due course.

I now wish to pass to the question of housing in so far as the Coloured people are concerned. I want to say immediately that as far as Coloured housing is concerned I believe that congratulations and commendation are due to the department which, together with the co-operation it has received from local authorities, has made meaningful progress in regard to housing for Coloureds.

I need only refer to the fact that in 1974 8 278 dwelling units were built, whereas in 1976, according to the report, that figure had doubled to 17 897. Unfortunately it has been necessary to use 25% of these units, directly or indirectly, to rehouse 4 383 Coloured families who have been moved under the Group Areas Act. Nevertheless, it is a creditable performance. I want to know from the hon. the Minister whether he can assure us that this tempo will continue. Correctly, the Secretary of the Department has reported that amounts voted by Parliament have hardly accommodated the increased building costs as far as housing is concerned. It is interesting to note that the average from 1957 to 1975 of funds made available to the National Housing Fund was R78 million per annum. In 1976 the figure was R85,5 million. I am sure that that figure of R85,5 million can certainly not provide the same number of units as the average provided over the previous period to which I have referred.

Recently the concept of new towns, which we have advocated from this side of the House for many years, has become a reality. We have in Atlantis and in Mitchell’s Plain examples of this new town concept. There is, however, a danger of Mitchell’s Plain developing into a dormitory area and not a new town and in this connection I wish to refer to two matters. The first is the lack of adequate transport facilities for the inhabitants of Mitchell’s Plain. There seems to be no action, no planning, or no start in regard to railway facilities to Mitchell’s Plain from Cape Town. I see from comment made by persons who are concerned with the possibility of providing a bus service that if there is no railway service the bus company will require no less than 350 buses to be able to cope with the transport of the people from Mitchell’s Plain to their places of employment. The second point which I want to refer to in regard to Mitchell’s Plain—and I hope that the hon. the Minister will be able to give some clarification—is that the pamphlet that was issued in regard to Mitchell’s Plain indicates a very substantial industrial area, which is essential to any new town concept in order to provide work opportunities in proximity to the town. I understand that there is some difficulty in regard to the incorporation of that industrial area within the area of jurisdiction of the Cape Town municipality, which is responsible for Mitchell’s Plain.

This has resulted in some negotiations between that local authority and the adjoining local authority. I would like to have an assurance from the hon. the Minister that there will be no delay in the development of the industrial area of Mitchell’s Plain and that the matter will be attended to on the same basis as the priority attention which has been given to the development of the industrial area as far as Atlantis is concerned.

One is interested to see from the documentation that has been made available by the department that this new town concept is now also being extended to the Transvaal with the development of Ennerdale. There is also reference in the report to a number of urban renewal schemes. Most of these, if not all, are merely dormitory schemes and do not come within the concept of the new town planning.

The Secretary in his report states that witnesses before the Cillié Commission testified one after the other that the shortage of housing was one of the most important causes of unrest. This is true and I am glad that it is a position that is recognized by the department.

It is also true that little or no unrest occurred amongst the Coloured population in home ownership areas. Give a man a home, preferably one he owns, and he becomes involved in the maintenance of law and order. He has something to value which he will endeavour to protect. I would like the hon. the Minister to indicate to us what further schemes are envisaged, especially in the new town concept, to cope with the need for this type of development and decentralization, particularly as far as the Coloured people are concerned. We would like to know whether new towns are being contemplated, apart from the establishment of further dormitory areas in the Western Cape.

I also want to thank the hon. the Minister for the interest which he has shown in regard to the curbing of building deterioration or decay. I only regret that local authorities have not co-operated with the department to the extent that one would have expected them to do. Thousands, if not millions, of rands can be saved if the life and usability of existing dwellings in old parts of cities can be extended and urban decay prevented by timeous repairs and renovations. One should recall that as far back as 1971 the Department of Community Development issued a circular to local authorities requesting them to do surveys of this nature and to report on those surveys to the department to see what could be done to prevent urban decay. It appears that there has been little or no response to the circulars which have gone to local authorities throughout the country. It is necessary today to appeal to ratepayers’ associations in the various towns to interest themselves in the question of urban decay and to take a little more active interest in prodding the local authorities to deal with these matters.

I do not propose to deal further with the question of Coloured housing other than what I have said so far. Other speakers may have local problems which they will raise with the hon. the Minister.

The housing of Whites has now taken on a different emphasis, if I may put it that way. The problem has to a very great extent moved from the availability of housing to the cost of housing. That is the difficulty as far as Whites are concerned, particularly those with fixed incomes and those in the lower income groups. There are three serious factors which I believe are contributing to this difficulty. The one is that the rate of increase in the cost of building is exceeding the average rate of increase in income of the persons who are desirous of obtaining housing.

The second point is the withdrawal of the bond interest subsidy which occurred this year, and the third point is the effect of the application of the Rents Act which is now being felt, especially now that there is a slump in building prices.

I should now like to refer to the first point, i.e. in relation to building costs. From 1970 to 1976, according to the Department of Statistics, the average cost of houses increased by 74%, which is an extraordinarily heavy burden for people who are restricted to a fixed income. Since then there has been a further escalation in the cost of bricks, cement and other items which are used for housing.

In so far as the withdrawal of the bond interest subsidy is concerned, let me say that one appreciates the fact that the hon. the Minister of Finance has said that this is a financial saving and that it therefore had to be considered. I doubt, however, whether it was wise on balance because the security and settlement of family life are surely more important than the saving which I believe will be something in the region of R200 000 per annum. It is, however, depriving numbers of people of just that little extra to enable them to acquire a home.

As far as the Rents Act is concerned, the problem is a continuing one, the problem of the right of the investor to a reasonable return and the need to provide housing to the middle and lower fixed income groups at a reasonable cost. Since the 1975 amendment, however, we have had the phenomenon that there was immediately a spate of applications for increases. After 1975 the cost of reconstruction or replacement became a factor and market prices became a factor, and rentals were set at inflated values although then actual market values. However, now that those market values have decreased, there is certainly no benefit accruing to tenants, because the tenants are still bound to pay their rentals on highly inflated values. One of the hon. members on this side will give instances to the hon. the Minister to indicate the extent of the problem. What I am concerned about is the following. Whereas the hon. the Minister was, last year, able to give the House an indication of the percentage increase in rents—a figure which he gave as 23,32%—when he was asked a similar question this year, he replied that such statistics were not kept. I want to suggest to the hon. the Minister that that is an omission on the part of his department. I think it is vitally necessary that statistics should be kept, and kept for all time, in regard to this matter. In reply to question 727 in col. 962 on Wednesday, 27 April 1977, the hon. the Minister stated—

He was responding to a question by the hon. member for Sea Point. I do believe that the hon. the Minister must remedy that situation as far as his department is concerned.

I now want to come to the final point that I want to raise with the hon. the Minister. I refer to the vexed problem relating to permits. It is a problem which the hon. the Minister himself conceded a year ago was a matter which was causing him some concern. I want to speak, in particular, about permits for sporting events, entertainments and public amenities such as restaurants and the right of persons to use those amenities. If there is a policy, after the 12 months in which this has been considered, I can only say that it is a policy of confusion more confounded than we have ever had in the past.

The hon. the Minister of Sport and Recreation was being quite clear when, in the debate on his Vote, he said that as far as he was concerned it was obvious that if one could do without a permit, it would be much better. He refused to call it a permit system and said that he was trying to get away from it as it was not necessary to have permits. We welcome this attitude. I want to remind the hon. the Minister of what he said last year. The hon. the Minister said: “I think the Cabinet Committee can go into the laying down of norms and the laying of general principles, but we cannot permit this to be continued on an ad hoc basis because it causes confusion and distress.” As I said last year, I welcome that sentiment. But what has in fact happened? According to the report, his department during this year has had to deal with a vast number of applications for permits. The figure is some 5 036 applications of which 484 were refused. Almost all, if not all of those which were refused dealt with the personal occupation by unqualified persons of a house or something of that nature. If the Government is not prepared to exempt all sports stadiums—and the hon. the Minister knows that I have grounds like Newlands, Kingsmead and others like that in mind—and theatres and restaurants, from the need to obtain permits, can he not delegate that power to local authorities to advise him on those matters? After all, he consults the hon. the Minister of Bantu Administration and Development on Bantu cases and he consults the hon. the Minister of Sport and Recreation about sport permits. I do believe that if the hon. the Minister would merely refer these matters instead to the local authorities, the whole matter would work more advantageously. The hon. the Minister shakes his head. Let me refer him to the Cape Town Festival. The city council of Cape Town was able to arrange a festival, and there were in excess of 200 functions and entertainments arranged by them. Not one of them was subject to a race restriction of any sort.

Are you sure?

Those were the ones arranged by the Cape Town city council and the festival committee.

[Inaudible.]

I will come to the hon. member for Vasco. There were two functions which were restricted. They were not arranged by the Cape Town festival committee although they were on the festival programme. I would now like to deal with those two functions. The one was a fundraising function on behalf of Army Fund organized by the Southern Cross Fund. Arrangements had gone on for a long period and it was to be a prestige function for fund-raising and not merely for entertainment. The other one was the Bierfest at the Drill Hall. I think that it is necessary that this House should take cognizance of the fuss that was made over this Bierfest. I obtained information from the organizer of the festival, Mr. Elkan Green himself. On the first night 10 Coloured persons arrived at that Bierfest. While they were there a representative of the police called at the Bierfest and pointed out that the licence which had been granted to the organizers was for Whites only. He then agreed, after representations had been made by Mr. Green, that the Coloureds who were there could stay there as he did not want to cause a disturbance. This was a responsible way of dealing with the matter. Mr. Green then undertook that he himself would be at the entrance door the following night to deal with any persons who came and were disqualified from entering and he would handle the matter. Mr. Green assures me that only six Coloured persons arrived the whole evening while he was at the door. As far as those six were concerned, he told them that it was a function arranged by a commercial concern, and on behalf of the city council presented them with tickets for the Tavern of the Seas in Adderley Street and told them to go there and enjoy themselves without having to pay admission. Despite the fact that there were only six Coloureds, the Press suddenly reported that they were being inundated with complaints. This matter then became a major issue when in fact—and, as I say, I have this information from Mr. Green himself—there were only six Coloured persons there on that particular night. I mention this because it is true that there are those who will say this should not have been restricted but that it should have been an open function. I want to say at the same time that as far as the Cape Town city council is concerned, every function that it organized in connection with the festival was free of restriction as regards race admission.

Except for certain liquor outlets.

They had the liquor outlet in Adderley Street. It was open to everybody. It was called the Tavern of the Seas. Cabinet Ministers enjoyed the company which was there and there was no trouble. I want to say to the hon. the Minister that throughout that period, when Cape Town reverted to its customary way of managing civic affairs as far as its population is concerned, there was no trouble. What is unfortunate is that while that old civic spirit of this city was revived, tested and proved, an attack on the mayor, who was chairman of the festival, came from certain political quarters. I want to say that this House and in fact the whole of the Republic is indebted to the festival committee and in particular to the mayor of Cape Town, Alderman John Tyers, for the lead which he took in this matter.

The attacks which were made upon him following these two functions, were most unwarranted in the circumstances.

I want to revert to the question I have put to the hon. the Minister with regard to permits. May this truth in practice not convince him, the Cabinet Committee or the Government of the wisdom of regulating these matters at local level and having regard to local opinion? It has been proved as far as Cape Town is concerned. If I may use a colleague’s expression in regard to other activities, I want to suggest to the hon. the Minister that he must as soon as possible normalize the use of the amenities of the type to which I have referred for the people, the citizens of Cape Town. He must normalize them in such a way that people can mix and make use of these facilities, because it will then give meaning to the Government’s proposed intent of doing away with discrimination.

I want to say to the hon. the Minister in particular that we cannot now have that state of uncertainty which he deprecated 12 months ago, continue another day longer in this situation as far as the issuing of permits is concerned. I hope the hon. the Minister will be able to give us more of an indication than The Cape Times gave us this morning of what has been discussed in the Cabinet Committee. The report in The Cape Times was rather superficial. I hope the hon. the Minister will give us more details as to where he and the Government are going in regard to this matter of permits.

Mr. Chairman, I do not want to react to the very constructive and interesting speech made by the hon. member for Green Point now. I think that we should like to hear more about the Opposition’s standpoint.

I am just rising to make a short announcement in connection with the income limits which are being laid down as requirements for obtaining sub-economic and economic housing. I am doing this in case there are hon. members who want to raise the matter, so that they will therefore know beforehand what the position is.

As hon. members know, the sub-economic income limit for qualifying for aid from the National Housing Funds, is R200 per month at the moment for White, Coloured and Asian families, while the economic income limit is as follows—

For Coloureds and Asian families, irrespective of the number of children, it is R400 per month at the moment.

A differential interest rate of 3½% per year holds for rented properties financed from the National Housing Fund for White, Coloured and Asian families where the monthly income of the breadwinner is between R200 and R250. Furthermore the income level for admission of single people to youth centres is as follows—

The National Housing Commission reconsidered the abovementioned income levels on 8 June 1977—this is why the announcement is only being made now—and after careful consideration, and having regard to the present economic circumstances and the heavy burden which the sub-economic income level places on the Housing Fund by way of subsidization, the Commission decided to reduce the sub-economic income level for families of all three population groups to R150 per month.

Furthermore the commission decided that the differential interest rate of 3½% on families of the abovementioned three population groups would apply in the income categories from R150 to R250 per month.

As far as the economic income level is concerned, it was decided that the levels which hold for Whites at the moment, would also apply to the Coloured and Asian groups. The limit for admission to youth centres for all three population groups is put on a par at R300 per month per person. The new income limits have already been approved by my colleague, the Minister of Finance, as required by the Housing Act, and will apply as from today.

Mr. Chairman, naturally we have not yet had an opportunity to look at the hon. the Minister’s statement and study the full implications of it. I nevertheless believe that as far the adjustment of the sub-economic level is concerned, it is a very necessary one because with the limited admission requirements for sub-economic housing schemes we find that an increasing number of unbalanced communities are developing, which one wants to avoid at all costs. In view of this, the hon. the Minister’s announcement is welcomed.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Green Point initially spoke in a very constructive way today. I felt that I could agree with him to a large extent, even in connection with what he had to say about rent control. But that was as far as it went, in the sense that the hon. member once again fell into the annual temptation of making his usual complaints about permits, to try in this way to score a minor political point again. He has made a habit of raising this matter every year. Similarly, we have seized upon this opportunity every year to make it very clear to him what the policy of the NP is in this regard and to point out the development in that sphere.

It was and still is the policy of the NP that there should be control over the attendance by other colour groups of presentations, whether in a theatre, a hall or some other place. Our policy is that such attendance may be allowed in specific cases, but that it must also be regulated by means of permits. This is the first guideline in the policy of the NP. The second guideline is that the attendance should take place at the recommendation of the management concerned and with the permission of the Minister concerned. The hon. member feels aggrieved by this. His objection boils down to the fact that the granting of permits takes place on an ad hoc basis. He says that there should be a principle of policy which can be applied when it comes to issuing permits. Surely it is obvious that the hon. the Minister will do this in terms of specific principles and it is just as obvious that a specific set of circumstances can have a different result in different places, depending on the community concerned. That is why it is not so illogical to me that similar applications are investigated separately on their merits. Where separation promotes good order and eliminates more racial friction than it causes, it is only logical that separation should be maintained. When separation no longer achieves its original objectives of promoting sound relations in a specific sphere, however, and where it will then cause more serious friction in specific cases than it is supposed to prevent, separation can circumspectly be removed, as is in fact being done already—indeed, there have been times when the hon. member has referred to this with appreciation. Another very important factor is whether there are equal alternative facilities available for other colour groups. The merit of the so-called ad hoc decision is that every application is judged on its own merits and that this is done mostly at Cabinet level. Surely the Cabinet Committee to which the hon. the Minister referred last year, has already considered this matter in this interim period. I assume that there have already been discussions with the private sector, specifically with the entertainment industry. But there are no easy solutions to this matter.

I accept that it is the right of the various cultural groups to isolate themselves from time to time in the practice of their culture. It is a right which I demand for myself and similarly it is a right which I believe any other cultural group may demand for itself. If this is not the case, it is blatant discrimination as far as I am concerned. If one adopts that standpoint, it is quite obvious that a general rule cannot be laid down.

If we want to see a big mess, we must leave this matter to be dealt with by theatre managers and local authorities. The primary task of the entertainment industry is to make a profit and not to concern itself about sound relations or overturning the existing order. Since the whole situation is so delicate, we cannot allow this matter to be handled with clumsy fingers. After all, the Government cannot shift its responsibility onto the local authorities, as the hon. member proposed here once again today. Because it is a difficult task, one dare not wash one’s hands of it. If the public outside wanted the situation to be dealt with as the hon. member has proposed today, the hon. member would have been on this side of the House and we would have been on the other as a result of the way in which we handled the matter. What is happening now? It is clear that even that party’s time to oppose is running out.

The hon. member also referred to the Cape Festival. The circumstances of the Cape Festival were entirely different in the sense that it was not a recurring, constant event, but a festival occasion. The hon. member is now making out that tremendous numbers of people attended the festival. People are not forced to attend festive occasions, but the hon. member wants to carry that integration to places where people are forced to go. That is the whole difference.

A new thing which is now beginning to emerge, is that requests are also being made for mixed audiences at the presentation of film premieres. The situation in regard to cinemas is not comparable with a situation such as that of the Nico Malan theatre. No case can be made out for mixed cinema audiences in our urban areas, because in the urban areas there are cinema facilities in almost every residential area. Where these facilities are not available, we must help to create them.

After all, I have the right to ask the Opposition parties what their standpoint in regard to cinema shows is. What is the standpoint of the hon. member for Green Point in this regard? Must the cinemas be opened to all races?

The owner of every cinema can decide for himself.

Surely I am being fair when I ask the hon. member what his standpoint is in this regard. Can he answer the question without trying to avoid it by shifting the responsibility onto the local authorities?

I have already said that the owner of the cinema can decide himself.

Sir, you see now how the hon. member is arguing and trying to evade the question. This is the situation in which we find ourselves. We are now arguing about a matter in regard to which there are few problems, while we have to hold a debate on a vote which deals basically with housing.

I have sympathy with the hon. member for Green Point, because he has become sterile in the capacity of opposing. One can understand that the ideal in him is dying. The greatest ideal which that party has today, is to die, and it seems as if they cannot even do that. As the hon. member said, we have already discussed housing on various occasions during the past session, and I do not want to go into this any further, because some of my colleagues on this side of the House will discuss it.

The hon. member referred to the position of Coloured housing with great appreciation, but some of my colleagues will take this matter further.

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

Mr. Chairman, I am just rising to give the hon. member for Tygervallei an opportunity to complete his speech.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the hon. member for Mooi River for the opportunity which he has given me. The fact is that it has become imperative that the Coloured community be actively and productively involved in this phenomenal effort. I believe our Coloured community is willing, if the necessary initial assistance is available, to make a meaningful contribution themselves towards satisfying the housing requirements of their own community.

Therefore I want to express a few ideas today in connection with the Peninsula Community Association in particular, in order to indicate what the position of Coloured utility companies is in general. PCA is a registered utility company; in other words, their objectives do not include any profit-making. The company was recently established with the aid and through the mediation of the Department of Community Development and Citizen’s Housing League. The company has a primarily Coloured group character, because its board of directors is made up of seven Coloured and four White members, of which the hon. the Minister appoints one White member. The main objective of this company is to provide the Coloured community with low-cost housing and community facilities.

The Citizen’s Housing League, a White utility company, is still assisting with the administration of the PCA at this stage, and Coloured staff will be trained to enable them, eventually, to deal with the management and administration of the company themselves. Progress has, however, been made in the sense that the PCA is already negotiating with the Department of Community Development, the Cape Town City Council and the Divisional Council of the Cape for the acquisition of land and funds for the construction of various housing schemes. Funds are also being mobilized with the aid of the private sector by means of employers, building societies and welfare organizations. Amongst the organizations there is also the recently established Urban Foundation. A start has already been made with the planning of various projects, inter alia at Belhar, Mitchell’s Plain, Bishop Lavis, etc. The assistance of the National Housing Commission will be required for financing the projects.

The board of directors of PCA has adopted a strong standpoint in a policy in favour of home ownership. I want to qualify the standpoint immediately, however. Where sub-economic leasing schemes are carried out, the board of directors aims at enabling responsible tenants to purchase the houses themselves as soon as possible. In order to indicate how strong the desire for home ownership amongst the Coloureds is, one can mention that 13% of all the requests which were received by the Cape Town municipality during 1976-’77 from Coloureds who wished to purchase their own houses came from people who were earning less than the present sub-economic level of R200 per month.

A stumbling-block in the way of more general home-ownership is, however, that the interest amounts to 9¼% per year as soon as the house has eventually been bought, while the interest rate for sub-economic letting units amounts to only 1% per year. I want to advocate seriously to the hon. the Minister today that the department should investigate methods to narrow this tremendous gap in order to encourage greater home-ownership. In the case of letting schemes—the hon. the Minister also referred to this in his declaration—there is in fact an intermediate interest rate of 3½%. In particular I want to ask him whether it is not possible for the interest rate of 3½% per year to be extended to the group of houses to which I referred. It is already the department’s policy that sub-economic letting units can be bought. Now, our local authorities are apparently not yet serious enough about transforming our letting schemes in such a way that they can be sold. Of course—and I concede this—there must always be a preponderant quota of letting units, because we are dealing with a large population of lessees. Nevertheless, there is a large percentage of these homes which can in fact be sold. The Cape Town City Council has calculated, for example, that if only 10 000 of the existing 70 000 sub-economic houses can be sold to Coloureds at an average of R3 000—that is, of course, if the interest rate can be adjusted—the additional income for the National Housing Commission will be sufficient to build another 500 low-cost living units at the present cost every year.

The Department of Community Development can play a very important role in supporting this Coloured utility company. We are already certain of the support of the department in this regard. So far all Coloured accommodation has been handled either by the Department or by the White utility companies. Now, however, for the first time, there is a Coloured group which qualifies for financing by the National Housing Commission, a group which is willing and eager to undertake the establishment of housing projects. This is a potentially important contribution by the Coloureds themselves. Therefore, they deserve all the possible support of the department. The Department of Community Development and the National Housing Commission can be particularly helpful through the sympathetic consideration of requests for the financing of proposed housing schemes. They can also be helped by encouraging local authorities to make land available. Furthermore, in cases where it has such land, the department could also make it available for this purpose.

It must be remembered that today the PCA is in a similar position to that of the Citizen’s Housing League which was formed in 1929. The PCA is already active in making accommodation available to poor Whites in the urban areas. Therefore, PCA is in the same position as that in which the Citizen’s Housing League was at the time. The Citizen’s Housing League also began with nothing and could only get started by means of considerable donations of land by the State and by other bodies. The reason for this is that these utility companies have no shareholding and are non-profit making organizations. That is why they need a great deal of help to begin with.

Another important advantage which can be brought about by the growth of this organization, is the training and experience which can be gained in housing management and housing development by the Coloured staff. This knowledge will be required on a much larger scale within the foreseeable future, when local authorities are formed for Coloureds. It is even possible that organizations such as PCA can act as a central housing agency in the interests of the various Coloured local authorities which are foreseen for the future, especially in the Cape metropolitan area.

The Peninsula College for Advanced Technical Education already offers a certificate course in housing administration. Unfortunately it is not as yet a very intensive course, in this sense that it takes place on a part-time basis only and extends over a period of two years. I am convinced that there is already a need for a diploma course on a full-time basis, but the Department of Community Development can create the necessary stimulous amongst Coloureds by allocating greater functions to these utility companies so that they may become very much more involved. We believe that this is where the solution to the problem of involving the Coloureds much more in their own housing lies. So far, Coloured housing has primarily been the function of the State.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Tygervallei started off in the first part of his speech by giving the hon. member for Green Point a little lesson on what the Government’s standpoint on the use of separate facilities or communal facilities really is. It was an interesting debate which has been conducted during this session from the Government side.

On the one hand we had those who argued that it was the policy that one should create separate, equal facilities for the various groups and on the other hand it was the standpoint that differential admission to the same amenity on the basis of race should be done away with. These are two different conceptions of moving away from discrimination and the hon. member for Tygervallei relied on the first, namely that it is the actual policy of the Government that equal, separate amenities should be created. Of course that is not true. The Separate Amenities Act clearly determines, specifically in the section under discussion, that if such separate amenities are created, they do not have to be equal in quality.

There is no such Act.

There is no law which determines that it may happen. I do not actually want to enter the quagmire of thinking on separate amenities, because it does not make sense to any right-minded person in any case. [Interjections.]

I want to return to the problem of the housing shortage. The report mentions this and it is also alleged that the housing shortage was one of the most important causes of the recent riots.

Where do you find that?

Hon. members ask : “Where do I find it?” I think they are mindless slaves of their own ignorance. It is stated in the report itself. On page 26 it is stated that—

The report also states—

This is stated in the report of the department itself. At least the report of the department reflects how seriously they treat the matter. Of course, this shortage affects all population groups, but most particularly the Coloured, the Asian and the Black population groups. I personally believe that the shortage of Black housing is going to become one of the most serious problems in the future. But since this is not the responsibility of the Minister of Community Development, I want to concentrate on the problem of the housing shortage, amongst the Coloured population in particular.

In this regard I want to concentrate especially on two problems by putting specific questions to the Minister. The one is the calculation of the housing shortage. I should like to have a little more information from the hon. the Minister about how this shortage is calculated and secondly, the quality of the housing which is being provided, against the background of this shortage.

