Mr. Chairman, I request the privilege of the half hour. What I want to discuss in the time at my disposal in fact concerns three basic aspects. In the first place, there are questions arising out of the annual report of the department; secondly, there is the basic point of departure of the Government with regard to the Coloured population; and finally, there are a few critical remarks about the policy of the Government in following a labour preference policy in regard to the Coloureds in the Western Cape. The questions I want to ask about the annual report in fact only concern information I require. In the introduction to the annual report it is said that one of the most important tasks of the department is to acquire rural land for the Coloured population. In the first paragraphs of chapter II we note that the farm Anhalt in the Uniondale division has been acquired. We also note that land has been acquired at Mangete and Emoyeni for the Dunn group of the Coloured population. The report also mentions that an inter-departmental committee was appointed to investigate the acquisition of agricultural land in the Northern Cape in the Kimberley region. Furthermore, an inter-departmental committee has also-been appointed relating to land which has been preliminarily identified for the Coloured population in the region of Kokstad, Matatiele and Umzimkulu.

However, there is no information in the report relating to the recommendations of these inter-departmental committees. I should like to know what land they recommend should be acquired in the Northern Cape and also what region has been identified in the region of Kokstad, Matatiele and Umzimkulu.

I also want to put this general question to the Minister: What is the department’s policy relating to the Coloureds in the rural areas, what are their plans to acquire still more land and what do they have in mind?

The next question I want to put relates to paragraph 2.3.2 in which reference is made to negotiations with the Administrators that are at present under way with a view to vesting more powers in local management committees. I should like to know from the hon. the Minister what specific powers are being considered. What powers can be transferred to local management committees? I am not referring to so-called purely Coloured municipalities—there are very few of them—I am referring specifically to the idea expressed by the Government, to the effect that one can have, as it were, two municipalities alongside each other in the same municipal area.

Paragraph 2.7.2 makes reference to the fact that there is an inter-departmental committee on labour in the Western Cape which concentrates on the problem of work-shyness among the Coloured population. The report goes on to mention that the CRC has been requested to make suggestions on how to combat this problem. I should like to know whether suggestions have yet been made by the CRC, and if so, what the nature of the suggestions are and how they hope to deal with the problem.

Paragraph 2.5 of the report concerns the issue of licences to possess fire-arms, to the Coloured population. According to the report the department has laid down certain guidelines which it has submitted to the Commissioner of Police. What is the nature of these guidelines? This is not clear from the report and I should like to know what recommendations the department made in this regard. The other day I spoke to a person who has a business and he told me that he has been trying to obtain a licence to possess a fire-arm for the past two years. His business is in an area in which theft and breaking and entering often occurs, but he is unable to acquire such a fire-arm. I have already corresponded with the department of the Minister of Police in this regard. He refers me to the Commissioner of Police and the Commissioner in turn refers me to the hon. the Minister. Thus far I have had no indication as to how I am to solve this problem.

Paragraph 2.7.5.3 concerns public relations committees which have been established. It is stated in this paragraph that these public relations committees are making good progress. I should like to know what the nature of that progress is. It is also said that these committees are now trying to get the youth actively involved. It is not said how this is being done and I should like to know to what extent success has been achieved in these efforts to involve the youth and what steps are being taken in this regard.

Then there is a general question which also arises out of the report: What is going to be the future position of the Coloured, Rehoboth and Nama groups in South West, assuming that that territory is to obtain its independence? It is very clear from the report that the department still accepts responsibility to a large extent for the administration of that area. This includes the purchase of land, the maintenance of an education system, the regulation of local authority structures for these people, etc. It seems to me that at some stage the department will have to emancipate this territory, as it were, and I hope that the hon. the Minister can already give us an indication as to what steps are being envisaged in regard to that situation.

Those, Sir, are the questions arising out of the report. The other two matters I want to raise are more contentious. One concerns recommendation 153 of the Theron Commission and its implications for the Government’s approach to the Coloured population and the other concerns the labour preference policy of the Government with regard to the Western Cape. In this regard I want to ask that we should try not to caricature each other’s standpoints. Let us rather try to reply to the arguments themselves.

†Recommendation No. 153 of the Theron Commission reads as follows—

1. (b) the advancement and pursuit of culture be dealt with within the same organizational framework as for Afrikaans-speaking and English-speaking Whites in South Africa.

The Government’s reaction to this recommendation, as set out in its White Paper on this report, reads, inter alia, as follows—

These two statements, i.e. the recommendation itself and the reaction of the Government to that recommendation, point to a basic difference of opinion with regard to the Coloured population group in our society. They point to a fundamental philosophical difference, if one wants to put it that way. The Government chooses to persist with its attitude of regarding the Coloured population as a distinct and separate group in our society, and what I want to find out is on what basis they do so. We get conflicting standpoints when this question is answered. One group says they are an ethnic group, in a sense. They say: “Hulle is ’n volk in wording, in ’n sin, of ’n etniese groep.” I want to put it to hon. members opposite that there is no social-scientific definition of ethnicity which is acceptable that can be applied to the Coloured population group. I am not aware of such a definition.

Therefore, in a sense it would be pure hypocrisy to persist with the idea that this is in fact an ethnic group in any acceptable sense of the word. If, however, the Government persists with that, obviously certain contradictions present themselves. One could then say that ethnic groups like the Afrikaners, the English, the Portuguese, the Germans or the Jews should also get the same kind of treatment. So I do not think one can argue that these people are an ethnic group in any sense.

The other argument that is used is that it is said: Well, maybe they are not an ethnic group, but they are an identifiable group— you can see that they are a particular group in our society. In the same sense, women, men and steelworkers are also identifiable groups. We therefore need more information. We cannot simply say that they are an identifiable group. In what sense does the Government use this argument?

I want to put it that the reason why they are treated as a separate or distinct group is a consequence of White party-political rivalry in the past. That is the only reason. There is no other reason. Because of that rivalry and because it led to certain difficulties within White politics, it became convenient to treat them as a distinct group. As a result of that, certain laws were passed by this Parliament. The Group Areas Act, the Immorality Act, the Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act, the Population Registration Act and other legal mechanisms were used to herd, cajole or coerce these people into a particular physical area so that one could say: There they are; they are now a group. It is in this respect only that one can say that, because of legal compulsion, we have created an identifiable group in our society.

Why am I making this point? I am making it for the simple reason that, as a result of the Coloureds having been coerced into a group in this way, the Government now find themselves in the position that they have to get some kind of co-operation from this group to make their new constitutional proposals work. So far they have not been particularly successful in that. The only unanimous kind of reaction they have had from the Coloured population was that they rejected the basic assumptions the Government hold with regard to them as a group. There has not been any clear indication from that population group that there is a great deal of enthusiasm for these new constitutional proposals. If we cannot get that kind of co-operation, the whole constitutional programme becomes pointless. It is not just an interesting experiment we are engaged in. We are in fact confronted with a Government that intend to change the very constitution of this country. If the constitution of this country is to be changed, one should at least be more or less certain that the co-operation of the communities involved will be obtained. If one does not get that co-operation, one will not be solving anything: One will simply be shifting the forum of conflict from where it exists at the present time to a far more elaborate level.

In this respect, I want to ask the hon. the Minister what progress has been made in getting this co-operation and what the difficulties are. Please, let us not hear the argument that we sit with a little computer in our caucus room directing and giving instructions to the Coloured population group, telling them what they should or should not accept. This is a clear insult to the people themselves. They know what they think and they know what they feel. Obviously, it is the Government’s duty to try to persuade these people to co-operate. None of the normal indications of support, i.e. by means of elections, voting or a referendum, have been used by the Government to test the support. Instead, they try on a low-keyed level to create public relations committees to get co-operation on that basis. I am not saying that this is not permissible, but one would at least want to have some kind of indication of what degree of success is being achieved in this respect.

*The final point I want to raise is the issue of the labour preference policy in the Western Cape. In this regard I want to make an appeal to hon. members to discuss this point, if possible, without heat and without distortion. I have already said that it is true that there are Government members who mean well and who adopt the approach that it is for the benefit of and for the sake of the Coloured population that one should try to establish a preference policy here. My point of departure is that ultimately this will be detrimental to the Coloured population itself. I want to give a few reasons for my view and I should be obliged if hon. members would react to them. Firstly, I think that the preference policy will not be beneficial to the Coloured population…

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

I have very little time, Mr. Chairman. If there is time at the end of my speech I shall reply to a question by the hon. member. The preference policy does not take into account possible economic fluctuations. In other words, when there is an economic slump, there is pressure for the Blacks to leave the Cape so that the Coloureds can get the employment opportunities. Then, when there is an economic upswing and there is no oversupply of unskilled labour, these people may return. In other words, this operates on the assumption that the Coloured population must be prepared at all times to cope with these fluctuating economic conditions. In fact, they must be permanently prepared to fill a labour vacuum. This is the first point I want to make, and in a certain sense it will contribute to great instability in the Western Cape region. The second reason is that if this policy is implemented consistently, it will certainly hinder economic development. Every businessman I have spoken to thus far—and this is even said in the Press—has confirmed that he will obtain the labour which is most suitable for him so that he can carry on his economic activities.

No, the cheapest labour.

It does not matter if it is the cheapest labour. What would those hon. members do if they were running a business?

Are you making an admission?

Mr. Chairman, it is quite simple. One can try to persuade them not to pay low wages, but if it is a matter of economic development one will not persuade anyone to employ labour if he is not going to make a certain margin of profit. It is as simple as that. Whether we think it is wrong or not, the fact remains that that man is making a contribution to economic development. The politicians can try to persuade him to pay more, but he is making a contribution to economic development in the Western Cape. One cannot impose an artificial restriction on him and hope that he will carry on with his economic activities. What will happen in reality is that he will move away from here. He will move to another region. We spoke about this the other day and even then it was clear that this was the trend that was appearing here too.

Thirdly, this kind of approach will certainly cause friction between the Coloured and the Black man on a permanent basis, specifically due to the first point to which I referred. In this regard this policy, if consistently implemented, could in fact prejudice race relations due to all the problems I have sketched, since a situation will be created, due to deliberate Government action, in which an unhealthy form of competition between the Coloured and the Black worker will be created. It is already causing trouble because I see in the report …

It is specifically their influx that creates the problem.

That influx will occur in any event in spite of Government policy.

You are encouraging it.

We have been discussing this policy for 20 years now and what do we have?

We are still faced with the situation. Now that an economic slump has occurred, the Blacks all of a sudden have to leave. If an economic upswing were again to occur these hon. members would be among the first to ask that the Black people be brought back. It is specifically due to this approach that friction is created.

I do not merely wish to be critical, but also wish to put forward certain suggestions. The question is: What is really necessary? In the first place, economic development must be stimulated in the Western Cape with all the means at our disposal. We know what the problem is and all the means at our disposal must be utilized. When I say this I mean that we cannot implement an artificial labour policy because it will have the effect that eventually the Coloureds’ advancement will be restricted by a preference policy. There is an inherent assumption that they must do the manual labour and, depending on the changing economic circumstances, this restricts his advancement. Secondly, I believe it is vital that machinery be created whereby unemployed persons or workers who are not fully employed are informed of employment opportunities. This point is very clearly stated in the Theron Report. It is maintained in that report that there are many people who are not fully employed or who are unemployed. However, there is no machinery to enable them to be informed about employment opportunities that exist. I am not referring solely to those who are registered as unemployed, because we know that only a small percentage of unemployed are registered in this way. Other machinery must be created, such as labour bureaux where one can contact these unemployed persons and acquaint them with the employment opportunities that do exist. In the third place, I believe that there will have to be a great deal more technical training in order to increase labour productivity, and that a great deal more in-service training of the various groups will have to be undertaken. One of my colleagues will probably come back to this point at a later stage. The actual point I want to make in regard to this preference policy for the Coloured population—and I say this in all sincerity, in the light of its implications for the Black population as well, although this is not at issue at the moment—is that by means of this policy we are building up trouble for the future which could cause us tremendous harm and hurt us a great deal.

Mr. Chairman, when the hon. member for Rondebosch rose to make his speech this morning, I felt a little sorry for him since it probably took a great deal of courage to speak from the ranks of the Opposition on such an historical and exceptional day. The hon. member’s speech was rather feeble, but I could not blame him for that. He is a very courteous member and consequently I thought that he would perhaps congratulate the NP on its 30th year in office. However, I do not blame him for not doing so.

I want to tell the hon. member at once that we accept his challenge and that we on this side of the House would also like to discuss these matters in depth and will very definitely give attention to the aspects he mentioned. In the first place he put a spate of questions to the hon. the Minister, to which the hon. the Minister will consequently reply. We have been watching the Question Paper and we saw that from the beginning of April questions on Coloured matters had dried up. Therefore, I wonder whether the hon. member and his colleagues should not simply make use of question time in the House in future to put their questions, so that we will be able to dispose of the discussion of the Vote more rapidly.

The hon. member stated that because the Coloureds had occupied a position of conflict in White politics, we had removed them from White politics and had, by means of legislation, turned them into a population group. By adopting this standpoint I think the hon. member is in fact insulting the Coloured population group as such, and I shall indicate why later in my speech. I am not going to reply to the hon. member in full on his arguments on our preferential labour policy in the Western Cape.

However, other hon. members on this side of the House will do so. I find the hon. member’s attitude in this regard strange, particularly because we had a recommendation on this matter from the Theron Commission in which the commission adopted a firm standpoint on the matter. The hon. Opposition reproached us at the time for not having accepted all the recommendations of the Theron Commission.

I was opposed to it from the outset.

We were reproached for doing that. We were told that we should accept all the recommendations of the commission. We could not do so. Today, however, the hon. member said it was wrong of us to have accepted this recommendation of the Theron Commission and to be implementing it at this stage.

I was opposed to it from the outset.

We on this side of the House will furnish replies to all of the arguments advanced today by the hon. member for Rondebosch.

Hon. members on this side of the House who are going to participate in the debate after me, will proceed at once to discuss the proposed constitutional changes. I hope that hon. members in the ranks of the Opposition are prepared this morning to participate in a debate on that subject.

There is a profound difference between the PFP and the NP, a difference which it will never be possible to bridge. In my opinion we are dealing with two political polarities which are absolutely irreconcilable. I want to repeat here today, in view of the historical event which we are commemorating today, that the fundamental principle on which NP policy is based is the recognition of the right of self-determination of every nation or population group in the country, together with the right to full development. In reply to what the hon. member for Rondebosch said in this regard, I want to say that the NP accepts that the Coloureds are a population group of South Africa in their own right. Whoever denies this and whoever disputes this, wishes to draw a line through history. Surely it is true that even before there was a policy of separate development, the Coloureds already had their own institutions. They created those institutions themselves, developed them themselves over the years, and are justifiably proud of them. Surely no one can draw a line through that development and no one can undo it. Surely it is a fact that a nation does not allow itself to be deprived of what is its own. The Coloureds have their own creations today, their own institutions, which did not come into existence as a result of the activities of the Government, but which emerged from among themselves, which they themselves created and cherished over the years. Surely we cannot draw a line through this now and tell the Coloureds that they are not a population group. We cannot tell them now that they do not have the right to have and possess their own things. I repeat that a nation does not allow itself to be deprived of what is its own.

Mr. Chairman, may I ask the hon. member whether the Coloureds cannot be allowed to decide their destiny and political future themselves. [Interjections.]

Mr. Chairman, that is precisely what our policy is. What does self-determination mean? In the constitution of the NP it is provided that they may decide their own interests.

Furthermore, I want to ask this question: What is the position of the Coloureds in the South African society and in the constitutional dispensation of South Africa today? It is my view that the Brown people today, as a population group in their own right, stand in a normal relationship with the other peoples or population groups of South Africa. In this dispensation of peoples they have, in the first place, the right to preserve their identity. Is it a sin, an atrocity, if we tell a population group which has existed over the years in this country, that under our policy they have the right to preserve their identity? In the second place it is a dispensation in which the Brown people are able to take decisions concerning their own interests and in which they are not politically dominated by other groups and are in no way at all abused or exploited.

The hon. member for Rondebosch said that the Brown people had caused a conflict in White politics. I want to say that they were not the cause of the conflict. It arose because they were being totally exploited. In the third place the Coloureds are in a position, within the ethnic relationship, in which they are being afforded the opportunity of developing to the full. In the fourth place their ethnic relationship in which they stand is one in which the violation of human dignity is eliminated, because we have a normal and adult ethnic relationship here. In other words, in South Africa we have the dispensation of nation as against nation, population group as against population group.

During the discussion of this Vote we have an opportunity—I think this is the purpose of the debate—to determine whether the Coloureds as a population group in the multinational set-up in South Africa are receiving their rightful share, are occupying their rightful place and whether they are capable of maintaining this place. I think these are the aspects with which this debate should be concerned today. It is a very wide spectrum which we shall have to consider, a spectrum in which social, educational, economic and constitutional factors all play a role. We on this side of the House shall deal with these aspects during the discussion of this Vote.

I said that the NP policy of multinationalism makes provision for the preservation of identity. No one can deny that the Coloured population has succeeded in establishing itself very firmly as a population group in every sphere of South African society, or that they are in a dignified and adult way occupying that place in the array of South African nations. No one belittles or despises this population group. We consider them with good reason and proudly and see how they are taking their place in the array of South African nations. Consequently I want to pay tribute to the Coloured leaders who have over the years provided positive guidance in the social sphere and who, with their untiring zeal, have under difficult circumstances established a sound community life with its own features and character. The community life of the Coloureds is a strong and well-established community life in which all activities, for example religion, culture, the business world, sport, politics—in fact, everything which is unique to a nation—can be practised. [Time expired.]

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

Mr. Chairman, I thank the hon. member for the opportunity to complete my speech. I also want to say that it is a community life which is basically responsible for the fact that the Coloured population is able to stand on its own feet today, and is not an appendage of other nations, something which it does not want to be. It is a community life from which the Coloureds are able to make their voices heard today. They have their political platform from which they can state their case. Today the Coloureds are established in their own residential areas and have their own community life. They have facilities of which any nation in the world may be proud, facilities which many other nations do not possess today. In the social sphere the Coloureds have been placed in a position where they were able to raise their standard of living drastically. I was born a few kilometres from this debating chamber, and spent my childhood years in Cape Town. I remember the years when the Coloureds walked the streets of Cape Town in a condition in which we no longer find them today. Today—and we do not begrudge them these things in any way—they possess luxuries such as motor-cars, television sets and all these things. This was not the case thirty or forty years ago, and I am stating a fact now. We on this side of the House are not blind; there are problems. For that reason the Government appointed the Theron Commission to investigate those problems. For example, we must give attention to better and adequate housing.

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

Not at this stage. We shall also have to give attention to better and adequate facilities. We are doing this every day. In the social sphere we shall have to give constant attention to a sound interaction between the White and the Coloured population groups, not only by eliminating discriminatory measures, but also by recognizing one another, by having respect for one another and a sound reciprocal attitude. All the apartheid notices can be removed and all the apartheid measures on the Statute Book can be repealed, but if there is no reciprocal recognition, respect and goodwill, we shall not get anywhere.

I want to point out what has been accomplished in the sphere of education. Over a period of 11 years—1966 to 1977—there was an increase of 268 000 school children and 10 300 teachers. Over the same period there was an increase of 7 000 candidates who passed the junior certificate examination and an increase of 3 000 who passed the senior certificate examination. Annually, 2 000 Coloured teachers are being trained. The University of the Western Cape began in 1956 with 477 students; today there are 3 040 students. In addition 600 Coloured students are studying at other universities. The basic requirements for the welfare of any nation’s economy is a well-trained source of manpower. The figures I have furnished—they are only a few; other hon. members on this side of the House will furnish more figures— indicate clearly that the Coloureds have not lagged behind in the training of their people.

I want to repeat that there are problems. There is, for example, a lack of adequate school facilities. These must and will be provided within the framework of the Republic’s economic means. I know that the faculties at the University of the Western Cape must be expanded.

Hon. members may now ask me what became of the trained Brown people.

They went to Canada.

No, they did not all go to Canada. The hon. member must listen to what I am saying. In the period 1970 to 1973 the number of Coloureds in professional posts in South Africa increased by 12%. In 1973 28 000 out of 140 000 Coloured professional men were occupying professional posts. What economic effect did that have? The total labour remuneration paid out to all the Coloureds in the Republic was only R177 million in 1966. In 1975 it was R979 million. It is expected to amount to more than R2 000 million by the end of the century. I should also like to mention that the average income per family in Cape Town and vicinity rose from R1 500 in 1970 to R3 100 in 1975. This was an increase of 97% within the space of five years. One does not wish to draw comparisons, but I feel that I must mention that the increase in the case of the Whites, during the same period, was only 60%.

In 1970 there were approximately 14 000 established Coloured enterprises. Today the Coloured is no longer a person who merely owns the little shop on the comer. Today he is a director of companies. Today he owns large undertakings. Who enabled him to do so? The Coloured Development Corporation of course, which, from 1962 to 1976, lent R34 million to Coloured businessmen. The Coloured Development Corporation not only lent money to businessmen. It also provided them with advice and guidance, thus enabling them to establish themselves in the business world.

