Mr. Speaker, I move—

Agreed to.

Mr. Speaker, next week the House will continue to deal with Votes. If the House should so decide, it will turn its attention, at convenient intervals between the discussion of the Votes, to legislation as printed on the Order Paper.

Mr. Chairman, I think it is important for me to mention at the outset the aspects of the rationalization of the Public Service which have led to the Department of Water Affairs, Forestry and Environmental Conservation to come under one heading. I think this is one of the better aspects of the reorganization, and I think the hon. the Prime Minister has done a good job in this respect. I should also like to take the opportunity of congratulating the various officials who have been appointed to positions in the new composite department. Firstly, I should like to congratulate the Director-General, Mr. Otto, who comes from the old Department of Planning and the Environment. I am sure that under his able control the new department will go from strength to strength.

As far as the old Department of Water Affairs is concerned, we now have a Deputy Director-General in the person of Mr. Hobbs. I should like to congratulate him too. It will be hard to follow his illustrious predecessor, Dr. Kriel, but of what I know of Mr. Hobbs I am very confident that he will fill that position very ably. Referring to the old Department of Forestry, I should like to state that I know Mr. Sonntag’s predecessor, Mr. Ackermann, very well indeed. From what I know of Mr. Sonntag, he too is going to do a very, very able job indeed.

I do believe that these three departments fit very well under one roof, because so many of the things that concern the one also concern the others. It is a fact that forestry has much land which is in fact water-shed land. The run-off from forestry land goes into dams which conserve our water.

Mr. Chairman, may I, with your indulgence, ask for the privilege of the half-hour at this stage?

I have just been thinking about that. I shall allow the hon. member the privilege of the half-hour, although I am supposed to get the consent of the House for that. The hon. member may proceed.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Forestry does not only have water-shed land from which water flows off into dams. It also has land which is a great depository of much of the wild life of South Africa living in those forest areas. During the debate on the hon. the Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries’ Vote, or during a previous debate, I said that it would be better if the Parks Board could fall under this department as well. I hope this is going to be so. I heard along the grapevine—and I do not know whether this is to be confirmed —that this was possibly in the pipeline. All matters which affect conservation will therefore come under one body. I believe that this is a necessity. I believe that control is still considerably divided in that provincial authorities are still responsible for the flora and fauna in their particular provinces while some of them have provincial game reserves of one sort or another. I am not suggesting for one moment that this control should be removed from the provincial authorities, but I do believe that there is a necessity for a central clearing house of information, a co-ordination of research for example. I believe that this could well happen under the roof of this particular department.

In talking about this I am going to refer to the example of one operation which is going on at the moment and which largely concerns water, and this is the development of the whole Mfolozi area. I think the hon. the Minister and his officials are to be congratulated on the approach they have taken to it, although there are aspects of it that worry me. The hon. the Minister knows that I have raised this matter in the past. I felt very strongly that there should not be dams in the Mfolozi reserve. I feel that in proportion to other countries of the world we have so little park land at the moment that we must not in any way endanger existing parks. I think I am right in saying that the Mfolozi Park is, if not the oldest, then one of the oldest parks in the country. It is certainly the oldest park in Natal.

I looked with interest through the annual report of the department to see what was going on as far as the Mfolozi area was concerned. There has been considerable surveying of boreholes on site in the Vryheid area, which is of course situated north of the area adjacent to the White Mfolozi River, right down to Mtubatuba, which is east of the area concerned.

However, I see that still no finality has been reached on this matter. I was most interested in the proposed White Mfolozi River Government Water Scheme (Klipfontein Dam), a White Paper that was tabled fairly recently. When I looked through my documents, I came to the conclusion that I was not even aware of the fact that this dam was in the pipeline. I first thought that it might well be the Onrust Dam, but on reading through the document I saw that it is not.

All your “onrust” was for nothing.

Nevertheless, this is an interesting proposal. In the White Paper it is commented that the Onrust Dam will probably be a bit big for the amount of water that is required at this stage. It is quite interesting to see what area this dam is going to serve. There is industrial development around Vryheid for which, of course, water is needed. There is also a supply of water to Ulundi, which will be served for a period of some 20 years by this dam which is to be built. It will obviously also be of advantage in that it will satisfy agricultural requirements further up. An aspect of the White Paper which is particularly praiseworthy, is the heading “Ecological considerations” on page 15. This is very good indeed. I am glad the hon. the Minister is finally learning a lesson in this respect, because I believe ecological considerations are very important. The White Paper sets out these ecological considerations before giving details concerning the choice of the dam site and how that choice was arrived at. I want to go a little bit into the follow-up to this, which obviously will be major dams somewhere further down, either on the White Mfolozi, the Black Mfolozi or on the combined Mfolozi River as it approaches the sea. I look with interest and see in the annual report that the Mpila Dam, the surveying of boreholes and the setting out has all been done. I also see that the Ku Ngqoloti Dam, which the hon. member for Mooi River might be able to pronounce, is also referred to, and the setting out of flags on the centre line as far as surveying is concerned is also progressing. Various surveying has been done for boreholes on the site of the Onrust Dam and the Ku Ngqoloti Dam. The Mooiplaats Dam is also mentioned, but I am not quite sure which the Mooiplaats Dam is. There seems to be quite a difference in nomenclature between people on the spot and what one gets from the department’s report. I think we know which dam Ulundi Dam is and also Doornkop, which is close to Ulundi. There have been various preliminary surveys of sites on the White Mfolozi and air surveys have been made of many sites, but it seems that we are still at a situation where there are 11 possible sites, including the Onrust site, plus the new Klipfontein Dam, where no finality has been arrived at. However, where I believe the department deserves some congratulation is because they have been doing on a continuing basis an environmental-impact study of the whole area. I was fortunate enough to attend the seminar of the CSIR on the whole question of environmental-impact studies. I was also very pleased to note that the new Director-General of the department, and I think also some of his staff, were there, because I think a lot of wise words were uttered at that particular seminar. We had experts in various fields talking about environmental-impact assessments. I do believe that major projects, specifically waterworks in this instance, do have to have environmental-impact assessments of this nature. A very good one has been made, and I refer at length in my speech today to documents produced by a certain Mr. Porter of the Natal Parks, Game and Fish Preservation Board and who, I believe, has been continually occupied into looking into the ecological aspects of this particular matter.

I think it might be of interest to hon. members to know exactly what one is talking about when one talks about environmental-impact assessments. Firstly, one has to look at the need for anything. One knows, e.g. if one looks at that area, that in spite of the Klipfontein Dam there are many other places that have to be supplied with water. Firstly, one has to go further than Ulundi. It will need more. The Vryheid district is inevitably going to grow further. The local authorities at both Mtubatuba and St. Lucia Township will have requirements which are unlikely to be met in the future by the existing waterworks. What one also has to look at, however, is in terms of the impact it might have on the environment. I noted down quite a number of things that would be assisted by the provision of a major dam of some sort or another. Firstly, there is the salinity question in Lake St. Lucia. A dam would ensure that there was a good supply of fresh water going down from time to time and that the salinity level would be able to be adjusted.

The question of flood control is also most important. Some of the most productive sugar areas in the world are situated on the Mfolozi Flats. I think it was in 1977 when major floods took place there. Tremendous sediment deposits were made all over that area doing tremendous damage to that farmland. A lot of the sediment had to be removed by mechanical means. A dam could help in controlling these sediments. And, of course, a dam would be of considerable benefit to agriculture. One must also give consideration to aspects which may be of major environmental concern, depending on its location, and I stress “depending on its location”. A large dam could have considerable impact on a number of areas of major ecological environmental and nature conservation concern.

Firstly, let us talk a little about the Mfolozi Game Reserve itself. It contains a very special breed of riverine forest in that it has, I think, Ficus sycamores and Acacia robusta, which are not rare trees, but which combined form a special sort of riverine forest. There are rare species of animals, a great number and diversity of species. There are wilderness trails and it is also a tourist attraction. It was interesting to learn that nearly 50% of the visitors were from overseas. Obviously visits by tourists is a major source of foreign earnings. This also applies to the Mfolozi estuary and the unusual type of swamp around it and also to the flood plain and pans. These pans are sort of major lakes and are already providing commercial fishing opportunities for Zulu fishermen. Particularly in the reserve, and around it, there are sweet-veld grazing areas which provide some of the necessary winter grazing for both wild and domestic animals.

In connection with public health, it is interesting to note that although Bilharzia is endemic in the area, it is not very prevalent in the Mfolozi Reserve. Possible reasons for that are the floods and the mountainous environment. Dams obviously and inevitably increase the possibility of Bilharzia. This happened with the Aswan Dam project in Egypt, because it gave the snail-vectors an opportunity to breed on a more prolific scale, thereby causing a worse bilharzia problem.

That applies to all dams in the eastern part of the country.

Yes, I am trying to indicate what an environmental-impact assessment does.

As far as wild-life is concerned, in the riverine forest in particular there is a tremendous variety of birds. I think there is something like 340 different species, which is of tremendous interest to bird-watchers from all over the world. There are also waterbuck, Nyala, bush-buck and bush-pig. Two or three decades ago the question of the survival of the white rhinoceros came up specifically, because it was an endangered species. It was saved in the Mfolozi Reserve. Some people might not regard that as important, but I certainly do.

All in all I would like to stress to the hon. the Minister that it is vitally necessary for him to choose a dam site, even if it should cost more, that does the least damage in terms of the environmental-impact assessment. It is always a temptation to choose the cheaper one thereby damaging the ecology and environment. If technology is not going to improve the quality of a person’s life— and I believe quality of life encompasses such things as game reserves—it is not worth having. There is of course always a survival technology that is necessary, but we are not at that stage, and I therefore think we must give consideration to improving the quality of life, which may mean paying more for major works like dams. To digress from the Mfolozi scheme, on a forestry tour the other day we were fortunate enough to go to the Kogelberg Forest Reserve, which is a most interesting reserve in that it contains some most interesting and rare plants. It was interesting to see a plant which has been in the news recently, namely Erica pillansii. I believe that is the major growth area for this endangered plant species. The Palmiet River flows through this reserve. At present a decision is being made as to where a dam is to be built in that reserve. As far as I understand there are two potential dam sites, one of which will flood a vast area of very important soil in which some of these endangered species can flourish, while the other will probably be slightly more expensive to build, but will do less damage to the reserve. I want to ask the hon. the Minister to give consideration in this instance to actually spending more money on the site that will do less damage to the nature reserve.

Finally, I want to deal very briefly with two aspects relating to water, and one is the Orange River scheme. I believe it is time we had another White Paper on this. We have not had a White Paper for some considerable time, and there seems to be a slowing up of the whole process. I am aware that canals are being investigated. I looked at just one area, namely the Sundays River area, which, as the hon. the Minister probably knows, had problems with regard to salinity from Lake Mentz. It was only by virtue of fresh water being pumped in from the Orange River scheme that the Sundays River citrus estates, for example, were prevented from suffering serious damage. I believe that that area, which has tremendous export potential, should get more water as soon as possible so that more land can be brought under irrigation. I would therefore suggest to the hon. the Minister that we should be brought up to date on this matter.

Another provision one thinks of is the hydro-electric schemes which were planned all along. We have the Hendrik Verwoerd and the Orange-Fish schemes. But various hydro-electrical schemes were suggested and I believe it has also been suggested that something like 10 000 megawatts could be made available in terms of electrical supplies from the total scheme when it has been completed in its entirety. I think it is necessary that we should be informed when we are likely to reach that stage.

Finally, I want to turn to my hardy annual. I see the Makatini Flats development project is under way. I am very distressed to see that that dam is still virtually empty. I see the hon. the Minister actually looks a little bit guilty about this. Perhaps I could ask him whether he has made any progress in his negotiations with the Swaziland Government.

I feel surprised. I do not feel guilty at all.

I know it is a sensitive matter and I am not going to push him on this, but we would like to get the next instalment of the serial that we have had year in and year out so far.

Before I sit down I want to comment very briefly on the very interesting visit we, as a group, paid to the Drakensberg pump storage scheme. I believe trips of this nature are of immense value to hon. members. I think this is a scheme that South Africa can be very proud of indeed, and I hope the new department will be able to organize further trips of this nature.

Mr. Chairman, I have no fault to find with what was said by the hon. member who has just resumed his seat. On the contrary, I should like to join him in welcoming the senior officials of the department, i.e. Mr. Otto as Director-General, Mr. Hobbs as Deputy Director-General and Mr. Sonntag. Due to their experience as senior public officials and in view of their past achievements, all of these gentlemen are pre-eminently suited and equipped for their work and we wish them everything of the best and promise to give them our co-operation.

Since we are now dealing with Water Affairs, I want to say that Mr. Otto, who will now fulfil a controlling function as Director-General, is, as a qualified engineer, exceptionally suited to occupying this post. Mr. Hobbs has performed excellent work over a long period as engineer in the department, and has risen to the highest position. I want to congratulate him most sincerely and trust that he will continue with his predecessor’s good work.

The hon. the Minister will probably reply to what the hon. member for Orange Grove had to say further, but I do want to compliment the hon. member by saying that I have often had the privilege of working with him and he usually adopts a positive approach and makes a sound contribution. Consequently I hope that the hon. the Minister will take cognizance of what he said. I really think that I can recommend him in this respect, although not in respect of his political standpoint. But I want to say that we really appreciate his contribution and his co-operation and I trust that he will continue to have the opportunity to do so for quite a while yet.

The Water Affairs Division does not, relatively speaking, receive a very large allocation from the Treasury, but nevertheless fulfills an extremely important function and has a very important task to perform in our country’s development and in the provision of public services. I think there are few similar departments in other Western countries which could achieve what the Water Affairs Directorate has achieved with the money voted for them. I think we have exceptionally competent and hardworking engineers and I think the efficiency of the Water Affairs Directorate is of a very high standard.

I also want to thank the hon. the Minister for his co-operation. He is a person with practical knowledge of the department he runs and he has a frankness and a practical approach which makes it easy for us to commend him and to co-operate with him.

I do not want to dwell at length on general matters, for these things are obvious. I want to take the opportunity today to discuss a specific matter in the limited time at my disposal. It is a matter which is very dear to me and I also think that it is of sufficient public interest. I am referring to the question of the supply of water to our drought-stricken and low-rainfall areas. This is a problem which cannot be rectified so easily, because for the most part it also involves the sparsely-populated areas of our country. However, I broach the subject because the people who live there are worthy people and because the distress in those areas is very great.

With the knowledge of the hon. member for Namaqualand I want to refer here in particular to the White Paper on the supply of water to the southern part of Namaqualand. The proposed connection point for that water scheme lies within my constituency at Koekenaap. It is an area which I have had the privilege of representing in Parliament before. I want to quote briefly from the White Paper in question to give hon. members an idea of the exceptional circumstances and the dire distress of the people in question. On page 9 is stated—

This is the terminus of the railway line to Namaqualand—

That is the station just next to Koekenaap—

For interest’s sake I should just like to make a conversion. R7,30 per m³ are metric figures which we sometimes find a little strange. However, this represents a price for water of more than R30 per 1 000 gallons. We need only recall the accounts we received in earlier times when we still looked after accounts ourselves. This affords some idea of how much the water really costs.

It is only a Namaqualander who could pay that price for water, and not because he has so much money. On the contrary, those Coloured people and Whites are ordinary people who have to live on the same salary as people elsewhere—and perhaps even less. They do so because they are people who can use water sparingly. I knew a woman in Namaqualand who used her ordinary water for household purposes at least three times. She made a small shower for her children. A few gallons of water are poured into the shower apparatus, and the shower is then placed on a stand and worked by hand. A bath is placed under the shower for the children to stand in, and of course they use the water as sparingly as possible. Once the children have showered, she rinses the children’s clothes in the water that has collected in the bath. After that she uses the water for the garden, and that woman still had quite a nice garden in the heart of Namaqualand.

By that time it is mud.

I am merely mentioning this as an illustration. [Time expired.]

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

Mr. Chairman, I thank the hon. member for the opportunity of at least finalizing this matter. This illustrates to hon. members how extremely water-conscious these people were long before other parts of the country had learnt to be so. This also illustrates how very sparing they are with water.

Namaqualand is, as hon. members can understand, an area with a meagre rainfall, and the water table is of a very, very poor quality. In fact it is so poor that even the animals often suffer from it when they are dependent on that water in times of drought and are compelled to drink it. That is why I should like to make an appeal today. I want to ask the hon. the Minister to give special attention to this matter. A scheme is set out in this White Paper to make the water which is delivered to these people a little cheaper. The eventual price mentioned here is approximately R4 per cubic metre. The exact figure is 397,15 cents per m³, i.e. approximately R4. If that scheme could be completed, we should be very grateful. The estimated cost of the scheme is R5,7 million and it is situated in a relatively sparsely populated area where more than two-thirds of the population are Coloureds with a very low income.

Since I still have a few minutes, I want to go on to quote briefly from the report of the Commission of Inquiry into Water Affairs. I quote from the first column on page 146—

I have no fault to find with that as a general guideline and as a principle which must be maintained as far as possible. I am, however, interested, because the hon. the Minister and hon. members know that we are at present taking special trouble and incurring expenses in an effort to keep the people in certain rural areas of our country on their land. This is important for various reasons. I want to put it to the hon. the Minister for his consideration, that he discuss this matter with the Cabinet and, if possible, bring this specific scheme to their attention, and ask for a special contribution for this area, while the people are still there and while such a ruinous price is being charged, because R4 per m³ is indeed a ruinous price for those people. I want to emphasize that it is late in the day when we have to attempt to bring people back once they have left their land. However, it is the simple truth that droughts, that of necessity occur from time to time, together with these high water prices, gradually drive people off the land and exercise pressure on the rural areas as a result of which people are moving to the urban areas in increasing numbers, and since this is happening, we must incur special expense to accommodate people and to provide them with work. I trust that we shall see this matter in its particular milieu and persuade the Government to give attention to this kind of matter. I or another member could probably make a plea for other parts of the country too, with the same good reasons. We must be prepared to spend a considerable amount in order to counteract this kind of situation and alleviate the distress of our people before it is too late. I want to add to that that if we look at public life today, at the senior officials sitting here, we often see that they are people from Namaqualand. I am almost tempted to say to the hon. the Minister, in the words of the Bible: “That they were worthy for whom He should do this.” These people are worth it. They are our hardy people, our people who have learnt to live thriftily. This is the kind of person who applies this principle in the position he occupies. They are usually people who have families, too. They set this example, even though the water is so expensive that even the children’s faces cannot always be clean. But they are people of quality, people with stamina, people with intelligence. These are people with perseverance. Even though there are not many of them, I believe it is nevertheless essential and desirable for us to give special attention to this area in particular, as well as other similar areas—areas in which the same trends occur—and grant special assistance to them.

Mr. Chairman, I have no doubt that the hon. member for Piketberg made out a very deserving case and that the hon. the Minister will give it the necessary attention.