If we look at the calculation of the housing shortage, we see that the report itself states that in the Cape Town area alone there was a shortage of almost 36 000 family units for the Coloured population. Once again, what are the indications which the department used in order to calculate the shortage of 36 000 units? I just want to ask whether certain factors have been taken into consideration. Naturally, and as it is stated in the report, the natural growth rate of the population is taken into consideration as a factor. One can understand this. Another factor which is also taken into consideration, is the existing waiting lists of the various local authorities or the various bodies or persons responsible for providing accommodation. I should like to know, however, from the hon. the Minister whether in the third place, the whole question of over-population cannot also be looked at. In that case there is a hidden shortage of housing. The whole question of over-population must be taken into consideration because there are for example young people, young married couples who still live with their parents. There are also old people who keep on living in a house. We also find that a large number of families live in the same house. Unless one makes a thorough study of or obtains information about the nature and extent of over-population in the existing residential areas, one will experience problems in calculating the actual housing shortage.

Another factor which must be taken into consideration, is the question of squatting. The names of people who are squatting may be on the waiting list, but many of them have not put their names on the waiting list. How is one going to determine whose names have actually been placed on the waiting list and whose names do not appear on it? A fifth factor is the question of migration to the urban areas. I know that with his legislation on squatting over the past two sessions, the hon. the Minister has tried to bring about a subtle form of influx control as far as the Coloured population is concerned, so that they cannot move to the established industrial areas.

I want to suggest that these five factors, which are interdependent, must be taken into consideration if one wants to get a real idea, a more reliable picture, of what the real housing shortage is. I should like to hear from the hon. the Minister to what degree these factors are being taken into consideration when the housing shortage is calculated. If one does not have a figure which is as reliable as possible, as far as the actual housing shortage is concerned, one can experience problems with one’s planning for the provision of housing. One can have injudicious capital expenditure as a result, and of course what is more serious, one can stir up feelings. The people become frustrated because the goals of the Government as far as building programmes for the provision of housing are concerned, are paralysed simply because information concerning the actual shortage of housing is not obtained in a reliable way. This is the first general problem which I want to put to the hon. the Minister.

The second problem is the quality of the houses which are provided. In this connection I have in mind that it is absolutely essential for housing which is provided by the State, by the department, to take into account the socioeconomic means of the population to which it is being provided. This is a point which is particularly emphasized in the Erika Theron Report, namely that it is no use building houses for people who cannot afford them. I think the department is aware of this, because on page 11 of its report, the following is stated under the heading “Laekostebehuising”—

I welcome the fact that core houses are being experimented with. All I want to know from the hon. the Minister is: How much progress has there been with these experimental core houses? What standards will be taken into consideration when alterations are made to these core houses? I assume—it also seems so from the report—that the department is now thinking of allowing the inhabitants to make improvements themselves at a later stage once the core house has been provided, although these improvements will take place under supervision. What does the department have in mind here? What is the nature of the supervision? For instance, will standards be laid down as far as the material which must be used is concerned, etc.? I believe that if a form of core house is provided, it is eventually going to solve the problem as far as housing requirements for the Coloureds and the Blacks are concerned. I really hope that the department will be successful in its experimenting with this form of house. We must bear in mind that the Theron Report repeatedly made the point that, for instance in the Cape Peninsula, the average income of 50% of the economically active Coloureds is less than R100 per month. This gives one an idea of how much of that R100 may be spent on housing provided by the State. The cheaper and stronger this type of house, and the more people can assume responsibility for them themselves, the easier it is going to be to come to eliminating the housing shortage.

Mr. Chairman, basically I have no fault to find with the essence of the speech of the hon. member for Ron-debosch. It seems to me as if he is also beginning to realize what an extensive problem our Government is faced with when it comes to squatters and the housing of our Coloureds. For a large percentage of those people, it is virtually impossible for one to give them any type of house which they can afford.

Of course, the socio-economic problem of the Coloureds does not make it easy for the department and the Government to provide accommodation. Therefore I cannot find fault with the ideas which the hon. member expressed here, except to say that when it comes to low-cost housing of course, and one talks about things like core houses, etc., it is all very well, but on the other hand one must also guard against removing people from slum conditions and creating slum conditions elsewhere. This is the reason why the department has always been very careful when it comes to determining standards for accommodation, even for the lowest income groups in our communities.

I do not want to discuss the remarks which the hon. member made at the beginning of his speech now. These are not things which we can talk to one another about, because hon. members on that side of the House and ourselves differ basically on separate residential areas. Separate residential areas is one of the cornerstones on which the National Party and the policy of the Government is built. These are very closely concerned with the maintenance of their various identities by the various nations. That is why it is useless for us to talk about these things, and I therefore want to leave the matter at that.

I want to raise an interesting matter here. In recent times, in providing housing in our urban complexes in particular, the aspect of high-density housing has become more and more prominent. In my own constituency the municipality started a project of approximately 550 or more dwellings on this ultra-high-density basis. The project is now in the completion stage. Some of my colleagues and the hon. the Minister have seen the project. I am personally pleased with what is happening there and that is why it has stimulated me to investigate many other examples of high-density housing and as a result of that, I should just like to state a few fundamental facts today.

Firstly, there is a measure of concern in certain circles in South Africa about flat dwelling as such, especially in areas where a very high density has developed, for example in Hillbrow, Sunnyside and to some extent even in Sea Point. That is the first point. Various surveys have also confirmed that South Africans seldom consider flats to be suitable permanent accommodation and equally seldom to be suitable accommodation for families with children. I am not offering any opinion on these findings; I am merely stating the facts.

A third factor which we have to face up to, is that it has to be accepted as fact that more and more members of our South African population are living in flats today and that even more will in future have to depend on flats and high-density areas for accommodation. This is inevitable, and the reasons are obvious. I do not want to dwell on them now, but I should just like to mention a few. The one is that land in and around our large urban centres has simply become so scarce and expensive today that many of our young people who want to set up a home simply cannot afford it any more.

Another factor is the prevailing interest rates on bonds, which has also made it impossible for many people to own their own homes. A third aspect is that our ordinary detached housing areas are situated so far from the centre of the cities these days that transport costs, and the travelling time which is lost between home and work, has assumed such proportions that it simply does not pay to live so far away any more. Then, of course, there is the side-effect that when residential areas arise far away from the urban complexes, a large number of people travel to the city in their cars and in this way create a new problem, namely traffic congestion. I shall leave it at that, however.

I want to point out that the consequence of housing conditions, as well as of high-density living, on the mental state of people and on their behaviour patterns and family life has already been the subject of frequent study in our country and in other parts of the world. In our country the Institute for Sociological, Demographic and Criminological Research of the Human Sciences Research Council conducted an investigation into the psycho-social consequences of high-density living. As a matter of interest, I just want to give hon. members a few of the findings. Surveys by the institute indicated that people in flat areas—I am simply stating the facts of the report—are mobile, autonomous and anonymous and the population is heterogeneous. Concern has been expressed about the possibility that the condition leads to poor social control of individuals. For instance, mobility in Sunnyside is so high that 40% of the flat dwellers live in the same flat for one year at the most. Only half of those flats occupants know the surnames of their neighbours and more than 60% of them never visit their neighbours. This is what the survey uncovered.

They are tenants.

I do not know who the neighbour of the hon. member for South Coast is. If he is in such a bad way, he should also protest.

They are not the owners.

I am not referring only to Sunnyside. I am mentioning it as an example because the inquiry took place there. Another fact which emerged, is that owing to the high socio-economic class and status of the people who live in these areas, very few children are found in the flats. There are, however, other interesting findings too. As far as children in flats are concerned, an analysis of data which was made in a national sample of White scholars, disclosed that pupils of above average intelligence who live in houses, do a little better on the average than a corresponding group which live in flats. In contrast to this, pupils of average and below average intelligence who live in flats, achieve higher marks on an average than a corresponding IQ group which live in houses. This is very interesting data.

What does that prove?

I am coming to my conclusions in a moment. Furthermore it was discovered that the ability to adapt of pupils in flats and houses do not show marked differences and that psycho-social deviations are not more marked amongst children in flats than amongst children in houses either. Another point which emerges, is that in high-density areas, for example Sunnyside and Hillbrow, the crime rate is not at all higher than in for example Johannesburg and Pretoria as a whole. [Time expired.]

Mr. Speaker, I merely rise to give the hon. member an opportunity to continue his speech.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the hon. member for Mooi River for his gesture. I shall not take unnecessary advantage of the opportunity which the hon. member has afforded me.

I pointed out that the crime rate for these high-density areas is not relatively higher, for example Hillbrow as against Johannesburg and Sunnyside as against Pretoria.

I want to go outside South Africa’s borders a little, however, and point out that investigations which have been made in other countries, clearly indicate that high-density living does not influence people’s state of mind. A survey which was made by an American in 1971, indicated that even in Hong Kong, which is a very good example of one of the places in the world which has the highest population density, namely 250 000 people per square mile, nearly 40% of the population share their beds with two or more other people.

Double beds?

No, I am not talking about double beds now. [Interjections.] I do not want hon. members to get ideas now. That is not the reason for my mentioning these facts. In these areas where the density is so high, it was discovered that high-density living does not affect the basic levels of emotional moods and feelings of hostility.

We in South Africa are faced with the fact that more and more of our people will have to be accommodated in flats and in the very high-density areas. It is a good thing that these surveys which have been made, indicate that many of the so-called psycho-social problems which are being attributed to high-density living do not exist and are not based on facts. On the one hand this sets one’s mind at rest. I think it will set the minds of many people who live in flats and who think it is not good for children to live there at rest. These facts must lead us to see this matter in another and better perspective.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Parow made a very interesting speech about housing in general. Unfortunately, I cannot follow up his arguments because I should like to refer to a few specific cases relating to my own constituency.

Quite a few weeks ago I brought a matter concerning 12 or 13 houses to the attention of the hon. the Minister. The rental of those houses had been increased by the Rent Board from R38 per month to nearly R58 per month. Moreover, I was informed this very morning of a case in which an application had been made for the rental of a particular house to be increased from R37 per month to R65 per month. As I see the matter, I do not think the Rent Board will be able to do much about the application for R65 per month.

The argument I want to advance here, is that these are not isolated cases. It is generally true to say that rentals in many parts of the Peninsula are today being increased by considerable percentages. I have referred to two cases. In the first case, the increase in the house rental from R38 to R58 per month means an increase of approximately 50%. In the second case—the increase from R37 to R65 per month—it means an increase of approximately 75%. I do not believe the Rent Board is doing this sort of thing on purpose. The rent board is aware of the prevailing economic conditions. They are also aware of the fact that the prices of a thousand articles are rising daily. The conclusion I come to is that the Rent Board is simply being forced by the Rent Control Act to prescribe this type of rental for certain houses. I want to put it to the hon. the Minister that there are thousands of people in South Africa—and now I am referring to the pensioners in particular—who really cannot afford a rent increase of 50% or more per month. I want to appeal to the hon. the Minister to give some very serious attention to the Rent Control Act because it seems to me that the problem lies in the basis on which the Rent Board has to work out the rental to be awarded. This is the first point I want to make.

The second matter I want to raise is also a local one. It concerns the so-called Maitland Garden Village, a Coloured housing scheme abutting the White area of Maitland. The area in which it is situated was declared a White area years ago. The Coloureds are still living there, however. The removal of the Coloureds has been postponed from time to time and this has been done for the very good reason that no alternative housing could be found for those people. We are putting up with that situation. What we cannot put up with, however, is the fact that conditions in the Maitland Garden Village are extremely poor. The City Councillor concerned told me that personally. My request to the hon. the Minister is that although that area still falls under the Cape Town City Council, I should be very grateful if the hon. the Minister would also show some interest and determine how much money is needed to clear up that area properly. If the Coloureds have to live in that area next to Maitland, then let them at least live in decent conditions. The Cape Town City Council will need money for that—and I am aware of the shortage of money—but I am firmly convinced that the utilization of a certain amount of money in respect of this area would have an extremely beneficial effect.

Thirdly, I want to raise the matter of Sanddrift. It was planned to construct a certain number of houses in Sanddrift. I obtained the relevant figures from the hon. the Minister. It was planned to construct a total of 984 houses in Sanddrift. In the past few years 532 have been completed. Therefore there is a balance of 452 that still have to be completed. To my deep regret, delays have occurred in the provision of houses and as a result the building was halted. I understand that the problem is being caused by storm water. Allow me to say in passing that that housing scheme is being undertaken by the Cape Town City Council and that the city council is doing excellent work. What I cannot understand, however, is that the city council has only now become aware of the problem of storm water. This is something they should have known for a long time. The result is that we now have a housing scheme which is too small to enable us to give those people their own schools there. There are no shops, nor is there a post office or a bus service. Unless we complete the entire scheme, the necessary social facilities for those people will continue to be lacking. Apart from that, it is true that there is a waiting list of more than 200 applicants for houses in Sanddrift because good houses are supplied there at a low monthly rental. I can tell the hon. the Minister now that as soon as the clearing, if I may put it like that, of the Woodstock/Salt River area is started, people from that area will move to Maitland, Brooklyn and Sanddrift Then there will be a need for those houses. I am appealing to the hon. the Minister to put pressure on the Cape Town City Council. We cannot wait another two years before the other 452 houses are completed.

The fourth matter I want to raise also relates to Sanddrift. The hon. the Minister is aware of the fact that there have been some complaints about defects in the houses that have been provided in Sanddrift The hon. the Minister’s department was very good about it and as a result of my requests and the representations I made to them, they agreed to have the matter investigated by officials of the department. They did good work. I do not know what the outcome of the investigation was, but I want to submit to the hon. the Minister for his consideration today that there are many people in Sanddrift who are bitterly dissatisfied with the defects in their houses. One could try to justify the faults with all kinds of excuses, but if I were able to afford a house for the first time in my life and then, a year after I had signed the purchase contract, I found that the house was beginning to crack, I would be concerned about it. We cannot pass off the matter by saying that it is a cheap type of house. To the people who live there they are beautiful houses. Sanddrift is a residential area which everyone can and ought to be proud of. I believe that we should cultivate a pride amongst those people by giving them a product which they will not have problems with later.

I know the hon. the Minister will react sympathetically in respect of this matter. I once had the privilege of driving through Sanddrift with him. The problem of complaints about defects in the houses is not one that can be passed of lightly. I want to ask the hon. the Minister once again to give his closest attention to it. It is months since his department investigated the matter and we still do not know the reaction of the Cape Town City Council. Too much time is being lost, time which, in modern life, is too valuable to lose. Once again I want to ask the hon. the Minister very politely to put pressure on those people who are involved in this matter.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Maitland will excuse me if I do not react to his speech. It seems to me as if the problems he has are of a more local nature, except his reference to the increase in rentals due to the decisions made by rent boards. I have sympathy for the complaint of the hon. member that rentals are being increased so drastically, particularly in the present economic climate.

To begin with, I want to congratulate the officials of the Department of Community Development on, and thank them for, the thorough and comprehensive report which we received from them. The report gives us a clear picture of the fine and good work that is being done in the department.

In addition, I want to congratulate the department on the work they have done during the past year in respect of housing. When we talk about housing, I have in mind housing for Whites, Coloureds and Indians in particular. I think the increased rate at which housing has been provided by the department during the past three years, is an achievement. As far as housing for Whites is concerned, the department supplied 3 373 houses in 1974 as against 5 660 in 1976. Moreover, there were 3 714 under construction at the end of 1976.

I am nevertheless somewhat concerned about the trend that is becoming apparent, viz. that it is becoming the responsibility of the State to an increasing extent to provide housing. According to the report of the department, provision of housing by the private sector shows a drop from 92% during 1974 to 84% during 1976. One can understand that factors such as the increased price of land and particularly the prices of new houses are probably the most important factors which have contributed to the responsibility of the State in respect of housing showing an upward trend.

This also proves to me, however, that it is becoming more difficult for the average man to obtain a house without Government aid. We know what the State is doing in this regard. There is inter alia the existing State-supported houseowner’s saving scheme. Notwithstanding the attractiveness of the scheme, through which one can get up to 11 % tax-free interest, I am disappointed in the participation in that scheme.

According to the department’s report there were only 1 251 such savings accounts at building societies on 31 December 1976. The income limit to qualify for that scheme is R7 200 per annum. When we look at the census survey of 1970, at least 80% of White males earned too little during that year to qualify for such a scheme.

When a maximum loan of R18 000 is awarded, then the monthly obligations of someone who gets such a loan, including payments, tax, maintenance and other expenditures linked to house ownership, are at least R200 per month. In my opinion this is beyond the means of at least three-quarters of our population.

Our big problem in that regard is that those people will never be able to afford their own house without aid. We are aware of the fact that a great deal is being done to help those people in those lower income groups to obtain economic houses. One asks oneself, however: What becomes of all those people who do not qualify for assistance of this nature?

In that regard I am thinking particularly of our young people who struggle a great deal to get accommodation which is within their means. The Commission of Inquiry into Housing Matters is conducting an investigation—we are really looking forward to their report—and it is possible that many of those problems could be solved by this. In the past there has been much talk about the fact that young people build houses that are too luxurious, but I do not want to go into that.

Although the private sector is the biggest provider of housing, much can be learnt from the Department of Community Development. In that regard I should like to refer to page 46 of the report, where the action programme against inflation is discussed. I quote inter alia the following—

In my opinion it is a real achievement for the department still to be able to provide houses for that price of under R10 000. Many of the people can attest to the neat, high quality houses that are being provided for that income group.

Secondly, I am particularly concerned about our pensioners. Normally these are people with a limited income, and as a result they cannot afford a suitable residence. Even those pensioners who do have their own houses are finding home ownership increasingly difficult due to the high rates and maintenance costs of a house. It is unfortunate that due to a lack of funds, as indicated in the report, the 81 approved schemes to the value of approximately R19 million for the provision of housing for old people like these, cannot be proceeded with. That is why I should like to advocate to the hon. the Minister that priority be given to the accommodation of our pensioners, our aged persons, because they are finding it increasingly difficult to obtain accommodation, particularly in view of their limited income and the fact that there are no prospects of a larger income for them. I should also like to advocate that consideration be given to the provision of accommodation to our young married people. Newly married couples ought to begin their marriage and their family life in a decent manner because then many of the problems to which the hon. member for Parow also referred, would be eliminated. When we talk about housing, I also think that there ought to be a greater measure of self-discipline amongst our people. Reference was made here to the high standard which local authorities and town developers are setting. However, I wonder whether many of those high standards which city councils are setting, for example, are not the result of pressure exercised on city councils by the town inhabitants.

Whenever a start is made on the development of a new township, usually only the best is demanded. Broad streets are requested, as are kerbstones and street lights in front of every house. When the streets and pavements are ready, there are still more demands. It often happens that a man refuses to maintain the pavement in front of his house and expects the city council to look after him even in that respect. All I really want to say is that in this way, the maintenance costs which local authorities have to bear, are being increased to such an extent that it is becoming impossible for the average man to afford his own house, let alone all the other expenditures related to the possession of a house of one’s own.

Mr. Chairman, I do not have much to say in reply to the hon. member for Boksburg. I think he discussed matters on which all hon. members can more or less agree. In my speech I want to comment briefly on the hon. member for Tygervallei. I am sorry that he is not in the House now. The hon. member for Tygervallei says that we should rather put these questions on permits on an ad hoc basis. Last year the hon. the Minister said exactly the opposite, however. I quote from the hon. the Minister’s speech in Hansard—

Then the hon. member for Tygervallei went on to say that he did not really want to talk about permits, but that he would rather discuss accommodation. He alleged that accommodation was the task of the department, and therefore he did not want to waste time by talking about permits. [Interjections.] However, I think that the House should be reminded of the fact that it is actually the NP Government which has politicized all aspects of the South African society. This very department is in charge of some of the most terrible and the most unpleasant tasks in terms of the political policy of the Government. Therefore the hon. member for Tygervallei should not complain when we talk about the political aspects. The permits themselves are a difficult aspect too.

†Mr. Chairman, we would like to welcome the hon. the Minister’s statement in regard to the removing of discrimination and the qualifying figures for economic housing. We are pleased to know that. We are sorry that, because of the economic situation the qualifying rate for sub-economic rentals had to be lowered. I would, however, like to deal very briefly with a number of issues, as the time at my disposal is short.

Firstly, I want to thank the hon. the Minister for the very good work that was done at Tin Town in Durban. It is mentioned in the report and I want to assure the hon. the Minister that his department has earned the appreciation of the people of Durban, particularly that of the Indian community. I believe that this particular incident is a very good example for hon. members opposite of more things that the Government could do. At the time that the people of Tin Town were involved in having to be accommodated in tents as a result of the flooding of the Umgeni, a certain well-known lady, Dr. Fatima Meer, was very involved in that community. She is a person who greatly concerns herself with the underprivileged and she is also known to have strong Marxist views on the economic situation. I believe that the hon. the Minister and his department completely neutralized any of the political opinions which that woman might have been able to convey through their quick and efficient action in resolving the Tin Town situation.

I would like to ask the hon. the Minister about the Mariannhill housing scheme. We have been very impressed and pleased to see the pamphlets which have been issued in regard to the new towns for Coloured people. The hon. the Minister gave us the assurance last year that Mariannhill was going to be planned in a similar way. We have already had one unfortunate incident where there was a lack of co-ordination in planning in Mariannhill, where the primary school was not completed in time, because there was apparently not enough co-ordination between the Department of Coloured Relations, the PWD and the Department of Community Development. I hope that this is not going to set a precedent in the way in which Mariannhill is developed. I know this problem has been resolved. I would therefore like to ask the hon. the Minister what he is doing about other facilities in Mariannhill. For example, I would like to know whether we are going to get a swimming pool there. In the Durban climate a swimming pool is an important facility and we hope we shall get one as soon as possible. [Interjections.] The people living there do not have the sort of money to spend for jaunting around the beachfront like some other people do.

I would also like to ask the hon. the Minister whether he can give us some idea as to when he may have a decision with regard to the Blue Heights matter in the borough of Westville. I am sure that the hon. the Minister will be able to give us some indication. I know that he will obviously communicate with the correct people who have raised the matter with him, but maybe he could tell the House hopefully more or less when he thinks he might have a decision in regard to this matter.

Why don’t you write letters about that matter?

As I see it this is an extremely controversial matter and I do not want, nor am I competent, to express my views on the merits of the case. However, I can express my concern as a democrat at some of the methods applied by those involved in this controversy. I deplore the action which involves sending lawyers’ letters threatening libel actions. We need healthy public debate in our society and I object in the strongest terms possible to methods which amount to nothing less than intimidation in an attempt to silence criticism.

I would also like to ask the hon. the Minister what he is going to do about the collapse in land sales by his department. For example, I have noticed that the upset prices for land in the Queensbourough area were not reached. Recently, there were some land sales in Pretoria, particularly flat sites for cluster housing, where the upset prices were not reached. Also in the case of land sold by the Pinetown municipality, land which I think they took over from the Department of Community Development, the upset prices were not reached.

Not to mention District Six.

Precisely! I gather that in the case of District Six the hon. the Minister has not been able to sell any land at all at the prices he wants for it. Could the hon. the Minister perhaps tell us what the policy of the department is in regard to land which does not reach upset prices, particularly in this economic recession? This affects very seriously local authorities which have land on which they are gaining no rates income. If they could sell the land at least they could collect some rates from that land.

I would like to ask the hon. the Minister whether he has any views in regard to the situation in Durban, arising from the fact that there apparently was corruption in the allocation of houses in Chatsworth. I understand there is some doubt as to whether this matter should be pursued or not, because of the history of it, etc. I shall be glad if the hon. the Minister will give us his views in regard to the Chatsworth housing corruption issue.

Finally, I wonder if the hon. the Minister would tell us what arrangement he has come to with the Department of Bantu Administration and Development and more particularly the local Bantu Affairs Administration Board, because most of the houses that are now being sold to Black people, certainly in Soweto, were built with funds provided by his department through the National Housing Commission. I wonder if he can explain to us what the arrangement is and whether, when houses are sold which were built with funds provided by the National Housing Commission, the money will be repaid to his department or whether it will be paid to the Department of Bantu Administration and Development. I ask this because I, personally, am concerned at the fact that housing matters should be transferred to the Department of Bantu Administration and Development, in whose housing department I do not have the same confidence that I have in the hon. the Minister’s department. I would like the hon. the Minister to explain whether the delay in regard to the sale of houses to Blacks was due to difficulties in sorting out the question as to what funds should be paid to his department and what portion thereof should be paid to the local Bantu Affairs Administration Board.

We are delighted to see in the report that the hon. the Minister has accepted the principle of a core house. We do hope that the core house schemes will be properly administered andinspected so that the Minister cannot say in five years’ time that it has become a slum. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Pinetown started off by launching a sham attack on the hon. member for Tygervallei. I do not want to react to his speech except to tell him that this Government does not flinch from the political implications of its policy since our policy is based on common sense and a basic sense of justice. Therefore, it does no good to keep harping on that note.

The hon. member for Green Point raised two matters which affect my constituency. One was the transport situation in respect of Mitchell’s Plain. I want to agree with him on that score, and I hope it will be possible before long for the Railways to construct the much needed railway line there so as to provide improved facilities to the people living there. As far as the establishment of an industrial area there is concerned, however, I disagree with the hon. member. I do not think it has ever been the intention to locate industries in that area on a large scale. The intention is not to create a new magnet to attract Coloureds to new employment opportunities. Moreover, I think that would be in conflict with the actual planning to have decentralization in the direction of Atlantis. Consequently I am unable to agree with the hon. member in that regard.