Let us draw our conclusions. Within their own community the Coloureds have established themselves well and in strength in the business community. In this sphere, however, we do not yet have maximum utilization. I want to repeat that the standard of living of the Coloureds has been raised. As the economic position in the country recovers, the Coloureds will also enter the industrial sector. The world is therefore at their doorstep.

Furthermore, I want to point out that the Coloureds have received participation in local authorities, as well as in the constitutional sphere. The hon. member asked questions in regard to local authority committees. We shall reply to that. The committees have been established. What did we find a few years ago? What did we find prior to 1948? We found that only a few Coloureds were members of a few city councils. Today we find in almost every city and every town local government committees on which Coloureds are being trained and incorporated into the activities, into the operations and procedures of local authorities.

Then, too, there is the CRC. I want to ask what platform the UP gave the Coloureds? What platform did the UP give them from which they could state their political case. The NP gave the Coloureds the CRC. Now we are on the eve of a new dispensation, a dispensation of full-fledged municipalities, of a full-fledged Parliament, of a joint responsibility in matters of common interest.

Finally, I want to point out that the NP, after 30 years, has given the Coloured population group assurances and guarantees. The Coloureds are a population group in their own right. They must display greater progress and growth and development and the NP will do everything in its power to effect these very things. The NP gives the Coloureds a guarantee of protection, the guarantee of no exploitation and of not being ploughed under. The NP gives them the guarantee of mutual recognition, of reciprocal esteem and respect. We are not asking for confrontation, we are asking for the practice of good neighbourliness from which good friendship is born. We as Whites and they as Coloureds are co-builders of a joint Fatherland.

In these times of threats, of onslaughts by communism and of the barbaric behaviour of our enemies, there is for the White man and for the Brown man an opportunity to manifest a supreme patriotism, to manifest Christian behaviour towards one another, a reciprocal understanding of one another, and the implementation of a constitutional dispensation which guarantees all of us a future. There is work, work for us all, work which cries out to be done. If we have made mistakes, let us eliminate those mistakes in future. Even if the pace has not been rapid enough, let us accelerate that pace.

When the well-known Coloured poet told the Coloureds that the “dice” had rolled badly for them, our reply is that the dice did not roll badly, but that we simply must not gamble with our future, for then the fire of our enemies will incinerate and consume all of us.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Oudtshoorn referred to the 30 years that the NP has been in power and to the political supremacy that they have enjoyed over these last 30 years. In discussing the Coloured Relations Vote today, we in these benches would like to say that of all the communities, the Coloured community must most regret and rue the day that the Nationalist Government came into power. We have a situation today when, after these 30 years, the Coloured people’s political future is still in flux. There has been no definite solution to the problem of meeting the aspirations of the Coloured people. If one looks at the position of the Coloured people after the 30-year period, what does one find? One finds that they have been removed from the common roll—and in this connection one can look at the method that was used, namely the packing of the Senate—and placed on a separate roll. For a time four White representatives of the Coloured people in the Cape Province sat in this House.

There was a phasing out of Coloured voters on the voters’ rolls in other provinces and then followed the complete abolition of that very limited representation that they had had in this House by the creation of the CRC. The creation of the CRC, rather than solving some of these problems, merely seemed to frustrate the political aspirations of many of the Coloured people. We know that the CRC does provide the Coloured people with the forum where they can put forward their points of view. But in actual administration they are hamstrung as far as finance is concerned. This Vote, the Coloured Relations Vote, which we are considering today, deals with the amount of money that is to be allocated to the CRC. If one examines the estimates that are before us, it will be seen that there is a sum of R248½ million to be allocated to the CRC and an additional R11½ million for the administration of the CRC, making a total of R260 million. We are being asked to vote that for the CRC. The CRC is to a great extent impotent as far as many of its resolutions are concerned, resolutions which are intended for the benefit of the Coloured people. Because of the financial situation many of these resolutions cannot be put into effect.

We welcome the idea and the steps that have been taken by the Government to review the position and to come forward with a new dispensation for the Coloured people. Other speakers in these benches will deal with what we believe are matters which should receive the careful and due consideration of the Government when considering a change to the Constitution of South Africa. The political position of the Coloureds is, as I have said, in flux, and our appeal is that, if there is to be a satisfactory solution to this problem, the Government should keep the position flexible for as long a period as possible and continue discussions and negotiations with the Coloured people. The door should be kept open for further negotiations. I should like to ask the hon. the Minister to give us some indication of the basis on which these negotiations are taking place and to what extent these negotiations are taking place as far as the new constitutional proposals are concerned. In recent times various reactions from the Coloured leaders have been seen in the Press following upon the debate which took place on the Prime Minister’s Vote. Other developments have also taken place. For example, a constitutional action committee has been formed. In this connection a great deal of disappointment was expressed by some of the Coloured leaders in the Cape Province about some of the statements that were made during the Prime Minister’s Vote. The establishment of this constitutional action committee will obviously receive the due consideration of the Government, but we do hope that the door for negotiation will remain open for as long as possible so as to ensure that all the Coloured people and all the Coloured leaders will be given an opportunity to put forward their views as to how they believe the Constitution should be amended. We in these benches attempt to indicate how we see the position as far as the constitutional development is concerned. It is known that we believe in a federal concept, and this matter will be debated further in the course of the debate. The question of finances and how finances will affect those constitutional proposals is also of vital importance. Obviously, if a body is to be created, it has to have a degree of financial control so that it can put into effect many of the things which it wishes to give effect to. I therefore hope that the hon. the Minister will be in a position to give some indication as to the financial set-up that will be created in terms of the new constitutional proposals. I ask this in view of the fact that large sums of money are required for the upliftment of the Coloured community. Reference has been made to the report of the Erika Theron Commission. Some of us who were present in this House last year had the opportunity of discussing the report. It soon became obvious, however, that if the Government should implement those recommendations, many millions of rands would be required for the general upliftment of the Coloured people.

I now wish to come to the attitude of the Coloured people. This is a matter of great importance especially since we are soon to celebrate certain other important dates in the history of South Africa. We shall celebrate Republic Day next week and in this connection it was interesting to see in the Press recently a statement of a member of the Executive Committee of the CRC. I refer to Mr. Curry’s statement in The Argus of 24 May this year. He referred to the manner in which Republic Day would be celebrated or rather not celebrated, by the various Coloured schools under the control of the Administration of Coloured Affairs. He said that school inspectors had been visiting school principals asking them for their plans in regard to Republic Day celebrations. He then continued—

The reference to fear of victimization by the Administration of Coloured Affairs does seem to be a serious matter and I hope that the hon. the Minister will give some indication as to his reaction to that particular statement.

The question of finances and the financing of the CRC is one of great concern to those people. As I have indicated earlier, it is a cause of great frustration in many respects. Therefore, in spite of what the hon. member for Oudtshoorn has said, we find that amongst the Coloured community today there is still a tremendous need to provide for those who require assistance. We know that the question of the wage and salary gap is of vital importance. It is a question which requires urgent attention. We know that many people feel very strongly that steps must be taken to ensure that that gap is closed. Another matter which requires urgent attention is the payment of certain other benefits to the Coloured community. We know that the social benefits which are paid to members of the Coloured community fall a long way short of the benefits which are paid to other race groups. This is something which also requires the urgent attention of the Government.

Social services are of great importance in the light of the unemployment situation in which many members of the Coloured community find themselves. In so far as the position in the Durban area is concerned, we know that as a result of the recession a considerable degree of unemployment has occurred. Many Coloured people, some of whom only have limited training, are finding it extremely difficult to obtain further employment. In this connection I should like to refer to a survey that was undertaken in the Wentworth Coloured township area. The survey revealed that of the 3 655 households visited, 1 709 men were unemployed. This means that just more than 40% of those men were unemployed. The number of women that were unemployed amounted to 741 and there were also 744 families who were dependent upon grants and pensions. The recession in the building trade affects these people tremendously and they are also affected by the recession in the motor trade, but fortunately to a somewhat lesser extent. It does, however, result in a tremendous strain being placed on the provision of social services to these people. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Umbilo who has just resumed his seat, raised certain positive aspects on the question of new dispensations, for which I have great appreciation. I want to tell him that when it comes to the question of financial measures, we are all in agreement with him that we should try to effect improvements. I am certain that the hon. the Minister will express an opinion on this matter.

It is certainly not contentious to maintain that every population group in the Republic has the right to progress towards political independence and equality. I am specifically mentioning these two aspects of political independence and equality, because I believe that these two aspects go hand in hand. As far as the Coloureds are concerned, we on this side of the House believe in the sole decision-making right of the Coloureds over their own affairs in their own Parliament.

On matters of common interest we believe in joint responsibility and consultation, and the implementation of those decisions in separate Parliaments. What does the Official Opposition propose in this connection? I have tried to make a study of their views in this regard. I must admit, in all honesty, that I cannot arrive at any conclusion. It is therefore better for us to look at what the world demands of us. The world demands from South Africa power sharing by means of “one man, one vote” in a joint Parliament. Whether this will also in the end be the policy of the Official Opposition they themselves have to decide, but what I can assert with certainty is that certain individual statements have been made from their ranks which corresponded precisely with this world opinion.

Langenhoven said: “Pasop vir ’n man wat sê hy is seker hy is reg, want dan het hy waarskynlik nog nie die ander kant van die saak bedink nie.” For this reason it behoves us to take a critical look at the policy of power sharing which is being forced upon us. Has it ever been applied, where has it been applied, and with what results? The reply is: “Yes, in many places, and it failed everywhere.” I want to refer to a few examples. I am thinking of the Hindus and the Moslems in India, the Greeks and the Turks in Cypress, the Jews and the Arabs in Israel, the English and the Irish in the British Islands, and even lately the English and the Scots in England, the French-and English-speaking Canadians in Canada, to say nothing of the numerous dictatorships in Africa, which are primarily attributable to the fact that power sharing does not want to work in practice. Consequently it is clear that people of different cultures and ethnicities cannot be accommodated in the same political body. That is the first consequence. A second, which is very important, is that it has nothing to do with colour, because the examples to which I have now referred are for the most part those of people of the same colour. For these reasons I do not doubt for one moment that the constitutional plans of the Government in respect of the Coloureds indicate the right direction, and this is only a point of departure. If I may use a image, it is like a soldier using a compass to help him reach his destination. The instrument assures him that he is on his way to his destination, but obstacles which he encounters on the way, he has to overcome with sound common sense. If one is moving into an unknown situation, it is ordinary, sound common sense to maintain the status quo until the next step is clear to one and one is able to take the next step. This is the responsible process of evolution to which the Government has committed itself. No laws which one can place on a Statute Book or can delete from the Statute Book, make people equal. This is proved by the USA where, despite laws and violence, 90% of the population has been unable to absorb 10%. What result has this had? The result has been Black Power, violence, and a Black caucus within the American Parliament. Another example is England. Read the English Race Relations Act of 1976. This impresses on one the comprehensive series of acts and omissions which are punishable as race discrimination. Yet in spite of this, 56 million people are unable to absorb 3,4%. The result there, too, is that the central theme of the next general election in England, and probably in future as well, will be the race problem.

We on this side of the House believe that there is only one way in which people can be made equal, namely by giving each group or nation its own cultural, political and economic power base. Of these three the economic element, and not the political, is the most important, for even political agitators and insurgents use economic arguments to activate people politically. For this reason the visit of our group, together with the hon. the Minister and some of his senior officials, to the Coloured businessmen was so successful and made such a great impression on us, and, I hope, also on hon. members of the Opposition who also joined the tour. These Brown businessmen are people in their own right; they are no one’s inferiors.

I am therefore advocating that, in addition to the political, the economic leg of our policy in respect of the Coloureds should be made even stronger, particularly as far as ownership of subeconomic houses is concerned. On the basis to which I have referred, the Minister and his officials are administering a particularly sensitive department with distinction and dedication, and for that reason it is a privilege for me to support the acceptance of this Vote.

Mr. Chairman, I find it extremely difficult to follow the logic of the hon. member for Namaqualand.

You are too stupid.

That may be so, but I hope we shall be able to iron out some of those problems in this debate because I am looking for answers to certain key questions. One of the key questions raised by the hon. member for Namaqualand, concerned the matter of power sharing. He rejects power sharing. According to the columnists of the National Party newspapers, the policy of the National Party is that each group should have a say in its own affairs as well as a joint say. It cannot be both. One cannot reject power sharing and any form of having a joint say, and then say that that is one’s policy. This is the matter that I want to try and clear up today. I want to know where power sharing, the matter of having a joint say, ends in terms of the Government’s policy. There is the proposal that three Parliaments be created with a joint Cabinet Council. I am trying to establish what power the joint Cabinet Council will have. Will there be a joint say or not? Will there merely be consultation, or will there really be a joint say in matters of common concern?

†The problem with this Vote—and I accept without question the sincerity with which Government members approach this issue—is that it is an emotional subject and that there are emotional undercurrents which run right across the issue. It started with the hon. member for Rondebosch, who pinpointed the issue of whether the Coloured people are, in fact, a separate group. Hon. members on the Government side say they are. The hon. member for Namaqualand referred to their own separate cultural identity. But I believe the hon. member for Rondebosch is correct The Coloured people have adopted the White man’s culture. They have adopted the White man’s languages and the White man’s religion. However, that to my mind does not mean that there is no identity attached to the Coloured people. Let us not cloud the issue with false arguments about cultural, language or religious identities which are different from our own. What exists is a “community” identity, and that is something with which I wish to deal. There is not a basic cultural difference, nor is there a language difference, nor a religious difference, except for the Malay section of the Coloured people. I said that when Government members speak, they speak with sincerity. However, I also believe that there is a great deal of hypocrisy as well, not in what is said in this Parliament…

Order! The hon. member cannot use the word “hypocrisy” in relation to what is said in this House.

May I finish my sentence, Mr. Chairman? I wanted to say hypocrisy in the thinking of people outside this House.

Order! Did the hon. member not refer to hon. members of this House?

I say that I accept that they speak with sincerity, but that I believe there is a great deal of hypocrisy in thinking on this issue outside. I accept their sincerity, but when one goes outside and hears the public talking, then I believe that sincerity is often missing. I believe that is why the reaction to the policy of the Government and to the White man by Coloureds varies from acceptance and mutual respect to violent antagonism and bitterness. That is why I believe that amongst Coloureds themselves there is no common pattern of approach towards their identity as a group, nor is there in the Government’s approach towards the Coloured people. It is essential that we find some way through this emotional jungle to try to get to the reality.

I want to say quite frankly that I am one of those who believe that had this Government not come to power 30 years ago, had it not applied its rigid ideology, had it not reacted to political fears, we would not have had a “Coloured problem” today, because I believe society would have dealt with the question of human relationships between Whites and Coloureds. Society would have dealt with it; the people would have dealt with those relationships, and we would not have been in the position in which we are in today. However, we have to deal with facts as they are and not as they might have been. We have to deal with them as they exist after 30 years of Nationalist Government. Whether hon. members of the NP are wearing single flowers or double buds or no flowers at all, like the hon. member for Moorreesburg …

He is the “verligte”!

… does not matter, although it may identify the “verligtes” from the “verkramptes”. The hon. the Minister of Education and Training wears a double one and I see the hon. the Minister of Coloured Relations …

Order! The hon. member must come back to the Vote.

Yes, Mr. Chairman. That hon. Minister is wearing his “verligte” badge today.

Are you jealous?

I hope we can then approach this subject in that “verligte” spirit. Although I accept that there is no separate cultural identity for the Coloured people, a community identity does exist. The important point in this regard is not only whether a community is identifiable, but whether there is self-identification by a community of its own identity. In this respect, despite the finding of the Erika Theron Commission on cultural identity, the Coloured people have made it clear—all their parties—that when it comes to political negotiation, they want to negotiate as Coloured people and not as a minority appendage of the White people. They want to speak and negotiate as a group for their own political future on behalf of their own people. Unlike the Official Opposition, we therefore accept that, for the purpose of negotiation and for the purpose of determining the constitutional future of the Coloured people, they should be recognized as a community. We shall talk to them as a community about their future place in the political scene in South Africa. I believe that I am right in saying that that is what they want.

When are you going to do that?

I shall tell the hon. member when we are going to do something about it in a moment. The Coloured people reject White domination.

Can I take it that you are serious?

Yes, I am being serious.

Will you agree with me that, while talking to them, we must make sure that they do not dominate, in any arrangement, the White community?

I was just starting to deal with that. I have already said that they reject White domination. Equally I believe, however, that the Coloured people reject Black domination and equally that the White people reject domination of the Whites by any other community. The test, the issue, the dilemma facing South Africa is: How does one balance the protection of the identity of communities from domination against the degree of co-operation in a constitutional structure with joint decision-making on matters of common concern? This is the dilemma for which we are trying to find a solution. We further believe that we differ from the Government on two basic aspects. [Time expired.]

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

Mr. Chairman, I thank the hon. Whip for his courtesy. We accept the right of any community to determine at local level whom it will accept as a member of that community. We also accept that those who do not wish to identify with a community should have open areas in South Africa, areas of a high standard, where they may live and identify with whom they wish. The Government does not accept that right of option. They determine that everyone should be classified and that that classification should be absolute. We believe that there should be an option. However, in our negotiations with them, we visualize the Coloured people as a separate community in the federal political structure which we advocate for South Africa. In our policy the door is not locked by ideology against the merging of any communities which wish, by mutual agreement and not by unilateral imposition, to admit to their communities as full members those whom they are prepared to accept.

We believe that in the fields of commerce and industry, in employment, wages, opportunities, education and training there should be complete equality of opportunity and that there should be no discrimination in pay, facilities and opportunities preventing the various peoples from playing their full part in the economic structure of the country.

The only limitation we impose is the equal right of any community which so wishes to remain exclusive and to admit only its own people. If one does not do this one is imposing forced integration on a community against its will. So, while we believe that a community may open its doors, that community also has the corresponding right to close them—to remain exclusive to its own people.

The hon. member for Piketberg asked when we were going to apply this policy. I want to say that we are doing it now. We are doing it in Natal, where the NRP is the government, where we are in control of the administration … [Interjections.] … and have been in control—we and the parties from which we come—not for 30 years, but for 68 years. [Interjections.] I repeat very clearly that this party and the parties from which we come have been in control for all that time. We do not consult in a hole-in-a-corner or on a master-to-servant basis. We have an official consultative committee on which elected representatives of the Coloured Representative Council, the S.A. Indian Council and the kwaZulu Government, under chairmanship of the Administrator, meet formally with the full Executive Committee, and consult on matters of common interest. We see this as the forerunner of the institutionalized federal system which we envisaged and recommend for South Africa, a system in which people get together around a table and take decisions together on matters of common interest. Where we are the government in Natal, we are moving and acting in that direction. It works in practice and could work equally well on a national basis in a federal structure.

We have a Parks Board Advisory Committee consisting of members of all communities. This committee has removed untold frictions and problems and has generated goodwill by sitting around a table and taking decisions together on matters which concern all the communities.

I should like to refer to one or two major decisions that have been taken by the NRP Administration in Natal. Firstly, I should like to refer to Addington Hospital, which is in my constituency and on the advisory board of which I serve—together with a Coloured member. This Coloured man has now served on this board for some time. Nobody kicked up a fuss; it was a natural development. White and Coloured serve together on a board, dealing with matters of common interest. 14 years ago there were complaints about facilities at this hospital and it was decided to open a new hospital for Coloureds. The Coloured people asked for it. Now, through negotiation, and arising from the needs and interests of the Coloured people, it has been decided and announced this week— and I can confirm that it is official policy— that the treatment of Coloured people will not be transferred to Wentworth Hospital as long as there is a need for their treatment at Addington Hospital. Secondly, as soon as the blood transfusion service has moved—which will happen very shortly—we intend to move Coloured children into the White children’s hospital and to make available to them all the facilities of that historic children’s hospital. When this is done it will eliminate duplication of administration and staff. However, the tradition of separate wards will be maintained. Thirdly, it has been agreed that a doctor in Natal, whatever his race or colour may be, may treat his own patients in a White provincial hospital if those patients are White.

We have similarly accepted that a doctor, whatever his colour, may operate on his own patient in a White hospital, and that the staff will accept his authority as a doctor and carry out his instructions. We have also accepted —we have been doing it for years—that Coloureds, Indians or even Blacks may be treated in White specialist units, for instance the intensive care and renal units, when it has been necessary and other facilities have not been available. There has not been one scrap of trouble from the public, the staff or the doctors concerned. This happens because we have an enlightened approach. We are not destroying the pattern of society. We approach it as an enlightened, but responsible administration.

What about equal pay?

We have accepted the principle and made recommendations for years and years and at last the Government has accepted in principle that in our administration doctors and medical staff will receive equal pay. We have pressed for it as long as I can remember.

I want to refer to one or two other examples. We have offered and we lend to the Coloured community certain former White schools in Natal. They are desperately short of school accommodation. We have now offered them the Commercial High School, which is situated in an area in which although there are no White residents—there is a racecourse and a factory—is technically in a White area. The hon. the Minister for Community Development has refused the application for that school to be used as a Coloured school. Natal has offered the school to the Department of Coloured Relations, but the hon. the Minister of Community Development has rejected the right of the Coloured people to receive education in that empty school in an area where it does not affect any White residents. The name of the school is the Commercial High School, if the hon. the Minister wants to check.

I know the whole story.

