Mr. Chairman, first of all I should like to apologize to the hon. the Minister on behalf of the hon. member for Mooi River because of his absence here today. Unfortunately there has been a death in his family. Therefore the hon. member has asked me to offer his apologies to the hon. the Minister.

I am quite sure hon. members will agree with me that we have, over the years in all debates concerned with farming, persistently heard the call that farmers should be kept on the land. I think the hon. the Minister will agree that there is a great need today for the individual owner-farmer to be kept on the land. This also applies in the case of those farmers who at the same time also grow timber. If this is to be achieved it is absolutely necessary for the management of the various sectors of agriculture to be soundly based. I think the hon. the Minister will agree with this.

I think he will also agree that the timber growers are at the present time going through extremely difficult times. First of all there is a surplus of certain types of timber resulting in low prices, which in turn affect the economics of timber growing. As a result there is a mood of despondency and instability in the industry. I believe this is a great pity, because timber production requires extremely large investments over long periods of time and because of the relatively slow turn-over of cash. Therefore, if there is one industry that needs stability, it is the timber industry. I am sure the hon. the Minister will agree that the situation at the present time is serious and that it needs his urgent attention.

Having discussed this with various timber growers it has become clear, as the hon. member for Orange Grove said on Friday, that there is an urgent need at the present time for a single association to co-ordinate all timber growers into one united group so that they can represent growers’ interests only. I want to stress the fact that an association that will represent growers’ interests only is what is needed. At the present time we have the S.A. Timber Growers’ Association, the S.A. Wattle Growers’ Association, the Forest Owners’ Association, all of which have different interests. There is an attempt to get them all together within the Federation of Timber Growers’ Associations. I think the hon. the Minister must admit that this is simply not working at the present time. The reason why it is not working is because there are too many conflicting interests within the Federation of Timber Growers’ Associations.

Firstly, we have the actual growers of timber, the individual farmer who makes his livelihood merely out of growing timber and then selling it to the processors. Secondly, we have the processors of timber, whose main function is to buy the timber and to process it either in the form of sawn timber or pulp for the production of various products, such as paper, rayon, etc. However, the problem arises from the fact that many of these processors are themselves very large producers or growers of timber, also because of the powerful economic influence which they wield and because of the influence which the Forest Owners’ Association wields. I want to put it to the hon. the Minister that they also have an influence with him. We find that the processors of timber can easily manipulate both the market and the price of timber to the detriment of the individual grower who produces timber for sale. There is much evidence of this. I recently received a memorandum from the S.A. Timber Growers Association, and I believe all hon. members here who represent timber-growing areas have received this same memorandum. On page 3 it says—

The hon. the Minister is aware of what this has created. Let us take the case the South African timber growers who have negotiated a deal to sell wood chips to Japan. They have agreed to supply 250 000 tons of wood chips to Japan. However, the Forest Owners’ Association were opposed to this, and when this deal did go through, what did the forest owners and timber processors do? They increased the price of timber in order to try to thwart the sale of those timber chips to Japan because they wanted to tie up the entire market.

This is, I believe, a very serious situation. It is not doing the timber industry any good at all. As a sugar farmer who also farms in a timber area, I believe that what we are hearing today is like a page out of the history books of the sugar industry. Prior to the 1936 Sugar Act exactly the same situation was to be found in the sugar industry, where the millers cum planters were exploiting the situation to the detriment of the individual grower. I should like to appeal to the hon. the Minister to do something about this. What is required at the present time is an amendment to the Forest Act with a view to clearly defining and separating the two distinct sections of the industry. Firstly, it should define the grower and, secondly, the processor. Both of these two groups should, under the Act, have equal representation before the hon. the Minister. If a producer or processor also grows timber, he should not be a member of the Timber Growers’ Association—that is the way I see it—because he does not truly represent the real interests of the individual grower. That is the way it was in the sugar industry prior to 1936, and since the 1936 Sugar Act I must say that the sugar industry has operated very well indeed, and here I am referring to both sides of the industry.

I have very little time left, but I do want to raise the matter of the Injasuti trails. I believe that the hon. the Minister is aware of this because Mr. Sutton has contracted him about it. There is an organization in Natal trying to promote trails through the land of the Natal Parks Board, especially the Giant’s Castle Nature Reserve and the forestry land. They want to promote this, not only amongst South Africans but also amongst overseas visitors to this country so that people who are interested in nature conservation and who enjoy the outdoor life can go on a two or three-day hike on a trail through forestry land. I think this is a very admirable objective on the part of this organization, but what it would like to do is to get the permission of the Department of Forestry to erect, at overnight camping sites, suitable ablution facilities so that the area is not despoiled. They want facilities enabling them to conduct these tours in a manner which would not only be a credit to the Natal Parks Board and the Department of Forestry, but would also satisfy conservationists who believe that the environment should be kept clean and free of pollution of any sort. That organization has appealed to us to put the matter to the hon. the Minister. I think this is, as I have said, an admirable objective on the part of that organization and I believe it would do South Africa an awful lot of good, especially with overseas visitors coming to South Africa and going on these tours. We have the assurance of this organization that nothing will be done to damage the environment or to detract from the aesthetic value of the environment in these areas, those things which we who love to visit the Natal Game Parks enjoy, appreciate and treasure so much. I should like to ask the hon. the Minister to give this his consideration because, as I have said, this is an admirable cause.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. the member for Orange Grove mentioned in his speech on Friday, and the hon. member for Amanzimtoti has just mentioned, the necessity for a single growers’ association within the timber industry. Both of them expressed the view that the existence of three such organizations at present is to the detriment of the industry. I fully endorse those views, but I should like to examine the situation more fully.

The three organizations concerned are the S.A. Timber Growers’ Association—Satga— with approximately 2 400 members, the S.A. Wattle Growers’ Union—SAWGU—also with a large membership, and the Forest Owners’ Association, the FOA, with only about 40 members. Satga and SAWGU represent bona fide growers and are working together excellently in serving the interests of their members although those interests are, to a certain extent, divergent. These two bodies are also strongly supported by the co-operative movements in both the timber and wattle industries, and furthermore they enjoy the support of the S.A. Agricultural Union. The FOA, however, is a break-away society. The majority of its members, as has been very ably pointed out by the hon. member for Amanzimtoti, are processor/grower companies, small in number but large in terms of plantation area owned. The lack of co-operation between the FOA on the one hand, and Satga and SAWGU on the other, is a matter for grave concern. The main area of conflict between the associations revolves around a difference of approach to various matters involving the industry. I think that the cardinal factor in this respect has been the influence of the processing interests of the FOA members, the majority of whom are buyers of timber in addition to being the owners of large plantations. It is all very well for the hon. member for Orange Grove to claim that a single growers’ organization is necessary, but it is my contention that he has forgotten for a moment that it is the FOA that has thwarted all efforts, in the past, to attain that ideal. That hon. member and his party, representing as they do the interests of big business, have ranged themselves squarely behind the big business interests represented by the FOA.

Not true.

As an example let me refer to his stand in the Select Committee, and in the debates in this House, on the question of the marketing of timber in the round. He then took up the cudgels against the small grower and his interests as primary producer of timber. However, keeping in mind the name of the hon. member’s constituency, it is apparently expecting too much of him to properly appreciate the very real problems the bona fide timber grower is facing today. Perhaps the citrus farmers may find in him a better ally and protagonist.

*On my part, I certainly side with the point of view of Satga and Sawgu that a single association of timber growers is essential to proper order within the industry. Such a single association should meet certain basic requirements. It should be formed from all growers, both large and small, who should then elect their representatives on a geographical basis in accordance with the principle of “one man, one vote”. I believe the State should lend recognition only to such an association. After all, this is the case with most other agricultural commodities, and since cultivated timber is also an agricultural product like maize and other products, matters should be no different in the forestry industry than in the other sectors. The FOA was not prepared to endorse this viewpoint since those of their members who had processing interests, would not permit this because it would be to their detriment. In an attempt to salvage the position, the two organizations established the Federation of Timber Growers’ Associations. I must say that, like the hon. member for Amanzimtoti, I do not have much hope for the success of this federation. The federation can only make decisions on a consensus basis. This was agreed to by the parties concerned. Up to now, such unanimity has only been reached in respect of a few matters of minor importance. The moment contentious matters appear on the agenda, another deadlock is reached and this is always prejudicial to the small grower. I do not believe that in the long term this federation can be a useful instrument in the interests of the timber growers in general and of the smaller growers in particular. For that, the FOA throws too many spanners in the works.

It is being said that the growers themselves should solve their problems by mutual agreement However, I do not have much hope for that either. I share Satga’s conviction that a solution can only be achieved by the intervention of an outside authority. I am therefore requesting the hon. the Minister to give serious consideration to exerting more pressure on the FOA and in that way forcing them back into the ranks of Satga or a new single growers’ association. He could do this by merely withdrawing his recognition of the FOA as a growers’ association. The processors within the FOA have, in any event, their own organization in which their own interests are being served properly. They should not be allowed, like a Trojan horse in the shape of the FOA, also to have a voice in the sphere of growers’ interests, interests which are to them, in any event, subordinate to their own processing interests. The forestry industry is too important to the country for us to allow these unsatisfactory conditions in the growers’ organizations to continue. The annual domestic earnings of the industry amount to approximately R600 million. It has also become a very important earner of foreign exchange. With the large timber surpluses of the past and a dark future facing the grower as far as that is concerned, the small grower is at present under serious financial pressure. He has no market for his products and the market he could still obtain, is being manipulated by the big processors. Since stability in the industry is of cardinal importance at the moment, I request the hon. the Minister to consider my proposals. If he agrees with them, he should please exert the necessary pressure.

Mr. Chairman, I wish to support the hon. member for Ermelo in his plea for the protection of the bona fide timber producer, and particularly of the small timber producer and his interests.

I should like to deal with another field within the sphere of the activities of the department I am referring to the nature reserves and the mountain catchment areas, and the problems being experienced there. On 17 March this year the hon. the Minister opened the Hottentots Holland Nature Reserve at the Nuweberg State Forest. This is the largest fynbos reserve in our country. It is unique—I believe it is unique in the entire world—and is 24 500 ha in extent.

Further to that, I wish to furnish a few particulars. The earth is divided into six floral kingdoms. I am going to deal with this briefly. Kingdom No. 1 is the Holarctic domain, or the northern kingdom, which covers 42% of the earth’s surface area. Kingdom No. 2 is the Palaeo-tropical kingdom, which covers 35% of the surface area. Kingdom No. 3 is the Neo-tropical kingdom, which covers 14% of the surface area. Kingdom No. 4 is the Australian kingdom, which covers 8% of the surface area. Kingdom No. 5 is the Antarctic or Patagonian kingdom, which covers 1%. Kingdom No. 6 is the kingdom known as the Cape Floral Kingdom and covers surface area of 0,04%, in other words, not even 1%. However, this small area has the greatest variety of species of all floral kingdoms in the world and the rarest of all plant species are encountered here. Many of these rare plant species are being threatened by a variety of human activities, by veld fires and finally by invader plants.

It is particularly these invader plants that I wish to dwell on for a while. We could also call these plants terrorists, but these terrorists are not only threatening our forestry area or our reserves; they are threatening a much wider area. In this regard, a booklet has been published under the direction of the Cape Provincial Administration. It was compiled by a certain Mr. C. H. Stirton and is entitled “Plant Invaders—Beautiful but Dangerous”. I regard this book as a “must” for every farmer and nature lover in our country in order to become aware of the problem we have to contend with.

I wish to refer to several of these invader plants as they are also referred to in this book. There are the various species of hakea, the various species of jointed cactus, the water hyacinth and the nasella tussock. When people in agriculture hear these names, they know immediately that they are dealing with a danger which is also making itself felt in the field of agriculture. However, I shall come back to that later. As far as the extent of these invaders is concerned, we also read about them in other reports tabled in Parliament.

In 1964 jointed cactus infested 1,2 million ha in the Eastern Cape alone. From 1957 up to the present the Department of Agricultural Technical Services has spent R9,1 million in combating this invader plant. In spite of the expenditure of that large amount, jointed cactus has spread into other areas. The area that has been infested with this plant has increased from 1,2 million ha in 1964 to 1,7 million ha in 1978.

We encounter the water hyacinth in our dams and rivers. In the Hartebeespoort Dam, it has created a very difficult problem. We are very grateful that the Department of Water Affairs has been 100% successful in exterminating that plant. In this regard, the cost, including the research, in coping with the problem, has amounted to R295 000. According to the annual report, the eradication programme which the Department of Forestry launched to keep these invader plants from certain areas, amounted to R319 000.

One of the other invader plants that presents the same great danger to us, is nasella tussock. In New Zealand, nasella tussock at present covers 1 million ha of land. In Australia it covers 2 million ha of land, and in the Republic of South Africa, it covers 120 000 ha of land at present. Nasella tussock has already been found on the slopes of Table Mountain. When we consider the areas where these invader plants are being encountered, areas under control of the Department of Forestry, the Department of Water Affairs— in dams and rivers—and the Department of Agricultural Technical Services, then there is a need to think in terms of co-ordinated planning, and of liaison between all the departments to enable us to eradicate these invader plants. It sometimes happens that a specific department incurs costs in a particular area to eradicate the invader plants, while on adjoining private land, the owner concerned makes no attempt to eradicate them there. The result is that the infestation simply sets in again in the area that has already been cleared. I do not think we can simply allow this state of affairs to continue. The Cape Provincial Administration convened a symposium in 1977 to which various persons were invited to discuss the future of nature conservation in the Cape Province. I think we should hold such a symposium under the direction of the Department of Forestry, at which all organizations and departments should be involved in the eradication of these invader plants. In this regard I am thinking, for example, of the Department of Water Affairs, the Department of Agricultural Technical Services, the National Parks Board, the various provincial divisions responsible for nature conservation, organized agriculture and the education departments with their various sections, by means of which the youth could be involved. I also have in mind the various service organizations and representatives of nature clubs. We are seeking a national programme to make the population aware of our problem on a national basis and to launch a cleaning-up process.

Mr, Chairman, forestry includes not only the production of timber, but also the conservation of other natural resources. One of the activities of the Department of Forestry which seldom if ever receives attention is the reclamation of drift-sand areas. Yet this is essential and very important work which the department is coping with in a very deserving way. I wish to pay tribute to the department today for what it has done over the years in this regard in my constituency as well. The declared policy of the department on driftsand reclamation reads—

The importance and value of drift-sand reclamation does not lie only in the value of the land that is reclaimed and made useful again. The importance and value of the combating of drift-sand also lies in the fact that valuable land that is being threatened by drift-sand is protected and safeguarded against being swallowed up by the drift-sand.

Drift-sand encountered on State forest property is of course controlled by the Department of Forestry. Considering the serious threat which drift-sand also poses to adjoining private properties, it is obvious why its control outside State forestry property should not simply be left to the owners of the properties involved. The reclamation and control of drift-sand is a slow, tiresome and often frustrating and expensive undertaking. For most owners it would be impossible, for financial and other reasons, to control driftsand on or near their properties without assistance. Consequently, subsidies are made available in terms of the Soil Conservation Act of 1969 to those land-owners who undertake drift-sand reclamation on their properties at their own expense. In some cases the reclamation of drift-sand areas is also undertaken by local authorities with the financial assistance they receive in terms of the Soil Conservation Act of 1969. However, where it is deemed to be in the national interest, to stabilize specific drift-sand areas, the State accepts full financial responsibility for the reclamation and the work is entrusted to the Department of Forestry. It is essential that the State should obtain ownership of such land and that after being transferred to the State, such land should be demarcated in terms of the Forestry Act of 1968. In this way, right of ownership is entrenched until the vegetation in the area is well enough established for the land to be used for other purposes again. Drift-sand reclamation was undertaken in the Stilbaai area in the Mossel Bay constituency by the Department of Forestry as far back as 1911, and I pay grateful tribute to those who showed enough vision and initiative in this regard at the time, and also to those who, over the years, have rendered land service of the highest order in this respect.

At present, drift-sand areas in State forest property extend over 31 258 ha, of which 18 338 ha has already been stabilized. The total area covered by drift-sand in the Republic is approximately 42 000 ha, of which the greater part is, or was, in a serious state.

Having now expressed my thanks and appreciation for the good work of the department in this regard, I also wish to address a few friendly requests to the hon. the Minister. Looking at table 5.7 in the annual report for 1977-’78, I find that in the Stilbaai area alone, there was 14 353 ha of so-called open sand in 1911, of which only 801 ha has been stabilized since 1911. The open sand at Stilbaai constitutes more than 90% of the open sand in the forest area of the Western Cape, while the 801 ha stabilized since 1911 constitutes only 7% of the stabilized sand in this forest area. During the year covered by the report of 1977-’78, only R3 739 was spent on drift-sand reclamation in the Stilbaai area, which is approximately 3% of the amount spent on drift-sand reclamation in the Western Cape forest area. To me this seems to be an imbalance, and I therefore make an appeal to the hon. the Minister to make a more substantial grant for drift-sand reclamation at Stilbaai so that faster progress can be made with the stabilization of drift-sand in this area.

The practice at present is still to cover the drift-sand with acacia and rooikrans branches. I accept that this has always been the most effective method, but the fact remains that it causes other areas to be invaded by these alien plants. I am merely inquiring whether it is not possible to replace this covering material with other harmless covering material, and if or where this is not possible, I wish to make an appeal to the department to apply more effective measures to control and check the invasion of adjoining land and agricultural land by this alien vegetation.

In conclusion, talking of Stilbaai, there is a serious shortage of houses for officials of the Department of Forestry. It would therefore be appreciated if a number of houses could be built at Stilbaai to provide accommodation for the officials of the department. I shall not enlarge on that; I shall leave it to the hon. the Minister to give the necessary attention to this matter.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Mossel Bay has given a most interesting speech concerning the stabilization of driftsands. I found it a very interesting contribution to the debate.

However, I want to come back to the speech made by the hon. member for Ermelo this afternoon, and I regret to say that I do not really believe that the industry is well served by this sort of petty politicking. The hon. member chose—I am prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt—to misinterpret what I had to say earlier if not to misrepresent what I had to say. He said that I stood firmly behind the interests of big business, which is not so at all. I believe that I have the best interests of the industry at heart and I say to the hon. member for Ermelo that the timber industry expects just a little more from its politicians than the sort of bickering we heard this afternoon. The timber industry expects positive action, and I thought that on Friday I had made certain positive suggestions which were worth listening to. However, I must admit that I get a little tired with the constant bickering on the Forestry Council between the Forest Owners’ Association on the one hand and the small growers on the other hand. However, if one analyses the situation one realizes that what actually the difficulty is at the moment is that there is a surplus of timber. I said that the answer to this is some sort of positive action on the part of the Government, to do away with that surplus. One looks at projections for the future and one sees that at some time in the future we shall have a shortage of timber, and I am sure this is probably so. The immediate problem is that there is a surplus, with the result that many growers, particularly small growers, are having difficulty getting rid of their timber crop. I also suggested that it was important that growers should get together and not bicker about what price they could get, but rather to do away with that surplus. It needs positive action to try to create new markets for timber so that a surplus need not arise. Once that has been achieved, I can promise hon. members that there will be no more arguing about the price, because once there is a shortage of timber, there will not be the problems we are experiencing at the moment. I made suggestions for example about timber housing. I believe that that is probably one of the areas where the most can be done by the hon. the Minister. He interjected in response to a comment I made in my speech that he had already approached the Department of Community Development about timber housing, as I suggested. I believe it is vitally important that as a matter of urgency the Department of Community Development uses more timber, and not only in regard to housing. We must remember that timber is something that affects every aspect of our lives. I believe that there should be something like a timber promotion council that will have to consider new ways of using timber. The department does a certain amount of this and organizations like the S.A. Timber Growers’ Association exercise their minds with what new uses timber can be put to. I believe the really positive contribution the Government can make, is to find new outlets for timber. I would like to see the industry as a whole get together and not argue about the differences they may have, i.e. small growers on the one hand and large forest owners and processors on the other hand. They should rather make sure that that surplus disappears. When the hon. member for Ermelo therefore starts making petty politics, I do not think he does the industry any service at all.

You have been doing that for years.

There is one other aspect of the department’s report that I want to refer to. I would like to hear a little more from the hon. the Minister about the department’s policy in regard to the large area of land that is still unafforested, and I would like to know whether it is unsuitable or unavailable for afforestation. What exactly is the hon. the Minister’s policy in regard to this land? I have already said that I know that a large extent is unsuitable. At the moment the department follows a policy of conservation in these areas. Many of these areas are watersheds, and looking after them is therefore important for other areas that are afforested.

Are you now referring to mountain catchment areas?

I am talking about mountain catchment areas and among others, also areas that are unsuitable for afforestation. I believe there are certain areas that should probably be taken away from the control of the department and be allocated to the National Parks Board.

I think the department has to be complimented because they have done extremely well in setting up forest trails and other recreation areas. The report contains most interesting statistics. It indicates how many people made use of forest areas in one way or another, be it mountaineering, following trails, picnicking, overnight camping in various areas, etc. In this regard the department is doing a tremendous job, but I am not completely convinced …

What areas do you have in mind?

That is why I suggest that we should look at table 3.2 on page 118 of the report. According to this table 1 168 241 ha of land is unafforested, unsuitable or unavailable for afforestation. Can the hon. the Minister tell me what all that land is? Are these all mountain catchment areas?

Mostly mountain catchment areas.

Fine. The point that I am trying to make, if the hon. the Minister would listen, is that I believe that recreation areas should not be the responsibility of a department like the Department of Forestry. Strictly speaking, recreational areas should fall under another department, and I believe that the Department of Forestry should be devoting their energy elsewhere.

[Inaudible.]

If the hon. the Minister wishes to make his speech now, I shall sit down so that he can go ahead. I would be very grateful indeed if he will allow me to make my point.

You are lost in the forest now.

Perhaps I shall get an intelligent answer from the hon. the Minister when he replies to the debate. It disturbs us to get generalities which never answer specific questions. I am saying that I do not believe that recreation for the South African population should be the responsibility of the Department of Forestry, although they are doing an excellent job of it at the moment. I believe that this responsibility should go over to another department, and I am suggesting to the hon. the Minister that he would do better concentrating his energies on finding new markets for timber, on building new markets for timber …

Whom do you suggest should we go to?

I do not know whether the hon. the Minister wants to make a speech, but if he wants to, I shall sit down so that he can do so. After that I shall continue with mine. The hon. the Minister keeps on grumbling away on the other side. I have suggested for instance, that there were many areas that should go over to the National Parks Board. In Natal, for example, there are many areas that could go over to the Natal Parks Board with a great deal of benefit. [Interjections.] They can do an admirable job in that sort of direction.

One other aspect that I want to mention has to do with burning programmes undertaken by the department in mountain catchment areas. I have had complaints over a long period of time specifically from the Drakensberg mountain catchment areas of Natal where burning programmes are extraordinary in that within six months or eight months there would be sometimes two burnings on a particular property and then none at all for three years or four years. When I was at the Drakensberg Gardens, I had many complaints from local farmers about the burning programme of the department. I do not exactly know how the department organizes its burning programmes in these catchment areas. I do not know whether they are scientifically conducted. From the report it becomes clear that they are. However, when one hears in situ reports of what does happen in those areas, one begins to wonder. Many of the farmers down there are extremely able and know something about soil conservation and grass burning. The policies pursued by the department leave them absolutely disbelieving of what is going on. They cannot believe that burning programmes like this can be scientifically organized. At the very least, I should suggest to the hon. the Minister that, if this is a programme of scientific research—it might just be on a trial and error basis of how one should undertake burning programmes—it would be advisable to inform the public of what is being done. It would be helpful.

I find it regrettable that one could have a situation where the public of a particular area get extremely cross about the department’s burning programmes, which have not been successfully explained by the hon. the Minister’s department My suggestion is that at the very least, a public relations operation would be successful and help the image of the department in the eyes of the general public.

Mr. Chairman, It was not really my intention to follow the hon. member for Orange Grove. But it is rather odd that he, who comes from Johannesburg, tried to create the impression this afternoon that he wanted to teach the hon. the Minister of Forestry a lesson. If there is at least something which is true, it is that I do not think there is an hon. member on this side or that side of the House who can tell the hon. the Minister anything about the Department of Forestry and the work of that department. With that I shall leave the hon. member in the capable hands of the hon. the Minister.

In the short time at my disposal, I should just like to refer briefly to the pioneering work, the important work which the Department of Forestry is doing in South Africa. It is not a department which is in the limelight every day. The department does not lend itself to that. The exception is when there is a forest fire. The extremely important work which this department does in various fields, is not always brought to the attention of the general public. The department was not only a pioneer in South Africa with the establishment of a forestry industry, but even today— after private enterprise has entered the picture—continues to do pioneering work and to establish more plantations. The department provides guidance in the field of research and also in respect of two other important facets of the forestry industry: The question of improved labour exploitation and the question of labour protection in the industry. Nor is it generally known that the Public Service Commission, approximately 20 years ago, singled out this specific department to carry out a work study aimed at the improved exploitation of labour. This particular department fulfilled the task entrusted to it in an excellent way, and also achieved excellent results with it, to such an extent that the figures show that, whereas this department had a labour force of 19 500 at the time, the department was nevertheless able to succeed in reducing that labour force to 10 504 employees, in spite of the fact that a considerably greater volume of work was done by the reduced number of employees.

I do not want to bore hon. members with long rows of figures. However, I just want to mention a single figure, a figure which is particularly enlightening. In the norm year 1958 3 910 labourers were used for the preparation, the hauling out and transportation of a total of 1,051 million cubic metres of timber. In the year 1976-’77 just over 2 million cubic metres of timber were removed from the plantations by only 2 024 labourers. It therefore amounts to a reduction of approximately 40% in the number of the labourers required, in spite of the fact that it was an operation which does not lend itself to mechanization on a large scale, but which could nevertheless be carried efficiently as a result of the work study which was undertaken to establish what could be expected from a labourer. By doing that, as well as by encouraging the labourers, this exceptional achievement was accomplished, and it is estimated that, by the improved application of labour in that particular department, an amount of approximately R14 million was saved in the previous financial year, a saving which was brought about simply as a result of an improved utilization of labour. Furthermore, this department also set an example to other departments, i.e. that labour can also be better exploited in the South African mileu than is usually the case.

Furthermore, this department also made an exceptional contribution towards protecting the labour and the labourer in his working conditions. The percentage of accidents and the percentage of injuries in the activities of this department—in its plantations as well as in its sawmills—is well below the average for South Africa as a whole. Allow me to mention just one figure. According to the latest available figures the injury frequency rate in the department’s timber growing and sawmill activities are 7,7 and 2,6, respectively, as against 19,9 and 26,5, respectively for the country as a whole. These figures speak volumes in the story of the success which the department has also achieved on this sphere of its activities.

Therefore, it is extremely pleasant for me, as someone who comes from the most beautiful constituency in the country—and nobody will argue with me about that—to be able to say that the Noscar Award was made to the oldest sawmill of this department, a sawmill which is also situated in my constituency, for the third year in succession for its achievement in the field of safety. I am also grateful that people from the Department of Forestry, also in my constituency—we in the Eastern Transvaal are used to taking the lead—were able to accomplish this exceptional feat.

In conclusion, I should just like to convey the gratitude of this Committee to the department for its excellent work, and in particular to an extremely capable Minister, someone who through his hard work and dedication is an example not only to his department but to all of us.

