laid upon the Table—

1. (1) Identification Bill [B 79—86 (GA)]— (Standing Committee on Home Affairs).
2. (2) Public Safety Amendment Bill [B 80—86 (GA)]—(Standing Committee on Law and Order).

as Chairman, presented the First Report of the Standing Select Committee on Mineral and Energy Affairs, dated 18 April 1986, as follows:

Bill to be read a second time.

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

A glance at the annual report of 1985 of the Department of Public Works and Land Affairs will show a substantial difference between the information in this particular report and that contained in the report for the previous year, 1984. It shows how the original department, the Department of Community Development, has been buffeted about as a result of the tricameral system of Parliament. However, I shall begin my speech by referring to the preface of the 1985 report of the Director-General. He says the following:

So they were and I think they worked particularly hard.

I want to refer to that aspect of the report as well as to the memorandum submitted by the hon the Minister of Public Works. Page 15, under the heading “Houses of Parliament” the total estimated cost is R28 850 000. This Committee is now being asked to vote the sume of R10 025 000 towards this project. I want to know from the hon the Minister precisely how we are to spend this money. I refer him to page 38 of the annual report which states the following concerning the parliamentary complex:

In the next paragraph the development of the open area surrounding the parliamentary buildings is discussed.

Which report is the hon member quoting from?

I am quoting from the annual report for 1985. I have quoted this particular paragraph because this is all that we know. The members of the Standing Committee on Internal Arrangements have no further information concerning this matter other than is contained in this report. They appear to be out of touch, as members of Parliament are, with the latest plans for the finalisation of this building which affects every one of us here in Parliament as well as the taxpayer and everyone who is contributing towards the cost of this building. I submit that this Committee and Parliament should be better informed, and I ask the hon the Minister to see that this is done.

I have in fact gone over the plans with the architect and I inspected the site just recently. The reference to 1 000 persons which I have quoted, is vague. The large hall will in fact seat 366 members. Bearing in mind that as Parliament is presently constituted, there are 308 members. I ask the question: What are the other 58 seats for? [Interjections.] In addition, the hall will occupy a height equivalent to approximately three floors. Looking at this ceiling, I think hon members will agree that it is very, very bland. I therefore ask how the ceiling in the new hall will be decorated and how it will look.

Above this hall will be the Chamber for the House of Delegates. This will be equal in height to a further two storeys and will provide seats for 72 members. Why 72 when there are only 45 members in the House of Delegates? What are the other 27 seats for? There will be a restaurant for the House of Delegates only and a prayer-room for Moslems and Hindus facing Mecca, which is laudable and praiseworthy. There will be 295 new offices. Who will occupy these new offices? Furthermore, since the members of the House of Delegates will be vacating the Marks Building, who will then take their place in the Marks Building? What will happen to the present Chamber used by the House of Delegates? Would we, for example, be able to use it for standing committees? [Interjections.] Furthermore, will the 1964 extensions to the present building aesthetically match and blend in with the new one which is now being erected?

A sum of R2,3 million will be spent on the basement alone. I understand that Parliament has a problem in housing all its documents. Part of this basement will be used as archives. I ask whether this space is going to be adequate and whether the staff and everyone else involved has been consulted with regard to the enormous storage space that is required not only for this House but for the other two Houses as well. Why has the standing committee not been consulted in this regard?

With regard to the second basement, this will provide for an air conditioning plant, transformer, kitchen preparation area, kitchen staff and 15 parking bays. At the mention of parking, I feel compelled to express the dissatisfaction felt by a number of hon members to whom I have spoken, particularly in respect of the ham-handed manner in which the parking was allocated and arranged in the Stalplein area: [Interjections.] The marking was poor, rude notes were sent to hon members, there were blunt interventions from staff, complicated circulars were forwarded and even now certain of the presently reserved parking bays—such as B1—13 in particular—are often empty when hon members walk or drive past them. We have for some time now been calling for a list of the people to whom the reserved parking has been made available and we are still waiting for this list and for the satisfactory resolution of the parking issue.

Since the building will be completed on 18 October 1987, we would like to know what will happen when the joint sittings take place. More importantly, have this hon Minister and his colleagues in the Cabinet anticipated future constitutional development in relation to the provision of accommodation in the building operations which are taking place now? We are busy with changes, and no doubt constitutional changes will come about. Will this complex cope or will it have to be rebuilt and will we in fact be faced with a lot of wasted expenditure?

This Assembly should provide for discussion at joint sittings. If that is so, it should provide for voting and therefore, an investigation should take place into modern electronic voting systems in use in modern capitals.

As for aesthetics, the architect has assured me that he has paid particular attention to the aesthetics of this very, very large hall. [Interjections.]

Surely some provision should be made for the accommodation of Blacks. This has got to come, we all know. There seems to be some doubt as to the existence and future of the President’s Council. Will the President’s Council and its chamber remain? If not, what will happen to that chamber and how will it be used?

The report puts the cost of rebuilding and of extensions to Parliament in respect of the present tricameral system at R68 320 000. This is a very expensive experiment for a temporary affair—if it is to be temporary, which seems to be the case. An analysis of the report shows the following:

For the next item, “Parliament”, the amount budgeted for is R28 850 000. The total therefore R68 320 000. When one takes into consideration the expenditure incurred on Ministers’ houses at Belhar and Pelican Park, one must add another R7 million. The total about which we are talking now is therefore R75 320 000. Is this expenditure justified and is it being spent in the best possible interests of the taxpayers of South Africa and with minimum wastage?

Another question which I want to put to the hon the Minister regards Twin Towers. A question was asked as to whether the department had purchased a flat in Twin Towers, which it said it had on 28 December 1985. The reply was yes to the question as to whether it was for official accommodation. The cost involved was R281 147 and the flat was required for the Chairman of the Commission for Administration. I want to tell the hon the Minister and this Committee that after a report appeared in the Press concerning this matter, my office received a call from an estate agent in Cape Town. That agent said that as recently as in March 1985, only nine months before December 1985, he in fact sold that same flat for R235 000. That is approximately R50 000 less than the department paid. Hon members will know that in March 1985 property prices were much higher than in December 1985. In December there was a tremendous drop in property prices.

In answer to the question put to him in this regard the hon the Minister said that it was fair market value. I want now to ask him whether he still thinks that it was fair market value when, in a falling market, he paid R50 000 more for a flat than it had been sold for nine months before. Furthermore, I think the expenditure of R17 000 on such refurbishings as a bathroom, built-in cupboards and the installation of aluminium louvres needs clarification. Perhaps the hon the Minister will be kind enough to enlighten this Committee in some more detail about that.

There is one remaining question which stands out insofar as this deal is concerned. In 1983 the Standing Committee on Finance asked the Land Bank which had purchased two flats in the same block, namely Twin Towers, at astronomical prices at the expense of the taxpayer, to sell the flats. The Land Bank sold one flat and let the other. Can the hon the Minister please explain how he can justify the expenditure of R281 000 on a new flat when the Land Bank is waiting to sell a flat in Twin Towers? I am sure that flat could have been obtained at a much lower price. I certainly think the hon the Minister owes this Committee an explanation in that regard.

I want now to turn to some other aspects of this Vote. In particular, I wish to turn to page 10-5 in the Estimates of Expenditure, to the programme under the heading “Housing Aid”. I want to quote what is said under that heading:

Are these objects still the same? I do not think they are. Surely these objectives require variation? There is much dispute about them, and a lack of clarity.

On page 10-7 we find that the allocation from the National Housing Fund, to which I am referring, for Whites is R138 million—I shall leave out the small print—for Coloureds R140 million odd; Indians, R91 million odd; and Blacks approximately R118 million.

I am quoting from programme 2, 10-7.

This department is not responsible for Black housing, as far as I understand, and it is not responsible for Coloured or Indian housing. Yet, these amounts appear on the particular Vote that we are discussing now. It appears to me that there is total confusion with regard to the control of housing, which is so important at this stage. In view of the Bill which we discussed yesterday and which has not yet been implemented, what responsibilities will this department be left with insofar as housing is concerned? Is it just going to have control of the money which it will then farm out to the various own affairs departments with that for Blacks going to Constitutional Development and Planning?

What is the role of the National Housing Commission today? What are its functions today? What is it reporting on? Can the National Housing Commission determine priorities for the various groups? What notice will the various groups take of it?

I should like now to refer to the Venter Commission Report. Point 2.3 on page 11 states:

There was a lot that came out of the Venter Commission, for example, the acquisition of land, the registration of townships, the speeding up of the registration of townships, freehold title etcetera. However, most important of all, there are the recommendations of the minority committee consisting of my hon leader and the hon member for Bezuidenhout to the effect that with all this, after all the discussions and after three reports of the Venter Commission, unless we scrap the Group Areas Act and have a proper policy for all, we are wasting time and money in South Africa. I think the hon the Minister must give consideration to this as with.

I want finally to raise a very important matter that appears on 10-13 of the estimates—that is the acquisition of land, the improvements and rights and areas evacuation. There is a sum of R9 520 000 which is being appropriated for areas evacuation. Who is the hon the Minister evacuating, why is he evacuating people, to where is he evacuating people, and on what is he spending R9,5 million?

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Hillbrow again let fly at random, and raised a whole variety of topics which cannot possibly be dealt with in the space of ten minutes. I intend to discuss one of the topics in broad outline only. Other hon speakers on this side of the Committee will deal with some of the other topics.

When one regards the activities of the Department of Public Works and Land Affairs critically, one should not forget that it is a service department. Its task is the implementation of policy decisions which have been taken elsewhere. It would be inappropriate, therefore, to level one’s criticism against a policy decision at this department. What is of importance in the evaluation of the department’s work, is the question as to whether the decision regarding facilities has been carried out properly, whether unnecessary luxury was guarded against, whether effective control over the spending of funds on professional services and contractors was displayed, etc.

Such criteria can be applied in respect of the improvements being made to this parliamentary complex at present, to which the hon member for Hillbrow referred, and indeed to parliamentary facilities in general. The hon member referred to the memorandum of the hon the Minister of Public Works, and criticism was also expressed in recent newspaper reports against the spending of more than R80 million on parliamentary facilities. The hon member mentioned some of these in passing. One can enumerate the total number of items briefly. A list of the improvements appears on page 15 of the memorandum. Among these are the Good Hope Theatre, the Marks Building, Stal Plein, Tuynhuys, the Parliamentary Building itself which cost R28,8 million, the additional housing at Acacia Park, the housing at Laboria Park and that at Pelikan Park. On page 17 it is indicated that R6,2 million is being spent on the purchase of properties as accommodation additional to the parliamentary complex. There is also the provision of residential accommodation for Ministers at Walmer. This amounts to more than R80 million.

When one looks at the illustration in this very comprehensive report of the department—it is on the centre page—one sees immediately that the new Stal Plein forms the open-air foyer of this whole new parliamentary complex. One cannot but be filled with pride in respect of this dignified home for our legislative and executive authority. I want to believe this is how the founders of the American nation felt when they saw the impressive government complex in Washington for the first time. I also believe that just as they would not ask themselves today whether the expenditure—which at the time was also an immensely great expense for a young community—was at all justified, our descendants will not ask that question, nor naturally the questions put by the hon member for Hillbrow, one day.

I do not believe we should use our reluctance to accept the present tricameral Parliament as an excuse not to support this fine project. No one will deny, after all, that Tuynhuys is a worthy seat for the head of the State and the Government, regardless of which party is in power. The fact that the department received the SA Institute of Architects’ prize for its work in respect of the Good Hope Theatre, shows us that there is much greater appreciation for this praiseworthy achievement of the department than is merely limited to the members of this Parliament.

Apart from the parliamentary circles and the SA Institute of Architects, it is also known that great appreciation for this project exists in the ranks of the Cape Town City Council, which is definitely not well-disposed towards the National Party. The reason for that is, after all, that this project is involved not only with the provision of facilities to Parliament, but at the same time is also a commendable achievement with regard to urban renewal and conservation. No one who loves our Cape heritage at all, would dream of maintaining that Tuynhuys and the Good Hope Theatre were not worthy of preservation.

Surely Tuynhuys’ claim to preservation goes without saying. Perhaps it is not as well known, however, that during the previous century the Good Hope Theatre was the seat of the old Cape Parliament. In a certain sense it is indeed appropriate that this hon Minister is involved in this project. I understand his great-grandfather served in the old Cape Parliament in that building.

The old building later burnt down, and only after being rebuilt was it used as the Good Hope Theatre. Here, therefore, we have two historic buildings which are being used for quite functional purposes—one of them as the Office of the State President; the other as the seat of the President’s Council.

Naturally we must remember that restoration is always expensive. There are many reasons for this. Indeed, I do not believe it is necessary to elaborate. Certain components of old buildings often have to be specially copied at great expense. In this connection, Sir, I nevertheless think it is important to remember that we often have to hear the accusation that we have too many “dead” monuments in South Africa; that we erect statues and build other structures which have no utilitarian value. This Government is often pressed to build living monuments, for example hospitals, schools and similar structures. This project is, of course, a living example that this is being done.