It does one good to take cognizance, from time to time, of the fact that many people often express their concern about the future water situation in South Africa. They ask whether our water supplies will be adequate in the future to meet the demands of the time and the circumstances. By way of illustration I should like to quote the statements of various experts in this field on this matter. I have before me a report entitled “Suid-Afrika se waterbronne gou nie genoeg nie”. I quote—

Another report, entitled “Suid-Afrikaanse water gou ten voile benut” reads as follows—

However, the following is gratifying, and I agree with these two respected gentlemen—

Since the hon. member for Piketberg confined himself principally to Namaqualand and other areas in his part of the world, I should like to confine myself to my own part of the world, viz. the Vaal Triangle area. The massive Vaal Dam is also situated in the Vaal Triangle, a dam which supplies water to 20% of the Republic’s people. Altogether 5 million people are served by water from the Vaal Dam. This region comprises a surface area of approximately 17 000 sq. kilometres. Its boundaries extend from Sasolburg in the south to Pretoria in the north, from Bethal in the east, up to Klerksdorp and Rustenburg in the west.

If adequate measures are not taken in good time, it is predicted that after 1992 the Vaal Dam’s water will be insufficient to supply the population of that area, which will double by 1992, with the necessary water. That is why the Rand Water Board, which distributes the Vaal Dam’s water over this large area, is already engaged in painstaking research as well as in devising methods to combat the problem in future. I should like to refer to a few of these proposals. I quote—

I want to refer to three of the plans which the Rand Water Board is at present formulating in order to deal with the problem in the future. Firstly, I want to refer to the Lesotho Highland Project. This project is based on the storage dams in the Highlands and a tunnel to the Sterkfontein Dam in the Orange Free State. One of the benefits of this scheme is that it is capable of incorporating a hydro-electric scheme. Furthermore, evaporation will be substantially reduced since the water will be conveyed underground. I want to put it to the hon. the Minister for his consideration that because this water is being supplied from Lesotho, we should negotiate an exchange agreement with Lesotho in this regard. We know that Lesotho’s major revenue at the moment consists of the cash earned by its workers on the South African gold-mines. I think that we are in a position to give Lesotho the guarantee that we shall be able to provide their workers on the gold-mines with that work in future if in exchange they can guarantee us water from their own territory.

The second possibility being investigated by the Rand Water Board, concerns the Tugela-Vaal connection. The Spioenkop Dam in the Tugela River is not playing any role at the moment, but it could be used to alleviate the situation up to the end of this century.

Thirdly I want to refer to the Orange-Vaal connection. By joining the P.K. le Roux Dam in the Orange River to the Vaalhartz Dam and the Vaal River by means of approximately 200 kilometres of canals and pipelines, the shortage of water which cannot be supplied by the Bloemhof Dam can be supplemented. If this is done, less water need consequently be released from the Vaal Dam for the Vaalhartz Scheme, and more water will be available in the Vaal Dam for industrial development in the Vaal Triangle.

As I have said, the Vaal Dam supplies 5 million people in the Vaal Triangle, or one-fifth of our country’s population. That area yields 60% of our industrial production, and one-third of our agricultural products. For that reason I think it is essential that the hon. the Minister and his department should consider these proposals of the Rand Water Board very carefully and seriously with a view to the future.

Finally, I want to broach quite a different matter. When I drive through the Black homelands, it strikes me that the development of water resources there is as yet far from adequate. In view of the fact that we spend so many millions upon millions of rands on the consolidation of the homelands, I wonder whether we could not channel a little more of that money to the Department of Water Affairs, so that the water resources in the Black homelands could be developed more rapidly. I say this for a number of reasons: In the first place for the production of food, in the second place for the provision of labour in the homelands, and in the third and very important place, to reduce the pressure on our own water from our own White areas and to reduce the extent to which it is channelled to the Black homelands.

I am suffering from a severe bout of flu and the only reason I have been able to speak is that I was able to discuss water, which is so refreshing.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to congratulate the hon. member for Meyerton on his very interesting speech.

By ensuring that water is always available for industrial development and for the production of agricultural products, Water Affairs is making an indispensable contribution to the economic preparedness of South Africa. People are under the impression that the department is a department which only receives finance from the State, but it is also true that the State derives revenue from State water schemes. During the 1978-’79 financial year this amounted to a sum of R37,7 million. This revenue for the Exchequer ought to increase annually.

As a supplier of water for the generation of hydro-electric power, the department is making a notable contribution in the Orange River project in particular. The demand for electrical power is steadily increasing. By sound planning, the timely provision of adequate funds to the department and with closer co-operation from Escom, the department ought, I believe, to be put in a position to construct a series of weirs in which turbines for the generation of electricity may be installed. Such a weir could be constructed downstream from the Hendrik Verwoerd Dam and I believe that a whole series of these weirs ought to be constructed below the P. K. le Roux Dam down to Upington. Where necessary, these weirs can also be used for irrigation purposes. In the future we are going to be saddled with the major problem of a shortage of electrical power. In my opinion the solution, and the cheapest solution, is along these lines. The water which in any event flows through the sluices of the P. K. le Roux Dam for irrigation purposes and for the generation of electrical power, could be recycled constantly for the generation of power with the aid of such a series of weirs. I believe that timely action in this regard could prevent subsequent shortages of electricity.

In recent decades the Department of Water Affairs has not received adequate funds from the Exchequer. A real danger has arisen, viz. that it may become impossible to supply adequate water in future. As I see the matter, only an increase of 22% in this department’s next budget would avert possible crises in the supply of water. A severe backlog has developed. In August 1970 the water level of the Voëlvlei Dam was so low that had it not been for unexpected rains in September, there would probably have been a cut in the water supply to Cape Town and surrounding areas. Last year the Voëlvlei Dam was only 53% full, against the previous year’s 47%. I believe that if more funds were available to expedite the Riviersonderend-Berg River Project, this potential crisis could be averted. Greater spending to get additional water from the Tugela and elsewhere to the Vaal River in time, could avert a potential crisis. A shortage of water in the Vaal River could give rise to an economic crisis in the PWV area and to tremendous losses for the irrigation farmers along the Vaal and Harts Rivers down to Douglas. The work on the Loskop Dam was delayed for two years as the result of a lack of funds. Last year, on 6 August, this dam was only 13% full. I could enumerate various similar projects, for example the Greater Brandvlei-Kaggaskloof Dam, the Mentz Lake, the Kalkfontein Dam and the Grootdraai Dam which has to supply water to Sasol 2 and 3 and Escom.

According to estimates the demand for water for industrial purposes in urban and rural areas is increasing by 7% per annum, and for irrigation, by 2,5% per annum. It is true that virtually all the cheaper schemes in South Africa have already been built. Owing to the lack of water, schemes that are relatively more expensive and from which water has to be conveyed over long distances, now have to be built.

It is very interesting to consider that at the beginning of this century the Witwatersrand obtained its water from springs in the Klip River, which is only 50 km from Johannesburg. As far back as 1919 it was necessary to convey water from the Barrage over a distance of 100 km. In 1934 the Vaal Dam had to be built and in 1951 its wall had to be raised. In 1964 the Bloemhof Dam had to be built. At present, additional water for the Witwatersrand is being pumped over a distance of 400 km from the Tugela, up to a height of 500 metres over the Drakensberg. The schemes are becoming increasingly expensive. So we have virtually the same pattern with all water schemes throughout South Africa. That is why the real cost of supplying water has risen by at least 6% per annum.

In determining the cost of the construction of water schemes the influence of inflation must be duly taken into account. I believe that an inflation rate of 12% should be added to the construction cost. The cost of operating schemes is, of course, increasing tremendously. The cost of transport, electricity and material is constantly rising as well.

The department has tried to effect savings over the years. What is very interesting is that it has also succeeded in pushing up the productivity of its employees. The department has been compelled to reduce its employees by 28% between 1974 and 1979 in order to restrict expenditure. This department will have to employ more employees in future, and will have to be put in a position to do so.

Quite apart from the leeway to be made up and new projects which have to be undertaken, the department is also pre-eminently capable of providing work to unskilled labour in particular. For example, is it not possible to make excavation work more labour-intensive by letting the pick and shovel take their place alongside the machine? We can provide work for many unskilled labourers and we could even teach those who have the disease of workshyness that work is not a disgrace.

Productivity, I say, has risen, and it is interesting to know, taking into account the excavations and the soil and concrete positioning of the department’s construction schemes, that the position is that whereas the volume of work per man in 1971 was 563 m³, by 1979 it had risen to 742 m³ per man. I know of no other sector in this country where productivity has increased to such an extent. The department’s employees have thus made a very fine contribution to higher production in South Africa.

Furthermore, the department has also saved by exerting pressure on cities to install meters. For instance, meters have been installed for all consumers in the case of Port Elizabeth and Durban, and in both cases we have had a reduction of 20% in water consumption. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I believe the hon. member for De Aar, who has just sat down, quite correctly said that the department was under-funded. He mentioned that its funds should be increased by 22%. But I wonder whether the department is really in a position where they can utilize such an amount of money. However, if the hon. member wants to propose an increase of that magnitude, I shall certainly support it.

I would like to associate myself and my party with the comments that have been made about the rationalization which led to the new structure of the department, the new overall umbrella which has been formed. I also want to congratulate Dr. Otto and Mr. Hobbs on their promotions. I want to add one thought and that is that I still believe that the Department of Tourism should reside under the umbrella that Dr. Otto is holding. I believe that if one has a man who is a keen fisherman in charge of all this activity, one would be able to generate a volume of tourism in our country which would attract thousands of visitors from overseas. One only has to think of the impoundments which are controlled by the Directorate of Water Affairs of the department. I know it resides in the provincial authorities at present, but it certainly requires co-ordination, inspiration and a bit of go to bring this thing to its proper conclusion.

The fact that we in the Opposition spend a great deal of time discussing the affairs of the department means that it is a successful department. If there was something wrong with the department, we would devote a lot more time to chewing them up. But as it is now, we think it is not only a successful department, but also one which has developed into an extremely clever department. I think it is important that we should realize this and give credit for the fact that the schemes that are being tackled today and taken in hand by the department are not only big and imposing but also inspiring and clever. The schemes are tackled with a flair which I think is very much to the credit of the department. One only has to think of the Tugela-Vaal scheme, which is a very imaginative scheme and which is growing all the time. The implications of that scheme are getting bigger and bigger. It is a source of concern to me that a few years ago legislation was introduced by the Department of Water Affairs to appropriate R104 million on capital account. This year the figure is R143 million, but the hon. the Minister is able to build less and less dams for R143 million than he could with R104 million.

I want to come back very briefly to a particular hobby-horse of mine. I think this Committee is simply inadequate to deal with the expenditure by the department of that amount of money in the short time at its disposal. I therefore want to appeal to the chairman of the Select Committee that a special meeting of the Select Committee on Irrigation Matters should be held, together with the officials of the department, so that we could have a full day, or perhaps even two days, during the recess where the expenditure of the department can be discussed in detail. It is totally inadequate for us to come here and in a very short time try to handle the immensely complicated affairs of the department and the amount of money that it spends.

I mentioned the Tugela-Vaal scheme and I notice in the report of the Water Research Commission that there is a growing concern that where water is now being reclaimed, and also the flow of natural water into the Vaal barrage, there is an increasing danger of pollution, to the extent that the department has set up a computer programme whereby the mineralization of water flowing into the Vaal barrage can be known at any particular time. I regard that as being most enterprising. I think it is highly praiseworthy that that has been done, but it is a measure of the concern which is being shown about the fact that we have to depend, as an hon. member said, on the re-use of water in the Vaal River to an ever-increasing extent. We have the developments going on in the Tugela-Vaal scheme, but it is a depressing thought that in a very short time even the developments that have taken place there are going to be inadequate to provide the water needed in the Vaal River area. While the hon. member for Orange Grove spent his time talking about Natal, I want to raise a particular question about the Rand Water Board and the Vaal River scheme. I want to raise the point with the hon. the Minister that the Spioenkop Dam was built as the original dam in the Tugela-Vaal scheme. I notice, however, in the fifth supplementary report on this scheme (W.P.H.—80) that it is now being proposed that 65% of the cost of the Spioenkop Dam should be debited to the users of water from the Vaal River. I was at pains, yesterday, to refer back to my copy of the original White Paper on the scheme (W.P.X—67) and found that at no stage was it suggested there that users of water from the Vaal would be debited for any of the capital costs involved in the Spioenkop Dam. As regards the question of funds, which is always dealt with in the last portion of the White Paper, the capital costs would be recovered by the sale of water at a cost in those days of, I think 2 cents, which seemed a reasonable figure at the time. Now the hon. the Minister is proposing to take from users of water in the Vaal area 65% of the capital cost of the Spioenkop Dam.

In the White Paper it is stated that the Spioenkop Dam is there to serve the needs of people lower down the Tugela River. That is the purpose of the dam as it has now developed. Originally the Spioenkop Dam was the holding dam and water was to be pumped from the Spioenkop Dam to the foot of the berg and then over it. When Prof. Matthews discovered the geological freak of the Tugela basin and the department was able to plan to catch the water at the head-waters of the Tugela and pump it straight up from there, Spioenkop Dam was really moved on to the back burner, as it were. It is now regarded as being a holding dam to regulate the flow in the Tugela. I should like the hon. the Minister to explain to me why 65% of the capital cost should now be debited to users of water over the berg in the Vaal area.

You are exporting your bilharzia to us.

Well, if the hon. member is worrying about us exporting the bilharzia, we shall simply not sell him the water. It is quite easy. He has a choice. He can have one thing or the other.

Do you prefer to carry the burden yourself in Natal?

Yes, we shall use the water ourselves. When there is no water for people to drink, as in Namaqualand, they will all come to us in Natal.

I should like to turn to another question. The Select Committee is dealing with a proposal involving the Umgeni Water Board. The Umgeni River is in my constituency and this is a very, very important matter to me indeed. The Umgeni Water Board is looking at future plans in order to ensure the supply of water to probably half the total population of Natal and to areas including Durban, Pietermaritzburg, Pinetown, the Valley of a Thousand Hills and Howick. I should like the hon. the Minister to tell us whether planning has reached an advanced stage to import water into the Umgeni catchment area. I know that there are plans to build a dam on the Umkomaas and to construct a tunnel to bring water from the Umkomaas into the Umgeni. This will have to be done at some stage or other. I have personally had discussions with the Umgeni Water Board and I noted with interest that it is the idea to integrate the Hazelmere Dam into the supply of water which falls within the purview of the Umgeni Water Board. I think that that is very rational. With the growing Indian area in Phoenix to the north of Durban, I believe it will now be much easier to supply water from the Hazelmere Dam which has a considerable surplus capacity of purified water. The water can now be brought from there and it will not be necessary to proceed with works in the Durban area or in the Umgeni area in the gorge or elsewhere higher up the river. This is of immense interest to us. As I have said, the Umgeni River caters for half the population of Natal, although it is a very small river. It is, however, singularly silt free and it is very easily utilized because the country through which it flows lends itself to the construction of large dams.

The hon. member for Piketberg raised the question of droughts and the supply of water to the drier areas of South Africa. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Mooi River agreed with other hon. members that we should have to spend more money on water, and I think we are all convinced of that. I am now going to be somewhat personal, but I want to say that we are fortunate today in having a Minister who really gives his full attention to this issue of water. We have a man who makes a study of his department and really becomes involved in the problems of his department. I wish to thank him in particular for a recent visit to my part of the world. His visit contributed greatly to setting the minds of the farmers there at rest. I also wish to thank the new Deputy Director, Mr. Hobbs, for having accompanied us in a visit to the Gamtoos. He was the man who started building the Paul Sauer Dam, and we are deeply appreciative of the fact that he was there again now. I believe that he will be a tremendous success in his new post.

Turning from the conservation of water, I wish to discuss an entirely different matter. I wish to discuss the damage that water sometimes causes. Despite warnings, the floodplains are being utilized more and more for agriculture, industries and residential areas. It is therefore not surprising that severe damage is caused in these floodplains from time to time and that there is even loss of life. As one who farms along the Gamtoos River I can attest to how the work of years can be destroyed within a few hours. Nor is it only the farms that are affected. It seems to me that the eastern parts of the country are particularly hard-hit by floodwaters. Here I have in mind recent floods in Port Elizabeth, East London, Durban, Cradock and in my part of the world along the Gamtoos. It seems as if thunder storms and heavy rains are inclined to concentrate there. Even the worst floods are so easily forgotten, however. Farms are repaired and houses are rebuilt and used.

Accordingly I should like to refer to the Act passed a few years ago. The Act provides that development can only take place in certain areas. I hope that this Act is being duly implemented. I think it is important that floodlines are determined as laid down in that Act when a new development takes place. A very thorough knowledge of every situation is required in determining such floodlines. Moreover there are different aspects to be taken into account in this regard. Firstly, the extent of the risk must be determined, viz. the frequency of the floods. Secondly it must be determined whether the development in areas in question is of national importance and whether control and protection works are justified in such a river. Experience has taught us that protection works are expensive, and often they are not effective either. In my part of the world I have often seen how massive works of concrete and stone are circumvented by the river changing its course. When that happens those works are useless.

Today I should like to draw attention to a method by which such flood damage can be controlled relatively easily and cheaply, viz. by keeping riverbeds clean and promoting vegetation on river banks. I think we all agree that this is the best way of keeping rivers from changing their courses. Already many local authorities, groups of farmers and even individual farmers do work of this kind. How often is this not neglected, however? The river-beds are allowed to become congested with vegetation and to form islands. As soon as a flood occurs, the river bursts its banks and as a result the whole floodplain is inundated. The construction of storage dams and the irrigation of lands also influence the vegetation growth in a river-bed. Such a storage dam prevents small floods from keeping the river-bed open, with the result that it becomes overgrown, and when there is a flood, surrounding areas are inundated. The regular flow of water into the river from irrigation land results in lush vegetation.

It is therefore clear to me that the State will have to provide aid with regard to this matter. There will also have to be sound co-ordination in connection with this problem. As I understand the position, protection works in river courses can be subsidized and loans can be obtained for this purpose, and if it is in the national interest, a catchment control area or an irrigation district can be declared. Assistance can even be provided to individual farmers.

However, no assistance is provided with regard to the clearing of river-beds, because this is maintenance work and cannot therefore be subsidized.

In my opinion a further problem is that the Department of Water Affairs has no control of the vegetation in rivers. As soon as one is dealing with vegetation it becomes the responsibility of the Department of Agricultural Technical Services.

I just wish to refer briefly to the very good work in regard to flood research done by the Universities of Stellenbosch, the Orange Free State and the Witwatersrand in cooperation with the Water Research Commission to determine true flood damage and undertake a study of floods. In this connection their findings will be particularly useful in determining the extent of floodplains to which I referred earlier. The drawing up of plans to protect and clear river-beds is a highly technical matter and must be handled with care, because anything done higher up in a river-bed can affect others further down.

I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether he is satisfied that there is good co-ordination between the various bodies involved in this work. Is the information which public bodies or farmers will require to protect and clear their river-beds, available? Is there a body which will supervise the work done and which will ensure that the maintenance of river-beds is kept up? Should State financing not be reconsidered, particularly since such works are in the interests of communities and even of towns and cities, for example those along the Vaal River?