Mr. Chairman, it is a pleasure for me to be able to participate in this debate. I find it an excellent arrangement that we are here dealing with two Votes, Forestry and Water Affairs, which both fall under the same Minister. These two Votes deal with two of the important natural resources. Not only do these departments contribute to the exact sciences and meet our economic needs but it is very clear, from the way in which these Votes are being dealt with, that there is also room for the fine and beautiful things in life.

I therefore saw fit to concentrate more on the question of nature reserves today, on what the Department of Forestry is doing in this regard and what it means to our people. In view of what I have just said, it is not strange that the Department of Forestry was one of the first to do something about the establishment of nature reserves. In history we find that when our people arrived here in the Cape and had to satisfy their growing need for timber here, they began to chop down the trees on the slopes of Table Mountain. The Dutch East India Company then prohibited this practice and there we began with our first attempts at nature conservation. Approximately 150 years ago, when some of the forests in the southern Cape were being ruined, a forestry officer was appointed. He not only controlled these matters, but when he received additional staff, he also began to establish new plantations. In other words, that was where our Department of Forestry as we know it today, began. The Forest Act, No. 72 of 1968, provides that when the hon. the Minister wants to enhance the status of a certain area, he may, by notice in the Gazette, set aside those areas as nature reserves, protected forests or wilderness areas. In such cases roads may not be constructed and high tension wires or power lines may not be installed without the permission of the House of Assembly and the Senate.

In aggregate our wilderness areas extend over a large surface area. These are areas where we want to preserve primitive or undeveloped conditions because they are of great scientific interest as eco-systems. In order to express their value, I cannot do better than to quote from a paper which was read by the present Secretary of Forestry in 1977 at the 39th annual congress of the Forestry Association. He quoted from a report which was written by an American, Durward L. Alien, in American Forests. Inter alia, he had the following to say about these eco-systems or wilderness areas—

While the protection of water catchment areas in the forest areas and in the mountains has been one of the major tasks of the Department of Forestry, they discovered by accident that the practices which they apply to exercise good control, are also the practices which are applicable to nature conservation. The hon. member for Standerton mentioned invader plants a while ago and the Department of Forestry has found that the removal and destruction of invader plants by means of regular, controlled and selective bush fires which bring about control of the plant cover, at the same time serves the natural sciences and, of course, nature conservation as well, because the indigenous plants are given a far better opportunity to grow.

We find that the Department of Forestry owns certain properties throughout South Africa. On certain of those properties there are nature reserves for the purpose of conservation. I want to mention a few of the types of plants or geographical areas which are involved in this conservation. We find the veld and bush types, such as the indigenous high bush, the Eastern Cape and Lowveld bushveld, the dune land, coastal bush, fynbos and the mountain grasslands. All Government forests are treated and managed as nature reserves, but nature reserves are only set aside if there is a specific plant type or plant community which the Minister feels should be protected. This is done mainly to enable the foresters and other officials of the department to give specific attention to the preservation of those specific plants.

I should like to refer to the size and extent of our nature reserves. When the hon. the Minister opened the Hottentots-Holland Nature Reserve in March of this year, he opened the 29th nature reserve under the control of the Department of Forestry. These nature reserves have a combined surface area of approximately 32 000 ha. If one looks at the latest annual report of the department, one notes that the Umzimkulu area will probably be added to it in July of this year, which will cause the size and the importance of these nature reserves to be increased.

I want to thank the hon. the Minister and the department, as well as the people who did not consider their task to be solely the determination, regulation, regimentation and control of the forestry industry, but also regarded it as a method and an obligation to develop, preserve, protect and beautify our nature reserves.

I want to conclude by saying a few words on what I regard to be the value and the necessity, in men’s lives, of nature reserves at beautiful, lonely places. In this regard, I want to quote once more from the paper which was read by the Secretary of Forestry at that same occasion—

If we look at the Bible, we read the following beautiful words—

It is among the masses that the individual experiences his greatest loneliness. Nature reserves, the expensive, joyful loneliness of the quiet rain forests or the undulating plains with the sounds of animals and birds around him, offers a sophisticated human being the opportunity, the environmental conditions and the atmosphere in which to confer with himself and with his Maker, to confront himself, to re-orientate himself once more and to choose for himself the right path. These nature reserves are something wonderful, something permanent; they are like the proverb—

Mr. Chairman, I should like to congratulate the hon. member on the atmosphere he created here with his speech.

Mr. Chairman, I get the impression that the general public find it easy to ignore the Department of Forestry. Therefore I think it would be a good thing if we could pause for a while to consider the activities of the department and the industries that came into existence as a result of the forestry activities of the department as well as those of the private sector, and thus put the contribution this industry makes to the national economy in perspective.

The involvement of the State in forestry activities dates back 103 years to the days when indigenous forests in the Cape Province were placed under control in 1876. Since 1945 the Department of Forestry has been a full-fledged department During 1884 the first forest plantations were established in South Africa and this took place in the Amatola ravines in the Stutterheim district in my constituency. In the same year trees were also planted in Tokai. In the following five years five forest stations were established in the Stutterheim district, viz. Evelyn Valley, Isidenge, Kubusie, Kologha and Quacu. Only in 1894 was a start made with plantations in Knysna. In Stutterheim the Department of Forestry is the largest single landowner. It owns 26 500 ha there. Of this, 12 200 ha comprises the most beautiful natural forests in which louries and parrots are among the more distinctive species of birds one finds there. One of the State preservation installations is found at Stutterheim and provides the Post Office, Escom and the private sector with poles. Apart from this installation forestry activities resulted in four substantial and six smaller privately owned industries. Together these industries provide 1 489 unskilled and semi-skilled Black work opportunities. Jointly they are also the largest provider of labour at industrial level and they make a significant economic contribution to the community, especially if one bears in mind that 71% of the forests in the Eastern Cape are situated in the Stutterheim district. It is so much more meaningful if we bear in mind that on 31 March this year the department provided 10 341 semi-skilled and unskilled Whites and people of colour with employment and that at the same date the department had 2 254 posts on its permanent establishment.

The forestry industry is in fact a large industry. South Africa saves R400 million annually on foreign exchange in the form of timber and processed timber products. Apart from this millions of rands are earned from the export of wood, chips and processed products.

When afforestation was started 100 years ago the region of Stutterheim was still wild and desolate. The afforestation was carried out in the correct places, but in 1970 the department expanded the forest station Quaco by purchasing farms in the Quanti area. The land that was purchased has a high agricultural potential and is eminently suited to large and small stock grazing. The farming community feels that trees were planted here on land on which red meat, wool of special quality and maize had been produced up to that stage. A stock grazing area that used to be free of wild beasts has now been transformed into a haven and breeding place for red jackals and lynxes. Farmers whose farms are adjacent to this area or who farm in the neighbourhood have all of a sudden become border farmers faced with an impending disaster. In view of this it can be argued that if something like this happens at Stutterheim where 270 ha land was afforested during the past year, it certainly can happen elsewhere as well, because in the same period 2 283 ha land in the whole of the Republic was afforested. This increases the department’s total area under forests to 250 632 ha. In the meantime agricultural land and land for small stock grazing are becoming more and more scarce.

Therefore I want to suggest to the hon. the Minister of Forestry, in the first place, that it should become his department’s declared policy that any future land purchases be subject to the co-operation of and negotiations with the local soil conservation committee. Secondly, that on request of a farmer whose farm is adjacent to the area purchased, fencing material should be supplied that he can use to keep out vermin. In the third place that fire breaks be established on the State-owned property because the establishing of such firebreaks on the adjacent property might cause inconvenience because (a) transverse internal fences could be severely damaged, (b) firebreaks could cause problems with the paddock systems and (c) grazing of paddocks in which fires have been set is subject to grazing regulations in terms of the Soil Conservation Act. If the hon. the Minister does that, it will not only lead to satisfaction, but the agronomists and stock farmers will be able to live in harmony with the forestry industry.

Mr. Chairman, it is true that forestry can sometimes become a burden to those who adjoin the forestry area. I was especially interested to hear that in my constituency a reserve for leopards is to be created. In the inhospitable areas of my constituency leopards are quite a threat to agriculture, because people there farm with sheep, goats and cattle. Leopards, therefore, cause problems quite often.

I should like to discuss the activities of the Department of Forestry. I think I can say that the department has succeeded very well in the goal it set itself. In the present economic climate which requires stringent cuts in State expenditure, it cannot be expected that the Department of Forestry will be able to carry on unhindered with its expansion plans which are largely aimed at ensuring adequate supplies of timber for the country. Admittedly the amount of R44 700 000 budgeted is 7,25% higher than the allocation in the previous financial year, but if the inflation rate is borne in mind, it will be found that the effective funds at the department’s disposal are actually less than those of the previous year. I think this has presented the Department of Forestry with an enormous challenge.

Over the past decade the department succeeded in increasing its productivity substantially with the result that the expansion of its activities was not accompanied by a comparable expansion in its state of employment and labour force. Better housing and feeding of its labourers the application of work studies and the sustained safety campaign— the hon. member for Heilbron also referred to this—which was started in co-operation with the National Occupational Safety Association, all contributed to this. Attention is now given to more intensive job training. A further contribution to increased productivity will thus be made. To stay within the limits of available funds, it is nevertheless necessary to cut the labour force to an even greater extent, because increased productivity alone will not make this possible. Of necessity therefore the activities of the department will have to be curtailed.

It is interesting to look at the various functions the Department of Forestry performs. The functions of the department are the administration of the existing State plantations and timber processing plants; the insuring of adequate timber resources for the future development of the country, by establishing its own plantations as well as by encouraging private afforestation; the administration of mountain catchment areas to ensure the obtaining of clean, silt-free water—this is very important to our farmers; the conservation and administration of indigenous forests; the reclamation of drift-sand, especially as far as adjacent land is concerned; the implementation of sound nature conservation principles on all State forest property; the making available of State forest property for multi-purpose utilization; inter alia, by the supply of facilities for extensive outdoor recreation; and research into all these spheres to ensure that the various activities will be carried out on a sound, scientific basis. Inevitably higher priority is given to some of these facets than to others and some activities have to fall by the wayside, while others continue at a normal pace in spite of a shortage of funds. I think we can say that the department has succeeded very well without using more funds. I want to thank the Secretary of the department and his officials for the good work of the past year.

Mr. Chairman, I found it refreshing to listen to the various speeches made here, in which the various facets of the industry and of the activities of my department were discussed. I wish to express my appreciation to the hon. members for the very positive contributions they made in this regard.

As has been customary during the past few years, I should first like to furnish a general survey of conditions in forestry before reacting to the hon. members’ representations, criticism and ideas.

In the first place I wish to point out that during the discussion of the Forestry Vote last year, I pointed out that the forestry industry was probably experiencing the worst recession since the depression of the ’thirties and that, although it would be unrealistic to expect a speedy recovery, there were indications that the lowest levels might have been reached at that stage. That has indeed proved to be the case, and during the past year there has been a gradual but nevertheless very welcome recovery in certain sectors of the forestry industry and the industry has slowly started moving away from the low levels experienced during the recession. While this phenomenon is being welcomed and helps to relieve the position, a far greater recovery will have to take place before the industry can recover fully from the consequences of the recession. The most important contribution to the movement away from the low levels has undoubtedly been made by the sustained export effort. An amount of R154 664 981 was earned during 1978 by the export of timber and products manufactured from timber, as against R130 559 364 in 1977, an increase of approximately 18,5%. The hon. member for Orange Grove has pointed out that we need to launch an energetic marketing campaign—and I shall presently enlarge on that—that at this stage I wish to tell the hon. member that this is not the task of the Minister. We co-operate and we try to be helpful. For example, we grant subsidies on rail-age in order to stimulate exports. Hon. members should realize, however, that they cannot request on the one hand that private enterprise should be given a free hand and then, as soon as problems arise, accuse the Government of not giving sufficient guidance.

Mr. Chairman, may I ask the hon. the Minister whether he does not think that the fact that the State itself owns so much timber and sells its own timber does not make the situation worse as far as private enterprise is concerned? Does the State not have a responsibility specifically to encourage the marketing process because it is an owner itself?

Yes, the State does have an interest in that, but the State sells by far the major percentage of its raw products mainly to private undertakings and they have to find a market for their products. That may imply that since the State produces the raw product—and that is what the hon. member now wishes to argue—it should assist with the marketing of the processed product. The State cannot actively participate in marketing, except to adopt measures to render assistance. I shall come back in a moment to the measures that have been adopted. To a certain extent I therefore concede to the hon. member that the State has a responsibility, but not only because the State itself produces the raw product. In general, when something is produced here that is useful and essential to the country, the State naturally has to take an interest and try to encourage marketing and development.

Since it may interest hon. members to know how these export earnings of R154,6 million are made up, I could mention that timber in the round accounts for R3,3 million of this total amount; sawn timber and laminated timber, for R17,8 million; pulp, rayon pulp, paper and paper products, for R126,5 million; and wood chips for R7 million. We trust that this export drive will not only be sustained, but will gain even further momentum. On behalf of the forestry and timber industry I wish to pay tribute to those persons and bodies within the industry that are also single-mindedly promoting the export drive. Their contribution in the interests of the country and of the industry in particular, cannot and may not be underestimated, particularly in view of the fact that the export of timber and timber products in terms of the monetary value, has increased by more than 65% since 1975. I wish to express my appreciation to all concerned in this.

Notwithstanding the improved export initiative it will require considerable expansion of the processing capacity before the accumulated surplus of timber in the round has been disposed of. Despite the increased exports, local sawmills and veneer manufacturers only absorbed an additional quantity of 40 000 m3 of timber in the round.

During the same year the intake of pulp wood decreased by 60 000 m3, whereas the mine-timber intake increased by 5 000 m3. Apart from this, the volume of pole timber taken in at the preservation plants during 1977-’78, has shown a considerable increase of 42 000 m3. These intake figures prove conclusively what important role exports have played in the stabilizing of the industry during the recent recession. Without exports, the financial position of the timber grower would definitely have been chaotic. It is no wonder that the exports of rough timber increased by approximately 79 000 m3 during the year 1978, which represents earnings of approximately R2,8 million. Another problem I referred to last year and which is still causing concern, is the fact that notwithstanding the considerable local surpluses of timber in the round, pulp and paper products to the value of R142,5 million still had to be exported during 1978. This is an increase of R12,5 million on the 1977 figure. We therefore have a situation here where we are saddled with the raw product while we have to import the processed product. There is a serious shortcoming in this regard. Import replacement of these products can make an important contribution to the stimulation of the timber industry, create employment opportunities, and relieve the balance of payments position. I have therefore considered it advisable to appoint a committee to investigate and make recommendations on—

1. (a) the extent to which South African pulp mills with their present capacity, can replace imports of pulp, paper and paper products;
2. (b) the additional factory capacity required to increase replacements to 25%, 50%, 75% and 100%;
3. (c) additional employment opportunities that would be created by increased replacements; and
4. (d) adjustments, if any, that would have to be made in the utiligation pattern of consumers to make locally manufactured pulp and paper products that might not comply with the quality of the imported products, acceptable.

I trust that this satisfies the hon. member for Orange Grove to a certain extent He can therefore see that we are trying to assist where possible by means of investigations and stimulation.

The activities of this committee have already commenced and I am looking forward to an early report. The possibility of establishing another pulping factory, or additional factories, as well as the extension of the processing capacity of existing pulping installations is again being looked into. However, I wish to repeat what I have previously stated, namely that the capital investment in new pulping plants, where economy of size is a central factor, or even in the extension of existing pulp factories, is of such magnitude that it could hardly be afforded by private entrepreneurs, and that Government loans at a low rate of interest would be necessary. We shall have to give attention to this aspect, too, and I have already had discussions about this with my department. I trust that the IDC will be able to make the necessary contributions in this regard, because this is definitely necessary.

The sales of sawmill products have, likewise, maintained a reasonable rate of growth. I foresee a moderate growth in the marketing of timber and timber products in 1979. This view is based on the moderate revival in the building industry and the lively demand for industrial timber at the moment, so much so that at times the demand for this timber exceeds the supply. The upswing in this specific market for industrial timber and other timber in short lengths, has resulted in an imbalance arising between the saw log lengths and the required lengths of the product. It is true that the demand for industrial timber and other timber in short lengths can be met by utilizing the relatively expensive and long saw logs for manufacturing file shorter lengths, but this entails an excessive rise in the price of this timber. I should like to explain very briefly to hon. members what the position is here. Industrial timber was normally very cheap timber and was regarded by some sawmills as waste timber. It was used, inter alia, for making furniture, crates, and pallets, and as a result the demand has increased to such an extent that it can no longer be met.

The result has been that wherever supply and demand have played their part, the price of that type of timber has risen. It has also led to some of the users of this timber having to depend on the more expensive type of timber, the long lengths to which I have referred. To a certain extent this has created tension between the users of this type of timber on the one hand and the saw millers on the other hand. We are giving attention to this aspect and I wish to emphasize that in future serious attention will have to be given to it. Steps have already been taken to ascertain the extent of the disparity, the practices and market values of various categories of industrial timber, after which the present basis of saw log price calculations will have to be reviewed. This therefore also relates to saw logs supplied by the department. This is yet another case where my department is watching the position. When a disparity arises, as has been the case, we look at the prices of saw logs so as to accommodate the people who process them, to enable them to supply the market effectively. If the extent of the disparity is substantial and appears to be permanent, serious attention will have to be given to the determination of a new basis for the division of saw logs into categories for differential prices and the possible reduction, or even elimination, of the difference in price. The development of an export market for conifer products, primarily furniture, during the past year or two has indeed made a great contribution to the increased demand for industrial timber since the exporters concerned primarily utilize this type of timber for the manufacture of their products. Initially, exporters are concentrating on the European market where pine furniture is acceptable in all respects and, in fact, is preferred to furniture manufactured from veneer products. However, markets are now also being developed in countries such as the USA and Israel.

In this regard I wish to tell hon. members that it nevertheless causes concern when one finds that an export market has been developed and that the raw material being used is actually of fairly poor quality. I fear that our manufacturers are running a risk in using this type of timber. I have had discussions with them because they were experiencing problems in that they could not obtain sufficient quantities of the timber. They set out their reasons. I think it is very interesting to note that in Europe, furniture is mainly manufactured from veneer or plywood. Furniture manufactured from solid timber is no longer generally encountered there. If one now manufactures solid furniture from this inferior timber that is full of knots, it is proof to the consumer in Europe that this is not veneer or plywood. All those knots in the timber which earlier detracted completely from the value of the timber are now ensuring that it has a value, since it proves that it is actually solid timber from winch the furniture is being manufactured. I do think, however, that we are running somewhat of a risk there, yet it is very interesting to observe this development.

According to my information the export drive has thus far been particularly successful and in 1978, the export earnings already exceeded the R3 million mark, while in 1979 these are expected to exceed R10 million. It is therefore obvious that a vast export market exclusively for pine furniture is in the process of developing here. There is a possibility that the figure of R2 million might double by the year 1981, provided sufficient timber of the required specifications is available. The manufacturers claim that the timber they require is not available in sufficient quantities at present and that, as against a demand for 5 000 cubic metres per month, they are only able to obtain 3 000 cubic metres a month. They also claim that with the recent substantial increase in the price of industrial timber, partly as a result of the fact that sawmills were compelled to utilize the long and more expensive saw logs for the production of industrial timber in order to meet the increased demand, they are finding it difficult to remain competitive on the foreign market. The development of an export market for pine products with an augmented value, is to be welcomed and should indeed be encouraged. The problems which these exporters are experiencing in connection with the availability and price of the timber they require as a raw material, is already receiving attention, and it is trusted that this difficulty will be solved in the near future.

It is gratifying that the exporters concerned have already formed themselves into an association so that any problems that might arise, can be tackled at association level. My optimism for an improvement in the market for sawmill products is further strengthened by the fact that during 1978-’79, saw millers were able to take in 88% of their saw log quotas from State plantations as against only 69% the previous year. It therefore appears that there has been a considerable improvement. As far as pulpwood is concerned, it has been gratifying to learn that the greatest user of hard pulpwood in the country has decided to undertake a factory extension. Although the increased intake that will result from this factory extension is still several months away, timber growers are able to note with satisfaction that there will be an outlet for an additional volume of hardwood pulp timber.

An improved outlet for conifer pulpwood can also be expected in future when the extensions at present taking place at two pulp mills, come into full production. Further feasibility studies for the erection of additional pulping plants are also being undertaken and the results of these studies are being awaited. However, I must also point out that as a result of the relatively high expenditure in rail transportation of timber in the round, one of the pulping undertakings in the country is at present conducting an investigation into the rationalization of its supplying of pulp.

It is in itself very interesting that we should now be looking at the cost factor, that we should be analysing our costs. I have had discussions with representatives of this undertaking. They have clearly indicated to me and the department how they are now being compelled to transport timber over long distances, and how loads of pulpwood often have to be transported to the farthest pulping plant instead of to the nearest one. This is something that will definitely require attention. Attempts will have to be made to have the timber transported to the mills over the shortest possible distance. Transport is, in fact, a very important cost item. We cannot allow people to be compelled to transport timber to mills over long distances. If this approach is carried through, the department will also have to look into the conveyance of timber to pulp mills from certain remote plantation. Regardless of contracts, in the interests of the industry we shall have to ascertain whether we should proceed with these contracts and so compel people to convey timber over such long distances. If these pulpwood undertakings could be placed in the position where they could convey the timber over a short distance, they would be able to pay the timber producers far more. The little bit extra they might perhaps be able to pay at present, is now being taken up by extra transport costs.

I am looking forward to further developments in this regard, and I trust that we shall be able to obtain the necessary cooperation in this regard from all concerned. It might easily happen that the pulping undertaking concerned might adjust its timber intake in order to take in more timber from plantations situated nearer to the pulping plant and to take in less, or none at all, from distant plantations. However, rationalization of this nature is regarded as being in the best interests of the forestry industry as a whole, and negotiations are at present taking place between the undertaking concerned and the Department of Forestry in connection with the provision of pulpwood from State plantations. I have already referred to that. I believe that this is a very interesting and useful exercise.

†The world-wide energy crisis has focused attention on the use of wood as a renewable source of energy, either by its direct use as a solid fuel or by its conversion into liquid fuels which can replace or supplement those derived from petroleum. Developments along these lines would serve the dual purpose of alleviating the energy crisis and at the same time leading to the establishment of additional timber using industries, which would create a welcome market for current timber surpluses and for the large volume of plantation waste which is left behind after harvesting operations.

The forestry industry believes that the manufacture of liquid fuel, such as methanol or ethanol, would be the most promising development in so far as the establishment of additional timber-using industries concerned, particularly as it would not be necessary for such an industry to enter the export market and since the manufacture of such products would be in the national interest. Accordingly the Forestry Council with my approval last year appointed Mr. P. V. van Breda—who was then engaged in a similar investigation on behalf of the sugar industry—to carry out a full investigation into the possible establishment of plants for the manufacture of alcohol from wood. This investigation, which took place in close liaison with research organizations such as the CSIR, has now been completed, and the report was recently released with my approval. The Forestry Council considered this report during April this year, and I have now approved of the following recommendations which were made to me by the Forestry Council—

1. (a) that a committee of the council be appointed to carry the matter further;
2. (b) that the committee be authorized to appoint consulting engineers to carry out a feasibility study on the erection of a pilot plant for the manufacture of alcohol from timber; and
3. (c) that the necessary funds for this purpose be made available from the Forestry Industry Fund.

I think these are very positive steps. It seems as if the hon. member for Orange Grove is happier with these remarks than he was with previous remarks I made. The committee commenced its work at the beginning of May and has already been in touch with consulting engineers who may be prepared to undertake the investigation.

I have already said that the sawmilling industry suffered heavily during the recession. I do, however, wish to address a word of warning to the sawmilling industry, and that is that it should guard against pricing its products out of the market. I have full sympathy with this industry, but the manner in which prices were recently adjusted leaves me with a measure of concern that the new prices are perhaps not in the best interests of the industry. As an example I may mention that the differential prices established for different grades of structural timber seem to have the effect of concentrating the demand on only the very lowest grade.

The pulping industries are, on the whole, in a fairly good position, and from recent Press statements it would appear that companies engaged in the manufacture of pulp and paper are expecting better profits during this year.

The timber grower is still experiencing difficulties in realizing an acceptable price for his product—hon. members have referred to this—and this aspect will have to receive attention in the ensuing year. The Forest Amendment Bill, now serving before Parliament, will, if it is passed, create the necessary channels for placing this matter on a sound footing. The investigation into the cost of growing timber—a matter which has occupied a committee of the Forestry Council for several years—indicates clearly that a very low interest on invested capital can be earned by growing timber. It is a fact that cash flow is unusually low in the timber growing sector, in fact to such an extent that this industry is in danger of collapse. The Forestry Council took note, with concern, of the unhealthy economic position in the industry and has agreed on the necessity for such a macro-economic study to supplement the cost studies which have been carried out so far. The necessary arrangements for this will be made, and when such studies have been completed the further steps, necessary to solve the problem that has been identified, can be taken. I must point out, however, that the answer may not necessarily lie in higher prices, but that aspects such as increased efficiency, better labour utilization and attention to safety will also have to be considered. These are factors to which hon. members too have drawn attention.

The prognosis of round wood supply and demand was recently revised and indicates that approximately 512 000 ha of new afforestation will be required to the end of this century. Of this area 476 000 ha will be required for the production of coniferous pulpwood and 45 000 ha for the production of hardwood saw timber. If these areas are afforested over a period of 20 years, a mean afforestation tempo of 25 000 ha per year will be required which is very close to what has actually been planted over the six-year period from 1971-’72 until 1976-’77 which averaged 24 900 ha per year. If this tempo can be maintained and the required species planted on correctly located sites and managed for the purpose for which the timber will be required, sudden problems of shortages should not arise in future. On the contrary, advanced afforestation to meet rising future demands may well lead to more surpluses in the more immediate future.

To sum up it is my considered opinion that the forestry industry will grow together with the gradual recovery of the general economy of the country and I have reason for guarded optimism on the future of this industry.

What I have said now replies to a certain extent to the difficulties which hon. members saw.

*I may add that the situation is very difficult. I would be the last person to venture a prediction here—after all, our national economy is, to a large extent, dependent upon the general economic trends in the world— but I nevertheless think that we are entering a phase where we are growing in strength from a position of strength. The timber industry can play a very important role in this regard, particularly if we expand and try to curtail the import of processed products as I have indicated. I therefore think that in general we have reason to be more optimistic than last year.

Before specifically referring to hon. members’ contributions, I wish to inform hon. members that Mr. Danie Ackerman, the Secretary for Forestry, will unfortunately be retiring from the service at the end of this year. As was the case with the Department of Water Affairs and the Water Research Commission, I have been dealing here with people who have made a singular contribution, but who will be retiring within the next year. I wish to express particular appreciation to Mr. Ackerman. According to my calculations, when he retires, he will have had 14 days short of 45 years’ service, leaving out the study leave granted to him over a few years. He started in the office of the Forest Conservationist in Cape Town on 16 January 1935. Later he was transferred to Forestry Research, Pretoria and thereafter to Forestry Research, Pietermaritzburg. I do not intend setting out his entire career, but I am merely pointing out certain aspects. Mr. Ackerman made a particular contribution in the processing industry, in particular, and held various posts in various sections of the department with distinction. He also represented South Africa internationally. He was a member of the South African delegation to the Sixth World Forestry Congress in Madrid in 1966, and leader of the South African delegation to the 15th Iufro Congress—i.e. the International Union of Forest Research Organizations—in Gainesville, Florida in 1971. In 1974, he became Secretary for Forestry and Chairman of the Forestry Council. He was also Chairman of the National Hiking Way Board. I wish to express my particular appreciation to Mr. Ackerman. As hon. members are aware, South Africa can be proud of her officials. They are capable, they have integrity, and they compel respect throughout the world. Mr. Ackerman is also one of this outstanding group of officials. He was the initiator of the hiking way system. The hon. member for Orange Grove has stated that it should not be the task of the Department of Forestry—and I shall return to the hon. member’s argument in a moment—but Mr. Ackerman has made a contribution, by means of these hiking ways, to making our forests accessible to our young people. We are still extending the hiking way system. The previous Minister of Forestry also made an enthusiastic contribution to this, and the proposal that a hiking way system should be proclaimed from the Cape to the Limpopo actually originated with him. In any event, Mr. Ackerman was the initiator of these hiking ways, and he still takes a great interest in them. Now and then, when I have the time, I join in the hikes. If one bears in mind, when walking with him, that Mr. Ackerman is soon to retire on pension, then one wonders whether members of the House would be able to do this when they go on pension! I therefore wish to convey a particular word of thanks to Mr. Ackerman for his long and fine service.