I want to associate myself with the hon. member for Boksburg, who congratulated the department on the annual report and the other very fine publications we received. They provide evidence of wonderful achievements, particularly in respect of the provision of housing. One of them has a beautiful sketch on the front page and is entitled “Die Helpende Hand”. A few facts and truths are stated in this publication and I should like to touch on one of them which deals with employers. There is a short paragraph which reads—

I should like to exchange a few ideas on this aspect. Our population is becoming urbanized. It has always been the practice, as it still is, on farms for the employer to provide the worker with a decent house. This is in the interest of both worker and employer. It is a tradition and a condition as well as a guarantee to both worker and employer. In the towns and cities it is still a totally strange idea for the employer to provide the employee with housing. There the local authority or the State must provide housing and this is an old problem.

Now several employers have started making provision for this and I just want to mention a few in passing. The Cape Town Chamber of Commerce, for example, has acquired 308 sites for employees of its members and approximately 220 dwellings have already been constructed on these and the rest are under construction. A total number of approximately 700 stands will be available to employees at Belhar under this scheme. A second example is that of Rembrandt which launched and completed a scheme for its employees at Paarl. I do not want to elaborate on that as articles have been published in magazines about the scheme.

Recently two wonderful schemes were completed in my own constituency, both linking up with the greater Firgrove/Macassar residential area. One of these is the scheme of De Beers or AE & Cl, and the other a scheme of two subsidiaries of the Armscor group. These two residential projects in my constituency are neat, well planned, a credit to the area and an excellent advertisement for those employers. In fact, I think they are an example to others. However, there are two problems in this regard to which I should like to refer before elaborating to some extent on the merits of the two schemes.

The first problem is that both concerns are finding that they have too little land and that they would like to provide further housing for their employees. They want to have further extensions. It has been their experience that they benefit from the better housing they have provided as their workers are more loyal and more content. Could the department not render assistance in this regard? Somchem tells me that they would like to build another 150 houses. They would be very pleased if they could obtain sites at Mitchell’s Plain as it is close to one of their factories, Swartklip Products.

The second problem in this regard is that there are some large undertakings and some small ones, too, that are reluctant to provide housing and hide behind the fact that they have too little money to assist everyone and consequently prefer to do nothing. That is why I want to address the following request to the department. Some time ago the department launched a campaign to enlist the co-operation of various local authorities in curbing and combating squatting. So I should like to ask them whether they do not want to initiate a new campaign amongst industrialists and other employers at this time so as to enlist their co-operation in providing housing for their non-White workers. I foresee a massive campaign resulting from the initiative taken by this department possibly reawakening blunted consciences, consciences about good workers, living in poor housing at the moment, consciences about the occupation of the Western Cape by Blacks which, on the one hand, is pushing the Coloureds from their natural employment opportunities, and, on the other hand, making the Coloureds themselves physically Black, consciences which conceal the responsibility of the private sector itself behind the so-called belief that the public sector, the State, should be the sole provider of housing for these people.

I think this should be regarded as a challenge to this department, and then I want to mention the two areas in my constituency as an example to be used by the department for inspiring employers to provide housing in this regard.

The first example I want to mention is Salvopark at Firgrove. Salvopark is a Coloured township for the employees of two subsidiaries of the Armscor group, viz. Somchem and Swartklip Products. These people realized that the demand for housing exceeded the supply by far. They believed in the old saying: “There is no place like home.” They felt that they wanted to do a deed of upliftment in both the social and economic fields. They also wanted to make it possible for the worker to make an investment which would pay financial dividends, but also dividends in the form of a stable labour force. They decided that they wanted to recover only the basic costs of the project. They also decided that the workers themselves should be proud of what they wanted to establish for them, and that is why they not only complied with minimum requirements but also established a decent residential area for them with tarred roads and every other facility and service, as in any modern White area. They consulted with the workers about the basic building plans they used and allowed the workers to decide on the name of the town and on the names of the streets. The principle they formulated for themselves was that the profit derived from this project should be in the form of a satisfied labour force loyally dedicating their services to the task at hand. The 131 houses were completed in February last year. Everyone of them was sold. A very reasonable interest rate is being charged. The houses were sold at between R12 500 and R15 800. Every unit has three bedrooms and a garage or a carport. There is an elected ratepayers’ association which sees to the maintenance and the general interests of the scheme.

Another scheme situated virtually directly opposite on the other side of the national road, is that of De Beers, or AE & Cl, who decided in 1974 that they wanted to start a housing scheme for their own workers. They decided that the ethnic group concerned should plan its own housing requirements. They appointed a committee from their own workers who had to decide on the plan and formulate plans to create the environment in which the community would like to live. The land was obtained from the Department of Community Development. They built 95 houses at a cost of R1,2 million in nine different designs. The cost varied from R8 600 to R11 750. Everyone of the houses was sold. It is a fine town with tarred roads and electric street lights. Each house has three bedrooms and most of them have carpets. There are beautiful, well designed gardens, with lawns and shrubs. The committee, consisting of the workers themselves, allocates the houses, having regard to social similarity and differences in the process. The houses can even be bought without any deposit having to be paid as the employers are making it possible for those people to buy their houses by taking up very cheap and reasonable loans. The committee, which will eventually become a management committee, keeps a watchful eye on the houses and ensures that they are kept in good order. I understand that this enterprise has elicited many inquiries from all over the country about the scheme. We hope that other employers will follow their example.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to associate myself with the hon. member for False Bay and emphasize the fact that we are of the opinion that employers can make a very important contribution towards a solution of the housing question and also in respect of the binding of people to their properties through the incorporation of ownership in those schemes. I think we should be giving a very incomplete picture if in the discussion of this Vote we did not take note of and devote some attention to the fact that the Department of Community Development, and therefore the Government, has made an exceptional contribution in years past towards eliminating the housing backlog, particularly that of the Coloured population. For example, if we look at the recommendations in that regard in the report of the Theron Commission, and the decisions in the White Paper which followed it, we see that during the years 1972 to 1975, 43 694 dwellings were built for Coloureds. This was done at a cost of R163 536 000. That was not the end of the programme, however. Since then another 35 747 dwellings have been approved. An expenditure of R225 700 000 will be incurred in this regard. During the past five years, so the White Paper tells us, 64% of the total budget for house building was spent on the construction of Coloured houses. If we bear in mind that the Coloured population is one of the smaller population groups—a little over half of the White population group—then it is obvious that the emphasis has fallen on the provision of housing for the Coloured population group in particular during the past five years. What is more, I think it says a great deal for the Government and this department, particularly since the rate of population growth amongst the Coloureds is rapid and we had a major backlog in their housing and also because in general they represent the lower income group. Under those circumstances it is not only remarkable, but also praiseworthy that the department made this contribution towards the provision of housing for the Coloured population.

I want to stress the idea that wherever community establishment for the Coloured population is taking place and building plots are being made available, we shall also make provision for building plots for the private entrepreneur, the private builder or the owner-builder in the Coloured community.

When one looks at a Coloured residential area such as Westbank near Malmesbury, it is surprising to see how many of the Coloureds there have built their own houses which compare favourably with those in any middle-class White residential area.

I heard that during the riots last year, agitators and inciters came from the city to urge the Coloured people of Malmesbury to take part in that type of demonstration as well, but the Coloureds of Malmesbury made it very clear to those people that they should turn right round and go back to Cape Town, otherwise they would be helped on their way. Those people from Cape Town simply could not make any headway there. The Coloureds of Westbank simply said that they would protect their place, their town and their property if necessary. This happened in other places as well. To me, this underlines the importance of the encouragement of property ownership and of the building of houses by the responsible members of the Coloured population who have the necessary financial means.

We want to express the hope that wherever urban areas or townships like Mitchell’s Plain, Atlantis and others are developed, ample provision will always be made for development by the private owner who wishes to build his own house. Many Coloureds are in the building industry and have good experience which enables them to do it themselves. This is one of the important and essential conditions for fostering a pride in themselves and a sense of their own value amongst these people.

Another important matter to which I want to refer is the provision of community facilities. Recommendation 105 in the report of the Theron Commission deals with that. I quote—

I do not want to waste time by quoting it at too great length. We are pleased to know, however, that under the present circumstances, with the development of the larger schemes in particular, we are moving in that direction. There is great appreciation among the Coloured leaders and the Coloured community for the fact that this is being done. There are all sorts of problems that have to be overcome in the establishment of such a new township which could eventually develop into an urban area. We have heard about the transport problems and other problems which arise, for example the necessity for a railway line to Mitchell’s Plain. Of course, these are things that cannot happen overnight.

It is essential, however, and part of the process of completion of such a set-up, of establishing a satisfied society there, not only to make the people happy, but also, as the hon. member for False Bay has indicated, because it is to the benefit of the employers if their employees are contented. Moreover, that type of urban development affords the Coloured entrepreneur and professional man a unique opportunity, not only of settling there, but of making a rewarding living there. I want to express the confidence that we shall continue on this path. The State has already taken the lead by providing money and so on. I hope that the department, in co-operation with the other departments, will also help to mobilize and motivate the different communities, whether White or Coloured, not only to be proud of their town and area, but also to co-operate to make their town as attractive as possible by establishing gardens, planting trees, keeping streets clean, etc. It puts one off completely when one has to look at the bits of paper, tins and rubbish scattered around in some communities. I am afraid that this holds true for the sub-economic residential areas in particular. However, if one goes to a Coloured community where the houses are provided on an ownership basis, one notes immediately that it is different there. Then it is clear that the people concerned take trouble to keep the area clean. I think the Minister should enlist the co-operation of the educational authorities in educating the children and mobilizing them to co-operate in that regard.

Mr. Chairman, as my time is very limited the hon. member for Piketberg must forgive me for not reacting to his speech.

†I should like to raise several matters. The first matter I should like to raise is that the Department of Community Development and the boards that resort under the department have property worth R237 million. That is the book value of that property. However, where such property has been developed and services, etc., have been provided, the value in actual fact amounts to thousands of millions of rand. I think the Government should do everything in its power to encourage private enterprise to assist in the development of this land. I should like to know from the hon. the Minister what his policy is in this regard.

As regards South End in Port Elizabeth, the hon. the Minister indicated in answer to a question that the sale of plots could commence in May 1977 and that building operations could commence possibly in 1978. It is absolutely essential that this project should get off the ground. One of the main snags there is the ore dust. Until the menace of the ore dust is removed, that scheme will never get off the ground and will never be properly launched. The hon. the Minister has said in reply to a question that his department was negotiating at a very high level with the S.A. Railways. We should like to hear from him today what the outcome was of those negotiations. I can tell him that people from all parts of Port Elizabeth are fed up with this ore dust menace. The sooner something is done about it, the better. They consider it a matter of urgent priority that something should be done about it.

At the same time I should like the hon. the Minister to indicate to us what progress has been made by the property consultant who has been appointed to act in respect of South End. We should also like to ask the hon. the Minister what progress has been made with the report of the commission of inquiry on housing. I think the hon. the Minister realizes that this is a most important report. We are all waiting anxiously to hear from him when this report can be expected to appear.

It was with a sense of extreme disappointment that we took note of the abolition of the 2% subsidy on homes purchased at a value of up to R18 000.1 must say that the departmental officials have co-operated very well with us at all times. They have even made representations to the Treasury to help with hard-line and border-line cases. We appreciate the co-operation we got from the department in this regard.

Did it get you anywhere?

Yes, we managed to solve some of those cases. The 2% subsidy did an enormous amount to encourage home ownership and it is absolutely essential that the hon. the Minister must reconsider this position. To create a stable situation in South Africa, it is vital that home ownership be extended to as many South Africans as possible. We must avoid becoming a nation of lessees. That is why the hon. the Minister must do everything in his power to ensure that the benefits of home ownership are extended to all South Africans. A home owner will stand shoulder to shoulder with other home owners in times of trouble. Home ownership lays the foundation for stability in family life.

*Mr. Chairman, my opinion, and I am sure that all the hon. members on both sides of the House will agree with me, is that we should rise above the level of party politics and should do everything in our power to keep race relations in this country on an orderly and friendly level and to improve them.

I believe the time has come for all of us to forget about politics in matters such as the Port Elizabeth theatre. We should consider the matter as fair-minded and thinking people who wish to do justice to all people of all races in this country. If we want to secure the future of our dependants we should start laying the foundation today in order that our descendants may build a bigger and better South Africa with love and joy. We in this party want to do our share in promoting good race relations and we shall do everything in our power to bring this about. This debate is concerned with race relations and racial affairs. It is not a debate for the politicians, but a debate for the people with vision, faith and wisdom who see the South African situation as it really is. The hon. the Prime Minister said the following in Port Elizabeth on 30 September 1976—

†In view of the hon. the Prime Minister’s stated attitude, I would like to make a very special appeal to the hon. the Minister of Community Development to grant a permit to enable the people of all races to attend performances at the opera-house in Port Elizabeth at all times. The opera-house in Port Elizabeth cannot be duplicated in the Coloured, Indian or Bantu townships. In the first place we cannot afford the millions of rands needed for duplicating this sort of facility. In the second place there is not the demand to duplicate this sort of opera-house in all the townships. Thirdly, at the level of opera there is no problem and there will be no problem in Port Elizabeth. Fourthly, we have the example of the Nico Malan opera-house in Cape Town. This opera-house was opened to all races and there have been no problems. In fact, I would say that the opening of the Nico Malan opera-house has made a substantial contribution towards good, sound relations in South Africa.

We live in an era of challenging and changing times. We are on the threshold of difficult times. These times of challenge are such that we must do everything in our power to ensure that happy changes are made, not by force, but voluntarily in the interests of all South Africans. I am sure that everybody in the House, whether a parent or a grandparent, has one main ideal in his mind, i.e. the happiness of his children and all other children in a happy and prosperous South Africa. To ensure that this happiness exists and is perpetuated for future generations we must be prepared to share the fruits of Western civilization. In a place like Port Elizabeth one will have Black diplomats and other important Black persons from other States and in addition, one has a limited number of members of other race groups living in Port Elizabeth who would like to attend the opera-house.

In all fairness and reasonableness I would like to tell the hon. the Minister that he will do much for race relations if he accepts the appeal that I am making today. I will understand if the hon. the Minister says that he cannot say “yes” in this debate, but if he cannot do that I would like to make a further appeal to him to give the undertaking today that he will consider this matter in depth, and take the matter to a Cabinet meeting as soon as possible and consult with the Administrator of the Cape Province, who has to be consulted. I am irresistibly convinced that if the hon. the Minister considers this matter in depth he too will become irresistibly convinced that he should open the opera-house to all the race groups in Port Elizabeth.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to avail myself of this opportunity to convey my sincere thanks to the hon. the Minister and the department for their sustained work on housing over the past year. It is true that there have been bottlenecks with regard to funds, but in spite of this problem there has really been phenomenal growth with regard to housing. In this connection I want to make a point of saying that housing for elderly White people enjoys a particularly high priority with the department. This applies in particular to their efforts in respect of housing for the infirm aged. In this regard the department has really made a praiseworthy effort.

A monumental task is also being carried out with regard to slum clearance. These often unsightly areas are being cleared in spite of frequent unfair criticism and this project, which promotes human dignity, is being extended. In this regard I want to refer in particular to the South End of Port Elizabeth, an area very well known to me. Over the years we have become accustomed to this neighbourhood in South End which not only used to be an unsightly slum, but was a place where Brown people were often grossly exploited. This slum area has been cleared and the inhabitants have been properly housed elsewhere.

This process has been carried out in Cape Town, on the Rand and in virtually every city and town in the Republic. If ever there was a monument for the department, that monument is the work being done in respect of slum clearance. In April of this year, in the course of a bus tour for members of Parliament arranged by the department, I was impressed by the thousands of dwelling units built by the department and by local authorities for Brown people. Former squatters have been rehoused in very attractive dwellings. During the period from 1 April 1974 to 31 December 1976, no fewer than 12 800 units were built in this way, and 4 960 squatter families and others were re-housed in these units during the period mentioned. The slums which they had formerly occupied have been demolished.

In spite of the phenomenal building programme of the department, there is still a shortage of housing for Brown people. The department estimates that 36 000 units are required immediately for housing of Brown people in the Cape Peninsula. This building project must be financed from the pocket of the tax-payer. The problem is occupying the minds of a number of right-thinking people, particularly when the priority which the Cabinet gives housing in spite of the present financial cuts is borne in mind. This afternoon the hon. member for Rondebosch stressed the importance of housing. This side of the House, and the Government specifically, are fully aware of the necessity of housing and we are certainly not insensitive in this regard. The Government gives housing such a high priority that only Defence enjoys a higher priority.

One facet of the problem is the apparent lack of self-motivation to be found among the Brown people in particular. To illustrate this statement I should like to refer to the fact that according to the latest available statistics, 92 300 Brown people are regular employees on farms. This number represents 454 300 souls who are provided with housing by the farmers. Together with these, it is calculated that 194 200 dwelling units were built up to and including the end of March 1974 with funds provided by the State. This represents housing for 92 600 people. It can therefore be calculated that about 1,5 million Brown people are housed by farmers and the State. If we add to this the natural increase and the squatter families awaiting housing—there are about 65 000 of these families, conservatively estimated to represent 450 000 souls—about two million Brown people are housed by the agricultural sector and the State jointly. That is to say that more than half of all the Brown people in the Republic do not provide their own housing. There are therefore few Brown people who provide their own housing needs. In this regard the cause is certainly not the income factor. Then, too, we must bear in mind that many Brown people are employed in the building industry. That is to say, they have the skills and the financial potential to look after themselves in this regard.

In my opinion the important factor in this regard is the lack of willpower among our Brown people. They lack the will to tackle an independent enterprise, and the question therefore occurs as to whether the departments concerned should not effect a degree of co-ordination in this regard. Would it not be possible to cultivate among the Brown people, in the family context, a degree of pride in their own creations so as to stimulate in them an appreciation of what is theirs? A national group that only receives is a group that never learns to stand on its own two feet.

Now I want to touch on a different aspect, an aspect which directly affects my constituency. It concerns the housing in flats in Algoa Park. There are about 804 flat units in Algoa Park and for some time I have been under the impression that those flats are not in demand. This is, of course, despite what the department is doing there. At the moment, 220 of the available 804 flat units are unoccupied. The question therefore arises as to whether it is necessary to take another look at the flats in Algoa Park. What may be necessary is a change in the way they are constituted, better recreation facilities, even more reasonable rentals, if possible, and beautification of the environment. All these are relevant aspects if one expects those flat units to be in demand again as they were in former years.

Last but not least I want to make a plea for the speedy submission of the report of the Commission on Rent Control. It is not only the lessee who sometimes gets the short end of the stick in this regard, it is often also the lessor of flats—I say Ais from experience—who encounters problems when he is faced with rising costs.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Somerset East must excuse me for not reacting to his speech. However, I should like to congratulate him on his extremely illuminating speech.

In the first place I should like to deal with the new city of Ennerdale. A major part of this new Coloured city that is envisaged falls in my constituency. By way of introduction I should like to quote from page 8 of the annual report—

Furthermore, provision has of course been made for proper housing and facilities for the Coloured community of South Africa—

I quote further from the report—

I should like to congratulate the department and the hon. the Minister on what is to be done here.

Last year during this debate I made a very earnest plea to the hon. the Minister that the properties belonging to the Whites who have to make sacrifices here, be expropriated with as little delay as possible and that a start be made as soon as possible with the planning and eventual construction of the houses for the Coloured community. I want to convey my sincere thanks and appreciation today, firstly to the hon. the Minister who honoured us with a personal visit to this area and, accompanied by myself and other members of the community, undertook a tour of inspection. I also wish to convey my sincere thanks and appreciation to the Secretary, Mr. Fouché, his deputy, Mr. Gerber, and other members of the department of Community Development and their regional office. Due to the extent of the problems that are being created in expropriating this area, these people have always been prepared to give me a hearing and have always treated me with the utmost sympathy.

Not a single voter or landowner in my constituency objected to the expropriation of their properties. I think it should serve as an example to the other population groups in South Africa that the Whites of South Africa are prepared to give these people their rightful share. The hon. the Minister met a number of these people. In this area there are old people, pensioners and very needy people who have a limited income or pension, but who are nevertheless prepared to do their bit. I want to make an earnest plea today in all humility to the hon. the Minister, and, knowing the department as I do, I know that I will have sympathy from them and that they will give my request a sympathetic hearing. My plea is that these Whites, these elderly people, these needy people, who are now making sacrifices, will be given fair compensation for their properties and that they will in fact be put in a financial position to re-establish themselves elsewhere and lead a decent life once again as loyal and faithful citizens of South Africa.

A second aspect I want to consider is the resettlement of Indian traders. The Department of Community Development has already done pioneering work in this field, and as evidence of this I just want to quote to the House from a report which appeared in the Natal Mercury of 11 February 1977. The report, entitled “Good life for South African Indians”, reads as follows—

The department has been criticized absolutely unnecessarily with regard to the resettlement of Indians. It has become customary to read in the newspapers headlines such as “Page View: emotions high”, “Traders evicted,” “Lelike tonele in Page View,” “Indiërhan-delaars uitgesit,” “Skelwoorde is vryelik na die amptenare geslinger,” and “Die polisie het die Indiërs gewaarsku om op hul taal te let.” Another article reads—

This appeared in Die Transvaler of 16 March 1977. Then, too, another report appeared in The Star of 7 March entitled “Reprieve for 100 Page View traders”. The report reads as follows—

When the fuss and the unfavourable publicity on the matter had died down, these people realized that they had criticized the hon. the Minister and his department unnecessarily. Then one had reports such as the following. I myself went to look at the Oriental Plaza and I should like to agree with this report. The report appeared under the title: “Dit kan Goudstad se toeristemekka word” and “Oos-terse Plaza naweek ’n miernes” and reads—

This department does not merely resettle Indian traders for the sake of resettling them. Consideration is also given to the possible commercial potential, the area and its development before they are resettled. Let us see what else has been done. Resettlement for trade purposes has already been completed in 14 Transvaal country towns. In a further five towns commercial centres are under construction whereas substantial expenditure has already been incurred in respect of planning costs for 11 towns. Attention has also been given to commercial centres in 15 other country towns but the physical planning stage has not yet been reached.

Far greater progress could have been made if the traders had been prepared to co-operate. Let us ask ourselves a very important question today: What is the attitude of the Indian himself to resettlement for trade purposes. Much criticism is expressed in this House, many irresponsible newspaper reports appear and a great deal is said about this matter. However, let us look at what the Indian who has to be resettled, has to say. It is striking that the capital-rich trader, who often occupies a leading or even a monopolistic position in his community, does everything in his power to cause resettlement for trade purposes to fail. On the other hand, the small trader, who is in the majority, shows a greater preparedness and usually an eagerness and need to co-operate. There are even traders who exert pressure for the provision of alternative accommodation in their own areas. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I am sure the hon. member for Overvaal will forgive me for not continuing his line of thought, because I have my own problems.

†I am sure the hon. the Minister is feeling very nostalgic today. In fact, he has a nostalgic look about him. I think the debate has really deteriorated from the standard that we have been used to in the past years. Perhaps I should say the standard has not deteriorated but the peace and quiet is quite a change compared with other years.

It is a new milieu for me.

It may be because certain members are now in the Other Place of course. I want to remind the hon. the Minister that this department was once said to be the largest real estate company in South Africa. I rather think that it is the most tardy developer in South Africa.

I want to speak about my own area. We are very conscious of the work that this department has done in the Western Cape. We are very proud of the great achievements of the department in this area. I am sure that none of us has any criticism about the work that has been done and the standard of work that is being done, but what worries me is why all this work has been done in the Western Cape. Is it because the Coloured people in the Western Cape are a majority group here? I want to remind the hon. the Minister that the Coloureds in Natal are a minority group and should not be considered in the same light as the Coloureds in the Western Cape because they are not the same type of people. I wonder whether this fact is not often lost sight of. The Coloureds of Natal are completely different from the Coloureds in the rest of South Africa. I feel that a lot more consideration should be given to the needs of the Coloured people, particularly in southern Natal. The Marburg group area was proclaimed about seven years ago, but since then nothing has happened. No housing of any kind has been provided. I remember a hon. member yesterday asking what the UP had done. It was said that when the UP was in power not two bricks had been laid one upon the other. I want to remind the hon. the Minister, however, that not a single brick has been laid in the Marburg area since I have been there. It is having a very demoralizing effect on the Coloured people in southern Natal. The living conditions in the Marburg area are, I submit, the worst in the whole of South Africa. There cannot be worse conditions, I am certain of that. They are living in backyards, they are living in packing cases and they have no conveniences. What sanitation there is has to serve 10 to 15 families. There is no water. One stand pipe may have to serve a whole area and there is no electricity either. There is no street lighting and there are virtually no streets. It is an Indian area and the Indians charge exorbitant rentals for the accommodation—if one can call it that—for these Coloured squatters. They are squatters because they are living in an Indian area.