Finally I want to challenge the hon. the Minister to tell us whether, in the light of the answer to a question from his colleague, the Minister of the Interior today, there are to be Coloured administrators and executive committees, and whether provincial councils are to disappear.

If not, why have the Coloured people been told that this is so? [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I listened with interest to the hon. member for Durban Point He maintained, inter alia, that if the NP had not come to power in 1948, we should probably not have had a colour problem. Unfortunately we shall not be able to see the other side of the coin, namely how many disasters and problems we would have had today if the then UP had remained in power.

We in South Africa have always regarded the Coloured population as a separate population group with an identity and past of its own. The hon. member for Rondebosch also referred to that and said that the Government was simply continuing with its policy of regarding the Coloureds as a separate group and dealing with them as such. He pointed out that there were no formulas to cover the situation in sociology. The situation of the Coloured population in South Africa is undoubtedly a unique one. However, I want to point out that today’s political situation grew out of the past The Coloured population has never been generally accepted as part of the White group. They have never been generally accepted as part of the White population group, whether Afrikaans-or English-speaking. What is more, they have always enjoyed very limited political rights. Furthermore, their ownership of land and property was totally inadequate and subordinate. In religious and educational matters they are organized on a separate basis. Over the years they have built up a major economic backlog. In fact, over the years they have grown to be an indigent community with a few exceptions. The question was how this population group could be guided to development. How could the road to progress be opened to them? How could their political rights be expanded?

With regard to these matters a very important problem area developed over the years, in that certain political parties used the Coloured and his political rights, not for the sake of the political rights of the Coloured population and its progress, but to serve and further certain White political interests. The Coloured was used to win seats for the UP to the extent that he did have the franchise. It is an historical fact that this was the point of conflict in South African politics between White political parties for many years. The issue is still alive today. And that is not all.

I am inclined to agree—within our unitary system.

That hon. member has spoken for two 10-minute periods. He must now give me a chance to say the few things I would like to say.

I agree with you!

It is true that this situation has developed, and the White man in South Africa saw in it a threat to himself. The White electorate has over the years expressed itself in election after election in regard to this matter. Whereas today the Opposition sits there on the other side as small three groups of representatives, it is unfortunately the case that their own people have found against them. Their own people have voted against them. It was not Nationalists who voted them out of power in the first instance; it was their own people. It is their own people who told them that they were taking the wrong path and that their policy was a dead end policy for the Whites in South Africa. That is why I want to say to the hon. member for Rondebosch—with all respect for his argument, although it was an academic argument—that we should consider the political situation. It is a simple fact that here in South Africa there is a White population group which, taking the whole picture into account, is a minority group, but a very important minority group; a minority group on which depends the progress and even peace in South Africa, peace among the other minority population groups. That is why it is so important that we should not simply throw these realities overboard and say that they do not matter. We must not operate on the basis of the PFP’s fundamental idea, the idea that one can simply put people together and give them political rights and other things and that everything will then be fine. Unfortunately that is not the case. That is not the experience. That is not the reality. That is why we in South Africa have developed the policy of securing of national identity. There is no doubt that the Coloured population, too, is a population group with an identity of its own. This is the outcome of history, and we need not argue about it. Furthermore, they regard themselves as a Coloured population group. Over the years the NP has developed its policy in such a way that protection for every population group has been incorporated in the policy. On this path there are development opportunities for each population group. What this means is that the entrepreneur in each specific population group is afforded the opportunity to come into his own. In the world we are moving in, the world of large companies with tremendous power, the world of certain interest groups, certain economic groups, what chance is there for the man who has been left behind? What chance is there for the Coloured population group with their tremendous backlog? What chance do they have to come into their own and to acquire a real and fair share in the economy, rather than to be employees? It is this problem which gave rise to the establishment of an enterprise like the CDC. The intention is not to exclude the Coloureds from the economy of the Whites, but to give the Coloured a foothold, the opportunity to start somewhere and, in time, to acquire a fair share in the whole economic structure; not merely to be a prosperous employee but also to possess and control capital. To me this is important and I want to illustrate it.

I once heard a prominent Coloured say that he assumes that the day will come when enterprises like Old Mutual, Sanlam and others will appoint Coloureds to their boards of directors. He thinks that that would be the end of the road. He thinks that would constitute the realization of a great ideal. In fact, the Coloureds would then still have achieved nothing because they would not yet be controlling capital, would not yet be in the position to carry on their own entrepreneurial activities.

Therefore he would not yet find himself in the position of an entrepreneur who could work out something for his own people and achieve something. In other words, there is no true self-realization along that path. That is why we are continuing, not only to encourage and expand the activities of the CDC, but to extend property ownership on the part of the Coloureds, to extend their land-ownership, so that the Coloured community will not merely be a prosperous community of employees, but a full community comprising entrepreneurs, employers and employees.

The Government is also continuing to solve the problem of their political rights by giving them a place of their own; not in competition with the Whites, but alongside the Whites. Then, of course, there are all manner of clever questions one can ask. However, in essence, what it amounts to is that we are affording the Coloureds the place and the opportunity, alongside the Whites, to manage their own affairs. Because we demand for ourselves the right to govern the Whites as Whites, we also want the Coloureds to have the equivalent right. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, since I want to say certain things this morning that are critical of certain members of the Coloured population, and since the position which the Coloured people occupy in South Africa is under discussion this morning, I want to state our approach to this matter unambiguously at the very outset We regard the Coloured people as an identifiable national group, a national group with its own community pride and its own institutions. It is the one non-White community which is closest to the Whites and which, in fact, is continually moving closer. We regard the Cape Province as the preferential area of the Coloured people, an area in which the interests of the Black man—even the interests of those who live here permanently—are subordinate to the interests of the Coloureds, who have no other homeland. The Cape Province is the home of the Coloureds as well as the Whites.

This is how we see the matter, and it is in this light that I want to criticize certain people to some extent.

If my observations are correct—and I have no reason to believe that they are wrong— relations between the Coloured management committees and the municipalities are deteriorating. Let me say at once that my knowledge in this regard does not go beyond the system as it is being applied in Port Elizabeth. Over the years a great deal has been accomplished because of the co-operation between the Coloured management committee and the municipality. Since the last election, when members of the Coloured management committee were elected on a political basis, there have been a great many threats, however, and the atmosphere has been tense. It has happened that recommendations made by the Coloured management committee have been turned down by the city council for good reasons. Sometimes such recommendations have been turned down due to the fact that the people do not realize as yet what is in the interest of the voters. They make a recommendation presuming that it is the correct one, but the city council, however, takes a decision which is in the interest of the voters. If this happens there is a fuss and from time to time they threaten to strike in the sense that they will no longer continue their activities. If I may use this expression, I say that the long and the short of the whole matter is that some members of the Coloured management committee do not want to serve as members of a management committee, but as city councillors. They say so too.

For a considerable time there has been a feud with the city council about the question of membership of the standing committees of the city council. The Coloured management committee wants its members to serve on the standing committees of the city council. I want to say at once that the Indian management committee is of the same opinion. If the hon. the Minister was correctly quoted by the Herald, both he and the Administrator of the Cape Province are in favour of this as well. The newspaper said—

My opinion is that the municipal ordinance will have to be amended before anyone who is not a city councillor may serve on such committees. The question is how many of those members should serve in this manner. Are they going to have the right to vote or not? This is one of the problems with which we shall be faced.

We shall have to obtain clarity in this regard. If one considers the situation in Port Elizabeth, one finds that Port Elizabeth has a city council consisting of 26 members, while the management committee already consists of 18 members. If one has regard to the area occupied by the various groups as well as the income derived from the various groups, one notes that the ratio is completely wrong. This is one of the reasons why I say that if the people are not city councillors, I fail to see how they can serve on the committees unless the ordinance is amended. Even then we shall have problems. We must be realistic. It will not work.

It would be much better if the Coloureds could put up candidates for election to the city council. I know, however, that this is not Government policy and consequently I leave the matter at that.

But we should also consider the alternative: Where it is justified to do so, municipalities of their own should be established for these people as soon as possible. Port Elizabeth, Mitchell’s Plain, Atlantis and similar places are ideally suited for doing this. We are aware of the fact that the Yeld Committee is undertaking an investigation at the moment. I am afraid, however, that the committee is not receiving the necessary co-operation. I want to point out the seriousness of the matter as far as the investigation of this committee is concerned. The hon. member for Bryanston said that the people must decide on their own future themselves. Here we have an attempt to obtain their co-operation so that they may decide on their own future. The Yeld Committee was appointed, but they refuse to serve on it. I have various cuttings here, but there is one that I should like to read out. After the management committee had decided that they would not serve on the committee, after they had gone so far as to refuse to elect a member to serve on the committee and after they had gone so far as to call for the resignation of the representative of the city council who is also the chairman of the housing committee, we read on 24 May—

They are not even prepared to go into the possibility of a city council of their own. The point I want to make in this regard, is that the hon. the Minister will have to take action. I do not want to anticipate the findings of the Yeld Committee, but if this committee were to find that city councils could in fact be established for Coloured areas, the Minister must take active steps and establish such city councils. If some of the Coloured leaders do not want to serve on them, I am convinced that there will be other responsible Coloured leaders who will be only too keen to serve their own people in that way. I am convinced that if a thorough investigation is conducted into this matter—and the Yeld Committee is doing so—we shall find ways and means of enabling the existing city councils to provide services to the Coloured city councils. In this regard I have in mind services like the provision of water and electricity, the reception and processing of sewage, etc. There are various ways in which these city councils may be helped. In an area like Port Elizabeth a metropolitan umbrella body could be established in due course, a body which would have several municipalities under its wing. What difference would it make in that case whether it is a Coloured municipality or a White municipality? This is the light in which we see this matter.

I want to refer briefly to what I feel is the prime requirement in this regard. The Government will have to decide, with a view to making a success of these municipalities, to do something about the training of staff. The city council of Port Elizabeth has already taken active steps in this regard, not with a view to establishing a separate municipality, but with a view to enabling Coloured people to serve their own people. Even now there are Coloured people who have been given a proper training and who occupy senior positions.

There are also a few other matters to which the hon. the Minister will have to give his attention. Firstly, a timetable will have to be drawn up for the establishment of the various municipalities it will be possible to establish as soon as the Yeld Committee has presented its findings. Secondly, the Government will have to commit itself to a programme of making those municipalities economically viable. Thirdly, a fully subsidized training scheme will have to be established. It will have to be a scheme which will ensure that people receive not only a salary while they are undergoing training, but also family allowances and housing. I do not want to go into further details concerning such a scheme. Facilities will have to be created for these trainees, so as to enable them to prepare themselves for the day when they will have to accept responsibility. We know that the University of the Western Cape offers a diploma course in public administration, but there must also be facilities for the practical training of these people. One of the places I know of that is ideally suited for offering such facilities, is Port Elizabeth. There we have a Coloured community that has the facilities for training available. There are libraries, community halls, modern municipal offices and everything associated with modern offices. For instance, there are modern typewriters … [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member who has just resumed his seat, referred more specifically to his own area, and I leave him to the hon. the Minister. I should like to come back to a few remarks made by the hon. member for Rondebosch about the new constitutional dispensation. I did not agree with him, but I must say that he did at least rise this morning and made his contribution in a reasonable and calm manner.

Yes, but he was very naïve.

Yes, I am not saying that I agree with him. He was in fact very naïve, but I want to concede that his approach was calm and reasonable. I should like to look at this political dispensation from a different angle. The hon. member for Rondebosch must listen very carefully now. I want to begin by making a general political statement and I want him to listen to it. The statement I want to make is this truth: South Africa’s struggle for survival today is essentially a freedom problem. We can talk a great deal about what power sharing is or what it is not, but the basic problem with which we in South Africa have to contend today, is the problem of freedom for all. In our search for freedom for all the NP has done the basic spade-work as regards this concept of a new political dispensation for all the non-Blacks of our country, i.e. the Indians, the Brown people and the White people. The NP has done this spade-work.

What is the essential idea contained in this concept with which the NP has come forward and which has been submitted to all of us for our consideration? I want to try and summarize it in a single sentence: Essentially, it is the granting of full and equal citizenship, or a credible prospect of obtaining such citizenship, within a single political dispensation to people of another colour in a way that will eliminate group domination and its inherent dangers of disruption. This is the essence of the concept with which the NP has come forward. No one can dispute what I have just said.

What was the reaction to the draft plan announced by the NP? I want to look at the reaction of the White people first. The NP first raised the plan at its congresses and after that the essence of this plan was discussed by the White people from place to place.

That is not true! It is not the White man, but the Nationalist.

Just listen to that! What, in essence, was the basic reaction to this plan of the vast majority of White people in South Africa? Now I am not speaking of a few Progs or of a few people in the middle benches on the opposite side. I am asking: What was the reaction of the vast majority of the White people in South Africa? I am asking this in the light of the big majority by which we won the last election. Again I want to summarize this in a single sentence, because my time is limited: In our hearts, in the hearts of the vast majority of Whites in South Africa, we are already experiencing the rise of a new concept of South Africanism in our White and Brown relations politics; we are on the threshold of the association of the Brown people with our own nationhood in a way that cannot be called permanent subordination. Hon. members will agree with me that this is the essence of the plan.

The second question that arises is this: What was the reaction of our Brown people to this plan? After having made a very thorough analysis of this, I want to divide the reaction of our Brown people into exactly two parts. Firstly there is the reaction of what I want to call the perverse, the smashers of crockery, the temperamental Amins amongst our Brown people, the stupid people amongst our Brown people. Now I am speaking of those Brown people—listen carefully now— who are so stupid as to think that the striving after full and equal citizenship for their people encompasses a Brown alliance with White Nat haters, Nat haters like the Eglins, the English Press and certain impertinent people who can be found in the ranks of the Black people in South Africa at the moment.

Now you are insulting 90% of the Coloured people.

It is a stupid Coloured person who thinks that he can enjoy the freedom I am speaking of, in such a way today.

Mr. Chairman, may I ask the hon. member …

No, the hon. member must give me a chance. There was a second reaction too, however, from the ranks of the Brown people. I can assure hon. members that I have spoken to many of them in an attempt to ascertain their attitude. There are thousands of Brown people whose attitude is like a breath of fresh air in our Brown politics. They want to have a dialogue and discuss a worthy partnership in joint decision-taking. This is the calm voice of leadership, in contrast to an offensive screeching—I want to put it like this—for power which is so obviously undeserved. It is logic which is being revealed here and which is focussed exclusively on the concepts of life, growth and evolution for the future. If we make a further analysis of the talks of this group of Brown people in their own ranks, there are then aspects in particular which they raised. I do not have the time to refer to all of them and I quote only three of them.

In the first place they had an argument, and I want to ask today that we should listen to this argument in our own ranks—the hon. the Minister as well. It concerns the location of their Parliament. Where should the Brown people’s Parliament be? Should it remain in Bellville South with the background and colour it has built up over the years, or should it be closer to the White people’s parliamentary complex? I shall come back to this matter. The second question that was raised, was the idea of regional administrations without legislative power as against the possible content of our provincial system. There is no clarity about this, and the Brown people say so. I ask the hon. the Minister with respect that we should have another look at this point. Thirdly, there is the question of compulsory military service that must ultimately come about and which must go hand in hand with this new dispensation.

I shall deal with the location of their Parliament first On more than one occasion the Brown people have expressed the idea that since we are now starting to build the image of one Government structure, it is important that the Parliament of the Coloured people should form part of the building complex of that of the White people. At discussions, the Brown people have repeatedly asked questions about this matter, and it has been asked straight out whether the Brown people’s Parliament should not be accommodated in the old Marks Building, for instance. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I want to react at once to the speech of the hon. member for Moorreesburg. As a starting point I want to use the statement he made at the very outset of his speech, viz. that the struggle for survival in South Africa is essentially a freedom problem. If we take this as our premise, viz. that in essence there is a freedom problem in South Africa, we must interpret the concept in terms of the existing political problems, concrete problems that are staring us in the face. By way of contrast, I want to put it to the hon. member that, if there are different groups in South Africa that are each facing a freedom problem, it would not be possible to solve this problem in a way which would mean that the prerequisites for freedom for one group would become a threat to the freedom of the other. This is the dilemma.

Secondly, we come to the new political dispensation to which the hon. member referred. Hon. members may express fine sentiments in favour of it, and we do not want to question their doing so. They may speak of how wonderfully it will work in future. But how, with the aid of this new political dispensation, are we going to resolve the practical political problems confronting us at the moment? I want to give the hon. member a very simple example, one which has been referred to before. Supposing the new political dispensation is in operation and the Coloured population makes use of that dispensation by means of representatives. Supposing those representatives say that they as a Coloured group find that the biggest threat to their freedom, the major obstacles obstructing the way to their freedom, are things like the Group Areas Act, the Population Registration Act…

It is not group areas; it is community development amongst the Brown people.

No. The question I am asking the hon. member is this: Supposing it were to happen—there is a considerable likelihood of this in fact happening—what, in the present political dispensation, would he do to remove that obstacle? This is the elementary question that is at issue in this regard. The point at issue is not what we are going to …

Yes. But do you want…

The hon. member must please give me a chance; I did not interrupt him while he was speaking.

You want to put an end to community development amongst the Brown people.

I gave the hon. member the opportunity to put his case and I did not make a single interjection while he was speaking. He must please give me a chance. The issue here is not what that hon. member or the Government is going to decide should be the freedom endeavours of, for example, the Coloured population. The issue here is the problems that they themselves experience and what political dispensation one can create in that case which will result in those problems being resolved for them.

The answer is to be found in this draft.

If the objective of these plans is the elimination of political conflict, then they simply must work. If they do not work, we may as well forget about eliminating political differences.

This brings me to the second argument of this hon. member in which he made a few cutting remarks about the reaction amongst the Coloured people, and others, concerning this political set-up. It is no use calling these people stupid and referring to them as smashers of crockery. The fact of the matter is that if the majority of that population group does not give their active support to a political dispensation, it is simply not going to work. The question that arises now—I have put it to the hon. the Minister before—is this: What can the Government do to convince those people that to accept such a dispensation may be to their own advantage? There are various ways in which one can test their feelings.

We are already doing so.

Hold a referendum amongst these people and ask them what they think of it. Use television, radio and all the other publicity media in order to propagate this idea amongst them. The hon. member cannot tell me at this stage, however, that the majority of the Coloured people are interested in this political dispensation. If this is so, what is the use of abusing them and calling them names? Why do suspicion and problems exist? The very reason for their existence is the position they will have to occupy in the political dispensation.

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

Unfortunately I cannot answer questions now.

The third problem that we are faced with in this regard, is the question of identity. I raised the matter initially and a few hon. members on that side of the House have reacted to it.

I could have told you all about it.

When I ask what the nature of their identity is, then the hon. member for Piketberg and others stand back and say, “They just have an identity”. The hon. member for Durban Point said they had a community identity. But one has various forms of community identity. For instance, one may speak of a Pietersburger or of a Johannesburger as having a form of community identity. The basic dilemma that arises in this regard is this: If a group exists in a society that feels of its own free will that it wants to maintain an identity, then one does not need formal legislation to force it to have an identity. It is as simple as that. The test that I want to put to hon. members on that side of the House is this: Would they want to create an opportunity in the South African political dispensation, according to this new plan, for those people to rid themselves of measures which, in their opinion, attribute an artificial identity to them? Is the Government prepared to say that the Coloured people’s identity does not depend on the provisions of the Population Registration Act and that it does not depend on the provisions of the Immorality Act, the Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act or the Group Areas Act?

How do you know?

If the hon. member says that it does not depend on those Act, why does he not test this and do away with those Acts? What then is the necessity for having those Acts?

The Group Areas Act determines where people have to live. [Interjections.] I do not hold it against the hon. member for Piketberg for having dealt with what was being done by the CDC. The CDC, however, has to operate within the framework created by this type of measure. Within that framework they have to utilize land, try to generate capital, develop labour, etc. Within that limited framework they still have to compete with the so-called—of course, it is a completely wrong concept—White economy. It is a struggle that these people can simply never win. It is actually these problems that have to be faced in terms of the new political dispensation. Having given these illustrations, I want to come to the essential problem.

You must come back to earth!

I come back to earth and ask the hon. the Minister directly: What, in his view, is going to happen if the Coloured people come from their Parliament to the Cabinet Council and say that they have been delegated to say that they want to introduce legislation to do away with the Group Areas Act and the Immorality Act? [Interjections.] This is the point at issue. Another example: What are we going to do as regards the matter of making capital available to those parliaments? Supposing they were to come to the Cabinet Council and say that they needed a certain amount for education or for developing their residential areas. It is a political conflict that is not simply going to disappear like mist before the sun; these are the concrete problems with which we are going to be confronted and which the political struggle is all about. It is not about fine, romantic ideas of national identity and walking hand in hand into the sunset. Speeches in this vein are not going to help us at all. We must be able to give concrete evidence of how the destiny of the Coloured people is going to be changed under the new dispensation.

Up to now we have had no indication in this regard. Every time we ask questions about this, those questions are avoided and evaded, and we hear about the good intentions behind it all. We are tired of good intentions. We want to know how we are going to deal with the conflict, and the hon. member for Moorreesburg and other hon. members have not yet given attention to this.