I also just wish to announce that Mr. Sonntag, who has already been in the service of the department since 1937, will take over the position at the beginning of next year when Mr. Ackerman retires. We are very pleased that Mr. Sonntag is present here today. At present he is Chief Director of the Forestry and Timber industry. He is being promoted to the position of Secretary and will succeed Mr. Ackerman. I congratulate him and wish him a successful term of employment in his new capacity in the department.

I now want to reply to the representations that hon. members have made. The hon. member for Orange Grove, as well as other hon. members, raised the question of a single growers’ organization. Various hon. members stated that the Minister and the department should take the lead in this regard. However, this is a very difficult matter. Langenhoven said that if one’s dog was fighting with the neighbour’s dog, one hit the neighbour’s dog to stop the fight. We are dealing with three organizations here, and the department has interests in all three of them. Some hon. members are now saying that I should hit this dog and others are saying that I should hit the other dog.

Hit them all.

You are just playing one off against the other.

That makes the position difficult in any event. I wish to point out to hon. members that my predecessor, the department and myself have tried to solve this problem. On 29 November last year I had all these organizations, namely the S.A. Timber Growers’ Association, the Wattle Growers’ Union and the Forest Owners’ Association together round a conference table and discussed matters with them.

†It is apparent to me that there is a clash of interests as far as these organizations are concerned. I am convinced, however, that the differences between them are far less important than the grounds which exist for their cooperation.

I agree with you.

I told them as much.

*I told them over and over again: Bury the hatchets; get together and try to reach a mutual agreement in a single organization. The hon. member has stated that with regard to the export trade and general organization should be established. There are various interested parties in the timber industry that saw and process timber. When we have an over-supply in the country, everyone tackles the overseas trade separately. I have told them to get together and establish a single organization.

†The hon. member for Amanzimtoti mentioned the sugar industry in this regard. I for my part want to mention the citrus industry, an industry with which I have grown up and which I know. The citrus industry managed— with big investments in some cases—to build up a market by co-operation throughout the world. The same can be said of the sugar industry. I quoted these examples to these people.

*However, the people feel that each should go his own way. I think they are wrong, but they will have to bump their heads, since we do not have such a volume of timber available that it has a great influence on the foreign market. Therefore I cannot see why various groups …

Mr. Chairman, may I ask the hon. the Minister how he is going to overcome this bad business practice of obviously squeezing the growers when it comes to prices and markets?

I was explaining a point when the hon. member put his question, and I should like to dispose of it before I reply to his question. I cannot agree with these people that everyone should try on his own to find a market overseas. In this respect too, they have not yet been able to agree. As far as I know there are a few groups that are each trying to build up a market. I wish to tell hon. members now that on occasion we received information from one of our trade attaches that one South African undertaking had obtained a market for timber products in a certain country and a little later it was undercut in the same country by another South African undertaking. One would like to allow free enterprise to have its own way, but when people act in this way, they need some talking to.

The hon. member asked, where there was a conflict of interests, where one group of growers were also—as in the sugar industry—processors, whereas the other group were exclusively growers and they differed on the price that had to be paid for their product, how we were going to reconcile those two approaches. I cannot say that I have a clear solution to that, but in my view the solution is that these people should belong to a single association, get together around a conference table, and get to understand one another’s problems.

The hon. member for Amanzimtoti also requested that legislation similar to the Sugar Act should be introduced here. I do not think that that is going to be the solution. The problem is not quite so simple and not quite the same as that in the sugar industry. These interest groups have invested vast amounts in the establishments of forests. Very well, the sugar mills also invest a great deal, but the ratio is not the same. We shall have to take a thorough look at one another’s interests. However, I wish to tell the hon. member that as far as I can see, these people should get together around a conference table and get to understand one another’s problems. I have already mentioned that the pulping people are now going to look into the cost of transportation. They should like to pay the grower more, but they are unable to do so. They have to expand and have to obtain investments from the private sector. The private sector is not going to invest in a pulping organization unless it can be clearly indicated to them that they can be assured of high dividends in future.

Mr. Chairman, may I ask the hon. the Minister how it is that the processors are making so much money and profit that they are buying out the private timber growers because these farmers cannot survive economically? Surely something is wrong with a system which causes the one end to make so much profit that they have the money to buy out the other end.

I do not want to argue the point, but maybe they are making the money elsewhere. [Interjections.]

*It is so. They do not make it…

They cannot pay a decent price for the timber. They say they cannot afford to …

Well, that is business. They are trying to get the timber at the lowest possible price.

But what about the private grower?

I have a lot of sympathy for the private grower. I am a private grower myself and I am struggling as far as timber is concerned. There is no doubt that it is a very difficult situation.

*It is not easy to deny these large timber users—particularly the pulp mills in which hundreds of millions of rands have been invested—the right to determine the price by simply enforcing it on them from above by legislation. Those hon. members themselves stated that they were in agreement with the general approach that one should keep private initiative as free as possible, but then on the other hand they advocated that we should draw in on the reins. It is very difficult to find a middle course. I do not think that we have an immediate and easy solution to that, except, as I have stated, to ensure that these people get together around a table and so gain an understanding of one another’s problems. I have told hon. members that the industry has to expand. I cannot see how these pulping companies are going to attract outside capital unless they can present a favourable picture to the investor. If we compel them to pay too much for timber or if we dangle a sword over their heads in the form of legislation, we are going to frighten away these investors. We want them to persuade the private entrepreneur to invest in the industry. Hon. members will therefore see that one has to adopt a very careful approach to the matter. One should not deter and chase away the people with the investment capital and processing facilities with threats, for then one is not going to attain the market one would like to have for the private grower. At the moment the position is, however, that the private grower is experiencing the problem that he has no bargaining power, yet I wish to tell hon. members that if the private growers would stand together they would, on a cooperative basis, be able to force those large undertakings to pay them a more acceptable price, or at least not to take advantage of their position. A course is therefore open to them along which they might progress.

To proceed, I just wish to refer briefly to another aspect. However, I cannot dwell on that too long.

The hon. member for Orange Grove referred to a more aggressive marketing policy and housing, etc. I wish to tell him—I have already done so—that these are matters to which the department and I have devoted a great deal of attention. In this regard I wrote to Administrators and to local authorities in the peri-urban areas. I also had discussions with the hon. the Minister of Community Development and the hon. the Minister of Public Works. Wherever possible I spoke to people about this matter. However, there is a prejudice in this respect which has also developed in South Africa. To a certain extent, our architects have played a part in this. I spoke to the hon. the Minister of Transport. My department spoke to them. As far as I am concerned, a great deal of prejudice has developed in this country against timber products and timber houses. However, I must state—hon. members referred to this—that the Department of Plural Relations and Development is making more use of timber houses in certain areas. Timber houses are more acceptable than other types. Another important aspect is, however, the question of costs, a question to which producers will have to devote attention. I therefore content myself with telling the hon. member that we are doing everything possible as far as these aspects are concerned, and that in the nature of things the Minister cannot dictate to private undertakings. Nor can I undertake a marketing campaign on their behalf. We can only stimulate them by adopting auxiliary measures and having a word with them occasionally when we think they are making mistakes.

The hon. member for Humansdorp referred to the two existing organizations. He also referred to the prevailing economic conditions. I think in my general survey I replied to a large extent to what he said. His request was that exports should be promoted and that the new Act should give added stimulus to them. These are all matters I dealt with in my survey. I also emphasized that the establishment of plantations was not an attractive proposition at present, but as we all know this is a long-term matter and we have to consider it in that light.

The hon. member for Middelburg apologized for the fact that he was unfortunately unable to be here today. On Friday he referred to the hiking way they wish to establish between Middelburg and the Loskop Dam. He gave an interesting discussion on that and requested that assistance should be rendered. I understand that the Hiking Way Board will, where possible, render assistance to them in the development of this excellent undertaking.

I have already referred to certain of the problems in connection with marketing and to problems of the small farmer, matters which the hon. member for Amanzimtoti raised.

†He said that the situation was serious and that a single organization was needed. I have already dealt with that matter and I am not going to enter into a detailed discussion regarding the pros and cons of it. I personally would prefer one organization. After having had a discussion with these people, I wrote to them saying I thought that the federation served the purpose and that we should give it a chance to see what it can achieve. This Federation of Associations came into being only 18 months ago.

Then the hon. member referred to the promoting body for tours. The people to whom he has referred can contact my department. It does give assistance, but we cannot, of course, give exclusive rights to one organization. However, I do not think that these people should experience difficulties. If they do co-operate we should be able to facilitate matters for them, and if we do not have all the facilities available we shall at least know that there is a need in certain areas.

*The hon. member for Ermelo also discussed the two organizations. He wants me to wring the neck of one of these organizations and allow the other one to survive. I have already pointed out that this is a very difficult matter. The hon. the Minister of Agriculture is having problems with two maize organizations, and hon. members know what a struggle he has already had. Once our people have gone their separate ways, it is rather difficult to get them together again. The hon. member also pointed out that the federation was not the appropriate organization and pointed out once again that the market was being manipulated by the large consumers. I do not think it is quite as bad as all that, but I do agree with him that abuse does take place, and we shall do our best in this regard. Unfortunately I cannot go any further than that. I do not think it offers a solution to destroy one organization in order to save all the others.

The hon. member for Standerton, in his usual lively and interesting way, directed our attention to the botanical aspects of the activities of the department and to the floral kingdoms of the world. He has referred to the book by Stirton on invader plants, to the hakea, the hyacinth, nasella, jointed cactus, and so on, and also pointed out that R319 000 had been allocated to the combating of invader plants in the Forestry estimates this year. I wish to point out to hon. members that the department is making very good progress, but I do not have the time available now to go into detail. Those hon. members who drive around Devil’s Peak will notice that the spruce firs that had invaded that area and had already covered a large area of the mountain, have already been cleared to a certain height. There are people who are not happy about that. This year, I went out with the department to view certain areas and hon. members know that I also accompanied them last year. I can therefore give hon. members the assurance that the department is already making good progress in the eradication of hakea.

The hon. member rightly referred to the problem of the private owner in cases where the State was unable to spend money. That is also being attended to. The hon. member also suggested a symposium to discuss this matter so that all the persons and bodies concerned could act with a certain measure of uniformity. We can consider that. The Department of Water Affairs is confronted with the hyacinth and water plants and the Department of Forestry is confronted with the invader plants, and in the end it amounts to this, that the people prefer that these two departments should handle the screaming baby and make the best of things. Nobody else wants to be saddled with the problem. In my view there are certain advantages attached to that, but there are areas where we have no control and where we therefore cannot do it. My department and I shall definitely give further consideration to the hon. member’s idea of a symposium to discuss the matter.

The hon. member for Mossel Bay raised the interesting matter of drift-sand, and set out the present policy and particularly the position at Still Bay. As far as Still Bay is concerned, since 1911 only 800 ha has been stabilized out of a total of 14 000 ha. I am inclined to differ with the hon. member in this regard. Two weeks ago, officials of the department and I went to look at the position at Blombos and in the direction of Still Bay. It is mainly private owners who are experiencing problems there. The department is experiencing problems to obtain the land, but as is the case with invader plants, the department cannot spend State funds on private land. We shall therefore have to find a solution in this regard. As far as the progress there is concerned, the hon. member has suggested that we should not make use of the acacia and rooikrans branches. It is interesting to note that the rushes being used for this purpose are very effective. The rushes are cut on the farms or fanners nearby and then laid on the drift-sand. I therefore believe that to a certain extent we are already complying with the hon. member’s request.

Furthermore, I wish to give the hon. member the assurance that we shall take another look at the estimates to see whether his constituency and particularly Still Bay, is receiving its rightful share. I shall request the department to take a very careful look at that. The drift-sand problem on the west coast is of course an enormous one, and since it perhaps constitutes a greater danger there at the moment, the department has spent a major part of the available funds there.

The hon. member for Orange Grove, in his second speaking turn, referred again to the surplus in the timber industry. I think I have largely replied to all his questions and arguments in this regard. The hon. member, inter alia, made a plea for more positive action.

†He also asked for a timber promotion council, and I have already mentioned the fact that I have had these people together and that I asked them to market jointly overseas. I experienced great difficulty in convincing them to accept my ideas. They rather gave the impression that they thought that I did not know what I was talking about and that I should rather stick to politics or to my department. I was in the saw-milling business myself and as I am still very concerned with the forestry industry, I know a bit about it. I do not want to repeat what I have already said, but I can assure the hon. member that we are doing our best to assist where we can.

*The hon. member also referred to the large tracts of land which we are not utilizing for forestry purposes. I must express my disappointment that the hon. member should have displayed such terrible ignorance in this regard. He requested, inter alia, that we should transfer parts of this land to the National Parks Board. When I wanted to know from him what parts, he became annoyed and he has still not told me what parts he was referring to.

I was thinking of areas like the Tzitzikamma and other areas here in the western Cape. I do not know.

Yes. I think the hon. member’s best reply would be “I do not know”, as he has just said. I shall try to explain to the hon. member what the position is throughout the country. There are certain areas which have good soil and where the rainfall is high enough for afforestation. Because we did not have the products available in this country, it was thought to be in the interest of the country to let the forest industry develop through the department. These areas are mostly situated on or near the high rainfall areas, in mountain ranges.

*The department is establishing plantations from the west coast, from the Cedarberg area, where our State forests are, in those areas and spots where good soil is to be found. These plantations are being established throughout the country as far as the east coast and from there northward again as far as Soutpansberg in the Northern Transvaal. Related to that, there are also those areas on the mountain peaks where conservation has to be applied, a task also assigned to the Department of Forestry. It is our task to ensure pure water there, because we cannot allow those areas to become commercialized, nor can we allow development to take place there. If we were to do that, then we should be incurring the risk, in a country already poor in water, of silting up dams, of soil erosion taking place, and of other abuses occurring. That task has been entrusted to the Department of Forestry. For that reason, the area from the Western Cape up to Northern Transvaal has been declared mountain catchment areas in terms of the Act. This has been done to identify and to protect those areas. We are constantly buying more land. In Natal, we are finalizing matters in co-operation with the Department of Agricultural Technical Services, and it is being ascertained where, topographically speaking, the function of this department lies in respect of water conservation and nature conservation in those areas. Forests have been established on the slopes of many of those mountains where the soil and the climate are favourable. I must tell hon. members that it is not possible for the Department of Forestry to transfer parts that have already been afforested, to other departments or bodies. The department is carrying out the task of conservation and the creation of mountain catchment areas and wilderness areas just as efficiently as any other organization could do it I said this at the time of the opening of the Hottentots Holland Nature Reserve. I do not think the various persons and bodies engaged in nature conservation in this country should now start making demands on one another. In particular, this should not be done to the Department of Forestry, which is fulfilling a crucial task. The department is also fulfilling a crucial task as far as water and nature conservation are concerned. Where the department’s forestry production activities are mainly situated in the same areas, pieces of that land cannot be transferred to other persons and bodies. I made it clear there that each of these organizations, including the National Parks Board, should purchase land in other areas where there are great possibilities. They must not request, where an existing organization is already doing effective work, that this should be transferred to, for example, the National Parks Board. We could have long arguments about this, but I do wish to give hon. members the assurance that I do not think it would be in the best interests of the country that pieces of land should now be ceded to other organizations.

Mr. Chairman, may I ask the hon. the Minister whether, in view of the hon. the Prime Minister’s statement that State departments were going to rationalize operations, he does not think it is sensible that when one deals with people visiting wilderness areas, they should be dealt with by one department and not three as is presently the case?

It should then be dealt with by the Department of Forestry, because that department controls the wilderness areas and through legislation have the say over wilderness areas in this country.

I should prefer that the Department of Forestry look after the National Parks Board rather than Agriculture.

The conservation of natural forests throughout the country is part of the responsibilities of the Department of Forestry. These forests fall within the department’s areas and within the province of its task. I just wish to tell the hon. member that when one rationalizes, one should also study the whole set-up sensibly, otherwise one is creating other problems. Although it is a matter about which one could perhaps argue, I am leaving it at that.

The hon. member has also alleged that injudicious burning is taking place. I wish to tell him that my department co-operates with the local communities and with the Department of Agricultural Technical Services and that they are engaged in intensive research. Scientists are at present doing research on the question of where, when and at what intervals burning should take place. I wish to content myself with merely stating clearly to the hon. member that my department does not bum veld injudiciously, but with all the scientific knowledge at its disposal.

The hon. member for Barberton apologized and said he could not stay long. I wish to thank him for a very fine contribution. He highlighted the success of labour utilization, the work studies and the training which the department launched. He also referred to a sawmill, but did not mention the name. However, this is evidently Elandshoek, since that has an outstanding record of safety. In general the department has a very good record as far as these matters are concerned. I am pleased that we have received a pat on the back from hon. members in that regard.

I also wish to mention that owing to the death of a close relative, the hon. member for Mooi River is unfortunately unable to be here today. He has tendered his apologies.

The hon. member for Heilbron dwelt on the function of nature conservation, nature reserves, legislation governing wilderness areas, water catchment areas, etc. He gave a very fine elucidation of the task of the department, and I am surprised that the hon. member for Orange Grove did not listen to him. Then he would not, in the first place, have suggested that this function should be taken away from the department Even if one advances the argument that we should rationalize, it is still clear that we are dealing with a vast country, with the many attendant problems.

The hon. member mentioned the enrichment that nature brings to one. It is for that very reason that the Department of Forestry started the recreational movement As I have already said, this took place on the initiative of Mr. Ackerman. We have excellent natural areas, areas we should not like to commercialize, but to which we should nevertheless like to admit to the public. Obviously we do not want to construct roads, erect large hotels and effect all sorts of improvements enabling civilization eventually to encroach so far into the wilderness areas and natural areas that those would be totally destroyed. For that very reason, we have our hiking ways. Our young people—in fact, all of us—can make use of our hiking ways without great development having to take place. In this way they can see nature conserved in its original state, develop a love for it, and also make a personal contribution in that respect I thank the hon. member for his contribution in this regard.

The hon. member for Griqualand East has also referred to the history of the department. He furnished a historical survey of the activities of the department, particularly in so far as it concerns his own area. Then, he has also referred to the red jackals and lynxes. Unfortunately this is indeed a problem. When one is concerned with nature conservation on the scale on which the Department of Forestry and other organizations do it, one realizes that nature conservation and farming simply do not go hand in hand. Wherever the veld life and wild life have been re-established, there is an increase in the number of predators, baboons, etc. Those wild animals— they are not necessarily always predators— are then inclined to create problems for the farming community in the immediate vicinity.

The hon. member made a suggestion. In the first place, he referred to the small percentage of land which had been afforested in recent years. However, this is on account of a curtailment of our funds during the past few years. In future there will again be an increase in afforestation. The hon. member also requested that we co-operate with the local soil conservation committees, and that we supply fencing material free of charge and that we establish fire-breaks on the land of the Department of Forestry. I can appreciate the hon. member’s arguments, but unfortunately I cannot simply accept his proposals. After all, the owner of the land concerned also has his responsibility. However, we are already cooperating with local agricultural organizations. If the hon. member knows of instances where there is no proper co-operation, he may as well bring this to my attention. I take due cognizance of this problem. However, I do not know what we are to do about the lynxes and the red jackals, except to cooperate with one another in that respect and, where possible to control those predators.

I am living in Newlands at the moment. A few days ago I was walking in my garden and noticed that some damage had been done. I wondered what could have happened and at first thought it was perhaps the neighbour’s dog that had been responsible. But then somebody told me that this was the work of porcupines that had come down from the direction of the mountain. This shows us how easily the natural life can be re-established once it is protected. One finds that nature even comes back to the cities, particularly when there are nature conservation areas in the vicinity, such as against Devil’s Peak, above Newlands. It is therefore important that nature conservation should be applied in a balanced way, and that animals which present a problem should not be allowed to get out of hand.

I wish to give the hon. member the assurance that I have a great deal of sympathy with the farmers who have to suffer damage of this nature. I shall request my department to go out of its way to accommodate farmers when they suffer damage as a result of the activities of lynxes and red jackals. However, it is somewhat difficult to obtain sufficient funds, particularly for game proof fencing.

Finally, the hon. member for Humansdorp referred to the leopard, an animal that has become almost extinct, but which has now found a haven in the conservation areas in the mountains. The hon. member also referred to the various activities of the department, and to the good housing which the department provides for its staff. He also mentioned the increased productivity which the department has effected among its staff. I thank the hon. member for his positive contribution.

Actually I am already exceeding my stated time, and now I am being chivvied by the Whips. I trust hon. members will therefore appreciate that I cannot go any further now. However, I wish to express my appreciation to them once again for a pleasant debate on a very interesting and pleasant subject.

Mr. Chairman, I was unaware of the fact that Mr. Ackerman would be retiring as Secretary soon. I want to add my best wishes to those of the hon. the Minister. I myself have a tremendous regard for Mr. Ackerman. I hope he does not take my suggestions about forestry trails and tourists personally, because I do, in fact, think that a man like Mr. Ackerman would be better to handle the whole matter of nature conservation. I do wish him well in his retirement. We are very sorry to see him go. I believe that he has upheld the highest possible Public Service standard in South Africa. Best of luck to him, therefore, from these benches.

Vote agreed to.

Vote No. 37.—“Sport and Recreation”:

Mr. Chairman, recently you told an hon. member that the Free State had lost many games in injury time. [Interjections.] In the light of what happened on Saturday you proved that you are indeed a prophet I should like to ensure that I am not ruled out of order during injury time and that is why I am rising at this early stage to express a few ideas.

But first of all I want to thank my colleague and predecessor—the present Minister of Plural Relations and Development and soon Minister of Co-operation and Development—for his years of contributing to South African sport. His zeal, dedication and infectious enthusiasm for the cause of sport are well known to us. The high esteem he won in the world of sport is perhaps best illustrated by the fact that I have not once met a sportsman or sportswoman, a sports administrator or enthusiast who had displayed anything but warm affection and great appreciation towards him, and I have met many of them in recent months. We wish him everything of the best for the great task now resting on his shoulders.

I should like to raise three matters in view of the debate to follow. Firstly, there are the points of departure of the NP in respect of sport in South Africa; secondly, South Africa’s position with regard to international participation, and thirdly, a few aspects concerning the Government’s decision that the Department of Sport and Recreation will in future render services to all population groups as a service department.

Firstly then, the NP’s standpoints on sport A shortage of time does not permit me to repeat in full the eight premises and guidelines as formulated by NP congresses in 1976. But we all know that these guidelines seek to achieve the following objectives: Sound co-operation and interaction among all population groups with regard to competition as well as administration; the opportunity for all sportsmen and sportswomen from all population groups to achieve their full potential and to be able to represent South Africa, and further: the mentioned cooperation and interaction, built on an infrastructure of clubs and organizations of their own for each population group, as well as their own competitions, alongside other competitions in which all groups are involved.

The NP believes firmly and unambiguously that pursuance of the guidelines to which I have referred and the objectives I have just formulated, will be in the best interests of South Africa and all its people in the field of sport Unfortunately some people are holding up a caricature of these guidelines and objectives for the sake of political gain, and as a result are creating confusion. This confusion is being compounded by the fact that in some types of sport, NP guidelines are being deviated from unwisely, to such an extent that the position in practice is quite different to what the NP would prefer. In other cases, again, consistent following of NP guidelines is impossible.

Against this background, on behalf of and with the full co-operation of the Government and this side of the House, I should now like to make the following clear statements:

1. (a) The NP reaffirms its well-known standpoints on sport as formulated in 1976 as general and fundamental guidelines to be pursued wherever practicable. Exceptional circumstances do not always permit of consistent implementation of the mentioned guidelines and it is recognized that special arrangements are justified in such circumstances. But unnecessary deviations must be guarded against, and exceptions must be dealt with in such a way that they do, in fact, prove the rule.
2. (b) It is not regarded as being in the interests of sport or of South Africa to enforce the mentioned guidelines by means of legislation. The autonomy of sports bodies in respect of sport is recognized, on condition that good order does not suffer and that the general laws of the land are recognized.
3. (c) Development in the field of sport geared to the development of opportunities on a community basis is regarded as being of decisive importance in the realization of the mentioned guidelines.
4. (d) The autonomy of owners of facilities with regard to the availability thereof for sports meetings is recognized. However, where existing facilities are not suitable for utilization within the framework of the mentioned guidelines, it is desirable that suitable facilities be created or existing facilities adapted.

Before I proceed with what I want to say, I want to point out that my predecessor, the hon. the Minister of Plural Relations and Development, has entered in the meantime this Chamber. Consequently I should like to repeat what I said in his absence. I want to thank him sincerely for his dedicated service and enthusiasm. I want to testify here in public, as I did a short while ago, to the great appreciation there is among the whole sporting community of South Africa for the contribution he has made.

Perhaps at a later stage in this debate I shall elaborate on these four basic statements I have made. At this stage I merely want to add this: Contrary to what commentators have sought to imply recently, the recognition of the autonomy of sports bodies is nothing new to the NP.

De facto and de jure, sports bodies have always been autonomous. They are not controlled by any law and no legislation has been introduced to enforce the NP standpoints on sport. That is why there is a real difference between what happens in sport in practice on the one hand and the sensible NP guidelines on the other.

However, if good order were to suffer, the picture would change and it would become the Government’s duty to become involved and to take steps to maintain good order. This distinction I am drawing should be seen as a very important one. Consequently I want to elaborate on it somewhat.

†In South Africa race relations are of the utmost importance and no Government can ever disengage itself from this subject.

There is a delicate balance built into any area where people from our many population groups are simultaneously involved. The basic and fundamental social and political pattern of distinguishable communities which exist in South Africa will, if threatened or if tampered with too often, assert itself.

Such assertion may take the form of withdrawal by one or more of the population groups from a particular type of sport, or may even split existing co-operation between population groups in sport wide open.

Against this background it must be realized that autonomy of sports bodies carries with it a heavy responsibility. Likewise the way in which the Press handles the autonomy of sports bodies and decisions arising therefrom carries the same heavy responsibility. If a situation of racial friction should develop, or if individuals, newspapers or pressure groups should misuse sport as a vehicle for political change in South Africa, then sport will move into the political arena, with the logical consequences attached thereto.

I therefore ask of everybody to handle sport and sport autonomy with the utmost care and responsibility. In particular, I ask of sponsors and administrators to do so.

The recognition of sports autonomy is not a blank cheque. The freedom of sports bodies to make their own decisions is limited by their duty towards society and their country, and by the autonomy of other institutions and organizations in other spheres.

Allow the politicians of South Africa, within the framework of their autonomy, to set the pace of political development in Southern Africa.