We must not cry about the expense, however. The whole complex is not nearly complete. In due course Parliament Street with its cobblestones will link up with Stal Plein so that the whole area will make up one complex. Later this year the cobblestones will also extend right across Plein Street, right up to the cathedral at the northern end of Roeland Street. It appears from this memorandum that the department has also purchased the complex of buildings on the opposite side of Plein Street for approximately R6 million. Since Stal Plein will in time extend right up to the facade of these old buildings, the purchase of these buildings, inter alia Garmor House, is necessary in order to ensure that the aspect of Stal Plein is improved.

At the same time it is expected that the future requirements of the Administration: House of Representatives will necessitate further purchases in any case. The above-mentioned properties will be able to meet the need in this respect.

The initial steps were taken and the planning of this complex was done by this hon Minister’s predecessor. As we have seen the advance planning of the whole complex becoming a reality, we have become increasingly grateful towards this hon Minister’s predecessor for his far-sightedness, and towards the present hon Minister for his continuation of this planned, beautiful project.

Mr Chairman, it is a pleasure to speak after the hon member for Umlazi. I agree with him that this department is a service department and that it receives instructions which have to be carried out. That is the way it is.

I want to thank the department for the annual report submitted to us. It was well prepared and provides many details. It was quite interesting to read in it, for example, that the public works function originated in the days of Jan van Riebeeck when Van Riebeeck was instructed to build the fort. It was not known as Public Works at that time, though.

The Department of Public Works and Land Affairs has done very good work for South Africa in the past, and we are grateful. There are monuments everywhere in South Africa which were built by this department. The Director-General can therefore count on his staff. I am talking about Mr Van Blommestein, of course. He has good officials and good staff who work under him. Indeed, they are staff one can be proud of. I believe the hon the Minister knows that too.

Since Acacia Park falls under the control of this department, I should be neglecting my duty as a resident of Acacia Park if I did not thank everyone involved for the good housing they have given us there as members of the House of Assembly. I want to express my thanks towards Mr Tocknell in the head office, and Mr A Joubert who is there in a full-time capacity at present. I also want to express my thanks towards each member of the staff there. They do their utmost, and they are people who do not mind doing their duty even after hours. I also want to express our thanks for the new housing that was erected while we were in recess.

As far as housing in South Africa is concerned, the Housing Advisory Council has a very great responsibility. It is this council, after all, which has to make recommendations to the relevant Minister about housing and inter alia also about norms, standards and financing. Provision of land does not take place at all easily these days; town planning and establishment is very expensive; and in addition, housing methods differ. Besides this, the council has to perform many other tasks, including tasks connected to financing methods. We realise it is not possible for the Housing Advisory Council to handle everything entrusted to it. As a result I agree with the State legal advisers that the council should be released of certain duties, because it simply cannot perform those functions on its own.

As a result of the distressing inflation, housing in South Africa has become so expensive that our people in the lower income groups simply cannot afford it any more. Even people in the middle income group find it difficult today to obtain a residence— not to mention the maintenance thereof and the increase in taxes! One hesitates to think how the taxes will increase once the regional services councils are introduced one of these days—and it looks as though they are definitely going to be introduced! Everything simply goes up and up and up and up.

I shall give a few examples of the things that make it difficult for those people who do get the houses to stay in their houses: Assessment rates are sky-rocketing; the cost of electricity is sky-rocketing, and the consumer price index is something everyone in South Africa has reason to be bitter about. I know the department is not responsible for that, but nevertheless, the people who live in the houses are affected by these things.

The Government has delayed for too long—I want to put it frankly—in taking Escom by the throat and making an end to the mismanagement prevailing there. We know about the ostentatious buildings they are erecting and the extravagant gardens laid out at power-stations, not to mention excessive office buildings and the extreme mismanagement. This is a heavy burden on the people who live in those houses. Eventually it is the poor householder, who is already struggling to keep his head above water, who has to pay for these excesses.

It is all very well to build scheme houses and flats for the people—that must be so— but how can the occupant of such a house afford to stay in the house if the costs of the essential services keep on sky-rocketing? That is what happens. It is almost impossible for the greater percentage of newlyweds to buy a house. If the wife does not work, they cannot keep the pot boiling and once things go wrong financially, everything goes wrong. Is that not the reason for the great drop in the birth rate of our Whites today? Our wives can do nothing else; they have to work. We appreciate their assisting their husbands, but…

Order! The hon member must not digress too far from the Vote. The hon member may proceed.

I shall come back to that, Sir.

I also want to say something about arrear rent of houses built by this department. There are many such houses in each of our constituencies.

Today I want to draw the attention of the hon the Minister to a matter which I hope he will convey to the rest of the Cabinet. If a White man living in such a House falls into arrears with his instalments or his electricity account, he is issued a summons because of the instalments which have not been paid and his electricity is cut off because he has not paid the electricity account. There is no mercy. It is not only our Whites who need houses, because other races need them too, and we grant them that with all our heart. It is not only our Whites who need electricity, because other races need it too, and we grant them that. There is a great “but” attached to this, though. If a White man loses his job or experiences a financial blow, for Heaven’s sake give him the same extension of time that is give to people of colour. We are simply asking for parity as far as the deferment of the payment of instalments is concerned and also that the current should not simply be cut off. I know that that is an instruction which can be given from the top. [Interjections.]

The department’s activities in Cape Town in respect of extensions to the parliamentary complex are untimely and a great burden on the taxpayer. I know that is not the department’s fault, since it is an instruction from the top, because, as I mentioned a moment ago, this is a service department. The hon the Minister must know I do not blame him and his department for the extremely great expenditure incurred in Cape Town at present as a result of the tricameral Parliament. South Africa can simply not afford it financially at present, and to compare us with the America of a number of years ago, as the hon member for Umlazi did, is not acceptable, since America is infinitely bigger than we are. I dealt with this facet in my speech last year and I am not going to elaborate on it again.

Millions and millions of rands were spent while the people in South Africa were starving. This recession did not begin today, after all. It has been in progress for a number of years. Surely the Government cannot say it was not aware of that. A year or two ago Dr Andries Wassenaar—he is not a CP member-warned against this extravagance and spoke seriously about it. No one listened to him, however, and the matter was not rectified. The Government was aware that it has been warned by one of its greatest critics, but it did not listen.

In passing I also want to refer to the cause of many complaints that are received, something which is talked about a great deal. The ladies find it very difficult to walk on the cobblestones between our building, the Marks Building and the Hendrik Verwoerd Building. We request that paths are built so that people can walk between the buildings on an even surface and not a bumpy one. I know many hon members on the opposite side have spoken about this too and therefore it is a general feeling.

Yesterday, while his Vote was under discussion, the State President tried to give reasons as to why the country was experiencing its present financial catastrophe. Admittedly the factors he mentioned are some of the greatest contributory factors, but what he did not mention was the shocking waste of money at this time when the country really cannot afford it. It should have been delayed until conditions had improved. The people in the public at large are asking for food and for work opportunities; they do not want ostentatious buildings now. The Government of the country must set the example in difficult times, but our Government does not, because it has lost touch with the general public.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Nigel spent most of his time discussing other Votes. His last remark concerned the waste of money, but since the Department of Public Works is mainly responsible for building Government buildings, I think this department in fact used a good opportunity this year, in view of the unemployment, not to cut down on its building programme. I am thinking in particular of places such as Port Elizabeth and even here in Cape Town where large projects are in progress. I am referring to prisons, police stations and other public buildings where work is in progress. One is grateful that as far as that is concerned, the department is doing its share to try to reduce unemployment.

The hon member also spoke about the arrear rent of Whites in comparison with that of Blacks. I think that falls under quite an another department than the Department of Public Works.

I should like to speak about a subsection of the Department of Public Works, viz that of the Government Printing Works. If one were to ask the man in the street today what a State department is, the answer would probably be it is a place where people work with forms. That is not far wrong, but in a State office one sees more than simply paper in the shape of forms. To tell the truth, it extends from the simplest pieces of stationery to the most involved printing work, books, maps, annual reports, letterheads, covers, passports, postal orders, cheques, postage stamps and a wide variety of other printing work.

According to the Treasury’s directive, all printing work needed by State departments must be supplied by the Government Printing Works which either prints it itself or has it done by private printers.

The Government Printing Works will be 100 years old next year, since it was established in 1887 by Pres Paul Kruger of the Transvaal Republic to do the printing for the Republic at the time. The first director of the Government Printing Works was a Mr Bell who was specially imported from the Netherlands by the President.

It is interesting to note that during the past 99 years, there have been only eight directors at the Government Printing Works and four of these have come from the ranks of the Government Printing Works. This shows us, as far as the quality of the staff is concerned, that good and thorough people work there.

In 1889 the Transvaal government bought the buildings and machines of the then De Volkstem, and this is where the first Gazette was printed. Adjustments have been made through the years and today the Government Printing Works is the largest and most modern printing works in South Africa.

Machines are important in a factory, but the people who work there are just as important. Something the Public Service can be proud of, is that the knowledge and expertise of the staff of the Government Printing Works is of the best in the country. They are second to none, both in respect of their colleagues in this country and those elsewhere in the world. The acceptance of the fact that the postage stamps printed by the Government Printing Works are among the best in the world is a striking example in this regard. In fact, our South African stamps have received international awards in the past.

I should like to mention a few interesting facts about the Government Printing Works. At present they are printing the new identity books which are to be issued to the Blacks in particular as from 1 July. They are going to print approximately 2,5 million per month and this will start on 1 May. This includes the printing, binding, the covers, etc of the identity books. More than 17 million application forms for these identity books have already been printed.

One can also look at the number of examination papers for the various schools which are printed for the various departments. At present the Government Printing Works supplies 4 767 different examination papers at short notice. In addition, the quarter millionth passport has just been printed. Postage stamps are printed at a rate of two million sheets per month. The Government Printing Works also supplies confidential and political reports.

One of the Government Printing Works’ particular achievements was connected to the signing of the Nkomati Accord. The Portuguese manuscript of this accord was received only the previous night at twelve o’clock. By 3 am it was complete—within three hours, therefore—and by 10 am it had already been signed at Nkomati. That was a wonderful achievement.

Although printing costs have increased, particularly in respect of private printing works, the Government Printing Works has kept its tariffs constant since 1 May 1984.

The Government Printing Works consists of two groups. Some of its employees are factory workers who are not public servants in the full sense of the word, but are members of the printers’ trade union. Their remuneration and conditions of service are prescribed mainly by the Industrial Council for the Printing Industry, although the technical and administrative staff are ordinary public servants.

The Government Printing Works is a unique organisation in the Public Service, because it is a factory which is operated in the same way as any private printing works. This means that the Government Printer and his management staff have to have the necessary printing, industrial and management expertise.

Government Printing Works is an organisation with many facets. It is an industry which has undergone exceptional technological development and will bring about far-reaching changes in future. The utilisation of the advantages of all these changes depends, however, on the ability of the people at the Government Printing Works. If one uses the technical abilities and efficient management of the past as criteria, the Government departments will never have to be short of the necessary forms.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Alberton made an interesting speech about the Government Printer, but I would like to return to Public Works. However, I do agree that the Government Printer falls within that portfolio.

I think that public works went through a sorrowful phase of its existence when it lost its identity for a while. Now it is back in full cry and we have a Public Works Department. It is a title which cannot really be translated. We may refer to the “Departement Openbare Werke” in Afrikaans, but it is known to everybody as “PWD.” Whenever a sign is erected to reserve a parking place for one or the other official, it is inscribed with the letters “PWD”. They do not bother to translate it because everybody in South Africa knows exactly what is meant by “PWD.”

I want to compliment the PWD on the production of the report I have before me. This year they have presented a report that makes good reading, is interesting and is certainly far and away the best that I have seen since becoming a member of Parliament.

I would like to join other hon members who have spoken about the parliamentary complex. As it takes shape, it is starting to look like something. I think it is significant that we are trying to follow the existing architectural pattern in the extensions which are now in progress. There are many who are critical of the cobblestones. I know the ladies do not like them, and I must confess that even my feet suffer sometimes when I walk across the cobbles. There is, however, something about them.

The whole complex is acquiring an air and character of its own, and I would suggest that it is a very elegant character. If one really wants to see that elegance epitomised, one need look no further than the reception rooms in Tuynhuys. I must give full credit to the hon the Minister, his predecessor and the Public Works Department staff for what they have achieved with this old building. It is not ostentatious; it is in fact very elegant.

The ugly duckling of the complex is really the H F Verwoerd Building. I am afraid that it sticks out rather like a score thumb in relation to the other buildings.