Another question I want to ask is whether legal exemption should not perhaps be granted to bodies undertaking protection works and the clearing of river-beds. Are they indemnified by law if they do work in a river-bed which may influence people lower down? I want to advance the idea that where a plan to clear a river-bed is accepted, and at least a minimum number of owners agree, they should be afforded legal indemnification. Millions of rands have in the past been paid out in reparations after flood damage. The State, too, has made its contribution. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, in what I want to say today, I also wish to associate myself to a great extent with what the hon. member for Piketberg said. I was the only one to cry “hear, hear” when the hon. member completed his speech. I did so because he spoke like a man after my own heart. He spoke about something which I understand, something of which I am thoroughly aware. I want to discuss water in the North West—the North West, the land of open spaces, the land of begin again, as Lawrence Green once so beautifully put it. To begin again is a common occurrence for the Karoo farmer, the farmer of the North West—particularly after every draught, as is once again the case now. The people of the Karoo, of the dry North West, can never try to become too big, can never try to fly too high. These are people who must humbly remain mere mortals, because they are constantly kept with both feet on the ground, where they must constantly, in humbleness before their Creator, continue to seek their salvation.

Of course we always appreciate aid measures which are made available in that part of the world. Nevertheless the only true relief comes only from God Above. That is why I say that the people of the North West are kept humble. The hon. member for Piketberg also referred to such people. I am not going to elaborate on this subject any further.

I want to make an important appeal today. When we have to struggle through a draught, such as the one which is prevailing in the North West at present, when beautiful thunder clouds build up on the horizon and there is hope and expectation in every heart, when people rejoice at the approaching rain, but when only a few drops fall, and suddenly everything is all over, and one sees how hardy people, an indomitable farmers’ wife, bursts into tears—Alas, Oh Lord, has it passed us by—one realizes what a struggle life is for people in those dry regions of our country. It is a struggle which not everyone always understands. That is why I want to associate myself with the plea made by the hon. member for Piketberg. We cannot always be appealing to the State for the financing of the services which are rendered to the North West. Nevertheless it is true that the State does after all have an obligation to keep people in our rural areas. These are people who play an enormous part in feeding our entire nation, as well as in earning foreign exchange. Consequently, when I make a plea for water for the North West, I believe it is important to point out that these were the original pioneering regions of our country. The first people settled there in the vicinity of well-watered spots. They made a living primarily from stock farming and arable farming, as many place names in those areas still indicate to us today. Along the reaches of the Sak River from Fraserburg down to Williston, and also lower down to Brandvlei, Van Wyksvlei with its Saaidamme, the first mission workers of the Rhenish Mission began their activities in South Africa. In 1883 the first State dam was built at Van Wyksvlei. That shows how long ago the State had already begun to render assistance in those regions. I could mention in passing that Beaufort West was the first town in South Africa to acquire municipal status. That was as long ago as 1837.

Consequently I wish to ask the hon. the Minister to institute another earnest inquiry into the possibility of supplying water to these areas, possibly, too, from the Orange River. In any event, the Smartt Syndicate is not unreachably far from the Orange River. I know there are problems. I said a moment ago that cost ought not to be the only aspect. There are certain other problems, too, for example the mineralization of the soil which can be investigated. I believe that by making use of the correct technical knowledge and assistance it will be possible to overcome these problems as well. The Smartt Syndicate is situated in the heart of a vast stock farming region. It is an area in which stock farmers are at present experiencing enormous problems obtaining stock feed for the coming winter. The traditional lucerne areas have changed completely as far as the cultivation pattern is concerned. Farmer have changed to grapes, cotton, beans, etc., and the cultivation of lucerne has been abandoned. This syndicate lies in the heart of the stock farming area. I am not able to state specific figures, because the draught is still in progress. However, while the draught remains unbroken, millions of rands are going to be spent on conveying feed— frequently feed of poor quality—from distant areas to these stock farming regions, in terms of the rebate system. The money for that purpose must also be advanced by the State. It is paid by Agricultural Credit and Land Tenure. That is why I wish to request that serious attention be given to this problem. In this region there are large areas which have the potential for the cultivation of feed and other crops. That is why the hon. the Minister ought to give attention to this matter. I know that we can rely on his sympathetic approach to these problems, and they are serious problems.

The Water Research Commission has instituted an investigation into the Beaufort West, Fraserburg and Merweville areas— these are specifically the uranium areas—in connection with the availability of ground water. However, I wish to ask in all earnest whether Water Affairs and Agriculture cannot co-ordinate their activities in this connection. Since the earliest times people in these regions have abstracted water only from the earth. In addition it is a fact that owing to the sudden thunder storms there, the run-off is rapid, and the draining of water into the soil is therefore relatively low. For agricultural and household purposes water is only abstracted and is never replaced.

More research can be done to find methods for restoring the underground water table. If the nature of the soil and the water run-off lend themselves to this, a farmer should be able to restore the water to the earth. In those areas this remains our best investment. Our evaporation quotient is extremely high and the run-off of water in those areas is, as I have said, rapid. An investigation can be instituted into methods for returning water to the earth, and storing it for the day when it is really needed.

As I have already said, the country people there in the arid North West have to do without a great many conveniences. It is true that television, FM radio and transportation services, etc., are not generally available to the country dweller. It is becoming increasingly difficult to attract young people and people who are able to render services to the rural areas. We must try to make the world there attractive to our young people. For this reason it is the practise for the inhabitants of every town and farm in the North West to lay out a small garden in front of every home and to plant trees along all the streets. Of the surface springs near which these towns arose there are today no visible signs left. This demonstrates that the water table has dropped by metres during the past draught. Longer water pipes of lengths up to 10, 15 and even 20 metres now have to be used to pump that water out of the earth. We must preserve those water resources for posterity, so that my son will also be able to earn a livelihood in that area. I trust that the hon. the Minister has accorded these few words of mine a sympathetic hearing.

Mr. Chairman, if there is any person who is greatly indebted to the hon. the Minister, it is I. There is an irrigation area of almost 800 square kilometres in my constituency. In years gone by, many of the works which had to be carried out along the Orange River, the Modder River, the Vaal River and the Riet River, were left undone. Consequently I appreciate the interest of the hon. the Minister in those works. In this connection I want to say that the problems concerning many of these works have been solved. I want to thank the hon. the Minister very sincerely for the time which he found to give attention to those areas.

The Karos area in my constituency is still being threatened by storm waters. I know that attention is being given to this, and that work there is in progress, but I still want to ask the hon. the Minister to ensure that the works which fall under the A works, should be completed as rapidly as possible before problems are again experienced with storm waters which cause mineralization of the soil in those areas, something which in its turn means a set-back for the irrigation farmers.

I also wish to associate myself with the hon. member for Beaufort West and say that we in the south-western part of the Karoo are also experiencing problems with stock watering places in that water is becoming mineralized to such an extent that it even constitutes a threat to our agriculture. In view of the vast project which is now going to be undertaken in the Kalahari, I think it is only right that the position of the farmers in the southern part of the Karoo should also receive attention in future.

I wish to express my thanks to the hon. the Minister for having paid a visit to our area recently and for having made it possible for us to develop the area in Prieska below the confluence of the Orange River and the Vaal Rivers. A good future awaits us in this connection. We are already engaged in the establishment of irrigation boards, and I trust that it will not be necessary, as far as I am concerned, to give further attention to them, because I shall perhaps not remain MP for those people for very long. Nevertheless I remain confident that there is a future for our farmers in that area.

There is one little matter I should like to bring to the attention of the hon. the Minister, and I regret having to do so now, because a deputation is already on its way to see him and to apply for assistance in this area. However, the matter is so urgent that I cannot allow the opportunity to say something about it today to pass. It involves the situation below the confluence of the Modder and Riet Rivers. In that area there is no canal system. When I consider the financial implications of this fact, I see that we run the risk of certain things happening which we should like to avoid. The surface area of this region covers approximately 2 790 ha, and in addition there is 1 500 ha which can easily be irrigated. I may point out that these irrigation areas are today occupied by approximately 65 irrigation farmers, that the investment made in those irrigation projects amounts to approximately R4,185 million, that investment in machinery and implements amounts to approximately R1,390 million and that the annual turnover from irrigation alone amounts to R3,8 million.

The number of White farmers who are dependent for the survival on the proceeds from their irrigation lands is 65 with approximately 260 dependants. In addition there are more than 400 non-White permanent male workers, who have more than 2 000 dependants. Some of the women work as domestic servants and the remaining women and children work on the lands during harvesting, planting and hoeing seasons of the cotton, potato, wheat, vegetable and grape crops. During the harvesting season, too, many more people from the nearby areas of Douglas, Ritchie and Plooysburg also find work in that area. Consequently there are thousands of dependants in that area. We must take into consideration that the circumstances in which the farmers find themselves today are such that none of them will be able to plant or harvest anything this year if assistance is not rendered. In that case the labourers of all the farmers, including those who are already at work there, will leave the area and go elsewhere. And then I see only hardship ahead of them.

Consequently I want to ask the Minister, since the deputation will soon reach him, to give timeous attention to this matter and ensure that these farmers are accommodated, not financially but in certain other respects, to enable them to ensure their survival in future. I know that the hon. the Minister will give this matter his attention, but I also know that the threats with which those farmers are faced with today will be inavertible if we do not make timeous provision to provide them with a water supply.

Mr. Chairman, I think this is a good occasion to enter the debate. In the first place, I wish to convey my appreciation to hon. members for their divergent but very praiseworthy contributions on a subject of vital importance to our country. The question of water supply and the other branches of the department are a very interesting subject. I hope hon. members will permit me to begin by dwelling for a moment on the broader aspects of the subject before attending to specific points they have raised.

In the first place, I wish to refer to the reorganization to which hon. members have also referred. As hon. members are aware, in the course of the process of rationalizing the Public Service which is at present under way, a new Department of Water Affairs, Forestry and Environmental Conservation was formed on 1 April 1980, as part of the reorganization of the governmental function and as a first step towards creating a smaller and, I hope and trust, a better and more efficient Public Service. It is perhaps appropriate that on this occasion I should give hon. members a short résumé of the aims of the newly formed department. As far as water is concerned, the aim, very briefly—in fact it goes much further than this—is to achieve optimal usage of available water resources by determining the potential of resources, planning water resources, developing and building water schemes and controlling the distribution of water. In the second place, it must see to it, in cooperation with the private forestry sector, that land not suitable for agricultural purposes is utilized to the optimum extent with a view to the country’s timber requirements. In the third place, it must take steps to ensure the protection and conservation of the environment with a view to improving the quality of the environment in our country.

Hon. members are also aware that even before the new department was formed, when the Department of Environmental Planning and Energy was abolished in the first place of the implementation of the new dispensation in the Public Service, the environmental function of that department, the section dealing with aspects relating to air, land, water and environmental evaluation, was transferred from 1 March 1980 to the then Department of Forestry. Therefore considerable progress has already been made in bringing functions together under one roof. Hon. members will agree with me that this is a very logical step. The hon. member for Orange Grove said the same, taking into account in particular the fact that even at that stage the former Department of Forestry was strongly conservation-oriented by virtue of its responsibility for the management of indigenous forests, nature reserves, wilderness areas and mountain catchment areas under its control. Since then the environmental function has been allocated to the new department, and as hon. member probably already know, the intention is to make the environmental conservation function a primary focus of central Government action and to bring about meaningful coordination and integration of the thus far fragmented action in the fields of nature conservation and the combating of practices that may have an adverse effect on the environment. I hope to table a White Paper within the foreseeable future which will spell out in detail the national policy for environmental conservation as it will be seen in the future. There is a prospect that even at this late stage legislation that has been outstanding for a long time may be passed during this session, because environmental conservation, which in my opinion has been in abeyance in the past, must be given extremely urgent attention. My department is dealing with this and we hope to have the opportunity, in spite of all the other urgent matters, to give attention to this legislation so that in the years that he ahead it will be possible to take practical steps in this regard.

Further attention is being given to the transfer of functions within the department so as to afford each section its correct functional content and establish the correct links with semi-State institutions. Reference is being made to the National Parks Board. I might just point out that this board will be placed under the control of the department on 1 June.

It is probable that more will be made known about this presently, but even at this stage I can say that the new department of Water Affairs, Forestry and Environmental Conservation will certainly be drastically affected by the next phase of the organizatory rationalization programme. While I am dealing with this point I want to thank hon. members who referred to the officials who are now heads of the new departments and directorates. In the first place I wish to associate myself with the words of welcome addressed to Mr. Otto. He has not been in the Public Service for very long, but he has wide experience of the public sector, in city councils and so on, and of the private sector as well. He is academically extremely well qualified to give a lead and perform this co-ordinating function, particularly, too, where there is an emphasis on environmental conservation. I wish to extend a welcome to him and wish him all of the best in his great task. He must not doubt for a moment that it is a great task. The second person to whom I wish to refer is Mr. Sonntag, who is now Deputy Director-general of Forestry. I might just mention that Mr. Sonntag recently received the award for 30 years’ service and also has an award from the Prime Minister for 40 years’ service. He has left his mark in the department and possesses all the abilities and excellent qualities required to give very sound leadership. The only thing that troubles me a little is that unfortunately Mr. Sonntag does not have very long to go in the department, but I know that up to now it has been a very fruitful period and it will continue to be so. Accordingly I extend a hearty welcome to him and wish him all of the best. I sincerely appreciate the co-operation he has given up to now. I also wish to refer to Mr. Hobbs, to whom other hon. members also referred, who is now Deputy Director-general of Water Affairs. He is a person who has already made his mark in the Department of Water Affairs, particularly in the construction field. He has a profound knowledge of the department. I want to take this opportunity to thank him for his co-operation thus far and wish him, too, all of the best in the future. I have no doubt that the officials and I will be able to form a good team and render the most satisfactory service. I do not wish to say that we are going to solve all the problems, but I can give hon. members the assurance that we shall act as a team to work in the best interests of the country. With the limited means at our disposal we shall try to render outstanding service. In passing, I might just mention that both Mr. Otto and Mr. Hobbs are products of the University of Natal.

†I said the other day when we parted from Dr. Kriel, that it just goes to show that you cannot keep a good man down.

Especially when he has been to a good university.

I am pleased that we have had strong reinforcements from that quarter.

Mr. Chairman, permit me just to refer to Dr. Kriel, who left the service at the end of April. He is an exceptional person. I have referred to his outstanding qualities in the past and therefore I shall not repeat myself. However, I wish to say that I have arranged with the Public Service Commission that Dr. Kriel’s services will be available to the department in that he will act as consultant with regard to special water studies. In my opinion we are dealing here with a person possessed of extraordinary skills and knowhow. To tell the truth, he has exceptional skills and know-how. I do not believe it would be right if they were to be lost to the department and the country. I am therefore pleased to be able to make this known.

I note with appreciation, too, that Dr. Henzen, the new chairman of the Water Research Commission, is present here today. This is a person of whom we expect a great deal and we wish him all of the best with the important work done by the Water Research Commission.

Then I want to refer briefly to the water position. Certain hon. members have also referred to it. However, I wish to discuss the broader aspects. If we are to maintain our position in the world today, it is very important that we should remain economically prepared, and to be economically prepared means that we must utilize our resources to the best possible advantage in order to increase our economic strength. This is particularly true with regard to a scarce resource such as water. It is therefore imperative in this regard that in the light of the available funds and the scarcity of manpower, there must be in-depth investigation of the priorities for the building of water schemes with special reference to deriving the greatest possible advantage for the country as a whole so that the economy as such may be strengthened. Later, perhaps, additional funds can be generated for the provision of water for other desirable undertakings which, however, do not make such a major contribution to the domestic economy. I want to associate myself with what hon. members, for example the hon. member for Beaufort West, said in this connection. Our approach is now that we must determine our priorities so that the most productive utilization of water will enjoy priority so that money may be generated for the better financing of more expensive water schemes. That is the approach. Hon. members will understand that if we utilize the available funds the other way around and achieve a lower productivity from its utilization, the country as a whole will not derive the greatest benefit from it and we shall not be able to generate the necessary funds in order to give the other areas the necessary attention.

It is a necessary consequence of the above that as far as irrigation is concerned, consideration must be given primarily to the stabilization of water resources of existing irrigation schemes because in such cases a greater part of the necessary development costs, not only of water supply, but in particular the whole infrastructure and establishment costs, have already been incurred, and this will result in greater stability. What I mean by that is that it is pointless establishing new schemes while existing schemes suffer from lack of funds with which to cover maintenance costs and effect the necessary improvements. We must therefore see to it that existing irrigation areas must remain as productive as possible before we spend money on new areas. In this case too, however, it is necessary to ensure that the cost of new water resources can be justified on a socio-economic basis. In the second place, it is very important that for all new schemes—for example the Riviersonderend-Berg River project, which is a very expensive scheme—there should be clear evidence that the benefits it entails will be greater than the cost of establishing and operating it. In other words, the benefit/cost relationship must be greater than 1. I shall discuss this aspect at greater length at a later stage. In certain areas of the country there are circumstances which could lead to our having to alter this basic approach. To that I wish to add that if the benefit/cost relationship is not satisfactory, then in the national interest the scheme ought not to be built, because there are so many more advantageous projects for which the available funds and scarce manpower can be used and which can make a positive contribution to the country’s economy to strengthen our preparedness and place further development on a sound basis.

However, I am convinced that it is necessary to investigate another facet of our physical preparedness, and that is the extent to which improved water supply to our northern and eastern borders could result in greater population density and stability on those borders. Hon. members will be aware that a scheme has been announced, or envisaged, by the hon. the Minister of Agriculture with regard to this problem. Due to the enormous expense it would involve to keep the farmers in those areas on the farms, the original idea was dropped.

However, after the Cabinet had taken a decision in this connection I instructed my Directorate of Water Affairs to carry out such an investigation with the emphasis on water supply, to agriculture in these regions in particular. I trust that a comprehensive report on this will be available before too long, on the basis of which a programme of action may be decided on. I just wish to dwell on this a moment longer. The hon. member for Prieska referred to the Kalahari. This is one such case. We must consider what it will cost to provide the people there with a permanent source of fresh water at reasonable cost. It is already clear that the cost/benefit relationship in this case will be less than 1. If one were not to do so and those people left those areas, for example the areas in the Northern Transvaal, how would one be able to maintain the physical preparedness of the country with a minimum population? Therefore it is possible that we could in fact save, because otherwise it would cost much more to secure the area militarily. It would be better if there was a reasonable density of population there so that people could look after their own interests. I therefore envisage that. I hope that we shall obtain the report in due course and that the funds may be made available. It also seems to me as if the funds will not be nearly as much as was originally envisaged for the agricultural scheme. However I hope that we shall be able to perform an important task for the country as a whole there by providing a substantial and reliable supply of water. However I wish to stress that in some instances we shall have to depart from the approach that the cost/benefit relationship should be at least 1.

I also wish to refer to problems with water in agriculture. This morning I had an interview with people from Natal, where there is a drought at present. There is an old irrigation scheme at the Goedertrou dam. There was a White Paper on the dam a few years ago. According to the original planning it was to cost R12 million. According to a new White Paper last year it now costs R36 million, due to the escalation of costs. That farming community now wants to know how matters stand. With the original cost of water they could easily have carried on, but due to the tremendous escalation, the cost of water has risen from R50 per ha per annum to R140 per ha per annum. That makes a considerable difference. There are other problems too.