*Put simply: The slogan “Keep politics out of sport” can only apply if one says at the same time: “Keep sport out of politics”.

A final dimension with regard to the recognition of autonomy is that the Government and I, by recognizing it, do not simply agree with everything that is done within the framework of that autonomy. For that reason I want to appeal to administrators and journalists not to link the Government and myself constantly to decisions by sport bodies, decisions with which we do not necessarily agree. The reporting of and comments made on a recent speech I made at Oudtshoorn, are an example of this.

Secondly, I want to refer briefly to South Africa’s position with regard to international participation. From questions replied to during this session, from the Press and now again, specifically in regard to the planned Springbok tour to France, it is clear that we are having an uphill struggle in many fields. In many types of sport we are out in the cold at the moment with regard to active participation in international competition and also full representation on international control bodies. Fortunately there are many rays of light, too, for which one is grateful, and which are dealt with in full in the latest annual report of the department, but this does not detract from the fact that internationally speaking, we are going through an extremely difficult phase.

It is a pity that this is the case. But I want to hasten to add: It is unfair that this is the case.

My experience and that of South African sport administrators, as conveyed to me, is that the sporting community of the world generally has great appreciation for what has been achieved in South Africa in respect of sport; that the sportsmen and women of the world want to compete against us; and that the majority of international sports administrators are favourably disposed to South Africa. The problem does not lie with them, the international sporting community, No, the problem lies with the political community of the world. It lies with the Western Governments that allow themselves to be blackmailed by the so-called Third World, by the communist power bloc, and by small political pressure groups and activists. The problem lies with Governments that lend themselves, as they do in fields other than sport, to double standards as regards South Africa. The problem lies with Governments that, sometimes subtly and often unashamedly, pressurize their sportsmen into not competing against South Africa.

If this is, in fact the case—and I have no doubt that it is so—that political expediency is the fundamental cause of our international sports problems, the time has arrived for everyone in South Africa to gain clarity on a number of matters in regard to which I now want to put the NP’s standpoint unambiguously, because this too falls into the sphere of politics.

Firstly, while we place a high premium on our sporting relations with the outside world and are prepared to do everything possible for the sake of opening doors to all our sportsmen and sportswomen, we may not allow ourselves to be blackmailed. To express this radically: If we have to sacrifice sports ties for the sake of the maintenance of a political system which will ensure the right to self-determination of minorities in South Africa, we shall have to make this sacrifice.

Secondly, it is our duty in the field of sport, and we are trying our utmost, to create a fair dispensation in South African sport. In this task, I make bold to say, we have already succeeded and even our most ardent opponents would concede that we have already succeeded in this to a large extent However, the fact is that what we are doing in the field of sport, must bring about lasting solutions for sport here. We dare not take steps for the sake of short-term benefits which will, in fact create long-term problems. Our only norm should be: What is good for South Africa and all its people and not what the outside world prescribes to us.

Thirdly, it is time for us to devote more energy, skills and money on the establishment of exciting opportunities for our sportsmen and sportswomen within South Africa and Southern Africa. In this way we can contribute towards overcoming the disadvantages of a shortage of international competition, where they exist, and maintain our self-respect.

Fourthly, cognizance must be taken of the unholy activities of organizations within South Africa. In this regard I specifically want to mention Sacos, under the leadership of persons such as Messrs. Hassan Howa and Father. The time has come for this organization to be exposed by every well-meaning South African. Sacos is a rebel organization undermining South Africa in the international field. They are linked to the Supreme Council for Sport in Africa and have as their external agent Sanroc, which is staffed by exiles from South Africa—at an earlier stage people such as Brutus, and now Ramsamy. Along these channels there is direct contact with the UN’s Special Committee against Apartheid.

Internally their method of operation is intimidation of players and administrators. Sportsfields and facilities are denied to participants by exertion of pressure on, particularly, Coloured management committees controlling these facilities. They insult international fact-finding commissions to South Africa and refuse even to negotiate with recognized sports bodies in South Africa or with the Department of Sport and Recreation. It is of this organization that the Natal Mercury, an anti-Government newspaper, says the following—

I want to tell Sacos and its leaders this afternoon: In South Africa’s sports dispensation there is no place for political activists. If they are in earnest in their intention to promote sport, my door is open to them, as I have already said earlier in this session. The services of the Department of Sport and Recreation are, as already announced, available to all population groups. They can either make use of them, in cooperation with the recognized sports bodies in South Africa, in which case a great and rosy future awaits their members, too, or else they can carry on prejudicing South African sport. If they choose the latter, they are passing a final judgment on themselves, because in that case they are robbing those people whom they allegedly want to serve, of new opportunities and benefits.

Thirdly, I want to refer to the decision that the Department of Sport and Recreation will in future render services to all population groups as a service department. This decision was announced on 27 March 1979 and arose principally out of the following—

1. (a) Under the previous dispensation the three Government departments serving, respectively, the Black peoples, Coloureds and Indians, managed the sport and recreation services of these groups as well, while the Department of Sport and Recreation rendered this service to Whites only. This divided control created confusion and prompted severe criticism.
2. (b) The services of the Department of Sport and Recreation to Whites are rendered by qualified technical staff. Since non-Whites have up to now been deprived of intensive expert assistance, they are, in fact, in a backward position as regards the standard of their sport in comparison with that of many types of sport in which Whites participate.

The decision arising out of these factors, viz. that a single department will in future render a sport and recreation service to all population groups, once again attests to the sincere intention of the Government to offer only the best to every South African sportsman and sportswoman. I am convinced that with this dispensation a new era is being entered in the world of sport, an era which will not only result in more excellent sporting achievements, but which will also promote goodwill among people. The exceptional challenge of this service and all it entails is realized and accepted by myself and the Department of Sport and Recreation. For that reason, provision has been made for the immediate extension of staff and resources in each of the ten regional branches of the department. Although 1979 is the first year in which intensive expert assistance will be granted to non-Whites, I must say that large sums have been spent on non-White sport by the Government in the past, too, sums which have also included funds for the creation of sports facilities.

Obviously, all the proposed services cannot be introduced to members of all population groups overnight. With regard to the extension of the services rendered by my department to all population groups for the 1979-’80 financial year, I just want to furnish very briefly certain financial details. In the first place, I want to refer to amounts which are already available and of which hon. members are aware. An amount of R419 000 has been made available for administration, which includes expert, organizational and technical auxiliary services; an amount of R1 975 200 had been made available for the promotion of sport; and an amount of R355 800 has been available for the promotion of recreation.

It has been decided—hon. members do not know this as yet—that a further amount of R804 000 will be made available as a result of this decision that the Department of Sport and Recreation will in future render services to all population groups. This amount of R804 000 is comprised of R125 000 for administration; R644 000 for the promotion of sport and R35 000 for the promotion of recreation. The amount of R2 570 000 which is already available, is consequently being increased to R3 374 000. In itself this amount of R804 000 is not impressive, but it is significant if it is borne in mind that the infrastructure for the provision of services already exists.

In addition it is necessary for the sake of perspective to bear in mind that the amounts to which I have referred, do not include all Government expenditure in respect of sport and recreation facilities. Last year alone large amounts were spent in this regard by other departments. For example, R15 762 451— almost R16 million—was spent in respect of Black peoples, R2 852 464—almost R3 million—in respect of Coloureds; and R1 139 880 in respect of Indians. This pattern of expenditure will continue. If in addition to this the comprehensive further expenditure by provincial and municipal authorities, as well as by large companies is taken into account, it becomes clear that the future of sport in South Africa is brighter than it often appears at first glance. I believe that all promotion groups will benefit greatly from this new dispensation. New doors are opening and new opportunities are being created for the communities that are in a backward position in the field of sport.

Finally, it is my wish that we should conduct a positive and constructive debate today, as in the past. It is a privilege for me to be able to serve in this department, and my task is considerably facilitated by Mr. Beyers Hoek and his dedicated team of officials. I am also encountering much goodwill from sports administrators. I wish to convey my sincere thanks to all of them for their excellent service, enthusiasm and support.

Mr. Chairman, I request the privilege of the half-hour. The very first thing that I should like to do is to congratulate the hon. the Minister on his appointment as Minister of Sport and Recreation. I think that he has a very difficult task to follow in the footsteps of the previous hon. Minister whom I would describe as probably the most slippery wing I have ever had to face, a man with very fancy footsteps. I believe that the hon. the Minister who is now handling this portfolio will bring a greater orthodoxy to the portfolio, and I want to wish him well, particularly in the interests of the sportsmen of South Africa. I think we can associate ourselves with much of what the hon. the Minister has said here today, and I shall deal with quite a few of the points he has raised during the course of what I am going to say. I think that he started the debate on a high and positive note and I therefore think we can have a fruitful discussion on many of these points. I want to say one thing to him, however, and that is that while he described the NP sports policy in the early part of his speech, I note that he left out—the hon. the Minister stated that he did not have the time to say more—all those restrictive aspects which have caused difficulty in the past I want to tell the hon. the Minister that a sports policy which is based on ethnic considerations and on racialistic lines can never work, not in this country nor in any other country. If one looks at the various types of sport in South Africa, that have made the most progress towards change and “normalization”, a word initiated by the previous hon. Minister, one finds them to have been those sports which have deviated the most from Government policy. I think it might be useful if, at the very outset of the debate, I tried to contrast with the guidelines given by the hon. the Minister, some policy principles and guidelines in which we believe in connection with sport.

The principles of the PFP in regard to sport fall under two main headings. Firstly, we are opposed to all forms of political interference in the areas of sport, whether these are external, as in the case of sports boycotts against South Africa, or internal, as in the Government’s past interference with the autonomy of sportsmen. Secondly, we stand for an open society, a society which we have spoken about in this House before, a society which is free from all forms of statutory or administrative discrimination. Within the framework of these two points we stand for equality of opportunity. When we use the term “non-racial sport”, this implies a move away from what the hon. the Minister described earlier as being one of the principles of the NP policy, a move away from ethnic considerations in sport so that proper merit selection can occur and all peoples of South Africa can benefit equally from the facilities which exist. This rests upon the assumption that participation in sport is a right and not a privilege, and as such rates equally with other citizenship rights. In application this would involve the removal of all legislative measures which prevent sportsmen from playing sport with whomsoever they wish to play, notably the Group Areas Act, certain provisions of the Liquor Act and regulations attached to both. In regard to the removal of politics from sport, my party and I realize that sport has been used as a political weapon against South Africa. We condemn this practice, let there be no misunderstanding about that at all. It is also obvious to us that even in the South African context sport and politics continue to be intertwined. This is a matter of great regret to us. We believe that the decision about whether or not to participate in sport, as well as what sport to participate in, and most important, with whom one is going to play is, above everything else, a private decision and one that should be above political or governmental interference. I spoke of the autonomy of sportsmen, and a few moments ago the hon. the Minister of Sport did the same.

He did not, however, spell out his intentions clearly in this regard but, in order to facilitate the depoliticizing of sport, we have committed ourselves to the total autonomy of sportsmen in promotion, administration and co-ordination in the playing of sport. To better realize this goal we would grant, through the Parliament of this country, a Charter to sportsmen which would be embodied in a statutory body, i.e. a sports council for all South Africans regardless of race, colour, religion or sex. This sports council would operate autonomously and would consist primarily of sportsmen and would be responsible for the provision of facilities, the co-ordination of coaching and for the fostering and the appreciation of sport amongst all our people. This council would be financed by an annual grant-in-aid and would largely take over the functions of the existing Department of Sport.

I believe that the Government’s role in sport should be that of adviser, benefactor and “Godfather”, but never that of an organizer or financial controller. I give notice now that, subject to successful discussions with sport administrators throughout the country during the Parliamentary recess, I shall next year move a private member’s Bill, to give effect to this proposal.

Finally, in order to realize the fullest implications of the equality of opportunity to which the party is committed if, for instance, merit selection is to mean anything, it is necessary not only to remove discrimination, but also to make up the backlog in areas of special need. In this regard I should like to congratulate the hon. the Minister on seeing this difficulty, taking this point and discussing it openly in his first address to the House. We believe that there is a backlog in areas of special need, a backlog which social, educational and economic deprivation have caused over many generations. Accordingly we would embark—and I commend the hon. the Minister on grasping this nettle—on a programme designed to provide special help to those sections of our society who, for many reasons, have up to now not had the facilities or the opportunities to participate in sport as they would like to.

In support of some of the thoughts that I have just expressed, I want to quote a few sentences from the annual report of the South African Olympic and National Games Association, the body headed by Mr. Rudolph Opperman. In regard to a united effort he says: “For years now this association has repeatedly advocated one department of sport for all the peoples of South Africa …” That has also been the attitude of this party, and again we are pleased that that is the direction that the hon. the Minister is taking.

In discussing restrictive legislation Mr. Opperman says: “There should be no reason as to why sport should not be exempted from these provisions completely …” On Government policy Mr. Opperman says: “The existence of such a policy, meaning the Government policy and encompassing elements relating to different races, has been used with considerable deleterious effect by the enemies of South African sport” Later on he says: “The time may well have arrived where the need for an official sports policy, as we have known it in the past, no longer exists.” He further expresses his views as to one of the difficulties being that it is the Government which decides upon the disposition of funds and not the South African Olympic and National Games Association and the Sports Federation. He says that he believes that that is incorrect.

There is another matter that I want to deal with. In past weeks a great deal of international controversy has been generated over South African participation in world sport I need only mention the Athens Conference of the European Council of Sports Ministers, the abortive Transvaal rugby tour to France and the cancellation of the French golf tour—all in the past few weeks—to illustrate this fact. In October last year, while I was in Britain, I was granted a lengthy interview with the then Minister of Sport, Mr. Dennis Howell. I put to him the case, not of the Government, whose policy remains unacceptable to anyone outside the RSA, but of the Black and White sportsmen of South Africa who, over several years, have moved on a broad front to eliminate discrimination wherever they have found it Protocol does not allow me to relate the details of the conversation with that hon. gentleman. However, there are indeed certain broad principles which were discussed and which can be mentioned without I believe, any objection being taken.

The first point which encouraged me was that the British Minister of Sport acknowledged that progress had been made in deracializing South African sport Secondly, he strongly took the standpoint that he would not be a party to the dubious practice of trying to achieve political objectives by using sport as a lever. [Interjections.] He stressed that he had made this clear to his Commonwealth colleagues and that he was prepared to stake his political career on it. As he put it to me, Britain was not prepared to be bullied into adopting a sports policy based on the political aspirations of communists or the Third World.

He also gave me, in writing, a list of five criteria which he had drafted and told me categorically that if South Africa could meet these criteria, he would be prepared to reopen the whole question of British-South African sports relationships. I have this document with me, and I should like to quote it to hon. members. It is from the British Government and is very short. I quote—

1. 1. The constitution of the governing body and its affiliated club must be truly non-racial.
2. 2. The development policy of sport must be non-racial.
3. 3. Quality coaching must be available at all levels without regard to race or colour.
4. 4. Facilities and opportunities in clubs affiliated to the governing body are genuinely non-racial, as shown for example in bars, toilet facilities and team selection at all levels.
5. 5. There is a complete absence of racial discrimination in the arrangements for spectators at sporting events.

I was quite frank with that hon. Minister. I told him that I did not like the permit system and that there were certain racially orientated laws that were still on the Statute Book. However, the essence of my message to him was that the sportsmen of South Africa did not control the Government and that in past years dramatic progress had been made in South Africa towards non-racial sport. I believe, and I also told him so, that progress should be recognized and that hard-line attitudes abroad could be counterproductive and would, in fact, retard change within South Africa. I told him that South Africa was very close to meeting the five criteria that I have quoted, and we are, in fact, very close to meeting those criteria.

I told him that I believed that the time was ripe to have another look at the whole situation. So encouraged was I at his positive and friendly response that I asked him to come to South Africa to see for himself what was happening in this country. I emphasized that the invitation would not be a Government one and that he would be free to see whomsoever and whatsoever he wished. He responded very well to this tentative invitation, subject—as he put it—to the advice of this foreign office.

When I returned to South Africa I had talks with the various sports administrators and even with the hon. the Minister. At that time I felt reasonably optimistic about South Africa’s long-term prospects. I was perhaps naïve. Events overtook my intentions and the British election jitters put paid to the hoped for visit.

However, imagine my shock when I read The Star of 13 March 1979 and 14 March 1979 and saw what that hon. Minister of Sport in Britain had to say. On 13 March he said from Athens, and I quote—

On the very next day that hon. Minister, who had given me the assurances I have informed hon. members about, said the following. I quote from The Star of 14 March 1979—

That from the Minister of Sport in Britain. I should like to ask whether world has politics sunk to this level of double standards and hypocrisy. What value can one place on statements from a high personage when, having specifically condemned politics in sport, the same person sinks to that level? How can a Minister of State, referring to the international cricket conference, ask: “How can it be a fact-finding mission if countries like Pakistan, the West Indies and India are not even represented?” How can he ask such a thing when he knew full well that those countries were invited to come to South Africa and, in fact, declined that invitation? As I said last week, in a different context, honour sinks where commerce long prevails. It is interesting, and I believe sad, to note when one reads the Gleneagles agreement, for instance, when one reads about the controversy surrounding South African sport, that this is indeed the case. If I may, I again want to quote Mr. Rudolph Opperman, president of the S.A. Olympic and National Games Association. He says in his report—

While it is clear that the road back to international sport is going to be a long and arduous one, this does not mean that we should give up. On the contrary, I believe that we should be stirred to greater efforts. What should the Government do at this level? Hopefully, Mrs. Thatcher’s Cabinet is made of sterner and more honourable stuff. We should make contact with the new British Minister of Sport I believe that we have an ambassador in Britain now who is most capable of doing this. We should make contact with the British Minister of Sport. We should ask him to come to South Africa to see for himself the progress which has been made in the fields we are discussing today. Secondly, I should like to call upon the hon. the Minister, not to try to please the British but, because of our own convictions, to make a declaration of intent based on the five points which were thrown at us by the British and elucidated by the now deposed Mr. Howell. I believe that such a declaration can do no harm, but might open the door to a new beginning. Even if PFP guidelines are not accepted by the Government, the Government has much to do in the field of sport, much which can be of great benefit to this country. The Government can do much to put our house in order and to create for us, once again, a chance of international success.

The first point I should like to mention is the merit awards which are described in the department’s annual report. I should like to know from the hon. the Minister why the merit awards for sport are still divided along racial lines. Why do we have to have Coloured merit awards, White merit awards and, Black merit awards? What is the necessity for this? What does South Africa gain from dividing merit awards along racial lines? Surely the answer is that divided merit awards serve to divide people and not to unite them.

I believe that one of the first things the hon. the Minister should do is to set up a system in terms of which merit awards are awarded to sportsmen for administrative effort and for sporting prowess in one single structure, regardless of race. It may be that some types of sport may be lagging behind from time to time. However, time will erase that if the hon. the Minister’s intentions are carried out to the full. I do not think we should continue with this divided system of merit awards.

Secondly, let us look next at the permit system, the system in terms of which sportsmen have to apply annually, monthly or weekly in terms of the Liquor Act and the Group Areas Act, the system in terms of which clubs have to apply for spectator seating at sports grounds. Whether this is done weekly, monthly, yearly or five-yearly, it is an unacceptable system. It is unacceptable in South Africa, and it is not understood outside South Africa. I believe that the unification of the sports bodies of South Africa is essential and I do not think we can afford, in South Africa, the sort of strife that we have had in the past. In my opinion this unification cannot take place while the permit system continues to exist No self-respecting sportsman is happy about asking the Government, weekly or even annually, for permission to play games, enjoy refreshments or sit in a grand stand or wherever else he likes. I say abolish the laws that make such applications necessary. If this is not possible, at least all sports stadiums, sports clubs and all sports gatherings should be permanently exempt from these laws. Even Rapport is concerned about this matter. In Rapport of 24 April it is stated—

Thirdly, I come to the question of stadiums. I should like to quote from Mr. Hoek’s report. On page 2 he states the following—

That is a very serious warning from a man who knows what he is talking about, and I do not believe the hon. the Minister can ignore this warning. I believe that Mr. Hoek has sketched a situation that is dangerous. In the past few days, in fact, we have seen incidents taking place in stadiums, incidents which I would not consider in the interests of sport or good order. A real need exists for stadiums to house the sports that are supported by the masses. I therefore call upon the hon. the Minister to react today to the statement made by Mr. Hoek in the report, telling us what he is going to do about it.

I should like to mention Government policy as such. It is my view that no Government should have a formal sports policy at all, except in the form of a pledge to be helpful and to support sportsmen. In South Africa, however, we are stuck with a policy. It has, I agree, fallen into obsolescence over the past few years and is hardly obeyed. It is nonetheless there, and as Mr. Opperman states in his report, having a policy causes our sportsmen difficulties all over the world. It is bad enough to have a policy, but in South Africa at this time I think it is even worse to have that policy exaggerated and to have, behind the policy, the threat of Government action, the policy being rammed down the throats of people who desire only to play the game. I should like to quote The Star of 8 May 1979. The article refers to Dr. Treurnicht, the leader of the NP in the Transvaal—

That hon. Deputy Minister, probably soon to be a Minister, is a very powerful man. He is a very well-known figure and an influential person in this country and abroad. His words are taken note of and used by the enemies of our country to further isolate South Africa and South African sportsmen. Moreover, I believe that those words are in direct contradiction to the direction taken by the previous hon. Minister of Sport I should like to ask the hon. the Minister for some assurances. Firstly I should like to ask him to assure us that mixed clubs are not under threat of legislation. I want to know if it is correct, as Dr. Treurnicht says, that legislation is being considered. Secondly I want him to assure us that legislation is not being contemplated and, thirdly, I want an assurance that the hon. the Minister will ask Dr. Treurnicht to keep his unsporting thoughts to himself in future.

Off-sides.

I should like to mention briefly the question of South African rugby. We have gone through a few sad months in South African rugby. It seems to me that South African rugby is joining the club of those who have been ostracized in the past Again, this is not because of our rugby opponents or friends overseas or because of people who are involved in the sport on the field, but it is because of Governments and politics. I want to say—and I do so very cautiously—that I believe that if the French/ South African rugby tour goes ahead, it will prove to be a disaster. The tour will not be stopped through the refusal of visas by the French Prime Minister or Minister of Foreign Affairs. The tour will not be stopped by Government action. It will be stopped at local level by the mayors, by the denial of fields once the team is there, by the withdrawal of players from matches …

Are you the new prophet?

… by the untrammelled demonstrations which will take place, concerning which the French Government has given notice that it will not stop them.

Now you are giving them tips.

Sir, I want to sound a word of friendly advice. I believe South Africa should pull out of the French tour with dignity. I do not believe that we as South Africans want to go where we are not wanted. I do not think we want to see another tour like the tour to the British Isles under Dawie de Villiers when our players had to undergo the sort of lambasting they experienced at the hands of other people. I believe our players deserve better and I believe that a time of sanity may yet return.

I want to direct another word to the rugby people, and I do so in a spirit of friendship. If we as rugby players—and it is my first sport as well—want tours, if we want to tour and if we want internal rugby peace and unity, I believe rugby must move to de-ethnicize, I believe that separate racial bodies such as exist at present will not work and will not be accepted at the national level, the provincial level or even at regional level. A genuine non-racialism is called for and not the window dressing we have seen to date.

Finally, I should like to quote Mr. Opperman again. On page 12 of his association’s report one reads—

A little further on he said—

These are very true words. I believe that Sacos in the past has had a legitimate grouse. That organization has fought for equality by its own lights and by its own standards. I believe that it has not at this moment achieved all it has set out to achieve. Nevertheless, I think Sacos should admit that there has been genuine and far-reaching change in sport and in the administration of sport in South Africa over the past years. It is a fact that future obstructionism, future confrontation, will produce only losers and no winners. I believe, as the hon. the Minister does, that a whole generation of South African cricketers, rugby players, soccer players and sportsmen generally, because of the conflict that is going on amongst various groups within this country, will not know international competition. The cry we get from Sacos is: “No normal sport in an abnormal society.” I want to ask: Does this hold water? I believe it does not. That slogan is a recipe for conflict, for bitterness, for isolation, for frustration. If Sacos, powerful as they are, refuse to come to terms with other sportsmen of goodwill, they will bring upon their heads the condemnation of the young people of today. I say to Sacos: Drive a hard bargain by all means; Sacos’ arguments do not lack strength; but, now that non-racial sport is fast becoming a fact, do not stand back, relying on past personal animosities to hold up progress. I ask Sacos to take the hand of friendship of those who seek change and who seek sporting contact within South Africa and outside. I ask them to take the road of co-operation and persuasion and not the road of confrontation.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Sandton gave a vague hint at the beginning of his speech of the policy of the PFP with regard to sport I have no fault to find with that side of the House trying to spell out that policy to us. Moreover, I do not think that the hon. member will find fault with my not agreeing with his party’s policy. However, I have a problem with the hon. member. Last week, during the discussion of the Interior and Immigration Vote, the hon. member showed us a poster used by the Citrus Exchange for advertising oranges.

Do you want a copy thereof?

The idea of the sports policy of the PFP as advocated by the hon. member, reminds me of the poster used by the Citrus Exchange in Britain: Approximately half is revealed; the other half is not revealed. As far as the oranges are concerned, a very good half was revealed to us, but the difference between that poster and the policy of the PFP as advocated by the hon. member, is that the poster at least depicts beautiful oranges, but I am afraid we did not even get that from the hon. member.

We accept that we differ with regard to the sports policy. While I do not want to suggest that we do not have the same objective in mind it is very obvious to me that, as far as the route is concerned along which we want to achieve that objective, there is a complete difference between this side and that side of the House. The hon. member said that as long as the policy of the NP recognized any ethnic differences at all, such a policy could not succeed. If I have the necessary time at my disposal to do so, I am going to attempt to prove to the hon. member that his policy is in fact doing the ethnic groups in South Africa a disservice. I hope I shall have time to prove this to him. Let us look at this single factor for the moment: If the NP’s sport policy totally denied or disregarded ethnicity, it would in fact mean that the NP did not even want to offer the child the opportunity to start developing from his ethnic context at school level to enter the wider terrain of sport afterwards.

The hon. member said that his party advocated equality of opportunity. This side of the House advocates equal opportunities. Since we seek to attempt to create equal opportunities and equal facilities for the various population groups in South Africa, it was necessary for the hon. the Minister to point out soon after his accepting responsibility for this portfolio that the organizational function of sport, as far as all the various population groups in South Africa were concerned, was linked to the Department of Sport and Recreation. Therefore, what this amounts to is that that department will deal with the promotion of sport amongst all population groups.

The hon. member said quite correctly that the guidelines of the PFP would probably not be acceptable to the Government. That is quite correct, but I want to tell the hon. member that he need not feel bad about our not wanting to accept their guidelines. We shall not be the only ones who do not want to accept their guidelines; the international world, too, will not want to accept the guidelines of the PFP. When one looks at the pattern followed throughout the world, one finds that particularly Rhodesia comes as close to the rules laid down by the IOC as it is possible to do in practice. When one looks at Taiwan, one really cannot believe that there is a population group which has tried harder to satisfy the norms been laid down by the IOC. Both these countries were unacceptable, however, because of political thinking in sport. The hon. member just has to accept that if our policy is not acceptable to the sporting world, his policy will not be acceptable either, because what the international, politically indoctrinated people in sport want to see, is not merely a sports policy which is being implemented as the IOC expects it to be implemented, but a policy pattern which will be acceptable to a politically sick world at all levels.