Mr. Chairman, on the occasion of a birthday, and today is the 30th anniversary of the coming to power of the NP, people will say “Congratulations!” Looking back on that 30 years I think it is incumbent on us as an Opposition to do likewise and say “Congratulations!” Since it is the Vote of the hon. the Minister of Coloured Relations which we are discussing today, we look back on his record and say: Congratulations for the way in which he removed the Coloureds from the common roll. Congratulations for alienating the Coloureds from the White, the group which was and is and will be the group closest to them in culture and in other matters such as language and religion. Congratulations for the feeling of hopelessness and the sense of rejection manifested by many Coloureds today because of the way they have been treated in the last 30 years. Congratulations for the unemployment position amongst Coloured families, and the hardship and suffering facing many of those families. Congratulations on the way in which individuals are classified and involuntarily registered as Coloured or White in a way which splits families, and all the heartbreak attendant upon subjective decisions taken by officials. Congratulations for the lack of sporting facilities and decent housing which affects the way of life of thousands of Coloured families and has, in fact, reached crisis point in certain areas; and congratulations for the way in which Coloured families have been moved about in terms of the Group Areas Act. [Interjections.] If these words are emotional, then I say it is fine because we are dealing with people and their feelings and emotions and we must bring these emotions out in this debate.

However, to be reasonable and fair I must say that no fair-minded person will say that nothing has been done, and that no progress has been made, that no homes have been built and no jobs created. But neither will any fair-minded person attempt to deny that the points which I have made are absolutely true.

In respect to living conditions, we do not want to hear about living conditions in other parts of the world which are perhaps worse than the conditions in this country. This is South Africa, and if after 30 years of uninterrupted Nationalist rule, we still have unsatisfactory and undesirable living conditions for large numbers of the Coloured population, then the same NP Government must face the music and take the blame for that situation. I say this because the NP has not been in government for five or 10 years; they have had 30 uninterrupted years of power in this country. Thirty years is enough time to solve a whole lot of problems, and if they have not solved them, it is at least time that we see the light at the end of the tunnel in some cases. I believe that as far as the Coloured population is concerned, we have not started seeing the light at the end of the tunnel. I want to say—I have said it before— that decent living conditions and a contented, settled population make for security and secure the country’s internal defence. Not enough Coloured families enjoy satisfactory living conditions to ensure that they feel secure. If they do not enjoy security, it will reflect on other race groups as well.

I want to deal with the aspects of housing and recreation because these aspects affect living conditions. I hope hon. members will bear with me because I realize that the matter of Coloured housing is being dealt with by the Department of Community Development. In terms of the whole sociological problem, however, I believe we should be allowed to raise certain points in relation to the shortage of housing. Contrary to what has been said in this House as recently as this year, I do not believe the Government is making any impact on the shortage of Coloured housing in South Africa.

The claim has been made—with certain justification—that the backlog is being reduced, but if one looks at this problem and if one probes the figures relating to the shortage of houses, the number being built and the projected shortages as at 31 December 1977, one sees that the position is in fact deteriorating. I believe the backlog is becoming bigger. The figures which are supplied by the various Government departments, present this picture if they are carefully analysed. I believe it is very difficult to prove otherwise. Tied up with the question of the shortage of housing is the lack of proper sports facilities for both pupils and adults in the Coloured areas. I should like to refer to Austerville, Wentworth and Sparks Estate in Durban. Since June 1976 no swimming baths, tennis courts, soccer fields, rugby fields, cricket pitches or hockey fields have been built for those communities. Only two courts for tennisette or netball and one athletics track are now under construction. A number of facilities have been planned, but they are only due to be completed in July 1979, and thereafter various other projects will be completed in dribs and drabs. Too little is being done and too many projects will be completed too late.

Speak to the city councils concerned.

And do not pass the buck onto the CRC either, because it is the policy of this Government, the money it votes for these other councils which is responsible for this lack of progress. It is not sufficient to pass the buck to the city councils. The money ultimately comes from the Government and the ultimate responsibility is that of the hon. the Minister. He does not get sufficient money to satisfy the needs of these people. He must use his influence in the Cabinet to see to it that he gets more money. [Interjections.] The hon. member obviously agrees with me that the conditions are unsatisfactory because he tries to blame the city council.

[Inaudible.]

My time is limited and I cannot answer him now. A great deal has been done in the 30 years. Hon. members remind us of this, and I think it is only fair that they should do it. However, it is our responsibility as the Opposition to remind them of what they have not done, where they have failed, where they have alienated people and where they have been unable to improve living conditions. On all possible occasions we want to tell them and remind them where they have failed, because if we do not prick their conscience, it is obvious that their own members will not do so, as is clear from their speeches today. It is incumbent upon us to do this, because otherwise they might get the impression that everything is right When all the arguments have been made and all has been said and done, it is ultimately going to be the attitude of this Government, through the hon. the Minister, his department and his officials, which will decide how the future relationship between the Coloureds and the Whites will work out in this country. I believe a very grave responsibility rests on the shoulders of the hon. the Minister to see to it that that future is a secure one.

Business interrupted at 12h45 and resumed at 14h15.

Afternoon Sitting

Mr. Chairman, we are celebrating a wonderful day, because the NP has been in power for 30 years. To thousands of Coloureds in South Africa, it is also a wonderful day. It is the first time in the history of South Africa that the diversity of nations in South Africa can also enjoy a privilege together with the Whites. For 30 years, too, doors have really been opened to the Coloured community in the Republic of South Africa, so that they can fulfil their political aspirations as they are entitled to do. I do not think that any Coloured who has any sense or who has reached maturity, would ever like to return to the era before 1948. Then they had nothing to look back on, and they had no future either. For the first time in history the Coloureds then obtained the privilege of building their own future and of availing themselves of the opportunities being offered to them. Before 1948, the Coloureds did not have that privilege, and I do not think that any Coloured would like a return to the previous dispensation. The Government has also proved that it does not merely talk, but that its actions speak louder than words. For that reason, the conditions of our Brown people have changed so drastically during recent years that at this time they can also lend their co-operation for a new future for South Africa.

We have much to be grateful for today. I am grateful for the support which I have received among the 37 000 Coloureds in my constituency for the policy of the hon. the Prime Minister of political rights for the diversity of nations in South Africa Every day, too, they express great appreciation for the hon. the Minister of Coloured Relations. Every day—wherever I go in my constituency—in the Coloured areas and townships, I get the message of good wishes and support and for the hon. the Minister to keep a stout heart and to stand fast on the policy of the NP of promoting the interests of the diversity of nations.

I am pleased that I am able to say a few words about our Coloured community today. In my constituency the Coloureds have won the hearts of the Whites during the past number of years for their side of the cause. While there is vast leadership potential today among the Coloureds in South Africa, I want to make an appeal that those leaders should come forward to serve their own people, as they ought We sometimes encounter leaders who are not really leaders, but misleaders, and who do the Coloureds a great deal of harm. I pray that the real leaders may be granted all the necessary strength, and I say to them that after 30 years in power, the NP is prepared to have dialogue with them so that we can also learn about their needs and lend our co-operation—not only in the interests of our Brown people, but also in the interests of the Whites and, above all, in the interests of South Africa.

There are many opportunities, and it depends on the Coloureds whether they want to avail themselves of those opportunities. They have the opportunity of living their lives to the full. It is the desire of the Government, the most earnest desire of our people, to foster satisfaction and co-operation to the benefit of all. For all our people, the diversity of nations today creates a serious problem. However, it depends upon those people themselves what they want to be. It depends upon those people themselves what they want to be. It depends upon a a person’s conduct, and it depends upon a person’s actions, because one’s conduct and actions determine whether one wants to serve or to break down and destroy one’s community.

No one is perfect, and consequently there is no perfection except in responsibility. Success depends upon the enthusiasm of a person to give of his best to his fellowmen. Therein lies success. Responsible people are forever seeking peace in good co-operation. For that reason, the policy of the NP is based on co-operation in the interests of all.

I want to say to our Coloureds and to our Whites—to all who are co-operating with a view to the future of South Africa, that a person’s character is not only distinguished and determined by how he acts towards his superiors, but also by how he acts towards his inferiors. A spirit of co-operation is essential in this respect.

However, I now want to refer to another matter—a matter which must be rectified. But it is not a matter which must be rectified by the Whites. It really concerns a weakness which the Coloureds themselves must attend to. I am referring to the phenomenon of work-shyness among our Coloureds. In our Coloured community, there are a great many people who are unwilling to work—people who are unwilling to avail themselves of the opportunity of doing something for their own people. But then, fortunately, we also have the willing workers. We are proud of those Coloureds. Their community can be proud of them, and they belong to a community of which we are proud. It is they who make a great contribution to the social life of their population group.

In order to live, one must work, and work hard. It is true that the Creator has laid down certain laws. One of those laws is that man shalt eat bread in the sweat of his face. The person who does not want to work, goes under. If he does not go under, in any event he retrogresses. The Afrikaner nation was once also one of the poorest nations. But the Afrikaner realized one thing. That was that if a nation wants to advance economically and politically, it has to work. The Afrikaner nation did indeed work. It worked and it was not ashamed to work. Today, the Afrikaner nation lives. Today, it has a future. In spite of all the humiliations and in spite of poverty, the Afrikaner nation has achieved something. Today, it is an economically vital nation—a nation with pride and honour, a nation that has also preserved its faith.

There are also many other laws. The diversity of people and nations is also in accordance with a scientific law. The scientific law of the diversity of people and nations is entrenched in the laws of nature. In the same way, there are also the laws of the inviolability of the borders of nations and of countries, and of the boundaries of languages. There is a diversity of languages and geographic boundaries throughout the world. They all exist in accordance with the laws laid down by the Creator in his supreme wisdom. There are also laws in the animal kingdom. There are the laws of obedience, the laws of gratitude, and then there is also the law that one may not deny anyone else what one grants to oneself. This is a law which is not only applicable to individuals, but also to peoples and nations.

The law of diversity is also part and parcel of the policy of the Government. All the laws of diversity which God has laid down in His supreme wisdom, are also laid down in His disposal of the peoples and the nations of the world. Those who try to violate them, who try to break them down or destroy them, will themselves be destroyed in the process. Because God has willed that in His supreme wisdom, the boundaries which have so been established, may never be changed. People and parties who try to tamper with these boundaries—and it is a general phenomenon today—are the tools of Satan in his diabolic struggle against the peoples and the nations of the world—also against South Africa—in an attempt to destroy what God has laid down in His plan of creation. Whether it be parties, churches, or our own people, it does not matter—Satan is using them in his devilish struggle for the equalization of people, of nations, and of languages. In this process of equalization, the object is that all people should be the same. But that is contrary to God’s creation and plan of diversity. Therefore I want to say today that the onslaught of evil against Christianity today, the onslaught against right and righteousness, will never be successful. The powers of evil will fail in the end. That is something of which we are certain.

Mr. Chairman, you will pardon me if I refer briefly on this occasion to this special day we are celebrating. Questioning voices were raised on the opposite side, asking why we on this side were wearing flowers today. [Interjections.] I think all hon. members know what the answer is, but I will point out one thing to them: It is a special flower we are wearing. Of all the flowers of the veld and of the garden the flower that lasts the longest is this one, viz. the everlasting. It can last for many more than seven years. Consequently it symbolizes the long period which the NP has been in office in South Africa, a record in the democratic Western world.

It is a glad day, and seen in context with this morning’s discussion, you will pardon me, Sir, when I say that personally, after 30 years, I see the significance of this day as being in the first place, on the African continent, the rejection of the era of colonialism that had lasted many centuries and its rejection in a democratic way. That process did not come to an end on 26 May 1948, but has been continued under this Government, which has been governing for 30 years now, among other nations in Africa to disengage them from the bitter fruits of the imperial colonial period. That is why I think it is fitting that we congratulate and convey thanks to the founders of this Government.

I want to express my gratitude for the tone of the discussion this morning. I may say that the NRP which is sitting here today as the continuation of the old UP which was defeated in 1948, have also adapted themselves to the new circumstances. After all, they are now the “New Republic Party”. Not only was the tone which they adopted positive, but the SAP and the hon. members on our side who participated in the debate, also adopted a positive tone. I even want to thank the hon. member for Rondebosch for the way in which he participated in the discussion. After all the long years in which the Coloured situation played a major part in our politics, I think it redounds to the honour of our Parliament that we are able to conduct a discussion of the Coloured situation on this level today.

What I also found gratifying was that the sentiments which were expressed by the two members of the NRP in front of me here, specifically the hon. members for Durban Point and Umbilo, indicated that these two hon. members have an understanding of the situation in which we are living today, viz. that there is a craving in the world, and also among our populations and population groups, for the right of self-determination. This emerged from what the two hon. gentlemen said. For that I am nothing but grateful. This concept, self-determination, is a concept—I want to say this to their credit— which their former leader, someone born of the same soil as I, the late Gen. Smuts, carried into the UN and implanted in its charter. Therefore it is no new concept, but a concept which Gen. Smuts helped to incorporate into the UN charter. Unfortunately this concept is not always respected today by that organization.

†It is because of my observation of this positive note in the debate that the hon. member for Berea really disappointed me. His predecessor is his own father who used to take part in the discussions on this Vote and also in other debates. I have the highest respect for his predecessor because of the way in which he took part in debates of this kind in this House over the years. I merely wish to ask the hon. member whether he is not in a position to see something positive.

Yes, and I said so.

But why did the hon. member then concentrate on making negative, almost bitter remarks? Let me tell him, as a young member of this House, that a man with bitterness in his heart and with bitter expressions will get nowhere in this place.

Just to round off the accusations of the hon. member He talked about the lack of sport and recreational facilities for Coloureds in Natal. I grant him that in many places facilities of this kind can still be attended to. There is quite a lot to be done. Does the hon. member realize, however, that the responsibility for the provision of sport and recreational facilities for all population groups rests with the local authorities in consultation with the Department of Community Development? Local authorities, of course, fall under the jurisdiction of the provincial administrations. Just before he took part in the debate, his hon. leader spoke. He informed us quite rightly that his party or the predecessors of his party have been in power in Natal for 68 years. Surely, the hon. member for Berea should lay the blame for the lack of facilities at another door.

But you are ultimately responsible for providing the money.

Since the hon. member for Berea spoke in such a negative vein today, I should like to refresh his memory. Thirty years ago today, as a young man— much younger than he is—I saw the methods of integration politics in action at the polls in the Cape Peninsula and vicinity. It was not a pretty sight; it was not a good thing, and it was not beneficial for the Coloureds. What it brought about was the greatest bitterness our country ever experienced. I do not want to recall that bitterness today, but I do want to put this matter in its correct perspective for the hon. member. That is why I am pleased, and why I want to express my thanks to the hon. member for Durban Point today for leading his party in the direction of taking a positive look at the Coloured population. The inevitable question which one may put to any Coloured person today, and which the hon. member for Prieska in fact put, is: Are you and your people better off today than you were 30 years ago, or are you not? I have no doubt that during the past 30 years new opportunities and a new future opened up for the Coloured population of South Africa. I shall support this in a moment with facts and figures. It makes no difference who was responsible, but for generations, for more than a century, the vast majority of the Coloured population lagged behind in the economic and social spheres. The premise of the Government is that this cannot be allowed to continue because, if part of the total population lags behind, for whatever reasons, this has a negative effect on the total population. That is why measures have to be introduced to make up that leeway. That is why specific measures have been introduced over the years.

One of the many measures which were introduced was to protect the interests of the Coloured people in that portion of the country which was traditionally its residential area, viz. the Western Cape. That is why it astonishes me that the hon. member for Rondebosch advanced the argument today that giving preference to the Coloureds in the Western Cape would keep the Coloureds down. Hon. members on this side of the House dealt with that and I shall go into further details by furnishing figures. I also want to pose the question which, I think, the hon. member for Oudtshoorn put to him: In view of the reproach last year that the Government had allegedly rejected the Theron Report, why, then, this left-about turn in respect of the Theron Report, a commission which stated with conviction and on the basis of sound arguments, after a thorough study had been made of the matter, that the Coloureds were benefitting from this? In fact, the recommendation of the commission was that this policy should be implemented more assiduously. Why, then, condemn the Government in the same breath for rejecting the recommendations of the Theron Commission? This recommendation is one of the large number of recommendations which the Government accepted. However, the hon. member is quarrelling with us about this.

I was opposed to it from the outset.

I do not want to reproach the hon. member now for adopting another standpoint. I know of another hon. gentleman—who is no longer with us here— who last year adopted a different standpoint to the one he had himself adopted on this matter on the Theron Commission. The hon. member’s standpoint is the standpoint of his party, and I know that, but as for the standpoint which certain people have recently adopted in the Press, I want to say that it is a standpoint of political expediency and not a standpoint which has regard for reality.

Are you certain the hon. member for Rondebosch is speaking on behalf of his party?

Yes, I am reasonably certain of that. I want to concede to the hon. member for Rondebosch that this has consistently been his standpoint and that of his party. There may perhaps be some members of his party who differ on this point, but I give him credit for it having consistently been his standpoint.

The hon. member for Rondebosch must pardon me if I only deal on a subsequent occasion with some of the questions which he put with reference to the annual report, because there are many points of detail involved. I first want to discuss the fundamental standpoints now.

The hon. member raised the question of whether the Coloureds, culturally speaking, are different from the Whites. If the hon. member were to glance at the Government White Paper again, he will see that it is recognized that they are identifying with the Afrikaans-and English-speaking language groups. There is no fault to be found with that, except—and this indeed applies to the Whites as well—that territorially speaking there may be cultural regions of their own. It even appears from the Theron Commission Report that the Coloureds, even if they are not completely an ethnic group—as I have come to know them over the years I know that there are at least six distinguishable subgroups among them—are an identifiable group. The hon. member for Durban Point also said this, and I am pleased that he did. If one looks at chapter 20 of the Theron Commission report, one sees that the result of an opinion poll among the Coloureds themselves indicates that this is also how they see it Since this is the case, surely what it amounts to is that there will be a specific need in the group as such, seen, too, in the light of the lack of progress in the cultural sphere. Attention has to be given to this matter as well. But it cannot be solved by integrating them into one pool. My standpoint is that the rise of the Coloureds, particularly during the past 18 years—I shall quote figures in this connection in a moment—not only served as an example of the earnestness of the Government’s intention to eliminate their backlog, but also has the effect that it is facilitating and improving relations between the Whites and the Coloureds today because there is less of a civilization and economic backlog among the Coloureds.

This speaks volumes to the benefit of the entire country. Since this is the case, the Government has been able, after having worked on it for years, to come forward with a constitutional plan in which the political rights of the Coloureds will be significantly developed. I am not referring to political rights as they were, and I do not think that hon. members of the NRP would want to return to that situation. However, we have reached a stage of new thinking, and I am pleased that hon. members of the NRP also think so. The hon. member for Umbilo told me this morning that he welcomed such plans, even though he was not in complete agreement with them. This is the attitude one wants, for thought must be given to these matters. The PFP boasted of plans of their own, but judging from replies furnished when the hon. the Prime Minister put questions to them during a previous debate, all that they have accomplished is the fact that they have a committee. Therefore, it would seem that they have fallen behind a little. In reply to a question put to me last year by the former member for Port Elizabeth Central, I said here that hon. members, if they felt themselves called upon to do so, could come forward with proposals to the constitutional committee appointed by the Government. Members of the SAP did in fact put forward proposals, and proposals were even put forward by one of the political parties of the Coloureds. In addition proposals were also put forward by certain independents in Coloured politics. Proposals were also put forward by individual members of this House and of the Other Place. Proposals also came from groups in this House, and, last but not least, from outside, too. However, there were no proposals from the PFP. I do not want to spend time unnecessarily on what is past, but this links up with the question asked by the hon. member for Rondebosch and the hon. member for Umbilo, namely: What progress is being made with these constitutional plans? Just to refresh hon. members’ memories, I want to state what steps have been taken. Firstly, on 20 August last year, before hon. members of this House outside the Cabinet were consulted—and this also includes you, Mr. Chairman—in regard to the details of these proposals, the elected members of the Coloured population, specifically the Executive of the Coloured Persons Representative Council, were the very first to be consulted. In such a situation people can sometimes be very wilful. I heard afterwards that it was said that I had run out of that meeting to go and inform the Opposition groups. That is not true. The Cabinet committee remained there till the end. That afternoon we adopted the same procedure with members of the Executive of the S.A. Indian Council. Consequently I do not know why such allegations are being made. When we were seated round the conference table— to this the hon. the Prime Minister, six other colleagues and I can testify—after a thorough discussion had taken place and questions had been put, there was obviously great enthusiasm for the proposals. The next morning two members of the Executive indicated their enthusiasm for the plans in the Press, and several newspapers published it. That afternoon, two professors from the University of Stellenbosch were at the Jan Smuts Airport. They told me—this was before the report appeared in the newspapers—that they had met these gentlemen there, and that they had expressed the same enthusiasm to them. The procedure which was then adopted has already been described here by the hon. the Minister of Defence and also by the hon. the Prime Minister, for example how a mutual agreement was reached and how an understanding was reached that each individual would go back to his respective party. After that the dialogue would be continued. That was the understanding, the undertaking. This morning the hon. member for Rondebosch asked me, apologetically, not to allege that they have a computer in the offices of the PFP which provides them with advice. I never said anything of the kind. What I find strange is that shortly after the proposals were made known—not yet in full details—the hon. member for Houghton spoke at Benoni.