That brings me to the next part of my address this afternoon, which has to do with housekeeping. On page 42 of the department’s annual report, one reads that occupants of official residential accommodation “are expected to keep the buildings and sites clean and tidy” and so on. The report then informs us of the following fact:

That is an enormous amount of money. However, I believe that much of the problem is to be found in the fact that public buildings are lacking in good housekeeping. I should like to draw every hon member’s attention to the H F Verwoerd Building, and tell them—I have done it over the past two days—to walk up this beautiful cobbled street of ours, to turn and to enter that building, and to walk up those stairs remembering that they are walking into the Government building of the Republic of South Africa. What does a leading businessman see when he comes into this building on his way to see a Minister in one of the offices on one of the 18 floors. The entrance doors and windows are dirty—no, they are filthy!—and the steps are neglected. It is not a credit to Parliament; it is not a credit to anybody.

I am sorry if I use strong language, but I am doing it deliberately because I think this is something that we must be aware of. Let us go into the new garage that we have underneath this building. All hon members of this House can walk through the first part of the garage, and they will see that it is clean—I even saw a broom there this morning! However, when one goes through to the new section of the garage, one sees—I am sorry to have to say this—that it has not been swept once since it was commissioned and since we have been parking there. Why do we allow this sort of thing to happen? When we allow this sort of thing to happen, our public buildings get an air about them, an air of neglect and lack of maintenance that allows them to fall into a state of shoddiness. We should not be doing this, because these are buildings which belong to all the people of South Africa. After all, when I go into the Hendrik Verwoerd Building or when the ordinary worker or anybody in South Africa enters it, each of us is entitled to say: “This belongs to me, and I cannot be proud of it”. I hope that the hon the Minister will take note of what I am saying.

Now I want to turn to the report, or rather to the other document, and I also want to touch on the subject referred to by the hon member for Hillbrow, that is the purchase of flats for personnel. The other day when a question was asked about this—and I have a question on the Question Paper too the hon the Minister indicated in reply to a supplementary question that “there are in fact no Directors-General staying in Acacia Park”. The hon the Minister was completely wrong. There are five or six Directors-General staying in Acacia Park, and I believe that we deserve an explanation as to why it is necessary to spend these enormous sums, for instance, a quarter of a million, on an apartment. How can a quarter of a million be spent on an apartment to house a Director-General or anybody for that matter for five or six months of the year? I do not think that it is something that can just be wished away.

While on this topic, I want to refer to the same page and ask the hon the Minister to tell us what the current position is in regard to the six houses for members of the Ministers’ Council of the House of Delegates for which an amount of R2 800 000 was set aside. I see that it is anticipated that some R720 000 is to be spent on this project in the year 1986-87. Is this an ongoing project and is it intended that this money is to be spent on only six houses? It is a vast amount of money per house. Is it necessary that this sort of money be spent in the economic climate in which we find ourselves?

I have no argument with the fact that the Department of Public Works is a source of job opportunities for people in the times in which we find ourselves. It is a source of opportunities in a profession which is very, very sorely pressed at the moment, and that is the civil engineering profession. If it were not for the State and for State contracts I venture to suggest that there will be many more large civil engineering companies that would be in serious trouble at the moment. However, I think we have to be very careful about what we are doing.

In conclusion, one of my colleagues commented to me at lunchtime today that the most expensive, the five-star accommodation in South Africa today is a prison. When one looks at the amount that has been spent and is being spent on prisons, one trembles for the future, because I wonder if we will have a population that will be able to enjoy all this accommodation. [Interjections.] When one looks at the amount provided for the Westville Prison, I am almost jealous of the hon member for Pinetown who I think is going to be the MP for that particular area. He is going to have to go there with his voters’ roll and update it because he is going to have an enormous number of postal votes. He is going to be able to canvas votes in a prison on which they are spending an astronomical amount.

Are we channeling these funds into the areas where they are most needed? Are we spending sufficient money on that which is needed more than anything else, namely housing? Are we giving sufficient consideration to curtailing unwarranted expenditure at this time? [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I should like to link up with the hon members for Umhlanga and Nigel in congratulating the Department of Public Works and Land Affairs on having drawn up this beautiful report. I think the Director-General, Mr Van Blommestein, and his team can rightly be proud of a very fine piece of work.

It is true—and the hon member for Nigel referred to the fact—that since the first public works project in South Africa, the Department of Public Works and Land Affairs has furnished a fine service to the South African authorities. The hon member for Nigel pointed out that the first public project of that kind was completed in the days of Jan van Riebeeck when they built the fort to project the refreshment station. If one listens to the CP’s political philosophy, one inevitably thinks back to those days when the fort was built.

There is no better proof of the good service rendered by this department to the authorities than specifically in the Port Elizabeth/Uitenhage area. It is common knowledge that the Port Elizabeth/Uitenhage/Despatch area is experiencing very serious economic problems, aggravated by the Ford factory’s moving to the Transvaal, the protracted unrest and violence in the Black residential areas of our city and a well-organised consumer boycott.

It is only when one is really experiencing difficulties that one knows who one’s true friends are. It is with gratitude that I can say today that in the South African Government we have no better friend in the Port Elizabeth/Uitenhage/Despatch area than the hon the Minister of Public Works. This hon Minister and his department have tendered for capital projects amounting to millions of rand in our area, projects which were in the planning stage for the 1987-88 financial year and thereafter. This assistance specifically enabled the building and related industries to keep workmen employed. It had a positive influence on the living conditions of thousands of people in our area. The most critical and pervasive problem in our area is that of unemployment. It is not merely an impression, but a horrible reality that has to be given constant and serious attention.

I want to thank the hon the Minister of Public Works very sincerely for the assistance he and his department gave us in our moment of crisis. The recently announced capital projects will be of great assistance to us, and the unflagging attention given to our area is greatly appreciated.

Because I know the hon the Minister of Public Works and the members of his department very well, and because they know I am a friend, I should like to give the department and the Ministry a few hints today. With the establishment of own affairs departments in Parliament, there are an alarming number of bodies dealing with capital works and buildings. Has the time not come for us to conduct an urgent investigation into the whole system of tenders and works with a view to proper co-ordination and effective control? If that does not happen, I am afraid that an unsatisfactory situation will develop, a situation that will not be to the benefit of the authorities or the inhabitants of our country.

Another very important matter I want to raise here today—Mr Chairman, you will find me skirting along the fringes ever so slightly, but I shall be returning to the topic under discussion so as not to be ruled out of order by you—concerns the rehabilitation of dependants. I am very well aware of the fact that this topic is not relevant to this discussion, but providing the necessary infrastructure for achieving that ideal is the responsibility of the Department of Public Works and Land Affairs.

Tenders for the construction of prisons in the Port Elizabeth area are at present in the process of finalisation, that is another very good example of the sympathetic, the empathic, action taken by the hon the Minister and his department. In the past prisons were erected using prison labour, but because we have the extensive unemployment problem, the hon the Minister has thought fit to give these projects out on tender with a view to providing jobs. The expenditure on these prisons is approximately R50 million, which is a tremendous amount of money.

Thousands of inhabitants of the Republic of South Africa are charged annually—and given prison sentences—for the use of dagga, in particular. My plea today concerns the construction of rehabilitation centres for such addicts, and I have certain reasons for doing so. I am referring specifically to the prisons now being constructed in Port Elizabeth. Firstly this would relieve the tremendous pressure on our prisons.

Order! I am afraid the hon member is slightly overstepping the limits of this Vote, that is if he wants to discuss the motivation for the establishment of prisons.

Mr Chairman, if I may just mention this. What happens is that the Department of Public Works is now going to spend millions of rand on these projects. What I am asking the State to look at is the possibility of building a small prison and a rehabilitation centre for dagga addicts rather than a large prison.

In connection with what happens to someone who is charged with the use of dagga, I can give hon members the classic example of what happened at Caledon last week. There a Coloured fisherman from Cape Town attended a court hearing at which his friend, also a fisherman, was being tried for the use of dagga. When he bowed, as a friendly greeting to the magistrate, a dagga cigarette fell out of his back pocket. The upshot was a sentence of R60 or 60 days. What happens, in effect, is that such a person is given a prison sentence. He is just an ordinary prisoner. His family is left behind, and when he gets out…

Order! The Justice Vote comes up for discussion tomorrow. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, I think that the Minister responsible for the infrastructure is now fully aware of the fact that under the Health and Welfare Vote I shall be asking for this kind of facility, because there are many advantages involved. [Interjections.]

In conclusion I just want to express a few ideas about the registration of 99-year leasehold. Since the 99-year leasehold system was introduced in 1979, there has been a gradual increase, over the years, in the registration of leaseholds at chief commissioners’ offices. From November 1986 registration will no longer be carried out at the chief commissioners’ offices, but at the deeds offices.

This will place an additional burden on the deeds offices, and bearing in mind the announcement that proprietary rights will now be granted to Blacks, it is to be expected that a further load will be placed on deeds offices. Since there have been requests in the past for the opening of deeds offices in various centres, the question that now arises is whether the time has not come for an urgent investigation into this matter, with due consideration being given to population figures when such deeds offices are situated. In this context I should very much like to link up with my colleagues from the Port Elizabeth and Uitenhage area, and in particular the hon member for Port Elizabeth North, who has led the delegations over the years, in the hope that the hon the Deputy Minister of Land Affairs will give very serious consideration to accepting this hint and, without any further delay, establish a deeds office in Port Elizabeth.

Mr Chairman, I should like to remain within the scope of the Vote, so I shall therefore not react to the speech by the hon member for Newton Park. [Interjections.] I promise not to mention figures because if I do so, the hon the Minister will again have to try to distort the figures on the radio and in the Press.

I should like to discuss a few aspects of the housing policy. I am doing this on the grounds of a deep involvement on every level of housing and not simply on the basis of one of those “see the sights of South Africa” tours on which one visits a few carefully selected schemes. I am talking about a real involvement in the matter, about the “snob” houses of businessmen, who may borrow money at 4% as part of the decentralisation bait, to the self-help housing schemes for Black people, who have to rely on themselves.

What are you talking about now?

There is perhaps no better barometer by means of which to measure the justness of a system of Government than to look at the housing of its subjects. The facade that one sees when one drives down the street or even when one sees a suburb from above, does not only reflect the particular preference of the occupant; it tells one much more. It tells one something about his socio-economic status and, since earning capacity is closely related to education and training, it also tells one about his motivation and about his intellectual abilities.

When one compares the facades of neighbourhoods, one can also get some idea of the norms of different neighbourhoods. Then again, when one compares neighbourhoods with neighbourhoods one gets an idea of the different strata in society. One can also judge how effectively the economic system operates with regard to the spreading of the fruits of the endeavours of society.

In our dear land such a trip through suburbia will, of course, also reveal another factor, namely that the neighbourhoods will have different colours. I am not referring to differently coloured houses but, in fact, to occupants of different colours. Suddenly a whole new set of conclusions can be drawn. The facade now no longer reflects only the preference, socio-economic status or ability of the owner; it reveals much more. The facade now reflects the standard of his education compared to that in a neighbourhood of an owner of a different colour. It reflects also the whole political system that determines his life chances.

When comparing the facades in a street, one notices that to some the norm is individuality or pride of home ownership while in other streets in townships, the monotony reveals not preference but coercion, and not pride of ownership and individuality but, in fact, bondage.

When comparing neighbourhoods, one does not see a normal spread of ability; on the contrary a system which is based on privilage and prejudice is revealed which is, in fact, maintained through coercion. There can be no greater indictment against the whole system of apartheid than such a drive through suburbia reveals …

Order! I have been listening very carefully to the hon member for Greytown. Until now I could see some connection between his speech and the functioning of this department, but I am not going to allow an address on …

I am talking about general policy under Programme 1 in order to …

Mr Chairman, may I address you on this point?

Order! I am still giving my ruling. I am not going to allow a general discussion of apartheid or any other policy matters under this Vote. The hon member for Greytown may continue.

Sir, I am addressing the Committee under the general policy determination which falls under programme 1. [Interjections.]

The housing policy of the Government is very important in the whole process of change. The young boys in the suburbs, both Black and White, will only realise that change is a reality when it is reflected in the facades. In the meantime, there will be trouble.

The new home-ownership policy for Blacks is certainly to be welcomed, but I think the Government can forget about trying to solve the problems of South Africa by telling the Black man that he can now own his ghetto, but he cannot in fact leave it; also that he can administer it, but he cannot take part in the allocation of the resources which would eventually change the facades. Until those problems are solved, however, I think there are other factors of policy that the Government could look to in order to try to still some of the problems of an overall political nature.

Firstly, I suggest that the Government looks very seriously at the housing subsidies to public servants. I spoke about this in both the Transport debate and under the hon the Minister’s other Vote of Communications. Quite simply, these subsidies make it possible for people to afford houses way above their just share. It will simply be intolerable in the South Africa of the future for some people to have a house in Waterkloof and another palace at Still Bay, or wherever, while others must suffer in block houses and in “pondoks” erected in a self-help manner.

The children of families from both Black and White houses will enter the job market, and the economy will not just be able to afford the Waterkloof/Stilbaai option to everyone. The young Black will not be satisfied with the inequality and therefore the Government and the hon the Minister in charge of housing must start now to moderate the expectations of Whites, many of whom are public servants.