We have various types of irrigation farmers in our country. In the first place there is the private irrigation farmer. The maximum he receives is a subsidy of R6 000. Then there are irrigation boards. They get a subsidy of one-third without any maximum amount being laid down. Then there are also State water schemes. Incidentally, these three elements in the irrigation set-up are of approximately equal size, each with among 200 000 to 300 000 ha under irrigation. However there is an imbalance. These people produce the same crops, but in many cases the Government schemes, due to historical and socio-economic reasons, pay less for water than the irrigation boards and the private farmers. Representations have been made to me repeatedly by organized agriculture in this connection. I have decided that we should conduct an investigation into this matter. I do not want to have a commission of inquiry with wide terms of reference. We had the Commission of Inquiry into Water Affairs in 1970 and as a result of that investigation the Government laid down a policy. However, in agriculture it seems necessary to have another in-depth look at the policy. I said to organized agriculture that I would appoint a committee in conjunction with the Department of Agriculture—and I have already spoken to my hon. colleague in this regard—to consider, together with organized agriculture, whether we should establish a new policy in order to bring about a more equitable situation, where applicable, as regards the cost of water in agriculture. I just want to mention as an example that the people who produce wine grapes who are going to get extra water from the Theewaterskloof Scheme are not happy about the fact that they have to pay so much for water, even though the higher price is not for all their water but only for supplementary water, while the water along the Orange River, where the same products are cultivated costs far less. These people are all competing in the same market. There is a great deal of unhappiness in this regard.

As far as the availability of water is concerned, the situation is that all studies and analyses indicate that all our known water resources will have to be utilized within approximately the next 40 years to meet the demand for water. The hon. member for Meyerton put it at 20 years, but I want to be more conservative and optimistic and put it at 40 years, but then I mean 40 years. When we reach the year 2020 it will in my opinion most certainly be necessary to utilize all possible resources. Water is therefore a limiting factor. When I say that this will be the case by the year 2020, I mean that even this will only be possible if there is no unnecessary wastage; in other words, if the water we do have is used to the best possible advantage to provide the greatest practicable yield per unit of water and if water is re-used to the greatest possible extent. In this regard I want to refer to the speech by the hon. member for Piketberg in which he gave the fine example of the woman who uses the water three times, first for the children, then for the washing and eventually for the garden. We have already reached that situation in certain areas. In other areas people accept water simply as something which is available and cheap.

Where it is a question of the scarcity of water, financial implications are not the only consideration. The really advantageous utilization of the water we have is far more important. I repeat that we shall no longer be able to make water available to an unlimited extent if we pay more for it. The stage has already been reached in some parts of the country—and this will eventually be the case throughout the country—that we will simply not have any more water to distribute, even if we are able to pay far more for it. More water cannot be made as the demand occurs, as is the case with fertilizer or steel, for example. The limitation on the quantity of water will also impose a limitation on all economic activities.

I wish to dwell briefly on a matter which has already been touched on, namely the question of funds. I want to point out that over the past 10 years the Department of Water Affairs has regularly had to prune its demands for funds in the national interest, and over the past three years we have regularly warned that if this should continue we should be running the risk of not being able to provide sufficient water. The danger of this happening is now substantial and urgent steps are necessary to avert potential crises with regard to water supply to various parts of the country. The hon. member for De Aar has referred to this and I want to thank him for doing so. I want to motivate this. He also did so, although only partially. According to calculations and estimates, the expenditure by Water Affairs ought to increase by 19,6% per annum, but in view of other steps which are being and may still be taken, the minimum growth rate for expenditure may be estimated in advance as 15% per annum, a percentage which will probably have to be reviewed every two years. A major backlog has developed in regard to expenditure of water schemes, and this cannot be rectified immediately. I think it would be unreasonable to expect that. We shall have to adapt to the extent that the economy permits. I want to motivate the figure of 15% briefly because I believe it is necessary that this be placed on record. Firstly, there is the increase in the demand for water. The hon. member for De Aar referred to that. It is calculated at 7% per annum for industrial and urban consumption and about 2% per annum for irrigation. On the basis of the present total consumption the former—the urban and industrial usage —comprises approximately 25% of the total, whereas irrigation comprises 75%. The average total growth rate in the consumption of water is therefore 3,25%.

The second reason I want to advance is the increased real cost of water supply. The hon. member also referred to the fact that we are now faced with more expensive schemes, and that at the Vaal River, for example, where previously the water was close at hand, we now have to bring it from distances of up to hundreds of kilometres, from Natal and elsewhere. In the third place there is the effect of inflation. Studies carried out by the directorate into this aspect, the cost of construction work etc., have led to the finding that the rate of inflation in the construction industry is about 12%. Another factor that plays a role is the maintenance of the water schemes, which also increases annually.

The cost of energy, etc., is increasing steadily. What this amounts to is that the Department’s Directorate of Water Affairs, taking all these factors into account, sets the required increase in expenditure on water schemes at 21,4%, if it is really our aim to comply with the requirements. However, certain steps have been taken, for example by way of greater efficiency, a smaller number of workers and the installation of water-meters in certain areas in order to reduce costs. I must point out once again what the influence has been of the installation of water-meters to check the consumption of water because people are obliged to pay for the water they use. After the directorate had made strong representations, the municipalities of Port Elizabeth in 1971 and Durban in 1975 installed water-meters for all consumers. In both cases this resulted in an estimated drop in per capita water consumption of approximately 20% and for approximately three years there was virtually no increase in the total water consumption.

Moreover, the directorate has already requested the Departments of Co-operation and Development and of Community Development to make provision in their housing schemes for measuring the water consumption of individual consumers. As far as irrigation schemes are concerned, the reliable measurement of water and payment for real use is being developed constantly in order to conserve water. Hon. members can think for themselves what will happen when a quantity of water is made available to people without them having to pay for what they use. We have found that that also applies to certain other schemes, for example Coloured townships. It happens that a divisional council decides that a water scheme is too expensive and that the taxpayer cannot afford this on top of everything else. However, when the matter is investigated it is found that the divisional council in question provides water free to the entire Coloured community. There are no water-meters. They are therefore unaware of exactly how much water the community will use. The Whites simply pay for it. This is another disguised method of assistance which these people have simply accepted. However, what it leads to is that the Coloured community does not accept responsibility for the quantity of water they use, and as a result there is tremendous wastage of water. As I have indicated it helps a great deal if in the first place, people learn to pay for the water they use and therefore if the quantity of water they use is measured.

I also wish to point out that as regards the introduction of water boards, of which there are already seven—the Rand Water Board, the Vaalkop Water Board, the Phalaborwa Water Board, the Pelladrif Water Board, which serves the mining region in the north-western Cape, the Umgeni Water Board and the Orange Free State Goldfields Water Board—the responsibility in this regard is for the most part given to those boards. Therefore the burden on the department is alleviated to a considerable extent, particularly for budgeting purposes. This is because the water boards make use of moneys from public funds for their work. I also just wish to mention that the department sees to it, inter alia, by way of liaison with the Department of Agricultural Technical Services and irrigators, and by setting conditions for the issuing of permits for the industrial use of water, that water is utilized more and more effectively.

I am mentioning these aspects because I regard them as very important and because I want hon. members to take cognizance of what the approach and the problems are in this connection.

Another very important problem is of course that of staff, particularly technical people. As my predecessor did over the years, I too am of course continuing to carry out more active recruitment with the cooperation of the Commission for Administration.

Then, too, I should like to refer to the contribution by the hon. member for Orange Grove. I want to thank that hon. member for the very sound and positive contribution to this debate. He too put a number of questions particularly with regard to the ecological aspects. Later in the debate when we shall be giving more attention to environmental conservation, I shall give more attention to those aspects. However, there is one matter I want to touch on at this point. It is the question of the envisaged Hangklip Dam in the Palmiet River to which the hon. member referred. In this connection I want to quote from an article in Veld and Flora of December 1979, an article written by someone with the initials R.D.M.P. I quote—

This is the kind of thing people write and this is what I want to warn against. We become very emotional about these matters, about things that can influence areas of natural beauty and ecological systems. I shall come back to this later. However, it is not correct simply to say that my department and I are insensitive about these matters. I feel we must really realize that alternatives have to be paid for. It is the prerogative of this Parliament to take the ultimate decision as to where the schemes are to be undertaken and not that of my department or myself. The hon. member also referred to the Umfolozi scheme. We must carry out the investigations there too.

As regards the water supply to the industrial area of Cape Town, I wish to say that the directorate will eventually submit plans in this connection. Everything is taken into account. The Directorate of Forestry was also involved. We shall have to weigh everything up in order to determine how much more we can pay for the water for this region, because care must be taken that the cost of water does not eventually become a major factor in regional development. Therefore it cannot simply be said that the department and the Minister simply take a decision and are insensitive as regards the survival of important areas of natural beauty. At a later stage I shall indicate very clearly to hon. members how Forestry and Water Affairs are very sensitive about these matters. For those reasons we appoint people to consider the effect of a dam system in conjunction with us in order to determine to what extent it is possible to prevent the environment from being disturbed unnecessarily.

I want to refer very briefly to another matter. From time to time, to the extent that we can afford it, we send people from the department to scientific meetings overseas where certain facets which affect us, too, such as construction, water pollution or whatever are discussed, and where they can conduct discussions with scientists overseas and broaden their knowledge. Recently I received a report from one of these gentlemen who went overseas. In this report he said, inter alia, the following—

I find this person’s line of thought interesting. We must consider making those people who pollute water, pay for that pollution, instead of other people having to pay for its purification. I think that we must give very serious consideration to methods whereby to give greater effect to this line of thought.

Business suspended at 12h45 and resumed at 14h15.

Afternoon Sitting

Mr. Chairman, I think that any newcomer making a speech in this House for the first time finds himself to some extent in an embarrassing situation. I myself am in a considerably embarrassing situation, and one additional reason for this may be that I had to fight an election against an extremely far right political party and now I am in the bench furthest to the left of you, Sir. However, may I ask hon. members, particularly those of the Opposition, not to draw mistaken conclusion from that.

I think it is appropriate that I should start by referring briefly to my predecessor, Dr. C. V. van der Merwe. I learned to love Dr. Van der Merwe over the years, a man for whom I have the greatest esteem and respect, a man who I believe had a subtle sense of humour, a sharp intellect, and one who undoubtedly made a considerable contribution in this House, and you came to know him as such in this House. To follow such a person in any constituency is no easy task.

I think it is appropriate that I should make my maiden speech under the Water Affairs Vote. We fought an election in extremely dry and oppressive conditions and, I may add, against extremely dry little political parties, and if in these circumstances the outcome was overwhelmingly “Nat” then I think that ought to mean something to the mind and particularly the heart of the hon. the Minister of Water Affairs. I think I am right in saying this. If the hon. the Minister suspects me of wanting to make improper use of this verdict of the voters who voted “Nat”, then the hon. the Minister is right. I want to use it. [Interjections.] Voters who were able to retain their political balance in those extremely dry conditions in nature and politics, deserve a sympathetic hearing.

With regard to the Directorate of Water Affairs, too, there are exceptional problems affecting these voters. The hon. the Minister will know that there are a number of schemes in the Fauresmith constituency falling under the Directorate of Water Affairs. Each scheme has its own special problems, troublesome problems, but I think the scheme with the most troublesome problem in that part of the country is the Riet River irrigation scheme.

It is a scheme which was faced virtually overnight with the situation that no further water was available, a scheme in which the irrigation farms are half the size which the department deemed necessary for irrigation farms in the same region under the P. K. le Roux Dam. Those people are now faced with the situation that their survival is threatened. These are people who have been assured for a long time, since the days of former minister Fouche, that this scheme of theirs would be secured and stabilized by additional water from the Orange River project. I can personally attest to that because I was present at many of these deputations to former Ministers. On the basis of these assurances—and I want to state this very, very clearly—the extremely dry periods of 1960-’66 were accepted by these people and the scheme was not left in the lurch. The maintenance of the scheme was also to the advantage of Water Affairs. It was maintained by these people because they were assured that eventually their needs would be fully met.

Now I fully realize that no immediate solution awaits these people. However I am merely asking the hon. the Minister to achieve finality as soon as possible about the eventual supplementing of water for the scheme so that when some of these people leave the scheme on a temporary basis, as they may have to, in order to make a living elsewhere on a temporary basis, they will have the assurance that ultimately they will be able to return and will not be lost to agriculture, because they are skilful and experienced irrigation farmers. I really think that this aspect is deserving of the urgent attention of the hon. Ministers of Agriculture and of Water Affairs, Forestry and Environmental Conservation. I believe that I shall obtain the co-operation of these hon. Ministers in this connection and that they will visit the scheme.

Allow me to say something briefly about a second aspect of the overall policy planning of the Directorate of Water Affairs. I believe that this Directorate should also adapt its long term policy formulations to Government policies which are not perhaps discussed very often in this House but which are of fundamental importance. Here I refer specifically to the depopulation of the platte-land I know that other hon. members have referred to this same aspect earlier in this debate. This Directorate will also have to take cognizance of this standpoint in determining its overall long-term policy. If, then, new growth potential is created by the announcement of the Orange River Project in such a region such as the southern Free State, which is suffering large-scale depopulation particularly as far as the Whites are concerned, I believe that there will have to be thorough overall planning in regard to the infrastructure to the extent that it affects this scheme. I believe that this planning is essential because we shall have to utilize this growth potential that has been created by the Orange River Project to the full so that we can also boost to the maximum extent the standard of living of people who are not directly involved in this scheme, by making use of this scheme, but then, as I have already said, the infrastructure which also affects the scheme indirectly, and not only the irrigation scheme itself, but the scheme as a whole, will have to be carefully planned.

Although there is a committee which co-ordinates the development of this scheme, and although many government departments, including provincial departments, serve on it, far more is required. I am convinced that as has been the case in regard to other regions, for example the Central West Coast region and the Southern Cape region, a really in-depth regional study should be carried out in regard to the Orange River region and the southern Free State, a regional study which, if it had been carried out at an earlier stage, would probably have meant that the present crisis conditions with regard to the Riet River irrigation schemes could have been prevented. These crisis conditions mean that at this stage 1 540 Whites and 19 600 non-Whites are going to be seriously affected and their survival will be jeopardized. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, it is a great privilege for me to be able to speak after the speech by the new hon. member for Fauresmith. It is very clear that he really has a feeling for the subject he discussed as well as for the community he represents. I trust that he will be able to make a long and successful contribution to the South African community. It was interesting that the hon. member referred to his seat in this House. Seen from our benches, he is sitting in the left-hand corner of this House. Seen from his angle, he is sitting in the right-hand corner of this House. We learn and experience in politics that the position we adopt can often be seen from various points of view: What is left to one person, is right to another.

I should like to refer to an announcement made by the hon. the Minister before business was suspended, concerning the water rate for irrigation and specifically when he referred to the cost of water from new projects which were commenced after 1970. I am very pleased to hear that after a few years of debate on this matter, the hon. the Minister has finally decided that the proposals from this side of the House are in fact ultimately correct. I want to refer to the debate which took place in 1978 in which I referred to the difference between the cost of water from the old and the new schemes. I pointed out the problems being experienced by farmers in paying the high tariffs for water being supplied to them. On that occasion I said (Hansard Standing Committee Debates, 1978, col. 513)—

I went on to say—

Consequently I was extremely pleased to hear the hon. the Minister quoting the same example in almost the same words in connection with the same product being cultivated in different areas where there are different water tariffs. Consequently it was decided to institute an investigation into the problem in co-operation with the South African Agricultural Union.

I actually intended proposing today that the method of determining the price of water, as proposed in the last paragraph on page 176 of the Water Affairs report, viz.—

… be amended so that the investigation be carried out by the Department of Agriculture in co-operation with the representatives of the S.A. Agricultural Union. However, I do not want to discuss the point any further, for the hon. the Minister has already dealt with this matter and I just want to reiterate that I am extremely pleased about this. During the period 1974 to 1978 South Africa was blessed with very good rains and consequently it was possible to meet the country’s needs during that period without the large-scale expansion of our dams. Fortunately these good rains coincided with a period of recession in which the average increase in annual spending was only 3%. I think the hon. the Minister referred to that this morning as well. Indications are, however, that we have already entered a dry period and that the pressure on our dams is going to assume dangerous proportions. Very prompt action will therefore have to be taken in order to create additional dam storage place. Let me refer once again briefly to the annual report. It indicates (page 1)—

Furthermore we have the problem that the best dam sites have to a large extent already been used. Because this is the case, new dams that have to be built will, of course, make water available at a far higher cost. In view of this, one of the problems with which the department is struggling is the fact that we are rapidly losing our staff and are struggling to compete with the private sector. Reference is made to this in the annual report too. In view of the fact that the department is already experiencing problems with professional and technical staff, I should like to associate myself with the idea—and I think the hon. Minister referred to this as well—that the department will have to reconsider its policy in respect of the execution of projects by the department itself. As I understand it, it is at present the department’s policy to carry out its projects itself. In other words, the planning of projects, the building of dams and the laying of pipelines, canals and an infrastructure, is being done by the department itself. I want to recommend that over a period of a few years the department should partially phase itself out and that the execution of projects be placed in the hands of the private sector. However, I want to make it clear that this phasing out should be done in a systematic way. In the first instance I want to propose that only those projects which are of necessity—and I emphasize the words “of necessity”—technically and mechanically intensive, should be given out on tender, for it is in this sphere that the private sector will be most competitive.

Must the department then do the less profitable work?

As I say, the private sector will be at its most competitive in that sphere. Therefore, due to the element of competition prices will to a certain extent be kept low. I also want to propose that the labour intensive projects be undertaken by the department. Let me explain why I am saying this.

Must this be done by the private sector?

No, those projects must be carried out by the department itself. [Interjections.] Allow me just to explain why I am saying this. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, on behalf of the farmers of the Baden area at Montagu, I want to convey a word of sincere thanks and appreciation to the hon. the Minister and his department for their sympathetic action and the excellent and prompt services which were provided to relieve the flood conditions after the Baden flood.

On 22 January 1979, a start was made with the erection of a construction residential area at Swellendam. This was the beginning of a long-awaited scheme which will provide purified water for domestic and stock watering purposes to approximately 983 farms, with an area of 6 077 400 hectares. The reticulation network which will provide water to the farms will consist of a pipeline approximately 2 500 km in length. This is not the first scheme of this nature which has been embarked upon in the Republic, but it is the first one on such a scale. For the Republic it was initially a revolutionary idea which met with great opposition in the development process and had to overcome many stumbling blocks before it was eventually accepted as an economic scheme which would benefit the region itself.

The agricultural potential of any area is determined by three important production factors, namely land, vegetation and water. If one of these factors is lacking from the agricultural area, or is unfavourable, and there is no possibility of supplementing it, it is impossible to make optimum use of the remaining means of production. In the Overberg area we have land and vegetation, but optimum utilization is being hampered by the limited supply of fresh water for both human and animal consumption. In spite of the relatively high rainfall of the area during the winter months, production activities are seriously curtailed by the short but critical dry summer period. The result is that in various spheres, but especially in the agricultural sphere, planning has to take place on a conservative basis in terms of the short dry period, while the true advantage of the relatively high rainfall during the winter months cannot be fully utilized.