[Inaudible.]

The hon. member knows that she spoke there and that her words there were: “This arrogant Government called together all its caucuses, all its rats and mice …”—these words appeared in several newspapers—“… all the leaders in the CRC and the Indian Council …” The hon. member’s big grievance was at the time that they, i.e. her party, had not been informed in this regard.

That is right.

Surely the hon. the Prime Minister settled that matter with the hon. the Leader of the Opposition here in the House.

That was a bad argument.

Can hon. members see what factions now sprang to work, only five or six days after this discussion had taken place, and after there had been positive reactions to it? Suddenly reports started appearing in the newspapers to the effect that the Executive of the Coloured Persons Council rejected the proposals …

Is that not true?

Of course that is true; they said it. What is wrong with it?

They rejected it.

I am now dealing with the reason for that.

*They ostensibly rejected the proposals. I have said on occasion that there were various influences which apparently made their effect felt on their attitude in those few days, and that the PFP, as well, exerted an influence in this connection. I adhere to that, and I can quote sources to prove it.

They think for themselves.

Yes, they think for themselves, too, but there was an influence of this nature. The hon. member for Sea Point, the Leader of the Official Opposition, afterwards challenged me during the election campaign to prove what I had said. I then produced the evidence from a platform and, strangely enough, he never came forward with those arguments again. One of the gentlemen who was involved in the decision of the Executive of the Coloured Persons Representative Council, then stated that they had seen the matter in a different light when they saw the actual proposals in writing. For the sake of the record, I want to state here this afternoon that that is not true. On 18 August an undertaking was given in Pretoria to furnish people with the proposals in writing within a week. These gentlemen had an appointment with me for the following week, but they never turned up. Therefore we were unable to hand them the proposals. On my insistence the proposals in writing were handed over to them three weeks later, on 9 September. That was the day of the opening of the new session of the Coloured Persons Representative Council.

I am furnishing this information to put the matter in its correct perspective and to demonstrate, if it is alleged that the written proposals presented something which differed from what had been discussed around the conference table in Pretoria, that it is not true. The left-about turn took place within a week, and the people who know more about it, must themselves seek the reasons for this.

They do not like your proposals. That is very clear.

That is not the case. I have tried to explain the position to the hon. member, but he knows quite a lot more about this.

What do you mean by that?

I explained to the hon. member that two members of the delegation from the CRC expressed their happiness with the proposals in public the following morning. But within a week there was a turnabout in their attitudes …

So what? They began to understand.

Perhaps I should quote something from Hansard. There is an hon. member of this House who was a member of the Other Place until 30 November last year. In the course of a debate in the Other Place last year, I was dealing with arguments of the Leader of the then UP in the Cape. While I was accusing the other hon. Senator of calling the then Cabinet Council a “puppet show” and while I was asking him why he did so, Senator Bamford interjected and said: “Quite right, it is a circus.” I replied to the hon. Senator’s interjections and said—

Senator Bamford interjected again and said: “I am very honoured to be.” Later in my speech I again referred to this and said—

The hon. Senator replied—

Perhaps some of the others are sitting over there too. [Interjections.]

*I maintain that the proposals which were discussed in Pretoria and subsequently given to them in writing were never intensively analysed and discussed by those people. Instructions were issued by the leadership group to reject the proposals, and that was the end of it. The meetings held subsequently were to reject the proposals and not to discuss them. I am of the opinion that there was an absolute lack of knowledge concerning the proposals. Yet in spite of this a growing interest emerged after the proposals had been published. When it was made known that the Executive of the CRC had rejected the proposals, I was inundated by inquiries from other Coloureds asking whether they could not come and discuss the proposals with me. The Opposition parties accepted the proposals, not unconditionally, but as a basis for further discussion.

Only as a basis of negotiation.

Horace, you had too much to say yesterday. Keep quiet now!

Such was the growing interest in the proposals that letters and telegrams rained down on me when I intimated that people who were interested and who could organize and co-ordinate themselves, would be afforded the opportunity of discussing the proposals further with the authorities. I myself issued an open invitation to all the members of the CRC who would be prepared to come and discuss the proposals to attend a meeting here in Cape Town during October last year. The hon. the Minister of Defence was with me at that meeting. With a few exceptions, everyone came. Some of them, however, did not come to hold discussions. I got the impression that they came to see who had turned up for the discussions. At that meeting I was told that they had obtained advice—I have my suspicions about where they did so—as to whether the meeting I had convened was not perhaps illegal. I told the questioner that he need not waste his time and energy because it was certainly my prerogative to invite anyone who wanted to come and see me to hold discussions.

What is your point?

My point is that the Government at all times has been open and still is open to consultation.

Do you mean you are prepared to change your mind? [Interjections.]

Mr. Chairman, I had better leave the hon. member for Pinelands there.

Your point is that they come to our door instead?

No. That is not my point. My point is that the door of the Government has at no time been closed. [Interjections.] There is an open invitation, and several other gentlemen made use of that opportunity.

What is the point of an open door with nothing inside?

One can equate that remark with the mind of somebody who has nothing between his ears!

That is a smart answer!

I maintain, therefore, that the Government’s doors remain open. After numerous discussions have taken place on a lower level, the Government will hold further discussions this year with persons and groups which want to co-ordinate themselves and conduct a dialogue with the Government. Next week legislation will be discussed here in this House, legislation which makes provision for the extension of the franchise for Coloureds to 18-year-olds so as to enable the election organization to hold a general registration.

However, because negotiations are in progress on the proposals and the number of electoral divisions involved, a draft Bill on this matter is still to be submitted as a basis for discussion during the further talks which will be held. Legislation in respect of all the other aspects of the constitutional proposals will be introduced here in Parliament next year.

†However, I want to come back to the overall situation. The hon. member for Umbilo referred to a newspaper report I think it is the same one I have in mind. It relates to a certain Mr. Davids who is connected with one of the constitutional action committees. One can see what is going on at this particular level. I was telephoned by an unknown reporter of The Cape Times one evening about four days after the hon. the Prime Minister spoke about the matter here in the House. He asked me whether I would comment on Mr. Davids’s comment on one particular aspect of the hon. the Prime Minister’s speech. I told this gentleman that I was not prepared to play his game and that if I wished to correspond with Mr. Davids I would do that personally and privately and was not prepared to do it via the columns of The Cape Times. That is the game which is being played. I am quite sure Mr. Davids was not here when the hon. the Prime Minister spoke. When the reporter phoned, he perhaps had not even read the speech of the hon. the Prime Minister. An interpretation of what the hon. the Prime Minister had said was probably presented to him and he was asked to comment Then I as Minister was asked to comment on what a third person said. That is the game that is being played.

*There is a difference in approach among the Opposition parties as far as these constitutional proposals are concerned. The PFP envisages equality and denies the existence of group interests.

We merely say that merit should be the only criterion.

They go into orbit and then they say things like that, for example that merit should be the only criterion. However, they deny the reality, viz. the existence of group interests. Hon. members of the NRP, on the other hand, emphasized emphatically last year and the year before last already that there was such a thing as group interests which had to be taken into account. They are not only now coming forward with that idea. As far as this aspect is concerned, I want to say that the total disregard of group interests by the PFP is to my mind a continuation of the old imperialistic, colonial mentality, and nothing else.

The NP also recognizes the existence of group interests, and I shall furnish the reason for this. By means of these proposals the NP is trying to devise a system whereby one population group cannot be dominated by another. The NP, as I have already said, does not believe in power sharing which would lead to the possibility of the one being dominated by the other, but believes in self-determination for each group—this implies power sharing—and in joint responsibility in matters of common interest.

A joint say.

A joint say as well. The proposal is that they should serve together in one council of Cabinets. Surely that means that they will bear joint responsibility. In other words, we are envisaging a full-fledged place in the sun for the Coloureds, an opportunity for them to play their part, an opportunity to show the world what potential there is in that population group, potential which I do not doubt.

Who takes the decisions?

Must I go through all of this again with the hon. member? The ground has been covered so often that I need not dwell on it any further. In the process of demonstrating that the Government is in earnest about giving the Coloured people a full-fledged place in the sun and full-fledged citizenship, it undertook to eliminate obsolete measures which could give rise to friction. I should very much like to furnish a list of such measures today. A short résumé, which I do not wish to imply is comprehensive, of these matters is as follows: The Master and Servants Act was repealed. In addition to that work reservation, with the exception of five categories, was phased out, and the five categories are now under consideration. In terms of section 19 of the Group Areas Act Coloureds and Indians may now do business outside their own areas. Industrial areas were thrown open completely to Coloureds and Indians. The income limits for sub-economic and economic housing were placed on a par with those for Whites. Separation notices, barriers, separate telephone booths were done away with wherever practicable. At courts of law separate witness stands and docks— before the law everyone is equal—were done away with. Common use of reading rooms at archives, State libraries and museums was introduced.

It is you who introduced it.

Yes, but when the hon. member still sat here as member of the old UP, he put up with the fact that his party, when it was still in power prior to 1948, also did certain of these things.

Read the debates.

With a view to equal treatment for Public Service employees the principle was accepted that the same post designations should be introduced, and appointments and promotional requirements are identical. In addition key salary scales were introduced and uniform standards of work were made applicable. Medical aid societies similar to those for Whites were introduced for Coloureds. Participation in sport takes place in such a way today that the population groups are able to compete against one another. Hotels are being made open institutions, subject to established standards. Venues for live theatre have been thrown open, or are available on an open basis by means of permit. Coloureds and Indians have been appointed to statutory councils, including the Wage Board, the National Housing Commission and the Group Areas Board. Coloureds may become members of agricultural co-operatives, interest-group associations, for example Chambers of Commerce, if the organizations in question agree to that Bus services on certain routes have been opened for combined use. This is an on going process. It is in respect of the circumstances in the year 1978, which do not necessitate such measures remaining in force, that the Government is displaying its willingness to remove them.

Furthermore, I should like to refer to the argument that the policy of giving priority to Coloureds in the Western Cape will prejudice the Coloureds, as the hon. member for Rondebosch said. I want to deal with this in the context of the entire effort of the Government to uplift the Coloureds economically and socially. I want to mention this in the spirit which I observed in a letter which recently appeared in a periodical from a Coloured person who wrote as follows—

That is why the Government introduced the policy of giving them priority in the Western Cape. I now want to mention some of the results of this to hon. members. In the period prior to the present economic recession, unemployment in this area, the Western Cape, among Coloureds had virtually been eliminated. Of course there will always be a minimal level of unemployment because there are always people who do not feel like working. In 1960—this is the year of comparison—there were 544 000 economically active Coloureds, as against 702 000 in 1970. It is expected that the 1 million mark will be achieved in 1980. Of the total number of economically active persons, 73% are in fact employed in the Western Cape. In 1960 39 000 men and 11 600 women were employed as clerical and professional workers. By 1973 this figure had risen to 67 000 men and 43 000 women—an increase of almost 60 000. In the semi-skilled and skilled occupations the number of Coloured men during the same period increased by 86 000 and the number of Coloured women by 79 000 to 344 000. The number of unskilled labourers increased by 40 000 men and women to a total of 349 000 in 1973.

The increase in the number of clerical and professional workers, as well as in the number of semi-skilled and skilled artisans, was therefore infinitely higher than the increase in the number of unskilled labourers. At present in the Western Cape—the area under discussion—Coloureds represent 95% of the total labour force in the clothing, textile, leather and footwear industries. In 1960 66% of the total workers’ corps in factories in the Cape Peninsula, and in 36 adjoining districts, consisted of Coloureds. By last year this total had increased to almost 84%; 169 000 workers, to be precise.

Let us consider the employment of Coloureds by Government departments and local authorities, in comparison with the employment of Bantu in the same sectors. We compare the figures of 1962 with those of 1977. In 1962 there were 18 300 Coloureds in the service of Government departments in the Western Cape, as against 51 345 last year. During the same period the number of Bantu in the service of Government departments in the Western Cape decreased from 17 476 to 13 249. Of the 13 249, almost 5 000 were contract workers. Thus there was a decrease of 4 227 in the number of Bantu employees in the service of Government departments in the Western Cape.

Let us now consider the local authorities. We compare once again the figures of 1962 with those of 1977. In 1962 the number of Coloureds in the service of local authorities totalled 16 223, as against 25 900 in 1977. This indicates an increase of 9 753 in the number of Coloureds in the service of local authorities. In 1962 there were 6 870 Bantu in the service of local authorities in the Western Cape, while in 1977 there were 5 061. Of the 5 061 almost 1 300 were contract workers. Thus was a physical decrease of 1 800.

So I can continue to quote further statistics. The labour remuneration paid to the Coloured workers’ corps rose from R177 million in 1960 to R449 million in 1970. Subsequently it grew to R979 million in 1975. According to forecasts it will increase to R2 083 million in 1980, depending on the recovery of the economy. The average income of Coloured households in the Cape Peninsula, as shown by a survey carried out by the Market Research Bureau, rose from R1 586 in 1970 to R3 131 in 1975.

This is an increase of 97% over the five-year period. It is an increase which compares favourably with the position of any other population group in the country. In 1975 the Coloureds in the Cape Peninsula represented a consumer force of approximately R485 million. This is considerably more than the gross domestic product of many African States. I can also refer to the agricultural sphere, but I do not want to bore this Committee with too many details.

In spite of the economic recession which caused unemployment among Coloured workers as well, no crisis situation has arisen among them. In the Cape Peninsula there were only 5 939 registered unemployed at the end of April this year, and 703 at the outlying offices of the Department of Labour.

One should also consider the Coloured schools, for these are closely associated with all the measures that have been adopted, not only to give the Coloureds preference in this area, but also to wipe out their backlog. It is interesting to note that whereas, in 1966, there were 392 000 pupils with 12 900 teachers, there were 660 900 pupils last year, with almost 26 000 teachers. One sees the same tendency in the teachers’ training colleges, for there, too, there was a tremendous increase, so much so that 2 000 Coloured student teachers are completing their courses annually. In 1977 66% of the 5 744 Coloured matriculants passed. At the University of the Western Cape there were only 477 students in 1966, but this year there are 3 040. So one can continue to consider other barometers as well.

One finds the interesting phenomenon that while the growth rate of the Coloured in 1960 was still one of the highest in the world, viz. 46,6 per thousand, it had already dropped last year to 28,5 per thousand. Throughout the world a drop in the population growth rate is considered to be a criterion for rising levels of development and economy.

So I can continue to indicate that the policy of giving preference to the Coloureds in the Western Cape has been and continues to be to their benefit. The argument that the Coloureds will suffer as a result of that policy, does not hold water.

I should like, on a subsequent occasion, to reply to the additional aspects and points of detail that were raised. I am now resuming my seat again to give hon. members a chance.

Mr. Chairman, the phenomenon which occurred once again today does not surprise me in the least. I am referring to the fact that everything which is being done by the Government for the Coloureds and which has been done over the years, is regarded as something similar to the gifts the Greeks bore, and one should therefore be careful. This is something which has manifested itself over the years while I was serving in this House from time to time. Twenty years ago I was elected for the first time as a member of this House and the then Coloured representatives also sat in this House for the first time in 1958. At that time there were four of them. When they rose to speak on Coloured education, rural areas, political rights, one could say “cum everything”, it sounded like a refrain: Be careful of what these people bring; it is a Greek bearing a gift. Timeo Danaos was on their lips. Therefore it does not surprise me in the least.

What does surprise me, however, is that the hon. member for Durban Point did not blush when he said that they had been doing these things so well in Natal for a period of 68 years now. He should have said, too, that they deprived the non-Whites there of the municipal franchise. I suppose he was not present when the hon. member for Umbilo, a very decent chap, spoke before him and said “we took them off the common roll”. There are only a few of us left in this House who had Coloured voters. I think that except for me the hon. member for Parktown is one as well. In the past I think that hon. member tried to come to this House while there were still Coloured voters on the voters’ roll.

I succeeded, too!

That was in 1953 in Maitland. I do not know whether there are more members like that in this House. Perhaps the hon. Leader of the House is another one who was already in the House at the time. At that stage there were, of course, no Coloureds in the northern provinces who were on the voters’ roll. Those of us who really knew those days, have virtually all died out, and there will be very few people who will testify that that was the happiest time for the Coloureds. How were the Coloureds treated at the time by the pious predecessors of the hon. member for Durban Point, to whom he referred with so much respect and love? They acted like the chess player who takes his box of pawns out of the drawer and then, in the words of the poet—

Every five years they were taken out and dusted. They were commandered and often, as Mr. B. K. Long said, “And it was surreptitiously up for sale!” Sir, I have to refer to this, because the hon. the Minister deprived me of so many of my figures that if I do not do this, I will not fill my 10 minutes! [Interjections.]

As regards the priority policy to which the hon. the Minister has just referred, three arguments are advanced against that, apart from those of the hon. member for Rondebosch. In the first place it is said that the Coloureds do not want it, in the second place that Bantu competition does not affect their standard of living, and in the third place that the control over the presence of the Bantu cannot succeed. I want to deny all three of those statements. On page 92 of the report of the Theron Commission I read that industrialists who are reluctant to use Coloured labour and who are in some cases even definitely opposed to it, seem to succeed relatively easy with pleas for additional migrant labour. On the other hand the Coloureds concerned do not have the necessary means and opportunities to bring the harmful consequences which the presence of the great number of Bantu in the Western Cape entail for them, to the attention of the authorities. In fact, very often they do not even have the ability to identify the harmful ways in which this affects them. That is why it is so easy to tell these people, “Beware! Those people do not want to do you any good. Be suspicious; there is always a sting in the tail.” As regards the second point, I delved into the matter a little and found two reports. I shall not call them as thorough as that of the Theron Commission. Nevertheless two previous efforts were made prior to 1948 by Governments to institute an investigation into and publish a report on the Cape Coloured population. The first took place in 1937, and dealt with the Union as a whole. That commission was also a multiracial one. Therefore the Erica Theron Commission was not the first multiracial commission. That commission published a report, and in this regard I refer to U.G. 54—’37. In paragraph 144 one reads the following—

This was 40 years ago—

Furthermore, in paragraph 147 one reads—

Then war broke out and nothing was done about this quite valuable report. Then I want to quote from the report of a committee appointed in 1942—that was during the war. That report (U.G. No. 18 of 1943) was entitled “Report of the Committee of Inquiry into conditions existing on the Cape Flats and similar affected areas in the Cape Division”. In paragraph 77 thereof one reads—

Now I return to the Theron Commission with which I started. Its recommendation No. 42(a) reads that—

The next question is—this is also the third point I made at the outset—whether the control over Bantu competition can be successful. If there are, in politics, two alternatives which are equally good—that I can say for my friends on my right—one has to take the one which can be successful if one knows that the other one cannot be successful. This is a very practical approach. If they do that, they will be closer to governing. The hon. the Minister indicated the success and the plus factor in State departments during the past 15 to 16 years where at the moment they have between 32 000 and 33 000 more Coloureds in their employ as then. In the case of the local authorities the figure is almost 10 000. This is, of course, in round figures. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Rondebosch asked on which basis the Government wants to regard the Coloureds as a separate population group. There are various conditions or factors determining such a basis. The most important consideration according to which such a distinction may be drawn, is and remains the desire and will of a particular population group to be recognized as a separate group. This is the basis. Because the Coloured population group has that wish and desire to be recognized as a separate group, the Government recognizes them as such according to their policy. Let me quote what the hon. member for False Bay said in this House in 1976 to demonstrate that the Coloureds have a will and a desire to be recognized as a separate group. In that speech he quoted as follows (Hansard, 23 June 1976, col. 10377)—

He referred to the finding of a group of students from the University of the Western Cape with regard to a sociological investigation which they undertook. He quoted their findings as follows—

On that occasion he further quoted from a statement issued by the Executive of the Coloured Representative Council under the leadership of Mr. Sonny Leon—

In this regard I stress the word “volk”. These people want and desire to be seen and treated as a separate group. This is the basis on which the Government designed the whole pattern. In conjunction with this, I should like to suggest that we are experiencing a particularly interesting period in which a people, the Coloured people, is discovering its own worth, its own dormant power and its own vast inherent potential. This awakening of and among a people, has been made possible through the policy of separate development of the governing National Party. There can be no doubt about this. It is the policy of separate development which affords the Coloured man and woman, youth and child those opportunities to discover him or herself and so, too, to discover that he can preserve, build and maintain himself as a people.