Secondly, for a large section of the population a mode of housing in the past was Government supplied, rented and subsidised accommodation. Their wages and salaries still reflect that policy, because one of the first questions one asks when one sits down to negotiate wages is, quite simply, what does one pay for accommodation. This created a whole generation of people who do not see the free enterprise way of home ownership as being the answer to their problems—quite simply, because at that given wage level, it means that home owners would have had to be satisfied with less than the person who lived in subsidised, rented accommodation. Furthermore, with the sudden change in housing policy, whereby the State …

Order! I should like to point out to the hon member that the Committee is not considering housing policy under this Vote, unless the hon member can link it to the functioning of this department. [Interjections.] Order! I am listening very carefully; sometimes the hon member does link his remarks to the functioning of the department, but sometimes he does not.

Mr Chairman, on a point of explanation, I should like to draw your attention to the annual report of the department, without wasting the hon member’s valuable time. This clearly is a question of policy. The whole report of the former Department of Community Development and the National Housing Commission and the activities of the bodies referred to are all linked with the policy, with great respect.

Policy, provided that it is linked with the functioning of this department.

Mr Chairman, item 10.8 provides for …

Order! Surely the policy of apartheid is not part of the functioning of this department. I do not want to waste the hon member’s time; he may proceed.

That is indeed the case, Sir. I should like to draw your attention to the programme description, namely “Policy formulation by the Minister, Deputy Minister, Director-General and other members of department and management”. I am not talking about apartheid, but about certain aspects of it. [Interjections.] Hon members can look at item 10-3, or listen to what I have to say; perhaps they might learn something. [Interjections.]

The problem was that the Government changed from home ownership to free enterprise home ownership over a very short period. In fact, from one Budget to the next the Government changed its housing policy. One cannot do this while the wage structures do not reflect that change. I would therefore say that it is now up to business to prove that free enterprise can distribute housing better than the socialist type of housing that people were used to. Therefore the subsidies provided by way of taxation must quickly find their way into the wage packets. It is also the duty of businessmen to demand from the Government that taxation should be reduced since they have now switched responsibilities …

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

Before I call upon the hon member for Boksburg to address the Committee I should like to point out that the hon member for Hillbrow has drawn my attention to the annual report of the Department of Public Works and Land Affairs, paragraph 2.2, on page 10 of which it makes mention of, and I quote:

I have no objection whatsoever to hon members’ discussing those matters. However, this certainly does not justify a general discussion of Government policy in respect of housing and the political implications thereof. I do not regard it as such, and I will not take instructions in this regard from the hon member for Greytown.

The hon member for Boksburg may now address the Committee.

Mr Chairman, I am going to try to abide by your ruling because I also agree that the closest the hon member for Greytown came to Public Works this afternoon was the fact that he spoke in a public building.

Thinking about the previous speeches I have listened to, let me tell the hon member for Newton Park that when he says that people in his constituency regard the hon the Minister as a very good friend because of the many buildings he constructs there, I get quite worried, because in my constituency the hon the Minister’s department—and this is what bothers me—is also building a large prison and a police station. I do not know whether this is a token of friendship towards my constituency.

The hon member for Umhlanga also touched on a certain matter here which had me worrying about the deterioration of his party. He said that…

Sakkie, you are not allowed to talk politics!

Order! Is the hon member for Kuruman casting a reflection on the Chair’s ruling?

Mr Chairman, you said we were not allowed to talk politics, but the hon member for Boksburg is specifically venturing into the political arena.

Order! The hon member for Boksburg may proceed.

Thank you, Mr Chairman. Shortly I shall also be saying something about the Conservative Party. I do think they are very upset about the fact that nowhere in the country has any monument to them been erected. I do want to comfort them, however, by pointing out that somewhere in the vicinity of Upington there is a small little statue that they can have as their monument. [Interjections.]

We are still going to be toppling all your integrationist monuments.

I think they must pay very close attention to that little monument. It is probably something they have been wanting for a long time now. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, let me rather deal with the annual report. I think it is a very neat piece of work. The report very clearly sets out all the facets entrusted to this department, and it is with gratitude that one notices that the department is also honest enough to tell us where there are areas of concern. One of these—according to indications—is that of the systematic deterioration of Government buildings. I am sure this is not happening because of this department’s activities. Here I want to agree with the annual report. I believe it is the result of the financial shortages we have had in Appropriations over the years. That is why we have not been able to maintain those buildings properly. I shall, however, be saying something more about this at a later stage.

I also want to express my thanks for the short building programme submitted to us. I agree with the officials that there is no sense in submitting a five-year or ten-year building programme to this House each year, because that programme is so susceptible to change that one would prefer to see what was going to happen in the next year or two. Then I also simply want to express my thanks for the construction work being done in my constituency—the subject I referred to earlier. It is a beautiful prison that is being erected there. It will provide for the needs of the East Rand, not far from there. The hon member for Brentwood and I have also, for years now, lodged pleas here for a police station in the White residential area in his constituency, but we are prepared to concede that the one now being erected in the Black town there meets a more urgent need, particularly at this juncture.

Order! I again draw the hon member’s attention to the fact that the evaluation of needs is not a function of this department. The hon member may proceed.

I shall abide by your ruling, Sir. I was merely referring to the comprehensive way in which the report informs hon members on the department’s functions and activities. That is why I wanted to congratulate the hon the Minister on the fact that his department slots in so well with the new dispensation. In reading the report one gains the impression that several of the activities on which the department is engaged have already been referred to own affairs departments and that the various administrations are apparently making a very good job of dealing with them. One is also very grateful to note that in many of the departments no duplication takes place.

I want to come back to the deterioration of Government buildings as a result of inadequate maintenance funds. I am concerned about buildings being neglected because there is insufficient money available for the appointment of suitable officials. This report shows, does it not, that there had to be a cut-back in staff. I am concerned about the fact that a policy will perhaps be implemented in terms of which it would not be possible to appoint those officials to whom I have referred. I think this department should preferably appoint those officials instead of incurring losses as a result of the deterioration of buildings. I am mentioning that because I believe that the service departments actually using those buildings do not look after them as efficiently as this department itself would do. I should like to know from the hon the Minister what his standpoint about this is. If he agrees with me, let me say that I think we should be very careful about abolishing those posts.

There is also another matter which gives me cause for concern, and I think the hon the Minister’s department should take note of this. The fact of the matter is that many city councils, particularly in the older cities of our country, and specifically on the East Rand, are replanning their central business districts. Many of these buildings are also situated in those business districts. I have discovered that one such city council is in the process of replanning such a business core. The replanning is such that the three Government buildings there are going to be completely pushed into a comer and hemmed in by other buildings. The city council foresees tremendous growth in the urban population, and that is why this business core is being rebuilt. What the city council does not take into consideration, however, is the growth that will automatically take place in the activities of these Government departments. The result is that those buildings will have no further room for expansion. The State will then have to rent or erect other buildings in some other part of the city to provide the departments, which are at present housed in those three buildings, with enough space. If it is in any way involved with this, I want to ask the department to bring it to the attention of the various administrations concerned that they should guard against making such a mistake. I therefore believe that such planning should only take place with the approval of this department and other Government departments concerned. I am mentioning this because I believe that this could, in future, place a tremendous financial burden on the State.

Lastly I want to congratulate the department on the initiative it has displayed in purchasing the Gold Coin Exchange buildings when that was still very much of a bargain. As far as money is concerned, I think that this department should adopt the principle that when such a bargain is up for sale, the department should not let it slip through its fingers, but rather snap it up. After all, it would always prove a good investment for the State. I therefore want to congratulate the department on the fact that it did do so in the aforementioned case.

In conclusion I want to mention that the department has come along with certain water conservation measures. I think that a great deal of labour and a great deal of water could be saved if artificial plants were used in certain areas within the buildings instead of making use of live plants. One gets artificial plants which are so beautiful that one cannot even tell the difference.

If I have any time left I also want to ask— this is perhaps particularly relevant to the Cape, where we are in the process of erecting a beautiful new building on this site— that in erecting Government buildings in the future, the specifications should be checked to some extent. I am making that appeal because for decades now we have been erecting Government buildings in which there are doors and windows with doorknobs and window catches that continually need refurbishing. I think it is an unnecessary waste of labour and that they could more easily be maintained, for example, by merely having them plated. I think that would be as attractive, though perhaps not as impressive. There are many new materials on the market, and these days, particularly in the aluminium industry, one gets beautiful types of metal that does not need to be refurbished. We must not saddle our descendants with the unnecessary amount of labour that is sometimes needed at present for the maintenance of some of our buildings. I support this Vote.

Mr Chairman, we should like to congratulate the hon the Minister and his department, particularly for the provision of housing in a portion of Acacia Park. I think they are lovely, functional little houses. One could make certain changes, but each architect always has 20 advisers, and even though there are a few things I would have done differently, everyone generally seems to be satisfied with the houses. The department did an exceptional job on the layout of the sites, of planting the grass that grew easily and on the problem of combating the sand. We are sincerely grateful for that.

Secondly I want to point out to the hon the Minister that the building of the Booysens police station in Johannesburg is in a very poor condition. We have frequently spoken about that, and the building figures in the Appropriation as far back as 1984. We want the new building to be built as quickly as possible.

Another matter very dear to my heart— the House Advisory Council is actually the only body that can assist us in this—is the major housing problem in the cities, a problem which has its roots in financing. Although that council is not responsible for the financing, it is the Advisory Council and should certainly be informed about these things. I realise that I am now actually going to speak about White housing, but this also applies to Coloured and to other housing.

These days, if one makes one’s payment on a house to a building society on the second day of the month, whilst the closing date is on the first day of the month, the monthly payment for that month is not calculated at all and one is penalised for a full month’s alleged non-payment. That is a very bad practice. In that way home-owners are wrongfully deprived of millions of rand. I think these people should be told that that is a practice that should not be perpetuated. A bank calculates its interest each day, and the building societies, which now want to become pseudo-banks, will not be in a position to do less. One could do that at banks as far back as ten years go, so why do the building societies not want to do so today? They do this to benefit themselves.

There is something else which I find problematic and which the Advisory Council could give attention to. If one bought a house in 1980, for example, a house on which the interest was 10%, the repayments on a house of R50 000 would, by way of illustration, be R600 during the first month. The agreement is therefore concluded for a repayment of R600 per month. The money spent on that house has already been borrowed and this has all been finalised. Then, on an annual basis, the building society applies the inflation factor, a strictly one-sided operation. Six months or two to three years later one is paying 18% interest, whilst the original contract was for a loan at 10%. That is basically dishonest. It is a built-in inflationary sliding scale to the detriment of the home-owner.

The Act provides—and certain guidelines are laid down—that a person should spend a certain portion of his salary on buying a house. Without his having had anything to do with it, the cost of that house increases.

That is just the prescribed maximum of 25%.

No, no. In some cases the interest on the price of that house increases to 25%, which means that every four years one regenerates the capital sum. So if one had a 20-year contract, based on this method of payment, and the interest rate were to increase to even 25%, as is the case at present, this means that in the 20-year period the capital sum would be regenerated four or five times. That is iniquitous. The man in the street is unable to do anything about that.

It is important for banks and building societies to see that we in this Parliament are dissatisfied with the practices they are implementing these days. We must seriously request the advisory council to furnish a report on this.

I now want to refer to the subject of township establishment. We have already investigated township establishment, but one fact is still as plain as a pikestaff: Township establishment must not be carried out in terms of present-day practice. It should be done solely in terms of cancellation of title and subdivision so that any matter can be finalised within more or less six weeks. As soon as one has to start asking for names, adding to that certain ideas put forward by the Post Office and obtain approval for streets, one has problems enough to keep one busy for years.

But then you wait five years for a telephone!

Yes. Any subdivision can take up to six weeks.

Take a city like Wilmette in Chicago, a city which is four or five times the size of Johannesburg but which is simply subdivided. One does not need street plans and all that; all one has to do is to number the street blocks if one wants them changed. Thus one does not have all the problems that we in this country unnecessarily incorporate into our system. It makes it difficult for the departments.

Today I am not lodging objections in regard to any specific hon Minister or any other person, but I do just want to say that housing must be provided much more rapidly these days. The major inflationary costs, for example, are to be found in the financing of land. If one purchases land—remember the State is faced with the same problem— for R1 million on which one has to pay 10% interest, and if one has to wait a year for the establishment of a township, the project costs one R1 100 000 in the first year. In the second year another 10% is added, and by the third year one is paying an unnecessary amount of R300 000 or R400 000. No one has profited by that, no one has gained any advantage and the whole thing is a complete loss.

It is not a matter of a bad job being done by a public servant or the department.

Mr Chairman, I should like to ask the hon member to what sections of the Budget Vote he is now speaking?

I think it is difficult for the hon member to understand this sort of thing. He should merely go and have a look, because on the top of page 11 one reads “2.3. Commission of Inquiry into Township Establishment and Related Matters”. The hon member must please not waste my time with things like this. He should go and read the annual report before he comes to this Committee. [Interjections.]