On the South Coast there are many Coloured people, and if they do not squat they have nowhere to go. The only saving grace in this area which has thus far averted a catastrophe is the climate, the temperate climate we have in southern Natal. That keeps the people from at least dying of cold. Before the area fell under the Indian town board, over a period of many years, the position was very bad. I make no secret of that. Now that the area has been taken over by the Indian town board, however, the position is deteriorating daily because the Indians are not keen to keep the Coloureds there. They have enough problems of their own. There are enough Indian people without housing and they are trying to make these people leave. This is very difficult to do. They cannot evict them because there is nowhere else for them to go. They consequently cannot obtain eviction orders, so they give them no conveniences and they charge them exorbitant rentals. In fact, they do everything possible to make them leave. The position is aggravated by the unemployment on the Coast. There are many Coloureds out of work. The position is further aggravated by the squatters from the Transkei. One can call them refugees, because there are Coloureds from the Transkei moving into southern Natal daily without permission and moving to the Marburg area. The problem is also aggravated by squatters coming from inland areas such as Harding and Ixopo where there is no work either. They come down to the coast looking for work and squat in the Marburg area. At last, after a lot of agitation, the Coloured school has been moved to the new group area which has been proclaimed in Marburg, but the only difference is that the children now have to walk further from the places where their parents are squatting.

There is a great need for housing in this area. When the department asked the local authorities down there how great the need was, the Afrikaanse Sakekamer did a full survey. They let the department have this survey a year ago. It shows the serious position there. It shows that at that time there were 1 237 Coloured people on the South Coast. There was a total of 223 family units, all squatting. In the Marburg area, of which I am speaking, there were 98 families living in the Indian area. The remainder were all squatting in the Black areas surrounding Margate, Port Shepstone and right down to Port Edward. When I asked the Department of Community Development in Durban a year ago what was being done about this, they told me that they were waiting for the planning. Just before the beginning of this session I saw the department again and I was told that development was now being held up by sewerage system problems. They did not know what to do about the question of sewage disposal. I submit that this is a red herring because Port Shepstone has just constructed an enlarged sewerage scheme which is adjacent to the Marburg town area. It must be the simplest thing on earth to connect the sewerage system from the Coloured area to the Port Shepstone sewerage system. The record of the Nationalist Government in regard to the Coloured people in Natal is a sorry one.

That is a lie; you have no reason to say so!

I am sure that this hon. Minister would be the first one to admit it.

On a point of order, Mr. Chairman: Is the hon. member for Carletonville allowed to say that it is a lie?

I withdraw that, Mr. Chairman.

Unfortunately I never heard the remark made by the hon. member for Carletonville, so I am not worried about it, but I would like to say that the Coloured people of Natal who are, in many cases, from St. Helena, Mauritian or Griqua descent have lost the rights they enjoyed before this Government came to power. Most of them had the vote and many of them were living in White areas. All those rights have now been lost and they are a deprived people. It is time that this Government made it up to them. They are a minority group, and we look to this hon. Minister to do something about it and to do something quickly. These people are not similar to your Cape Coloureds. They do not require education in housing. No interim housing is required. Sub-economic housing is what is required. There are over 116 families who, I am sure, qualify for sub-economic housing, as their income is below R200 per month. Something should be done as urgently as possible.

Mr. Chairman, in the few minutes left to me I would like to refer to something else, and that is the Indian shopping area in Port Shepstone. About ten years ago the Indian area of Marburg was declared by this Government. At the same time the Indian businesses in Port Shepstone, which had been there since time immemorial, were told that they would eventually have to move into this new Indian group area. Of course it was resisted, but eventually they were persuaded that they had to move. As businesses closed down or changed hands, they were taken over by this department and these people were instructed to find new premises in the new town board area. There is no incentive for these people to go to the new area, because there is no development, housing or services available. What is the good of building up a shop or starting a business if no customers come to it? One of the biggest shops in Port Shepstone, called Whitehouse, which belonged to a very prominent Indian family, was taken over by this department about five years ago. From that time this entire shopping complex of Whitehouse has stood empty or half empty while the department has been trying to let it or to sell it. They have been unable to find a purchaser. It was put up for auction the other day and they could not even get a bidder. I asked the hon. the Minister, as he will remember, whether he would not allow Indians to make a bid for the premises. Had he done so, he would perhaps have realized the same amount that his department originally paid for it. I have been told that it now has been sold at a loss. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for South Coast raised certain problems experienced in his constituency. He will have to excuse me if I do not follow up on his argument. However I want to tell him that he, too, has a task to perform there, and that is to help to promote family planning as far as possible.

Basically, a shortage of housing is ascribable to two causes. The first is the very large-scale urbanization that is taking place. One finds this throughout the world, particularly in Africa. The second cause is the population explosion.

Family planning is more important than any other domestic aspect in the life of a people. We in South Africa find ourselves in the uncomfortable situation that South Africa has the highest birth rate in the developed world. I want to point to a few examples. South Africa’s birthrate is 28% higher than that of Nigeria, 68% higher than that of Australia and 220% higher than that of America. One wonders whether it is possible to solve this problem if one has always to provide aftercare instead of preventive care.

There is not a single hon. member in this House, whether on this side or on that side of the House, who is not greatly indebted to the State, the department, the agencies of the department and local authorities for what is being done in South Africa with regard to the provision of housing.

I should like to quote a few figures in order to illustrate to some extent the achievements of the Government and the country. Between 1920—when State agencies were introduced—and 1960, viz. over a period of 40 years, an average of 800 houses per annum were built. In the 10 years from 1962 to 1971, an average of 1 570 houses per annum were built. Therefore, over this 10 year period the building rate doubled. It is very significant that the rate over the past 10 years was twice as much as that over the preceding period of 40 years. In the five years from 1972 up to and including 1975, 20 200 houses were built. This is an impressive percentage increase or growth in the provision of housing, if one bears in mind what was achieved in the 40 years from 1920 to 1960. In 1976 alone, 26 080 houses were completed and 19 000 were under construction.

Then, too, one must take note with appreciation of what the local authorities are doing. The local authorities have done a great deal in regard to the provision of housing. Between 1920 and 1974, 62 289 houses have been built for Whites by local authorities. For Coloureds 141 223 have been built, for Asians, 35 500 and for Bantu—I mention this merely for the sake of interest—354 000 houses were built during that period. In 1975-’76 this number, too, increased. 8 300 houses were built for Whites, 29 900 for Coloureds, 3 350 for Asians and 18 100 for Bantu.

I now want to refer to the issue of high-cost housing. I am very sorry that it was not possible for the Fouché Report to appear before we discussed this Vote. I should very much have liked to inspect the Fouché Report to see what the commission had found in its investigation in respect of high-cost housing. In the present economic climate we shall have to make substantial adjustments to our domestic economy. We shall have to accept a lower growth rate in this case. We shall have to save a great deal more internally. We shall also have to effect a more efficient utilization of the available capital.

Since housing is such an important aspect in the economy of the people it will also be necessary to look at high-cost housing. I do not believe that we in South Africa have a great deal to complain about. The capital outlay for dwelling units in the period between 1970 and 1974 represents less than 4% of the gross domestic product. Only 14,5% of our total fixed investments are invested in accommodation. In 1976 only 12% of our total fixed investments were invested in dwelling units. If one compares this with comparable countries in the rest of the world one finds that we spend less on housing than they do. I am referring to high-cost housing.

Nevertheless we shall also have to concentrate on this and we shall have to strive to provide more functional but also more durable and socially acceptable housing at a reasonable cost. In the present economic climate we cannot afford excessive luxury in the field of housing. In many instances housing is still unnecessarily expensive in this country. The emphasis is still on luxury more than on efficiency. The reasons for this are that owners or prospective owners sometimes buy expensive land and then have to build a dwelling which corresponds with the price paid for the land. Then, too, there is the unmotivated sense of competition among people: My house must be bigger and more luxurious than the next man’s. It is also based partly on ignorance on the part of the owner or prospective owner, who does not make an effort to obtain all the necessary information in advance to assist him to plan correctly when he wants to have a house built.

There are also other bodies and persons that contribute to this. For example there is the person who draws up the plans, who also wants to make a name for himself and consequently plans houses which will cost more to build than the people in question can afford. There are many houses that are on the market because the owners are unable to meet their obligations. The various authorities are also responsible for the unnecessarily high prices of houses in view of the standards they set and the regulations they issue in this regard. That is to say, there is a variation in the standards and regulations of different authorities. Then we have the building societies which, when they lend money, want a good investment. Apart from that, the builders, too, want to make the greatest possible profit out of the building of houses. Then too there are the landscape gardeners. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, today I feel very grateful and also humble. Up to now we have had a debate which, although not the most dramatic we have ever had in this House, was definitely one of the most constructive and gratifying debates I have participated in since I became Minister. Many of us share one sentiment, and that is our love and respect for Parliament as an institution. I really think that this afternoon we saw Parliament as an institution in one of its finest moods. Here the parties, which usually differ with one another, came to grips with the real needs of the population groups of South Africa. We have our political differences in this regard, serious differences, and those differences were not neglected either this afternoon. What we saw throughout, however, was representatives of the people who are concerned about a real problem, and every member, according to his ability and insight, tried to put forward a solution to that problem. Every member made a contribution according to his ability, expressed criticism where necessary, but acted constructively throughout. I want to convey my thanks to all the hon. members, from the hon. member for Green Point who introduced the debate on that level down to my hon. friend, the hon. member for Hercules, with his soft-spoken, well-reasoned and constructive contribution. Although I might perhaps find it difficult, I should like to reply in the same spirit to the discussion so far.

Resist the temptation.

I shall do my best to resist all temptations. My old friend, the hon. member for Green Point, opened the discussion by saying that he wanted to give credit where credit was due, and that he would criticize where criticism was warranted. I want to thank him for the credit which he gave. I think the credit is due to a large extent to the officials of the Department of Community Development. I know them to be dedicated men and women who are ready to sacrifice everything for the sake of finding a solution to the problems which are being discussed here. They are unselfish and unshakeable in their determination to find solutions to the problems. In the first place, we must pay tribute to them.

In the second place, we must pay tribute to the public conscience of South Africa. We must pay tribute to the people whom we represent here for the insight and realization—although it may perhaps be an unspoken realization—that the housing of people forms one of the cornerstones of a healthy State, of an orderly community and of the happiness of most of our people— something all of us are striving to achieve.

Therefore I now want to try to furnish my hon. friend, the hon. member for Green Point, with a reply to several very interesting questions which he put. In the first place he asked me for a progress report on squatter conditions in the Cape Peninsula. I want to deal with it very briefly. On 7 January of this year it was calculated that there were just over 22 000 squatters in Cape Town. This number has in the meantime decreased to approximately 21 000. Since 7 January approximately 500 squatter families have been rehoused. From the end of 1974 until 31 March of this year, no fewer than 5 548 squatter families have been properly accommodated in the Greater Cape Peninsula.

Approximately 1 000 families?

No. A total of 461 families have been rehoused since 7 January, and since 15 November 1974, when we counted the squatter shacks, we have resettled 5 548 squatter families. Most of these have been rehoused since we passed the Act last year, because the legislation, of course, added potency to our ability to take action. I think hon. members will agree with me that it was a remarkable achievement for us, in the period I have mentioned, already to have been able to accommodate more than a quarter of the total number of squatter families in most of the Cape Peninsula. That explains why a person like the City Treasurer of Cape Town was able to state recently in a morning programme over the radio—it was either Monitor or Radio Today, I am not certain which—that he had every confidence that as far as the city of Cape Town was concerned, the squatter problem would be solved within two years. The Department of Community Development is a little more cautious and thinks that it will take a little longer. We will be able to solve the problem in Cape Town within approximately 2½ to three years. However, positive progress is being made, and we can already see the light at the end of the tunnel.

The hon. member for Green Point also referred to emergency housing. Progress has been made with the plans to build core houses—I have discussed this matter here before—and we are now beginning to build houses in what I wish to describe as temporary transit housing complexes. The houses are not intended to be permanent, except in some cases where the houses are designed in such a way that the owner can rebuild it, can make additions to it and subsequently convert it into a permanent house. We shall of course encourage this.

†All this will indicate—I think the hon. member for Green Point will agree with me—that we are making meaningful progress. There can be no doubt about the determination of the Government, of the Department of Community Development, and of the municipalities and the divisional councils concerned that this problem shall be solved within reasonable time. We are doing just that. The hon. member complained that we were using too much of the available money for other purposes, that we were using only 37½% of the available money for the rehousing of squatters. In the case of the two new schemes that we have instituted for Mitchell’s Plain— the two self-financed schemes which amount to R60 million together—we have agreed that the proportion will be different and that 60% of the homes coming available there will be used for the rehousing of squatters, 20% for municipal purposes and 20% for the department’s purposes. All this indicates that we are trying to speed up a solution of the squatters problem in this area.

The hon. member also wanted to know whether Mitchell’s Plain was intended to become merely a dormitory for the Cape Town urban area. The answer to this is to a very large extent “yes”. That is the objective, because the people who are engaged in the business and in the economic life of the Cape urban area, are obviously entitled to decent housing, such as we are providing in the Mitchell’s Plain complex. We are, of course, planning a very large civic area and very large commercial areas there. Indeed, we have planned a civic centre for the whole of the Cape Peninsula there. The centre will not be at Athlone as we thought at one time, but will now be erected at Mitchell’s Plain. This factor will stimulate economic activity and employment in that area. There is also under consideration by the Department of Planning, an industrial area which will at least provide the service industries for the community of Mitchell’s Plain.

The hon. member also wanted to know whether we are planning further large urban areas for our Coloured people. I am sure I need not remind the hon. member of Atlantis, where, by the end of the century, we expect a quarter of a million people to live. Within the lifetime of some of our backbenchers in Parliament, we expect to see a city of half a million people there. We are also developing areas in Natal near Durban, but I shall return to that later.

There is also the spectacular development of Ennerdale in the vicinity of Johannesburg, a development which will form another vast urban complex for our Coloured people. The hon. member also wanted to know what we are doing to combat urban decay, to restore decaying dwellings so that they could be inhabited again. It is our policy to do that and the hon. member can see some of the work we are doing in District Six. Schotsche Kloof is an example of what has been done and what can be done. We are also doing this elsewhere. It is our policy to give more attention to this type of urban renewal. We have a committee consisting of members of the department and officials of the Cape Town city council going into the matter. They are investigating certain suitable suburbs, including part of the hon. member for Sea Point’s constituency. They do so in order to see what can be done. When we get their report, I hope the work will be expedited. When I say these things, the hon. members will know of course that everything one says today is subject to the availability of funds. It is a necessary qualification we have to make in every instance.

The hon. member criticized me because of our permit policy. In particular, he pointed out that it was a year ago that I, on the authority of the Government, announced that we would investigate the permit question with a view to simplifying the procedure and to get away from the position in which, in all instances, ad hoc decisions have to be made.

That is still the position today.

I am standing by that. However, people want to know why we are taking so long. I make no excuse for that. After all, the Automobile Association has just announced certain relaxations. It took them two years, and they are not as vast an organization as the State. Therefore, if the Government takes some time, it should be understood that we have to deal with a committee which consist of men who are very busy—some of the senior Cabinet Ministers are concerned with this—and also with vested interests.

For example, we had a meeting with some of the principal theatre owners and their representative organizations in South Africa towards the middle of May. There we put to them, for their reaction, the provisional conclusions we had come to. They promised to go back to consider them and to give us their considered assessment of what we had proposed. When I phoned them yesterday, they told me they had written a letter of reply to us, but that they could not post for another day or two for certain reasons, reasons about which I did not want to inquire. I am awaiting that letter, and I think that quite soon thereafter it will be possible to give hon. members the result of our deliberations.

The hon. member referred to what happened during the Cape Festival. He could have added the Community Chest Carnival, because this too was opened to all races by permit. I think it was a remarkably successful experiment. Of course there were certain exceptions. The hon. member also referred to those, but I will not go into that now. There were also some special rules laid down by the Police, I think in the case of licensed premises—not the tavern, but other places. In my opinion it was very successful. I think it was successful, mainly for two reasons. The first was the manner in which the public responded. No song and dance was made about it. There was no flamboyance, and there were no abuses either. That was quite remarkable. That, I think, is to a large extent due to the fact that the Mayor of Cape Town, Mr. Tyers, undertook, when we discussed the matter, personally to see to it that all was done in a manner and according to standards which would be beyond criticism. I can truthfully say that he kept his word. He played the game, and proved himself to be a fine and responsible South African citizen, someone with a South African outlook on these matters.

I believe it shows what can be done if we all approach these problems in such a responsible manner. However, I can imagine what would happen if certain people who are active in South African politics take charge of a thing like this. One can only imagine what would happen.

That then is my reply to the last point made by the hon. member for Green Point about why this could not be made permanent and why we could not delegate the function of issuing permits to local authorities. There is much to be said for that. After all, local situations differ, and even the outlook of people living in the different localities differ. However, we always take a chance in these matters, especially when irresponsible people, whom he and I can identify immediately without mentioning names, get hold of this. Heaven knows what can then be done to race relations in South Africa. For that reason I believe that the arrangement that some central authority control the issuing of permits is absolutely essential in order to prevent abuses which can exacerbate the problems which we have among the races in South Africa. This may be done through granting a fairly open permit for a period of time. I want to assure my hon. friend that good communal relations are our major consideration in these matters.

*I should like to thank the hon. member for Tygervallei for his contribution. He reacted to the speech made by the hon. member for Green Point, particularly on the permit aspect. He pointed out that we do not act arbitrarily in these matters, but that there are very thorough considerations of policy which we apply when we allocate permits. I want to mention just a few of these considerations again. I have already referred to racial friction in South Africa. It is our policy that when any recital, any performance, any activity which is of a non-recurring nature—something which happens only once, for example a music festival which is held only once and is not repeated— occurs and there is no opportunity for people to attend that performance separately, it is our policy to throw it open to all population groups, if there are no other considerations against it. Also when there is a lack of facilities, i.e. when the performance can be repeated but there are no facilities to do so, then the same procedure is followed here.

The example I have in mind is the Walt Disney Show which was held near Johannesburg, which required an area of many acres and a great many structures. One cannot move this around every evening, and this we also take into consideration in making the performances multiracial. It follows from this that the Government is loath—and I could use a stronger term than that—to throw the cinemas, for example, open to everyone. In every urban area of any note there are cinemas. Cinema exist throughout the entire country, and films can be duplicated. Copies of films can be made and premieres can be held simultaneously in various parts of the country. The considerations which I have mentioned above, therefore do not apply to cinemas, and therefore I can tell the public that it is almost certain that they will not succeed if they ask us to relax the policy in the case of cinemas.

The hon. member referred to utility companies, particularly here in the Cape Peninsula. He and I are of course agreed that we are very indebted to these companies for the wonderful work they have done over the years in regard to housing. An example I have in mind is that a suburb such as Pinelands was originally laid out by a utility company. One would never have thought it. It is one of the best suburbs of Cape Town.

The hon. member asked me whether we would not consider reducing the interest rate on certain economic houses for a certain income group to 3½% as well, as in the case of houses which are leased to people with an income of between R250 and R400. This matter was given very thorough consideration by the National Housing Commission. The commission is not unwilling to do it, but the economic climate at present is such that it was decided that we cannot do so now. But it is a matter which will be considered again as soon as circumstances are such that it becomes feasible.

The hon. member for Rondebosch referred to the housing shortage and the means of calculating it. He wanted to know how we calculate it, and asked certain questions in regard to our approach to the problem. I shall inform the hon. member in a moment what the result of our calculations was. When we calculate the shortage, we give sufficient weight to the increase in the population as well as to waiting lists, although that information is extremely unreliable. I do not want to elaborate on that, because I see the hon. member agrees with me.

In addition we take the question of overpopulation into consideration, particularly in consultation with the municipalities; as well as the problem of immigration, including the immigration of Whites from abroad; and the migration of other groups internally, and to the urbanization process which accompanies this. All these things are taken into consideration. In the case of squatting we determine the extent of the problem by way of physical surveys. We send people out in vehicles, in helicopters and on foot to determine precisely what the extent of the squatter problem is. Lastly—and this is very important—we also make use of the expertise of demographers, of those who are our friends and of those who are opponents in this matter. I should like to give my hon. friend more detailed information about our projections. According to estimates the housing shortage in the Republic of South Africa at present is as follows: For Whites there is a shortage of 6 100 dwellings; in the case of the Indians, 21 235, and in the case of the Coloureds—and now my hon. friend who asked why we should devote most of our attention to the Western Cape, should listen carefully—there is a shortage of 58 600 dwellings. To eliminate this shortage we estimate that up to and including 1980 the following average number of family dwellings will have to be built annually in the Republic to meet the expected demand for housing as a result of the population increase and other factors: In the case of Whites, 25 700 houses per annum; in the case of the Coloureds, 13 400 houses per annum, and in the case of Indians 4 000 houses per annum. To indicate what progress we are making with this matter, I want to point out that the following number of residential units were provided during 1976: For the Whites 5 301 houses were provided by the department and its agents, while the private sector constructed 29 400 houses. This gives a total of 34 701. This is enough to be pleased about. For Coloureds 17 900 houses were provided by my department and its agents, while 3 500 were provided by the private sector. This gives a total of 21 396, which is 8 000 more than is necessary to make provision for the normal increase and migration. The backlog has therefore been made up and outstripped by 8 000 units. In the case of the Indians 2 534 houses were provided by the department and its agents, while 1 700 were constructed by the private sector. This gives a total of 4 234, which is 234 more than what is necessary to make provision for the other factors to which I have referred. We shall have to speed up the rate in the case of our Indian population, for it is not entirely satisfactory. That replies to the first question asked by the hon. member for Rondebosch.

The hon. member also referred to core houses. The core houses designed by the department’s technical division comply with the requirements of the Slums Act and also with the minimum health standards laid down by the municipalities. By constructing these houses, we wish to encourage people who are having a hard time of it financially, to make additions themselves according to the example we give them. I also want to inform the hon. member that we are able, with our sub-economic housing plans, to fulfil many needs; for in terms of the new rules which I announced today, we can provide people with an income of up to R150 per month with houses at a rental of up to R37,50 per month. But I also want to point out that about half of the Coloureds in the Cape Peninusla are people who qualify for sub-economic housing. More than half of the Coloureds in the vicinity of Cape Town have a monthly income of less than R150 per month. This is not enough. It is all very well to say that the State should provide the houses. We are doing so. We are building houses on a scale which is unprecedented in the history of South Africa. We are doing our utmost to meet our obligations, but, on the other hand, there is a great responsibility on all employers to ensure that they pay their people better and more livable wages than R150 per month. I want to do now what I did in the Other Place this year, and that is to make an urgent appeal to the employers of the Western Cape to examine their own conscience and ask themselves whether they are paying their Coloureds enough to ensure them of a decent subsistence and enough to make it unnecessary for them to squat and devise all kinds of other plans to keep their living expenses low enough to be able to exist on an inadequate wage. That is all I want to say to the hon. member for Rondebosch.

I should like to tell the hon. member for Parow that I also appreciated his speech very much indeed. He gave an erudite analysis of flat occupation. I want to say at once that the Department of Community Development does not regard a flat as the ideal place for people to live in. Our first choice is the detached house with its own piece of land. The second choice is what is called the “town house” which also has access to a piece of the soil of South Africa. The flat is only our third choice. At the same time, however, we realize that the flat does have a role to play in a solution to our housing problems. We believe that there are times in the life of people when flats are extremely suitable dwellings. I am thinking for example of young newly-weds. For them it is a very good place to live. The mere fact that they do not have a garden in which to spend their time, makes them realize all the sooner that a flat is no longer suitable for them for a family with children should not be living in a flat. We believe that a family ought to have their own home. When one is old, however, the flat again has a good role to play. Once one’s responsibility to one’s family is ended, a flat is a suitable place to live in. It assures them of company, something which is frequently lacking in one’s declining years.

The hon. member for Maitland complained about the high rentals which have to be paid, particularly for the houses in Spencer Street. I dealt with this matter very fully in a letter which I posted to him today. Therefore I do not want to take up the time of this House in discussing an individual case. However, I just want to say something in general. The increased rental is determined in terms of the amended Rents Act. It is therefore not arbitrary action on the part of the rent boards. This is action within the prescribed limits, within the four comers of the Act, and they are frequently unable to do anything else. Besides, it was also very necessary in many cases. It has frequently happened that a block of flats has remained under rent control for 10 to 15 years and the owners never bothered to ask for increases. Now the shoe is beginning to pinch the lessor and he applies, after having waited many years, for relief. The relief which he therefore receives in one increase, must inevitably be more than would have been if he had sought relief from time to time.

Several speakers raised the question of rent control. I wonder whether it is not time we subjected our rent control legislation to a drastic reappraisal. I myself stayed in rent-controlled flats in the constituency of the hon. member for Green Point. The fact of the matter is that a great majority of the people who are today enjoying the protection of the rent-controlled legislation are people who do not need it. If a means test were to be applied, I wonder how many of the people occupying the grand old flats here in Sea Point and elsewhere, would really be entitled, for economic reasons, to protection against the owners of their flats. The equilibrium between the rights of the lessor and those of the lessee is becoming increasingly difficult to maintain, and I think it is time we took a good, hard look at the Rents Act. Now, I know that within a question of days, or weeks, the report of the commission on low-cost housing, under the chairmanship of the Secretary for the Department of Community Development, Mr. Fouché, will be available to us all. One of the terms of reference of that commission was to look into our rent-control legislation. I hope therefore that there will be proposals or suggestions which will make it possible for us as a Parliament to undertake a fundamental revision in the near future of this extremely difficult and awkward, and frequently unfair Act.