Attempts to combat this critical condition by tapping underground sources of water at a high cost have brought no permanent solution. The average high mineral content of these sources and the lack of sufficient underground water are the reasons for this. The Drooge River farmers’ livestock watering scheme in the Riversdal area was developed in 1970 as a pilot project for testing the economic justification for a pipeline in this whole region. In the scheme area there are a total number of 87 boreholes with a total depth of 3 000 metres, and a meagre average production of 82 gallons an hour. The total capital investment in pumps and holes is R25 200, plus a further annual maintenance cost of R1 800. Before 1970, the farmers had to bring in their extra water. The total distance covered for this purpose every year was approximately 42 000 miles at a cost of about R7 000, and that in order to supply only 3 million gallons of water to the farms. This amounts to a cost of R2,27 per 1 000 gallons, and the equipment for transporting the water cost more than R10 000.

The pine farmers with their 7 000 hectares of land who share in this scheme subsequently spent R54 000 on a pipeline scheme, including reservoirs with accompanying water metres, a 35 kilowatt electric motor and an eight-stage centrifugal pump. The result of this was that where it had cost them R10 300 a year before 1970 to provide water for 14 600 small stock units, it cost them R2 818 in 1978 to provide water for 18 000 small stock units. With fresh water in every camp, of which they can be assured, the farmers are applying a proper crop rotation system all over the farm.

Over the past eight years, cultivated pastures have increased by 48%, and small stock units by 23%. This is because it is cheaper, easier and quicker to establish camps full of pasture than to breed enough livestock. The farming operations are now more balanced and less risky. During the 1978 drought, this group of farmers did not have to bring in water and they also spent less on sheep fodder over a period of three months. The supply of small stock in that area can easily and safely be increased to 27 000 units, while the farmers who bring in water dare not add a single sheep. If this happened, one would have a total increase of 46% in the supply of livestock in that area. We also find that wheat is now more often sown on pastures than on brackish and stubble-fields, as the rotation system used to be before 1970. This also holds great economic advantages for those regions.

There are many other reasons which could be mentioned, but this experiment undoubtedly confirms the conclusion which was arrived at as far back as 1968 after a comprehensive investigation in the Overberg region conducted by the Bureau for Economic Research of the University of Stellenbosch. The investigation revealed that the area had a great dormant development potential, especially in respect of an increased production of protein, which is indispensable to the nutritional needs of the country as a whole.

It is very dry in the Southern Cape at the moment. Farmers are sowing their wheat in the dust and hoping for the best. Many farmers have to feed large and small stock and many farmers are bringing in drinking water for their livestock every day. They are very grateful to the hon. the Minister and his department for the fact that they know that this scheme is already being implemented. They respectfully ask that the scheme should be completed soon, if this is at all possible.

Mr. Chairman, I want to join the hon. member for Swellendam in expressing the hope that that area will soon receive very good rains.

On behalf of my voters I want to convey my very sincere gratitude to the hon. the Minister for his sympathetic approach to the interests of many of them. In my constituency there are two very large river valleys, viz. the Great Fish River Valley and the Sundays River Valley, where irrigation is being actively practiced. If one takes all the voters involved in those irrigations schemes and the thousands who make a living from them into account, one can understand that we are filled with sincere gratitude towards a very sympathetic hon. Minister. On behalf of my voters I once again want to convey my sincere gratitude to the hon. the Minister. We can only speak appreciatively of the sympathetic way in which the affairs of the voters in my constituency are being dealt with by the officials, from the section office staff in our community right up to those who occupy the highest positions. We thank these gentlemen as well.

Having said thank you, I now want to ask for more again. After all, this is the recipe according to which one does things. I am referring here to the increase in the State water tax. I want to put it to the hon. the Minister that people in the Sundays River Valley specifically are finding that the mineralization of the contents of the Mentz Dam over the past 18 months has caused the ground structure of the Sundays River Valley to deteriorate tremendously. Coupled with this we also have a deterioration in the production capacity of every tree unit. On top of that came the other increases in the production costs of the farmer, and if one also bears in mind the tremendous increase in the State water tax for that area, it strikes one that, taking all aspects into consideration, the increase has been almost 100%. This is a heavy blow which has struck those farmers, particularly, as I have mentioned, in view of the extent of the decline in the production per tree unit.

Furthermore we have the problem that at present the mineral content is still 310 parts per million. This is 110 parts higher than what, according to scientific specifications, is suitable to the successful cultivation of citrus. If we bear this in mind, prospects are not very favourable for us in that valley. It is asking a great deal of those people to have placed the burden of that State water tax which, we know, has to be recovered in some way, onto their shoulders. That is why I am earnestly requesting that that State water tax be reconsidered, and I want to bring this matter home to the hon. the Minister once again.

Another aspect I want to bring to the hon. the Minister’s attention is the problems that exist at the pump station at Wellington Grove. At the moment two of the three pumps are out of order, and there is a meagre flow of water into the Mentz Dam. Fortunately the dam’s water content is at present still 31%. In discussing that pump station, however, I think of the tremendous cost of the supply of electricity there. It amounts to several thousand rands per month, money which will have to be found in some way or other by the irrigation farmers in that area. If we bear in mind that, under phase 1, a canal was originally envisaged with a supply capacity of nine cumsecs it is a matter of concern to one that the present flow, with all three of the electrical pumps in operation, is only five cumsecs, which is the total supply of the three pumps. While elaborating on that pump station, I should also like to make an appeal for the expediting of the construction of the canal under phase 1, the original high-level canal, which was envisaged for the scheme.

Furthermore I want to bring another matter to the friendly attention of the hon. the Minister, a matter which I should very much like him to consider. Since Port Elizabeth, as it seems to me, does not want to use the water from the Orange-Fish River Scheme—with the help of the departments they are now building a new dam at Eseljags in the Gamtoos River Valley—one wonders whether the water from the Orange-Fish River scheme cannot be utilized in some other way as well. What I have in mind here, for example, is the supply of water to the Bushman’s River. I foresee that thousands of hectares of new land could be brought under irrigation, when the transfer of water from the Fish River to the Bushman’s River is possible. This could mean that large-scale developments could also take place along the Bushman’s River, particularly in the small towns situated in the immediate vicinity of the Bushman’s River.

A final matter I should like to bring to the hon. the Minister’s attention, because he is a person who always listens to one in such a friendly way, is the situation which is developing in the Swartkops River. The Swartkops River is also situated in my constituency. I received a letter to the effect that the water hyacinths in the Swartkops River are increasing to such an extent that they have become an absolute—pardon this word—plague to the riparian dwellers of that river. The curbing of these hyacinths is probably not the task of Water Affairs, but perhaps a task for Agricultural Technical Services. Nevertheless I do want to ask whether Water Affairs could not help us to obtain the co-operation of Agricultural Technical Services in controlling the water hyacinths which are growing so profusely, particularly after that road bridge on the road to Port Elizabeth was built across the river. While the water hyacinths could previously be uprooted by a flood and carried down to the ocean, there is now a blockage, with the result that they are growing in profusion in that river.

I could keep on talking about this fine department in this way.

I should also like to bring it to the hon. the Minister’s attention that because the bridges the department built across the Little Fish River have been washed away in the latest floods, the farmers are experiencing major problems in getting their cattle to the opposite bank of the Skoenmakers River. I want to ask the department whether it would not consider providing only the capital for the repair of those bridges. The people there are willing to pay the interest, but they do not have the necessary capital. I want to refer to the Smaldeel Divisional Council which actually has to repair those bridges but which does not have the necessary capital. I want to ask whether those people cannot be accommodated in this regard.

Mr. Chairman, in the first place I should like to refer to a very pleasant visit to the Tugela-Vaal Scheme which the hon. the Minister arranged for us in October during the recess. I want to thank him sincerely for that. It was most instructive. As far as I am concerned it was the most interesting parliamentary mission I have ever had the privilege of being on. Not only do I want to thank the hon. the Minister and the officials of his department most sincerely for this enjoyable excursion, I also want to congratulate them on such a fine scheme. It is truly an ambitious and quite unique Government project. The planning, the design and even the construction of that combined Water Affairs-Escom scheme attests to exceptional ingenuity, dedication and perseverance. They really thought big and as a South African one feels proud when viewing a project of this nature. I think it is an exceptionally fine showpiece of what our country has already achieved in the technical and technological sphere. I think we can be proud of it. In my opinion this also attests to the will and ability of us as South Africans to survive in this country, even in a world full of the demands and the threats of our time.

Last week an hon. member criticized this scheme quite sharply in this House. I do not know whether the hon. the Minister was present in the House on that occasion. The hon. member motivated his criticism by saying that we should rather keep this water in Natal in order to utilize it for the development of kwaZulu’s infrastructure. My comment on that is just that if we were to do what the hon. member advocated, we should not drop what is being done now either and should rather do both.

As far as our economy is concerned, water will probably always remain a limiting factor in South Africa, and as long as that is the case, it is inevitable that Water Affairs will remain a key department and will play an increasingly important role. Nor can I see that importance ever decreasing. It is more likely to increase.

One gains the impression of late that water is less of a limiting factor than was the case a few decades ago. I do not know whether my impression is correct, but if there is an explanation for this, it is probably not that our requirements have decreased, nor that our inherent water position is better today than it was a few decades ago. But if water is less of a limiting factor today than it was a few decades ago, the explanation lies in the great success with which Water Affairs has tamed and harnessed our available water resources. In this way they have made water less of a limiting factor in practice.

According to expert and authoritative estimates it is now accepted that with sound management and development our existing water resources will be adequate up to the next century, at least for most of the urban areas of our country. But owing to the nature and distribution of our rainfall, and its variability in particular, it is expected that serious problems will develop as regards regional water schemes.

The question now arises: If these problems are going to develop, how are we to solve them? To that the report of the Commission of Inquiry into Water Affairs of 1969 gives certain answers and makes certain recommendations. One which is mentioned is that the methods of development and utilization of our natural water resources can and must be improved. In this regard one cannot help calling to mind such a fine, imaginative scheme as the storing of water in the sand deposits of the flats, which could probably be regarded as having been fathered by Dr. Henzen. What the commission also referred to was that the effectiveness of the utilization of developed supplies must be increased, and in this regard one thinks of the reclamation of water from sewerage and industrial effluent, and also the more effective utilization of the available irrigation water.

The third solution suggested by the commission is one on which I should like to dwell for a moment today, viz. the development of new resources and specifically the desalination of sea water and of inland brackish water. The latter, the desalination of water, is a matter concerning which there is a very strong emphasis on research. Consequently a great deal of fruitful work has already been done in this regard as a result of the close co-operation with the Water Research Institute. Very fine work has already been done in this regard and certain considered conclusions have already been reached in connection with the methods of desalinating water, more specifically our inland waters, for I think sea water desalination is such a wide subject that I do not want to broach it today.

There are various processes which can be used for the desalination of water. There is, of course, the age-old distillation process, by means of heating and condensation, and then recently solar distillation as well, but the most important that have come to the fore recently through research are the so-called membrane processes, i.e. electro-dialysis, and more specifically the reverse osmosis process which has been very much to the fore recently and has shown exceptional promise.

As a result of this research the Water Research Institute has reached certain conclusions. In the first place they have found that reverse osmosis has clearly been proven as a practical and reliable desalination process. Furthermore it has been found that the desalination of brackish water can be carried out economically by means of this process and that the cost can be kept within limits. It has also been found that an excellent quality of water can be produced by this process. Finally, scientists have also succeeded in developing a mobile apparatus or installation which can be used very effectively for these purposes.

The result is then that we now have proof that this process is feasible technically and in practice and can be very useful in our country in particular. In the drought-stricken areas in particular it holds great promise. Perhaps this is not widely known, but many of these apparatuses are already being used throughout the world. It is estimated that 700 desalination installations are already being used in other parts of the world, and are producing 250 million gallons per day. Many of those installations have already been developed in our country, intended principally for small-scale household purposes and also to a certain extent for the purposes of watering stock in dry areas, in Namaqualand and the Karoo in particular.

There is a need for inexpensive, small-scale units for household and other purposes, but fortunately this is feasible too. The most important problem is that of cost. Cost is determined by various factors, for example the size or capacity of the apparatus one wants to use, the availability and cost of power, the quality of the water to be desalinated and the degree of desalination envisaged.

Our Karoo subterranean water usually has a salt content of 4 000 mg per litre. This must be purified to between 400 and 450 mg per litre for household purposes. This is in fact possible. The process which has been developed by the Water Research Institute is capable of producing that result. It has already produced very good results, except that the cost is still rather high at this stage. However, it is also estimated and envisaged that with further research, it will hopefully also be possible to decrease the unit cost of desalination to such an extent within a matter of a few years that this could be a very important additional source of water— on a very small scale this stage, of course, but nevertheless very useful as it can supply the requirements of farms and small communities in dry regions. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, one feels that one can listen all day to the very interesting things hon. members are saying. I also want to thank them for their expressions of thanks to the department. It is an exceptional pleasure, on my part as well, to thank them for their co-operation. It is not always possible to comply with all the requests of hon. members. Their understanding and co-operation, as well as those of the communities, make it very pleasant for my officials and I to perform our task. I express my great appreciation for this. I want to make haste and try to deal with the host of problems to which hon. members referred.

I begin again with the hon. member for Orange Grove who had a problem with the Klipfontein Dam near Vryheid and Mooiplaas. Mooiplaas is situated within the dam basin. There were alternatives, inter alia, the Mooiplaas site. A dam is usually called after the farm on which the wall is situated.

It is Mooiplaas and Onrus.

Perhaps there are two farms with the name Mooiplaas.

Everything is “mooi” there.

That just goes to show how many possibilities there are. [Interjections.] I thought the hon. member for Orange Grove was referring to them.

All these sites on the Mfolozi River will of course be thoroughly examined. The ecological impact will also be very carefully studied. I want to make it very clear that a dam is not simply built because it is cheap, but that all the other factors are also taken into account. Just before business was interrupted I was pointing out that we were involving people with special knowledge and that it was the task of Parliament to make the ultimate decision. The Minister and the department will not simply go and disturb the ecology, but are very sympathetic towards it. We realize, however, that if we undertake more expensive schemes, the communities will have to pay for them. All these things must be weighed up very thoroughly. The hon. member also referred to various other aspects. Last year I accompanied officials of the Department of Forestry to the Mfolozi area, the mouth of the Mfolozi River and St. Lucia Lake, to investigate problems which had arisen in the past, and problems which may arise in future. I also had a look at the wealth of animal life there. I shall probably return to this matter during the discussion of Forestry Affairs, but I can give the hon. member the assurance, as far as the Kogelberg area and the dam in the Palmiet River are concerned as well, that we are instituting a very thorough inquiry into the matter.

The hon. member also referred to the Orange River and wanted another White Paper on this scheme to be issued. I just wish to point out to the hon. member, and to other hon. members who also referred to this, that the White Paper which appeared in 1962 furnished a general survey of the possibilities. Since then the department has been refining these possibilities and has been engaged in probing studies into which of these possibilities are feasible in practice. Unfortunately it is true that people accept that what has been envisaged, should become a reality. In practice it appears after a thorough investigation that we have to look for alternatives, and in that way considerable changes emerge. I wish to tell the hon. member that I hope we will be able to bring out another White Paper within a year or so which will acquaint hon. members with what development from the Orange River will be.

The hon. member also referred to the generation of hydro-electricity. I think the figure of 10 000 megawatts which he mentioned, was far too high. Approximately 800 megawatts are being generated for peak requirements.

Mr. Chairman, may I ask the hon. the Minister whether he is aware that Dr. Henry Olivier, who is a well-respected engineer and who knows a lot about that subject, has estimated the figure which I quoted?

I am aware of Dr. Olivier’s many distinctions. In certain respect he acts as adviser to the department, but I think the hon. member was confusing the Orange River with the Tugela River.

The hon. member also referred to Pongolapoort. It is his hardy annual and he asked me what the position was. I want to tell him that I have seen the Minister concerned of Swaziland twice during the past year. We have signed an agreement. But the only problem is that the agreement which he and I signed, now has to be agreed to on the highest level by the two Governments. Consequently we are still waiting for the formal agreement to be ratified. To tell the truth, we were both rather surprised when, after we had signed the agreement, the Department of Foreign Affairs brought it to our notice that the agreement which we had signed was not really worth anything unless the two Governments confirmed it. However, it is very gratifying, probably for the hon. member as well, that we were able to reach an agreement after going to a great deal of trouble, and I want to avail myself of this opportunity to place my appreciation for the co-operation which we received from the Government of Swaziland on record. I can also inform hon. members that, technically and otherwise, we are co-operating very closely, to the benefit of both countries. I hope that this fine spirit of co-operation will continue, because it is definitely necessary for us to co-operate as far as this scarce resource is concerned.

I think I should now leave the hon. member at that. He also expressed his appreciation for the visit which was arranged. I just wish to say that I am sorry that hon. members have such full programmes that they are not able to go and see for themselves what is being done by the department, how the millions of rands are being spent, etc. I can say that I did my best to find a little time to go and see the various schemes for myself. If one deals only with reports and sees schemes in writing, one still does not have a complete picture of the circumstances and the problems, and of the reasons why schemes are being undertaken and why they cost such a great deal of money. I hope to arrange further visits in future. The year before last we arranged for hon. members to visit the tunnels. However, a few hon. members felt that they did not like driving into long tunnels to see what was happening on the inside, and what the problems there were. Nor will we always be able to go and take a look at such dramatic developments. But this is something which is extremely useful and I want to promise hon. members that we shall again try to give attention to this matter.

The hon. member for Piketberg made a plea for Namaqualand. He pointed out the price of water in that area. It is tremendously high. As I have already indicated he also pointed out how people in that area have learned to use water sparingly. He also referred to the scheme there, the details of which appear in a White Paper, and he asked whether something could not be done about the prohibitive price, as he put it, which these people have to pay. I wish to say a few words with reference to the quality of the people there—the hon. member for Beaufort West also referred to this. I agree with them that the people of that area are people of quality. One need only consider how many people who occupy prominent positions in this country came from that area, where they learned to brave hardships. I just wish to say that, if one makes it too easy for people, one unfortunately is not going to bring out the best in those people. To those who are still receiving inexpensive water I wish to say that they should not complain, because if they wish to become people of quality, they should receive expensive water, as is the case in Namaqualand. There are various aspects to this matter. However, I wish to agree with the hon. member that in that area we shall find people who have really learnt to appreciate things. A deputation under the leadership of the hon. member for Namaqualand came to see me last year, and when I informed the mayor of Garies, I think it was, what water was going to cost, he said: “If we can get water at R3 per cubic metre, it will be cheap. At present we are paying between R7 and R8 for it.” These people therefore have appreciation for what is being done. I want to tell the hon. member that I am in full agreement with him. I understand that people cannot live on sympathy alone, and that they want something more tangible. I must add that, in terms of the Act and its policy, the Department is restricted to certain aid. Further than that we cannot go. After that it becomes a matter for other departments, and they take over. Socioeconomic services and further assistance must then be rendered by them. But I can give the hon. member the assurance that the problem which he pointed out will be brought to the attention of the other departments, and that we shall try to act in a co-ordinated way. I shall also bring this matter to the specific attention of the Cabinet again because, as I have said, we need a special policy for border areas. In this connection I also wish to associate myself with the hon. members for Beaufort West and Prieska, who also referred to this matter, that if we wish to keep the people in the rural areas, we should perhaps have a policy which will enable us to act in a more accommodating way towards those people.