This discovery is so important because surely it is a fact which is historically based that a people, and only the people itself, can save itself. The National Party affords the Coloured people the opportunities to use its own reserves of power in order to rise out of a condition of weakness and backwardness in order to save itself. The basis, the foundation on which a people builds its own salvation, is, inter alia, its economical growth and power. The question immediately arises: Is the Coloured people growing and becoming stronger economically? The answer is unequivocally “yes”. Figures have already been quoted to prove this, but I want to quote a few further figures to prove this point. In 1970 the average income of a Coloured worker was R931 per annum. In 1977 it was R2 092 per annum. In other words, the percentage increased by 125% within seven years. I also want to quote a second figure, viz. the income of the Coloureds as a percentage of the income of the Whites. In 1970 it was 28,7%, while it was 32,7% in 1977. It is true that, comparatively speaking, this does not represent a major increase, but we must bear in mind in looking at these figures that the Coloureds are in fact, as a result of the leeway they have to make up, still for the most part the employee class. This can mainly be ascribed to a lag in educational qualifications. A further figure I want to mention, is the white-collar workers expressed as a percentage of the labour force. In this regard I have in mind people working in offices and doing clerical work and serving the courts. In 1960, 6,89% of the white-collar workers in the labour force were Coloureds. In 1970 this percentage was 9,10%; in 1973, 13,70% and it is estimated that in 1980 it will be 17,66%. This is a clear indication of the growing number of academically trained people in the ranks of the Coloureds, a tendency which once again originates from the policy of the National Party in terms of which these people are afforded the opportunity to receive training at schools and universities. Another interesting figure which indicates to which extent the Coloureds have already developed economically, can be found in the number of private motor vehicles owned by Coloureds. In 1970 45 941 private motor vehicles were owned by Coloureds; in 1976 this figure was 96 442. Therefore this indicates an increase of more than 100%. Had I the time at my disposal, I could have analysed the given figures further and also mentioned other supporting figures as proof of the economic growth and the development which is taking place amongst this population group. We must also emphasize that the Coloured Development Corporation has played a major role in the economic development of the Coloured. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I advise the hon. member for Kimberley North personally to contact and talk to Dr. Bergins and the other people whom he quoted on the question of a separate identity. From their remark, that they do not want to be an appendix, the hon. member deduces that these people are seeking separate identity. Should he consult these people, the hon. member will find that although they are proud of their status as Coloureds, they only want to be regarded as citizens of South Africa. [Interjections.] Many fine words were used in this debate, and I do not want to doubt the good intentions of hon. members on that side of the House. Words such as “co-operation”, “dictates”, “good faith”, “separate institutions”, and “group domination” were used. The words “group domination” is a sort of swearword among these concepts. I accept that the hon. members’ intentions are good as regards the concepts. However, we want to test them against the practical situation.

In this regard I want to mention an old issue again, because it still is an important one. In this regard I refer to District Six. District Six is and will remain a grievance and a focus of concern among the Coloureds. It is still the responsibility of that hon. Minister, although another hon. Minister is responsible for the implementation of parts of the policy to clear District Six. It is true that no Coloureds are sitting in this House, and that the CRC can do nothing about the matter, and it is also true that the Coloureds are and remain very dissatisfied about the state of affairs brought about in District Six. How do we know this? The report of the Theron Commission appeared two years ago and, inter alia, said the following, words which we may not forget—

At the time those who advocated that District Six be redeclared an open area for Coloureds, advanced six principal reasons as to why this should be done. I have checked those reasons again today and put it to the House that each of them are more valid and convincing than was the case two years ago.

Let us look at a few of the problems which have worsened since then. In the first place, there is the need for Coloured housing. All the hon. members know that there is no shortage of housing for Whites in the Cape Peninsula. However, we know that there is a shortage of housing for non-Whites. I want to concede immediately that much good work is being done with projects at Mitchell’s Plain, Atlantis and other places. These housing plans do not, however, comply with the special needs of the economic classes who are intimately involved in the life and the character of central Cape Town. For example, there are Coloureds who are interested in the plastic arts. These people need studios and workshops whereby they can remain in contact with city life, as well as with the suppliers who have the same interests and are responsible for the same type of productions. These Coloureds can make this part of the city District Six into a showcase for Cape Town and South Africa. Foreign visitors will also be able to see that there is a prestige area for the Coloureds in Cape Town, especially those Coloureds who are interested in the plastic arts and the creative crafts and who wish to practise these. A golden opportunity is being allowed to slip past and time is of the essence.

Let us further take a brief look at the fruitless expenditure involved in the matter. Since 1966, R25 million has been spent to raze District Six to the ground. When one walks through District Six today, it looks like the dark side of the moon: the area has been in that condition for years, while there is a desperate shortage of residential plots and housing facilities for the Coloured population. The area looks like a ghetto which has been razed.

It was a ghetto!

Yes. The land on which the ghettos stood can, however, be recovered. This should not, however, be done simply by evicting Coloured people again. Apart from the R25 million already spent, R9 million is now being spent to make certain improvements, inter alia, the restoration of the Bloemhof Flats. This will simply result in the Coloureds being moved from that area. The improvements to Fawley Terrace will result in a certain class of White people being moved, while other Whites will be moved there to take their place. Therefore this is doing nothing for non-White housing. Since 1974 not a single square metre of land of the 43 hectares in District Six has been sold to a White person. The land is up for sale, but cannot be sold. The Whites of Cape Town are ashamed of that part of Cape Town. They do not want to live there and I am of the opinion that they will never buy it. [Interjections.]

Then there is the question of the rentals which have been lost. An investment of R25 million has been lying fallow for quite a number of years now and even at the small interest rate of 5% one can add a further R5 million to the amount which has been lost because the land is lying there uneconomically.

But surely that is community development.

The hon. member will have an opportunity to speak later. If the interest is calculated at a rate of 10%—which is perhaps too high—we can add R10 million to the amount. 7 500 Coloured families were evacuated from District Six and new housing had to be found for them. The resettlement was a good idea for— let us admit it—District Six was a slum area. Priority housing had to be provided for 40 000 people. Last year there were still 2 671 families who had to be moved, and this in a time when land had to be sought and housing provided for other Coloured families who needed it. Why may they not benefit by the redevelopment of District Six?

From a moral point of view, the whole question of District Six is a public disgrace. From a financial point of view, it is an example of mismanagement and wastage of money. In fact, it is so bad that one wonders whether the Auditor-General should not investigate this as well. It is a cancer which will continue to spoil our relations with our Coloured friends.

I think the hon. the Minister of Coloured Affairs should accept the responsibility for this. It is not too late to rectify the matter. He should now break his long silence about this matter, before it has progressed so far as to do irreparable harm to the relations between the Whites and the Coloureds. There are very few Capetonians who want this state of affairs to continue. They would welcome the Coloureds back in a new model residential area, which they can vaunt and be proud of. I appeal to the hon. the Minister to give attention to the matter once again, before it is too late.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Constantia is often a difficult opponent in that he states things so quietly, calmly and coolly that one cannot pin him down easily. The hon. member touched on a specific problem from his point of view. I think that the hon. the Minister is quite capable of attending to the hon. member’s problem in the same calm manner. I must say, however, that I always enjoy listening to the hon. member for Constantia.

If one listens to the arguments of the White Opposition in Southern Africa, one often feels that they show their muscles especially when they attack the NP about three matters. The first is the NP’s policy with regard to the Blacks in White areas. The second is the NP’s attitude with regard to human dignity and its treatment of people of other race groups, and the third is its policy with regard to relations politics between Brown and White in Southern Africa.

The debate up to now, especially the speech of the hon. member for Rondebosch, has shown clearly that the vindictiveness and the very sharp criticism we had earlier on, was to a great extent absent in this debate. I listened very attentively to the hon. member for Rondebosch, who remains to me a prototype of a certain point of view in the White politics in Southern Africa. I must say that the hon. member for Rondebosch has been groomed to put forward their policy on the problems of Southern Africa from the ranks of the PFP. I could shoot down the arguments advanced by the hon. member for Rondebosch from a variety of angles. I could shoot down his arguments on scientific grounds, on the basis of historical considerations or for reasons of reality and ideology. There is one aspect on which one can always shoot him down. That is that the hon. member himself, as well as his party, do not have the support of the Whites of South Africa. I want to leave the hon. member at that. The hon. member cannot really talk, because he is not speaking on behalf of the Whites, and therefore he cannot speak on behalf of the Coloureds either. Therefore I want to express the conviction that, throughout the years—the NP has been in power for 30 years today—the same methods which the Progressives and their predecessors used to keep the English-speaking people away from the National Party, will disappear and, as they disappear, the Coloureds of South Africa will move closer to the standpoints established by the National Party. I also want to state that to the extent that the PFP and people like the hon. member for Rondebosch are active in the politics of Southern Africa, they will also lose the apparent support of the Coloureds that they enjoy today.

I want to read a short quotation from a speech of the hon. Leader of the House when he was Minister of Coloured Affairs in 1962. When I have finished reading it, hon. members of the Opposition should test it against what has happened during the past few years. At that stage the hon. the Minister concluded his first speech as Minister of Coloured Affairs by saying (Hansard, Vol. 4, col. 7894)—

This was what the first hon. the Minister of Coloured Affairs said on 13 June 1962. Therefore I want to tell hon. members of the PFP that in the light of our declared policy, they cannot but agree with us that we have grown during the past few years in that declared policy and that, in spite of all opposition, in spite of all the criticism which could be mentioned, the NP will be more and more successful in this policy.

In the few minutes still at my disposal I want to test this policy with regard to tertiary education, and especially with regard to university education. I am aware of the fact that hon. members of the PFP differ with the NP about what the nature, the value and the activities of a university should be. Nevertheless we established a specific university a few years ago. It is amazing to note the growth we have had, in spite of all opposition, at the University of the Western Cape. In 1960 there were 164 enrolments and in 1977 there were 2 744. In 1960 the number of teaching staff was 17 and the figure for non-teaching staff was 10. In 1977 the figures were 256 and 301 respectively. From 1962 until 1965, 105 diplomas were conferred, and in 1976, 143 diplomas were conferred. From 1962 to 1965, 74 degrees were conferred. In 1976 alone 192 degrees were conferred. It is also important that the report of the Department of Coloured Affairs shows an annual growth at this university. There have been new developments, and new courses have established, for example B.Admin., B.Econ., Hons. B.Econ., M.Econ., D.Econ., Diploma in Child Guidance, B.Juris, Diploma Juris, etc. There have also been developments in fields of study, i.e. Industrial Psychology II and III, Political Science II and III, Hebrew III, French I, II, III and Hons., Special Mathematics, Physiology II, and Honours degree in Mathematical Statistics, and also Xhosa II. Two new departments were established, i.e. the Department of Industrial Psychology and the Department of Semitism. I should like to ask the hon. the Minister today—and I am using the idea of the hon. member for Kuruman—whether we have not reached the stage at which, in the light of the accelerating growth of this university, we should give attention to the establishment of two more departments. What I have in mind is a department of physical education and a department of drama and related subjects.

As far as the department of physical education is concerned, I think it has become necessary that we should use men and women in the Coloured community who have a good academic training. We realize that academic training is playing an increasingly important role, not only in the life of every nation, but also in the Coloured community. Furthermore the fact remains that, with the aid of the NP, more and more opportunities have been created for the Coloureds, not only to participate in sport, but to participate in sport in the best competitive way in Southern Africa. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, today we once again had the opportunity to take note of the latest attitude of the Opposition parties with regard to the future of the Coloureds in South Africa. I want to dwell for a moment on those parties, starting with the NRP.

We have listened to the hon. the Leader of the NRP, the hon. member for Durban Point. He levelled the accusation at the NP that if the NP had not come into power 30 years ago, we would not have been faced with the so-called Coloured problem today. This is an outrageous statement. It is outrageous for the simple reason that, from the nature of the case, there can only be two so-called problems. One of them is the political problem.

At this very moment the Government is taking and making the greatest and most courageous steps and break-throughs ever with regard to the Coloureds in South Africa, steps in terms of which unprecedented political rights will be granted to the Coloureds, steps in terms of which a new dispensation is being introduced, a dispensation in which the Coloureds will be led to full citizenship in South Africa. The second aspect concerns the economic development opportunities for the Coloureds. No one in this country can deny that as long as South Africa exists, one will always have to look for new economic development opportunities for Whites, Coloureds and Asians, in fact for everyone in South Africa.

I shall come back to this aspect in a moment. However, I want to put the question in reverse. What would the problem have been today if the UP, the mother party of the NRP, had still been in power? If the UP had stayed in power 30 years ago and had still been wielding power today, the whole of Cape Town would have been a Windermere today. Would it still have been possible today to distinguish between Whites and Coloureds? Would the Whites have had a real identity, an identity of which they could be proud? [Interjections.] Would we in any case still have had a situation of order, a situation similar to the one in which we are living now?

The hon. member for Durban Point was very clever today in coming forward with his new policy statements. It was clever of him to tell us today how he regarded the situation if he could have made it with retrospective effect to 30 years ago. It was so clever that one can only laugh at it.

I also want to return for a moment to the arrogant young hon. member for Berea. He congratulated the NP very cynically here on having been in office for 30 years. Who on earth is the hon. member for Berea? When the NP came to power in 1948, he still wore diapers, he did not know the Coloureds in South Africa yet. [Interjections.] I want to congratulate the hon. member for Berea and the UP, the party to which his father and his forefathers belonged, the party that fell by the wayside, on the fact that they were expelled from office 30 years ago. If that had not happened, we would have known chaos today.

I want to pause for a moment to consider what the hon. member for Constantia said. In a typical Prog fashion he complained because a mess in District Six had been cleared up. That was a good thing we did there, but did he want the former disorderliness to have continued there? From the nature of the case more than 90% of the families who lived there and who were then removed, were people who had to be removed as a result of the dilapidated state of the slum tenements which they occupied there. Now that their position has been improved, we are criticized for it.

The hon. member for Rondebosch reproached and criticized the NP for its policy of labour preference which applies here in the Western Cape. He said that this policy was harmful and that it would counteract economic development. He also said that it would lead to constraint. Then he asked what we had achieved after 30 years. I want to pause to consider this question for a moment.

The political future of the Coloureds in South Africa is closely bound up with the economic future of the Coloureds and the Whites in South Africa, because they are both dependent upon one another for economic survival and they have to accept joint responsibility for their economic welfare. For the very reason that 87% of the Coloureds of South Africa live in the Cape Province, it is a problem which is unique to the Cape Province. Because of this, this province differs from other provinces and therefore it is the Whites in this province who will pave the way to a solution together with the Coloureds.

If one looks at the realities of today, one sees that there are at present thousands of unemployed Coloureds because of certain circumstances and especially as a result of an economic recession which is beyond the control of anyone in South Africa. However, I asked myself: What would the economic position of the Coloured have been today in South Africa if the Government had not decreased the number of Bantu contract labourers during the last three years by 55 000? What would the position have been with regard to unemployment in the Western Cape? What would have happened if the Government had acceded to the persistent protests and outcry from the Official Opposition and the other side that the Bantu contract labourers who work here should have been accompanied by their families?

Peace would have prevailed.

What would the situation have been if, in 1975, the 115 000 Bantu contract labourers had been here with their families, and if the 60 000 Bantu contract labourers of today had also been here with their families? What would the position of the Coloured have been if a policy of labour preference had not been instituted in the Western Cape since 1962? Nevertheless that party kicks up a great fuss and professes to be concerned about and interested in the socioeconomic development of the Coloureds. On the one hand it wants to pull them down; on the other hand it wants to build them up. That is the party which can advocate and proclaim an irresponsible policy because it knows that it will never be in the position where it will have to accept the responsibility of governing.

If one looks back on the progress made during the past 30 years, one sees that the number of economically active Coloureds increased by more than 500 000 during the past 20 years. One also sees that the number of Coloured males in the so-called white-collar jobs more than doubled over the same period. However, when it comes to the Coloured women, their numbers in those occupations more than quadrupled. One sees that the Coloureds have made such progress that as far as the manufacturing labour corps is concerned, Coloured workers already comprise 87% of the total employment. As far as the clothing industry is concerned, it is already 95%.

One can reason today in any way one likes, but the socio-economic advancement of the Coloured, which is a necessary prerequisite for the impending constitutional development, may be attributed to three reasons. The first is the establishment of economic and academic opportunities, as they have recently been established. The second is the strict implementation of the policy of labour preference. The third is the drastic reduction of Black contract labourers. As far as that is concerned the State set the best example by trebling Coloured employment during the past 15 years and by decreasing Bantu employment with 25%.

Therefore I want to state unequivocally that the Opposition parties, Coloured leaders and trade union leaders and the outside world, who have persistently called for the elimination of the preference policy since 1962, should take note of the results. In these times of unemployment the Coloured and trade union leaders came to the Government with the frantic request to stop the flow of Bantu labourers because the Coloureds are unemployed. They performed an about-face because they realized that that policy is really beginning to produce dividends now. Even if the Progs or the whole world stands on its head, this Government will not flinch one inch with regard to the preservation, to the end, of this preference policy for Coloureds in the Western Cape. The Government will not yield an inch, because the Coloured has his domicilium here in the Cape Province, because he has his political home here in the Cape Province and will have his parliamentary seat here, and because the Coloured will have to build his economic future here. Here in the Cape Province we shall have to build this future together with the Coloured and we shall have to see that everyone is able to live happily together. This has to be done in order to provide work opportunities for everyone and to enable all of us to live here in peace.

Mr. Chairman, it is fairly obvious, from what hon. members opposite have said, that what they have done in respect of the Coloured problem, this festering sore in the side of South Africa, is purely to lift the bandage and peep in from time to time. I contend that if we want to study the real problems of the Coloured people in South Africa, we have to remove that bandage and see what the festering sore looks like. It is very obvious that the NP has been concerned about the Coloured problem for many years. At the same time we must contend that the problems of the Coloureds are 300 years old in South Africa. But, Sir, the lack of finding real solutions to the Coloured problem is 30 years old. I think there are still some Nationalists in this House today who were involved when Dr. Malan and his Cabinet were discussing the removal of the Coloureds from the voters’ roll. An unprecedented step was taken in the caucus of the NP at that time. They suspended discussions for two months. That is how seriously the people felt about this business. I certainly hope that some of those people, who were that concerned then, are still present in this House today.

It is amazing to see the political contortions that party has gone through in its 30 year history to try to find a solution to this burning problem of the Coloureds in South Africa. Today, on its 30th anniversary, the NP probably got out of its bed, went over to the mirror to look at its well-preened self, and in all probability said to itself: “Mirror, mirror on the wall, who is the least guilty of them all?” I do not believe that the NP has to date found the real solution to the problems of the Coloured people in South Africa. We and the Nationalists are talking about the future, which we should do, but when we look at the existing problem, it is not enough just to raise the bandage and look at the odd soft spots. We must look at what the priorities are which will have to be tackled by all the Whites of South Africa, in order to solve this problem. We in these benches are very encouraged to find that at last the NP has taken it upon itself to examine critically and objectively the problems which the Coloureds are suffering from.

Let us look at some of the statistics quoted by the Minister. He told us that the average income of the work force of the Coloureds in 1977 had risen to R3 130. However, what we must ask ourselves is not what the wage-earner earns, but what the per capita income for the Coloured group is, because that shows the real poverty of the Coloured nation. An examination of the figures relating to the per capita income—and this is based on the well-known fact that only 33% of the Coloured population in South Africa are employed and are economically active—shows that the per capita income per month is only R52,66. That is the real truth of the situation, and not the fact that certain selected individuals are earning over R3 000 per annum.

That is the average.

Yes, it is the average of the wage-earners. I say we must look at the per capita income and the number of people dependent on a single breadwinner. The Erika Theron Commission did this too. That is the real measure of wealth.

The hon. member for Rissik spoke here about university attendance. We do not decry the increase of university students. We think that that is a very healthy trend. The real problem is, however, that no more than 0,11% of the Coloureds are attending university today as opposed to 2,5% of the European population. That is the discrepancy and this is supposed to be a priority area.

Furthermore, we must have a look at the true situation in which the Coloureds find themselves in order to be able to determine the correct priorities for the future. I think the hon. the Minister will be the first to concede that the policies of the Nationalist Government have not worked out to date. If they claim that they have indeed worked out, why then are they considering new constitutional proposals? These constitutional proposals seem to be reasonably well founded because there is a certain amount of accord between them and the policies of this party.

A further thing we must look at when we examine the problems of the Coloured population with a view to establishing priorities— and this is a direct measure of the poverty of that culturally-deprived part of our nation—is the staggering infantile mortality rate which has not dropped in virtually 50 years. An example of this is that the natural increase per annum of the Coloured population group has dropped by 25% from 1973 to 1976.

That is not because the birth rate has come down significantly, but because their infantile mortality rate is probably still amongst the highest in the world. When examining the policy of the Nationalist Government, I say it is a tragedy that sufficient attention has not been paid to this particular problem.

What is it the Coloureds really want out of this country? We have a high infant mortality rate, the hygiene problem, the medical problem and the educational problem, but what is it that the Coloureds of South Africa really want? I contend that they cannot get what they really want from the Nationalist Party Government because in the period of 30 years in which it has been in power it has tended to use the Coloureds of South Africa as chattels. What the Coloureds want in this country is a sincere Government, one which will really get to grips with the priorities and problems of the deprived people of South Africa The Coloureds, like the other minority and depressed groups in South Africa, have suffered as a result of the policy of rejection by the Nationalist Government.

*The Government has rejected these people. This is built into the policy of the National Party. Moreover, this applies not only to the past, but also to today.

†What the Coloureds, like the urban Africans and the Indians, really want from the Whites of South Africa is a sincere approach to their problems. I believe that that sincerity and the formula for the solution of the problems of the Coloureds, the Indians and the urban Blacks lies with the NRP and not with the Nationalist Party. That is undeniable.