In township establishment one encounters all these aspects. The department, everyone, is often subject to the whims of local authorities. We know the hon the Minister has a committee investigating these matters, the first reports already having been published. I think, however, that we shall have to take serious action to permit a more central, forceful system for township establishment.

[Inaudible.]

Generally, of course, one does not want to talk politics as far as this department is concerned, but I just want to ask whether this South African Advisory Council is a mixed council. I just want to know.

It has not yet been constituted yet.

Is it also going to include Coloureds and others?

That council will not be constituted.

It will not be constituted. I thank the hon the Minister for his reply. Then I almost spoke needlessly on that point. [Interjections.]

As in the case of many other points.

Order! The hon member would not have had the time to speak almost needlessly; the hon member’s time has expired.

Mr Chairman, the hon members for Hillbrow, Newton Park and Langlaagte raised a few points which fall within my field of activities. I shall reply to them in the course of my speech.

The points which have been touched upon are the registration of leaseholds, the period of registration, registration offices and the approval of township plans in this specific regard. Over the past few years, there was from time to time concern among hon members as well as among the general public and criticism was expressed about the time which is taken for the approval of plans and erven as well as the registration of leasehold deeds at the deeds registries.

At this stage I want to put it on record that 1 134 general plans, which include 366 883 erven, have been passed by the Surveyor General. As far as leaseholds are concerned, a further 199 general town layout plans, which extend over 67 341 erven, are with the Surveyor General for examination. One hundred and seventy-seven general plans, which extend over 72 568 erven, have been referred back to the respective offices of the Surveyor General for re-examination after certain mistakes had been found.

The first observation which I should like to make in this regard is that the general approval of erven for registration purposes has made very good progress. One should also ask how the deeds registries are progressing with the granting and registration of leaseholds.

Arising out of this, I should simply like to say that section 52 of the Black Communities Development Act, No 4 of 1984, made provision for the registration of 99-year leaseholds to Blacks in respect of sites in towns, even though they had not yet surveyed by a land-surveyor. This is being allowed on condition that they are surveyed by a land-surveyor within four years after being granted, and that after such a survey, the Registrar of Deeds shall certify the deeds of leasehold so that they reflect the correct size. There is therefore no legal impediment to the registration of leaseholds in respect of unsurveyed sites.

In general we have made good progress with the registration of sites and the approval of plans as well as leaseholds which have been submitted.

I should like to say something about the registration of deeds as such. All the deeds registries, at which considerable criticism was levelled at one time, are with the exception of Johannesburg, up to date with their registration of deeds. When we say that we are up to date with the registration of deeds, it means that the normal period of time that is necessary for registration as well as the normal period of time for the delivery of registrations has to be taken into consideration. Johannesburg is one day behind, however, but will soon be up to date again. In Pretoria at the moment there is a backlog of 8 days with the microfilming as a result of technical problems and the absence of personnel, but this situation, too, will soon be rectified.

On those grounds I think it is a special feather in the cap of the Registrar of Deeds and the personnel concerned. Perhaps it is only right that I take this opportunity to mention Mr Du Toit, who has worked at the Deeds Office for 44 years and has recently officiated as Chief Registrar of Deeds in Pretoria. He terminated his period of service on 1 April 1986 and I think this House and the country owe Mr Du Toit a word of thanks. He rendered 44 years of faithful service in the Deeds Office, and retired in that capacity. We should like to convey a special word of thanks to him today. [Interjections.] I should also like to extend a few words of congratulation, also on behalf of this House, to Mr J N van Vuuren who is Registrar of Deeds in Pretoria and as from 1st April, has been appointed Chief Registrar of Deeds. I think we can wish Mr Van Vuuren a very successful term in this office on behalf of the House and the Ministry. We hope that the registration of deeds will remain as up to date as it is at present. Good luck for the year ahead.

As far as the registration of deeds is concerned, a total of 17 928 leasehold registrations were carried out at the Deeds Office up to 1 November 1985, and from 1 November to 1 April this year, a further 3 860 leaseholds were registered. That means a total of 21 788 leasehold registrations during this period. If we analyse it in depth, we find for example that in the case of Johannesburg the following tendency is found in respect of registrations from November to March: In November there were 22, in December 310, in January 429, in February 527 and in March 614. The same tendency also occurred in Bloemfontein, but on a smaller scale. There were 4 registrations in November, 36 in December, 36 in January, 80 in February and 103 in March. The same phenomenon in respect of registrations is also found at other deeds registries and we find that there is a growing tendency since there is an increase in leasehold registrations. As I said previously, provision has been made for a leasehold to be registered on erven which have been approved by the Surveyor-General.

From time to time the criticism that leasehold registrations are not progressing satisfactorily and that there is delay, a laxness and a lack of proper departmental functioning as regards the granting and the arrangement thereof is levelled at the Government and the department. One should, however, compare it with the registration of sectional titles. After the introduction of the Sectional Titles Act there were just over 10 000 sectional title registrations in the White community, which was used to the economy and to a certain system, during the first five years from 1973 to 1978. During the period between the beginning of 1980 and the beginning of 1986 we have already had more than 21 000 sectional titles registered.

It shows a tendency which in my opinion indicates good progress and shows a great deal of promise. We do not want to say that there is no room for improvement as far as the approval of plans is concerned, or that we do not have to pay constant attention to this matter. Nevertheless I think we can compliment the people who are involved in this for the great progress which has thus far been made.

If we look at deeds and the registration of deeds in their entirety I should like to point out that representations have been directed at us from other quarters. The hon member for Port Elizabeth North has for quite a while been making representations to our department for the establishment of a deeds office in Port Elizabeth. This afternoon the hon member for Newton Park also made such representations to us again. Recently they also directed certain requests to me in my office.

The registration of leaseholds in certain areas indicates a certain tendency which has emerged during our enquiries. There is another factor which we must take into consideration. With the registration of leaseholds the announcement of the registration of property rights to Black owners and the possible expansion of the Deeds Office with the greater use of technological aids such as computers, microfilming and computer terminals at certain points, it is clear to me that we shall have to examine the system very closely so that we do not take the wrong decisions, thus being unprepared for a situation which could develop in future.

At the moment we have eight deeds registries namely in Pretoria, Johannesburg, Bloemfontein, Pietermaritzburg, Cape Town, Vryburg, King William’s Town and Kimberley. Section 1 of the Deeds Registry Act of 1937 empowers the Minister, by notice in the Gazette, firstly to establish or disestablish deeds registries, secondly to establish or disestablish a sub deeds registries within the area of deeds registries, and thirdly determine the registration acts or other acts which are required or permitted to be performed in any such registry.

As a result of the extra work which the registration of deeds by Blacks will entail, as well as the advantages inherent in the use of a computer to bring about a quicker and more efficient service on a decentralised basis, the hon the Minister has decided to convene a committee in which the Department of Public Works and Land Affairs—which will deal with the registration of deeds as well as the function of land-surveyors in general—the Department of Development Aid and the Department of Constitutional Development and Planning as well as the Association of Law Societies will serve. This committee will report back as soon as possible and interested groups will be consulted after the committee’s findings have been received.

On a previous occasion, when we debated on the Deeds Registries Act, I also undertook that before we make any changes to the present situation that we shall consult the Law Societies as such in the matter and that they will be given the opportunity to make a contribution and air their opinion on any changes that may take place. Since they will also serve on this committee by means of their Association, they will on a subsequent occasion also be able to give evidence concerning any such findings before a decision can be taken. I want to point out that the idea in this regard must always be that we must allow the precision and correctness of our Deeds Register in its present form, as well as the provision of a service to society as a whole, to have preference in respect of decisions which have to be taken in future. That is why it was decided that the terms of reference of the committee would be to enquire into the effect that the granting of property rights to Blacks would have on the existing deeds registry system, and to make recommendations in terms of what would be necessary in order to ensure a continued effective service.

This committee will of course have to take into consideration the expected volume of work, the availability of trained personnel, the use of technical aids—the computer for example—and the requirements of the Deeds Act in terms of the registration of land titles—all relevant factors which could have an effect on the matter. I believe that the Government, with this approach, is anticipating what could possibly lie ahead in future in respect of proper service being rendered to the public as a whole, but without existing structures being jeopardised because they were unable to participate in the decision-making process.

As far as this part is concerned, I should like to conclude by saying that recently many representations have been received from specific persons who wanted a deeds registry in a particular place. There were also representations and idle speculation from other people who had decided against it because they did not want it. I think that with the appointment of the committee no one area or region or body will be favoured to the disadvantage of another. It will have to be an objective approach which will have to truimph and I think we will all accept the findings whatever they may be.

In that respect therefore, I have accommodated a great many of the representations which the hon member for Newton Park made here. I have also accommodated certain arguments from one other two members here. One point was the one raised by the hon member for Hillbrow regarding the evacuation of certain areas, for which R9,5 million has been allocated in the Budget. It is R9,5 million, as opposed to R5,88 million in the previous fiscal year. I think that we discussed this specific matter in the previous vote. It concerns the resettlement of communities in other areas, in which this department is involved, financing and the evaluation of property, for example their homes and personal effects. If those people move and there is a valuation of their house and property, so that they can resettle somewhere else, this department compensates them.

Does this happen with their consent?

I can tell the hon member that according to the standpoint of the department—not this department, but the Department of Development Aid, and of the Government—it has recently been announced that no more forced removals will occur in this regard. In this case I can say that during December and January a relocation of such a community took place, involving approximately 800 families, all of whom agreed to it and even asked that such a relocation take place. They were also compensated for it. Roughly, the whole transaction cost about R2 million. After the relocation that took place those people expressed their thanks to the officials who were involved for the way in which the relocation was handled as well as for the accommodation which they received on the other side. In the course of one year there are always such communities to whom the Government must render assistance with regard to resettlement, and we must make specific provision for that in this Budget although we cannot always specifically confirm which communities will be involved. [Interjections.]

†That is the accepted attitude of the Government and it has been behaving accordingly since we declared that policy.

What about Wits?

What about what?

Wits.

Wits? Moutse! That hon woman only knows about Moutse. [Interjections.]

Order! Moutse is not under consideration now. [Interjections.] The hon the Deputy Minister may proceed.

I shall obey your ruling, Mr Chairman, but I should like to reply to the hon member for Houghton because we have a very good reply to her question! [Interjections.]

There is one other matter which I should like to raise here. It concerns a matter which has gained momentum over the past year and which is a worthwhile achievement for this department; it is in fact a feather in its cap. Over the years organised agriculture made very specific requests for the borders of independent states and those of the self-governing states to be fenced off, if possible with proper fences and patrol roads in order to ensure greater security and good neighbourliness as far as border issues were concerned. I should like to mention the name of Mr Van Blommestein, the Director General, who was very closely involved in the initial negotiations with organised agriculture. It was agreed that when money did become available from the limited supply, certain parts would be fenced off on an ad hoc basis wherever organised agriculture considered this to be essential. Our planning has been programmed over a period of a year, depending on available funds. This year R4,5 million is available for the implementation of such services.

As far as Lesotho is concerned, which borders for the most part on areas in the Free State—such as the region the hon member for Ladybrand represents—a good start has been made. The issue of border disputes between farmers in Lesotho and South African farmers has caused many problems. During the past year we have started to erect border fences extending over a distance of 412 kilometres, at a cost of R1,6 million; the full amount will be spent this year. A further 75 kilometres were recently surveyed and identified as a priority for fencing. The work will be given out on tender. The expected expenditure in this regard will amount to R412 000. These fences will cover 487 kilometres as far as Lesotho is concerned and should be completed during the current financial year.

Other progress has also been made. We have granted permission for a patrol road be built for security reasons. As a result of the fence that has been erected the road has been built lower down the mountain-side so that it may run parallel to the fence. Furthermore the decision has been taken to upgrade it to a high-standard road. That means that we have made good progress towards disposing of the matter. An amount of R866 000 was spent on it prior to March 1986. In the 1986-87 financial year further expenditure of R633 000 was budgeted for. The entire road project will eventually cost approximately R1,5 million. We have ascertained that the project has already produced results. I should like to pay the department a special compliment for the co-operation which organised agriculture and the individual farmers received from the department in that specific area.

In the Transkei, in co-operation with the various parties, fences extending over a distance of 329 kilometres are going to be erected in the various areas. They should affect a large area. In the Ciskei border fences have to be erected covering a distance of 110 kilometres. In Bophuthatswana and Swaziland the areas which need to be fenced off are not very large, and as far as Venda is concerned, only 6 kilometres of fence have to be erected this year. The co-operation in Venda was especially good and good progress has therefore been made. In Botswana only maintenance work needs to be done.

If one looks at the whole operation one finds that only the independent states and the BLS countries have been dealt with in my explanation and in this specific memorandum. These are all matters which can be discussed under this department and under this Vote. The other matters, such as those pertaining to the self-governing states are being dealt with in a similar way but are discussed under another department and under another Vote.

I should like to conclude by thanking hon members for the discussion here today. I should like to congratulate them on the discussion and extend my very best wishes for the year that lies head.