The hon. member for Meyerton also made a very interesting speech on the position of water consumption in the country. He also quoted from a speech made by Mr. James of the Rand Water Board. Actually this matter has nothing to do with the planning of the Rand Water Board. It is a scheme which is being planned departmentally. Probably this was simply the way it was presented in the Press. It is called the Lesotho Highlands Scheme. There are various alternatives for water from the Orange River or from the Tugela River, the water-rich area of Natal, to be brought to the Witwatersrand. Actually it is being planned by the department and he probably simply conveyed this information to indicate that we are giving the Rand Water Board a vast quantity of water. They must then undertake the distribution.

The hon. member wanted to know what progress had been made. Up to now the Lesotho Highlands Scheme has progressed very well on the technical level, but it has now reached the stage where an agreement has to be reached between the two Governments. I think it is very important for the Government of Lesotho to realize what benefit this scheme holds for them. I do not think we can enter into any agreement of exchange. In this kind of undertaking there have to be advantages for each party; otherwise it will not work in the long run. But I do wish to give the assurance that we are working on this, and I hope we are going to make rapid progress and that finality will be reached one of these days on further surveys, because the next survey phase is going to cost approximately R10 million. This is only the cost of the survey. The scheme itself is going to cost more than R600 million, and very thorough planning is essential to get the correct result in the end.

The hon. member asked for more schemes in the national States. I could enumerate quite a few of these. There is the Renosterkop Dam Scheme, which is in progress at the moment, and in Gazankulu there is a scheme which is being built for them by the department. But there is another important aspect in this connection. An interdepartmental committee of inquiry into the division of water between the Black national States and the Republic has been instituted. We hope to make its report available soon. It is a very interesting report and also gives attention to the various possibilities in connection with water in the various areas. I thank the hon. member for a very fine contribution.

The hon. member for De Aar referred to problems in connection with expenditure. He referred to the amount of money which is available. Although I have already dealt with this in detail, perhaps I did not do so in great enough detail. I want to thank the hon. member for his contribution, and just add that the senior officials of my department and I went to see the hon. Minister of Finance last year. We went there very well prepared, to ask for a larger slice of the budget cake for this important matter. After listening to the hon. the Minister of Finance and his officials for a while, we ended up by feeling sorry for him, for him with all his problems. We shall simply have to go back again, and try to obtain a larger allocation, for we consider it to be absolutely essential. The question of the generation of hydroelectricity, of course, rests entirely with Escom. The further potential in the Orange River is really not extensive. The fall of the river is not great enough. The building of abutments to generate power, is to the best of my knowledge, not a paying proposition. But this is really a matter which rests with Escom.

He also asked us to use unskilled labour in the construction of dams. The hon. member for Wynberg also arrived at that point towards the end of his speech. He implied that the department should concentrate on making greater use of manual labour in the construction of dams. He also said that those parts of the schemes, which could not readily be built with manual labour, should be allocated to the private sector. But this is not all that easy. Years ago we did it, and it has also happened in other countries. Today we cannot allow Black people to work as they worked in the days when the first dams were built in South Africa. At the time Whites lived without proper housing in the veld, in small tents or hessian shacks. Before I can employ people today, I have to spend millions of rands on their housing. I simply cannot consider what has been suggested. The whole world would be up in arms. They would rather see these people dying of hunger, but if we employ them, they must be properly housed and fed, and in addition we must also pay them a proper salary. Then it is no longer cheap labour.

I do not wish to take this argument any further, but hon. members will understand that, however much one would like to do so, it is impossible. I have been told that there are hundreds of thousands of Black people in the Eastern Cape who have no work. One would like to tell them to come and build dams and canals, but these are going to be expensive schemes, and that is going to create problems. I take cognizance of this with sympathy, but I am afraid that it will not work in practice. The hon. member for Mooirivier asked whether the department was able to cope with more funds. Actually we cannot immediately absorb a large increase, but we would like a steady percentage increase. This year, for example, we would be able to absorb, and very usefully employ, an additional R15 million, but one cannot simply receive an additional R30 million or R40 million in one year. That would create problems.

The other aspects which he raised were those of tourism and fishing. These are provincial matters. This department has enough responsibilities of its own, and prefers these matters to remain where they are. I can tell hon. members that during the December holidays, I went to see how matters were progressing at the various dams, from the Midmar Dam in Natal and the Allemanskraal Dam in the Free State right down to the Hendrik Verwoerd Dam. I also went to see what developments were taking place at Roodeplaat, and I can inform hon. members that the provinces are doing excellent work in this connection. There is no doubt at all that these resorts are coming along very nicely. Perhaps more attention could be given to the fishing potential, but I am satisfied that things are going well.

The hon. member asked for time for a discussion of White Papers. The hon. member will simply have to decide about this on the Select Committee and make time for it. They should establish from the chairman of the Select Committee whether this would be possible. If hon. members can arrange this, the department will make the necessary know-how available to them, in order to explain the matter to them.

He also asked a question in connection with Spioenkop Dam.

†I now want to read what the department tells me about this. They say—

I do not like this term “export” to the Vaal Basin—

This seems to me to be a well-motivated approach. If the hon. member does not agree with it, he can come along and discuss it with the directorate. In any case, this seems acceptable to me.

*I think I must leave the matter at that. The hon. member for Mooi River also referred to the water position in the Umgeni River, and I can tell him very briefly that the department is giving very thorough consideration to this situation, viz. the importing of water, but there is another possibility, also in regard to the Umgeni River, which we are investigating to bring in water from the south. But very thorough planning is required for this purpose, for the whole situation. If the hon. member wants more particulars about this, it would be a good thing if he went to discuss matters with the department for a while.

I wish to thank the hon. member for Humansdorp for the thanks he conveyed to me. I found it very interesting to pay a visit to his part of the world and to see the excellent progress which is being made in the vicinity of the Paul Sauer Dam—previously the Kouga Dam. Initially Mr. Hobbs was associated with the project.

The hon. member also referred to the cleaning up of river-beds, and asked for State assistance in the control of vegetation in river-beds. This is in fact a major problem. But whether the State should begin to keep river-beds clear I do not know. For example there is the Orange River, with its more constant flow, the Breë River, here in the Western Cape, as well as the Berg River. There are so many rivers that eventually we would be doing nothing else but keeping the rivers clean. We would not then be able to build any dams. I want to point out to hon. members that it is an enormous problem. The enriched water, coupled with the fact that vegetation encroaches into river-beds because the farmers no longer allow their livestock to keep vegetation in check, creates tremendous problems. Of course it is really the task of the Department of Agricultural Technical Services. We are trying to obtain their co-operation, and efforts will be made to co-ordinate matters to an increasing extent.

The hon. member also referred to protective works and the subsidy on such works, as well as to research into flood damage. The Water Research Commission will in future bring out a report on this matter, so Dr. Henzen tells me. The hon. members will find more particulars in that report. These are all matters of cardinal importance. Consequently I can give the hon. member the assurance that we shall devote attention to them.

The hon. member also discussed indemnifying legislation. When one interferes with the flow of a river, one creates risks. No river began to flow as it is flowing at present. It took each river years to, how shall I say, find its most comfortable flow. Consequently, if one initiates projects which causes even a slight disturbance of the course of a river, it could be damaging to other people. So the hon. member stated a very good case when he said that we should try to protect interested parties, who do wish to construct flood protection works, by means of legislation.

The hon. member for Beaufort West referred to his part of the world as the land of begin again. I have already referred in part to what he said. I want to thank him sincerely for the very neat and clear contribution he made. He asked for another inquiry to be instituted into the transfer of water from the Orange River to the Smartt Syndicate Dam. I can assure the hon. member that more attention has in the meantime been given to the matter. Perhaps we could even investigate it again. Although something of this nature was initially envisaged, it is unfortunately one of the schemes which cannot be implemented in practice. But as I have already said, we shall inquire into the matter again to establish whether such a possibility does not exist after all. For people who ask so nicely and who serve their community with so much dedication, one should perhaps look again to see whether a plan cannot be devised.

The hon. member went on to ask whether an investigation could not be instituted into methods of causing rain-water to drain into the soil more effectively, so as to feed the underground water supply. The Water Research Commission is at present identifying the areas concerned. We therefore hope to get to know more about this in future, and perhaps we can then do something about it.

The hon. member for Prieska had quite a few problems in connection with rivers and irrigation problems. I thank him for his fine contribution. The hon. member asked for protection against stormwaters. He also referred to the mineralization which is occurring in certain areas, and to the development in general along the Orange River. I wish to remind the hon. member once again of the legislation which is now being discussed by the Select Committee. If that legislation is passed, provision will be made to admit more people to that area provided they pay a surcharge, because the water in the P. K. le Roux Dam and in the Hendrik Verwoerd Dam is in fact available. We are doing whatever we can there.

The hon. member also referred to the problems which exist along the Riet and Modder Rivers, as well as to the number of people there and the investments in the area. I shall reply to this in greater detail when I refer to the speech of the hon. member for Fauresmith. Incidentally, I wish to congratulate the hon. member for Fauresmith sincerely on his very neat maiden speech. It was a very positive speech, a speech which testified to an understanding of the problems which exist there.

The hon. member said that he wished to appeal to my emotions. I can assure the hon. member that he did. But the problem is that even if we have heart-to-heart talks with one another and we do not have the funds or the means available to solve the problem, that is to a certain extent where the matter remains, and it could perhaps happen that we would ultimately be crying on one another’s shoulder and telling one another how sorry we were. It would not be pleasant for me if the matter ended in that way.

The hon. member is aware of the problems which exist there. For the record I want to tell the hon. member that a scheme there was contemplated, but upon closer investigation it appeared that, as in the case of the Smartt Syndicate Dam Scheme, to which the hon. member for Beaufort West referred, it would not be a paying proposition, and would not be practicable. Changes have now been made to the more detailed planning, but those plans have not yet been finalized. It will cost more than R100 million to provide half of that Riet River area, with which the hon. member for Prieska is also involved, including the Plooysburg area, with water. This water has to be pumped.

The hon. member heard other hon. members all promoting excellent schemes. Consequently we must determine our priorities. But this cannot happen overnight, as the hon. member admitted. I want to tell him that we are again engaged in holding talks on this matter with the Northern Cape Agricultural Union and that we shall do everything possible to try to expedite this scheme.

A very important argument which the hon. member raised was that it would also contribute to counteracting the depopulation of the rural areas. We shall have to consider the matter from that aspect as well. I can tell him that these problems are being examined as a whole in a regional context by the department and other departments. Consequently what he asked for is receiving attention, although perhaps not to the same extent as he would like to see being done.

I now wish to refer to the speech made by the hon. member for Wynberg. He discussed the cost of water and welcomed the inquiry which we are contemplating. I want to tell him that I do not think that we can simply equalize the cost of water everywhere. There are many good reasons why water must remain cheap in certain areas where it is cheap at present. The benefit derived from that by people in those areas is quite probably discounted by the price they have to pay for land. One cannot suddenly impose a burden on them because other people have to pay more for water. We are, however, trying to create a fairer and juster dispensation. In some cases a case can be made out for doing so. As I told him, this matter is receiving attention, and I hope that this inquiry will be very fruitful.

He suggested that the department should not tackle all these projects itself. We are giving out approximately 25% of those construction works to be done by the private sector. At times we are perhaps able to give out a little more of our work than usual to the private sector, but I want to inform the hon. member that we would be running a risk if we were to comply with his request. I am saying this with great respect to the private sector. The building of large canals in particular is a specialized type of work in which these people are not interested. They would prefer to undertake the easier construction work. The construction of the Elandsjag Dam, to which reference was made, was given out on contract. In any event, we shall keep an eye on the position. But I still think it would be rather dangerous to allow too much of this work to leave the hands of the department, because we have the know-how to enable us to keep a careful watch on whether these people are in fact maintaining the desired standard. I just wish to point out that the tenders which we received for the construction of the P. K. le Roux Dam were so extremely high that the Minister decided at the time that the department would have to build the dam itself. Eventually we succeeded in building the dam for R13 million less than what it would have cost if the private sector had built it.

I do not believe that.

The hon. member for Orange Grove says he does not believe it. I want to ask him to tender one of our ensuing schemes, so that we can then carry out a practical test. I shall now leave this matter at that.

The hon. member for Swellendam also expressed his appreciation of the department. On behalf of the department I wish to thank him and other hon. members for their co-operation. We are pleased that we were able to be of service.

He referred to the rural water provision schemes. He referred to a scheme which is now under construction in the area. One could derive tremendous benefit from it. The cost-benefit ratio is very favourable there. I think the one scheme, the Rûensveld East Scheme, cost R20 million, and the Rûensveld West Scheme R30 million. Altogether it already amounts to R50 million. Sitting over there we have the hon. member for Prieska with his problems, and over there the hon. member for Beaufort West with his problems.

And here I sit with my problems.

The hon. member for Losberg alleges that he has problems as well, but his problems, in comparison with the other, he should rather not raise in this House.

There is competition for these funds, and this creates a great deal of difficulty. One cannot always do everything at once. Naturally one must have priorities. I do want to give the hon. member the assurance, though, that a great deal of benefit is to be derived by expediting those schemes, and we are doing our best to make as rapid progress with them as possible. In connection with the Rûensveld East and the Rûensveld West Schemes, I do not know precisely which one should be given priority, but perhaps the hon. member should decide, for then my department and I will not be blamed. I thank him for his contribution. I shall see what we can do there. We realize what the problems there are.

I find it gratifying to see the hon. member for Somerset East here in this House. He made his usually thorough contribution. Everyone is delighted to see him here. We wish him a speedy recovery, for he is having problems with his health. He referred to the problems on the Sundays River, particularly as a result of increased rates. These do create a problem. One has to make the water available. As the hon. member knows, we succeeded just in time last year in getting the water from the Orange River to that area. Unfortunately it is true that that water is expensive. The Wellington Grove pumping station is creating problems. We can only undertake to try to help as quickly as possible. The hon. member heard, after all, what the other claims were. The original scheme is an extremely expensive one and when it has been completed, one cannot only bring the water up to that area, one has to take the canal scheme up to Port Elizabeth, otherwise a large capital investment will have been made that is going to He dormant for a long time. That is why the interim scheme is under construction. However, we shall weigh up all these matters and see what we can do.

The hon. member also referred to the increase in rates. We are looking into this very sympathetically. We have already informed the hon. member about this, and just wish to add that we know that people are really experiencing major problems there. For example the hon. member for Fauresmith pointed out that people cannot pay because they have not had a harvest. Those people have a strong case, but if an hon. member maintains that the people are only suffering slight hardships because at least they do have a crop, it creates a problem for us. We cannot give too much assistance to a person whose situation is still tenable. Nevertheless we are giving the matter our sympathetic attention. Another problem is that there are fixed formulae and a policy on which one has to work. We cannot proceed in an injudicious way. The hon. member also asked for water to be brought to the Boesmans River, something which in my opinion is not a viable proposition, but we shall look into this in future.

He also referred to the question of water hyacinths. These aquatic plants are a problem, but they are not the responsibility of Water Affairs. We are trying to make extension available and we are trying to help the people there, but we are just not able to act in the case of State-owned dams. Each owner will have to look after his own area, and this ties in to a certain extent with what the hon. member for Humansdorp said.

He also referred to the fact that the divisional council cannot build the bridges. The Klein Fish River has a strong flow of water and because the farmers’ farms have been cut in two, he asked whether we could not do something about it. After everything that hon. members have heard, they probably know by now how little money we have. Surely the divisional council will have to try to solve that problem itself. We shall, however, try to provide a stimulus as far as the problem of water hyacinths is concerned so that people will attend to it. These, and other aquatic plants, are causing a tremendous problem.

I want to thank the hon. member for Algoa for a very positive contribution. He referred to the Tugela-Vaal Scheme. He also said that as a result of research, the water position had in fact improved. It is better at present than it was at a certain stage. He also referred to the desalination, and developments in that connection. It is of course true that the Water Research Commission cannot do the work itself, but has the work done. Certain break-throughs have been accomplished which are indeed of great significance to us. As the hon. member indicated, this will perhaps not make such a great contribution, but it could be an important one. I thank the hon. member very much for his contribution, and for the time being, I shall content myself with what I have said so far.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the hon. the Minister for his answers to our queries. I think he has answered very extensively. I would merely like to return to a couple of points I raised earlier. I understand that he does not have the time to give me a full answer regarding the developments taking place on the Umgeni River. I shall certainly make the opportunity to visit the department one day and have a real discussion about what is going on there, because of the importance of that river to the whole heartland of Natal.

I now want to refer to the Spioenkop Dam. The point I tried to raise with the hon. the Minister is that this is the first time that I have seen in the White Paper on the Tugela-Vaal scheme that it is the intention to recover part of the cost from users on the Vaal. Perhaps I am wrong. I have been through other White Papers and I went back to the original White Paper, W.P.X of 1967, in which it was not even mentioned that there was going to be a direct charge against the people on the Vaal. It was intended to recover costs simply by the sale of water.

It appeared from the White Paper that the sale of water related to the water sold downstream to other users, for example municipalities, etc. I have perhaps misunderstood the intention of the White Paper, but I do not think so. I am concerned that a White Paper can simply say that 65% of costs are going to be recovered from another group of users when we do not really have the time to debate the matter across the floor of the House and go into the principles and details of the matter. I know that the situation will simply be that when the Vote is put the White Paper will be accepted. This illustrates the point I am trying to make, namely that hon. members do not have the time to go into such detail, which includes important matters of principle, in a debate. So I reiterate my plea to the chairman of the Select Committee. We should have a chance to go into all of these matters, so that we can take decisions which I think the Select Committee would be competent to take on a matter like that, decisions which might influence the thinking of the hon. the Minister, whether he thinks the department has a valid attitude or not. I would like to leave that matter there.

There are so many things I would like to talk about. I would like to talk about the report of the Water Research Commission in which some very interesting matters are raised. We ordinary farmers do not always understand the highly technical terms, but I think that if one just follows the argument intelligently one can find out what is going on. I think the commission is doing a very important job indeed for South Africa, and I think this House should convey to them our thanks and congratulations for what they are doing.

Because of the way the debate has been structured, I shall have to go on now to discuss forestry and the general environmental situation. I know that water affairs will be discussed in this debate again, but I cannot be here on Monday because I shall be involved with the Finance Vote in the Other Place, so I hope that the hon. the Minister will excuse me if I say my bit on forestry and the environment in general now, and that the hon. the Minister will understand, should he reply on Monday, that I shall not be able to be here.