I want to avail myself of this opportunity to congratulate the hon. the Minister most sincerely on behalf of this side of the House on his appointment as the Minister responsible for this department. We wish him the necessary insight to make a success of this department as well, as we know he is striving for success also in the other department under his control. Not only do we wish him joy in his work, but we also hope that he will derive pleasure and gratification every day and, above all, experience a feeling of joie de vivre, from seeing the guidelines laid down by him for sport in South Africa, bringing pleasure to the fit South Africans who participate in sport. To his predecessor, we, on this side of the House, want to confirm along with the hon. the Minister, that we shall remember his enthusiasm in the field of sport for a very long time to come.

It is true, unfortunately, that the field of sport and recreation lends itself to emotion in that some people want to blame the Government, because of the policy it is following, for the fact that we are not accepted worldwide in the field of sport. There are also some people who want to see the development of this policy to its logical conclusion as a danger sign. For this reason I am pleased that the hon. the Minister introduced this debate with a speech in which he explained his views with regard to participation in sport and the implementation of the policy.

I think I may say without any fear of contradiction that the hon. the Minister’s introductory speech testifies to an honest and fearless reflection on the direction of sport in South Africa within the framework of the policy of the NP. The intention of acknowledging the autonomy of sporting bodies is confirmed, as well as the desire not to interfere in their affairs, except when the question of law and order comes into the picture and when their actions and the carrying out of their arrangements can give rise to serious friction. In that case it becomes not only the task of the Government to become involved, but also the responsibility of the Government to act. History has proved that this Government has never attempted to shrink its responsibilities.

It is not necessary for any sportsman who has the ability to notch up achievements of a world standard, to depart from South Africa because of the sport policy of the NP. There may be those who do so temporarily because of better coaching methods or facilities overseas or there may be sportsmen who do so temporarily to compete against the top sportsmen in the world on a regular basis, but it is not necessary for sportsmen to go elsewhere to work out their salvation or to find a livelihood because of the implementation of the policy of this side of the House.

As far as the Olympic Games are concerned, the actions, or rather the lack of action, of the IOC proved that countries such as Rhodesia and Taiwan, which I mentioned a few minutes ago, were victims of the application of double standards, something which has been developed to a very fine art in the field of sport South Africa may possibly be a better example of a victim of the application of these double standards. One also rejects most strongly the attitude of singling out South Africa for criticism and for the application of direct or indirect sports sanctions against it on account of its domestic policy. That should be recognized for what it is, viz. selective morality and indefensible double standards.

I do not want to suggest that there are no problems in the field of sport and sport development, but I think that the problems with which we have to contend in South Africa at present, can mainly be ascribed to one problem area, and that is a lack of money. I want to add at once, however, that we on this side of the House believe that the hon. the Minister has the ability to point out the priorities and to do the necessary convincing so that this problem of a lack of funds will be viewed in a new light when the next budget is prepared. [Time expired.]

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

Mr. Chairman, I want to express my sincere thanks to the hon. Whip on that side of the House. I want to give him the assurance that I shall not abuse injury time, because if I do that, I am afraid I shall become a victim as happened to Free State last Saturday. In any event, I shall not go offside, because I do not want a penalty kick to be awarded against me.

Events in the sporting world show clearly that the political pressure on South Africa is strong and will probably become even stronger. The events over the past month and the controversy as to whether the Springbok rugby tour to France later this year is to take place or not, are conclusive proof of this. It is with gratitude that one takes note of the fact that a final decision has not been taken as yet about this tour, although I do not think that we should be over-optimistic. One has to be realistic, however, and realize that the 1980 Olympic Games in Russia will be a prestige event and that Russia will probably sacrifice anything or any country to achieve its end. One may assume that they will not want a repeat in Russia of the chaos of the 1976 Olympic Game in Montreal. In order to pacify some of the countries in the Africa bloc, it is necessary to look for another scapegoat which maintains good sports relations with South Africa. At the Olympic Games in Montreal, South Africa’s relations with New Zealand were under fire. This time the sport relations of France with South Africa are under fire. One simply wants to accept that someone will probably again be found when the next Olympic Games take place in 1984.

These double standards which are applied by our sports enemies, are inexplicable. If one takes cognizance of the fact that 33 different countries participated in 51 different kinds of sport in South Africa during 1978, one asks oneself why action is not taken against all of them as in the case of France. The reason for that is, of course, that the presence of certain countries are essential for guaranteeing the success of the Olympic Games. We have encountered the same phenomenon in other fields as well. If one has oil, for example, one is forgiven many things.

I am making these comments just to point out how politics dominate international sport completely. So one can only ask what South Africa is to do in this field. One can just wonder whether the following words are not possibly true in this respect: “For the foundations will be cast down: and what hath the righteous done?” If the world is not satisfied with the honest attempts of South Africa, I am afraid that in future we in South Africa shall have to continue to do what is in the interests of South Africa, of the sportsmen of South Africa and of the young people who can and will attain such standards in sport in future that notice will have to be taken of South Africa again.

The Hoek report and the importance of that report were mentioned during the debate on sport last year. I also want to avail myself of this opportunity to refer to the earlier announcement of the hon. the Minister that henceforth the Department of Sport and Recreation would render services on an equal level to all population groups as far as the development of sport and recreation in South Africa was concerned. We have to thank the hon. the Minister for reacting so expeditiously to this. I believe that this department, which has rendered so many excellent services in the past, will also contribute in future to enabling all of us to look forward to an improvement in the standard and quality of sport and recreation for all the population groups in South Africa. It is an indisputable fact that the implementation of the recommendations of the Hoek report will involve financial implications. I want to deal with that later on when I want to point out what the real financial need in South Africa is at present.

We want to express the hope and we trust that the hon. the Minister will be able to succeed soon in implementing some of the other recommendations of the Hoek report. I think that one of the most important of these, is that a national training scheme should be put into operation, in co-operation with the national bodies controlling sport and the sports training institutes, at institutions for tertiary education. The time has arrived for us to take active steps to establish a national association for trainers and officials under the co-ordination and guidance of this department. It is encouraging to see that the University of Pretoria has already taken the first steps to establish a sports training institute of this kind, but I think the time has also arrived for some of our other centres for tertiary education to follow this example. This is also a field in which the non-White universities and colleges in South Africa can do pioneering work for the various ethnic groups they represent. I think that we owe it to our various population groups to make available good leaders to raise and improve the standard of our sportsmen and sportswomen. Once we have raised the standards of all sportsmen and sportswomen in various kinds of sport and again want to notch up sports achievements of world quality, the sportsman who wants to participate for the sake of sport, will come to South Africa. If we are not welcome abroad, let us invite those sportsmen and sportswomen to South Africa to compete here in good sportsmanship.

I should now like to refer to the financial problems with which the promotion of sport has to contend. When one consults the annual report of the department which was tabled, one notices that only approximately R1,5 million was spent on the promotion of sport last year. According to the budget approximately R2 million is being voted for this year and it is with appreciation that we take cognizance of the additional R800 000 which the hon. the Minister—I feel inclined to say—got for us by putting up a fight. I can tell the hon. the Minister that there is appreciation for this effort of his, and we believe that with the same enthusiasm he will succeed to obtain even more for this department next year.

When we look at the budgets of different Government departments, we see that 34 departments received funds in the 1978-’79 financial year. Of these 34, the Department of Sport and Recreation was the third last one in the row. A comparative analysis of Government expenditure on sport and recreation between South Africa and other countries shows that only 59c per member of the population is spent on sport and recreation in South Africa. When we look at a country such as Britain, the figure comes to R10,70 per person. In a country such as West Germany, the amount is R21,60 per person. I also believe that no one will deny that there are more important matters than sport in South Africa for which provision has to be made, but the plea I want to make is that the hon. the Minister will succeed, with the cooperation of the Cabinet, in effecting a higher priority for sport and recreation when the next budget is drawn up.

When we look at the inherent value of sport, physical education and physical recreational activities, it is clear to me that the Department of Sport and Recreation needs more funds to enable it to achieve its objective of a healthy and fit population. The implications of an unhealthy and unfit people, in respect of national preparedness, productivity, public health and social welfare, are obvious. Sustained participation in physical fitness activities can have a noticeable influence on virtually all fields of our society.

Sport and recreation can make a major and a fine contribution to the problems of meaningful utilization of free time, which is one of the pressing issues of modem society. The department has succeeded in the past, in spite of the limited funds at its disposal, to make a contribution. This afternoon, I want to advocate, however, that the investments which will be made in sport in future, be regarded as an investment in the citizens of South Africa. This should hold good not only with regard to their physical well-being, but should also serve as a contribution to the social welfare, the happiness and the natural needs of the people of South Africa.

Order! It seems to me as though injury time has overtaken this Free Stater as well. The hon. member’s time has expired.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to support the hon. member for Bethlehem in his plea for more funds for sport and recreation. He asked that the hon. the Minister should advocate a higher priority being accorded to this department, particularly as far as funds are concerned. We want to give that plea our heart-felt support.

I should like to come back to the hon. member for Sandton who made the statement in his speech, inter alia, that sport which is based on ethnicity cannot succeed in South Africa. What the hon. member really wants to do is to draw a line through sport as it has been practised in South Africa over the years and through sport as it has been practised by the various population groups in various competitions and leagues. The hon. member for Sandton now wants us to throw all these things overboard in order to satisfy the outside world. Even if we were to do that, we would still be unable to satisfy the outside world. South Africa has never interfered in the leagues and the competitions of other countries. We have never prescribed to another country how they should practise their sport, but that is what the outside world wants to do to South Africa. Surely if one has a grain of integrity one does not bow to that pressure and throw in the towel.

The hon. member also alleged that the rugby tour to France should not take place, and he gave various reasons for that. He referred, inter alia, to the attitudes of mayors not to make fields available, as well as to demonstrations which may take place. I agree with the hon. member, because I also do not think that that rugby tour to France should take place, but for this single reason: They are prescribing to us how we should select our team and who should play in our test team. I do not think that any country in the world can allow itself to be dictated to in such a way. No country can allow itself to be dictated to in respect of how it should select its team.

I agree with you.

The hon. member also referred to awards and he wanted to know why two different awards should be presented to sportsmen. Specifically he wanted to know why a separate award has to be presented to Coloured sportsmen. Can the hon. member rise today to say what achievements by Coloured peoples, to give an example, are of such a nature at this moment that they are eligible to receive that award from the State President?

They do not need paternalism.

That is why arrangements are made for a separate award in cases where awards are made to Coloured sportsmen. These awards are not only applicable to sportsmen, but also to the sports administrators and the trainers. I wonder whether the hon. member for Sandton has ever attended such an award ceremony. He receives invitations, but he does not accept them.

That is not true.

I want to make an appeal to the hon. member this afternoon to attend those proceedings so that he can converse with the Coloureds there. However, the hon. member is never there. When one talks to them there, one realizes what appreciation they have for such a ceremony and for the awards that are made there. However, I know why the hon. member does not want to attend the ceremonies, for if he were to attend them, he would be condoning the policy of the NP. The hon. member should move around a little more. He should not talk to that Foreign Minister of England who told him a pack of lies in any case. He should talk to the people inside South Africa instead and discover what is actually happening in South Africa. However, I shall leave the member for Sandton at that.

In the course of my speech I should very much like to convey appreciation for the work which is being done in South Africa by sports administrators. These people have to work under very difficult conditions and I want to make the statement this afternoon that the task of a sports administrator, even under normal circumstances, is not an easy one. It is also true that South Africa’s conditions are abnormal in the sense that we are denied international competition. Let us admit this afternoon that international competition is the aim of all sportsmen. It is the ideal of every sportsman and every sportswoman to represent their country. It brings out the best in every participant and naturally attracts more participants to sport to realize that ideal and to wear the colours of one’s country.

Our sports administrators are now facing a situation that, as a result of the political confusion in international sport and the increasing isolation of South African sport, international competition cannot take place. I believe, however, that it is precisely these things in the international sphere that requires more imaginative internal adjustments, which have to be made in order to achieve self-realization in the field of sport I believe that the presentation of regular national sports festivals could make a very big contribution towards this. That is what I want to advocate this afternoon.

Since 1963, major South African sports festivals have been presented on a regular basis, which included, inter alia, the South African Games for Whites and non-Whites, as well as Republic Festivals. The biggest sports festival which has probably ever been presented in South Africa, was the S.A. Games of 1973, which I assume is still fresh in our memory because of the spectacular presentation. Approximately five years have passed, however, since the last S.A. Games took place. Since it take approximately one year or longer for the presentation of such a big sports festival to be organized, it is unlikely that a S.A. Games can again be presented before 1979 or 1980.

I therefore want to make an appeal to the hon. the Minister this afternoon, on behalf of our sportsmen, and on behalf of our youth and our thousands of sport enthusiasts, to pay real attention to this matter. I therefore want to advocate that national or regional sports festivals be held on an organized basis, which will be presented at intervals of three or four years and which will involve participants from all our population groups.

I know that the presentation of such sports festivals naturally makes tremendous financial demands and in our present economic climate it may cause eyebrows to be raised when such a sports festival is mentioned. The inflation problem, however, is not only of an economic nature. I believe that inflation also manifests itself in the physical, spiritual and moral fields. Unless the people of our time can be properly orientated in respect of a meaningful balance between constructive labour and creative recreation, the morale will go under. Therefore the emphasis must not only be placed on the economy of the labour structure, but it should also include physical recreation, because the upholding of morale without physical care is highly unthinkable.

I have been assured that, with the necessary leadership and initiative, our private sector can make the presentation of the national festival every four years a reality, by means of sponsorships. I believe that our private sector is more than prepared to play its part in this regard. By doing so it will not only be making a contribution to inspire our sportsmen to purposeful participation, but it will also be making a tremendous contribution to the development of a special cultural aspect in the life of the South African population.

I am also convinced of the fact, however, that it is not only the private sector that should make these contributions, but that we can also make this investment on the part of the Government in such a national sports festival, for it would encourage our sportsmen to greater participation and would inspire them and set an ideal for them, particularly since we have been excluded from international participation. The presentation of regular national sports festivals in which all population groups would be involved, could also serve as a basis to prove to our sports enemies that we are sincere in our attempts to offer every sportsman and woman from whatever population group the opportunity to develop to his or her highest potential.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Oudtshoorn lodged a specific appeal with the hon. the Minister, an appeal which merits a great deal of support, I believe, from people throughout the country, because obviously, if we create more opportunities for competitive sport, sport itself will benefit and sporting standards will also be raised.

To begin with I should also like to pay tribute to the predecessor of the hon. the Minister, the present hon. Minister of Plural Relations and Development, for the major role he has played in improving our position in South African sport and for giving us the hope of being able, once again, to participate in international sport. The hon. the Minister of Plural Relations and Development has now passed the ball to our present hon. Minister, and so on behalf of the NRP I should like to congratulate the hon. the Minister on his appointment I hope he will continue to move that ball towards the ultimate goal, which must be our readmission to the international sporting arena.

[Inaudible.]

Well, I was actually referring to football. The hon. member for Umhlanga is perhaps thinking of rugby. I just hope that this will eventually lead to our readmission to the international sporting arena.

There are several aspects of this Vote on which one would like to comment. First of all, of course, the hon. the Minister opened the debate on this Vote with an important statement with regard to policy and certain other matters. He made particular reference to the administration of sport as it affects all the various race groups. I believe an important step forward, indeed an essential step, has been taken towards bringing about a better situation with regard to the administration of sport in South Africa. We know that extreme difficulties are being experienced by various sports administrators in trying to establish national bodies which will be able to cater for all the people playing a particular type of sport, with a code of sport to ensure that those national bodies are not established on a racial basis but are representative of the sport as such, regardless of race.

I believe it is important that the process of establishing our sports administration in South Africa on that basis should be accelerated. Obviously those who have had contact with South African sport find it most confusing to have to deal with various sporting bodies in the same type of sport.

It is also unfortunate that Sacos, a body to which the hon. the Minister also referred, has played such a destructive role. There is no doubt about it that their unreasonable attitude causes a great deal of concern amongst sportsmen of the various race groups. I believe we should also pay tribute to those sportsmen, particularly Coloured and Indian sportsmen, who have persevered, sometimes in the face of severe intimidation, and in spite of pressure which has often been applied in an attempt to dissuade them from participating in various types of sport unless their participation takes place under the control of one of the sporting bodies affiliated with Sacos. I believe it is only right that we should pay tribute to them. I have discussed this matter with some of these sportsmen, and I know that an enormous amount of pressure and intimidation is brought to bear upon them. That is why the hon. the Minister quoted from an article in The Natal Mercury, in which an appeal was also made to Sacos to adopt a more responsible attitude. In this leading article in The Natal Mercury of 13 February 1979 there is a further paragraph which also merits comment I quote—

This is an aspect which merits consideration, especially in the light of the destructive role that is being played by some people who endeavour to use sport as a vehicle for their political thinking and their political aspirations. We in these benches condemn sport being used on that basis.

I think I should also indicate quite clearly to the Committee what the whole attitude is of this party with regard to sport. We believe that sport should be kept as free as possible from politics. This is an essential aspect of dealing with sport as sport. Secondly, we believe that sport should be left to the sportsmen as regards the administration and playing of sport and also whom they play with or against. We also believe that those who wish to have open clubs and mixed teams should be permitted to do so and, indeed, given every encouragement. We believe, too, that the national sports bodies should be constituted on a mixed basis, with our national teams selected on merit and merit alone. Fifthly, we believe that the provision of suitable venues for all sports to cater for sportsmen and spectators of all races is also a matter requiring urgent attention. We also believe that, in co-operation with local authorities, more recreational areas for all should be set aside so that more people will be able to participate in recreation as such.

This of course involves expenditure. The hon. member for Bethlehem referred to the costs involved. We believe it is important that more funds should be made available to assist our sports bodies where they require such assistance, particularly when one takes into consideration the opportunities presented to some of our sportsmen to improve their performance tremendously with professional coaching and assistance and through facilities being made available to them. We have seen that athletics has taken a leading role in promoting what is termed normalization in sport. There has been a tremendous improvement in the standards of our Black athletes. I think particularly of Sydney Maree who recently established a new South African record for the mile. This shows what can be done when sportsmen are given the opportunities and the facilities required to improve their performance. That is why the question of coaching is another aspect which requires further consideration. One is surprised to see in the Estimates that in respect of coaching there has been a reduction in the amount made available. On page 37-6 of the Estimates in Programme 2, “Sport Promotion”, one sees that as regards coaching the amount is being reduced from R63 500 to R43 600. This reduction is hard to understand in view of the real need that exists for coaching, particularly professional coaching, which should be made available to our sportsmen and sportswomen.

Furthermore, on page 37-9 in Programme 3, “Recreation Promotion”, one sees that while an amount of R4 700 was made available last year for coaching, this has now been reduced to a nominal amount of R100. I hope the hon. the Minister can give some indication of the reasons for this reduction as far as coaching is concerned, because this is indeed an important aspect of any form of sport in order to ensure that the performance of the sportsmen is improved.

I spoke of “passing the ball”, with reference to soccer or football. This is another aspect I should like to raise with the hon. the Minister. On 9 February this year I asked the hon. the Minister whether consideration had been given to assisting with the provision of additional sports stadiums and, if such assistance had been granted, to what extent this had been done and what the nature of that assistance was. The hon. the Minister replied that this matter was being investigated and that further steps would be taken flowing from the results of those investigations. As far as soccer is concerned, this is a worldwide game which has gained enormous popularity in South Africa in recent times with the introduction of professional soccer. We have found that, unfortunately, the administration of this game has caused a great deal of difficulty and concern as a result of certain jealousies that have arisen. It has been extremely difficult to try to reconcile the jealousy that exists between the various federations and leagues that have come into existence.

One thing that was illustrated in the annual report of the department was the question of stadiums. We know that one of the greatest difficulties has been to make adequate provision for large numbers of people to gain admission to sports stadiums when an important match is to be played. There is enough space in South Africa and certainly a need and a desire to see that we should have at least three stadiums that can accommodate 50 000 spectators each as well as a larger stadium, perhaps in the Johannesburg area, with a capacity to accommodate 100 000 spectators. It is quite within the realms of possibility if one considers the growth in sport—and particularly soccer—amongst all race groups. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I cannot remember, as the hon. the Minister does, your remarks with regard to the Free State and injury time, but I think it is quite appropriate on this occasion for a Northern Transvaler to say to Naas Botha: “Well done, Naas!” [Interjections.] Not only because he made his team win, but because—and I think I say this on behalf of all hon. members in this House—that kick of Naas Botha symbolizes so much to us. It symbolizes the necessity for all of us and especially for the youth of today, when our enemies are rejoicing at their victory over us, still to be able to have the perseverance to win. It symbolizes the fact that we have to stay cool when everyone around us gets excited. To me that kick also symbolizes—and I think all hon. members will agree with me—the fact that one must have self-confidence. Mr. Chairman, I only want to say to Naas Botha, to all the other rugby players like him, and all other sportsmen …

Order! Surely there must also be a referee who can read the clock correctly! [Interjections.]

I think it is very important for one to keep cool even though he has doubts about the referee’s watch. All of us are proud of and grateful to these fine young sportsmen of ours for what they maintain in such a manner in these difficult times for sport in South Africa, and for doing their thing in such a manner that they fill us with pride and pleasure. I want to say to all these sportsmen, “Carry on with the good work. You are setting a fine example on the sports-fields to the generations to come.”

I want to congratulate the hon. the Minister on his appointment. I hope he will remain in control of this department for a long time to come so that together with the able Secretary of the department, Mr. Hoek, and the other officials, he can continue with the fine work that has already been done. There is one matter that causes me concern which arises out of the annual report and which I have spoken about on occasion. I refer to professional wrestling.

Paragraph 8.7.2 of the annual report deals with professional wrestling. It is stated that professional wrestling had shown a revival because several well-known wrestlers from abroad took part in tournaments in South Africa. I do not think that they are well known. On the contrary, most of them seemed to me to be real has-beens. I want to express the desire that the hon. the Minister, before leaving this portfolio, will ensure that this thing called professional wrestling will no longer be included in the annual report, because, with the greatest respect, I do not think that it is appropriate to the annual report. Perhaps we must try to find another place for it, but I do not quite know what. [Interjections.]

The normalization of sport relations was discussed today and the hon. the Minister said that we must keep sport out of politics and politics out of sport. The fact of the matter is that South African society has become so politicized as a result of its racial composition and the nations of which it is composed, in the international world as well as locally, that one can hardly imagine a practical politician being able to discuss sport today without, at some stage or other, dealing with the essential reality of peaceful co-existence, of potential conflict and national relations. For that reason, it is very important to me that when we speak about sport, we regard sport in the total social as well as political context of Southern Africa. Sport is in fact a social activity which arises out of the social activities of a diversity of nations and communities. All the deficiencies with regard to peaceful co-existence inherent in society also appear in many respects in the world of sport I want to say in all humility that if we look at the potential problems and the potential areas of conflict in the field of sport, we see that the potential problems and potential conflicts are to be found specifically where the realities of the co-existence of nations and of communities show deficiencies, where a large number of people are not bound to their community as we should like and where communities in the urban areas still have problems. I want to illustrate this. In a place like Pretoria we are facing a potential situation of conflict. I should like to bring this to the hon. the Minister’s attention—not that I think that it has not been done before. As regards the Caledonian sports field in the centre of Pretoria as well as sports fields such as the Rand Stadium and various others in other large urban centres, we are facing a potential situation of conflict because masses of sport enthusiasts and interested people from time to time take those sports fields by storm. I am absolutely convinced that in the long run it will be in the interests of order that we look at this situation which has occurred and which might crop up in the future and try to deal with it in such a way that we can eliminate this potential conflict, because this situation cannot be in the interests of harmony, still less in the interests of sound race relations.

Sport is a mirror-image of society as a whole, and as a mirror-image of the whole society, it reflects, as I have said, the faults of that society. As far as sport is concerned, it reflects the potential for conflict as well as the potential for co-operation. In spite of what the Opposition says, I want to say that the potential for co-operation among the various race groups in the field of sport has been given priority in recent years by this Government. I am grateful for that and I think that we should continue in this way. The hon. the Minister spoke about adjustments and exceptions which will have to be made within the framework of the policy as laid down. I want to thank him for that, because it is an approach that indicates that one is not hidebound or blind to the realities that surround one, realities which can get one out of dilemmas and possible conflict situations. In connection with the urban complexes I want to make a very earnest plead that we should give consideration, on a dramatic scale, to the need for large stadiums and sport facilities. Whether we like it or not, it is a fact that most of the Black sports clubs in the Black states as well as in the urban complexes are in many respects appendages of White sports clubs. An inherent possibility for conflict is created by this, because in the first place, the White sports clubs have more prestige value; in the second place the White sports clubs are more attractive; in the third place there is more competition for individual sportsmen at these clubs; and in the fourth place the communications media centre their activities in and around these larger centres.

All these things make it essential that we also make adequate sporting facilities and everything that goes with them, available around the centres of our Black communities and Black states, alongside our White urban centres. We can start by building more and better stadiums and making still more coaches available. We must not make these Black sports organizations and Black sports clubs poor appendages of our White sports clubs and administrations, because if we do that we will eventually be faced with situations which are not in the interests of harmony and coexistence. I think the sport policy of the NP has showed us that when we as communities, nations and individuals of Southern Africa play on the sports field, and practise sport in our own right and with our own talents, we can do it in such a way that we can bring about harmony. In spite of the charges against us and in spite of the negative references to our particular society, we can say that Southern Africa—and I think that we must concentrate on Southern Africa in these times when we are being expelled from the international sporting world—is the sports forum and sporting playground of nations and communities where opportunities are afforded the individual athlete to compete as a member of his nation as well. We play sport in such a way as to eliminate the potential conflict situation, after which we convert it and apply it in the interests of good race relations so that we can say that in the field of sport, we have indeed converted the potential conflict into opportunities for co-existence, using the policy of this Government as a recipe.

Mr. Chairman, in the first place I want to say to the hon. member for Innesdal that it was pleasant to listen to his philosophical approach to sport facilities, sport fields, etc. I take it as read that for the sound and successful exercise of a sport, the availability of proper sport facilities is, in fact, a prerequisite. Having said this, I want to refer to three aspects. The first is: What are, in fact, the needs as regards sport facilities for the important types of sport among our various population groups? In the beginning of 1974 the Department of Community Development launched a comprehensive investigation into community facilities and I think that we can accept that sport facilities comprise an integral part of community facilities. At that stage the Department of Community Development established that sport fields, playing fields, swimming pools and tennis courts were, in fact, our most pressing need. If we want to tackle and solve this enormous problem among our various population groups with regard to sport facilities in a meaningful way, we shall have to get our priorities right too. In other words, we shall have to establish which types of sport we have to supply with which essential facilities. As I see these things, I think we could draw up various categories, but what this actually amounts to in practice is that at the moment, soccer needs the most facilities. It is estimated that in our large centres, between 200 000 and 300 000 of our Blacks are actively interested in soccer in one way or another. If that is so, we can take it that there is an enormous demand for sufficient soccer fields. We must also take it that whereas our Coloured community has in fact been the greatest exponent of rugby among our non-White peoples until now, our Blacks are also beginning to be interested and will start taking part in rugby on a large scale. For that reason, rugby fields are the second very important sport facility that must be supplied for our people.

In the third place I want to refer to swimming pools. In South Africa with its very special and warm climate, swimming pools are really something that is needed by all our people, almost throughout the country. In the fourth place I want to refer to another important aspect, i.e. that we in South Africa really need an enormous national stadium, a stadium complying with all international standards and where we can hold our games periodically. However, before I come to that, I have to say that in the past we have tried to organize large games here in South Africa. Even in 1969 we had the South African Games. The year after that we had the non-White games. In 1971 we had the RSA-10 sports days. In 1973 we had the South African Games.