I want to ask the hon. the Minister why it is that the National Party will not recognize the urban Blacks. They are going to be with us for thousands of years in the future. Like the Coloureds have done in the Western Cape, they are going to provide us with manpower in the other parts of South Africa. Why reject these people? Why should we continue with a policy which consistently rejects the other groups in South Africa? This is no way in which to build up the pride and self-esteem of those people. This is where the underlying problem lies. Whatever party is in power at a given time, whether it be the National Party or any other party, it will find reflected in the mirror the Coloureds being held up to them as proof of the real worth of their policy. What kind of image do we get of our policy in South Africa if we look in that mirror? Just look at the Erika Theron Commission’s report: Every page we turn over tells us what the problems are. I contend that the National Party has not yet found real solutions to these problems. We talk about the economic situation and the solutions which were so eloquently propounded by the hon. member for Durbanville. He told us that the economic position of the Coloureds has improved vastly and greatly in South Africa under the rule of the NP. What is the truth? According to the table in paragraph 2.7.4.1 of the department’s report unemployment amongst Coloured males went up fivefold between 1974 and 1977. This is not progress. This is a retrogression on the part of the Coloureds in terms of their income. It has degenerated in progressive steps.

It is advance in reverse!

We must take off the bandages. I believe the NP is man enough to really get to grips with the problem. Instead of doing a nice whitewash job or taking a piece of elastoplast and putting it over the wound and saying the wound has vanished, we must get to grips with the real problems highlighted by the Erika Theron Commission. The continuous policy of rejection followed by the NP up to date has resulted in chronic deficiencies in the culture of the Coloured people and their individual personality structure. If any hon. member has read this report thoroughly, he cannot help but agree with us. What did the Erika Theron Commission say in this regard? According to calculations about one million Coloureds belong to households who, in terms of income, are living below the supplemented living level. There is also the exceptionally high infantile mortality rate which has shown only a slight decrease in the past 30 years, which is a very significant number of years. Moreover, more than 50% of these deaths are due to infectious or parasitic diseases. That is happening in the 20th century and generations after the discovery of penicillin. Furthermore, there is the exceptionally high incidence of illegitimacy … [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I think the hon. member for Durban North was guilty of dirty politicking this afternoon. Over the past 30 years, the solution to the problems of the peoples in South Africa has been given very serious consideration for the first time. This Government was the first to undertake a study in depth—I am referring to the Erika Theron Commission—to consider all aspects of the problems of the Coloureds, their relationships, and their development. We stand by that report, and we also published a White Paper on it As I have said, the hon. member for Durban North wanted to play politics instead of helping to see what we can do—for quite a lot is being done by this Government—to finalize the situation of different peoples in South Africa and to bring about prosperity.

That was what you were doing with the ballet schools in Worcester, Piet!

That hon. member spoke about health services and about the high infant mortality rate in South Africa. I do not think there has ever been any previous Government in this country—in fact, I do not think there has been any Government in the world—which has done so much to assist its underdeveloped and backward people, also in the field of health services, as this Government has done. Only this morning, there was a news report about what the Whites in Australia are doing to the aborigines who live there. Only yesterday, many people asked what had become of the Red Indians in the USA. We never massacred any tribe. I think that South Africa’s Department of Health has a proud record in connection with the health services which are made available to our Coloureds and our Black people. I do not think that the NP need to be apologetic about its record—also not as far as the Coloureds are concerned. I think we have a fine record. Why do I say that? Because I, as a Nationalist and also as a White man, have a conscience with which I have to live. On Sundays I have to sit in church with the word of God ringing in my ears. Then I have to ask myself: Are you doing justice, you who sit in Parliament, to the Brown man in South Africa? I have to account to myself and the same also applies to our hon. the Prime Minister and the Government. I therefore say that no one in this House can examine his own conscience and say that it is clean. The hon. member for Durban North asked what they must do, and he also asked what the Coloured really wanted. I am not going to quote Coloured political leaders this afternoon, but I should like to point out—the hon. the Minister has also referred to that—that there is a move afoot in South Africa among the Coloureds who are not involved in politics. These Coloureds have organized themselves under the name “Constitutional Action Committee” … [Interjections.] Yes, the Progs are laughing about it now. I have attended some of the meetings of those people. Who are they? They are teachers, cultured and professional people who have not been politically indoctrinated. I have gone to listen to them, and at times I have had discussions with them. What do these people say? I quote a Coloured who, in this connection, said to other Coloureds—

That is the positive message which these people convey to their fellow-Brown men and women in South Africa One of their leaders, a very distinguished educationist in the Western Cape, has expressed the feelings of himself and his people on the new constitutional proposals by the Government, as follows, and I quote him—

Surely, that is a positive message from these Brown people to their own people. But what do we find now? The PFP laughs when they hear of Coloureds who want to form positive opinions and who are prepared to consider the Government’s proposals in this connection. I think it is disgraceful.

What is the Government presenting? It is not presenting final proposals. It is making suggestions and it is prepared to discuss them, to reach consensus about them, to negotiate on them, and also to make certain adjustments. I consider this to be a dramatic step forward in the evolution of the democracy of the White man, the Brown man and the Asian in South Africa It has also struck me that these leading figures who are not involved in politics havé on occasion addressed Brown people, and have said, inter alia—

Where can one obtain better testimony from people who are sincere? These people are building up what the PFP broke down within the first few days after the Government had announced its proposals to Labour Party leaders. The PFP now wants to deride and disparage these people as well, and I am not at all sure that some hon. members of that party are not chasing after the positively disposed Coloured leaders to try and indoctrinate them into breaking away and becoming negatively disposed.

In conclusion, I should like to say a word to the hon. member for Pinelands. As a former clergyman the hon. member ought to demonstrate his standards of sincerity and integrity to us. But what has he done? On 12 April 1978, this hon. member uttered the following two untruths here in the House. Among other things, he said the following and I am quoting him—(Hansard, Weekly Edition No. 10, col. 4608)—

That is one of the untruths which the hon. member uttered. Secondly, he said (col. 4608)—

That is the second untruth which the hon. member uttered. The hon. the Prime Minister explained to the hon. member in detail that it was not a dictatorship which we are establishing in South Africa. I do not want to go into this matter any further, because my time has almost expired. But I do want to point out that the statement by the hon. member for Pinelands, after this explanation, that it was a dictatorship which was going to be introduced in South Africa, was an untruth. I think he owes the House an apology. [Interjections.] I also want to point out that the constitutional proposals will not prescribe to the Coloureds what they may do and then, as soon as the Coloureds want to do that, again prescribe that they may not do that. What are the constitutional powers of these three Parliaments going to be?

Will they be able to repeal the Group Areas Act?

The hon. member for Green Point should rather go home. The PFP talks about “full citizenship”. I ask the hon. member for Green Point whether he is going to repeal the Group Areas Act if he comes into power?

Yes! Yes! Yes!

Thank you. Those hon. members of the Official Opposition are therefore going to allow the schools in Rondebosch, Pinelands and Green Point to be integrated and will allow Brown, Black and White pupils to attend school together.

Yes! Yes! Yes!

It seems to me the hon. members have made progress. [Interjections.] I wonder … [Interjections.]

Mr. Chairman, you must allow me some “injury time”. My question is: If the Group Areas Act is repealed, are those hon. members of the PFP going to place the Blacks, the Coloureds and the Whites in the same schools?

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

Mr. Chairman, the hon. members have already taken up enough of my time and I am not prepared to reply to a question. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, this first debate I have had the privilege of attending, was interesting to me. To me as an outsider, the debate had two salient features. Firstly, there is the report by the Department of Coloured Affairs, which clearly indicates that the hon. the Minister and his department are doing a great deal for which they are to be congratulated. A characteristic example of the excellent work being done in this connection, is to be found in a paragraph entitled “Introduction,” which reads—

I should like to stress the words “joint consideration” and the reference to the further constitutional development of the Coloureds, because to me, that was a characteristic of the entire debate. On the one hand, we have the NP, giving joint consideration to the further constitutional development of the Coloureds.

In this sense there has also been exceptional progress in other fields. For example, 99 public relations committees have been established which make an active and positive contribution to the promotion of better relations between White and Coloured groups. That is a further positive aspect of the work of the hon. the Minister and his department, and also of the implementation and development of the NP’s policy.

As against this, it was interesting to follow the Opposition’s contribution in this debate. I should like to try to maintain the standard set by the hon. member for Rondebosch at the beginning of the debate. He said that we should try to discuss this matter in a scientific and dispassionate manner. The hon. member for Rondebosch levelled certain criticism at the Government—criticism which was to be expected and which is acceptable. But what struck me was that apart from the criticism the hon. member levelled at the hon. the Minister and his department, he advanced no alternative proposals. He did indicate with what aspects of our policy he did not agree, but he did not state any alternative. The closest the hon. member came to doing so was to hint, by implication, at certain things. He made certain attacks and said the Group Areas Act, etc., should be repealed. However, he let it just glimmer through that he thought there should be a general levelling, that no distinction should be drawn, and that the Coloured population group for example, should therefore not be identified as a separate group. If that is so, I ask the Opposition why they do not state their standpoint clearly. Is their standpoint only stated at certain times by individual members on occasions where they will be acceptable to a specific audience? I want to refer to one example, in particular. Would the hon. member for Green Point, for example, have the courage of his convictions to go back to his place of birth and set out his policy there, or is he only prepared to do so in Green Point? They have different policies for different areas. What I find so interesting in this debate, is that on the one hand, there is a positive policy …

Mr. Chairman, may I ask the hon. member whether he will accept a challenge of conducting a public debate with me in Williston on race policy? [Interjections.]

I will be prepared to accept any challenge by the hon. member to address a meeting with him at any time and at any place, provided he is prepared to go with me. I want to express an objective view of the basic difference between these two parties. Even if the policy of the NP were perhaps wrong—although I believe that we are right—the NP, the hon. the Minister and his department at least take positive steps to achieve certain objectives, and there is mutual discussion about the future. That party, on the contrary, merely expresses negative criticism. I shall welcome the day when the Opposition comes forward with a constructive policy— whether it be right or wrong—and states it publicly and openly.

I should like to make an appeal to the hon. the Minister this afternoon. Since we are now making progress in all these fields, and we are on the eve of major constitutional developments, is it not possible that we are progressing too slowly at the third level of Government, i.e. local government at this stage? My question also relates to the speech by the hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central about local authorities and management committees. I wish to congratulate the hon. the Minister on the development of the management committees which have already been introduced and by means of which a positive goal is being achieved. At the same time, I wish to sound a warning that these same management committees and the policy of the hon. the Minister are being sabotaged by leftist liberal municipalities with which the friends of the Official Opposition are connected. The Cape Town Municipality, for example, is sabotaging these management committees in the sense that it is not making use of them, and is not giving those people the recognition to which they are entitled. The position is so serious that on 19 April 1978, in a speech at Oudtshoorn, the Administrator of the Cape found it necessary to comment on it On that occasion he stated—

I therefore maintain that those leftist friends of the Official Opposition are engaged in sabotaging the policy. I request the hon. the Minister please to give that the necessary attention.

At the same time, there is another matter concerning which I specifically want to make an appeal to the hon. the Minister, namely that since at this stage we are on the eve of a new constitutional development, we should promote the local authorities, and in this connection, I should like to inquire specifically whether he would not give urgent consideration to the granting of municipal status to a complex like Atlantis. Atlantis is one of the biggest projects in which we are engaged in this country at the moment. It is an entity on its own, and if the Coloured population is to have a meaningful share, they should be entitled to make a contribution, and also accept their obligations and responsibilities in this connection. I know that through the instrumentality of the hon. the Minister and his department, Coloureds have already been co-opted to the Atlantis Committee. However, I am asking for a statutory body to control Atlantis. I shall privately put such a proposal to the hon. the Minister at a later stage. Now is an ideal time. Atlantis is the ideal place, and now is the ideal opportunity for the institution of a statutory body as a forerunner of municipal status in which the Coloureds can become actively involved. At the present stage of development of Atlantis, 250 ha of land has already been provided with services.

Sixty ha of land has already been sold to industrialists. What is perhaps even more important, is the financial aspect. Atlantis’ consumption of electricity for 1977 was R363 800, as against R719 700 for 1978. If one considers the figures for general tax, this has risen from R77 150 to R231 299 during the same period. This places Atlantis in the class of the major local authorities in the Cape Province. Here, therefore, we have an actual situation in which such a step is justified. Over and above that, the entire area has already been supplied with an automatic telephone system, and every industrialist— and also every inhabitant—can obtain a telephone as soon as he applies for it. The ordinary municipal services are the most modern in existence. Stands are available and all the inner streets have been tarred, and trees have been planted along the streets. Vast sums have already been utilized for landscaping and for park development. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, like other hon. members, I also wish to refer to the 30 years’ rule of the NP. Seen purely from a narrow party political point of view, it obviously is an achievement. However, viewed against the greater South African scene, from a greater political point of view and in particular from the Coloured political point of view, we can say that the past 30 years have in many respects been an embarrassment instead of an achievement. Today we are no nearer to a political solution for the Coloured people than we were 30 years ago. Not a single political problem has been eliminated. The new dispensation at best offers Coloureds limited citizenship, and I am grateful to the hon. member for Port Natal for mentioning this. For the rest there will be representation in a Council of Cabinets, and in this Council of Cabinets the Coloureds and the Indians will be cast in the role of a perpetual opposition. The White political party which controls the White Parliament will also control the Council of Cabinets. The other White political parties will obviously be excluded, which means that the Coloureds and the Indians will be forced into a position of a perpetual Opposition. I do not think this is anything great we can look forward to.

You are very weak!

The hon. member says: “You are very weak.” It is the Government which is so weak after 30 years. Is that the best they can do with regard to political development? Hon. members opposite should stop shouting about 30 years of achievement. They should rather say that they have been in power for two or three years only, if one starts looking at their permanent achievements. Much has been said about the wonderful improvements that have been taking place lately as far as the Coloureds are concerned. A major part of the achievement which the hon. the Minister read out was due to the elimination of restrictions which were placed on the Coloured people after this the NP came into power in 1948. However, let us look at the situation today. Some of the so-called improvements have in reality caused humiliation for the Coloureds and have done untold harm to race relations in South Africa. Only today, 26 May, 1978 I find a photograph of a man and a woman on page 3 of The Citizen under the heading “Morals case hearing”. The article states—

Would they have been subjected to this kind of humiliation before 1948? Is this the sort of monument the NP wants? Does any hon. member really believe that we feel politically far safer today than in 1948? As far as the new dispensation is concerned, perhaps the only light is that the Government has at long last realized that somewhere along the line one must share power. As far as that is concerned, we welcome the move.

*Now I should like to refer to certain urgent problems with regard to education. In the first place we find a frank admission even in the department’s own statement, in a magazine like Alpha, that in the field of education a lack of school accommodation is in fact one of the major problems to be overcome. This lack of accommodation manifested itself in various urban complexes this year, especially with regard to high school accommodation, and more specifically in places like Durban and Port Elizabeth. If any group has to contend with this problem, one would not want that group to be the secondary pupils, because such a small percentage of them reach the top in any event. Virtually only 5% to 6% of the school population reach Stds. 8 to 10. In general one can of course measure this in terms of the number of double session classes, but that, of course, does not affect the high schools as such. From figures published last year we see that there are still 11% of the pupils who have to attend double session classes, all in all nearly 80 000 pupils. In 1964 there were 9 415. It has often been proved in the past, and the Erika Theron report confirms this, that what in fact happens, is that the large majority of classrooms built are used as replacement classrooms. What has in fact been happening in South Africa, is not only that we have had to contend with a large population increase amongst the Coloureds, but also that people have been obliged to move in terms of the provisions of the Group Areas Act That has given rise to a position of classrooms having to be built constantly, classrooms which are in fact replacement classrooms.

†Sometimes the NP’s own policy places artificial restrictions on natural development in South Africa It reminds me of Alice through the Looking Glass, when the Red Queen took Alice’s hand and ran through the garden of “live flowers” so fast that it felt to Alice that they were skimming through the air. After ten minutes they stopped and Alice discovered that she was still on the same spot. She then remarked to the Red Queen that if one ran so fast in her country one would have at least got somewhere. The Red Queen replied: “No, you have a slow country. In our country you must run so fast just to stay in the same place. If you want to get elsewhere, then you must run twice as fast.” Therefore, as a result of the hon. the Minister’s policies, we shall have to move much faster and build twice as many schools in South Africa if we want to solve the problem concerning higher and secondary education.

I now wish to refer to the matter mentioned by the hon. member for Durban Point From the beginning of this year in Sparks Estate in Durban 1 300 high school pupils have been forced to walk miles in order to attend school. The offer of the Natal Provincial Administration of the use of the Durban Commercial High was turned down. Ten years ago a site had already been decided upon. Since then the erection of that particular school has been postponed seven times. Similar situations have occurred in other areas as well, for example, in Port Elizabeth, at Bethelsdorp, at Galvendale and elsewhere. In some instances schools built to accommodate 900 pupils have upwards of 1 200 enrolled.

This is the sort of situation we simply cannot allow to continue in South Africa It is all very well for the hon. the Minister to maintain that progress has been made and to keep on telling us how many new school buildings have been erected. It has in fact been proved that many of the new schools which are built are only built to replace existing school buildings.

*Finally, I want to point out something else. I have mentioned the question of the wage gap during the past two or three years in the debate on this Vote. I must say that I am delighted about the improvements in the situation with regard to the staff of universities. That is a matter for which I made out a case last year. It would seem that this matter is now receiving attention at last. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, it seems to be the irony of this debate that the really nasty note heard in connection with the question of Coloured policy has come from hon. members of the NRP like the hon. member for Berea, the hon. member for Durban North and the hon. member for Durban Central. The hon. member for Durban North spoke about the Government not having defined its priorities in relation to the Coloured community. He did so without even vaguely indicating what those priorities were.

If one were to listen to these hon. members one would conclude that the position of the Coloureds 30 years ago, under the former UP Government, was in fact idyllic, that they were accepted in the South African society, that they played a major role in the South African society, and that politically they were in all respects accepted and fully represented in all spheres. The fact is that the policy of that particular party and its predecessors, the previous UP Government, was one in which the Coloureds were blatantly treated as second-class Whites, as an adjunct to the White community.

In the second place, the same discrimination, the same segregation, if you like, was practised in relation to the Coloured community. As a matter of fact, the NRP, its predecessors, and hon. members sitting in the PFP benches at the present moment, actually voted for legislation of which they are now very critical, for measures which they severely criticize now.

When the Separate Amenities Bill was introduced in this House in 1953—on the 20th August of that year—numerous statements were made. I refer to one of those statements, a fascinating exchange of words between the then Minister of Finance, Mr. N. C. Havenga, and Mr. Harry Lawrence. It dealt with the question of apartheid. And Mr. Harry Lawrence, who was a senior Opposition spokesman, remarked (Hansard, Vol. 82, col. 2033)—

The hon. member for Parktown, who was then the hon. member for Maitland, said in that same debate—and I think it is important that these things be said because one cannot judge policies of 20 or 30 years ago in terms of the consciousness of today … [Interjections.] One cannot do that. [Interjections.] I am doing this precisely because hon. members of the Opposition simply ignore perspective. They ignore the fact that they have played a role over these 30 years, that they have contributed to the politics of these 30 years, that they have sought the support of the electorate over these 30 years, and that on all occasions they were resoundingly defeated. [Interjections.] This is petty politics in a sense. However, it is necessary to make these points because the fact is that those hon. gentlemen do not have any perspective. They are constantly judging issues with the consciousness of today, issues which in fact have their origins in attitudes and in policies which were implemented in times and in circumstances which were valid 20 and 30 years ago. Unless one takes account of that distinction criticism is thoroughly hypocritical.

I now want to turn to the hon. member for Rondebosch, who, in both interventions in this debate, came back to the question of Coloured identity. In his initial remarks the hon. member said that as far as he was concerned the Coloured community could in no sense be described as an ethnic community. He said there was no scientific basis for this, and he challenged hon. members on the Government benches to answer just how they perceive the Coloured community. The hon. member and I are both social scientists, and in social science terms, my view is that identity is simply a question of perception. Moreover, I believe that there is an analogy between the Blacks of the United States and our Coloured community.

We know that there are people who constantly say that there is a parallel between race relations in the United States and race relations in South Africa. In so far as that parallel applies it applies to the Coloured community of South Africa and not to Black South Africans. As a matter of fact, if one takes developments during the 1950s in the United States and one looks at the kind of assumptions which were made there about the role of the Black American and his place in American society, one finds answers which are very relevant to our own Coloured community. The two communities are comparable in the sense that they are both marginal groups.

They are comparable in the sense that neither of them has a distinctive culture in relation to the White society. The Black American does not have a distinctive culture. He has the same culture as the White American. The same may be true of our own Coloured community. It has in fact been generally admitted by hon. members of the NP.

It is true.

Thank you. As a matter of fact, the initial assumptions which were followed in the 1950s, the assumption that the Black American did not constitute a separate ethnic group, that he should be taken up into American society as an individual, shows that the emphasis was placed on the individual. That is how it was perceived. The hon. member for Pinelands is familiar with all the court decisions and with how they were implemented. The fact is that there was a Black reaction to that.