Mr Chairman, I enjoy speaking, but I find it less enjoyable speaking after the hon the Deputy Minister. It is enjoyable because it is a privilege to speak after him but not so enjoyable because one cannot argue with him about what he said. [Interjections.] I must therefore concentrate on the hon member for Langlaagte, and speak to him. [Interjections.] That hon member had a lot to say this afternoon about the establishment of towns, the conditions for the establishment of towns, housing, etc.

It is a pity now that the department, which is a service department, is not going to occupy itself any more with housing, the establishment of towns and the conditions for the establishment of towns. The hon member for Langlaagte is an expert in these matters. He has had many years of practical experience in these matters. [Interjections.] It is a pity now that in future there will no longer be any scope for discussing these matters. He shall therefore have to confine himself to the vote of the hon the Minister for Local Government, Housing and Works. His arguments belong in that category, and I think his contribution will be of value to that department; of far greater value than his contribution to this debate. [Interjections.]

On page 42 of the annual report of the department the Director-General expresses his very great concern, which has also been referred to earlier in the debate, about the increasing number of Government buildings and that it is not possible to keep up with the maintenance and the renovation of these buildings.

Millions of rands are being spent on the construction of Government buildings. The wear-and-tear on those buildings is quite considerable though if, as often happens, a period of 15 years has to elapse before they can be renovated and maintained. In addition it then costs far more to restore those buildings to their original condition. If I remember correctly, it was the hon member for Umhlanga who referred to the Verwoerd Building. I should like to tell him that that building is really not in such a bad condition as he implied. But other buildings come to mind that do need attention.

It is mentioned in the report that during its compilation, 1 184 restoration and maintenance services were performed at a cost of R77 million. If we look at the Estimate for the coming financial year we see that the amount that has been budgeted for repairs, maintenance, municipal services and cleaning has been increased from R178 million to R223 million.

I should now like to make a request that a specific portion of this increased amount of R223 million—perhaps even a far greater portion thereof—be used for the maintenance of existing buildings. Now one realises of course that the construction of some of those buildings contributes to the high cost of their maintenance. Just think of the Union Buildings for example. A huge amount is being appropriated for the restoration and maintenance of the Union Buildings. The Union Buildings are after all a national monument and must last for ever. The leaning tower of Pisa is built of marble. It took 90 years to complete that marble construction and in those 90 years the Italians succeeded very well indeed in erecting a lopsided building. A much shorter period of time was required to complete the Union Buildings and what is more it is straight. Unfortunately, however, that building is built of sandstone, and the rate of corrosion of that sandstone is tremendous. In fact it is increasing. This will of course cause the maintenance costs of that building to increase even further in future. Hence the request that durability be a specific factor in the choice of building materials for Government buildings.

Furthermore, Mr Chairman, there is another matter which I should like to submit to the hon the Minister for his consideration. Circumstances have of course changed now. Many of the issues which were the subject of gossip-mongering are now under the control of the hon the Minister of Local Government, Housing and Works. That reminds me now of an incident in connection with a window-pane which broke in a particular building. The day when the labourers from the “Please Wait Department” came to instal a new window-pane the building had already been demolished.

The question which I would like to put from a cost-saving point of view if whether the ordinary upkeep and maintenance of buildings—for example the replacement of window-panes, the repair of leaking taps, blocked drains etc—should not be entrusted to the person in charge of the building concerned. A large part of the present costs relating to maintenance work of this kind are of course hidden costs. Suppose we have an institution in Wynberg, but the Regional Head Office of the Department is in the city centre. A glass pane breaks at the institution. It is reported to the Regional Head Office. The representative of the Regional Head Office drives with his vehicle to Wynberg to take the measurements of the window-pane that was damaged. After that he drives all the way back to the city to buy all the necessary materials and whatever else he may need. Then he must drive all the way back to Wynberg again to replace the window-pane. One could of course take it further and suppose that the new window-pane may also break en route, which causes the process to be drawn out even further. One may continue in this vein ad absurdam. Nevertheless it remains so that hidden costs are always part and parcel of such a process, for example travel and administrative costs as well as telephone calls and wasted time. All that for the sake of the replacement of one window-pane. The head of that institution in Wynberg could have requested the hardware dealer round the corner to come and replace the window-pane; then the whole process would have been completed within half and hour and the costs for the department would have been minimal.

And what is more, he could have paid it off over a period of a year.

Yes, as the hon member for Roodeplaat says, he could even have paid it off over a period of a year.

In using this example I do so merely because I am convinced that it would save the Department of Public Works and Land Affairs a great deal of expense if the minor maintenance services which are provided by the department to certain State institutions were to be organised by the top officials of those institutions—I am referring to those State institutions whose premises are maintained by this department—as far as it is within their ability to do so, rather than have it be done by the regional office of this department. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I wish to deal with one matter which is of great relevance to my constituency, namely the question of Durban’s King’s House.

King’s House is a good example of colonial splendour and is one of the most significant buildings in Durban. It is a large residence situated in one of the most beautiful spots in Durban, with magnificent views over the city and the sea.

It was built in 1902 as the colonial governor’s marine residence. Subsequent to that it was occupied by many notables—state presidents, colonial governors, royalty and other important visitors to Durban. It was also frequently used for administrative functions and for receptions.

When, however, the new Constitution was introduced one gained the impression that the new State President in terms of that Constitution had turned his back on any further contact with Natal…

Rubbish!

He ignored the splendour which was available. He decided not to use King’s House as a holiday residence for the State President. He simply did not come to Natal any longer for the purpose of making use of that building. King’s House has been standing empty for some time now. [Interjections.] The hon the Minister is aware of the fact that repeated requests have been made to him, to provincial authorities and to the Durban City Council that the building be restored and be used effectively.

I understand that the building was redecorated once in the 1920s and then again in the 1940s. To some extent, therefore, it has lost some of the original charm which it must have had soon after its completion. There have been some strong requests from professional bodies and from other people who have an interest in retaining the heritage of Durban and Natal and who also have an interest in maintaining buildings generally that King’s House be renovated and restored to its original splendour. I therefore ask the hon the Minister whether or not his department would agree to the renovation of King’s House so that it may be restored to its original splendour. Moreover, I ask the hon the Minister whether or not he is of the view that his department should undertake this task. I want to know whether or not something is going to be done.

Last year the department removed furniture from King’s House to Newlands House and Westbrooke. Once again it appeared that the prevailing view was that whatever was left in Natal as far as antique or period furniture was concerned, had to be removed; and so, with no qualms whatsoever and without negotiating with or consulting anyone, this department removed that furniture and brought it to Westbrooke. [Interjections.] I want to know whether that furniture is going to be returned to King’s House in Durban. Is King’s House going to be restored with fittings and furniture? I ask this because unless the fittings and furniture are restored the building will remain a shell and will not be of much use. I ask the hon the Minister to also investigate the possibility of declaring King’s House a national monument…

For what reason?

… in order to ensure that it will be protected and will not be altered in future so that it differs from the style in which it was built.

It ought also to fall under the supervision of Durban City and not of the hon the Minister because it would otherwise involve a massive bureaucracy if the house and its facilities were to be used by people in Durban, by Natalians. It could be used as a venue for administrative functions—one could even have held the kwaNatal Indaba in King’s House which would have been a far more suitable venue than the present venue in a relatively small room in the city hall. It could and should be used as a residence for important visitors, and even Cabinet Ministers like the hon the Minister himself could be allowed to stay there occasionally. It should therefore be used and it should also be open to the public on an organised basis.

I am half English …

The house should even be available for people who are “half English”.

King’s House is an important part of the heritage of Durban, the colonial heritage of Natal, and it ought to be looked after. I ask the hon the Minister to tell us what his department is doing, to tell us whether the furniture is coming back and to tell us whether it is going to be restored because that is what he ought to be doing.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Durban Central will excuse me if I do not respond to his speech.

No, I will not. [Interjections.]

He spoke about his “local option” as the hon members of the NRP sitting in front of me would say. I cannot, therefore, say anything about the matter.

Before I come to what I should like to say today, I want to say the hon member for Langlaagte made a rambling speech today and wandered off the topic of what the work and functions of the building societies really are. I think he charged the building societies here today with things which are not quite justified, but since the hon member for Hercules has already pointed out that these matters are no longer dealt with by this department, I shall not go into them.

Last year, because I am opposed in principle to the excessive protection of one’s interests by legislation, I spoke in this House about the Professional Engineers’ Act, 1968, and pointed out that in my opinion, this Act and other similar legislation which protected other institutes of professional people, did not do justice to the principle of free enterprise. At that stage I said inter alia that despite the fact that, once the Professional Engineers’ Bill of 1968 had been passed, an Act which created an institute for the technicians and technologists was also placed on the Statute Book in accordance with the regulations issued and in accordance with the Professional Engineers’ Act of 1968, the technologists and technicians still had no right to undertake any engineering work on their own. They still had to do it under the supervision of engineers. It was suggested in this House at that stage that my facts were not quite correct, and I also received a letter from the president of the Professional Engineers’ Association of South Africa in this connection. This led to my investigating the matter from the beginning again and, after a thorough study of the Professional Engineers’ Act, the Advanced Technical Education Act, their amending Acts as well as all the regulations proclaimed in terms of the above legislation, I can come to only one conclusion, that the statement I made that day was quite correct. [Interjections.] What had indeed happened, was that just after the Professional Engineers’ Act had been passed, a series of regulations was passed in which all the jobs reserved for engineers were specified, and all work that had anything to do with engineering work was reserved for engineers. The Advanced Technical Education Act did not bring about any change in the regulations which determined which work could be done only by engineers. Nor were any regulations issued after the proclamation of the above Act, deregulating certain engineering jobs for this group or reserving any work for them. The situation we have here is that, in contrast with the Institute of Professional Engineers, a new institute was established with an astonishing number of gradings for technicians and technologists, without their being able to do any job independently in accordance with the regulations which had been proclaimed, and without any work being reserved for them by means of regulations.

It is my honest opinion that in our country we will not be able to persist with this kind of closed board for professional bodies which reserve all work for themselves and to their own advantage. We shall have to enquire into all the Acts pertaining to professional bodies and determine the minimum requirements necessary for professional bodies’ legislation in order to protect the general public. I said for example—I received a great deal of criticism about it—that the Professional Engineers’ Act had only economic value for the man in the street in the sense that it regulated and co-ordinated the training of engineers, something that in itself is very valuable. No one has yet been accused in accordance with this Act, however, of having acted negligently. Such accusations are made in accordance with other legislation. I am afraid, therefore, I cannot change my standpoint on this matter, since as I said, the value of the Act lies only in that it protects the engineers and co-ordinates and standardises the training and education of engineers.

I am opposed to red tape and a too large concentration …

There is one behind you.

… of power in own hands.

If we look at the Department of Public Works, we must say it is the one department from which we can learn about decentralisation and privatisation. I assume this is the express endeavour of all of us in this House, and in the first place also of the State President. It is very important that we enquire very closely into this example. I do not think we can say we are going to privatise the activities of this whole department; that is the basic mistake we in this country are making. We can merely say we can privatise certain functions of certain departments. We cannot privatise all the functions of a whole department.

Let me give an example. I have written down a few of this department’s functions. Inter alia there is overhead planning, detail-planning, purchasing and provision of supplies, control and supervision of constructions, maintenance, further co-ordination of the whole department and so forth. There is also the function of registering deeds at the Deeds Office, and no one can tell me that one can privatise something like the Deeds Office. The Government would lose all power and control in this connection if it did so. If we look at the list of the department’s functions, we see that it can be privatised to a very great extent.

I want to point out a clear need. When we speak about privatisation, we must divide the whole into portions like slices of a cake, so that we can also give the small businessman or entrepreneur an opportunity to tender for the various functions of the department it is possible to privatise these functions in this way.

Only then will the purpose of privatisation succeed. If the State monopoly were to be replaced by that of a private undertaking, we would be even worse off than we are today.

Mr Chairman, I should like to reply to the debate which took place this afternoon. Right at the outset I want to thank the hon the Deputy Minister for his participation in the debate. I think all hon members will agree that he knew precisely what he was talking about. Actually it is a privilege to have such a Deputy Minister, for I need never go back and take a look at the matters he is dealing with. That makes my burden much lighter.

Hon members who have examined this vote thoroughly will have noticed that the hon the Deputy Minister and I are actually doing this little job as an extra; we receive no payment for it. Nowhere in these estimates is there any indication that we are being paid for it. [Interjections.] I receive my salary from the Department of Posts and Telecommunications and my hon colleague receives his from another department. Actually I am very pleased that there was so little criticism this afternoon, because if one does something for nothing, one must at least receive some credit for it. [Interjections.]

We got what we paid for!

I should like to thank the hon the Deputy Minister sincerely for his contribution.

I also want to thank the personnel, particularly the Director-General, Mr Van Blommestein, and the Deputy Director-General, Mr Van Niekerk and Mr Colyn, who are both here today. The chairman of the National Housing Commission, about which I shall say a few words in a moment, is also here, and I want to thank him too. They contributed a great deal to making it easier for me to cope with such a department. It is a service department, and I shall deal in a moment with a few of the misconceptions among certain hon members about what my staff and I are actually doing in this department.