Then there was the great gimnaestrada, and in 1981 we intend holding large games once again. In other words, with the facilities at our disposal but with tremendous extensions at a very high cost we were able to present these things. However, we are a country, a nation and a State with great ideals. We believe that we have to bring the South African nation together periodically at these great games, and I believe that in the years ahead we shall be able to bring the nations of Southern Africa together on such an occasion.

I also refer to the second aspect, viz.: What is the urgency as regards setting up these sport facilities? It is a fact that there is a pressing need and a great urgency for them, because here in our beautiful country, with its blue sky, its waters, its sun, its mountains and its open spaces, it is true that the South African nation is a sporting nation par excellence, not only people interested in sport, but also participants in sport.

Business suspended at 18h30 and resumed at 20h00.

Evening Sitting

Mr. Chairman, before business was suspended earlier this evening I was indicating how essential sport facilities were for the playing of sport. I also want to say that in the normal course, our various population groups must play their own types of sport in their own clubs. We do not have to debate this, because it is obvious and logical. However, a problem develops when there is a lack of the necessary sport facilities, because what happens then, is that one person wants to ask his neighbour for help. If it then happens, as is usually the case, that the neighbour’s sport facilities are not adequate either, problems can arise. Therefore I want to say that for really peaceful coexistence it is also imperative that every population group has the necessary sport facilities at its disposal. The presence of sport facilities also leads to greater participation in sport, which in turn is a very important and strong aid in making our people spiritually and physically prepared. I do not know of a single good sportsman who would soon sink to the level of a criminal.

The third question is: What modus operandi can we use to make the necessary sport facilities available? I want to state that not only the State, but also the private sector, local authorities and organized sport are to a certain degree under an obligation to help make sport facilities available. I want to refer to this briefly. I believe we can say that our mining companies and industries on the Witwatersrand, as well as our vehicle assembly plants in the Eastern Cape, have already done a tremendous amount to make sport facilities and sport fields available. However, I know of no good reason why the mining companies and industries on the Witwatersrand cannot make efforts to erect a large international soccer stadium for our Blacks. I believe I can also safely say that it would probably be the duty of the State to realize the ideal of a large national stadium complying with international standards. I also think it is the duty of our local authorities at least to make sites for sporting purposes available, as well as to lay on water and electricity for such sites.

Just as it is normal business practice for the private sector to regard making available buildings, offices, fuel, wages and salaries and expenditure of this nature as normal expenditure for an enterprise, they should regard the supply of housing and community facilities, including sport facilities, to the employee in the same light.

Mr. Chairman, I do not disagree with the hon. member for Newton Park on what he had to say about better facilities, an international soccer stadium and a greater participation in sport by all. I think this is basically our philosophy as well, and we therefore agree with him.

I intend dealing with a situation that also has an international side to it. Perhaps the hon. member for Newton Park, an ex-Springbok rugby player, will be the first to appreciate the point that I am about to make.

Later on in the annual report of the Department of Sport and Recreation the Secretary of the department has the following to say in the opening paragraph—

Later in his report, on page 13 (para. 8.7.1), he says—

In other words, the other sports do suffer under sports isolation. I find these paragraphs contradictory. How can he, under those circumstances, say that all is well with sport? Can we say that we are not isolated? Has the isolation not, in fact, increased?

With the Olympic Games to be held in Moscow in 1980—a fact which was referred to by the hon. member for Bethlehem in his speech—I want to submit that it seems that competing countries are so scared they will be excluded from those Games if they have sports ties with South Africa that we are getting repeated rebuffs. I submit that the reason for the rebuffs at the moment is that they are so sensitive. From what we saw in regard to the rugby tour of France, the golf competition and the quiet way in which the Middlesex and Surrey tours were handled, it is quite clear that these countries are very sensitive. We should not be unduly perturbed at the situation for the moment.

I think the countries are conscious of the sensitivity of the situation at the moment. We must therefore be careful not to place them in an embarrassing position. I think we all remember that prior to the Olympic Games of 1976, when there were sports ties between New Zealand and South Africa, there was talk about expelling New Zealand from the Olympic Games. That did not happen. However, a number of African countries withdrew at the last moment from the Olympic Games, to the consternation of the committee and many people.

That is no news.

Just a moment please. Do not shout. I think that we must try to remember that the Olympic Games is the supreme sporting challenge of the world. The best athletes in a country are selected and the countries then compete against each other. It is the culmination of four or more years of constant training, dedication and sacrifice that must go into the efforts of each competitor. Eventually the supreme champion of champions is chosen. The final winner stands on the rostrum and the gold medal is hung around his neck.

Where else could it hang?

The national flag of the winning country flutters at the top of the highest standard, and as the national anthem is played all the spectators, approximately 80 000 of them, rise like one man. The nationals of the relevant country swell with pride at that moment. It is that moment that stands out in my mind indelibly, as I longed to see the South African flag flying and to hear the South African national anthem being played, knowing well that we had athletes who, as Springboks of South Africa, should be standing on the rostrum to receive those gold medals. Our national anthem should then also be played.

I regard my visit to the Olympic Games in Montreal in 1976 as one of the highlights in my life and then only as a spectator. I imagined what it would be like for a competitor to have participated and to have won a medal. That is why the world is so sensitive. That is why in 1936 the Berlin Games were seen as more than just a clash of competitors. It was a display of international prowess and international strength. This is the manner in which the Olympic Games are regarded.

Where does the remedy lie? It lies with the hon. the Minister of Sport and Recreation. He must secure our participation and proper relationships for us in the sports world. The remedy lies in the hands of the Government. The remedy lies in this Parliament. This is the problem we in fact have to face.

On this point I want to ask the hon. the Minister of Sport and Recreation whether South Africans will be permitted, as spectators, to attend the Olympic Games in Moscow in 1980 and whether Soviet Russia will permit us South Africans to attend those games and to enter Moscow in 1980? I want to know from the hon. the Minister what steps the Government is taking to ensure that we can attend the Olympic Games in Moscow and what negotiations the Government plans …

[Inaudible.]

What is that hon. member “tjank”-ing about?

Ask Don McHenry. He will fix it up for you.

Mr. Chairman, we do not want a “Raw deal”. We want to know from the hon. the Minister of Sport and Recreation what he is doing to ensure that the hundreds of South Africans who have from time to time attended Olympic Games and who want to attend the Olympic Games in Moscow, will be able to do so.

What is in fact the problem in South Africa? The hon. member for Sandton has dealt with SACOS. SACOS have come out with a charter for the normalization of sport. They want one non-racial national body to be set up. They want clubs to be open. They want racially exclusive clubs to be abolished. They want overseas touring sides to be compelled to play against non-racial teams. Furthermore, they want no visiting teams in South Africa until non-racial sport has been introduced. In addition, they want school sport and junior leagues to be completely non-racial.

On the other side we have the S.A. Olympic and National Games Association who want to retain international links, at the same time working for the elimination of discrimination. The hon. member for Sandton has made it clear what our attitude is towards SACOS and that we do not go along with the pressure they have brought to bear on sport and the politicking they have engaged in. I think perhaps the time has come for the two bodies I have referred to get together. Perhaps the hon. the Minister of Sport and Recreation can arrange a conference at which these two bodies and his own department can get together to see whether a better agreement and better understanding cannot be reached with regard to sport in South Africa. There, again, the hon. the Minister must state very clearly what the Government’s policy is with regard to sport and how his statement of today fits in with it—and I have looked at that very carefully.

The hon. the Minister’s predecessor, the present Minister of Plural Relations and Development, is on record as having said in 1978 at a national congress of the association of clubs of South Africa that the Government accepted that the interests of South Africa and all its sporting peoples would be served best if sportsmen and sportswomen, White, Black, Coloured and Indian, belonged to their own clubs and controlled, arranged and managed their own affairs. However, on 21 February 1978 that Minister, addressing the International Tennis Federation, said—

He also said that early steps would be taken with regard to the restrictions imposed by the Liquor Act. In a letter by the same hon. Minister addressed to me personally and dated 9 October 1978, he wrote—

The hon. the Minister continued—

Then the present hon. Minister—and I wish him success in his new post—is reported on 22 April 1979 as having said in a speech at, I think, Oudtshoorn—

I take it he was correctly reported in the newspaper. [Time expired.]

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

Mr. Chairman, I thank the hon. member for Meyerton.

In the same article it is also said—

Can that be correct in the light of the hon. the Minister’s statement today? I therefore want to ask how much further the NP has actually gone, in trying to adapt its sports policy in such a manner as to eliminate the existing problems, than the stipulated policy at their 1976 Congress.

The hon. member for Sandton has set out our policy and principles regarding non-racial sport. Particular emphasis is placed on moving away from ethnic considerations. That is the first principle. The second principle involves competitors in sporting events being selected on merit. Thirdly, it is also our principle that sportsmen should not be barred by legislation from taking part in sport. In this respect let me also refer to the difficulties raised by Sacos. In this respect I believe that the legal prohibitions that exist can only be eliminated by removing the prohibitions that exist can only be eliminated by removing the prohibitions in terms of the Liquor Act, the Group Areas Act and the Urban Areas (Consolidation) Act.

The hon. member for Sandton also mentioned that there should be a total commitment to achieving autonomy for sportsmen, both in playing and in administration. He also said there should be a council of sport for South Africa. I want to deal very briefly with that. In doing so I want to enlarge somewhat on what we have in mind when we talk about a sports council for South Africa. When the hon. member announced that he would be introducing a private member’s Bill, what he actually had in mind was the outlining of certain basic principles in terms of which we could consult sporting bodies, on a broad basis, about some of the points or principles we have in mind. We envisage such a body would being a legal persona created in terms of an Act of Parliament. We would want such a body to have the power to contract and to own property of any nature, and also to act in all matters relevant to that body as a corporate body in its own right. As a broad principle we envisage developing and improving the knowledge and the practise of sport and physical recreation in the interests of social welfare and of the enjoyment of leisure by the public at large, as well as encouraging the attainment of high standards in conjunction with the governing bodies of sport and of physical recreation.

It is a sort of body, we feel, which should generally foster, support and undertake the provision of facilities for sport throughout the South African community. It should also, at all times, encourage and promote research and study in matters pertaining to sport. It would also be necessary for such a body, we believe, to co-operate with foreign and international bodies in furthering the objects of sport itself. Such a body can even act as trustees for collecting and administering certain moneys. The money, of course, would be allocated by Parliament. The council would also consist of a certain number of members and would draw up its own set of rules and regulations in terms of which it would operate. The body should utilize the funds obtained from Parliament, and of course from other sources, firstly for its own administrative purposes and, secondly, for the setting up of regional offices. Thirdly it should utilize such funds for the promotion of its aims and objects and, fourthly, for the allocation of capital and annual grants to sporting bodies and regional offices, in order of priority. It should concentrate, in particular, on the youth and on other problem areas. It should also try to achieve higher competitive standards in all types of sport and should also concentrate on the physical wellbeing and fitness of the nation by promoting participation in sport and physical recreation by all South Africans. The National Fitness Scheme, which is referred to in the report, is at present known as the National Trimsa Campaign and will be a continuous mens sana in corpore sano programme with the emphasis being on participation rather than on the spectator aspect of sports events.

That sounds like the name of a massage parlour.

For the benefit of the hon. member mens sana in corpore sano means “a sound mind in a healthy body”. As the hon. member for Newton Park said, these capital grants should go towards the building of stadiums. We need, for example, an indoor sports stadium. Preference should also be given to sporting facilities for handicapped people. Low cost schemes should be provided in areas of special need and voluntary clubs should also be assisted. Recurring grants should be given to the governing bodies of various sports, with special attention being given to coaching, preparation and training. Advice could also be given on architectural and engineering aspects. The Transvaal Rugby Football Union could also be advised, instead of having its members make many trips overseas to obtain advice. There should be a continuous campaign to encourage local authorities and commercial organizations.

In conclusion, I want to say that this is not a brand new concept. It has worked with success in the United Kingdom. The Sports Council of Great Britain was established by Royal Charter on 4 February 1972 and replaced the Advisory Sports Council which was created in 1965. It has overall responsibility for British sports matters. There are also separate councils in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. This council has separate committees to take care of aspects such as facilities, sports development, information and finance. It receives an annual grant from the Government to develop sport. It started with a grant of £3 600 million in 1972 and this amount had been increased to £10 200 million—the latest available figure—by 1976-’77.

The South African Government has come a long way in the field of sport since the announcement at Loskop Dam, and we give the Government full credit for what it has done so far. However, we appeal to the Government to make the final break-through by removing the last barriers, in particular the restrictive laws, and the permit system which is so unfair, to enable clubs to have a free choice. There is no better place to foster good relations than on the sports fields. Let us therefore try to build a happy and secure South Africa in this way because we owe it to our people.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. members who have participated in the discussion of this Vote up to now have to a large extent confined themselves to one branch of the department’s activities, i.e. sport. I think they were right, because sport is very important. Actually the active sportsmen and sportswomen of South Africa are the ones who win fame for themselves and for our country.

However, there is another branch which is also handled by the department, and that is recreation. I consider this aspect of the department’s activities to be just as important as sport. Therefore I should like to express a few ideas about recreation. In providing recreational facilities to the general public, it is an indisputable fact that all authorities have a very important function to perform. I just want to indicate how I see the responsibility of the State. In the first place, research should be done in this field. Secondly, the State should take the initiative by offering administrative, technical and professional assistance. Thirdly, the State should make financial grants-in-aid for the provision of basic recreational facilities. The function of the provincial authorities, I believe, concerns the provision of facilities on a regional level, i.e. where the natural resources for recreation are there. I am referring, for example, to public resorts with camping and caravan facilities and/or permanent structures for accommodation, game, marine and nature reserves, hiking trails, mountaineering routes, water sport facilities, angling facilities and many more. Although this function is already being performed to a greater or lesser degree, there is undoubtedly much room for improvement in respect of planning, research and co-ordination, mainly because of a lack of trained staff. Even if the State and the provincial administrations were to perform these tasks perfectly, the aspect of physical recreation would still be quite inadequate, since provision is only made for weekends and holiday use and not for daily use.

The percentage of the general public that is involved in this is much too low. Participation does not take place on a regular basis. The ordinary man, woman and child can only be motivated if the local authorities can be persuaded to give urgent attention to the matter. Therefore the local authorities have a vital role to play in respect of recreation, because they are the bodies with the most direct access to the public. It is of vital importance that the co-operation of local authorities be obtained. The most promising schemes can come to grief if the local authorities do not support them. The general public, i.e, working people, school-going children, and so on, usually spend most of their time during a normal week within the municipal boundaries of a town or city. Because of the increasing tendency to shorter working hours, people theoretically have more leisure.

I want to analyse briefly the way people spend their leisure. Leisure is the time one has for engaging in enjoyable physical or intellectual activities of one’s own free will. In other words, these are activities which one does not have to engage in. Especially the way people spend their leisure in our cities should receive absolute priority. Boredom and frustration are very real problems. Modem man lives a sedentary life movement because one of the effects of technology has been that the most important muscle groups of the human body, those of the arms, legs, stomach and back, get little or no exercise worth mentioning. Because of this, the occurrence of the so-called ailments of civilization, such as hypertension, high blood pressure, overweight, heart disease and many more illnesses is increasing at a bewildering rate. These diseases are generally found among our young people who have left school and adults who do not participate on a regular weekly basis in some form of organized sport or recreation. In this connection, I am not concerned about active sportsmen and sportswomen, but this group represents only about 14% of the population. It is the remaining approximately 86% that has disappeared somewhere along the line that is giving cause for concern. In the past, local authorities concentrated on the provision of facilities to only 14% of their inhabitants who had left school. The time has come for the local authorities to give more attention to that 86% of the population who do not have sufficient facilities available to them. Facilities which will stimulate recreation programmes in which large numbers of people can be involved must now be given priority. As I have already said, local authorities are the obvious bodies to make an important contribution in this connection. Our primary and most important task is to obtain the sympathy, enthusiasm and co-operation of the local authorities, and then comes the most difficult factor, i.e. rands and cents. Virtually without exception, everyone says that they simply have no money for more and better facilities, let alone the appointment of a permanent, qualified recreation official. Several reasons are usually advanced. One is that the burden on the taxpayer cannot be made any heavier and that other services such as roads, sewerage, electricity supply, health services, housing and so forth receive priority. It is said that when these needs have been met, little money remains. However, I feel that such excuses are no longer good enough. Money simply has to be found by local authorities. The order of priorities has to be revised so that programmes can be drawn up for the way people spend their leisure. People simply have to find the money themselves, because it would be an unhealthy situation if the State were to meet all the sport and recreation requirements of the local authorities, since that would destroy the autonomy of the local authorities and the bodies regulating sport and recreation. The contributions of the central Government must only serve as stimulants and must therefore be nothing but grants-in-aid. Local authorities simply have to have the staff available to implement on local level the projects of the Trimsa campaign which are circulated by the central Government at regular intervals, for the benefit of the masses.

Furthermore, it is of vital importance that the forms of sport for which facilities are provided on the league level should also develop sections where recreational sport can be practised. Therefore committees must be established for the forms of sport which are suitable for recreational sport, in order to help recreation officials of the city council to involve as many as possible of the approximately 86% of the population and to motivate them to action in the form of personal participation.

Only if we can bring about a situation where these three government levels support one another in the implementation of activities and schemes regarding the development of physical recreation can we hope one day to wipe out our backlog of approximately 10 years compared with Western Europe and our backlog of approximately 15 years compared with the USA.

I am convinced that the eventual success of the promotion of recreation in the RSA rests squarely on the shoulders of the local authorities, and I want to make a serious appeal to the city councils throughout our country henceforth to give their full cooperation to the provinces and to the central Government in the interests of this very important matter.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to congratulate the hon. member for Ladybrand on a fine, well-motivated and important speech. In any event, the hon. member fared much better than his fellow Free Staters in Bloemfontein last Saturday.

The hon. member for Sandton said earlier this afternoon that the policy of the Government was hardly obeyed any more. I want to state categorically that this is not a correct and true representation of the position in South Africa. The hon. member looks at me like that, but this is true. The reason why the hon. member says so is that he looks at the whole sport policy through integration glasses, and that is not correct. That is not the position in South Africa, because there are mixed sport clubs in South Africa, but with certain exceptions, this is against the policy of the Government. There must be no doubt about that, and in fact we say so to the people who want to introduce integration in the field of sport. Integrated clubs and integrated sport constitute far less than 1% of the total sport activities in South Africa.

There is a false conception of this whole matter, and the hon. member for Sandton falsifies it further by saying that the policy of the Government is not being obeyed in South Africa. The evidence is there that the policy of the Government on this matter is the right one and that it promotes the interests of the various population groups in allowing them to practise sport in accordance with the dictates of Government policy, and this evidence is available to all who want to see it and who do not regard this matter through integration glasses. The population groups will increasingly realize that the sport policy of the Government is in the best interests of our various communities and our various nations. Of course, there are people who act maliciously in this connection, but they are going against the interests of their own people. Therefore I want to tell the hon. member for Sandton quite frankly that it is not correct to allege, as he did, that the policy of the Government is hardly obeyed any more.

We whole-heartedly agree with the stand taken by the hon. the Minister this afternoon against demeaning ourselves in the face of outside pressure, in the field of sport as well. International sport relations are very important to South Africa, but our national honour and pride, in the field of sport as well, are much more important for our future. For that reason, we say that we refuse to bend over backwards for the sake of sport ties any longer. We refuse to grovel or demean ourselves before these people. We want good international sport relations, but if we have to grovel and plead for that, we say: “No thanks, that is out.” Our hands are clean as far as this matter is concerned and our case is just. We can face the world about this matter, because we have done more than we were asked to do five or ten years ago. The hon. the Minister rightly pointed out earlier this afternoon that our enemies were not interested in sport ties, but that they wanted to achieve other ends in South Africa by means of sport. We also say this today to those sport administrators of South Africa who think that they will achieve something by currying favour with our enemies and kow-towing to them; it will be of no avail and they should rather stop it. They should rather fight those people instead of kow-towing to them. We can get along without them if we have to. Let us keep our national pride in this field as well. I believe that in the long run, this will be much more important to us.

Along with this, I believe that we should make a well-motivated attempt to find an alternative for our many outstanding sportsmen and sportswomen and our thousands of sport-lovers. We must not sit back and lose courage and accept that we have lost. I think we should try to solve this problem through ingenious planning and motivated action. For example, we should be as ingenious as the Northern Transvaal Rugby Union was—I am not referring now to last Saturday—when they sent invitations to world-class rugby players to come and visit South Africa this year. I believe that the responsible rugby officials, Prof. Fritz Eloff, Robert Denton and others, deserve the thanks of us all for their efforts in this connection. Since we are going to be thrown back increasingly on our own resources, I believe it to be of the utmost importance that we should all co-operate to develop sport in South Africa, so that that which is ours may eventually become more important to us than international sport ties. In order to achieve this, we shall have to work together, plan together and refrain from squabbling, as we often do today.

The responsible people should get off their self-made platforms and take cognizance of what the ordinary people, we who provide most of the financial support for sport in South Africa, really want. When we look at our national sport, rugby, for example, we find that the man in the street would like to see rugby on television. We want to see it more often than we do at the moment. We do not object to other forms of sport being shown on television, but we feel that if those forms of sport were able to find a solution, so can rugby. We already know the arguments against direct broadcasts of rugby matches, and the arguments have some merit, especially when it is alleged that direct broadcasts of rugby matches affect the attendance of rugby matches elsewhere in the country. However, this argument is not always valid, and I want to state as a fact today that the public is not satisfied with the present state of affairs in this connection. In my opinion, it would be in the interests of this finest and most beautiful form of sport in South Africa for the responsible bodies to take cognizance of the fact that the present situation does not satisfy the supporters of this sport.

There is another field, too, in which I believe that we can do a very great deal to promote sport in South Africa through better co-operation and better planning. I am referring to the provision of facilities for the practise of sport. We have heard many pleas for more facilities today, and I am convinced that to obtain more facilities is a matter of some urgency. We are also convinced that it will cost a great deal of money, but unfortunately, we do not have the money.

However, we shall have to think of something, and I want to ask whether we cannot perhaps make better use of the existing facilities which have already been provided at great expense by educational authorities, local authorities and private bodies. Some of these facilities are often used for only a few hours a day or even just a few hours a week, while they are not used for the rest of the time.

I am convinced that if we can make the maximum use of the existing facilities within the community context, we shall have sufficient funds available to provide them in communities where no such facilities are available. It will probably be inconvenient, but if we want sport in South Africa to grow and prosper and to come into its own in spite of international sport isolation, as we all do, I believe that we shall accept that inconvenience and that we shall be prepared to make the sacrifice.

In several overseas countries, this practice is already working very well. I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether he will not consider negotiating about this with educational institutions, local authorities, etc., so that we may see whether we cannot perhaps make better use of existing facilities, with a view to increasing communal use within the community context I am convinced that if we do this, we shall be able to wipe out the shortages with regard to sport facilities much more rapidly.

Mr. Chairman, I should just like to tell the hon. member for Verwoerdburg that what is said makes a tremendous amount of good sense. We have a tremendous amount of capital invested in South Africa’s various recreational centres, and I am sure that if we investigated, in objective studies, the extent to which such facilities were utilized, we would find that without further great capital investment but with better planning we would probably be able to offer the population of South Africa the use of these facilities at no great cost.

The aspect I should like to concentrate on this evening is more on the recreational side than the sport side. It is very appropriate that in this Health Year we should, in fact, be discussing this very important portfolio of sport and recreation. It is a true maxim that a healthy body is the prerequisite for a healthy mind. I am sure that there are many hon. members in this House who will agree with me that to develop our healthy minds to a greater extent is just as important as to develop our healthy bodies.

As the hon. member for Verwoerdburg has said, South Africa is well known for being a sport-crazy country. I believe that there is hardly a gathering of men—and in many cases women as well—in which one does not hear discussion of the latest cricket scores, the latest football results or speculations about the result of a forthcoming rugby match. However, there is one very disturbing trend that has developed in South Africa, and that is that the majority of men and women, at a very early age, start to become talkers about sport, rather than participants. South Africa is a young, pioneering country and it is therefore not surprising to find that, despite the wide open spaces, for economic, population and democratic reasons the young men of South Africa, particularly the Whites, spend most of their physically active years preparing for a career, going to university or doing military training, of course, which is a tremendous boon to physical fitness. Once they have completed their university training, however, they take a job and are so busy that they cannot really afford the time to participate in competitive sport. Eventually they start dropping the participative aspect and sit in front of their television sets or go along to a sports venue where they sit and watch and thoroughly enjoy themselves. However, in the meantime they are putting on kilograms around the waist.

It is a serious indictment of our South African way of life that we have one of the highest fatality rates from coronary disease amongst young males in the age group 25 to 45 years. A fundamental reason for this must be the lack of physical exercise. It is said that an army marches on its stomach. However, I am sure, particularly when I look around at hon. members, that many people sit on their stomachs. They do not march on them at all.

My appeal is for the hon. the Minister to use his influence to obtain further funds to participate in the planning activities indicated by the hon. member for Verwoerdburg. These funds could be used to provide more extensive recreational centres in the various major centres of South Africa, recreational centres where ordinary men and women who are not interested in competitive sport can, on a Saturday or Sunday, or on an evening when they have the time, go and enjoy themselves, relax and participate in active physical recreation.

In the 1978 report of the Department of Sport and Recreation I noticed, o page 9, the very revealing statistics on the new concept which the hon. the Minister’s department has sponsored in Pretoria. The innovation known as a trim park has proved to be exceptionally popular. I do not know what the cost of such a trim park is—perhaps the hon. the Minister will tell us—but judging by the photographs which accompany the article, it cannot be very capital-intensive. From 1 July 1978 to the end of August 1978—a period of 60 days —no less than 33 495 citizens of Pretoria enjoyed their recreation at this particular park. It seems to me that if one really wants to remain fit, and is not interested in, or does not have the time for, competitive sport, this would be an excellent idea. The report goes on to say that it is anticipated that a further 11 trim parks will be built in the main centres of South Africa over the next year or two.

I mention this because if one looks at the available recreational facilities in South Africa, one finds that even in tennis, football, rugby, squash and others, one becomes involved in leagues, and if one does not become a league player, the rest of the members of that particular club are unfortunately not particularly interested in one. The end result is then that the man who is not that good at a particular sport, or who cannot maintain a league standard, finds that he falls by the wayside. He then rather remains at home or begins to become a mere spectator. For that man or woman, particularly the White male between 25 and 45 years of age, it would be tremendously beneficial if they could have a trim park in their immediate area.

What gives cause for concern is the excessive use of foodstuffs, particularly refined carbohydrates. I believe that the concept of eating excessively and therefore suffering excessively from diabetes and coronary diseases is a result of our failure to follow a way of life which will enable us to get rid of all those excessive calories through exercise. Most White people are in sedentary occupations. Therefore they do not have the facilities to get rid of those 3 000 to 4 000 calories which the ordinary South African male takes in today, while he in fact requires only 1 000 such calories for his style of life. However, I am sure that if we could promote the idea of trim parks, we would have gone a long way towards saving South Africa many unhappy lives and lives crippled by disease. This way of life, I believe, is the main cause of the sorrow and the misery of the young widow with young children, a woman who has suddenly lost her husband through a coronary disease. I believe that even if we have to invest millions of rand in order to provide these trim parks, it will still be a very small investment with a very large return, especially compared with the costs to South Africa of the thousands of people afflicted by coronary diseases and diabetes. I should therefore be most interested to hear from the hon. the Minister what his plans are for the establishment of trim parks, and in particular where the 11 trim parks mentioned by him are going to be built, as well as what the costs will be to the local borough or municipality or whatever authority is going to be responsible for building the trim parks.