There was a Black reaction in the early ’sixties when the Black American said: “I need to develop a sense of consciousness. I need to develop a sense of ethnic identity.” And in fact he did so. One has this reflected in Government policies in a variety of ways, for example President Nixon’s Black capitalism programme. That is something which was predated in this country by many years with the policies which we followed here. In a variety of ways the ethnic character of the Black American was acknowledged. As a matter of fact, the conclusion which people came to was that the Black American had wanted to achieve, through this process of integration, something which no other groups in American society had achieved. As a matter of fact, the Italians, the Irish, the Jews, all of them maintained their identity and were absorbed into the American society. They were all accommodated into the greater American society.

That is the telling answer which one can give to the hon. member for Rondebosch. The Coloured community perceive themselves, the vast majority of them, perceive themselves as a distinctive community. And they are perceived by other members of the South African society as a distinctive community. It is a mistake; it is not in the interests of the Coloured community for the hon. member for Rondebosch and his political party to adopt the line that this is not a distinctive community without a sense of identity. It was precisely that attitude towards the Coloured community which was responsible for the fact that the Coloureds, for so many years in the history of this country, were treated as second-class Whites, as an adjunct to the White society, without the right really to assert themselves as a distinctive community.

I want to move on very briefly to the constitutional proposals and the criticisms which have been directed at them. Accepting that the Coloured community is a distinctive community, the constitutional proposals assume certain important things. They assume that there is ethnicity in the first place. They assume that. This is one of the realities in the South African situation. In the second place we accept that in this kind of society where one is dealing with groups of this kind, one must transfer political power or decentralize political power. That is what these constitutional proposals do. As far as those matters are concerned, which are of specific concern to the particular communities, political power is transferred. In regard to those matters which are common to the communities there is co-responsibility. [Interjections.] The hon. member should not talk nonsense. Federations are territorially based and in no way can this be described as a federation.

The fact remains that there are certain important implications in these constitutional proposals. The first is the fact that they assume a single concept of public interest, a concept of public interest which affects Whites, Coloureds and Asians. In the Second place they assume a single concept of nationhood. The Whites, the Coloureds and the Asians form a single nation. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I am really sorry that the time of the hon. member for Gardens has expired because towards the end of his speech he was laying into the strident but negative ideas expressed towards the end of the debate. I want to congratulate the hon. member on what he said, particularly on his view as to what the Coloured is.

The hon. member for Rondebosch gave me the impression that he and his party—well, they are going into orbit. Surely they are forgetting what the realities are. Surely it is not since today or since 30 years ago that the Coloured community has existed in South Africa, that is one of the admissions which the hon. member for Gardens pointed out He is quite correct when he says, that their position is indeed comparable with that of the Blacks in the USA.

You must use that argument with care.

No, that argument is correct; It is a comparable position, because the position of the Blacks of the USA is not comparable with that of the Blacks in South Africa. I wonder whether the hon. member knows this. I have just obtained a registration card for voters in the USA. Provision is made on that card for indicating one’s race.

There is nothing wrong with that.

No, there is nothing wrong with that; it is simply that one must not be so pious and sanctimonious as they are. If we do it, it is evil and wrong, but Carter and his people can do it. [Interjections.]

Looking back at this debate and at the various aspects covered, I have gained one specific impression. They can say what they like about this Government but it has the initiative in this sphere and elsewhere, in the development of the Coloured population group and with its constitutional proposals. In contrast, there is delay and lack of movement among the other parties.

The hon. member for Durban Central said that the Coloureds and the Indians would be forced into a position of permanent opposition. I do not think the hon. member has given due consideration to the constitutional proposals or studied them. The object of the exercise is specifically to give these people a rightful share for the first time in the management of their own affairs in the first place, but also in matters of common interest. After all, we have a democratic system in this country. [Interjections.] What sound do I here there? [Interjections.] I wonder how those two hon. members came to this House, whether they came here in an undemocratic way. [Interjections.] I have a shrewd idea that they might have come here by methods other than those to which we are traditionally accustomed in this country. I say this if they deny that there is a democracy in the country.

Mr. Chairman, may I ask the hon. the Minister whether it will be possible for the Coloureds, the Indians and the Whites all to belong to the same political party although each will have their own Parliament?

Surely it is for each of those groups to decide on its own party affiliations. It is not for me to prescribe in that connection. Why does the hon. member ask me such a question? Must I give the hon. member a lecture in this connection? After all, in democracy a constitution is never static. In a living community which develops and progresses one really cannot have a static situation. I do not know how the hon. member can try such a shot in the dark. The hon. member states that the Coloureds and the Indians are now to become a permanent Opposition. Has the hon. member, then, no ambition to sit on this side of the House one day? [Interjections.] It is very clear that the hon. member has not given thought to these matters.

The hon. member tried to level a reproach at me concerning the issue of accommodation in Coloured schools. I concede that there are problems, for example in Durban, but allow me to show hon. members the other side of the coin as well. Let us look at the amounts voted under the Public Works Vote to construct school buildings. In 1973-’74 an amount of approximately R6 million was voted. In the following year, R11 million was voted and the year after, R12½ million. In 1976-’77 the amount was R15 million whereas in 1977-’78 it was R20½ million. Is the hon. member, then, incapable of grasping how an effort is being made in this connection, even with the limited capital available, to help to solve the problem regarding the lack of school accommodation among the Coloureds, more than in other respects? The hon. member is wrong to ascribe this situation to the resettlement of people. Does the hon. member know how many schools are being hired from other bodies or to what extent temporary accommodation is being made use of? New schools are being built every year at a tremendous rate. I concede that there is a backlog, but it is a backlog which is also bound up with the implementation of compulsory schooling. For example, the hon. member should consider the extent to which the school population has increased. He should consider the rate at which the number of matriculants has increased. If he takes into account that increase over the past five years, he will realize why there is a bottle-neck. The same applies to the hon. member who discussed housing. I must say in passing that this is a matter which is by no means at my level. The fact is that because they have freedom of movement, the Coloured population is moving to the Cape Peninsula to an extent unequalled by any other population group. The Department of Community Development is financing local authorities and is itself building for the Coloureds on a large scale. More than 60% of the year’s expenditure is on Coloured housing. This is therefore an acute situation which we are trying to deal with.

The hon. member also referred to the issue of parity in salaries. Surely he knows that parity in salaries is the aim of the Government as well. It was announced a few years ago that we were striving to achieve this, to the extent that we were economically in a position to implement it. Surely the hon. member knows that one cannot implement it in regard to one category of the public sector and not in regard to another. As the hon. member has intimated, one can begin at the high levels such as in the case of professors, for example. That is another story. However, parity in salaries cannot be implemented at all levels in education if one does not have the necessary means at one’s disposal. If one only implements this in regard to certain categories of people, what about the other categories? It must surely be done simultaneously for all. Surely the hon. member knows that this is the stated policy of the Government and that it is indeed engaged in implementing it. In education, key scales are now equal.

The hon. member for Vasco, and also the hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central, discussed local management affairs. The hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central referred specifically to the lack of co-operation in certain spheres between management committees and city councils. He made the statement that since the last election of management committees, a deterioration has taken place. I take it he is referring to the Port Elizabeth area. This is true, Sir, I am aware of this. The hon. member also referred to cases of elections being waged on a political basis. The aim was apparently to cause confrontation with city councils. However, there is another story as well. There are local authorities that do not do their share in this connection. The Administrator of the Cape and I have asked them to bring about the necessary liaison with management committees, and there are some of them that have not done this. Management committees are not the end of the road in local authority development. They represent an interim phase, one could almost call them a training-school, before the stage of full-fledged municipalities is reached. It is for that very reason that I want to associate myself with the appeal made by the Administrator of the Cape to the effect that local authorities should do their share in this process of development. One way in which they can do this is to appoint Coloured staff and train them in service. By so doing, opportunities can be created for them to develop so that when they develop their own municipalities they will be able to occupy the posts in those municipalities.

They will be able to gain experience in that way. Another method is to bring about the necessary liaison. It is not an art to bring about liaison. One need not prescribe to anyone else how it is to be done. There are local authorities that do it, and do it well, and it really pays off. There the co-operation is outstanding.

As regards the question asked by the hon. member for Vasco, viz. whether we are not progressing too slowly with the introduction of local managements, I could sketch a long background in this regard but I do not think this is necessary. I want to tell him that I have before me the interim report of the Yeld Committee, the committee which is looking into 30 local authority areas. One area is totally different to the next This committee is a technical one, and its terms of reference are to investigate specifically each of these areas and its circumstances. A number of areas have already been dealt with—not yet finally, but the spadework has been done. The interim report of the committee indicates that the major need in those spheres is staff. With the best will in the world there is no point in establishing a municipality if one does not have the staff to man it. That committee made recommendations concerning training. I think the hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central also discussed that point. Apart from the courses being offered at the University of the Western Cape and at the Peninsula College for Advanced Technical Education, other courses, too, are being offered so as to have human material ready for service in the city councils-in-embryo as soon as possible. At the college mentioned, a course is already being offered in Bellville for health inspectors, which is another category of officials one must have. Specific steps will now be taken, and where municipalities have been identified and investigations have been completed, they will be established as soon as possible. That, too, is the attitude of the Administrator of the Cape.

As far as Atlantis is concerned, unfortunately I must tell the hon. member that it is not so easy to give a new place being built from scratch, full municipal status immediately. Apart from its industrial area, there is also the residential area where new people are continually being accommodated. The leaders must first be identified. In other words, the community has first to find its feet before one can make a start with this. However, I want to agree with the hon. member that Atlantis has the potential to become one of the biggest and most rapidly-growing municipalities.

The hon. member for Worcester discussed the work of the constitutional action committees. I referred to this in my previous speech. The hon. member said that these proposals were open to discussion and were not yet final. I want to endorse this. They do not represent the end of the road, but the point of departure, a basis for discussion, and I cannot understand why some people do not wish to discuss them.

But did the people not vote about them?

Yes, the people did vote on them. What is wrong with that?

But then it is only a starting point, a plan.

Yes, it is a plan. However, the hon. member does not even have a plan yet. We have a plan which we can discuss with other people. We have found a formula. A former colleague of the hon. member said of their plans that “It is what it is”. That does not apply to our plan.

Can it be changed?

Yes. My word, Mr. Chairman, if one has a plan which one discusses with other people, then surely that means it is not final.

In that case the people have given you a blank cheque. [Interjections.]

The hon. member for Durban North put forward figures of his own to indicate that the per capita income was supposedly so low. Did the hon. member do his homework properly and analyse the situation? He said that 33% of the Coloured population were economically active. However, if one takes cognizance of circumstances which he did not take into account, then that is a very good percentage. I do not have the figures in front of me now but is the hon. member aware that the percentage of Coloureds under 15 years old is tremendously high? I think it is close to 45%, if not 50%. The large families necessarily mean that the percentage of economically active individuals cannot be very high. As a result a smaller percentage than in the case of the Whites will be economically active. When the hon. member discusses per capita income this also reflects the size of the families. It is important to note that the income of households, as I indicated with reference to the survey carried out in the Cape Peninsula, has increased tremendously. The figures only go up to 1975, the year when the survey was carried out. However, the income of the households is still increasing.

The hon. member for Durbanville stressed orderly progress. The hon. member for Constantia spoke about District Six. Mr. Chairman, you were not in the Chair at the time. Your colleague was. But it would probably be inappropriate to tell the hon. member that he was completely out of order. Even though the hon. member was given leave by the Chair, he ought really to have known that he was dealing with a subject which had already been disposed of in this House under the Community Development Vote. Surely it relates to a functional task of the Department of Community Development.

You speak on behalf of the Coloureds here.

Yes, and I often discuss that matter with my colleague. The hon. member can ask him. Representations have been made to me on the specific issue of District Six. I think that mentally the hon. member is still back in Von Brandis, his previous constituency. He has not been in the Cape long enough.

I grew up here.

Then his eyes must have been very tightly closed. The hon. member said that District Six was now a ghetto. District Six was a ghetto. Moreover, for the most part District Six did not belong to the Coloureds. I think that only 10% to 12% of the properties—my colleague can correct me—belonged to Coloureds. It was a ghetto which belonged to Whites, who rented the properties and did not mind letting Coloureds live in ghettos. Let me give the hon. member the background from my colleague’s notes. Surely the hon. member knows that a large part of District Six has been zoned for Coloureds since the original delimitation. However, part of the area must be developed on the basis of slum clearance and the hon. member surely knows that the expense involved—the hon. the Minister of Community Development can confirm this—is such as to place those properties beyond the reach of a Coloured family with an average income. That hon. member, and other hon. members too, asked why Coloureds could not come back to that area to rent properties there. I should like to know whether that hon. member will pay the rent.

They can because they have made progress in the economic sphere.

After all, someone has to pay the rent. The department of the hon. the Minister of Community Development cleared the slum conditions and if the result is that the price of the land is now such that the area cannot be utilized for residential purposes on an economic basis, who am I to dispute that? The hon. member should first make a thorough study of the subject before addressing me on a subject which he himself should have known about.

He knows nothing about it because he comes from Von Brandis.

The hon. member for Caledon made a very interesting speech concerning the various commission reports— apart from the report of the Theron Commission—which he unearthed from the past, reports which also pointed to the need for a preference policy for Coloureds in the Western Cape. I want to thank him for his contributions in this connection. I also want to convey my thanks to the hon. member for Kimberley North. However, time caught up with him when he wanted to dwell further on the major role played by the Coloured Development Corporation in regard to the development of the Coloureds.

The hon. member for Prieska referred, inter alia to work-shyness. This is also one of the subjects discussed by the hon. member for Rondebosch. It is a matter which has been referred to the executive of the Coloured Representative Council, but I have not yet had any reaction from them. I want to tell the hon. member for Prieska in his absence that this is a matter to which the Wiehahn Commission of Investigation into Labour Matters is giving special attention. However, since I am discussing this matter I want to point out that I was at a conference recently where three Coloured headmasters stood up, one after the other, to discuss, the subject of work-shyness, which was caused by a lack of discipline amongst certain parents. Their point of view—and I am inclined to agree with them—is that the solution to the problem is to prevent work-shyness from an early age, by implementing discipline, rather than to try to take steps to eliminate work-shyness among adults. They asked that cadet units be established at schools. Two years ago I announced that I had agreement in principle from the hon. the Minister of Defence to establish a piloting committee comprising representatives of the Department of Defence, my department and the Administration of Coloured Affairs. This committee is at present investigating the introduction of cadet training. To my regret I read in the newspaper recently that the president of a teachers’ organization—which, to be sure, does not represent all the Coloured teachers, but only a small number, who are in any case for the most part primary school teachers—said that his association rejected the school cadet system. It is a pity that anyone involved in education should feel so little for the young children of his own people. As far as I am concerned I shall keep my word. I have spoken to the hon. the Minister of Defence and I want to give the assurance that that work will continue with a view to the introduction of cadet units and the training of teachers as officers for such units. As I announced at the time, it is the aim that such units be introduced on a voluntary basis at schools where the headmasters, the school committees and the teachers want them. I think the Coloured people want such units, whatever anyone standing on a platform may say. The HSRC carried out a survey recently on a complementary aspect of this problem in the Eersterust region near Pretoria and in the Cape Peninsula. It concerned the employment of Coloureds in the Defence Force. In Eersterust that survey indicated that 88% of the Coloureds supported national service for Coloureds in the Western Cape and involvement of the Coloureds in the Defence Force. Here in the Cape Peninsula, 88,8% of them expressed themselves in favour of national service for Coloureds in the Defence Force. That is why I say that I have every reason to believe that the real feelings of these people can be gauged in other ways, irrespective of the motives for which some people discuss these aspects.

The hon. member for Umbilo wanted to know what the financial dispensation would be like under the new dispensation.

†The hon. member is well aware that a committee has been appointed, following upon the recommendations of the Cabinet Committee, to deal with these aspects. To my mind—I want to put it briefly to the hon. member—there is an attempt outside, and I am aware of it, to create the impression that the Coloured Parliament will only get their income from Coloured taxpayers. That is not true. If the entire taxpaying community of South Africa cannot provide the means for the Coloured Parliament and for all the other Parliaments to perform their respective functions orderly and purposefully, these proposals will have no sense. I do not want to go into detail. The hon. member must take note that an expert committee is attending to this particular aspect. I repeat that it is not the intention that the Coloured Parliament will be…

Self-sufficient?

… dependent on the income of Coloured taxpayers alone. The hon. member also referred to a report about the celebration of Republic Day which appeared in the Press. I have seen the report that appeared in The Argus on 24 May. It says the following—

I presume they were asked by The Argus—

He is not in charge of education, but of rural affairs—

The report continues quoting Mr. Currey—

I now want to point out to the House that Mr. Curry is not in charge of education. The only man of the Executive of the CRC who is in charge of education is the Rev. Hendrickse. He operates in that portfolio by way of delegation from me. It is therefore rather strange that Mr. Curry now says that principals fear intimidation from the side of the Administration. He is, in other words, referring to his own administration …

It does not mean that at all.

What does it mean then? How does the hon. member know what he means? [Interjections.] The hon. member is very quick to say what it means. How does he know?

It is obvious.

What is obvious? What is quite obvious to me is the fact that Mr. Curry—hon. members know that I do not go about commenting on what members of the Executive say from day to day—is not in charge of education …

Do you think that his ideas differ from those of the Rev. Hendrickse?

Forget about that. My point is that although he is not in charge of education, this gentleman goes about telling the outside public, through The Argus, that the principals fear victimization from officials in the Administration of Coloured Affairs.

*After all, that is a slander campaign. Surely someone in control of a portfolio does not slander his own officials. The other side of the coin is that the Executive of the CRC took a decision which it may not in fact take. They expressed the wish that schools should not celebrate Republic Day on 30 May and that those that did want to celebrate Republic Day should make application. Does this not perhaps entail a danger? Would this not perhaps mean that certain people will now know who applied? I regret to say it, but this report is a deplorable one. Someone who does not have the delegation to deal with education affairs makes this comment in such a way as to create antagonism between officials and headmasters. To whom were the inspectors referred? At least 50% of these inspectors are Coloured inspectors. In other words, officials and headmasters alike are having their toes trodden on in this report. I really find it most deplorable.

The hon. member for Moorreesburg discussed military service for Coloureds. I think that I have already dealt with that in replying to another question. I think I have also dealt with the issue of the Yeld Committee, which the hon. member also raised. The hon. member for Rondebosch put questions concerning rural areas, specifically the investigation at present under way in regard to the rural areas at Kimberley and in Kokstad, of which the department’s annual report makes mention. I want to tell the hon. member that the investigations have already made good progress but have not yet been finally rounded off. Therefore I am unfortunately unable to give the hon. member detailed information.

The report says that the investigation in the Northern Cape has been concluded.

Yes, the investigation was carried out in the Kimberley region, but I am as yet unable to furnish the final answer because the investigation has not yet been finalized. What I can say to the hon. member is that when the investigation has been finalized, it will result in the purchase of land.

The hon. member also asked for more powers for the management committees. I think I have already handled that aspect Negotiations have been entered into with the four Administrators of the provinces with the aim of gradually vesting more and more powers in management committees in the course of their development into individual, autonomous municipalities. The replies and the commentary of the various Administrators are now being awaited and will form the basis of further steps to vest greater powers in these committees.

The hon. member also discussed work-shyness with reference to what the report had to say about it. I have already dealt with this matter but I want to repeat that the Wiehahn Commission is at present giving attention to this matter as well.

The hon. member also raised the issue of licences for fire-arms. Unfortunately I cannot tell the hon. member exactly what the guidelines are. In any event the police are handling the matter themselves nowadays, and the normal procedure is being followed. The police go into the record of an applicant to see whether he has not perhaps been careless with a fire-arm before, whether he really needs the fire-arm, etc. In any event, this is a matter which the hon. member must take up with the hon. the Minister of Police. My department has no further function in this regard.

The hon. member put further questions relating to the future of the people of Rehoboth and Namaland and other aspects relating to these groups. As the hon. member can deduce from my present title, I am only Minister of Coloured Relations. I am no longer functionally involved in those areas, except that I have control over the officials of the department who still perform services in these regions. I have control of the staff but not of the future of those areas. This is a matter which is the responsibility of the future Government of South West Africa and is at present that of the Administrator-General.

I think we have now reached the end of the debate. I was unable to reply in detail to many of the hon. members who took part in the debate. To the hon. members on this side of the House I want to say thank you for their positive contributions. In general we can say that we have conducted a debate which was necessary, because we again focused on the needs of the Coloured population. For my part, I want to say that the Government is in earnest in furthering the interests of this population group. Doubt cast by certain people will not influence the process. In view of that I am grateful that even some of the Opposition parties reveal an understanding of these matters.

Before I resume my seat there is a duty I take pleasure in performing. In recent years Advocate W. M. van den Bergh served my department as chief law adviser. He is the retired Attorney-General of the Cape. Having retired from that office he was prepared to serve the State once again and enter the service of my department. As we heard the other day, the hon. the Minister of Justice needs the services of two experienced men for a very important task. Advocate Van den Bergh was one of those whom he asked. I want to express my gratitude to Advocate Van den Bergh for the outstanding services he has rendered my department for a number of years. I have the greatest appreciation for those services. I believe that he will perform his new and extremely important task with equal distinction. One admires a person who, at his time of life, after retiring, is still prepared to render such important services to the State.

Vote agreed to.

Business interrupted in accordance with Standing Order No. 22.

House Resumed:

Progress reported and leave granted to sit again.