I also want to thank my staff for a very informative annual report. It includes beautiful photographs of projects we have brought into existence and which today came in for a great deal of criticism on the part of one or two hon members.

I want to thank them for the way in which they are dealing with the regions and for the way in which the streamlining of the regions, as well as their entire administration, took place.

I also convey my personal thanks to the office staff of the Director-General, to the Parliamentary staff, who always support us with assistance in regard to legal advice and other very important matters, and to my own office staff. It is a pleasure to be able to work in such a team. I think it is always important for us to accord them recognition in this House as well, for perhaps it is sometimes taken for granted that they simply have to do the work. I want to thank everyone involved.

I should like to say a few words about the chairman of the National Housing Commission, Mr W J Marais. I cannot omit to do so today, because I consider him to be one of the ablest officials the department, and in fact the Public Service, has ever produced. After a period of service of 30 years, Mr Willie Marais is on the point of retiring at the end of this month.

Mr Marais is an engineer by profession, and before he entered the Public Service in 1955 he served on various municipalities. It is in the sphere of housing in particular that he made his mark. His share in various major developments, such as Mitchells Plain, are today tangible tokens of his ability and of the milestones in his career. In such projects it is not purely housing that is involved, but also the other facilities, such as business undertakings and sports facilities.

During his term of service he also served on various committees, such as the Building Industry Advisory Board, the Treasury Committee for Building Norms, disaster committees, the Housing Matters Advisory Committee and the SABS Building Regulations Committee. He was chairman of the Multilateral Technical Committee for Urban Development and Housing and of the Agrément Board. That is to mention only a few. It was on the Agrément Board in particular that Mr Marais made his mark, because that is where the prefabricated construction method really came into its own.

In the international sphere Mr Marais was on several occasions required to take part in seminars and represent the Republic there. This exceptionally popular and competent person is today considered to be one of the greatest experts in the sphere of lowercost housing.

When a new chairman for the National Housing Commission had to be appointed in 1982, it was obvious that the choice would fall on him. It was not strange at all when the SA Housing Institute recently granted him honorary membership because they wished to pay tribute to him. He deserved it. Fortunately his knowledge will not be entirely lost because he is going to stay on on a part-time basis as the chairman of the commission until such time as finality has been reached on the transfers, etc. On behalf of our department, his colleagues, the hon the Deputy Minister and myself I wish Mr Marais everything of the best in the time which lies ahead. We shall very definitely miss him in the department. [Interjections.]

I have already congratulated the Director-General on the annual report and the White Paper, but I just want to say here that during the past two years, while very strict financial measures had been introduced, we decided every time to take the money which the hon the Minister offered us, and we managed to come out on it. This year again we agreed without hesitation not to ask for additional money, and also to save the 2% the hon the Minister announced here. I think it is a compliment to the department and the Director-General that, when one is dealing with more than R1 000 million and advance programming has to be carried out, when contracts have to be initiated and builders finish at different times, we were in fact able to manage in this way.

I also want to address a word of thanks to the standing committee under the chairmanship of the hon member for Umlazi. They facilitate our work considerably. They carry the legislation through, and have also held talks on the various aspects that were dealt with here today. I want to thank the hon member for Umlazi very sincerely. I shall return to his speech in a moment.

I also want to thank the study group of the House of Assembly, which is important in this connection. I shall deal with what they said in a moment. It thank them very sincerely.

†The hon member for Hillbrow made a very interesting speech this afternoon. He criticised us concerning the expenditure of approximately R86 million, of which only about R18 million will be spent during this particular financial year. The other money has already been budgeted for or has still to be budgeted for. The hon member also criticised us for buying a flat for nearly R300 000, as did the hon member for Umhlanga. In no other speech was there any form of criticism of the financial running of the department. I want that put on record. When one takes the total expenditure for this year—an amount of R1 246 million is to be spent in total this year—and one takes the R18 million about which there has been criticism as a percentage of this total amount one finds that that criticism has been levelled at about 1,3% of our total budget. That means that my staff and I have managed to get a 98,7% pass which I think is good enough in any circumstances. [Interjections.]

*I find it astonishing, while we are discussing the expenditure of R1 246 million, that all the hon member for Hillbrow was able to do was to come here and complain in this Committee about the Parliamentary complex. The hon member for Nigel also spoke about it for a while, but he did not carry on about it to the same extent. It is important that hon members should be aware of the fact that the planning of this complex began a long time ago. To tell the truth, the restoration of the Good Hope Building and Tuynhuys, the construction of the Stal Plein complex with the parking facilities below it, were approved when the hon member for Waterberg and the hon member for Lichtenburg were still serving on the same Cabinet with me, and so they ought to know about them.

Not the adjoining Council Chamber.

No, not the adjoining Council Chamber. The expenditure on the Council Chamber, however, comprises a very small part of the total expenditure of R86 million.

I just want to bring it to the attention of hon members that in this department it is not possible to commence contracts and then cancel them the next year. The hon member for Waterberg will concede that at that time not one of us thought there would be an economic recession. Then I would probably not have had to put a cover over the hole in the ground at the back there, and keep it there until we had money again one day. [Interjections.] We cannot work like that. We did not exceed our budget, and we simply used all the money that was placed at our disposal. One cannot therefore say that this Government is wasting money because we now have a new dispensation. This is only a very small part of it.

We had to restore the Marks Building. We had to repair the interior and equip it for the purpose for which it is now being used. As regards the Good Hope Building, we had made considerable progress with the restoration when the idea of the President’s Council emerged. We then accommodated the President’s Council inside a living monument, as the hon member for Umlazi put it.

As for Tuynhuys, the same idea applies here. Previously it was also used to house the State President’s offices. We equipped the building to serve as the State President’s offices.

†As I know him, the hon member for Umhlanga is honest, and he described what Tuynhuys actually looks like. It looks like something that could have been built here and shows our heritage over a period of many years. Should we not be proud of these things? Should we not be proud of the Good Hope Theatre that has been restored? [Interjections.]

Should we not be proud of Stal Plein? Should we not be proud of the fact that we are putting in an eternal flame in honour of our young people who have died in wars over the years ever since South Africa’s inception? It is not a particular war that we are commemorating. It is for everybody who died. [Interjections.]

This particular design has won commendation from the architects’ association. The architect actually took the design to a workshop overseas, where everybody was excited about it. They said it was going to be one of the most beautiful Government complexes in the world.

*What did the hon member for Hillbrow do? He came here and complained because we are going to have such a fine complex here. [Interjections.] He complained about the R86 million.

If we examine these matters, we must examine them properly. If we think of the street fronting on the House of Parliament, there is no hon member, not even on the Opposition side, who does not think that it is an improvement of Parliament Street. We have removed all the cars that cluttered up the place, but what did the hon member do? He merely complained about the parking garage and said it was a terrible thing.

I once had a meeting with the hon member and other Whips and we ironed out certain things which they proposed. I now want to tell the hon member that there is never a day on which that parking garage is full. Usually it is only 40% to 50% full, and once it was 70% full.

†I shall follow the hon member for Umhlanga’s advice, because he gives good advice, and see what is wrong in regard to the cleaning up of the place and the cleaning up of the steps of the Verwoerd Building and the Verwoerd Building itself. We have a problem with regard to cleaning the windows because of the building of the new section but luckily they have now finished with all the excavations. Perhaps we shall now be able to see to it that the windows are properly cleaned.

Why don’t you …

Sir, the hon member for Hillbrow has finished speaking; I do not want to discuss this matter with him again. [Interjections.]

I just want to say I think it is time we were proud of what the Government was doing to repair and restore what is our own. [Interjections.] Why must hon members always be disparaging about this? Do they think they are going to score a few points off me? I have been in politics too long to let someone to score a few points off me over a few rands! [Interjections.]

What hon members are trying to do is to arouse suspicion against the whole system among the public at large by creating the impression that we are wasting money. If this is a waste of money, I want to know why the Cape Town City Council is so proud of this whole area, as the hon member for Umlazi correctly pointed out. A Mr Keeton—I think that was his name; I once fought an election against him—had the courage of his convictions the other day to say that he had looked at the plans and the work that had been done here, and according to him it was a wonderful example of how one could beautify Cape Town and improve the appearance of the city. Now why should we keep on complaining about this?

†Cannot we just stop complaining and stop getting the feeling that we must complain about everything that is really worthwhile?

What do you mean complaining? I asked you to explain certain problems! [Interjections.]

No, no. The hon member can examine our budget and look at all the explanations provided there. Would it have made any difference if I told him that we had spent R60 million instead of R90 million? He would have complained in any case, even if I said that the amount needed was R30 million! [Interjections.]

I was not talking about the amount. I want the details.

It is not for me to give an explanation of all the details.

*The hon member can look it up for himself.

I want to discuss the aspects of principle with the hon member for Hillbrow. There are a few other matters which he raised to which I want to react. The hon member also made other statements.

†The hon member is a past master at quoting irrelevant facts. He quoted them in the Post Office Budget, he quoted them … [Interjections.]

Order! The hon the Minister may proceed.

Mr Chairman, I thought for a moment you might think that I should withdraw that statement, although I thought it to be quite a legitimate statement. [Interjections.]

The hon member asked me why the hall should be built to accommodate 1 000 people. The hon member also asked me why when there are only 306 hon members there are 356 seats. [Interjections.] The hon member should ask those questions under Votes 2, and I think 8, when they do come up, if they have not been passed already. We are a service department. If the administration of Parliament says they want a hall with 1 000 seats we give them that; I do not argue with the administration of Parliament or with Mr Speaker whether there should be 980 or 970 seats. That is Mr Speaker’s job. I do not manage Parliament. [Interjections.] My department is only responsible for the erection of the building. [Interjections.]

Order! I cannot allow all these interruptions. Hon members have had an opportunity to speak. If they did not avail themselves of that opportunity, I cannot allow them now to conduct a running commentary on what the hon the Minister is saying. The hon the Minister may proceed.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Wynberg does not know what is happening in any case, because he was not in this Chamber once the whole afternoon. Now, however, he has a great deal to say. [Interjections.] Perhaps he should confine his attention to defence matters—those are very important matters. [Interjections.]

That is even worse.

But I do not think he is achieving much in that area either, judging from what I heard him say when I listened to him. [Interjections.]

†What I want to point out is that we are a service department, as was pointed out by the hon member for Umlazi. It is Mr Speaker’s prerogative to ask for 72 seats for the House of Delegates. Our department only does the building work.

The hon member also asked what was going to happen to the Marks Building when the other building is completed. I am sure we will find lots of uses for it. I am sure Mr Speaker and the hon Chief Whip of Parliament will use the present Chamber for standing committees; it can also be used for Committee debates like we are having today so as to try to enable Parliament to complete its work a bit quicker.

The hon member also spoke about Twin Towers and he gave us the views of his friend, the estate agent who telephoned him about it.

No, he is not a friend.

Oh, he is not a friend. [Interjections.] I am glad he is not the hon member’s friend because he did not give him all the facts. [Interjections.] Friends usually give one all the facts.

An investigation was carried out by the department in respect of the market value of this whole area. Just to give the hon member an idea, I can mention that Flat No 201 in the same building was sold in 1984 for R290 000. Flat No 1201 was put up for sale a few months ago, and an offer of R320 000 was refused! Flat No 1401 is presently for sale at R375 000. As a result of these complaints, however, the impression is created that when we buy something for an official we purchase it summarily and then merely present it to the official. What we buy becomes an asset to the State!

When I became a member of the Executive Committee in the Cape some newspapers—the Cape Times and The Sunday Times—almost went beserk when the State spent R43 000 to buy a house in Milnerton for me to live in. [Interjections.] With the eight erven surrounding it that house is valued today—I checked up just the other day—at nearly R750 000. That is what happens to State money when it is invested in property! [Interjections.] This flat is a case in point. According to the assessments I received from various market valuers, this flat too will appreciate in value—and I accept their assessments.

That is not all, however. There is something else I must point out. None of the flats I have just mentioned has a storeroom or a servant’s quarters, but this particular flat, No 701, does. Moreover, the security in and around this particular building is very strict, and is controlled by the body corporate itself. We do not have to arrange further security for the flat. If the hon member realises what such security arrangements cost today, he will appreciate the advantage we enjoy in this respect.

Why cannot we just put aside all this “pinching and biting”, however? After all, we are talking about a top State official. The chairman of the Commission for Administration is a top State official. So why should we cause him embarrassment? A man in his position must after all take people into his home. He is an important figure in the administration. He has to attend congresses and congress members visit Cape Town and he obviously has to take those people to his home. Did the hon member want me to leave him in Acacia Park in one of those two-bedroomed prefabricated houses?

What is wrong with that? [Interjections.]

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

No, Mr Chairman, I want to finish before six o’clock.