My hon. friend asked me about Maitland Garden Village. It is a problem. We admit it at once. The difficulty is, however, that with the limited funds at our disposal, we have to give preference to the housing of people who do not have houses at all, or of people who are living in extremely squalid slum conditions. However, the matter is receiving, attention, and as soon as finances allow, we shall consider it again. The hon. member and I discussed Sanddrift. There are very cheap houses there, extremely cheap houses. I think the hon. member will agree. Therefore I think that if there are minor deficiencies there the owners, since they do have such cheap housing, can see to it themselves that repairs are effected, except where it is still covered by the lien. Where it is a really serious case of damage or deficiency, and if the hon. member and the lessee concerned draw our attention to this, we shall see what we can do to repair it for them free of charge.

The hon. member for Boksburg, with his characteristic eloquence, raised a number of very interesting matters. One of these was his concern, concern which we all share, that the responsibility of the State in respect of housing is constantly increasing. This is a phenomenon throughout the Western world. One does not know what the answer to it is. However, I must say something here in defence of we South Africans. As far as the Whites are concerned, only 17% of our population avail themselves of the privileges which they are entitled to under the respective State housing schemes, while according to income, 80% of them could in fact lay claim to them if they wished. This is a fine tribute to the sense of responsibility of our White population in South Africa.

My hon. friends and other hon. members also discussed the subsidy of 2% which we paid on certain types of house mortgages for so many years. The scheme did not cost us as little as the hon. member for Green Point alleged. I know that he said what he said in good faith. I think he referred to a figure of R200 000 per annum. The last year the scheme was in operation, last year, it cost us R15 million. From 1970 or 1971, when it commenced, until we stopped it, it cost us R35 million. We would probably have bitten down hard and pressed on with the scheme if it had been achieving its end, but it was not. Instead of helping people who were having a hard time acquiring a house, it gave rise to people buying houses in a higher and more expensive category than the one in which they would have bought if they had not received the subsidy. Even if they had not received the subsidy, they would nevertheless have been able to buy a good, decent house, one which would have been suited to the requirements of their families. That is the main reason why we had to abolish it.

†My hon. friend, the member for Pinetown, paid tribute to the Government for what it did in the case of Tin Town. I want to thank him for his generosity in paying that tribute. I think it is something all South Africans can be proud of, that in an emergency we could act as quickly and as efficiently as we did to alleviate what would otherwise have been prolonged misery for the people affected.

He also spoke about alleged corruption. All I can say is that we have had a preliminary investigation done by our department and we cannot find any signs of corruption. However, because of the many allegations which were made, the Secretary for Community Development on a recent visit to Durban made arrangements for the appointment of a special standing committee to investigate this whole matter thoroughly, to unravel it completely and to unearth any possible corruption that might be taking place, but which is not immediately obvious. That committee will consist of representatives of the Department of Community Development, of the municipality of Durban and of the Indian community. The chairman of the Indian Council, Mr. J. N. Reddy, or his nominee, will serve on it, as well as the chairman, or his nominee, of the local Advisory Committee for the area of Chatsworth. I think that body will certainly leave no stone unturned to expose any possible corruption that could have taken place, so that action can be taken against the people concerned.

My friend also asked about the sale of houses to Bantu. About six months ago my department, together with the Department of Bantu Administration, worked out a formula whereby the prices at which old houses should be sold, could be determined. Now there is no reason why these houses should not be sold. I understand they are being sold. However, if my hon. friend has any problems about that he should really speak to the Bantu Administration, because once we had assisted that department in finding the formula I spoke about we became functus officio and had no further functions with regard to that matter.

May I ask the hon. the Minister a question? I raised that issue to inquire who gets the money, because those houses have been built with funds which have been obtained in terms of the 1957 Act from what now has become the Bantu Housing Board. That is what interests me. Who gets the money?

The answer is that any money obtained by the local Bantu Affairs Administration Board from the sale of Bantu houses comes back to the National Housing Commission and is then earmarked for Bantu housing. The National Housing Commission serves the Department of Bantu Administration only as far as the allocation of funds is concerned. It becomes a revolving fund, and the money goes back into Bantu housing.

*My friend, the hon. member for False Bay, put a question to me in regard to the railway line to Mitchell’s Plain. Unfortunately we needed R9 million this year to start work on this railway line. Owing to the financial circumstances, it was not possible for that money to be voted. However, we have had talks and have also discussed the matter at Cabinet level, with the result that the railway line between Cape Town and Mitchell’s Plain is now one of the first three priorities of the S.A. Railways. That is why we can expect work to be started on it soon. In the meantime the Department of Community Development appropriated a special amount of R2,5 million this year for the City Council of Cape Town to reinforce and improve the road between Mitchell’s Plain and Cape Town so that we can in the meantime use road transportation to the greatest possible extent to convey passengers between Cape Town and Mitchell’s Plain.

The hon. member for False Bay also asked that more land be made available for employers who wish to build houses for their employees. I want to give the hon. member the assurance that any employer who wishes to build houses for his employees will receive land immediately, because the necessary land is available. The difficulty is that most employers in the vicinity of Cape Town want land at Belhar, while land there is not unlimited. If they are willing to consider Mitchell’s Plain, land is immediately available for them there. If my hon. friend knows of any people who have any problems, he can tell them this. We shall help them to acquire the necessary land.

The hon. member for Piketberg inter alia asked us to make more plots available for Coloureds who wish to build themselves. I have a list here—the hon. member could take a look at it afterwards—which points out that we have more than 400 plots available near Cape Town for Coloureds who wish to build their own houses, and that the prices for those plots vary from R1 000 to R3 000 per plot. However, there is only a small demand for these plots. It seems to me the Coloureds prefer the municipality to build houses for them with the department’s money. However, if we can encourage them to build houses themselves, we must do so. It is in any case our policy that they will do this. In any case, hundreds of plots will soon be available from the Community Development Board at places such as New Orleans, Belhar, Newtown, Macassar, McGregor, Brandvlei, etc. Therefore, there are no problems in this regard.

The hon. member also asked us to do more to make community facilities available in the Coloured areas. Let me tell him at once that during the past 18 months we have made no less than R15,5 million available for that purpose, of which R8 million has already been spent. As the hon. member knows, the municipalities are now, when they establish new townships, being required by law to have the community facilities available at the same time as the houses. Therefore, that problem has also been solved. As far as the beautification of towns is concerned, I can tell the hon. member that we encourage the local communities in every way possible to beautify their environment. Every year, for example, a country-wide garden competition is held to encourage the communities to beautify their towns.

The difficulty with a debate such as the one which has been conducted today, in which everyone makes constructive contributions, and no one plays politics, is that hon. members ask so many questions that it takes far longer to reply to them than when one needs only make a political speech. The hon. member for Walmer asked me about South End. As far as South End and other similar areas are concerned—an hon. member raised the question of Algoa Bay; this is a similar case—I want to say that when we find that the public is not developing an area rapidly enough itself, we begin a township. When we have developed part of it, it encourages other people and stimulates them to continue the developments. We have appointed consultants in regard to South End, and we have already received advice from them. They will try to sell the land, and if they cannot succeed, we shall stimulate the development of this area by commencing the development there ourselves. The hon. member also said that we should encourage home ownership. We are doing this in every possible way, but the hon. member must remember that although we allow the sale of sub-economic houses, we should be careful, because there are many people who cannot afford to own a house. We have to make provision for them as well by making sub-economic houses available.

The hon. member also referred to the Opera House in Port Elizabeth. I can only say that when we have taken a final decision on entertainment permits, I shall bear his suggestion in mind, and I hope that when the result is known, he shall see that we do in fact pay attention even to the suggestions of the Opposition.

The hon. member for Somerset East expressed appreciation of the department, and I wish to thank him for doing so. He also raised the question of Algoa Park. My reply in this regard is the same as the one I gave the hon. member for Walmer a moment ago.

The hon. member for South Coast referred to the Indian area at Port Shepstone. I listened carefully to this suggestion of a section 19 area. I shall take up the matter with my department. If the hon. member finds that a section 19 area is established at Port Shepstone for the Indians soon, he shall see that what I have just said to the hon. member for Walmer, namely that we also listened to the good suggestions made by hon. members of the Opposition, is true.

The hon. member asked why the Western Cape was receiving more money than other areas. This is unavoidable, because the problem in the Western Cape is greater. There is a shortage of 58 000 houses for Coloureds. This is three times as much as the shortage in the case of the next group, the Indians. The need in the Western Cape is the greatest, and therefore they receive more attention.

As far as Marburg is concerned, I want to say that this is a major problem which the department inherited from the people which dealt with the matter before we took over. The major problem there is the situation high up on the slope, something which makes the services, especially the sewerage services—as the hon. member correctly stated—very expensive. We have now caused an investigation to be instituted by the Building Technical Division of the department. The hon. member may rest assured that the matter will receive urgent attention in the immediate future.

The hon. member also raised the problem of the White House. He is afraid that we shall not succeed in selling the property or that we shall sell it at a loss. I immediately sent away for a telexed reply on this matter, and I shall quote the relevant information to the hon. member—

†There is no question at this stage, therefore, of withholding the sale. Furthermore, we have recovered whatever we invested. I hope that will make the hon. member happy.

*I come now to the hon. member for Hercules, I have already thanked him for the note on which he concluded the debate up to this point, but I want to thank him once again very sincerely. In support of what he said, I want to make two observations. Firstly : Housing is probably the greatest challenge we are faced with today. We have heard before in this House, from other people, that with the population explosion it is going to become necessary for South Africa, between now and the end of the century, i.e. for the following 23 years, to build as many houses as were built in South Africa since the day Jan van Riebeeck arrived at the Cape. At the end of the century we shall have had to double the number of houses that we have at present in South Africa. This is a tremendous challenge, and I was pleased to be able to infer from the nature of the debate that all the hon. members realize the seriousness of the matter, and that the hon. members of all the parties are prepared to give their assistance so that we can accomplish this task.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to thank the hon. the Minister for the comprehensive way in which he reacted to my previous questions. I also listened with great interest to the hon. the Minister’s reply to a question asked by the hon. member for Boksburg concerning the 2% scheme. In this connection I want to discuss a non-controversial matter and a controversial one. A delegate from one of the building societies spoke to me about the 2% scheme and he gave me to understand that there was a great deal of confusion among building societies as regards this scheme and that the various building societies adopted differing measures when working with this scheme. I know that the department issued two circulars in which an effort was made to give greater clarity with regard to the scheme. One of the problems in this connection was the question as to who exactly qualified for the scheme. In the second circular issued by the department dated 23 July 1975, they say the following—

I know that the 2% scheme is no longer going to apply, but in this connection I am more concerned about the existing mortgagees. What does the term “family” really imply, and what constitutes a source of income? For example, in my opinion it is unjust if aged parents receive a very small pension and as a result their child can be disqualified or may not get the bond. If such a parent who receives a very small pension comes to live with his child, the mortgagee’s bond could be endangered. Another question is the following: Does the maintenance paid to a divorced woman for her children qualify as an income or not? This is one of the other anomalies in this connection. If anyone pays back more than the minimum interest rate on the bond, can he lose the bond? Is it still the case that if anyone makes a capital payment on his outstanding bond, he loses this subsidy? These are only a few of the anomalies and matters needing to be cleared up that have been brought to my attention and that I, in turn, now wish to bring to the attention of the hon. the Minister. The people have also expressed a need for better liaison, more precise liaison, between building societies and the department with regard to these problems.

The second matter I want to touch on relates to the question I put to the hon. the Minister on 12 April this year, questions No. 13. It concerns the whole issue of permits. The question I put to the hon. the Minister read as follows—

The hon. the Minister replied—

This is the reason that follows now—

I want to ask the hon. the Minister, in all honesty, whether he could not give an explanation in this regard as to what considerations applied in this particular case. I do not mean thereby that the hon. the Minister should say that this is policy; I want him to indicate whatever considerations played a role in this particular case. I shall tell the House why I require this information from the hon. the Minister. At the time when this distasteful piece of news was appearing in our newspapers, my name was on the list of the Department of the Interior used when people from outside South Africa are brought here to visit the country. I could talk to these people openly and objectively about our country’s problems, about their complexity and about the difficulties facing us. However I simply did not know where to start explaining to these people what has happened in this particular case. They were simply unable to understand it. They can understand that one can have a homeland policy and that one can try to implement a multi-national policy, however difficult it may be. They can understand what the Opposition’s alternatives are, but this type of decision does South Africa more harm than anything else that happens in the country and when I say that I include unrest. It is incidents of this kind that make it impossible for any South African to explain honestly to visitors from abroad what is going on in the country and what is being attempted here. That is why I should appreciate it if the hon. the Minister could give us a full explanation of the type of consideration that applies in cases like these. It could also help us to explain to people why children cannot dance together in private ballet classes. There are many of us who grew up on farms and who swam, played, scrummed and did all kinds of things with non-White friends. This is really an incident which deserves the attention of the Government of a country, something which is forbidden by the Government. I therefore ask that the hon. the Minister furnish us with a full reply on this point.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Rondebosch referred to a specific matter and asked a specific question. This is obviously a matter which I cannot react to now because then I should not have the opportunity to say what I have to say. [Interjections.] I have my opinions on that. Hon. members opposite need not laugh so uproariously. When the hon. member for Pinetown grows up and gets some sense into his head, then he, too, will understand these things. However, I have my own case to state, and the hon. the Minister will be able to reply to the question put by the hon. member for Rondebosch. Fortunately the hon. member for Rondebosch has more sense than that hon. laughing member for Pinetown.

On the path of development of any people or population group, political or constitutional development is the aspect which catches the eye, which arouses emotions, which is newsworthy and which has sensation value. However, when a people or a population group is not oppressed, but is assisted or encouraged on that path of development, with understanding, goodwill and affection and in a peaceful fashion, the constitutional or political aspects are certainly not of the most urgent importance to the majority of those people, to the ordinary citizen, to the family. When that is so, it is the most important aspect for a small group only—let us say, for argument’s sake, active politicians, and often, unfortunately, for activist pseudo-politicians as well.

Politics and political development are important. That is true. However, together with education, matters such as housing, community development, health and welfare services, employment opportunities and economic progress are by far the most important aspects. Indeed, they affect the population as a whole. They affect the entire population group— every living soul among them; and they profoundly affect each one of them. Whether a group develops in accordance with the Westminster system or in accordance with a canton system or in accordance with a canteen system is not the point. The fact of the matter is that while the development is taking place, the individual and his family must be able to eat, live, work and study in an orderly and secure environment, in decent housing, and with every opportunity to build up their securities and their incomes.

It is in this very respect that the Department of Community Development has such a vital role to play, and does in fact play that role. The specific facet of this whole which I have just outlined and which I should like to concentrate on today is that of Indian businessmen and Indian shops. I want to put it very clearly from the outset that I do not wish to tinker with the Group Areas Act today and that furthermore, I have no fault to find with the policy of the NP. The Act is a good one. The policy is right.

Last year I requested a somewhat more liberal implementation of Section 19 of the Group Areas Act. In this regard I should like to refer the House to the White Paper on the Report of the Commission of Inquiry into Matters Relating to the Coloured Population Group. I refer to the reaction of the Government to Recommendation No. 5 on page 7 of the White Paper. I quote—

1. (a) Die Regering aanvaar die aanbeveling en dit is trouens reeds bekend gemaak dat—
   1. (i) nywerheidsgebiede voorts geen groepskarakter sal hê nie, en vryelik tot beskikking van Kleurling-en Indiëronder-nemers moet wees vir nywerheidsves-tigingdoeleindes; wetswysiging wat nodig sou wees om hieraan uitvoering te gee, geniet tans aandag;
   2. (ii) in groter stede en dorpe meer vryelik van die bepalings van artikel 19 van die Wet op Groepsgebiede, 1966, gebruik gemaak word om ook buite Kleurling-en Indiërgroepsgebiede handelsterreine vir Kleurling-en Indiërhandelaars te identifiseer waar hulle kan handel dryf.

The aspect of trade is a far more acute one to the Indian than to the Coloured. On page 62 of the Erika Theron Report one also finds that the Coloured has a stronger link with the soil and that he has not progressed so far in the field of business. But the contrary is true of the Indians. It is specifically in that sphere that he has made a lot of progress, as I shall indicate in a moment.

I say that the Act is a good one and that the policy, too, is right, but what I want to discuss today is the implementation of the legal principles and the implementation of the policies. Surely it is a simple fact that those who are responsible for the implementation and carrying out of policies and legal principles, can carry out a good policy well and in the right way and can make a success of it. But it is equally true that if those who are responsible for the implementation thereof do so in a half-hearted or lukewarm fashion, they will not make a good job of it and if they oppose it, a good policy or law of this nature will be nullified.

Who in fact are those to whom I refer, who are responsible for the implementation of such a policy or of such principles of law? There are many of them. In the first instance there is the hon. the Minister and the Department of Community Development. There are many other departments, too, such as the Department of Planning, amongst others. In the second place, there are the Members of Parliament and Senators.

These hon. gentlemen can play a very important role by co-operating positively in implementing such a policy, but the same gentlemen can also play a role by placing obstacles in the way or perhaps by constantly dragging their heels. I do not think I should discuss ultra-conservatives who drag their heels and ultra-liberals who place obstacles in the way this evening. Perhaps it would not be appropriate to do so. However these gentlemen, too, play an important role in carrying out and implementing such a policy.

Then, too, there are the provincial councils and the local authorities. So one could continue. There is the Indian trader himself. There is the White trader. There is the Indian Council that is becoming more and more important. It would be pointless for me to debate who was the most important of all these groups in carrying out the policy. But what I can say without fear of contradiction is that the Department of Community Development and its officials have a vital role to play and are in fact playing that role. In this regard I want to thank the department and its officials and pay tribute to them for the major and often difficult task they have performed. I do not think I can put it better than the hon. member for Overvaal did.

At the same time, I want to make an appeal to the hon. the Minister and his department to see to it that particularly when there is positive change, as I indicated in the extract I quoted from the White Paper, that policy be implemented immediately and that it should be conveyed to every regional office and every official of the department. In the nature of the matter it would be pointless if the Government were to take a decision, Parliament were to approve it, the Indians were to smile broadly and that fine policy were to come up short against the first office desk in the first office. At the same time I also want to make an appeal to the Members of Parliament, to all the other groups I have just mentioned, to carry out the policy in a positive fashion as soon as possible—in fact, to carry it out immediately—because it is in the interests of the population group in question and because it is in the interests of good human relations.

There are certain other aspects which I should very much like to quote with regard to the carrying out and implementation of the policy, e.g. a policy relating to Indian business enterprises. When one considers certain figures, one finds on page 38 of the Report and elsewhere that up to now, 1 560 Indian shops have been resettled in South Africa; 913 of them by the department and 647 at their own expense. On page 38, too, we find that of those 913, 76 have been resettled in the Transvaal and only 121 in Natal. Of the 276 under construction, 213 are in the Transvaal, 63 in the Cape Province and none in Natal. Of the 530 being planned, there are 372 in the Transvaal and only 78 in Natal. The point I want to make is that we are aware of our country’s economic position. We know what the financial position of the country is, we know that money is limited. But when there are major advantages involved in establishing a shop in a central business area at a low cost, we should rather do so and use the money that we save for, say, defence, education or any other good purpose. [Time expired.]

Business suspended at 18h30 and resumed at 20h00.

Evening Sitting

Mr. Chairman, unlike the hon. member for Krugersdorp and further to what was said by the hon. the Minister, I should like to ask the question this evening whether, in view of the present economic slump and the lack of funds as well as the decrease in the construction of flats for letting purposes, the time has not come for us to review the entire concept of rent control. In view of that, perhaps we ought to consider whether it has not perhaps become necessary to give some thought to introducing a means test as a condition for tenants in rent-controlled flats. As an alternative we could ask ourselves whether the time has not arrived for us to give some attention to the gradual or partial removal of rent control, particularly in respect of the more expensive and more luxurious flats and whether this could not be extended to other flats in due course.

Rent control has been an absolutely essential measure in South Africa over the past 57 years since its introduction in 1920. It has served a specific purpose, because it is a vital measure preventing the innocent tenant from being exploited by the unsympathetic lessor in times of a housing shortage. This entire concept rests on three foundations: Firstly, the tenant is protected in that he pays a reasonable rent; secondly, the lessor is protected in that he receives a reasonable return on his investment; and thirdly, there is the very important aspect that the lessor retains the initiative at all times to build more blocks of flats which may be made available for letting purposes.

From time to time in the past the hon. the Minister has amended the rent-control formula according to circumstances and needs. He has been waging a never-ending struggle in the quest for the ideal solution to the question as to what constitutes a reasonable rental, i.e. one which is not too high for the tenant and not too low for the investor. At all times he has had to search for a sound balance between lessor and lessee in the matter of rentals. Two aspects are important in this matter. The first is to ensure that exploitation in the matter of the rent charged is combated at all times. Going hand in hand with this is the matter of ensuring the addition of thousands of new units each year.

During the past few years, however, the situation has undergone a drastic change. The steady provision of dwelling units and the continuous construction of new blocks of flats, this very important prerequisite for the combating of exploitation in the matter of the rent charged, have stopped all over the country. A dilemma has arisen because the number of people has increased. Whilst the need for flats has increased, their numbers have not.

The reasons for this are obvious. The interest charged on mortgage loans has increased unbelievably to 14% as compared with 6½% ten years ago. Tremendous increases have taken place in respect of services, rates, maintenance costs, and similar things, so much so that an investment in a block of flats has become a risky venture. It is such a risky investment that whenever anyone wants to invest in a block of flats today, he has to take various factors into account merely to break even. He has to know whether he will be able to absorb the ever-accumulating interest on the mortgage loan whilst the building is under construction, whether he will be able to get maximum occupation immediately after completion, and whether he will be able to obtain a rental varying between R150 and R250 per month for a flat with three bedrooms. That is what he needs to get at today’s building costs. Apart from that there is always a cloud hanging over him that rent control may possibly be extended yet again.

I believe that during the past number of years rent boards have played a special role in effecting a reasonable balance in the matter of the rent charged. In view of the continually rising maintenance costs, as well as other costs, they, too, have had to contend with a tremendous problem. In many cases the possibility of awarding realistic increases has steadily diminished, as has the possibility of limiting realistically those increases that had to be awarded. When one looks at rent board decisions, one sees that the rent charged for certain flats has increased, in some cases by 5% and in others by 300%. I could mention such cases. I believe that the formula is correct, however. If one makes an analysis of the cases heard by the rent boards in South Africa during the nine month period up to 30 June 1976, one finds that the average increase was 20,4%. In my opinion that increase, seen in the light of other factors, was reasonable towards both the lessor and the lessee. However, there are certain consequences we have to contend with. In the urban areas of South Africa the construction of flat projects decreased from 735 per annum to fewer than 400 from 1970 to 1975. In other words, there was a drop of approximately 50% in the construction of flats. A bigger shortage of flat accommodation is being experienced and the shortage is growing. The flats that are being constructed, are being constructed with the Sectional Titles Act in mind. In respect of many existing flats—and the Gardens is a typical example of this—applications are being made to obtain the necessary permission to convert those flats and to use them for office purposes. At present flat premises are not being developed and have become basically worthless. Here we are really dealing with a vicious circle—the greater the crisis as a result of the shortage of flats, the greater the need for stricter rent control, and the greater the need for the stricter application of rent control, the fewer additional projects are tackled. So it is a vicious circle we have to contend with.

Apart from that there is a further aspect. The rich and monied man with an income of R1 000 to R2 000 per month lives in a controlled flat for which he pays R75 per month whilst the poor man who earns R350 per month has to go and rent an uncontrolled flat at R150 per month. In view of this the question arises as to whether it has not become necessary to introduce a means test so that the controlled flats may be utilized for those who qualify for them on the basis of their income. I realize that this does constitute a problem in that the lessor is in fact subsidizing the lessee. On the other hand, however, it is fairer than to allow the rich man to continue living in the cheap flat. I also realize that it poses a problem to the State to say that a means test has to be introduced for accommodation in a private project. On the other hand, the State is the body which lays down the statutory provisions for combating exploitation in the matter of the rent charged.

What other possibilities are there? There are not many, it is true. One could tamper with the present rate of return as laid down in the Act, i.e. 8½% on the statutorily assessed property valuation less depreciation. However, I think there is very little one could achieve by tampering with that. If one were to reduce it, one would be affecting the lessor detrimentally and if one were to increase it, the lessee would not be able to afford it. Therefore, in order to make more flats available for letting purposes, the solution is possibly the consideration of giving partial and systematic relief from rent control on dwelling units and flats or the consideration of a partial and systematic lifting of rent control on such units and flats. One realizes that rent control cannot be lifted immediately as that would lead to chaos and as it would mean absolute exploitation in the matter of the rent charged. But what one has to do, is to lift this rent control over a period of a number of years in order to ensure that a sufficient number of units are constructed in due course. The partial abolition of rent control ought to begin with the luxurious flats. In due course it may possible be extended to other categories. It would appear, however, that in order to have a really adequate number of rental units made available, one would have to give consideration to relieving rent control in what is perhaps a more drastic manner— preferably over an extended period. The question may be asked what is to become of the poorer people and the pensioners enjoying protection in a rent-controlled unit. I believe that the State has a particular task and duty in this regard to see to the future of those persons who do not have the financial means to pay a rental. I believe too that the State, and in particular the Department of Community Development, has already played a tremendous role by means of the provision of sub-economic accommodation and housing for the aged. I ask myself whether one could not eventually do away with rent control and establish in its stead a control body to which a person could have recourse in the case of absolute exploitation in the matter of the rent charged. If these thoughts could be conveyed to the Fouché Commission so that they may investigate them whilst they are still conducting their investigation, then I believe that relief of this nature would restore self-confidence and that we would get more units, and this belief is supported by the fact that there is a capital appreciation built into the investment. In that case it would be possible to determine the rental in a reasonable manner on the basis of supply and demand and the State would look after those people who are in a poorer financial position. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Durbanville, who has just sat down, made a passionate plea in defence of the present Rents Act. I do not wish to comment except to say that when a prospective buyer of a flat which is under rent control cannot get a bond because of that control, then I do feel that the matter should be re-examined.