I should also like to go a bit further and to comment on an item which has been discussed quite extensively by other hon. members. That is the position regarding our standing in international sport I believe it is a foregone conclusion that the hon. the Minister should encourage the concept that sport in South Africa, and the way in which it is regulated, will decide whether we are going to be allowed back into international sport in the true sense of the word. Despite the extremely valuable work done by the Department of Sport and Recreation, we in these benches would like to advocate to the hon. the Minister that his real objective should be to allow sports administrators and the participants in sport to regulate their own interpersonal relationships. I do not believe that with Government involvement we are in fact doing ourselves any good in the international sporting field. It has become known in other countries that the Government has a Department of Sport and Recreation, that certain funds are made available, and that sponsorship is forthcoming from the Government. It is also seen by people—incorrectly, I may say—outside South Africa that the Government is in fact trying to manipulate sport in order to promote its own image overseas. This is very unfortunate. It is very unfortunate despite the good work being done by the Government. I think the hon. the Minister should stop and think whether by having Government interference in sport— and we are having an excessive amount of that—we are doing South African sport any good in the long run.

How can you say that there is excessive Government interference in sport?

I can say that very easily. I qualified the statement by saying that this was the way many people outside South Africa felt However, in many cases they are not correct. Until such time …

You obviously did not listen when I delivered my speech.

The hon. the Minister will get a chance to reply to this debate. Until such time as the Government of South Africa makes a firm commitment to leave sport to sports administrators and participants he runs the risk … [Interjections.]

[Inaudible.]

Previous speakers may have referred to this. Unfortunately I was in the Other Place during that part of the debate. However, I feel so strongly about this that I should like the hon. the Minister to confirm … [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I cannot help agreeing with what the hon. member for Durban North said about trim parks. The first time I went to the trim park in Pretoria, I was dressed in a suit. My children were with me. The place was so inviting that I simply broke into a run in my suit and Sunday shoes—I simply could not help it One reads in the annual report—so the hon. member ought to know it—that the department intends to encourage the establishment of trim parks. Eleven of these are being planned.

Unfortunately, remarks have been made about excessive Government interference in sport. It has become the vogue to make this accusation. I shall come back to it later. I want to state that no matter what we do, we shall not be accepted in international sport. I listened very carefully to what the hon. the Minister had to say. Having listened to his absolutely inspiring speech, to his fine and clear exposition, his splendid vision and his conduct up to now in respect of sport, I cannot help feeling happy about the future of sport in South Africa as far as all the various population groups in the country are concerned. I just want to say that we have reason to be grateful for having such a Minister to take over this portfolio. In his introductory speech, he pointed out the image, or rather the caricature which has been created of the Government’s sport policy. I think it is one of his tasks to destroy that caricature. The image of South African sport which the hon. the Minister has built so far is a very fine one.

In the first place, it implies that order will be maintained in sport One must take into consideration the circumstances in South Africa. In soccer, for example, there is always tension, overseas as well, when two teams are pitted against each other. In South Africa, we have the added dimension that teams consisting of members of the various population groups play against one another. When one considers the orderly way in which this happens in this country, we can only thank the administrators and the departments.

We may also consider the extent to which sport is being developed within the ethnic context in South Africa in respect of the facilities which are created, the training which is given and the financial assistance which is provided. When sport is practised within an ethnic context, the frustration is avoided which could otherwise occur. It is psychologically correct that people should participate in sport within a group context.

Thirdly, the orderly promotion of international sport brings out the best in every ethnic group. In other words, there is also the necessary competition between the population groups in the country.

Fourthly, one thinks of the fact that the best sportsmen and sportswomen from every population group can compete as an organized group against the best foreign teams. The sportsman in this country is denied nothing. There is no discrimination on grounds of colour or race.

In the fifth place, one sees that apart from the fact that the Government ensures that sport is practised in an orderly way and that friction and incidents are avoided, it does not interfere with the way in which sportsmen or sportswomen practise their sport in their clubs.

The hon. the Minister made it clear what his aims were and said that we would like to maintain the necessary autonomy of the sport bodies. But now people are making accusations which I shall quote from newspaper reports later. Our enemies have succeeded in creating the impression all over the world that our Government interferes with sport for ideological reasons by means of legislation. Surely we know that this is not so. I believe it to be the hon. the Minister’s greatest task to bring home to the world that the Government prefers to leave matters of sport to the various sport organizations, as in fact happens in practice.

The hon. member for Verwoerdburg referred to the fact that almost all our people prefer to practise their regular sport on club level within an ethnic context and even within certain social strata as far as certain forms of sport are concerned. This is a social action. I just want to mention by the way that we know that pressure is being brought to bear on the hon. the Minister by a small group of people who want him to lay down in legislation who is allowed to associate with whom in sport on club level. We believe that such people must surely realize that mutual participation in sport within the club context is to a large extent on the same level as ordinary social intercourse. We may compare it with a chess or bridge or friendship club, for example. We are not going to throw overboard the Government’s declared policy unnecessarily.

The Government does not want to interfere unnecessarily when people entertain members of other races at home or when people of different races decide to kick or punch a ball together, unless it is done in a disorderly fashion. This small group of people must surely realize that to enforce separate sport within the colour context by means of legislation is almost impossible. Therefore the sooner everyone realizes that the course which has been taken and the fine image which the hon. the Minister is constantly promoting are the best, the better for our country and all its people. Let us accept it as a fact that the various population groups in South Africa prefer to practise sport on the club level within their own ethnic context, and to make a fuss about a few exceptions is really not necessary.

I really believe that we shall never satisfy world opinion as long as we do not have a fully integrated national community on a one-man-one-vote basis, in other words, a Black majority Government. In this connection, I want to quote from the Sunday Times of 8 April 1979. In this newspaper, these people bewail their lot, and they say, among other things—

They bewail this fact, and according to the newspaper, they give the following reasons—

Surely we know that this is not true. Surely we know that people want to participate in sport within their own ethnic context and even within their own circle of friends. They go on to say—

The hon. the Minister quoted from The Natal Mercury where they criticize Sacos, but just look at the type of propaganda I have just read. The hon. the Minister has also appealed to the Press and to our people to put a stop to it, but I read the following in The Natal Mercury of 13 February 1979—

It is this caricature which is held up to the people overseas. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I should like to begin by thanking the hon. the Minister for his introductory speech, which was illuminating and really up to date. I think that if the hon. member for Durban North had been here when he spoke, he would have made a completely different speech.

I should like to emphasize two aspects. I want to say that it is indeed gratifying that the hon. the Minister has given a clear lead in this connection. The hon. the Minister stated unequivocally that there would be no Government interference with the authority of any club or with its private activities, provided that the club went about those activities in a proper and orderly fashion. I think this spells out to us very clearly the policy of the NP and that of the hon. the Minister and his department, and I feel that in this connection, we can now take positive steps on the road ahead.

I now want to refer to another positive aspect in the hon. the Minister’s introductory speech. He said that if we were pushed beyond a certain point and we then had to choose between participation in international sport on the one hand and the preservation of our self-respect and our own identity on the other, we would have no other alternative than to choose the preservation of our self-respect and our own identity. I think this is food for thought, because it is something which we sometimes disregard when we talk only about the question of participation in international sport. However, these political aspects have been exhaustively discussed by hon. members.

I should prefer to devote my attention to a crisis situation to which I believe the hon. the Minister will certainly give attention if only I point it out to him again. I should like to discuss the crisis situation which has arisen because of the lack of harbour facilities for small pleasure-boats. We are all aware of the increasing demand for harbour facilities for smaller vessels which are not used for commercial purposes, but purely for sport and pleasure. For this reason, we were delighted to learn of the progress which is being made with the feasibility study with regard to a pleasure-boat harbour at Granger Bay. For someone who has experienced the lack of pleasure-boat facilities in the Cape Peninsula in recent years, this is a gratifying situation. However, one only wonders whether these facilities at Granger Bay will be sufficient, and therefore one thinks of the fact that if Rietvlei were connected with the sea by means of a canal, one would be able to build the most beautiful marina in the world there. That is a wonderful vision. Apart from the Granger Bay project, it is a well-known fact that South Africa is totally lacking in suitable harbour facilities for pleasure-boats. I think this is probably why the Cabinet decided to authorize the feasibility study with regard to Granger Bay.

When one looks at the economic progress and the technological development which South Africa has experienced over the past decade, especially as far as shipbuilding is concerned, one sees that there has been tremendous development in respect of smaller pleasure-boats. There has been a great revival in that industry and it is now flourishing. A great number of yachts, keel-boats, power-boats and skiboats are being built However, these boats are not used for commercial purposes, but for private purposes, pleasure and recreation.

The report of the commission of inquiry into the control of small boats which are not used for commercial purposes, the so-called Reinecke Commission, is nearing completion. I believe that reference will probably be made in the report to the extent and importance of small-boat traffic in South Africa. I believe that the mere fact that this commission has been appointed is sufficient proof of the extensive use of pleasure-boats in South Africa, both along the coast and on inland waters. I do not want to say anything about the possible control of these boats at this stage, but what I do believe is that it is essential to point out to the hon. the Minister again that it is poor harbour facilities, and in some cases the total absence of such facilities, that the owners of these boats have to contend with. I believe that all hon. members of this House know that the demand for mooring facilities by transoceanic yachtsmen far exceeds the demand year after year. I believe that we all realize that the commercial harbours such as Durban, East London, Port Elizabeth and Cape Town are scarcely able to handle this demand, and in fact, since there is such a great shortage of mooring facilities, the presence of small vessels within the existing commercial harbours is creating problems for the commercial authorities in handling the commercial situation.

When we consider the tourist industry and the value of foreign visitors for South Africa, I believe we shall all agree that we cannot possibly turn away yachtsmen from overseas. On the contrary, this ever-growing tourist industry simply has to be accommodated at the expense of expansion of the commercial harbours. I believe that we must do something in this connection.

There is another very important aspect in this connection. We see that the permanent mooring areas within the existing commercial harbours for keel-boats and the bigger motorized boats is so limited that it is already being handled on a quota basis. When one considers that the annual increase in the number of boats in this class exceeds the available mooring facilities, one may accept that the situation has already reached saturation point and is now headed for a crisis. I believe, and I say this with great conviction and with all the knowledge I have gained of the local situation over years of experience, that Granger Bay alone will not be able to meet those requirements. But mooring facilities are not the only problem. I must point out to the hon. the Minister that the launching facilities for these boats which do not have a deep draught present another problem. These boats—smaller yachts, power-boats and skiboats—usually make use of slipways. Here in the Cape, we have the splendid example of Rumbley Bay. There are literally thousands of these boats that are active on our inland as well as our coastal waters over the weekend.

We have a problem with the control of these vessels in South Africa, but I believe that the question of control is associated with the lack of clearly identifiable launching areas or facilities for these boats. And no matter how much we talk about control, we shall not be able to do it effectively before we have provided the necessary facilities for these people. When we consider that literally millions of rands have already been invested in pleasure-boats in South Africa, and that it is a healthy industry which has been built up, I believe it to be essential for the State to contribute more than R50 000 a year to provide facilities for the large numbers of people who participate in it. The scientific investigations by the CSIR and the Town and Regional Planning Commission of Natal have already identified areas where these facilities can be developed. In my opinion, these studies should be supported by financial contributions from the State to make possible the development of some of those areas, not only in Natal, but also in the other provinces. Of course, I must point out that hon. members must not think only of the pleasure aspects of these boats. The boats I am referring to in this connection, especially power-boats and skiboats, can play an important strategic role in this country. The owners of these pleasure-boats have often been obliged to do rescue work at sea with their boats, and the creation of effective and adequate facilities along our coast would therefore contribute directly to the safeguarding of our long and unguarded coastline. I wish to point out that just as civil pilots are used to assist the S.A. Air Force with their private aircraft, we can recruit these boat-owners to help the Navy in emergencies, but then we shall have to help supply the necessary facilities and control at the same time. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I should like to react briefly to a comment made a little while ago by the hon. member for Oudtshoorn, who is not in the House at the moment.

He is in the Other Place.

I shall nevertheless react to what he had to say. He was discussing merit awards and said that the difficulty was—and he asked me a question on this—that, if all merit awards were placed on one list, certain communities would suffer in that they would not qualify to receive many awards. He felt that, by having a separation of the awards—and I think this is a legitimate argument—all communities could be honoured for their work and prestige within their communities. I think that that might have been a very good answer ten years, 20 years or perhaps 30 years ago, but in today’s world there are very few groups, communities or people who like to be the subject of, what I would term, paternalism. It is just paternalistic to say: Because you are not good enough to compete with one section, we are going to give you a special consolation prize section in which you can have your merit awards. I do not actually believe that that is the intention of the department or of the hon. the Minister, but it was the argument put forward by the hon. member for Oudtshoorn. If that is the position—and I hope it is not—then I want to say that we should move away from this attitude or paternalism. I believe that we should have one consolidated system whereby merit awards can be granted to all peoples of South Africa on an equal basis. In passing, the hon. member mentioned that he had never seen me at one of these functions and that I should come and talk to these people. He reminded me of the former Deputy Minister of Bantu Administration and Education, Mr. Punt Janson, I think it was, who told us that years ago he used to sit on a stone under a tree talking to his farm labourers and in that way developed his whole philosophy relating to Bantu administration. I do not know whether the hon. member for Oudtshoorn thought that, by coming to a function at which one particular sports award was made, I would develop a completely new philosophy relating to merit awards. I do want to say, however, that until a year ago …

You sat on a rock and watched your orange girl. [Interjections.]

Until a year ago I had not received any invitations of any kind from the Department of Sport and I do not remember—although I shall not put my head on a block—that I have ever received an invitation to a function at which merit awards were made to the Coloured population group. On the other hand, I have in the past year received some invitations, and where possible, I accepted them and shall, obviously, always accept them when I can.

Another point I want to raise with the hon. the Minister relates to a question I asked in the House on 30 March 1979. I put the question to the hon. the Minister of Justice, because it falls under his portfolio, but it concerns a matter which has direct influence on the sports administration in South Africa. The question, consisting of several parts, was: How many applications for international status for sporting clubs had been received, and granted as at 31 December? What were the names of the clubs that had been granted international status? In what cities were they situated? Was such status granted subject to any conditions; if so, what conditions? Was any such application refused or deferred as at that date, and, if so, what was the name of each club concerned and in what cities were they located? A full reply was given to me by the hon. the Minister of Justice, and I do not propose to read it to the House. Basically, there were 68 clubs which at the time when I put the question, had been granted international status, the application of one club was refused, and I think there were approximately 17 clubs whose applications were technically defective and were therefore to be considered at a later stage. There is nothing remarkable in that section of the answer. I want to refer, however, to the third part of the question.

It was whether such status was granted subject to any conditions and, if so, what conditions. I put this to the hon. the Minister in the spirit that what we are trying to achieve in South Africa is that, although Government policy may state one thing, the law should not prohibit the private club, at the level of personal sport, from arranging its own affairs. I am not trying to impinge, in saying this, on Government policy. I am merely stating that in the light of the letter to the Tennis Federation, as quoted earlier, about there being no laws which prevent participation, etc. This brings us to the conditions placed on the granting of international status to clubs. There are, in fact, conditions imposed. Liquor refreshments and meals may only be sold or supplied to a non-White person if, firstly, he is a competitor taking part in any match or practise on the grounds owned or controlled by the club; secondly, if he is an official accompanying competitors taking part in any match or, thirdly, if he is a guest of a club member.

Also, when by virtue of the authority liquor refreshments or meals are supplied to any person admitted as a guest to the licensed premises, no dancing shall take place in that part of the premises in which such person is present.

Sacred cow.

I want to put the following point to the hon. the Minister. Here we have the old story of the international hotels, the old story of trying to create a normal situation by enforcing abnormal rules. Does the hon. the Minister honestly think that we gain anything in South Africa and that we impress anybody? Does he honestly think there is any advantage to South Africa’s sportsmen, or to South Africa at all, to state on an application for an international club licence—and all these clubs are well-known in South Africa—that no dancing shall take place in that part of the premises in which such person is present. What is the hon. the Minister of Justice looking for? What is he frightened of? What actually is he worried about? The action of the hon. the Minister of Justice continues to affect detrimentally the efforts of South African sportsmen. I am not even looking at it in terms of race relations but only, in this debate, in terms of sport itself. In terms of race relations, I shall argue with the hon. the Minister of Justice under the Justice Vote. However, as far as our image in South Africa is concerned, I believe that making such conditions is degrading. Not only is it degrading, but I also think that this would give offence to any ordinary person.

I therefore ask the hon. the Minister of Sport and Recreation to go quietly to the hon. the Minister of Justice, to take that blindfold off his head and tell him that he is in the 20th century. The hon. the Minister should ask him if he would consider removing such offensive conditions which can only retard South Africa in its attempts to get back into international sport and bedevil relationships between sportsmen of different colours in this country. I think that the hon. the Minister of Sport and Recreation should take this matter up as a question of urgency.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to begin by expressing my wholehearted support for the plea made by the hon. member for Durban North tonight that the trim park system should be implemented on a much larger scale in South Africa. I made a similar plea here last year. We are grateful for the fact that 11 such projects are in the offing. I want to ask the hon. the Minister to persuade the hon. the Minister of Public Works to build one of these trim parks in Acacia Park, so that we parliamentarians may start participating there.

I do not want to react for the moment to what the hon. member for Sandton said. He and his party belittle everything which is done by this Government for other peoples in the field of sport by dismissing it as paternalism, oppression or something of that nature.

No, that has never been done.

They belittle every attempt which this Government has made to do something for the other peoples on the southern tip of Africa. I shall come back to the speech of the hon. member for Sandton at a later stage. First, however, I want to say a few words about a matter which I regard as very important for sport and physical training in South Africa. The annual report of the Department of Sport and Recreation emphasizes the fact that research in sport and recreation is playing an ever bigger and more important role in South Africa. In sport and recreation research, the departments of physical training at our South African universities play a key role. In training sport and recreation administrators, trainers and organizers, the departments of physical training at our Afrikaans universities and colleges are also playing a vitally important role.

I want to pay tribute on this occasion to the teaching staff of the departments of physical training at our universities and colleges, people who do research and who train young men and women who will have to take their place in the future as sport administrators, organizers and trainers.

In this Health Year, the importance of participation in sport and other physical activities cannot be over-emphasized. I want to allege tonight that the best doctor in town is the dedicated physical training instructor, who encourages and activates people, at school as well as in the community, to participate in sport. Therefore I pay tribute to the good work done by the departments of physical training at our White universities.

When we look at the successes of the Department of Sport and Recreation, I want to make the statement tonight that these successes can largely be attributed to skilled, trained, dedicated and expert physical training instructors, who have now lent their co-operation to Mr. Beyers Hoek, the Secretary to the Department of Sport and Recreation. I am thinking of Mr. Keet, for example. He received his instruction in physical training at the University of Potchefstroom. Then there is also Mr. Okkie le Roux, who was a forward for the Maties and W.P. He also obtained his degree in physical training at the University of Stellenbosch. Then there is my friend and classmate, Wollie Brand, the regional representative of the Department of Sport and Recreation in the Cape Peninsula. These are people who qualified at our universities as physical training instructors, and who today make practical contributions in the field of sport organization and administration in South Africa.

In the light of this, it is disappointing that there are no departments of physical training at the Universities of the Western Cape and of Durban-Westville. It so happens that I made a speech in the Other Place this afternoon which was almost in the same vein. I must say that I am delighted with the fact that the hon. the Minister of Coloured Relations announced there that the Council of the University of the Western Cape had already decided to establish a faculty of physical training at the University of the Western Cape. I want to request the hon. the Minister to ask the hon. the Minister of Indian Affairs to introduce courses in physical training at the University of Durban-Westville and at the Indian training colleges now. In the report of the Department of Sport and Recreation I read on page 20—

Since the Department of Sport and Recreation is now becoming a service department for all population groups, I am convinced that the department needs to be services of Coloured physical training instructors, who can help with the organization and administration of sport among the Brown people, as well as of Indian physical training instructors, who can help with the organization and administration of sport among our Indians, and also of Black physical trainers, who can help with the organization and training and administration of sport among their own people. In 1971, during the discussion of the Bantu Education Vote, I pleaded for the introduction of courses in physical training at Black universities and colleges. I understand that progress has been made in this field. I think that the Coloured young people and population, as well as the Indians, deserve to have departments of physical training introduced at their universities and colleges, departments which would train future sport administrators, organizers and trainers to serve their own people within an ethnic context. Therefore I want to ask the hon. the Minister to help the Ministers of Coloured Relations and of Indian Affairs to achieve this. Because I believe that the Department of Sport and Recreation needs these people to serve their own people within their own ethnic context, I want to suggest that if necessary, consideration should even be given to the granting of bursaries to Brown, Black and Indian sportsmen and sportswomen who want to obtain degrees in physical training.

I also want to respond to what the hon. member for Sandton said here this evening. In his opening speech, he said that a sport policy based on racism could not work. He belittled and dismissed as paternalism all that the Government has done for the other peoples in the field of sport.

I was referring to the argument of the hon. member for Oudtshoorn.

The PFP regards South Africa as an undivided unit with a population of 25 million people. They see the political solutions for this country in this context. They see all the solutions for South Africa in terms of an undivided South Africa with a population of 25 million people, Black, White, Brown and Yellow all together. As against this, the NP sees South Africa—and for this reason I believe that we cannot achieve consensus in respect of our standpoints of principle in this connection—as a country with a diversity of nations which are developing in terms of community consciousness in the political, social and educational spheres, as well as in the sphere of sport.

The hon. member for Sandton asked whether the hon. members agreed with what the hon. the Deputy Minister of Plural Relations and of Education and Training once said. However, the hon. the Minister said this evening, with reference to co-operation and interaction between nations—and this is one of the ideals we are seeking to realize—that “this co-operation and interaction can be built on an infrastructure of clubs and organizations of their own for each population group, as well as their own competitions, alongside the competitions in which other groups are involved”. This is the NP’s standpoint …

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

I am sorry, but my time is rather short. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I want to congratulate the hon. member for Kuruman on the constructive way in which he replied to the hon. member for Sandton. I think the recent by-elections demonstrated that the Opposition cannot sell their policy. I think that Swellendam and Beaufort West proved this. Their policy cannot even be given away.

First of all I want to associate myself briefly with what was said by the hon. member for Ladybrand with regard to recreation as a part of this Vote. I should like to suggest respectfully and submit this suggestion to the hon. the Minister for possible consideration that particularly in urban areas which are not blessed with a super abundance of beautiful natural scenery and opportunities for recreation as Cape Town with its mountains is, it may be possible to construct walks as such walks are badly needed and can offer particularly interesting family recreation. In addition I should also like to associate myself with what was said by the hon. member for Bethlehem. I want to congratulate the hon. the Minister most sincerely on his appointment to this portfolio. I have no doubt that he will make a resounding success of his task, particularly since he is a person who has been blessed with many exceptional gifts. But I should also, since I am dealing with this, like to pay special tribute to the former Minister of Sport and Recreation, Dr. Koornhof, for the pioneering work performed by him with great deal when he was responsible for this portfolio. I believe that a great deal of what was achieved was achieved because of his endeavours, both behind the scenes and in the front line. I strongly doubt whether South Africa will ever realize what pioneering work he did in many respects. In this regard I think involuntarily of a boxing tournament in which I was involved many years ago, and in which Dr. Koornhof had a lion’s share. I am referring to the boxing match which took place in South Africa for the light-heavyweight world title between Bob Forster and Pierre Fourie. To make that fight possible for us in South Africa at that time, was a major step. Today, however, this type of event is an every day occurrence.

I should also like to associate myself with what was said by the hon. member for Verwoerdburg, and go on to express a few ideas on a subject on which there has been heated discussions in the past as well, and that is whether the S.A. Rugby Board and the TV chiefs cannot reconsider very seriously the transmission of Currie Cup rugby matches, possible test matches and certain club matches. We are aware of the fact that our rugby chiefs in particular are of the opinion that this could possibly lead to their having to be satisfied with poor attendances at matches. I believe, however, that there are many ways in which they can be compensated for any such losses, although I do not want to concede that direct transmissions will necessarily result in poor attendances. I should like to suggest, with respect, that the possible advantages of such transmissions far outweigh the possible disadvantages. In passing I should like to ask whether the hon. the Minister could possibly tell us whether there has been any follow-up of the suggestion made by the hon. member for Newton Park during this debate last year, viz. that a survey be conducted of the number of viewers interested in specific programmes, and that it be ascertained to what extent direct transmissions of rugby matches are possible. As a first idea in this regard I should like to state very clearly that I believe that when the All Blacks, or the Springboks, Western Province, or Transvaal, the Free State or the men in light blue play on a field to which one has easy access, and one is in the vicinity, nothing on earth would keep any lover of King Rugby in front of the TV set. They would like to be on the side-lines of that field in person. Nothing will convince me that this would in any way affect the number of spectators which would attend a rugby match like that. In addition I believe that the sponsorship which the rugby chiefs as well as the TV people will receive, could be substantial and that it could also be used beneficially for the development of the game, and in covering ever-rising costs. In practice, I, as well as various friends of mine, have experienced at our homes that the interest shown in and the loyalties felt towards rugby by our young boys are undoubtedly diminishing, owing to the fact that rugby and special rugby programmes are not being presented on TV. There is definitely—and I have nothing against soccer or tennis—a major shift in the interest of our youth to tennis and soccer, but at the expense of rugby.

I believe that this change which is taking place is directly related to the attitude adopted by our rugby chiefs with regard to televising rugby matches. [Interjections.] As one of my hon. colleagues is remarking here now, one need not even elaborate on the interest there is in tennis, too. In consequence of what I have just said, and particularly in consequence of the fact that we in South Africa cannot as yet testify to real experience of case studies, I read up on the effect and the influence of television in other countries. I should like to refer to the book Television and the Child by Himmelweit, Oppenheim and Vince. This is an in-depth, technical study and I can only refer to it very superficially. I quote from page 38 from this book—

This links up with our one-channel situation and also points out how the child’s interest, if he is limited to viewing specific subjects, can be channelled into that specific direction and how his interest in participation in sport can also be influenced specifically in that way. I should also like to quote briefly from page 346 where reference is made to the questions of outdoor activities and sport—

Even here the premise is that when a pattern of interest has already been established in a person, even an adult, his interest can be stimulated and pushed in another direction. In other words, television can influence him. I should also like to refer briefly to the book Ons en Televisie by Du Toit and Nel, a book which also goes further into this matter. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, at the outset I should like to convey my sincere thanks to all hon. members who have taken part in this debate. I think that in general the debate was conducted at a very high level. Even the hon. members of the Opposition sought to be as positive as possible. It is true that there was a grey patch here and there, but it is difficult for them to be positive consistently. In general, however, there was cause for gratitude and I want to express my thanks for the generally constructive tone in which we were able to conduct this debate.

Before replying to specific speeches, I should first like to react briefly to two general matters which were broached in a number of speeches. In the first instance, reference was made by many hon. members to the issue of international competition, a matter which I, too, dealt with at some length in my introductory speech. Listening to the debate it became clear to me that despite the political differences that may exist between us, there is nevertheless a reasonable degree of consensus among all hon. members in the House in regard to a number of matters relating to international competition. I want to mention a few of the points upon which there is consensus. It seems to me that there is a reasonable degree of unanimity that we would not like our sportsmen to be insulted or endangered.