I think Forestry is one of the most interesting and exciting portfolios in South Africa. I have always envied the hon. the Minister having this portfolio. I think it must be one of the most satisfying portfolios to have. It is branching out as a tremendously exciting and worthwhile directorates. It is actually a production directorate and brings in a great deal of money to the State annually. It is involved in a renewable resource. Wood is one of the natural assets of South Africa that is going to play, I think, a very much more important role in the future than it is now. When the directorate took the step, a couple of years ago, of going into the “hiking-way” business, if I can put it that way, it expanded its horizons and brought itself into contact with the general public as never before. The hon. the Minister and I attended the opening of one of the “hiking-ways” at Himeville. It is always said that when I go anywhere it always rains, but when the hon. the Minister goes anywhere it rains like mad, so when the two of us were there together we almost flooded the place out. It was a very interesting occasion, and I was very pleased indeed to be able to attend.

My concern with the forestry situation in South Africa is that although the wattle industry is doing well today—the bark price is good and there is a good export market for timber—the saligna and patula pine industries seem to be battling because of over-supply. In my constituency, which is a big forestry area, there seems to be a total lack of interest, amongst private growers, in going ahead with the planting programmes which were so lightly discussed four and five years ago. The hon. the Minister knows how many complaints I had from people who were refused permits to plant, for example, in the Umgeni catchment area for a very worthwhile reason, namely to preserve the flow of water. The Department of Agricultural Credit and Land Tenure made loans available to people who wanted to plant trees, but there is a total lack of interest now in my area in going ahead with planting. The whole programme for the future was based on the fact that the department would plant 50 000 ha a year and that the private sector would also plant 50 000 ha per year, thus working up towards a point where by the year 2000 we hoped that we would be able to supply about half to three-quarters of our local needs and have to import only the remaining balance. I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether the department is still keeping to the programme because over the past years it has been cutting down on pruning, thinning, hoeing and weeding due to a lack of funds. With the drought that we are now experiencing, I wonder whether this is not going to effect even more seriously the future programme of planting which I regard to be so very important to the future of the timber industry. We are at present depending a great deal on export to keep the industry going, to underpin the market and to give the local producers a fair return. However, one cannot play ducks and drakes with an export industry. Once one has built up an export market, it must either be kept supplied or it will be destroyed. My concern is that, while our economy is now moving ahead, something the timber industry is going to take advantage of, the export industry which we have built up over the past years is going to fall by the wayside, and we are simply going to lose a great deal of the good relationships we have built up in countries overseas. That is my concern and I would be interested to hear what the hon. the Minister has to say about this matter.

In the last few minutes I still have at my disposal I want to raise another matter with the hon. the Minister, a matter which I am concerned about and which I have not been able to keep abreast of, and that is the matter of Table Mountain. In 1978 a report was issued on the future control and management of Table Mountain and the Southern Peninsula mountain chain. A very clear recommendation was made that the Administrator of the Cape Province should be the co-ordinating factor between all the different authorities concerned with the control, preservation and conservation of Table Mountain. Those authorities were quite obviously the provincial council, the then Department of Forestry, the then Department of Planning and the Environment, local authorities and private persons who own ground around the base of Table Mountain. I do not think it is necessary for anybody to argue the case for the conservation and the preservation of Table Mountain. It is an absolutely unique natural feature and a most impressive and tremendous tourist attraction. Of course, in the old days Table Mountain was the symbol of South Africa and everybody who left here or came here could see from the harbour this magnificent mountain. During the past few years the mountain has been under very considerable attack from pollution, the penetration of exotic plant species and the, perhaps, misguided enthusiasm of people who in past years planted pines all over the mountain. If one now looks up at the mountain one can see where perhaps wiser heads have decided that those pine trees must be eliminated to allow the natural flora to be preserved and one will see pines lying at all sorts of impossible angles on slopes where they cannot be recovered. One of the interesting aspects of the report was that there is an over-population of cats. The cat population, which has grown totally wild, is starting to affect all the natural phenomena … [Interjections.] I did not say Nats, I said cats. The point is that the natural balance of the snake and mice population and of everything else which keeps the whole place healthy and maintains the macro-ecology of the system is being very seriously affected. I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether he can give us any kind of report on what progress has been made, because quite obviously two sections of his department are involved. I would be grateful to know what kind of progress has been made. I know the extension of the reservation area into the mountains south of Table Mountain is a provincial matter.

In other words, you are talking not just about Table Mountain, but about the whole range down to Silvermine?

Yes. I should like a report from the hon. the Minister on that. Perhaps he can give the House some information about what has happened in that regard.

I dealt earlier with the 50 000 ha of land that must be planted per annum. The hon. the Minister made the point that it does not help to come along with investments after one has had to cut for a number of years in succession. He said one may well have to continue cutting until one reaches the point where one is prejudiced to a very severe extent in respect of the programme one has set out for the future. The investment then has to be three to four times what it might have been if one had been able to carry on in the normal way. That is what I am concerned about. I therefore want to return to the question of the planting, the thinning and the general administration of the department’s plantations. Once one begins to neglect the thinning, one affects the entire growth of the stand. If one neglects the weeding and the planting, one is going to get further and further behind. The effort then to catch-up is not represented by a straight line, but by a curve which takes off. I think the hon. the Minister is going to find himself in a position where he is going to have to squeeze a lot more money out of the hon. the Minister of Finance. I am very concerned about this matter. I should like to know from the hon. the Minister how the planting programme is going, whether he thinks he is going to be able to keep ahead and what factor he thinks will have to be built into his budget next year to allow him to catch up so that we can simply get back to square one where we should have been all the time if we had not experienced the financial difficulties we have gone through. I should like the hon. the Minister to reply to those questions in time.

Mr. Chairman, I share the concern of the hon. member for Mooi River about Table Mountain, for in Gardens, where I live, Table Mountain offers the finest view one could wish for. I want to say at once that I do not share his concern about the cats of Table Mountain. It seems to me that the cats are flourishing, because they are very noisy up there.

The well-known Afrikaans writer F. A. Venter published a splendid work in 1970 dealing with the water of South Africa. That book of his contains the following striking remark—

In my own constituency, too, one finds the irrigation farmers so strikingly described by Mr. Venter in his monumental work. Irrigation farmers are usually fairly small farmers and they are probably the hardest hit of all farmers by the enormous increase in production costs. With a few exceptions, irrigation farmers always have one great worry, namely the shortage of water. The case I want to put to the hon. the Minister on behalf of the irrigation farmers today is the need of those farmers for the prompt supply of spill water to them when it is available and when they ask for it. To the smaller irrigation farmers in particular, spill water often means the difference between a successful year and another crop failure. This is because in the hot bushveld climate in particular, there is a very serious need for more water than the allocated quota. Those farmers are forced to cultivate a winter and a summer crop, otherwise they will not get by. Over the past 10 years in particular it has become absolutely essential for most small farmers to cultivate two crops. With one crop they can no longer make a profit, and because of the enormously high input in production costs, this is a matter which is presenting those farmers with a very great problem. Very few of those farmers are farming on a piece of land which was regarded as an economic unit under the old schemes. Today that property, with the water allocated to it, is no longer an economic unit. In the past, an irrigation farmer could recover from a crop failure within a year or two, but these days that is no longer possible. It now takes between four and five years to recover from a crop failure.

To have good crops.

I am saying that spill water should be made available rapidly, precisely because this is also a serious problem for those farmers who have to make maximum use of any extra water they can obtain. Over the past few years, I have often talked to members of advisory committees who have to recommend the application for extra water, as well as to many farmers in that area. In particular, they are very unhappy about the fact that when spill water is available, and application is made for that water, too much time elapses before permission is granted from Pretoria for them to receive the spill water. In such cases, time is of the essence.

It so happens that the last few years have been good rain years, and dams have often overflowed. During the same years, however, we have had some of the hottest summer days. This has meant that considerably more water had to be used to ensure that the crops on the fields were saved. It is when it is so swelteringly hot, and dams are overflowing, that farmers are extremely frustrated when applications for spill water are not immediately granted. Farmers do not want to use their quota water under such circumstances. They realize that they have to use their quota water very carefully in order to cultivate the winter and summer crops. For this reason, their request is that during good years, there should be an automatic sale of spill water when the dams concerned are overflowing. I know that there is a standing arrangement of this nature at the Njelele dam and the Clanwilliam dam. I therefore ask the hon. the Minister to provide for such a standing arrangement to be made with regard to the dams in my constituency as well.

The understanding attitude which prevails these days with regard to farmers in the border areas, the designated areas, makes me feel at liberty to ask for this. Many of the farmers can no longer make an economic living on one unit with the water scheduled for 12,9 ha, for example. They have to buy or lease additional land or they have to get out. I can give the assurance that depopulation is taking place in my area for that reason as well. We should like to prevent that. An arrangement with regard to spill water could be a great help, an arrangement such as the one at the Clanwilliam and Njelele Dams, for example. I am aware of the fact that it is departmental policy that fresh applications have to be made for extra water every time. The reason for this policy is that the injudicious granting of extra water could lead to water-logged soil and mineralization, for example. The department prefers to consider every case on merit every time in the light of the circumstances prevailing in the schemes concerned at a given moment. However, I really want to advocate that at the Marico-Bushveld Dam, to mention only one example, the hon. the Minister should have an arrangement made such as the one at the two dams I mentioned earlier. However, I want to go further and advocate that where the level of dams is such that extra water can in fact be allocated, the minimum time should be lost. For the compelling reasons already mentioned, the matter should be treated as one of the greatest urgency.

Mr. Chairman, I want to associate myself wholeheartedly with the plea made by the hon. member for Marico for spill water to be made available as soon as possible to irrigation farmers who apply for it.

My argument here this afternoon should be seen against the background of the experience which the irrigation farmers of Vaalharts had during the drought of the late ’sixties, when their irrigation water was cut off and the reason given was that what little water was available had to be supplied to the industrial and urban areas. It is true that the farmers were compensated by way of an ex gratia payment, but they nevertheless suffered enormous losses because of the fact that their irrigation water had been cut off. Since then, the Bloemhof Dam, the Sterkfontein Dam with its Tugela additions and other dams have been completed. When the Bloemhof Dam was completed, it was generally believed among the Vaalharts farmers that that dam had been built to meet the needs of Vaalharts in times of water scarcity. At the same time, the farmers of Vaalharts gained the impression that with the completion of the Bloemhof Dam, which they believed to have been built for their irrigation purposes, no more water would be available for irrigation purposes from the Vaal Dam itself in the lower Vaal River area. This is the impression—right or wrong —which those people have gained. In the meantime, while they were under this impression, the Vaalharts farmers took cognizance, however, of an enormous increase in the use of water from the Vaal River for urban and industrial purposes, especially by way of the Vaal/Gamagara water works through which water is pumped to Hotazel, Sishen and other places. These places are situated below the Bloemhof Dam. They have also taken cognizance of the building of the Usutu Dam to provide in the needs of Secunda 2 and Sasol 2 and 3. In the light of the experience they had in 1966, it is understandable that the farmers of the Vaalharts scheme are worried about what will happen if there is another protracted drought such as the one in 1965 and 1966, and there is an ever-increasing water consumption below as well as above the Bloemhof Dam for urban and industrial purposes, as there is at the moment. There are further questions, too, which are worrying these farmers. The water of Vryburg, for example, is supplied from the canal system of the Vaalharts Dam. The farmers now believe that water for Vryburg is guaranteed. They would like to know how much water is guaranteed. They want to know whether it is limited in any way and whether it will not also be supplied at the expense of the Vaalharts farmers in times of drought. There is a further source of concern, namely the fact that the present principal canal from Vaalharts for water distribution in the Vaalharts area has for technical reasons been built on a smaller scale than was originally planned. In peak hours, this principal canal is actually unable to carry the water that is required, and problems are being experienced. Now the idea has been mooted— and I want to advocate it myself—that in the light of the possibly increasing supply of water to Vryburg, as well as of the fact that the principal canal cannot carry any more water than it does at the moment, a cost study should be made in connection with the construction of a pipeline with a view to supplementary water provision. What is to happen to the Black township near Pudimoe, where its water supply is to come from, I do not know. To enlarge this principal canal will naturally be impossible. That is why I am pleading for a cost study in order to ascertain what it would cost to construct a pipeline for the provision of extra water.

There is another question which is being asked by these farmers. That is how much water has to be provided to Bophuthatswana for its irrigation works. Connected with this is the question of whether the maximum amount of water to which Bophuthatswana is entitled for irrigation purposes at Taung is already being allocated to them, and whether there is perhaps the possibility of an even larger amount of water being allocated to them in the light of the agreement entered into with them. If a larger amount of water is to be allocated to Bophuthatswana, this would reinforce my plea for a cost study to be made with regard to the construction of a pipeline for the supply of extra water, because the principal canal cannot carry any more water than it has to during peak hours.

What we have to bear in mind is that there is 34 000 ha under irrigation in this area. It is the largest irrigation area in our country. If these people were to be hampered in their production by a lack of water as a result of drought conditions and because of the supply of water to urban and industrial areas, it would be a serious blow to our agricultural production. Therefore I also want to make a serious request for an in-depth investigation into the possibility of constructing another storage dam in the area between the Vaal Dam and the Bloemhof Dam.

Mr. Chairman, I want to begin by congratulating the department on an annual report which is really informative, an annual report which gives us a fine impression of what the department has done over the past year. Right at the outset I also want to thank the hon. the Minister for having visited my constituency during the parliamentary recess. He was visiting the State water scheme in the Renoster River. I also thank him for having undertaken an inspection tour with us during which we had the opportunity of investigating the problems in that area with the farmers there. I thank the hon. the Minister for the time he spent there and the way in which he listened to the problems of the farmers there.

We are still having problems there. The water canals there are being lined with concrete. There are a great many organizational problems as well. With the patience and co-operation we are receiving from the hon. the Minister and the department, as well as the co-operation which we believe the farmers are willing to give us, I am sure that we shall soon be able to eliminate these problems.

I want to talk here today about a subject which the hon. member for Humansdorp and I discussed here a year or two ago as well. This is the subject of weather modification. When we are talking about weather modification, I believe we are covering the activities of both departments. After all, we need the water to enable the trees to grow. Therefore it affects the activities of both departments. I want to talk about weather modification and divide it into two legs. These two legs are rain stimulation and hail prevention.

Before I come to that, however, I should like to explain why it is so important in South Africa to keep emphasizing the need for weather modification and the possibility of rain stimulation. The other day, we heard no less a person than Prof. Hiemstra of Stellenbosch say in a very illuminating speech that if we could exploit and use all South Africa’s water resources, we would eventually have to limit our population to between 43 million and 64 million people because we would not have enough water for a larger population in South Africa. We also know that the increase in the consumption of water in those areas which receive the water caught in the Vaal basin is 6% a year. Now we can work out for ourselves what the result of this will be in a number of years.

It is also a well-known fact that since 1970, no more water has been made available for agricultural and irrigation purposes from the water caught in the Vaal River basin, precisely because the requirements of industries and towns are so great.

The hon. the Minister said about two years ago that if we wanted to develop and use all our water resources in South Africa as they should be developed and used, it would cost us round about R1 800 million, i.e. almost R1 000 million a year, up to the end of this century. This is an enormous project and an enormous task which will rest on our shoulders. If we view this in the light of the fact that South Africa needs a great deal of money in other fields as well, we begin to understand how essential and how challenging these projects are going to be to us in the future.

When we consider the present situation, we see that there are certain areas in South Africa which have had no proper rainfall during the past four years. It is also costing the State literally millions of rands just to enable the farmers in certain regions to keep their livestock alive, so that they may have breeding animals to go on with when it rains again. In this connection I want to express my sincere thanks and appreciation to the Department of Agricultural Credit and Land Tenure in particular. These large amounts have to be spent to keep our farmers on the land. I want to tell hon. members that if there are people who want to know what those drought areas look like, they are free to go and see. It is a harrowing experience to see how people there are fighting to survive, how farms with all their potential are going to waste, as it were, and how people’s spirit is being broken. We need these people on the farms. These conditions are being caused by droughts.

I also want to say—I have said this before—that according to my own calculation, between 70% and 80% of all crop failures in South Africa are due to a lack of water. That is why the supply of water, or the possibility of increasing the water supply, is so essential.

According to experts, only 5% of the moisture in the clouds eventually reaches the earth. If this is so, we must do everything in our power to increase that percentage. The fact is, too, that if we can increase our rainfall in South Africa by 20%, the amount of free water, the water flowing down the rivers and creeks, would probably be increased by 40% to 60%, because the ground would already be wet and the water would consequently flow much more easily. We know that we have no other source of water in South Africa. All water which is available at the moment, whether pumped from the ground or stored in dams from which it is released for irrigation purposes, originally comes from the air. Therefore it is the only source we can try to tap.

There are 74 countries in the world that are making use of weather modification. There are countries which claim to have achieved very great success. I saw in a magazine the other day that Russia alleges that it has had an increase of as much as 80% in its rainfall in certain respects. There are also countries like America and Israel which are claiming to have obtained certain good results.

I want to allege that if we in South Africa can eventually reach the stage where we can increase the rainfall in certain arable farming areas by 5% on a controlled basis, it will have an enormous effect and we shall be very successful. I want to underline the word “controlled”, for if one cannot control it, one could cause a great problem at the other extreme, in that one could cause floods.

There are various projects in South Africa, but unfortunately, in my opinion, they do not fall under one agency. At Nelspruit we have the scheme where the Lowveld Tobacco Corporation has hired people from America to try to do research into hail prevention in particular. There are great differences of opinion, especially among the farmers. Hon. members know the stories that are going round about the differences. Very often the farmers have been rebellious, and many say that these people are just trying to protect the tobacco farmers, and now the other farmers are suffering droughts on account of the things that are being done. I found it interesting, while reading about this, to hear that in the club-house of the golf club at Nelspruit, there is an inscription saying: “Here you shall not speak of women, or sex, or sin, neither of weather modification.”

What is there left to talk about?

Therefore it is really a very controversial matter.

On the other hand, we have the Weather Bureau at Bethlehem, under the Department of Transport Affairs, which is doing very good and illuminating research in respect of the cloud masses, in respect of the times when seeding can best be done and the means with which it should be done. Before I forget, I should like to state here that it is quite clear, going through these reports, that these people have a great need for the right type of aircraft in order to do their work properly. In the first few years these people are making real surveys, they are making a study of conditions and acquiring the technological background. Then they will begin the actual seeding. When this seeding has been done, the results will be properly analysed to ascertain whether the rainfall has in fact increased, whether there has been more hail, what the weather conditions have been like, what type of cloud masses have accumulated and the extent to which the increase in the rainfall, if any, has affected the run-off water. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I just want to reply very briefly to the hon. members who have continued the discussion of water affairs. In the first place, I want to tell the hon. member for Mooi River that I think it would be best if he cleared the whole question of the new approach to the Spioenkop Dam with the department. I understand the department’s argument and I do not think it would serve any useful purpose for me to go into that again. The whole planning of the Umgeni is a comprehensive matter which he should rather discuss with them. The whole matter with regard to forestry I want to deal with later, but I have taken cognizance of what the hon. member said. With regard to Table Mountain and a co-ordinated nature conservation action, too, I can only say, for the hon. member’s peace of mind, that the Environmental Conservation Division is determined, and that I also hope, as I have indicated, to introduce legislation to deal with this matter, because it is very important that there should be no further delay with regard to this matter.