The hon. the Minister and his department are, I think, to be complimented on the new housing complexes which are being designed and built these days. I am thinking in particular of the ones which we have been taken to see at Atlantis and Mitchell’s Plain. I think that they are outstanding examples and one feels quite overwhelmed by the amenities and facilities which are being provided. One is in fact rather dazzled by the total community requirements that are included in the overall planning of these complexes. My plea to the Minister, however, is that he should not overlook the deficiencies in the older townships. These were also once new and bright and attractive, but what are they today? On this tour that we were taken on by the department we saw that many of these older townships are positively dirty and unhygienic. There is a lot of rubbish lying around and they are degenerating into poverty-stricken overcrowded slums. What has gone wrong and why is there this degeneration? I feel that the answer is that there has been inadequate planning in the past. Welfare services and community facilities which are now being catered for were not adequately provided at that stage. I was looking at the survey published by Nicro in 1975 on crime in the Cape Flats and it shows these remarkable lapses in township planning and how evident they are. On the one hand you have Bonteheuwel and Bishop Lavis, which are well-equipped, and on the other hand we have Uitzig, which at that stage had no police station, no sports fields, no swimming pool or tennis courts, no cinema, no library, no playground, one clinic, but no post office, shops or sports clubs. We would like to know from the hon. the Minister in what practical aspects the provisions of the Housing Amendment Act, 1975, have been applied and also what the recommendations of the Standards Committee which was formed under that Act are towards facilities for a balanced community life in these older areas.

This department is involved in the movement and resettlement of tens of thousands of people. The latest figures that I have are those for 31 December 1975 and they indicate that 58 834 Coloureds, 30 646 Indians and 1 594 Whites have been moved. Such resettlement is fraught with inherent disruptive problems and out of this disruption a congenial and happy community must grow with compatible norms. It is therefore essential that facilities for cultural, social and recreational activities be provided. We found that in these older townships such facilities are sadly deficient. To quote again from this report, Cheree Bloch, an attorney of the Supreme Court of South Africa, says: “The process of readjustment is so frustrating for them that it is small wonder that their behaviour often runs to extremes which frequently manifests itself in criminal activity.” We hope that in his reply the hon. the Minister will tell the House what joint interdepartmental efforts are being made to provide balanced community life in the older townships.

Very often the hon. the Minister’s plaintive cry is one of poverty. We feel that charity begins at home. In fact, the hon. the Minister sits on a treasure trove. His department is the biggest real estate giant in South Africa. It has gobbled up so much property that in answer to a question put to him the hon. the Minister could not even tell us what the extent of his estate was. For instance, at Ashburton, just outside Pietermaritzburg, the department owns 433,9 acres. We are told that this has been put aside for future planning. I believe that when the time comes when houses will be erected in that area it will be 20 years hence. In the meantime the purchase price of R344 295,25 lies unproductive. I think the hon. the Minister has begun to realize his potential wealth. On page 5 of the report it says that the department has taken even more active steps than before to alienate properties. I hope that the Ashburton property, as well as many others, will be sold and that the revenue will be used by the board for the community facilities to which I have referred earlier on.

Of course, the bonanza of R22,5 million is District Six. I believe that the final planning stage is being reached. We hope the hon. the Minister will tell us tonight that a Houghton for Coloureds will be built there. It has the advantages of elevation and proximity to places of work and leisure. With the programme of urban renewal for the surrounding area the restored gems of olden day architecture will certainly reinforce the status of this area.

I should like to refer to another matter the report deals with and that is the question of outstanding debts. I see that the department has reduced the outstanding debts by R400 000 over the last three years. I think they are to be complimented for this effort. I also notice that the number of tenants has decreased by 85%. I should like to know from the hon. the Minister whether he can account for the decrease of these 6 163 tenants. I also want to ask him what measures are employed to exact payment of outstanding rentals. The country is going through difficult times. Many Coloureds are out of work. A report appeared in The Daily News of 6 June this year which quotes Mr. Bill Hendrickse, CRC Member for Wentworth, as having said—

In other words, one in three families in that area is without a breadwinner. One cannot throw these tenants out on the street because they do not have work and cannot pay their rentals. I hope the hon. the Minister will consider organizing some form of departmental labour projects where tenants can contribute their labour in lieu of rent.

Finally, I should like to refer to the issue of permits for mixed audiences at entertainments. This issue has been touched on earlier. The only explanation we can get from the hon. the Minister is that permits are issued on merit after consultation with the management.

Last year 432 applications were received by his department, of which 69 were refused. Three of these refusals affected Pietermaritzburg. The show The Black Mikado, which had a mixed cast, was played here in Cape Town to mixed audiences. At the same time “Lysis-trata, SA.” which also has a mixed cast, was playing to mixed audiences. Yet in Pietermaritzburg theatre-goers were not permitted to see The Black Mikado, while a permit was later granted for a mixed audience to see Umabatha. At the moment Count Dracula and Edwardian Scrapbook will be open only to Whites in Pietermaritzburg. I find this approach inconsistent. I feel the permit system must be re-examined.

Even Senator P. R. de Jager made a plea in the Other Place on 8 June for more theatres to be opened to Blacks. I hope the hon. the Minister will follow the example of the hon. the Minister of Sport and Recreation. Notification is made by the local authority of the year’s programme and a blanket permission is granted.

If ever there was an opportunity to reduce red tape and deflower discrimination it is in the examination of the permit requirements for mixed audiences and casts.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg North will excuse me if I do not react to his speech. I should like to devote my contribution to community facilities. The hon. member for Piketberg and some other hon. members have also referred to it, but they will forgive me if I approach the matter from a slightly different angle.

First of all, I want to point out that the report for 1976 of the Secretary for Community Development—I have the report here in front of me—states that encouraging progress is being made in the provision of community facilities for both new and existing housing schemes. That is stated on page 9. Furthermore, the report states that most local authorities have now opened community facilities accounts and that there was approximately R2 million in those accounts as at 31 December 1976. It is unfortunate that the report does not give us any details as to what has been done about community facilities by the various local authorities up to now. In addition, the report states that loans of more than R14,5 million from the National Housing Fund have been approved and that moneys to the amount of approximately R4 million have been allocated for projects which have already been completed or which are under construction. I should like to have some examples of where and how this money has been and is being spent. The report also mentions that in the establishment of housing schemes, provision has to be made for community facilities as an integral part of those schemes. Mitchell’s Plain, Atlantis, Ennerdale and Phoenix are mentioned as examples of this. The serious question I want to ask in this regard is the following: What is being done or what is going to be done in respect of existing housing schemes where no community facilities were provided initially? Could we perhaps get some details about this if any are available?

As far as the provision of facilities in existing areas is concerned, I want to ask whether we do not all too often make use of the strategy of sharing facilities instead of creating new ones. I am sorry the hon. member for Rondebosch is not here, because I want to point out in this regard that basically it is and remains NP policy to provide special amenities or facilities for all population groups in their respective areas. The Government has stated repeatedly that until certain amenities that are lacking in the community of a specific population group have been provided, the existing facilities of Whites can be placed at the disposal of other communities. In other words, whenever facilities have to be provided in a certain community, existing facilities of Whites may be shared temporarily by other communities. Examples of this are the Nico Malan Theatre, the Civic Centre in Johannesburg, and the Rand Easter Show. When it comes to throwing open certain facilities, however, I want to say that there has never been any question of a total opening of facilities to all population groups. Even the Erika Theron Commission wanted separate facilities to be reduced on a selective basis. The Government’s reply to that was that this was in fact being done, but that precisely as a result of representations received from Coloured communities or groups of persons, certain facilities were being provided for the exclusive use of Coloureds, where problems had been caused by the sharing of these facilities with other non-White population groups—please note, non-White population groups! In other words, the Coloureds expect this as well. The Coloureds in my part of the world do not want to share their facilities with other population groups. They state that very clearly. The Indians and the Whites are not very keen to do so either.

At the level of local authority, facilities in White areas are much too easily thrown open to all population groups. Where do these facilities come from originally? We must be very honest with ourselves this evening and admit that originally, no matter how many years ago, these facilities in White areas were established by the initiative and financial means of the Whites for the use of Whites. I have already spelt out the fact that we shall share those facilities in cases where we are unable to provide others. We insist on our right to the facilities in our own areas, however. I could mention some examples of local authorities who are all too quick off the mark in opening White facilities to all population groups. There are the city councils of Johannesburg and Pretoria, for example. They have opened the parks in their areas. The Johannesburg City Council went even further by opening revenue offices, libraries, the museum, the art gallery, the zoo, etc. These measures of the local authorities have shamefully destroyed the rights and customs of the Whites. If these facilities had been shared in a proper manner by the various population groups, I should have had no objection. What is happening, now, however?

We are living in the ’seventies and not in the ’fifties.

The hon. member is not listening to what I am saying and that is why he is now talking about the ’fifties. [Interjections.] Whilst the hon. member for Green Point is talking about it, I want to point out to him that I have experienced this type of thing in Johannesburg, on the Witwatersrand and in the Provincial Council of the Transvaal. [Interjections.] The man who was responsible for this is the hon. member who is now part of the brain behind the PRP, the hon. member for Yeoville. He started the Reformist Party in the Transvaal, took over the Johannesburg City Council, and, as everybody knows, walked over to the Progressive Party with the whole lot. They persuaded Mr. Oberholzer to apply those measures there. Now he has been left holding the baby and the NP must help him. [Interjections.]

Why can certain parks not be reserved for certain population groups? I should very much like to have a reply to that. That would mean sharing amenities, which I am prepared to accept if separate amenities do not exist. Moreover I want to ask: Why can certain visiting hours, or days in revenue offices, libraries, museums, etc., not be reserved for particular population groups?

Surely you are not being serious!

I now want to ask that senior citizen who is sitting there and making such a noise what his standpoint would have been if he had been in my position. Now he is sitting back and making jokes. I have a married daughter living in Johannesburg. She has to pay her water and electricity accounts at the revenue office. She does not live in Houghton, Orange Grove or Parktown. The people living in those residential areas need not go to the revenue office themselves. They can afford to send a cheque or a servant with the money. However, my daughter has to go herself and she asked me: “Dad, can’t you do something about it?” She wanted to know from me whether we were aware of the terrible conditions prevailing in that revenue office. I do not even want to describe the conditions there. The hon. member for Green Point would do well to go and take a look and then he would be convinced of the terrible conditions.

[Inaudible.]

The hon. member is being very clever this evening. I want to ask the hon. the Minister to take a look at these conditions. I want to know whether the hon. the Minister has any suggestions. In this respect local authorities are actually autonomous and they may take whatever action they choose. The result is that the Whites no longer make use of the facilities that were created for them in Johannesburg and Pretoria.

Let us be practical. How many of the thousands of Whites in Hillbrow who live near Joubert Park can or do still go to Joubert Park? The hon. member for Jeppe knows that that is the only park they have. How many of those thousands of people have a park where they can go and relax? In earlier years beautiful paintings were exhibited there and the people could go and study them in peace. Today this park is dominated by one population group only, and those people have been denied their privilege.

How many Whites in Pretoria can stop or sit and look at the statue of President Kruger on Church Square with reverence and respect today? The hon. members would do well to go and have a look. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, with regard to the points made by the hon. member for Maraisburg, our attitude is that each community should be responsible for the provision of its own facilities. The local community should have the power and the responsibility to decide on the provision of equitable and suitable facilities for all the members of its community. We go further and say that where there are facilities of such a kind that it is unable to make additional provision for them separately or for them to be duplicated, those facilities can be shared.

I wish to raise two matters with the hon. the Minister. The first concerns the town of Simonstown. I want to refresh the hon. the Minister’s memory because he has not been Minister of this portfolio for very long. He will perhaps remember that Simonstown was proclaimed a White group area in the late 1960s. The Coloured community of Simonstown was moved to Ocean View, which is on the Atlantic Coast, near Kommetjie. That decision was considered to be inadvisable and was disputed by many of us who knew the circumstances of the community. We felt it was wrong, and that provision should have been made for the Coloured people of Simonstown to be accommodated in their own group area in Simonstown, within a larger White group area. That is water under the bridge and the fact is that the Coloured people of Simonstown have now been moved to Ocean View. What I want to bring to the hon. the Minister’s attention, is the fact that these people have now re-established themselves as a community. I think it is a pity that their community has also been diluted by bringing into that old Simonstown community Coloured people from the rest of the Peninsula. I personally pleaded at the time for the Coloured community of Simonstown to be treated as sui generis and to be kept as a community on its own. We had trouble in the Ocean View township last year and I am quite sure that the reason for that trouble was because Coloured people from elsewhere in the Cape Flats and elsewhere in the Peninsula were brought into that self-contained Simonstown community at Kommetjie. That is, however, not a matter I can deal with any further here. In fact, I have made representations to the Cillié Commission. I understand it is the hon. the Minister’s responsibility for looking at communities that have been re-established in places other than those from which they have been moved. In the case of the Coloured community of Ocean View, they have a wholly inadequate bus service, and they are suffering very considerable financial hardships as a result of the fact that the bus service is inadequate. If the hon. the Minister can use his influence to see whether the bus company can be subsidized or that other buses can perhaps be provided by the Coloured people themselves for transporting the Coloureds from that township to Simonstown, where most of them work, and to the other parts of the Southern Peninsula where they work, it will be very much appreciated.

That brings me to the second point I want to raise with the hon. the Minister. Those Coloured people who were moved from Simonstown in some cases vacated flats that had been erected with Government money by the municipality concerned. They also vacated a housing scheme, the Dido Valley housing scheme, which was erected with public money by the municipality. Approximately 350 Coloured families were involved in the removal from Simonstown. The gravamen of my charge today—I do not blame the hon. the Minister; he is too new in the portfolio, but this is something that must never be allowed to happen again—is the fact that the houses and the flats that these people vacated in Simonstown were allowed to stand idle. In some cases they were filled by what I can only described as a riff-raff population. They moved into the flats and houses and took possession of them. In other cases some people were brought in on short-term leases, but public money has been wasted. The flats were broken into, doors were removed, windows were taken out and they have been absolutely ruined during the last six or seven years. About two years ago I asked the hon. the Minister’s department what the cost for restoration of the flats alone would be. The answer was that to restore them would cost something like R500 000. Only last week I put some other questions to this effect and I was given the answer that those flats were to be renovated, repaired and obviously expanded and improved at a cost of R1 738 000. That is a scandalous waste of public money. During the period in which those flats were unoccupied, vagabonds and vagrants moved into them. I mention this to the hon. the Minister because it has been a considerable cause for concern to the White taxpayers of Simonstown who are paying very high rates. The Government will also have to step up its subsidy which is paid to the municipality of Simonstown. Rates that used to have been paid by the Coloured communities in private houses at Simonstown, have also fallen away and those houses have been broken down and broken into. I hope that that sort of waste of public funds will never take place again.

However, that is water under the bridge, and I now want to move on to the question of Coloured housing and the responsibility of Coloured people and Coloured communities. It always amazes me how in this House people from other provinces, particularly from the province of Natal, talk about the Coloured people of the Cape Peninsula, a group they know absolutely nothing about. [Interjections.] We have had another example here tonight. They are always quick to refer to social studies. They are always quick to refer to the grievances of the Coloured people. I am the first one to say—and I have given an example tonight—that the Coloured people of Simonstown were done an injustice. They should never have been moved. There have also been other cases, many other cases—here in the Peninsula with which we are familiar— in which Coloured communities have, I believe, needlessly been uprooted and resettled. However, there is a sort of sick liberalism when it comes to the Coloured people. It is something which makes me absolutely sick.

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

No, the hon. member cannot ask me a question now. [Interjections.]

Order!

Much is said about the Coloured people. Many of them have suffered. Many of the Coloured families with whom we are familiar here in the Peninsula and in the Cape Province are fine people, responsible South Africans who have played their part in the development of South Africa, and I believe they will play an ever greater part in the future development of South Africa. Many of them are intelligent, responsible and worthy citizens. However, there are many other Coloured people throughout the Cape Province who have no sense of responsibility whatsoever, especially towards their fellow Coloured people.

There is another side to this coin. Take, for example, Coloured housing. In the case of Coloured housing, subsidies are paid to the Coloureds. Coloured housing is subsidized by the Government. Whole families live together. The combined incomes of Coloured families living in those subsidized houses far exceed the combined income of White people living in houses owned by themselves, on which they have to pay rates. Yes, we have a situation in Cape Town in which something like 10% of the population of greater Cape Town pay the rates for the whole of Cape Town. Those Coloured people in subsidized housing schemes, the hundreds of thousands of Coloured people, go scot-free when it comes to paying rates. Yet they use our facilities; they use the common facilities of all of us living in the peninsula, provided only by some!

Therefore I am asking the hon. the Minister to look into the question of some new form of municipal taxation which will spread the load very much more fairly than is the case at the moment. I think it is time that the subsidized Coloured housing schemes should be made home-ownership schemes. I say that for several reasons. First of all, it will be fair to the Coloured people. Secondly, it will give them pride of ownership, something they do not have at the moment. Thirdly, it will give them stability, and fourthly, it will give them an opportunity of paying the same rates that others in the Peninsula are paying towards the common services that are shared by all of us.

I think it is high time that the Coloured people of the Cape Peninsula should also start paying their way in the provision of municipal facilities. I want to make an appeal this evening. Appeals are so often made to the Government to do something about the Coloured people, and I echo many of those appeals. But I think it is high time that an appeal were made to Coloured communities to show far more responsibility, especially among their leaders, towards the people of those communities. They should exhibit a new sense of responsibility and they should play a more responsible part in the development of their communities, and of the country in which we all live.

Mr. Chairman, I agree with much of what the hon. member for Simonstown has said. I am just worried that tomorrow some hon. members of the Opposition may call the hon. member for Simonstown a person who hates Coloureds. They may probably say he angers the Coloureds. There is one thing, however, about which I do not agree with the hon. member. It is the allegation he made to the effect that an unfair removal of Coloureds had occurred in Simonstown. It is true that particularly in the ravines surrounding Simonstown, Coloureds lived in extremely poor conditions, particularly along the road to Red Hill. I think the Coloureds who were removed from those places are really far better off.

I want to come back to the aspects which I really want to discuss. I should like to name an official of the department, who, in my opinion, has given faithful service for many years, viz. the Regional Representative of the Department of Community Development in Cape Town, Mr. Dirk Coetzee who is retiring after 43 years as an official of the department. Many of us who live and work in the Western Cape have had contact with this official. Mr. Coetzee has been an adviser and a help to me. On behalf of my constituency, it is with great pleasure and respect that I thank him very much for the services he has rendered not only to the department, but also to me as a member of the House of Assembly and to my constituency.

Earlier on this afternoon—unfortunately, I was not present at the time—the hon. member for Rondebosch again raked up his old story of the ballet school and the ballet classes at Worcester. If the hon. member for Rondebosch wants to play politics, that is his privilege and he is welcome to do so. There are various peoples and ethnic groups in South Africa, and over the years we have tried to create good relations between these various population groups.

Even in the ballet class?

Yes. One can either create good relations in an orderly manner or one can allow things to degenerate into disorder. The National Party has always said and believed that there are peoples or ethnic groups that have to build bridges to each other. I shall give the hon. member for Rondebosch an example of that presently. When I practise my sport it is laid down by my party and my Government that every ethnic group should practise its sport and culture within its own ethnic context. It has also been laid down that it is the right and privilege of any ethnic group to isolate itself on occasion, for example, in its own school, in its own residential area and on its own sports field. But then we at least provide and develop the opportunities for these peoples to play against each other, and to compete against each other, even in the cultural field. We do not play politics with these things. The NP Government has a great responsibility to ensure that things run smoothly in this country and that order is assured. I think the hon. the Minister will in fact state the department’s standpoint on permits and permit systems and its reasons for having asked as it did, action which I support.

I should like to raise a matter which I feel sure affects more towns than just my own. There is a Coloured village in Robertson which is older than I am. It was established many years ago. I think that in earlier times there were town councils which did not take matters seriously, but today the situation exists that because of the situation of that village on the slopes of the Langeberg—it is situated on a fairly steep incline—the roads and streets of that village are washed away when the winter rains come. We are helping the Coloured people and we are encouraging them to buy their own houses. Now, Coloured people buy houses there, but when the winter rains come they suffer damage to their properties since the roads are not tarred or do not have drains.

Three or four years ago the National Housing Commission decided in principle a service of this kind, viz. the tarring of the streets could be made available and granted the necessary permission to the municipality of Robertson. The expenditure was approved on condition that funds were available. Consequently I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether he and that municipality could not put their heads together for the municipality to obtain a public loan, with the assistance of the department, or for the department to undertake the financing to have the streets of that village tarred, to prevent, inter alia, damage to the properties of the Coloured people in winter when it rains and the streets are flooded. As a result of the wet conditions their properties or houses are damaged. Damage to the walls and foundations does occur. In connection with this problem I should also like to point out that, as hon. members are aware, the divisional council and the municipality of the area concerned are the first two such local authorities in the Cape to work together. I am mentioning this fact as I am convinced that the divisional council, the road builders, could do this job much cheaper than if it were to be given out on tender.

I have paged through the brochures with which the department has provided us. One of them is entitled most appropriately, “Die Helpende Hand”. I want to quote a passage from one of these brochures and the heading is “Wat eerste kom”—

I do not think there is one of us who disagrees with this statement.

When the achievements of this department were discussed here this afternoon, achievements relating to housing as well as the other things falling within the operational sphere of the department, I noticed sneering expressions on the faces of the hon. members of the PRP, and more specifically on the face of the hon. member for Pinelands. This man who has a lot to say, is indifferent towards what the Government has already done for our Brown people. I want to accuse the hon. member of being very pious here. One of our hon. members made a fine speech this afternoon about what had already been done for our less privileged people, White, Brown, as well as Indians, but that hon. member sat with a sneering expression on his face. He is and remains cold and unfeeling towards the achievements of the Government.

Sir, we do not want to complain about the wonderful projects like Mitchell’s Plain and others, but I want to ask the hon. Minister to ensure that we do not forget about the rural areas altogether. The rural areas also have housing needs. We know that because of the tremendous influx of people, cities have a more pressing housing need, but the hon. the Minister must not forget completely about the needs of the rural areas. There are towns that have housing problems. There are White people, Brown people and Indians who are living in critical conditions. I am pleased to be able to say this evening that many of the problems in my constituency have virtually been solved. Nevertheless there are still some towns that do have problems.

It is true that the State has done much to help. Today we are aware of the fact that employers are becoming increasingly aware of their responsibility. I have here in my hand the latest edition of Alpha, a publication of the Administration of Coloured Affairs. In this edition of May 1977, there are two articles which I find wonderful. One of them deals with employers who are extending a helping hand so as to afford their employees the opportunity of obtaining and owning a house of their own. On the next page mention is made of the aspirations which many employees have. They say that a house is the basis for a settled life. That is why I am grateful that the idea of home ownership is taking root more and more particularly in our Brown communities. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, unfortunately I do not have much time and therefore I cannot comment on the hon. member’s speech.

†I should like to discuss some matters with the hon. the Minister. The hon. the Minister says the time has come that we must have a drastic look at the Rents Act and rent control in South Africa. I fully endorse this statement with the one reservation that before the hon. the Minister rushes in to appoint a commission or before he comes with a new Act, he should at least table the report of the Johannes Commission, which, in fact, conducted an in-depth investigation in regard to rent control in South Africa. We on this side of the House cannot understand the reason for keeping this secret for so long, while I believe that its publication could only have been to the benefit of all hon. members who wished to discuss this matter of rent control. One would then not find members, like the hon. member for Durbanville, speaking about the “billike basis van die waardasiebepaling”. This is one of the problems with the Rents Act. One does not have a fair basis for the determination of the value of property. I asked a series of questions this year about increases in rental in the Durban area, in particular those submitted to the Northern and Southern rent boards. I am indeed grateful for the replies I received from the department. All the information I received, however, reinforced me in my belief that the Rents Act, in its present application, requires urgent and complete revision. We cannot continue in the way we have been doing for the past decade. At the moment the whole system creates enormous administrative problems, and in essence fails to provide protection for those people who need to be protected in regard to the availability of accommodation at reasonable rentals. The hon. the Minister made mention of rich people who should perhaps not be living in rent-controlled buildings. But that is only one side of the coin.

Last year the two rent boards in Durban had 410 applications submitted to them. They considered 358. This indicates that at least they are not idle. In fact, they have been kept very busy indeed.