Hear, hear!

Moreover, it seems to me as if we do not like the outside world to prescribe to us. It also seems to be generally felt that it is unfair to maintain that there is reason to discriminate against South Africa. I regret that I heard no “Hear, hear!” in that regard.

Hear, hear!

There I hear a “hear, hear”. It therefore seems to me that we are unanimous on that score as well. It also seems to me as if we are unanimous in wanting to see greater discipline in world sport, greater discipline in the sense that South Africa should be afforded recognition for what it has done in the field of sport, and that unfounded criticism of us should be rejected on merit and that double standards should not be applied against us. It is as well that we should be unanimous in regard to these matters, and it is as well that this House should tell the entire outside world unanimously—the West, the East, the Third World and whoever else may be involved—that our hands are clean in South Africa. We may differ on minor points, but every sportsman and woman of world calibre can represent South Africa, and we believe they ought to have the right to do so on the international sports fields as well, if sport is still to have the meaning it ought to have.

Then, too, fairly general reference was made to the French rugby tour and the events surrounding that tour. I think that as far as that is concerned, we must say that at this stage it is primarily a matter for the sports administrators. We cannot simply pay lip service to autonomy. Hon. members say “Hear, hear”, when we say that we recognize the autonomy of sporting bodies, but every now and again their true colours in regard to this matter show through, and they want the State to prescribe sporting bodies in regard to certain specific matters.

Who said so?

You, among others.

That is not true.

I do not wish to make any statement on the issue of the French tour this evening. I am fully aware that the matter is at a very delicate stage. I therefore think it is as well that we withhold comment, except of course in that what we have said in general about international competition, undoubtedly reflects our opinion in regard to France or any other country in the world. I may find it necessary at a later stage to issue a full statement in this regard, but I really do not think that this evening is a suitable occasion to do so.

Another matter touched on very generally by various hon. members is what they described as the lack of funds. It is good that we should seek more money for sport and I am prepared to get wholeheartedly involved in this. However, when the State votes funds, it is a fact that it only has a limited amount of money available and that it has to share the cake among the various people who lay claim to a slice of that cake. Now, the fact is that within the framework of the accepted priorities, it has been found difficult to vote more money for sport than the amount voted at present. We were able to obtain a further allocation of R804 000 as I have announced. I also wish to remind hon. members of the figures I have already provided relating to funds flowing to sport from other departments for the provision of facilities. The total end result is by no means as meagre as hon. members of the Opposition want to make out.

I should also like to refer in this regard to what the hon. member for Durban North had to say. The hon. member apologized for not being present, because he is busy in the Other Place. He asked that there should not be too much State interference. I shall elaborate on this in more detail at a later stage. If we were to vote large sums of money for sport, that would place a question mark over the autonomy of sport. The fact is that the percentage of the total budget allocated to sport in South Africa— the hon. member for Bethlehem has already referred to this—is among the lowest in the entire Western World. Therefore, when we say that we recognize the autonomy of sports bodies, it is a meaningful statement. Lip service is paid to autonomy abroad, too, but in the meantime the sporting bodies are so totally dependent on the sporting grants they receive from their Governments that they have to dance to their Governments tune. In South Africa, this is not the case. By allocating an enormous sum to them we should make them far more dependent, but then their independence would be questioned abroad. After all, we believe in a free enterprise system. In this field as well, just as we differ from the Western World, which is tending to become socialist, with regard to pensions and other matters, it is also good that we should differ from them and follow the golden rule by not leaning towards socialism.

Having said all this, I want to add that I too would prefer to see the State finding it possible to vote more funds for sport, because the needs are pressing. Many hon. members came forward with deserving causes, and I should like to see some of them enjoying greater support. Many types of sport do not earn large sums in gate money. The number of their spectators and their circumstances are simply not such as to enable them ever to earn large sums in gate-money. However, one should not only look to the State when more money is required. I want to encourage our sports administrators and sportsmen in general to seek out all possible sources of finance themselves. Our large companies that act as sponsors for certain sports, deserve praise for what they have already done in this regard, but there is still a great deal of money to be found for sport in the private sector. Through dynamic action and originality, we can unlock new funds for sport without necessarily looking to the State for more money. Hon. members can rest assured that the Government is sympathetic towards sport, but in the present time, in view of the demands being set South Africa, often due to factors entirely beyond our control, it is difficult to give more. That is why the amount voted is a defensible amount for which we must express our gratitude. I am not critical of it, precisely because I am aware of the problems experienced in its allocation. However, we all hope for better days.

Many hon. members referred to the issue of stadiums, and in a moment, when I reply to the arguments of the hon. member for Sandton, I shall furnish a comprehensive reply to those hon. members as well in this regard. Before beginning to reply individually to hon. members’ arguments, I do want to take the opportunity to bring to the attention of hon. members a report which has just come to my notice. We have recently been looking forward a great deal to the arrival here of a young athlete about whose achievements in America we have heard a great deal. Well, he really has not disappointed us. I refer in this regard to Sidney Maree. It has just come to my attention that shortly after his return to America he exceeded the South African record time in the 5 000 metres when he covered the distance in 13 minutes 27,07 seconds and won the race, during the championships of the Inter-college Amateur Athletics Association of America. On the same occasion he also ended second with a very good time in the 1 500 metres. I am also told that this young athlete appeared on American television after his return and projected a very positive image of South Africa. I think that since this news has reached us while we are engaged in this specific debate, it is appropriate for us to thank him and congratulate him on his achievements there.

†I now come to the hon. member for Sandton. He tried his best to be positive, but he did not quite succeed in doing so. However, we all have sympathy for him because he is a Prog and believes in what his party believes. [Interjections.] They are not positive with regard to many problems in South African sport. [Interjections.] Let us deal with one example of what I am trying to put across.

The hon. member was quite positive in rejecting what the former Minister of Sport in Great Britain, Mr. Dennis Howell, said, in the sense that in his discussion with that Minister, the latter projected a fairly positive approach, but later turned about and actually broke his word. However, the hon. member is not critical of the fact that a politician of another country has the gall to prescribe to us five points with which we should comply. That is blatant interference in the affairs of South Africa. I want to know from the hon. member whether, when he had these discussions with Mr. Howell, he asked him why he wants to prescribe to South Africa and not to America. Did he ask Mr. Howell that and criticize him for picking on South Africa? Did he point out to Mr. Howell that America, with its 25 million people of colour, have, to the best of my knowledge, at the top level only produced one international tennis player thus far? He should have done so. [Interjections.] He should attack any politician of another country for interfering in the internal affairs of South Africa. [Interjections.] What did he do? He dutifully wrote down the five points and brought them back to South Africa with the intention of asking us to accept them and then to inform him that we have received his prescription for the solution of our problems and that we shall try to comply with them. That is no positive approach towards the problems of South Africa.

If we want to project the right image, we must stand together in rejecting interference from outside. With one voice we must say that we shall solve our problems on our own and that we do not need prescriptions from outside.

I appreciate the hon. member pointing out to Mr. Howell that, regarding his five points, he could state that we were almost there. However, he should have rejected that gentleman’s right to dictate five points for another independent country, a country whose hands are clean with regard to sport.

The hon. member for Sandton accused me of avoiding what he referred to as the more negative aspects of the policy of the NP because I did not read out the eight principles. I want to read out to him again the three particular points I raised. In the first instance I stressed the following aims of the policy of the N.P.—

1. *1. Sound co-operation and interaction among all population groups with regard to competition as well as administration.
2. 2. The opportunity for all sportsmen and women from all population groups to realize their potential to the full and represent South Africa.

Then formulated the third objective and said that the mentioned co-operation and interaction was founded on an infrastructure of clubs and organizations of their own for each population group and also their own competitions alongside other competitions in which all groups were involved. I challenge the hon. member to show me, on the basis of these three objectives, a single aspect of the right guidelines as laid down by the congress that I have shown contempt for or ignored. They are all there in a nutshell and summed up, and not a single one is suppressed. [Interjections.]

The hon. member said that ethnicity had no place in sport. Is the hon. member opposed to the fact that Britain applies ethnicity in sport? Is he opposed to the fact that Britain, a country which forms a single political unit, never has a rugby team coming to play against a team representative of the total political unit of Britain? When a rugby team goes to England, against whom does that team play? It does not play against the British Isles. No. It plays against Scotland, against Ireland, against Wales and against … [Interjections.]

Order!

Allow me to continue.

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

Just give me a chance to complete my statement. Allow me to discuss the question of ethnicity further. We listened carefully to the hon. member for Sandton. Now I want to ask him to tell us on a later occasion whether he regards ethnicity as part of the realities of South Africa or not, particularly in view of the fact that he argues that we should ignore ethnicity totally. Are there various ethnic groups in South Africa or not?

The PFP does not know about anything like that.

Of course there is ethnicity in South Africa. It is part of the reality here. However, the hon. member stated that he ignores it. Now I want to know from him how sincere they are when they state in their constitutional plans for South Africa that there will be culture councils for the various ethnic groups so that they can maintain their ethnicity. [Interjections.] No, they are inconsistent when it comes to ethnicity. When it suits them they say that it must be ignored. However, when they think it will be to their political benefit they say that it should in fact be recognized, that cultural councils should be formed …

We have even made provision for the FAK. [Interjections.]

The hon. member states that they have also made provision for the FAK. Probably, then, they have also made provision for Inkhata and for the Tswanas. They probably also make provision in their cultural councils for the Indians. [Interjections.] Ethnicity forms part of the reality in South Africa. We did not create it. Nor did we forcibly impose it on sport. It forms part of the historic foundation on which sport in South Africa has been built. Therefore it is something which cannot be ignored. It is something that manifests itself, something we cannot talk our way around. However, the hon. member for Sandton tries to talk his way around it. [Interjections.]

Mr. Chairman, may I ask the hon. the Minister whether they require a Population Registration Act in Britain to enforce ethnicity in sport, as we do here in South Africa? [Interjections.]

Mr. Chairman, we are now speaking about sport and not the Interior. [Interjections.]

You are running away from the principle itself.

The fact remains that in rugby, England, within its borders, is geographically, but also ethnically, orientated and that it does not even form one joint team. This is quite different to what happens in South Africa. When touring teams come here they play against separate ethnic teams but also against a joint South African team.

Can they dance together? [Interjections.]

Oh really, Mr. Chairman, those hon. members really need not get so excited. I am still going to speak about dancing. [Interjections.]

Order!

I am still coming to the question of dancing.

†The hon. member for Sandton also pleaded for proper merit selection. Does he accuse South African sport organizations of not applying proper merit selection?

I did not say that.

Now, why does he plead for it then? It is part of the realities of the situation.

You misunderstood his argument.

No. The hon. member pleaded for a charter for sportsmanship. Has that now got to be in sport what their Bill of Rights will be on the constitutional level?

No, it will be a statutory body.

The hon. member pleaded for a sports council. Is that meant to be the counterpart in sport of their national convention with regard to constitutional matters? The hon. member also pleaded for the abolition of all discrimination on the base of race or sex. That is also the point of view of the NP. However, we just go about it in a different way. [Interjections.]

Order!

Our way of moving away from discrimination, of eliminating discrimination, is a better way because it is built on realities. [Interjections.] By the way, when the hon. member referred to the question of no discrimination based on race or sex, does that mean that he now stands for mixed changing rooms for both sexes as well? [Interjections.]

That would make things much more interesting!

The hon. member also referred to various other matters to which I should like to reply now in more detail.

*The hon. member made a plea for the introduction of a statutory body for sport, a sport council or something of the kind. The Department of Sport and Recreation is a service department. It does not administer any legislation, apart from two minor, insignificant laws relating to professional wrestling and professional boxing: The composition of a board, funds, control of standards of probity, etc. If we were to depart from this policy and establish a sport council, an important question would immediately arise. Who would control that sport council? Who would constitute it? I know that one could discuss its possible composition at length. However, I want to point out that a greater degree of State involvement would be one of the first disadvantages of such a sport council. It must be borne in mind that such a sport council would have to be established in terms of legislation.

On the other hand the fact is that sporting bodies in South Africa have already organized themselves into the S.A. Sporting Federation and the S.A. Olympic Committee, with proper liaison between the two. They also have an executive committee which functions, meets regularly, etc. Why also plead for a council with statutory powers? However, a sport council would involve other disadvantages as well. The department already has an infrastructure. If a sport council were to be established it would in turn have to create its own infrastructure. We speak about a shortage of money for sport. Now, however, we are to create another source on which funds are to be spent. One thinks of aids, offices, staff, etc. I doubt whether the hon. member has provided sufficient motivation for that. In the six months in which I have been Minister of this department I have not yet had any representations from the world of sport itself intimating that there is a need for a statutory sport council. The situation is of course that if I get such a request and it is fully motivated I shall look at it in depth. Then, perhaps, we can discuss it again in a future debate.

The hon. member went on to refer to merit awards in sport. I think the hon. member is a little confused. Merit awards in sport are not made on a paternalistic basis in the sense that there are superior and inferior sport awards.

That is what it looks like.

No, that is not so. There is a gold medal, the State President’s award for a world record or equivalent achievement. Nor is there any restriction relating to colour or whatever as far as this award is concerned. It can be conferred on any sportsman or sportswoman. I should welcome it if one of our non-White sportsman could achieve this. It seems to me as if Sydney Maree is very close to doing so. Perhaps that award will be conferred on him in the future. Then, too, there are silver and bronze medals. Awarding of these medals has to do with the size of the organization in question. Silver medals are awarded to participants and coaches of bodies with which five or more provincial bodies are affiliated. The bodies themselves nominate the recipients, and that is how they are awarded. The same applies to bronze medals, except that only bodies with fewer than five provincial members qualify for these. I see nothing wrong with the fact that these medals have been awarded to Coloureds, the Indians and the Whites on separate occasions. Many factors are involved here, factors such as where those people are, where the greatest geographic concentration of those people is to be found. The greatest geographic concentration of Coloureds is in the Western Cape. The greatest geographic concentration of Whites is in the Transvaal. The greatest geographic concentration of Indians is in Natal. There is nothing paternalistic about that, nor is there anything wrong with awarding these medals to the various peoples on separate occasions. There are no sinister ulterior motives involved.

It is not a good idea.

I want to say to the hon. member once again that ethnicity forms part of the realities of South Africa. He cannot seek to recognize this today and deny it again tomorrow. Nor is recognition of this fact any sin. It is not discriminatory, nor is it insulting. People who are proud of their ethnic links often welcome it when something is done within the ethnic context, rather than having everything mixed.

I now come to sport stadiums. Apart from this hon. member, various other hon. members have referred to this matter, inter alia the hon. member for Newton Park, who made a strong plea for them, and the hon. member for Umbilo. I want to say at once that the Hoek report referred in depth to the great need for bigger and more effective facilities. My department, as is clear from the annual report, and I are very much aware of the pressing need that exists in this regard. I want to associate myself with the annual report and say that we are very much concerned about what is going to happen at our soccer matches owing to the vast crowds they attract and in the light of the situations that have developed in the past when friction assumed serious proportions. I have appointed a committee on which all the bodies in question are represented. Very hard work is being done in this regard at the moment and an in-depth investigation into these problems is being launched. I can give hon. members the assurance that good progress has already been made.

I do not wish to anticipate the findings, but would ask hon. members to display a little patience because announcements in this regard will be made shortly. On the other hand, I do not wish to arouse unfounded expectations. We must realize that stadiums are needed at more than one place. Even if we were to have a positive report, and even if the funds for a large stadium were to be available, there would still be a need at other places. Therefore everyone should try to get private initiative involved and to have existing stadiums improved or make some kind of practical plan to expand facilities as far as possible and as expeditiously as possible. In any event, I can give hon. members the assurance that this matter is enjoying high priority and that we are giving it our close attention.

In conclusion, the hon. member referred to permits and the Liquor Act. I very much resent the way in which he referred to it. If one had been uninformed about the conditions in South Africa, one could have inferred from the hon. member’s representation that there was special legislation with regard to permits with the aim of making things difficult for sport and of imposing State control. Surely that is not so. After all, there is not a word about sport as such in the general laws of the land. Surely the Group Areas Act and the Liquor Act are not sport laws. They are laws that apply generally. They apply to all sections of society.

We do not say that.

The mere fact that the hon. member drags this in the discussion of the Sport and Recreation Vote creates the impression among uninformed people that this is aimed at sport, and then it is used against us in the field of sport. These laws exist in the first instance to defuse the potential for conflict in South Africa to which the hon. member for Innesdal referred. Every country takes steps to defuse emotionally loaded situations. My information is that the ordinary outsider in England is simply unable to get a place on the pavilion for a major soccer match. He first has to become a member of a club and only then can he sit at a certain place. He only obtains access to that stadium if he is a member of a specific club. Thus in England they have found their own method of defusing friction. I want to make the statement that the legislation exists to prevent friction and to eliminate conflict, something which is very much on the cards and can easily occur in South Africa. We can differ on this score. Hon. members can argue about the necessity or otherwise of these laws, but it is a deed of disloyalty to South Africa to read into them a negative motive of racism and of a disparaging attitude towards other peoples. They are not intended to be insulting, and hon. members know that. Nor are they implemented in an insulting or humiliating way. [Interjections.] Other countries do not have the same problems and the same population structure as South Africa. If the hon. member for Musgrave does not like South Africa he must go to England. [Interjections.] This legislation applies in all spheres of society in South Africa and not only in regard to sport. They are laws aimed at the maintenance of law and order, which is primarily and basically the task of the State, and we must refrain from questioning the justification for those laws. It is only hon. members that represent constituencies such as Houghton that do not understand why such laws have to exist, because the people there think that they can do with their money what the laws do for others who do not have money. The PFP had better face that fact. That is why they did so badly in Swellendam, why they are going to do badly in Randfontein and why they are going to do badly throughout the country.

However, I want to conclude on a friendly note to the hon. member and thank him for his positive co-operation with regard to Sacos. I think that in this regard he advanced balanced arguments and I want to thank him for the fact that we are absolutely unanimous in regard to that important matter—because Sacos is doing us tremendous harm abroad.

Mr. Chairman, may I remind the hon. the Minister of what I said earlier in reference to the hon. the Deputy Minister’s statement, where he said that legislation might have to be introduced if there was large-scale racial mixing at local level in sporting clubs. I asked the hon. the Minister for an assurance that mixed clubs would not be under the threat of legislation. Would the hon. the Minister please react to that?

I have not seen the report of the speech to which the hon. member refers. Consequently I do not wish to comment on it All I want to do is to repeat what I said in my introductory speech. I said (Hansard, 21 May, 1979)—

I went on to say, inter alia—

That is the official standpoint of the NP, of the hon. the Deputy Minister to whom the hon. member referred, of the Cabinet and of all of us sitting here. Moreover, that standpoint was confirmed by a provincial congress of the NP in 1977.

I wish to convey my sincere thanks to the hon. member for Bethlehem, as chief spokesman on this side of the House, for a positive and very useful contribution. I want to convey my wholehearted thanks to him and to hon. members who have conveyed their good wishes to me. Apart from the sound way in which he dealt with the arguments advanced by hon. members of the PFP in particular, he stressed one very important point and that is the establishment of training institutes in South Africa. It is a pleasure for me to announce that the first training institute is already in full operation at the University of Pretoria. Plans are already being made to establish similar institutes at other universities with physical education facilities. It can be expected that this project will have progressed a long way by next year.

As regards the implementation of the recommendations of the Hoek Report, a great deal of progress has also been made in regard to the recommendations relating to the promotion of recreation. The development of recreational gymnastics have culminated in the gymnaestrada which the hon. member knows about and which was a great success. That, and the introduction of trim parks, to which I shall refer later in greater detail, are examples of the progress already made. I thank him for his positive contribution, his support and his study of the subject to which his speech bears testimony.

To the hon. member for Oudtshoorn who apologized for being unable to be present I want to say that he really worked the case of the hon. member for Sandton. He also made a plea for regular presentation of sports festivals and RSA games meetings. It has already been announced that the S.A. Sport Federation and the Olympic Games Association are planning an R.S.A. Games for 1981. It may be expected that it will achieve the same heights of sport as the previous games. I want to associate myself with the hon. member and say, as I said in my introductory speech, that I believe that other opportunities should also be created, opportunities which must be made attractive to spectators and participants in an imaginative way. He referred to regional events. I think this is an excellent idea and I am well-disposed towards it. Cash is only a problem occasionally, but we have already spoken about that.

The hon. member for Umbilo put questions concerning deductions with regard to two items. In the first instance, he asked why there had been a reduction in regard to coaching under programme 2—Sport promotion. As far as this and the other matter are concerned I want to tell him that grants are made on the basis of applications we receive.

†The applications which are received do not follow a specific pattern. In the one year there is a bigger demand for funds in a certain direction and a lower demand for funds in another direction, while in another year it switches around. He will therefore see that some other item is considerably more. Whereas there was this decrease, there was an increase of more than R100 000 with regard to another sub-programme under the same general heading.

*Similarly, there has been a reduction of R4 600 in regard to coaching under programme 3. The hon. member referred to that. In this regard, too, there was a small shift. Hon. members will note that there was an increase of R8 900 in regard to training. Like sporting organizations, recreation organizations are autonomous and submit their applications to the department independently. For that reason the hon. member must not make any negative inferences from this.

The hon. member for Innesdal made a plea with regard to exhibition wrestling. I am aware that he was an amateur wrestler of note. I do not think, therefore, that he has any great love of exhibition wrestling. The fact is that there is a strong following and support for that form of entertainment. The State has to take note of that. The question is whether it could have a detrimental effect if it were to be controlled or promoted by the department I do not wish to become involved in a debate as to which form of wrestling is best or the question whether exhibition wrestling is agreeable or not. My grandmother gave me good advice in this connection. She said that one could not argue about what is agreeable and what is ugly. Perhaps we should follow that good advice in this regard as well. I also want to thank the hon. member for the positive standpoint he adopted in regard to expansion of facilities and development of opportunities on a community basis for the various peoples in order to defuse the potential for conflict in South Africa. In this regard he will have noted from my introductory speech that this is one of the fundamental points I singled out, and he may rest assured that I am intent upon specifically stimulating those population groups that are in a backward position in this regard by means of the department’s activities and by means of cooperation of sporting organizations in order to develop opportunities and facilities for them.

†The hon. member for Hillbrow asked me whether he would be able to attend the Olympic Games in Moscow. I do not want to be frivolous, but should the hon. member rather not ask Mr. Brezhnev that question? [Interjections.] In all seriousness, we have a very amiable Minister of Foreign Affairs, and I suggest that the hon. member discuss that matter with the Minister of Foreign Affairs. He will surely be able to advise file hon. member on that matter.

It is your task as Minister of Sport and Recreation to do that.

We do not have diplomatic relations with Russia. In any case, I think the hon. the Minister of Foreign Affairs is the best channel through which to arrange entrance into a foreign country.

Are you prepared to take it up with him?

I shall mention the hon. member’s problem to him. Is the hon. member then not on speaking terms with the hon. the Minister of Foreign Affairs?

It is better if it comes from you.

I shall surely take it up with the hon. the Minister of Foreign Affairs if the hon. member feels that he cannot do so himself.

Furthermore, the hon. member referred to the statement made by a rugby player, Watson, about the fact that he needs a permit.

*What I said to the hon. member for Sandton applies equally here. In South Africa one needs a permit to enter a Black residential area but one does not need a permit to play sport One needs a permit to enter a Black residential area for two reasons. The first is one’s own safety, because sometimes it is dangerous to do so. The second is so that the authorities can know who is entering those Black residential areas, because we in South Africa are faced with various problems, including matters such as urban terrorism, and a form of control for the sake of the security of everyone in South Africa, Black, Brown and White, is required. That permit that Cheeky Watson, or I, or the hon. member, requires when one of us wants to enter a Black residential area, has nothing whatsoever to do with sport. Once again people are doing South Africa a disservice when they bring up that permit in connection with sport. It exists purely for the sake of matters such as the security of the country, general security and the elimination of friction.

The hon. member for Ladybrand asked that we give more attention to recreation. I think the hon. member made a fine plea in this regard. We are already doing a great deal with regard to trim parks, and things like funrun, pedal-power, etc. I also wish to support his appeal to city councils. Then, too, I want to point out that other State departments too, particularly the Department of Forestry, are already doing a great deal along these lines. A great deal more can, however, be done.

The hon. members for Verwoerdburg and Roodepoort made special reference to the issue of rugby on TV. In my capacity as Minister of Sport and Recreation I have no control over TV, and in my capacity as Minister of Posts and Telecommunications, we merely erect the structures which transmit the broadcasts. I do not have control over the content of the programmes. However, this is a matter which generates a great deal of emotion among our people. I therefore want to give the assurance that I shall discuss this matter with the hon. the Minister of National Education and with the rugby administrators of South Africa, to see whether we cannot find a formula.

I think that in general, sound arguments have been advanced here and I intend sending the speeches of those two hon. members to the parties with whom I wish to speak, so that they can take cognizance of the facts ascertained and the research done in this connection.

Then, too, the hon. member for Verwoerdburg asked for better co-ordination with regard to facilities. I intend kicking off in this field by arranging an informal discussion among the provinces, the Department of National Education, Sports administrators, the United Municipal Executive and my department. I believe there is a lot of room for better co-ordination in regard with facilities and that a great deal of money can be saved.

†The hon. member for Durban North pleaded for more facilities for physical exercise and recreation as opposed to competitive sport. I agree in principle, and a lot is in fact being done. He referred to trim parks. There is a brochure available which we are distributing freely to all municipalities. There is widespread interest. The average cost of a trim park is in the vicinity of R8 000, although, depending on the topography, it can be cheaper. We expect that in about one year’s time there will be a trim park in each of our 10 regions. I am opening one next week in Milnerton and I suggest that the hon. member visit it to see what can be done.

He then referred to a matter which upset me somewhat. He tried to preach to us about Government interference. I think I have already to a certain extent replied to this. I want to say that sport administrators still ask for more money, whereas he suggested that we already give them too much. He implied that. In comparison with Western countries, we are not giving them as much as sport organizations in other countries receive. Therefore, how can he say that there is from a monetary point of view more Government interference in South Africa than in other countries? There is much less Government interference.

In my speech I specifically stated my acceptance of the principle of autonomy. I do not think we can take it further tonight due to lack of time. We can take it further at a later stage.

*I want to thank the hon. member for South Coast for his strong support. He made a logical and well-considered speech and I want to thank him for his positive and motivated support of the Government’s guidelines.

The hon. member for Vasco referred to harbour facilities for small pleasure craft. He referred to Granger Bay. I want to tell him that the investigation has already made good progress, and a report will be submitted to me for consideration within a few months. I think he will understand that I cannot anticipate it at this point He also made a plea for launching facilities in the interior and at the coast. I want to tell him that the department has already donated considerable sums. We have already discussed the shortage of funds, but within that framework we do recognize this as an important priority.

In conclusion, the hon. member for Kuruman made a plea for faculties for physical education at our non-White universities. I am pleased to take cognizance of the developments at the University of the Western Cape. I shall discuss the matter with the hon. the Minister of Plural Relations and with the hon. the Minister of Indian Affairs. We shall go into those matters.

I thereby wish to thank everyone who has assisted. This has been an interesting debate and I am already looking forward to next year’s debate, when we can hold a further discussion on the unsolved matters.

Vote agreed to.

Business interrupted in accordance with Standing Order No. 22.

House Resumed:

Progress reported and leave granted to sit again.