The hon member for Umhlanga said that five or six Directors-General were living at Acacia Park while I the other day said there were none. I was actually wrong and he was closer than I was because there are actually nine Directors-General living at Acacia Park. I made a mistake because I did not quite grasp the question at the moment and I am sorry that I gave the wrong information. However, that does not really matter because those who live there want to live there because their children are at the school and they do not have to transport them too far. I do not, however, want to compare the chairman of the commission with any other Director-General because he and the other member of the commission are both on a different level to the Directors-General, who accept that.

Class distinction!

The hon member for Hillbrow spoke about the National Housing Commission. I do not want to take up the Committees’ time. The hon member and the hon member for Greytown can look at the first page of chapter 2, paragraph 2.1 of the annual report where a full explanation is given of what the National Housing Commission is going to do.

*The hon member for Greytown is sitting there, holding a conversation now, and is not interested when I want to reply to him. He began his speech in a strange way by saying that he was not going to quote figures today, for when he quoted them on a previous occasion, I went and distorted his figures outside the Committee. He subsequently did not quote any figures and he made a whole speech about something which did not fall under the activities of my department at all. [Interjections.] He spoke about housing.

†He kept telling long stories about the “facade”, the “facade” of the Black and the “facade” of the Brown. That is as much a “facade of foolishness” as I have ever seen in my time! I do not deal with housing. The hon member must read paragraph 2.1 on page 9. He will see that we have already handed over all the White housing to the hon the Minister of Local Government, Housing and Works. We have also handed over Coloured and Asian housing. We have handed Black housing to the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning and the hon the Minister of Education and Development Aid. [Interjections.]

*The hon member confirms this, but he is wasting our time. He came here and told me what kind of housing I should provide, but I have nothing to do with housing. I am responsible for ensuring that the recommendations of the Venter Commission, to which the hon member for Langlaagte referred, are implemented. Those recommendations deal inter alia with township establishment, but I must tell the hon member that at the moment I have nothing to do with township establishment.

Would the hon the Minister tell us just now what he does do?

I shall make the hon members an offer. I propose that when we sit again in August I shall present a seminar—the hon the Deputy Minister and officials of my department will also be there— to inform hon members about precisely what happens in this department. [Interjections.]

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

Order! Is the hon the Minister prepared to reply to a question now?

Mr Chairman, I cannot do so now. I gave the hon member sufficient opportunity to speak. [Interjections.]

I have referred to the aspect which were discussed by the hon member for Umlazi, and I thank him for doing so. I also want to thank the hon member for Nigel, who adopted a very level-headed attitude. He did complain about the costs, but anyone has the right to complain about costs. He discussed the expensive housing, and I am in complete agreement with what he said.

The hon member also dicussed rentals that were in arrears, but that is an own affair. The hon the Minister can discuss this matter with the hon the Minister of Local Administration, Housing and Works during the discussion of his vote. That hon Minister’s vote still has to be discussed. I did not want to give him any extra work now; perhaps he thought that he need not discuss the matter again. [Interjections.]

The hon member thanked us for the good accommodation in Acacia Park. “Thanks” is always a nice word. The hon member also thanked two of my officials, Messrs Tocknell and Joubert. I am certain they also have great appreciation for that, for sometimes they do come under fire.

I have already said that the decisions concerning the Parliamentary building work were taken long ago, when the hon the Leader and the hon Deputy Leader of the CP were still members of the Cabinet. The additions to Parliament, which affect the new dispensation, were only added later. The restoration of the Good Hope Theatre had nothing to do with the President’s Council. The restoration of the building was decided upon prior to that.

The hon member discussed the cobblestones. The hon member for Umhlanga also referred to them. We are already looking into the matter, and we can easily rectify it. The architects have added long, flat, white paving-stones, and we have already spoken to them about the piece in front of the H F Verwoerd Building. We could perhaps insert a zig-zag path there. Unfortunately it is rather awkward to walk across at present. It seems to me people wore wooden clogs or something like that in the old days; then cobblestones were not so awkward to walk across. [Interjections.]

I want to thank the hon member for Alberton for his fine words about the Government Printer, one of a few printers who are unique in the world. Actually it is the best printing works in South Africa and in my opinion, one of the best in the world. There are very few printing works in the world that print postage stamps. One can go and ask the hon member Mr Vermeulen, because he knows everything about postage stamps. As far as the Commonwealth is concerned, I think New Zealand and Australia have their postage stamps printed in England. It is a very complicated process, and we are sending the Government Printer overseas soon to have a look at other processes.

I urge hon members to have a look at our annual report. Just look at the quality of the printing work and photographs contained in it. That shows what the Government Printer can do.

It is only the first photograph that worries us!

No, that is the best one of the lot! [Interjections.] It is rather old though; I was a little younger then.

The hon member for Alberton referred to the identity books which is one of the Government Printer’s major tasks in respect of his contribution to the Government’s policy. I am sure that we will complete the task in time.

†The hon member for Umhlanga wondered whether R77 million was not rather a lot of money for repairs, renovation and maintenance, and I would like to put that amount into context. We have property valued at R5 000 million, and we have allowed a backlog to build up over the years as far as maintenance is concerned because we have found this the easiest way to reduce expenditure. We may decide, for instance, to postpone painting a roof for a year, but the next year we may discover that the economy is in a worse state and so we do not paint the roof then either. This is how a backlog in repairs builds up. We have therefore decided to allocate a certain percentage of our budget every year for repairs. It is no use having a nice building and neglecting it, because it costs a great deal of money to restore it in the end.

I have answered the other questions the hon member raised, except for the question about the houses for the Ministers in the House of Delegates. We did call for tenders, but we thought they were too high and we let them lapse. However, I must point out to the hon member that the amount does not only include building cost. It also includes the favour of roads and services because the area where we are building these houses will obviously not be in an established residential area where there already are services. [Interjections.]

The hon member said that we were spending a lot of money on jails, and he asked if we were spending it wisely. I would not know, but we will do everything we can to provide people who are in jail—one can never be too sure that one may not also find ourself in there sometime—with good accommodation. [Interjections.] I hear only one or two hon members laughing; the others must feel it is quite a serious matter! The department actually decide on the size of the prison they want. The hon the Minister of Justice and his Department of Prisons have been doing a lot to upgrade prisons and make them places where human dignity can be maintained. We shall help him. There is a priority list and we only spend a certain amount on these buildings every year. The Police get a portion of that and the other departments also get their share.

I want to commend the hon the Minister of Justice on his decision to put jails out to tender—the hon member for Newton Park mentioned this—instead of doing it with their own work teams as they used to do. This gives private enterprise a chance to build these R13 million and R14 million projects. I always like listening to the hon member because even though he may criticize he is at least always friendly.

*The hon member for Newton Park expressed his thanks, and I want to thank him too. It is always a nice word. He asked whether the question of tenders and co-ordination could not be investigated. I can say at once that the State President himself took the initiative and requested that the entire question of the Tender Board and tenders be looked into. As regards the question of coordination, we are at present negotiating with the other departments and the provincial authorities. Now that certain changes are going to be made, we shall perhaps be able to deal with it better.

The hon the Deputy Minister replied to all the other questions of the hon member. I should very much have like to have given him a reply to the story about the dagga, but it seems to me it is out of order. So I shall simply leave it at that. [Interjections.]

†I do not want to spend much time on the hon member for Greytown. There was absolutely nothing in his speech that pertained to my department in any way.

*I urge the hon member to read through the annual report carefully, and if there is something he does not understand, he must approach someone in the department and we shall explain it to him.

I want to thank the hon member for Boksburg for his reference to the annual report. He made a neat speech. He raised a few points to which I cannot give him replies now off the cuff, but we shall ensure that he receives the answer to his question.

An interesting suggestion he made was that door handles and knobs which do not have to be polished should be fitted. I must say that I have been Minister of this department for a year and a half now, and I had not thought of that yet. But I have a problem with the architects. If this building has certain types of fittings on the doors and windows, they want to use similar fittings in the other buildings as well. On the other hand, it probably keeps someone busy if he has to polish those knobs and doorhandles. We shall simply have to try to keep the knobs clean. [Interjections.] Nevertheless we shall bear the hon member’s suggestion in mind. The hon member made a very neat speech.

The hon member for Langlaagte thanked us for what we had done in Acacia Park. I appreciated it very much that he feels that way about it. We took some trouble to make it tidier and more habitable, for that is the only accommodation one has for one’s family for six months. We thank the hon member for having expressed his appreciation.

As regards the building societies and township establishment, I must point out to the hon member that that is not within my ambit and he will have to pardon me if I do not reply to him in that regard.

We are experiencing problems with the Booysens police station. Perhaps the hon member could help us with an anti-crime campaign so that we need not enlarge the police station again.

As regards the Housing Advisory Board, which the hon member discussed, we are not going to implement that legislation. There is a problem in that regard because according to all the law advisers it is only able to advise me on financial matters. It is of no value to us. We want advice on standards, norms and building materials, and we have already agreed—all the hon Ministers in respect of who I serve as co-ordinator—that we shall appoint a non-statutory board. Hon members will understand that Black, Coloureds and Asians will also have representation on that board, because it is concerned with advice on housing for all populations groups. The committee will then furnish all my colleagues with advice through me. It will also be able to negotiate with me directly.

Under whom does this changing of the guard fall?

I do not know; I will find out. [Interjections.]

As regards the hon member for Hercules,

I may just as well have forwarded his reply to them, because housing no longer falls under the Department of Public Works. Sometimes one has to repeat a thing a few times, so that hon members can understand it. I think the hon member stressed the point that we should spend more on maintenance. I want to tell him that this is one of the most important things that have to be done. We shall very definitely have to spend more on maintenance. If we want to get by, we will definitely have to ensure that we spend more on it.

The hon member also made a few other good points. For example he said that the head of an establishment should receive money to spend. We are already doing that. We introduced this a short while ago, and at a later stage we shall see whether the amount can perhaps be increased.

I should now like to turn to the hon member for Durban Central. The hon member must not try to dramatise every little thing that happens in Natal. After all, the hon member has now acquired a high-level post in the PFP. Surely he must behave himself in a way befitting that responsibility. [Interjections.]

†Let us just stop at King’s House for a few minutes. I have only a few minutes left. King’s House was build in 1904. It underwent what my architects described as “damaging improvements”, in 1917 and in 1935, which changed the complete original main fabric of King’s House.

*I had nothing to do with that. If hon members would go into the history of this matter they will recall whose Governments were in power in 1917 and in 1935.

†The architects say the following about the defacing alterations:

So, they destroyed the complete architectural style of King’s House and it is now my duty to rectify that. As “a Boerseun” I will restore it for hon members! [Interjections.]

The hon member also spoke about the furniture which forms an important part of King’s House. The history of King’s House shows that one must be very careful before one climbs on a bandwagon. I was approached by a large number of representatives of committees who asked my permission to use King’s House. I went there myself and it was obvious that renovation was needed. I had discussions with the Administrator and also with the mayor of Durban. The first thing the mayor of Durban wanted to know was who was going to do the wiring and fix the place up. We agreed that the Department of Public Works would do the work—whatever we decided to do with the building.

I decided at a later stage, after having had talks with both of them from time to time—I issued a statement about my decision, although I do not want to go into greater detail about it now—that King’s House would be used for functions of the State President and Ministers, and that they could stay there as well.

Let us just have a look at the position regarding furniture in King’s House. At first there was obviously no furniture at all. [Interjections.] At a later stage they had to try to get it furnished for Heads of State. In 1934 a large number of items of stinkwood furniture was taken from Westbrooke in Cape Town to King’s House. In World War II they decided that this was going to be used as a hospital, and for this particular reason they removed most of the furniture. They sold what could not be used, and the remaining furniture was moved to President’s House in Bloemfontein.

After the war the King of England visited South Africa and they therefore decided to move furniture from Bloemfontein and Westbrooke down to that particular house. They also brought some other furniture for about R2 000 in order to get the house in good shape for the King and the Queen.

The final point I want to make is to say that we will restore King’s House. We have decided that. Two well-known Durban architects have already been appointed; they have been on site and they will report on the matter. We will restore King’s House and furnish it again with traditional Natal furniture. I am sure we should be able to find it. We will not take furniture from Bloemfontein, Westbrooke and Tuynhuys if any traditional Natal furniture is available. I can assure the hon member of that. We do not intend to take stinkwood from Westbrooke back there and then bring it back here again.

I want to make one last point and that is that the hon member should realise that, regarding all State property and prestige houses, we have to move furniture around from time to time. It belongs to the State. We do not try to be insensitive. It is unfortunate if anybody was hurt in this case but I think the public should realise that the furniture in this place was not traditional Natal furniture; it had been moved there from the other provinces. I can assure the hon member that if he will take a little time and put our point of view to the people of a Natal so that they will realise that King’s House is going to be a monument to Natal when it is finished and furnished for the use of the State President, then I am sure he will be satisfied as well.

I should like to thank all the hon members for their participation.

Vote agreed to.

Business interrupted in accordance with Standing Order No 19.

House Resumed:

Progress reported and leave granted to sit again.