*If we analyse the 358 cases of which we have details, we find that it is apparently the policy—and that is the basic problem—of agents or owners, when applying, to insist on ridiculous increases, as a matter of principle. More than 90% of those applicants should know that their applications do not stand a chance and that in effect they are not going to get that increase of 40%, 50%, 100% or more which they have requested. But why did they do it? That is the question we have to ask ourselves. On the one hand it is a way of terrorizing people. It is sometimes done on purpose to create a measure of uncertainty amongst the tenants, because they want to get rid of them. That is one side of the story. On the other hand, however, one has to take into account that in terms of the present valuation system, the rent boards are forced to consider from one to five different aspects on the basis of which a valuation can be made. One only has to think of the diverse nature of these considerations. There are, for instance, municipal valuations, the valuations of divisional councils, as well as the purpose for which the ground can be used. If one takes these aspects into account, one finds that this is actually the reason why there is no correlation between the amount requested and the amount approved. Meanwhile the poor tenant is saddled with the problems. There may well be some of those rich people to whom the hon. the Minister referred, but in my constituency, Durban Central, it is my experience that a great number of the tenants are pensioners, or people who live on a fixed income. They simply cannot sit back and think that there may be an increase of only 10% or 20%, because increases of 40% or 100% are sometimes granted. Therefore, the sword of Damocles is constantly hanging over them. I want to state positively that something must be wrong. I am now going to deal with a specific case about which I have also put certain questions to the hon. the Minister, questions with regard to a specific block of flats in Durban. It was found that the rent had been increased by 100% within seven years. I do not want to go into detail on the question of whether it is right or wrong in this specific case; I only accept it as a fact. Something is wrong when the rent is doubled within seven years.

That really is a sweeping statement.

It is a building which is 62 years old and which was bought for R130 000 last year. The buyer is now spending R100 000 on improvements, mainly to the ground floor. That is no real improvement for the tenants of the flats. One finds, however, that he applied for a rent increase of 100% and that it was approved. In terms of the Act one finds that the land is presently valued at R140 000 and the building at R240 000, adding up to a total of R380 000. Whether that is a municipal valuation or any other valuation, it bears no relation to the money invested in that building. I consider this to be one of the big problems. The hon. member for Durbanville spoke of the fair basis on which valuations are made. But this is one of my problems. My problem is that it is not taking place on a fair basis at the moment. That is one of the great problems and it gives rise to a wider interpretation of the true value. In this specific case the annual gross income on the investment of R230 000 is in effect R56 163,48. That means that within four or five years one receives a gross income—I presume it is gross income because expenses have to be deducted—which enables one to recover the whole original capital outlay. That is my whole point. One should not only say that there is something wrong with the matter. We have to accept that there is something drastically wrong, that this is an unsatisfactory state of affairs. I do not want the hon. the Minister to try and defend this specific case, because it is a fact. The first step the hon. the Minister should take, however, is to enable us as Members of Parliament to obtain the facts, such as those contained in the Johannes Report. If it then becomes apparent, in our opinion and also in his, that a further investigation is necessary, a further investigation should be made.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Durban Central devoted his speech to rent control, an aspect which is being dealt with in detail by the Fouché Commission, and we hope to have its report within a few months. I believe that anyone who listened to this debate this afternoon will agree that healthy and well-planned communities are the basis of a happy and contented nation. Therefore the most important function of the Department of Community Development is to see to it that all population groups in this country are properly settled and accommodated in communities offering the best conditions for a decent existence and for healthy development. I do not think there is anyone who can accuse the Government of neglecting this principle or of not giving effect to it. I can say frankly tonight that in the 30 years of Nationalist Government we have seen to the creation of healthy communities. If one reads impartially the comment in respect of each recommendation in the Government’s White Paper with regard to housing and community development for the Coloured population group, one finds evidence there of the tremendous job being done by the authorities and any objective reader is struck by the additional planning carried out. If one thinks back to what has already been done, we in this House have to agree that it is a tale of growth and development. It is a tale of hard work, a tale in which the hon. member for Pinelands will never have a part. One thanks the Lord that that is so. It is also a tale of thorough planning, of millions of rands that have been spent and are still needed, of challenges accepted and of opportunities created. I want to contend tonight that it is right and good that these things have been done. According to table 20.16 on page 450 of the Theron Report, Coloureds questioned in the urban areas declared that they considered housing, land, public facilities and services to be the main problems, problems to which the Government has to give immediate attention to improve the conditions of the Coloureds. In other words, a healthy community is placed above all other things in importance. There should be no surprise with regard to this determination of priorities. I cannot call a better witness this evening than the Theron Commission itself. I want to quote from paragraph 9.23 on page 209. With regard to the past, in the times of the United Party, the commission says—

The commission then comes to the following conclusion—

What did the authorities do to improve these conditions in South Africa? I want to refer hon. members to the Government’s White Paper, section 14, on housing and community development. 19 recommendations are contained in this section. 18 of these recommendations were accepted by the Government and only one, that in respect of District Six, was rejected.

Why?

The hon. member of Pinelands asks “why?” Whether Whites or non-Whites live in District Six, it will not contribute to happy communities in South Africa. The Government is now being put in the dock for supposedly being totally indifferent to the interests of the Coloureds. The hon. member for Pinelands and all his henchmen in the PRP should be ashamed of this front page of Deurbraak which features a drawing of a tombstone with the inscription: “Here lies the Erika Theron Commission.” This commission is not dead. The work is being done and it is being continued with.

With regard to priority No. 1, which was stated by the Coloureds themselves, I want to say tonight that the Government is promoting the process of community development in South Africa in a positive way. I want to prove that. If we look at the comment on recommendation No. 98 in the White Paper, we see that the Government is sincere and in earnest with regard to the provision of dwellings. We see that in the period from 1972 to 1975, 43 694 dwellings for Coloureds were erected at a cost of R163 536 443. With regard to this recommendation, the comment of the Government is—

The hon. member for Pinelands will be satisfied when 100% of the money available for housing is spent on the Coloureds and not a single cent is spent on the Whites.

What about all the people you moved?

The comment on recommendation No. 99 reads that 94% of all Coloured families qualify for national housing and that virtually all of them make use of Government aid with regard to their housing. The comment of the Government is also—

With regard to recommendation 105 the Government aims at establishing full-fledged townships with all facilities. We admit that there is a backlog. The Government is, however, rapidly eliminating the backlog. The availability of funds has to be taken into account, however. The Government’s comment on recommendation 108 states very clearly that the Government endorses the principle of participation; in other words, that the Coloureds should also have a say with regard to the planning of townships and housing schemes. It is right and good that this should be so because the people are involved in all development. With regard to the development of communities for the Coloureds, it is essential that they be involved too.

It is true that low-cost housing also causes its problems. Therefore, we find in the report of the Theron Commission references to “deadly monotony” and “countrywide sameness”. It is gratifying to know that the Department of Community Development is giving its active attention to this matter. There is for example a team of professional officials who made a study of low-cost housing and whose help and guidance is invaluable to local authorities. I think that we have made mistakes in the past with regard to certain housing schemes and certain residential areas, but I believe we are geared for better planning now. I want to ask tonight that we do not just build housing schemes—I am speaking with regard to the Coloureds now—but that we should also see to it that each house has a proper fence and that there are proper streets and drainage so that it can be a worthy township in every respect.

I am also convinced of the fact that the inhabitants of such a housing scheme can do their bit. The hon. member for Piketberg has already referred to that earlier this afternoon. I think that conditions in some of the Coloureds townships are scandalous. It is a shame to see the condition of some of the houses that have been built recently. I think greater emphasis should be laid on beautifying. The inhabitants of the areas should be more concerned about neatness because the scattering of rubbish is common and derelict cars are often to be seen in these areas. I believe that Coloureds can do much more in this respect to make the townships attractive. I believe that Coloured leaders and the CRC, too, should make their voices heard in this regard. I believe that associations could even be formed to beautify these areas.

It is especially with regard to housing for the lower and middle income groups that the Department of Community Development, in co-operation with local authorities, has exceptional achievements to its credit. In this respect I want to refer to local authorities in the country districts, especially the Western and Southern Cape. In this area there is hardly a community in which proper provision has not been made for the Coloureds. In this area we have the fine double-town system where Whites and non-Whites each have their own facilities and their own community life. I am referring to towns like Malmesbury, George and, of course, Oudtshoorn. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Oudtshoorn, who has just spoken, made an excellent speech, like all the other hon. members on my side of the House. The two speeches in this debate that I found outstanding were the speech made earlier this afternoon by the chairman of our group, the hon. member for Tygervallei, and then the speech by the hon. member for Maraisburg.

The hon. member for Maraisburg was talking about Church Square in Pretoria when his time expired. If I understood the hon. member correctly, I think he wanted to say that he hoped the necessary recreational facilities would be created for Blacks in Pretoria so that Church Square could again be used exclusively or mainly by the Whites. If this was what he wanted to say, I agree with him.

Mr. Chairman, when one speaks about housing, one realizes that every country in the world has housing problems. When we compare South Africa with other countries in the world, we realize that with regard to this problem—and it applies to so many other problems as well—South Africa is one of the fortunate countries in which conditions are very favourable. A report in Die Burger of 6 June 1977 reads—

The article continues—

If one takes this information into account, one cannot help saying that in South Africa the Government plays a part in housing which is unprecedented in the world. I can mention reams of figures, but I want to confine myself to one. In the five-year period from 1 April 1970 to 30 June 1975, 70 671 residential units for Coloureds were completed. 82,6% of these units were erected by the Government itself. The department was responsible for 34% of all housing provided for all groups during that period.

Order! The hon. member for Durban Central must stop talking.

I am particularly flattered to know that the hon. member for Durban Central is not interested in my speech.

While I am pointing out the department’s achievements, I may add that there are achievements worth mentioning in my own and neighbouring constituencies as well. Mention has already been made this afternoon of the fact that a Coloured city is being planned and built in the neighbouring constituency, Overvaal, which will accommodate between 100 000 and 200 000 Coloureds by the end of this century. That is the Coloured city of Ennerdale.

In my own constituency in the White areas of Grasmere and Unaville, an Indian city is being planned, in which 35 000 Indian families will ultimately be accommodated. It is a pleasure to speak of these achievements with regard to the provision of housing, townships and cities for Coloured population groups in South Africa.

I want to pay particular attention to the small group of Whites who are in actual fact fulfilling the promise “Ons sal offer wat jy vra”. The members of this small group of Whites have to give up their property and the land on which many of them were born and raised, in order to create townships for the people of colour in our country. In my constituency there are people of 50 years and older who were born and raised on their property and it therefore stands to reason that it is not easy for these people to leave their residential areas.

Because it was not easy for them and they made this decision very reluctantly—initially they were not unanimous but after persuasion they unanimously decided to give up their area for this purpose—I want to make two requests to the hon. the Minister and his department. Firstly, I want to request them to accelerate the valuation process which is taking place. Although we are living in difficult times financially and economically speaking and funds are often a limiting factor, I want to ask the hon. the Minister to use his influence in this case to ensure that the properties of these people are bought out as soon as possible so that they can resettle elsewhere.

My second request is that these people be paid the maximum market value of their properties plus what I shall call a disruption allowance, because these people are being disrupted by circumstances beyond their control. They are living there happily and contentedly and now they have to go and resettle elsewhere as soon as possible.

On behalf of myself and my voters, I want to express my sincere thanks and appreciation to Mr. Fouché and his department for the way in which he, his department and the hon. the Minister have handled the whole matter up to now. They can rest assured of our sincere gratitude and appreciation.

The people of Grasmere and Unaville are loyal radio listeners; they listen to the parliamentary review at 07h30 every morning and they will be even more loyal towards their radio if they can hear tomorrow morning that their member has pleaded their cause here in Parliament. [Interjections.] They are equally avid newspaper readers and they would like to read in the paper that their interests are being considered in this highest Council Chamber in the country.

Mr. Chairman, if one sits and listens to what is said in the House, one has no wish to comment …

Not on that last one.

No, I have no wish to comment on the hon. member for Pinelands.

The more reference is made here to the number of houses we have built for the Coloureds and the more reference is made to shortages, the more I am impressed by the true situation: the problem is growing. That is true after all. I have been sitting here for nearly 25 years and we now have a greater shortage of houses than ever before. [Interjections.] Surely that is the truth. There is only one reason for it, and that is an imbalance between our economic means and our physical capacities to make the housing available and, together with that, the birthrate amongst the Coloureds. Those are the facts. There is an imbalance.

If only hon. members of the PRP would direct their pleas differently, it would be a good thing. In Heavens name, they must put an end to their sickly, political, humanistic bickering. They should speak to the Coloureds as they want to speak to them or as they pretend to speak to them, and appeal to them please to exercise responsible parenthood. If hon. members were to speak to the Coloureds, they would achieve much more, and then they would also achieve what they want: the absolute moving away from discrimination.

I do not want to discuss the path of moving away from discrimination now, because I know you will stop me, Sir, because it is not relevant now. You will, however, allow me to make two points. Moving away from discrimination requires the striking of a balance between the economic means and the productivity of the population groups in South Africa on the one hand, and, on the other, the class or the quality housing we have to supply. We could bring he Coloureds into Parliament this very night, but that would not solve the problem of discrimination. The fewer houses the Coloureds have and the smaller their houses have to be as a result of lack of funds, the more luxurious the houses of the Whites become. That gap and contrast is constantly growing. Hon. members on that side of the House are labouring under the grossest misconception if they think we will remove discrimination by bringing Coloureds into Parliament or by giving the Coloureds political rights. The path of moving away from discrimination and the ultimate elimination of discrimination lies in implementing the policy of separate development and in the establishment of geo-political lines. Behind those geo-political lines, fear of each other disappears and there we can aid each other without fear, mistrust or antagonism. [Interjections.] What is Christian? There sits the hon. member for Pinelands, a preacher who is full of human rights and humane action and respect for human dignity. What is Christian? Let me rather ask: What is un-Christian. I believe it is un-Christian of someone—whoever it may be—to bring a number of children into the world when he knows full well that they will suffer want throughout their lives, that throughout their lives they will lack work, proper educational facilities, ordinary community services, sports facilities, proper housing. That is indeed un-Christian.

When a Government, and when political parties—and especially an Opposition party, whose duty is different to that of the Government—does not perceive these things, one enters the field of a welfare state. Then one ends up in a situation where one has to keep things going by means of favours and charity. All this talk about housing and all the competition about how many houses are built and how many are going to be built, comes nowhere near the crux of the matter. The crux of the matter lies therein that we do not have a proper quantitative population policy. The NP has a fine record. The NP has a wonderful, unparalleled record on which it can rely. Unfortunately—and this is the crux of the problem—the NP does not have a proper quantitative population policy. Before we have that, this same thing will be brought up year after year in this House, and we shall have to build more and more houses, without ever having a chance or a hope of making up the leeway.

Mr. Chairman, I think this is a good opportunity for me to reply to the important statements that have been made in the debate since I spoke this afternoon. As always, I listened with great interest to the way in which the hon. member for Carletonville concluded this debate. He did this with the necessary emphasis and eloquence and he expressed interesting thoughts. My problem, of course, is that my task is confined to community development and that birth control does not fall within the scope of my activities. It is my responsibility to look after people’s interests once they are there. Another hon. Minister is responsible for ensuring that there are not too many people. However, I think it would be interesting to give the hon. member for Carletonville a chance to repeat those thoughts of his if the opportunity presents itself. This will have to be on an occasion when the Minister concerned can reply to him, of course.

The hon. member for Rondebosch, who spoke immediately after me this afternoon, asked me certain questions in connection with the abolition of the subsidy of 2% on bonds of up to R15 000 on houses with a purchase price of up to R20 000. According to the hon. member there are certain points I should clarify. The hon. member also put some questions to me in connection with widows and married people. I can only give him a general reply. As far as the future is concerned, the scheme has been abolished in all cases. However, when there are cases of, for example, a widow who used to qualify but who no longer qualifies because of changed circumstances—in cases where the value of the house has changed, and other circumstances which arose before the abolition—every individual case will be judged on merit and with great sympathy. The idea is not to prejudice anyone who had a certain right up to the date of abolition. The idea is rather to protect and perpetuate existing and established rights which existed at the date of abolition. This is the spirit in which the matter will be administered. However, it is very difficult to reply to hypothetical cases. The merits of each case will be different, of course.

Furthermore, the hon. member referred to the refusal of permits for a joint or multiracial ballet school at Worcester. This is one of the things where the hon. member and I come to the parting of the ways, and I do not think it will be easy for us to reach agreement on this. The hon. member does not attach the importance that is attached by us on this side of the House to the preservation of the identities of the various population groups in South Africa. To him this is not important. He is quite willing to accept the disappearance of the differences as well as the fine and positive things which distinguish us from one another. That is why he is sitting where he is and sometimes showing how unhappy he is with the course he has taken. We believe that the first requirement of a policy dealing with the relations between population groups in South Africa is that it should be designed to enable every population group to retain and to develop its own identity, and to enable every individual to realize himself to the maximum of his abilities within the context of his own population group identity. That is our standpoint. It must be understood that in order to achieve this objective, we consider it to be essential for every population group to have its own schools. To us this is a basic requirement. What happened at Worcester was that the ballet classes developed into a ballet school, a school with permanent classes. This conflicted with the standpoint and the policy of the Government. That is why we said that the classes could continue on the same premises, that they could continue in the White area, but that there should be separate classes in accordance with NP policy. The hon. member for Sea Point is shaking his head so emphatically that one can hear it over hear. It does not bother me. I am quite prepared to accept that he and I will not see eye to eye on this basic principle, as we did not see eye to eye when I was still sitting over there, for at that time it was the policy of the United Party, too, that the preservation of the identity of the various population groups was of fundamental importance as a policy standpoint in South Africa.

Mr. Chairman, may I just ask the hon. the Minister—this is really important to me—to explain how a ballet class at Worcester can threaten the identity of either the Coloured people or the Whites?

The hon. member has been sitting in Parliament long enough to know how the minds of some people in this country work. If the Government makes a concession in respect of a ballet school, the argument is advanced that if this can be done for a ballet school, why can it not be done for a nursery school as well? And if it can be done for a nursery school, why can it not be done for a primary school as well? In the end one does not have a leg to stand on. One has to take a stand on one’s principles somewhere, and as soon as possible; otherwise one is exposed to agitation, to misrepresentations of one’s standpoint and to exploitation of concessions one has made.

Mr. Chairman, may I ask the hon. the Minister a very simple question? [Interjections.]

Order!

Mr. Chairman, may I ask the hon. the Minister whether that means that mixed rugby eventually means mixed clubs as well?

Mr. Chairman, I have known my hon. friend for a long time and I have a great respect for his intelligence, but if I get impatient with him, he will understand me. [Interjections.] One cannot compare a rugby match with a school [Interjections.] After this performance has ended and these animal noises have subsided, may I now continue? I say that one cannot compare a sporting event with a school, because in a school one is permanently thrown together, one’s culture is developed together and one’s outlook on life and values are determined together. On the other hand, a rugby match is a temporary encounter that comes and goes, and the only qualities that one may develop are qualities of sportsmanship and these are common to all people. [Interjections.]

I think you should give the priest a chance to put his question.

It is being suggested by somebody whose opinion I respect greatly that we might be missing a gem of high intelligence if I do not answer a question from the hon. member for Pinelands.

Mr. Chairman, I am very grateful to the hon. the Minister for having the perception to realize that. However, may I ask him: What about a Sunday school?

Mr. Chairman, I cannot for the life of me see how one can compare something which has to do with eternal values, e.g. religion, with something of secular value, like ballet. If it is that hon. member’s idea that things which have an effect upon one’s eternal life are comparable to little girls and boys dancing on their toes, then his values are different from mine.

Mr. Chairman, may I ask the hon. the Minister whether he sees the fact that we have permitted private schools in Natal to become mixed as a threat to the identity of the communities in Natal?

Yes I do. I think it is most unfortunate and it runs contrary to the wisdom of our thoughts and policies in South Africa.

*Now I want to deal with the speeches of two hon. members who raised matters which are important to the welfare of the people involved. I am referring to the speeches made by my hon. friend, the member for Krugersdorp, and by the hon. member for Overvaal, who raised the same aspects. They spoke of the resettlement of certain Indian dealers, especially in the rural areas of the Transvaal. They wanted to know why we were concentrating on the Transvaal and they pointed out that approximately 5 000 dealers had already been resettled. We are concentrating on the Transvaal because more than 50% of the economically active Indian population there is involved in the retail trade. Their presence in large numbers in the towns in the rural areas of the Transvaal in particular is creating problems for us. I said a short while ago, in a different context, that our first task was to preserve the identity of the various population groups. Our second task is to avoid friction between population groups in South Africa at all costs. Since we are convinced that the circumstances of many of the towns in the Transvaal are causing friction and could cause greater friction, we are trying to remove that danger in an orderly, sympathetic and very constructive way by affording our Indian trading community other opportunities which will not give rise to conflict and friction. We have resettled thousands of Indians in this way. It costs money. An amount of about R23 million has already been mentioned in respect of those we have to resettle. However, this is not money which is lost to the State. Every cent comes back with interest. The complexes we create for the people are temporarily leased on a sub-economic basis, but as soon as they have settled down, we charge an economic rental and they pay back the purchase price plus the interest. Most of them recognize the wisdom of the policy once they have settled down. This happened with the Eastern Plaza in Johannesburg. They are queueing to buy the shops we have built for them from the Department of Community Development. So that money comes back, and it can be used again for further positive measures designed to create better relations between Indians and Whites and Indians and Coloured people in South Africa.

My hon. friends must remember that for many years before the Group Areas Act was placed on the Statute Book, an Indian could not obtain ownership of land in the townships anywhere in the Transvaal. For that reason, most of them conducted their business in small rented shops, with shelters behind those shops in which they lived in desperate circumstances with their families and all their children. But thanks to the Group Areas Act, the Indians in the Transvaal will soon be living in their own residential areas, in circumstances they have never known in South Africa under previous Governments and up to and including the ’sixties. These people are proud of this and they are grateful. Their towns do credit to the Transvaal and to South Africa. The same process is taking place with their resettlement in trading areas. We meet with resistance, and the resistance is often organized by people who do not have the interests of the Indians at heart, but are only interested in harming and misrepresenting the Government. We also meet with great resistance on the part of people who have a financial interest in opposing this policy. Some wealthy Indians and other people who are to some extent exploiting the less well-to-do people want the present conditions to continue. In every case where these people have been resettled, they have been grateful and appreciative after a short period of adjustment and have wished to do something that they have never been able to do before, i.e. to buy and to own their own businesses. If there is one aspect of the NP policy which I firmly believe to be a positive and a necessary one, serving the interests of the people involved, then it is the resettlement of the Indian dealers, especially in the rural areas in the Transvaal.

The hon. member for Durbanville made a very well-argued and well-prepared speech on rent control. I listened to it attentively. I think his arguments were very sound, and I can assure him that when the time comes to review rent control—and it is very near—we shall have to give careful attention to the suggestions he made. We shall have to consider the idea of a means test. The idea of exempting luxury flats from rent control is also a good one; it opens up possibilities. However, we are all waiting for the Fouché Commission’s report. This is a commission of experts who have devoted all their lives to matters of property and housing. I am convinced that they will produce suggestions which we shall all appreciate. That report will be available to everyone within a few weeks. Then we can examine it, reflect on the matter again and start planning again.

Mr. Chairman, may I ask the hon. the Minister whether he will give consideration to publishing the report of the Johannes Commission, seeing that it is a very valuable document?

Mr. Chairman, I am coming to that. That point was pertinently raised also by another member.

*We shall have to go into the question of rent control again. I am sure we shall find useful suggestions and guidance in that report. It is quite clear to me—I said so in my previous speech—that we cannot go on with rent control in its present form, because we are protecting people who do not need any protection. The majority of those who benefit by rent-controlled properties are people who could afford anything. They are very wealthy people. This is the case in our cities in particular. We cannot go on in this way. Things will have to change.

†The hon. member for Pietermaritzburg North wanted to know about the deficiencies in the older housing schemes, especially in the Cape. I want to thank him very much, seeing he comes all the way from Natal, for having shown such a keen interest in a situation in the Cape Province. I want to assure him that the Cape members can look after their own interests very well, but being unselfish gentlemen I am sure they will not object to his interest in their affairs.

I want to admit at once that in the older townships constructed by the Department of Community Development and its agencies, community facilities are wanting. The reason is that our first priority when we started, because of the tremendous backlog we had, was solely the building of houses. Our first and foremost thought was of houses. I want to admit that that was perhaps an over-simplified approach, but we have learned from experience that if one wants to build and develop communities, it is better to take a little longer about the housing—not much, but a little longer and to create places which, when they are initially occupied, already have the amenities which civilized communities require.

The best model to visit which I can suggest is Mitchell’s Plain where, when people moved into their homes, schools were already finished, sportsfields were already finished, a very attractive park was ready, their street lights were in and their streets were tarred. But this is a relatively new policy. It is only two or three years old. In the case of the older townships, we have a backlog to make up, and we are making it up. I said earlier that we have obtained something like R15 million for that purpose. We have already spent R8 million, and we hope to get more as when it is required. I want to say at once that there are several funds today, some magnificent funds, which have been established to help to improve what I called when I came back from France about two years ago, taking my example from a similar department of the French Government, “the quality of life” of the people in these areas. I want to suggest that, rather than to try to build up another superstructure for cheap housing which cannot be better than the one we have built up over the years in Community Development, they would be wiser if they would improve the quality of life in the older townships by using some of the money they collect in order to provide the community facilities that are lacking in those areas. This lack of facilities is reducing the quality of life of people in those areas. They would get our full assistance and support.

The hon. member also spoke about permits for theatres. I do think that I dealt with that fully in my previous speech. I explained that there was an investigation going and that there were consultations with the interested parties, with the theatre owners and the impresarios. I explained that we were about to come with a report and decisions which would facilitate the situation and perhaps remove some of the difficulties which my hon. friend has with this matter.

Finally, he suggested that we are sitting on a treasure house.

A treasure trove.

I do not know how one can sit on a treasure trove. It might be a bit uncomfortable, because one would have to be in motion all the time. He suggested that the department was sitting on a treasure chest of property and that we should sell more of these properties. I want to tell the hon. member that that is in fact the policy of the department. We are selling. We have sold with success. We are also offering properties. For example, we are offering properties in District Six here in Cape Town. We are offering properties round about the Milnerton area. We almost concluded a very successful deal recently, but the Administrator would not give us the permission to use the property for the purpose for which it was intended. As a result the deal fell through. However, my hon. friend must remember that we are not prepared to sell at a loss at this stage. It is not necessary for us to do it. In view of the market at the moment, it is not always easy to obtain fair prices, in our view, for our property. In a case where, after having appointed extra consultants to assist us in the sales, they report to us that the area is a slowstarter, we begin with pilot developments in such an area. We build imposing buildings, we build a small, attractive residential area, which can act, as a nest-egg to attract other people to the area, and so development takes place faster, or we encourage, as we are now trying to do in District Six, some major prestigious business to start with a major development, which will mean that others will follow. That we will do and for that we are willing to spend money. The hon. member’s suggestion is a sound one and I appreciate it as such.

*The next speaker was my good friend, the hon. member for Maraisburg. He spoke with great sincerity because he wants justice to be done to all the population elements in South Africa. I should like to emphasize that if hon. members opposite wish to understand the thinking of the members on this side of the House, they must realize that it is our desire, in implementing our policy, to do justice, not only to one population group, but to all. This is the important statement I want to make. We believe that every population group in the Republic of South Africa, whether it be the White, the Coloured or the Indian group, has the right to withdraw into itself for privacy when it feels the need to do so. The right to privacy is one of the fundamental rights of every Western civilized individual. We believe that the rights of the individual should also apply where he is associating with people whose character, background, language group and culture are similar to his own.

Even the Opposition is separating.

Yes, see what happens in the Opposition ranks. They are always separating into smaller groups because they believe that they too are entitled to preserve their separate identities. [Interjections.] It is merely an extension of this principle.

They support the canton idea.

They are applying the canton policy in politics. That is why they do not understand our attitude in more important matters.

I am grateful to the hon. member for Maraisburg for a refreshing exposition of the fundamental concepts and thinking of this side of the House. I think that one of these days, when a certain Bill is introduced, he will get an opportunity to have those ideas of his placed on the Statute Book and to present his standpoint at greater length and in a more reasoned form.

†The hon. member for Simonstown put an interesting case. He mentioned some special problems he has concerning bus services, and so on. I hope he will forgive me if I do not use all the Committee’s time to discuss those problems. He and others know that they can approach me or my officials at any time and we shall examine the peculiar problems to see what we can do about them. He raised the case of the Waterfall Flats and suggested that in that regard we were guilty of doing bad business and that we possibly spent money unnecessarily. He also said that this case had a long history. I am not going to indulge in an argument about the history of it. I shall tell him what we are doing now. Here we have a dilapidated building.

That is not true.

I want to assure him that it was in a bad condition when we bought it.

It was in excellent condition.

That is the information I have. It happened before my time. I have reason to believe that it was not a perfect building when we bought it—to put it in that way. Since then the condition of the building has deteriorated further. I grant him that. However, now we are not repairing it for the purposes for which it has been used before. We are using the shell of it in order to do something more imaginative and necessary, in view of the needs of Simonstown and especially of the South African Navy, which has its headquarters in Simonstown.

The headquarters are in Pretoria.

It has its base at Simonstown. What we are doing to this building— my hon. friend must listen—is to convert it into single quarters for members of the South African Navy. We shall provide quarters there for 400 members of the Navy. In and around that building we shall also provide communal facilities, such as a mess and other facilities, necessary for 600 men, not only for the 400 living there, but also other men in the vicinity who are living in smaller units.

It is being done at a cost of less than R3 000 per person, and that includes the general amenities. I have come into the picture rather late, but to me it looks like very good business not only for the sake of the men concerned, but also for what is priority No. 1 today, viz. the defence of South Africa and the happiness of the people who are in the first instance responsible for that defence.

Finally, my hon. friend for Simonstown made the point that the Coloured people were being given preferential treatment beyond the public interest, if I may put it that way, as regards their housing. He pointed out that they were living in cheap houses, often in overcrowded conditions, that they did not pay rent and that they were being subsidized by the Government in an unconscionable manner. That may be true, but I can assure the hon. member that where overcrowding does take place, it is not the fault of the people concerned. What does one do when there are more people than there are homes? That is the position in the Greater Cape Peninsula at the moment. It is only because there is a considerable shortage of homes for Coloured people in South Africa, a shortage of more than 58 000, mainly concentrated in and around Cape Town, that this overcrowding takes place. Rather than condemn these people, I would say it is our task to house them properly. Once housing is available—here I am with my hon. friend—we can demand of these people that they care for their homes properly and that they accept the civic responsibilities which go with home occupancy and home ownership. I think our first duty is to attend to the backlog in housing in respect of the Coloured people.

*My hon. friend, the member for Worcester

The ballerina!

… spoke of the needs of the rural areas. I just want to assure the hon. member that the Department of Community Development deals with 900 local authorities all over South Africa and that the needs and requests of each of those 900 local authorities are carefully considered and dealt with on merit. Not a day passes without attention being given to the problems and aspirations of the rural areas. Generally speaking, we succeed in giving them the same measure of satisfaction as we give in the big cities, places we hear more about because matters relating to the cities are bigger and more spectacular and receive more publicity in the Press.

The hon. member for Durban Central made a very interesting speech on rent control. He will forgive me if I say—I do not mean to be disparaging—that it was actually something of an anti-climax, for I had already indicated in my previous speech that the question of rent control was creating problems for us as well and was causing conditions which we could not allow to continue. I also pointed out that when the Fouché Commission’s report has been received, it will be necessary to go into the matter very thoroughly and perhaps to introduce measures next session in order to solve the difficulties referred to by him and by me. I thank him sincerely for his contribution. We have already decided to do the things he advocated.

The hon. member asked, as did the hon. member for Green Point, that we should publish the findings of the Johannes Committee—not the Johannes Commission. Mr. Chairman, this was a departmental committee, and it is not customary to publish the reports of departmental committees. My hon. friends on the other side are not entitled to learn the contents of such a report. Apart from that, I want to point out that that report is no longer valid in any event. Since then we have appointed an expert commission under the chairmanship of Mr. Louis Fouché to reinvestigate this subject. The findings of this commission will be made public. I shall announce them one of these days, and then the hon. member will have the latest information and the latest evaluation by experts on the matter available to him. I think it will be easier and better for us to rely on the latest and best information rather than to refer to things no longer applicable.

The hon. member for Oudtshoorn made a speech which showed interest and knowledge, and he discussed many matters which I do not want to deal with in detail now. Nor does he expect me to do so. He mentioned one matter on which I do want to agree with him and which I want to emphasize and this is that it is essential, where we plan and build these housing schemes, towns and cities, that the inhabitants should contribute their share towards making a success of it. The hon. member is quite right. One of our major problems—I do not mean to be derogatory; actually I find it tragic—is that there are Coloured people who have grown so accustomed to living under unbearable conditions and circumstances, especially in squatter conditions—which some hon. members in the PRP wish to make a permanent feature of urban life—that they no longer know how to live in and look after a proper house. As houses become available to them, they will have to be assisted by public welfare and psychological experts to adapt themselves to decent conditions. I find it tragic that people can be reduced to such a state by circumstances that they need a re-education to be able to live a decent life in proper houses like normal people. Those people who are so concerned about the standard of living of these people now have an opportunity to help us by means of welfare experts to enter these people’s shacks and to condition them for the better circumstances we hope to provide for them.

The hon. member for Meyerton made a very interesting speech. Amongst other things, he made a statement which I have also made, but which he is entitled to repeat, because it remains true. He said that as far as housing is concerned, the efforts made in South Africa in this field compare favourably with those in any other country in the world. While he was speaking, I happened to have a document before me which I always find interesting. Amongst other things, this document contains a table comparing the achievements of South Africa in the field of housing in recent years with the achievement of an important, enlightened, socialist country—Great Britain. It is very interesting to note that in 1968, Britain provided 425 000 houses and in 1975 it provided approximately 400 000 houses to its population through Government bodies. This means that in 1968, they provided 7,7 houses for every thousand of the population. By 1975, however, this had dropped to 6,6 houses for every thousand of the population. In South Africa with its smaller population, we provided 24 000 houses for Whites in 1968 and 36 000 in 1975. This means that in 1968, 6,9 houses were provided for every thousand of the White population, and in 1975 the number was 8,5 houses per thousand.

In case anyone wants to say that we always favour the Whites, I want to say that in the case of the Coloured people, our achievement has been even more remarkable. In 1968 we built 9 500 houses for Coloured people, and in 1975 almost twice that number—17 000. This means 4,7 houses per thousand of the population in 1968. By 1975, this figure had risen to 7,2 houses per thousand. Surely this is an achievement we may be proud of. It leaves no room for argument. It is an achievement for South Africa, and I am grateful to be able to tell such a story. I am glad that the hon. member for Meyerton gave me the opportunity to confirm his remarks in this way.

Then the hon. member joined the hon. member for Overvaal in speaking on behalf of those hundreds of White families at Lawley and Grasmere, east of Johannesburg, people whose farms and whose towns will have to be sacrificed so that Coloured people and Indians can be housed there. They have to sacrifice 4 000 ha of land so that 60 000 Coloured and Indian families can be settled in the big new cities we are planning there. What I find admirable and what I am very grateful for—the hon. member for Overvaal also referred to this—is that they are prepared to do this; they are prepared to sacrifice their heritage, their slice of South Africa, because they feel that these are deserving people who also have the right to live a decent life. The people living in this area were given an opportunity to make this possible in co-operation with the State.

May I ask the hon. the Minister a question?

The hon. member may ask his question a little later. [Interjections.] Or never mind. He has already interrupted my train of thought. He may as well ask his question.

I just want to know from the hon. the Minister whether the people have been compensated for their great sacrifice by receiving the market value for their properties.

Mr. Speaker, Oscar Wilde said that there are people who know the price of everything, but the value of nothing. I am very sorry to say that that is an apt description of that hon. member.

*In this connection we are not concerned with what they received for their farms; what is important is that these are the farms of their fathers and grandfathers which they are being asked to sacrifice.

The hon. members said that we should make haste and finalize the matter as soon as possible. Last year, under the most difficult circumstances, I got R10 million from the Treasury for buying the properties of people who wanted to make their houses and farms available immediately. This year I have obtained a considerably larger amount for continuing this work. It is our policy today, if any of the people living in this area feel that they want to leave so that the Coloured people or the Indians may move in and so that we may make preparations for urban development there, to do our best to buy their properties at a reasonable valuation, a valuation done by valuators who are familiar with those parts and who are highly qualified to value the land, houses or buildings. After negotiations with these people, we usually come to an equitable agreement. In spite of the cynicism of the hon. member for Pinetown, we appreciate the attitude of these people and as far as I am concerned, we shall gladly pay them a disruption allowance as well, where we request them to sacrifice their houses and their heritage in the interests of the community.

I have greatly appreciated the discussion of this Vote, for it has been very interesting. I am glad hon. members got a little hot under the collar, for what would a Wednesday evening be like if we did not let fly at one another every now and again? Generally speaking, it was a positive and constructive debate, a debate which indicated that at least three parties in this House take a sincere interest in the welfare of ordinary people and of the under-privileged amongst us.

Votes agreed to.

Vote No. 36.—“Tourism”:

Mr. Chairman, I want to state at the outset that I think the annual report of the Department of Tourism is by far the best I have seen. It is an honest, frank and realistic assessment of our domestic and foreign tourism, and we would like to compliment the Secretary for Tourism on a thoroughly professional document.

If we focus first of all on the film section of the department, we find that they have a follow-up on the very successful film produced by them last year in the film we saw recently, A Jewel of a Continent. When one thinks of it that the director, Mr. De Silva, whom we congratulate on this very fine film, is working on a shoestring budget, it makes this achievement the more incredible. Last year the hon. the Minister concurred with the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg South that a “See South Africa Year” should be launched, and he indicated that the target object of the department for 1978 was 1 million tourists.

Towards attaining this goal Satour has done a tremendous job over the years. They have brought visitors to South Africa, visitors who have gone home again with a better understanding and tolerance of our problems. They have also gained for South Africa foreign exchange and goodwill. We know that Satour has built up and has reached the stage where it is about to make a breakthrough. However, Satour needs further encouragement in order to achieve the objective of 1 million visitors. Even though this will mean extra money, we will support the hon. the Minister and give him every encouragement in achieving this end.

I would like to offer some suggestions for consideration by the hon. the Minister. We all know that tourists are very money-conscious. Particularly in these days of high motoring costs, they have focused their attention more on air, rail and coach travel. They expect to find travel concessions in the countries they want to visit. We feel that if South Africa is to attract more foreign tourists, we will have to be competitive and will have to offer comparable concessions to overseas tourists. In that regard we feel that the Department of Tourism is in a very fine position to negotiate with the Department of Transport to try to achieve such travel concessions. I would like to suggest to the hon. the Minister that he consider a permanent inter-departmental committee to be formed for this purpose.

The first concession I have in mind is in rail travel. I feel that Republican Rail, or Reprail, could operate in the same manner as Eurail in Europe, or Britrail in the United Kingdom, or Amtrac in America. In those countries foreign visitors have the privilege of unlimited rail travel for the period indicated on the previously purchased rail pass. They find that they conserve up to one-third of what the normal travel costs would be, and that they can, therefore, budget more efficiently for their holidays. Students get even further concessions in those countries.

I see in this document that Eurail entitles full-time students under 26 years of age to two months of unlimited second-class rail travel at a cost of R219. This is a saving of R124 on the adult Eurail pass, which in itself is one-third of the normal railway fare. On my approximate calculation, Eurail travel costs are 20% less than the South African charges per kilometre. On a Britrail pass a student can travel for 192 hours at a cost of R38. In comparison, here in South Africa he can only travel for 28 hours if he pays R39,75. That is the second-class train journey between Cape Town and Johannesburg. I feel that if South Africa was going to attract tourists, it must compete with the prices and the facilities offered overseas.

We do have some very attractive railroads in the country. We have the Banana Express going down the South Coast of Natal, the North Coast Flyer. Travelling on the North Coast Flyer one even gets sugar cane as a “Bonsella” along the route. We have the Appel Express through the lovely Langkloof. I think, even more famous is the Garden Route trip. Of course, one should not be in too much of a hurry if one chooses that particular route.

For our crack trains, the Blue Train, the Orange Express and the Drakensberg, the scenic views, I feel, are lost because of inadequate viewing facilities from the trains. I think a great asset would be to have a panorama viewing car, such as one finds on the Canadian Pacific Railway. There passengers can relax and admire the view and they can also plug into tapes which inform the listener about the area which is being traversed.

Our second suggestion to this interdepartmental committee is that they put their heads together over concession air fares. “Fly-as-you-please” options are available overseas. In the USA a passenger can leapfrog around for 90 days for $355. That is the equivalent in South Africa to a cost of a trip from Cape Town to Johannesburg, then to Durban and a return to Cape Town, a trip which can be completed in a day. Meanwhile in America they can fly for 90 days. I feel that these “Rep-Air” flight options could be made available on flights at non-peak periods. We know that most of our mid-week flights are not at full capacity and I am sure that the hon. the Minister could convince the Minister of Transport to agree to this plan if he could earn some extra revenue for his department.

A final suggestion which I wish to make to the hon. the Minister is that he investigate a “ride-as-you-please” scheme. The Greyhound Bus Company in the USA operates what it calls an Ameripass and one can buy a pass which ranges from 7 to 60 days. By comparison a six-day trip in this country, for example, the Garden Route via Oudtshoorn, will cost the tourist R212 for six days, whereas on the Ameripass he can travel for 30 days for R154, although admittedly the price in South Africa does include full board. We feel that visitors would like to roam as they please and be able to pick up a bus when they want to move on. We feel that this “Rep-Ride” scheme is a scheme to accommodate those particular tourists.

Our final suggestion to the hon. the Minister is that he negotiates for big game fishing facilities at Richards Bay. I believe that efforts by skippers so far have failed and that they are having to move their boats to East London and Durban. However, Richards Bay is ideally situated on the funnel to the Mozambique Channel which is one of the best big game fishing playgrounds in the world. With the lack of interest in the port of Maputo, Mauritius and Madagascar are booming with this trade, and we feel that these tycoon tourists must be accommodated at Richards Bay.

In conclusion, we believe that our suggestions will not involve the department in much more expenditure. All that is necessary is their expertise and the acquiescence of the Department of Transport. If this permanent interdepartmental committee can negotiate these particular concessions which I have mentioned, we feel that we will achieve the dramatic break-through that we are looking for in our tourist trade. We will also excite and stimulate the tourist industry with these improved selling options and we shall assist Satour in their efforts. We feel that South Africa’s climate and unique attractions offer marvellous all-year tourist appeal. South Africa can, if we implement these competitive concessions, give tourists the best welcome in the whole world. As was said of Cleopatra is also true of South Africa, namely “Age cannot wither her, nor custom stale her infinite variety”.

Mr. Chairman, I do not think it is expected of me to reply to the railway speech made by the hon. member. I want to confine myself to tourism and the problems we are experiencing. In 1975 South Africa received a record number of 730 000 tourists. During 1976 there was a general slump in South Africa, just as there was throughout the world, a slump of approximately 12%, which reduced the number of tourists who visited South Africa to 638 000. Now the question arises—and this is the criterion in terms of which we should judge the Department of Tourism and Satour—what is Satour doing and what is the Department of Tourism doing to put the matter to rights and to attract tourists to South Africa once again? There is an impressive programme and if one looks at the impressive programme and at the zeal with which this task is being tackled, one can only express one’s regret this evening that a man like Mr. Theo Owen, the director of Satour, deemed it fit at this stage to resign as director of Satour. We can only look back with appreciation at the services Mr. Theo Owen has rendered for Satour and express our gratitude that his advice will not be lost.

What do these people do? In the first place Satour and the Department of Tourism bring a number of influential travel writers to South Africa. They travel about in South Africa and subsequently publish descriptions of South Africa in the various travel publications and travel columns of the big newspapers abroad. This is done with an exceptional amount of success. In the second place all the branch offices of Satour abroad exert themselves to make more contact so as to reach more people in various ways. One of the methods which is employed successfully is the holding of seminars. Such seminars are arranged with group tour operators, travel agents and the public. On those occasions the people are informed of the travel possibilities of South Africa and they are attracted here. In 1976, 330 such seminars were held by the 13 offices of Satour. A second method is to hold exhibitions at congresses in various parts of the world. This is done in co-operation with S.A. Airways. Typical South African tourist attractions are used as a theme, for example Groot Constantia and large exhibitions of proteas which are a special attraction to the tourist from overseas and which attract thousands of people. A third method is to concentrate on international conventions and congresses.

One such congress that was attended, was that of Asta—the American Society for Travel Agents. This congress was held in New Orleans. It was a special congress, attended by no fewer than 5 000 travel agents from America and 110 other countries. South Africa and Satour achieved exceptional success at this congress, because these people immediately brought us prominently to the forefront in a friendly fashion. Instead of advertising in the normal way, Satour spent the money it would have used otherwise, on two diamonds. Everyone of the advertising pamphlets handed out by Satour had a number on it and it was announced that the winners of the diamonds would be made known the following day by drawing lots. The hall was packed as people came in their thousands to see who was going to win the diamonds. That was how Satour did its advertising. Not a day went by on which Satour did not appear on the front page of the Asta news letter. It was an exceptional success and great publicity was given to South African tourism in this way.

Films are also made. These films are shown to various agencies in the world and in this way no fewer than 4 million prospective tourists have been reached. These are special films and two such films have already been made. They are of exceptional quality and are aimed at making publicity for South Africa in the best way imaginable. One of these is called A World in one Country and is a tourist film second to none. The latest one, A Jewel of a Continent, may be used to make publicity for the various facets of South Africa. For the rest the tourist offices abroad are concentrating on advertising.

For the first time in history the two most important marketers of South Africa’s tourist industry have pooled their funds on a rand-for-rand basis and have achieved an exceptional amount of success as a result of this. I am referring to S.A. Airways and Satour. Some outstanding advertising material has been produced and the best-known is the beautiful desk calendar which is sought after by all of us. When I was in Italy two or three years ago, we paid a visit to one of their largest offices, namely that of IRI, which may be compared with our IDC, although it is a few times larger. This beautiful calendar stared me in the face from the desk of the general manager. Of all the calendars in the world he could get, it was the one from Satour which he chose to grace his desk. He said he looked forward to getting one every year. Many of these calendars are sent overseas to various important tourist organizations and diplomatic missions. Approximately 69 000 of these calendars are marketed in South Africa as well. They are distributed to the various bookshops where they may be purchased as gifts.

Exceptional success is also being achieved with film productions, as I have already said, and shorts, or short films, are also made. For example, not long ago, when Liz Taylor and Richard Burton were still very much in love, they visited the Kruger National Park. Their visit to the Park was shot and this gave us an outstanding publicity film for the Kruger National Park. Through the medium of the Movietone and Visnews distribution networks, more than 400 million people saw that film in cinemas throughout the world. More recently Charles Aznavour visited the Natal National Parks. A similar film was made of that visit and 71 television networks in 65 countries, and Movietone, showed that film. Despite her many problems, South Africa is being seen on the tourist platforms of the world, thanks to the energetic efforts of this special group of people under the leadership of the Secretary for Tourism and the Director of Satour. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, we have had a very interesting speech from the hon. member for Fauresmith about the operations of Satour. Quite clearly, from what he said, Satour is doing a very wonderful job for South Africa and I am sure we all share in the appreciation he has expressed for this organization.

I should like, if I can, to link up with the speech of the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg North who spelled out the hard facts that in attracting people to South Africa, one of the most important factors is actually cost. An effort must be made to make holidays in South Africa competitive in relation to other holidays that are offered. The hon. member mentioned, I thought, some very good ideas about what one could do with Railway concessions. I should also like to put an idea to the hon. the Minister which he might like to consider. As the hon. the Minister is probably aware, it is impossible for independent carriers to operate package tours in South Africa because they cannot get permission to compete with the S.A. Airways. When one considers the distances and the prices of airflights from Europe to South Africa or from America to South Africa, one sees how difficult it must be for people, who want to put together package tours in South Africa, to compete with Europe or America. From the cost point of view this becomes very difficult. I believe that if something could be done about this, it would really make an incredible difference to the numbers of people that we could bring into South Africa.

I therefore want to put the following suggestion to the hon. the Minister. We have a money market called the securities rand market, and as the hon. the Minister probably knows, the securities rand market is designed expressly, at this stage, to enable aliens who live outside South Africa to buy rands from other aliens in order to purchase quoted securities on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange. In the securities rand market the present discount at which one alien can buy rands from another alien is approximately 40% This means that by paying out 60c in the equivalent of dollars or pounds, or whatever currency is applicable, one can buy the equivalent of R1 of South African currency. I therefore suggest that the hon. the Minister speak to his colleague, the Minister of Finance, to get him to agree to the following proposition. Let us suppose that bona fide tourists to South Africa are intending to be in the country for a period of 21 days or more and are able to buy R1 000’s worth of special travellers’ cheques through the securities rand market, the said travellers’ cheques—let us call them tourist cheques—having to be spent in the course of their stay of 21 days in South Africa, or whatever the length of the holiday happened to be. The person would then be able to buy R1 000 in South African currency for the equivalent cost of say R600. This is immediately a R400 saving which would go a long way towards offsetting the difference in travelling costs of the holiday to South Africa in relation to a holiday in Europe or elsewhere in Africa. This would be a very significant amount of money for those people who look at these big package tour holidays. Let us consider the impact. Firstly I think that a great many more people would actually use this facility and come to South Africa. The tourist industry in South Africa would be able to spend a lot of money in marketing package tours to South Africa because then, for the first time, it would be able to compete with what is offered by other countries. The hon. the Minister of Finance might, of course, tell the hon. the Minister that South Africa could actually lose foreign exchange because instead of tourists buying money through the normal banking processes, which would improve our balance of payments on the tourist account, they would be using the securities rand market and we would therefore not be getting that additional foreign currency. I think this argument can be countered, however, by pointing out that, firstly, more people would be coming to South Africa and, secondly, that people who would normally come on business and stay for three days, four days or five days, would probably extend their stay to 21 days to take advantage of this particular offer. The tourists would therefore obviously spend more than the originally estimated R1 000, so on our balance of payments we would actually not lose foreign currency. Thirdly, we know that the tourist industry is depressed at the moment. A lot of that is the result of the recession we have in South Africa at the moment. The other countries of the world are moving out of the recession, however, and it would probably be some time before we follow suit. We can cash in on what we might call this boom that is ahead of us by getting people to come to South Africa, and we can do so if we can compete on the cost aspects. Another factor is that S.A. Airways itself would benefit because there would obviously be more revenue from people coming in. This can all be done without costing the South African Government or any individual in South Africa even a single rand. It can all be done by using a special market which is at present restricted to aliens dealing with aliens.

Business interrupted in accordance with Standing Order No. 22.

House Resumed:

Progress reported and leave granted to sit again.