†I therefore hope that the hon. member will have a peaceful weekend knowing that at last these things are in good hands.

But can you catch the cats there?

The hon. member for Marico made a plea for prompt decisions to be taken in connection with spill water in dams. I just want to assure the hon. member that this is a matter which is under consideration at the moment, and I may only add that I agree that one has a problem in practice if farmers want water and they ask for it by means of advisory committees or whatever. If it is a lengthy process and they have to wait a month or six weeks before getting a decision, it is frustrating and creates problems. However, we are aware of the problems. I have already discussed them with the department and they still want to clarify a few matters, and we shall let him know as soon as possible. We have great sympathy with his approach and with the problems of the farmers in the area, especially because it is a border area. We are trying to come to a decision as soon as possible as far as this problem is concerned.

The hon. member for Kimberley North spoke about the question of the Vaal River and asked a few very pointed questions in connection with water assurance for Vaalharts. He said that rightly or wrongly, the farmers had gained the impression that Bloemhof Dam had actually been built to give greater assurance to Vaalharts. This is to some extent true in the sense that when Bloemhof Dam was built, the idea was that it would not become necessary to obtain water from the Vaal Dam. It is quite clear that it is not at all economical to pump expensive water across the mountains from Natal and to use it for irrigation. An attempt is being made to store enough water in the Bloemhof Dam to give a reasonable assurance to Vaalharts. Because I know how unpredictable the weather in our country can be, I shall not venture to say that we can give any guarantees on the basis of Bloemhof Dam.

He also asked for another dam to be built as a result of development and the resultant abstraction of water for Vryburg as well as the Vaal Gamagara scheme, which means that water is being pumped over a long distance for the mining of iron ore and other minerals. Unfortunately, the use of water for human consumption and especially for mines and industries is much more economical than the use of water in agriculture. The productivity obtained from one cubic metre is much greater, so naturally, for the sake of the balanced development of the country, one has to give priority to the consumption which is the most beneficial to the country.

The hon. member also mentioned that the principal canal was too small and asked for a pipeline, especially if Vryburg is going to get water or if an increased allocation is possibly going to be made to Bophuthatswana. I want to tell the hon. member that there will be no increased allocation, because Bophuthatswana is not yet using all its water. Naturally, if the canal has not been built big enough, I cannot allow the farming community to be prejudiced by that. Therefore we shall have to watch the position very carefully. I can give him the assurance that we shall handle the whole matter in such a way that a developed area which is dependent on water and which contains 34 000 ha of highly productive agricultural land will not experience any problems because of the possible increase of industrial consumption or because of an extra allocation somewhere else.

However, I want to mention in general terms that hon. members must understand that if there is a water shortage and Vryburg is getting water from the area for human consumption, it is laid down in legislation that priority must be given to the supply of water for human and animal consumption before it can be supplied for secondary, i.e. agricultural or tertiary purposes. We shall have to accept that, but I assure the hon. member that we shall approach the matter with great circumspection. As far as the question of another dam is concerned, the hon. member probably heard all the pleas for more dams. The hon. member is one of those who are standing in the queue with regard to this matter. I suppose it will have to be done in the future.

I want to thank the hon. member for Heilbron for his fine contribution. It is a contribution which testifies to penetrating study and which shows that he thoroughly acquainted himself with the problems. I am particularly glad that he mentioned the matter, because the chairman of the Water Research Commission is here and we have a difference of opinion about the question of who should do research into weather modification and rain stimulation. It is actually the task of the Weather Bureau, but as far as I am concerned, it really is an agricultural matter as well, with such an enormous impact that I think we should discuss it again. I do not want to criticize the Department of Transport Affairs, but the Weather Bureau is perhaps more interested in whether ships can enter harbours and whether aircraft are able to land. That is why they are interested in the weather. Although they may have an extensive theoretical knowledge of cloud formations and of cloud physics and of all the scientific details in connection with rain and weather generally, the practical implementation of rain stimulation is a matter for Agricultural and Water Affairs, which directly affects the water supply as well. The hon. member also quoted certain figures in this connection. I want to thank the hon. member for a fine contribution and for the information he made available to this House. I just want to refer to the Renoster River State Water Scheme. It seldom happens that there is a mix-up in the department’s affairs, but in this case, matters did not take a very satisfactory turn, and I was a little unhappy about it myself. I am glad I was able to be there to see how things were going, and I hope that we shall have this work finalized sooner because it affects an area which is already producing and in respect of which one wants to regulate the water supply as effectively as possible.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. the Minister who has now taken responsibility for the environment under his wing is well known for his very conservative political views. I hope he will be as conservative when it comes to the conservation of our environment. [Interjections.] I am being friendly now. On that hon. Minister’s shoulders will rest the responsibility for the conservation of our extremely valuable environment in South Africa, which is the very basis of our life, prosperity and happiness in this country. I wish him well and hope that he will make a great success of and give priority attention to this task and that he will take the necessary steps to see to it that our environment is not harmed.

It is a new departure where the environment and forestry now fall under one Minister, which is a result of the hon. the Prime Minister’s rationalization programme. I am rather sorry that the environment division should merely be an adjunct of another department. I am equally sorry that it should be part of a department which, rightly or wrongly, is seen to be one of the minor departments of the Government. I have always believed very strongly that the environment should be part and parcel of the responsibilities of the hon. the Prime Minister. Previously we had the Department of Planning and the Environment, which I did not think was correct either because all effective planning with regard to the activities of society is in fact related to environmental planning. When we introduced the concept of a Department of Environmental Planning I thought that we were making some significant progress. Already in 1976 I appealed for that department to be a senior department and that it should be responsible directly to the hon. the Prime Minister.

What do you mean by “senior department”?

I know the hon. the Minister is obviously very proud of his department and he is not going to like it …

There is no such thing as a senior department.

Well, some departments are seen to be more important and powerful than others.

By the ill-informed.

The Departments of Finance and Defence are obviously more powerful than the hon. the Minister’s department, but I do not want to make a big thing of that. I am just saying that environmental planning and conservation must be seen to be one of the most important functions in our society. I rather feel that it is symptomatic of the problems surrounding environmental conservation that it has been relegated to a single Government department and in fact is a mere adjunct of it. I would much rather have seen it occupying a position of far greater status and priority.

There have been many attempts over the past years clearly to identify what the conservation of the environment is all about, to identify the nature of the problems involved, the dimensions of the problems involved and how it relates to all the activities within our society. If one reads the vast amount of material, exceptionally interesting material, which has become available in the last few years in South Africa, one sees that all report the efforts which have been made to identify what environmental conservation is all about and to define clearly the responsibilities regarding environmental conservation and its relationship to the other activities within our society. Also, there have been attempts to provide for legislation which would give effect to the need to conserve our environment.

I should like to make a few statements which I think may be controversial at this stage. If one looks at all the efforts to date—I do not say that this will continue, because I have the feeling that great improvements are going to come about in the very near future—one sees that these efforts have often rested on false premises with regard to the identification of the environment. There has often been a lack of perspective. The environment has not been seen in its true broad perspective. There has been confusion in Government Departments and in particular in the private sector amongst people responsible for development, engineering organizations and so forth. The whole thing has on occasions led to frustration and disillusionment and, in the end, lack of effective action. Those are the statements I wanted to make. I should like to debate what gives rise to that situation as I see it and what can be done about it.

Environmental protection or conservation is unfortunately not understood in its comprehensive context. It is always seen as some bothersome but necessary adjunct of some or other activity. In other words, if one builds a road, a railway or a factory, there are unfortunately some environmental considerations one will just have to take into account. It is not an integral part of the planning process. It is not an integral part of the concept, but it is seen as an unfortunate and bothersome but necessary adjunct of economic activities. Alternatively, it is seen as relating merely to recreational activities. That may be why it now falls under the directorate of Forestry. One thinks, for instance, of mountain trails. Mountain trails are part of the environment and it is nice for people to walk along them. For that reason, perhaps, the whole job was given to the Minister in charge of forestry.

You are talking rubbish.

I am not talking rubbish. I wish the hon. the Minister would listen.

You do not know what you are talking about.

I wish the hon. the Minister would listen.

I am listening.

One of the hon. the Minister’s predecessors in charge of planning, the present Mr. Speaker in fact, in his time listened very carefully to what I had to say and agreed to a large extent with these points of view. He was a Minister who would listen. That is what worries me: “’n Verkrampte wil nie luister nie. Hoekom is daar nie ’n verligte aangestel nie?” In any event, one cannot compartmentalize the environment. One cannot say: “We are going to deal with just the air as part of the environment. We are going to deal with that one thing. Water is going to be dealt with separately; so is the sea and forestry.”

Now you are talking sense again.

One cannot compartmentalize these things and deal with them separately. They are all part of a greater whole and this should be treated comprehensively as a whole. I believe that environmental conservation does not have the status in South Africa it should have.

I agree with you there.

It has far less status than it should have. It is not seen in the correct perspective and it is not given the priority it should be given, particularly in the economic activities of our country.

There has always been a search for a discipline which could be used as a foundation, a discipline to which other disciplines in society can relate and which would lead to an interrelation of disciplines. The economy of the country has always been the discipline that has been used. In other words, the economy is considered the basis of society and of all the activities within the society. Other activities are then studied in relation to the economy and the economy is used to interrelate those other activities. That has been the basis of the capitalist world to date. Unfortunately, the economy today is a purely materialistic discipline.

Therefore the considerations have been exploitative. The exploitation of the environment has been the main concern. Short-term profits are often the main concern instead of the long-term interests of society as a whole. I believe fundamentally that the only effective discipline that can serve as a basis for the activities of society is a discipline involving a concept of the environment and its proper utilization and conservation. That is the only discipline to which one can intelligently relate the activities of society, and which can effectively interrelate a society’s activities, particularly those activities that are most closely dependent upon the environment. [Time expired.]

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

Mr. Chairman, I thank the hon. Whip.

Therefore the environment is, and should be, formally recognized as the common denominator of the activities of society rather than the economy. Of course, the interrelationship between the economy and the environment is an extremely close one. Let us just briefly look at this. The environment is, after all, the provider of all the good things. All primary wealth or income derives from the environment. All our economic resources derive from our environment. So it is the provider of the primary wealth and resources of our society. It is the provider of all the food that we eat, and that is extremely important. It gives the environment a very high status and priority. The environment as such determines the areas in which we live and the circumstances under which we live, as well as determining where we work, study or relax. It is the basis of our economic activity and the basis of our social and recreational activities. It is not just the small concept involving parks, rivers, nature reserves, forests, etc. It is the whole broad spectrum.

What one needs in order to have an effective policy for the conservation of the environment is an overall broad national policy that covers all those aspects, not just certain compartmentalized aspects of the conservation of the environment. We need an intelligent and enlightened national policy for the proper utilization of the environment, practising effective protection and conservation of all our natural resources. If one looks at all the representations being made by environmental bodies, the representations being made by the Council for the Habitat, and even the most recent document issued by them after the seminar they held towards the end of last year, and even as late as January of this year, one sees that their main request was for a broad national environmental policy, to be introduced by the Government, to which all activities affecting the environment can be related and in respect of which control over all these activities can be brought about. They feel that it is essential to have a single powerful and independent department of Government that will be responsible for the studies that have to be made in connection with the need involved in the conservation of the environment, a body which will synthesize the policies and the approaches required, which will initiate action, which will plan that action, which will establish the necessary organizations to put that action into effect, which will co-ordinate the responsibilities of various departments and which, in the final analysis, will have ultimate control over the whole process of environmental conservation and protection. It cannot be done by a vast array of separate little organizations operating in their own fields without liaising with other parties. In addition to that it needs an effective policing organization.

It does not matter what aspect of the protection of the environment one looks at, there is an ineffectual policing action with regard to those activities. Let us just look at the fragmentation we have today. There is a plethora of departments, State departments, provincial departments and local authorities. There are regulations and proclamations which apply to the conservation of the environment. Each of these has its own little set of norms, each one operating within its own little area of activity. There is no effective communication between them. There is very little liaison between them and therefore, because of their dispersed nature, they are not as effective as they could otherwise be. The Department of Agriculture and Fisheries looks after national parks, and is now also responsible for fisheries. It is also responsible for the prevention of soil erosion. The Health Division is responsible for the control of air pollution, the Division of Water Affairs controls water pollution and the Forestry Division is responsible for certain aspects of environmental protection. The Department of Industries is responsible for dumping at sea, as we saw when we dealt with the Bill on that matter the other day, the Department of Defence is responsible for the Navy and certain aspects which flow from that, the Department of Transport Affairs is responsible for harbours and any pollution which may occur in harbours, the Department of Manpower Utilization is responsible for factories, the provinces are responsible for lakes, for certain parks and for the estuaries of rivers, and local authorities are responsible for certain aspects of noise control, smoke pollution, the controlling of litter, etc. In other words, one gets a whole range of departments and authorities responsible for various separate aspects.

Another problem is the conflict of interests which often arises, such as in the case of the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries which must, on the one hand, conserve fishing resources and, on the other hand, must also be responsible for the exploitation of those resources. Not always, but often that conflict of interests is dominated by economic interests rather than those dictated by the conservation of the environment. We need an integrated, holistic approach to this whole situation and a machinery which can apply conservation of the environment in an effective way.

Then we have the problem in South Africa that State departments, provinces and local authorities are immune to the need to conserving the environment. They are not subject to the various regulations and procedures which already exist, and they make every effort to see to it that they will not be subject to them. That is another problem which we must overcome. All authorities, whether private or State, must subject themselves to a single discipline in terms of the conservation of the environment. Environment impact assessments must not be something which is sometimes done and sometimes not done and for which there is no specific and clearly prescribed procedure and norms laid down. They must be an integral part of any major project and must be part of the planning of that project from the day it is started, and not something which is done purely because it needs to be done at the end.

Liaison with interested bodies is not what it should be. Environmental bodies, cultural bodies, historical bodies and nature conservation bodies must all be drawn into the process effectively. I know that the Council for the Habitat attempts to do that, but it is not yet being done effectively. One can speak to any of these bodies, and their common, major complaint is that they sometimes respond to something when it is already too late. They are only consulted when the damage has already been done. They respond to things when it is already too late, and they are not part of the initiative right from the beginning. There is very little public participation in planning in South Africa which affects the environment. Public awareness and public interest will always remain the most effective regulator as far as the conservation of the environment is concerned, and it is in fact the practice of real democracy that the public and its institutions must, at all times, be totally involved in environmental planning. When it comes to town and regional planning objectives, and the whole machinery that is being set up and all the steps that have been taken up to this point, there is a clear indication that we have wasted a lot of valuable time by not, from the outset, making all the aspects relating to those levels of planning an integral part of a comprehensive national policy.

Lastly, I do not think that the Government can afford, with regard to environmental planning, to have any ideological requirements. I do not think that the Group Areas Act, for instance, can any longer be seen to be part of the environmental planning programme, or the provisions of the Physical Planning and Utilization of Resources Act, because apartheid will not survive. We are basing our planning, however, on planning for an apartheid society, which will not exist for longer than the next decade or so. We are wasting money and we are wasting time. We are creating a false impression and a false situation. All these ideological attitudes and requirements must be wiped from our environmental planning programme because they just bring it into disrepute. What is required? [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, we have now listened to a long speech by the hon. member for Bryanston, in which he tried to convince us of things that we have already been convinced of for a long time. We all have a great interest in nature conservation and planning. It is just a pity that the hon. member succeeded in dragging apartheid in towards the end. We agree with the other things that he said.

It is true that the department has been reorganized. We now have the position that nature conservation and forestry are grouped together. I must say that it was a very good change. Forestry is the oldest organization in the country concerned with the environmental conservation. That is why I think that forestry and environmental conservation fit together very well. Consequently I can assure the hon. member for Bryanston that this matter will definitely enjoy positive attention under Mr. Otto, who has had many years of experience of planning and environmental conservation.

I actually feel a twinge of sadness when I think of our former Secretary, Mr. Ackerman. He retired last year. He was distinguished by his enthusiasm for forestry in general, and particularly his inspired leadership in the sphere of hiking ways and wilderness areas. We want to say thank you very much to the department and to Mr. Ackerman for the very interesting tour that they arranged for us in the Eastern Transvaal last year. It really was an experience to see what is being done in the Sabie area. Once again I say thank you very much to him. We hope that he will be very happy in what he is doing now.

We have Mr. Ernst Sonntag in his place. He is just as much of a lover of trees and nature. Mr. Sonntag was born in Venda. His father was a missionary there. He too was a lover of trees. He planted all the trees that are mentioned in the Bible at his mission station, and I understand that many of these trees are still there today. Mr. Sonntag began his career in the Department of Forestry, and ran the whole gamut of duties and posts in the department. Therefore, he knows the department inside out. That is why I really welcome him to this department. I want to say thank you to him and to the department for the very pleasant tour to the Kogelberg reserve. Once again, the tour gave us the impression that the new dispensation that we now have, in which environmental conservation is linked to forestry and water affairs, was a correct decision.

When we spoke about forestry and the position of timber last year, the prospects did not look too good. There was talk of surpluses at the time, and the enthusiasm for planting trees had reached a low. However, these conditions bring out the best in people. The sawmills made a marketing agreement which introduced stability into the marketing of sawn timber. They will also be able to bring about price increases. The cooperatives and the millers applied themselves to export trade. This meant that the volume of exports increased by 16% from R160 million to R190 million in the past year. This fine effort with regard to exports was accompanied by a boom in our economy. Sawmills can now work at full steam once again. The hon. member for Mooi River spoke about exports and said that we should not allow this fine effort to come to nothing. I agree with him that we should develop this further.

Now I want to put a few questions to the hon. the Minister. Firstly I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether export possibilities are also borne in mind when planting is planned, and secondly I want to ask him whether he is satisfied that there is the correct co-ordination with regard to the export effort. Is enough research being done on marketing abroad, and who is doing this research? Do we know what the countries abroad want? Is the right thing to export rough timber and chips? Should we not add a supplementary value? Is it correct to export wood pulp if we can export paper? Is it correct to export chips if we can export hardboard? I think it is very important that we should ensure that a very high standard is maintained in all this. I was impressed when I read in the report of the Forestry Council of the important work which the council as well as the Department of Forestry is doing in this regard. However, the department caused me some concern. I quote what the department says in its report—

It seems to me as if there is some work for the department or the Forestry Council in this regard. A committee was formed by the Forestry Council consisting of sawmillers and officials of the SABS and the department. The purpose of this committee was to bring about rationalization. An export section was established from the members of this committee. I should like to see the report of this committee.

Something else that I am very interested in, is the study that was made by the Department of Economic Affairs on the efficiency of export incentive. I think this is very important for future timber export. Timber is a raw material that can be renewed. It can also be used as a source of energy. However, we cannot expect everything to run smoothly from start to finish when it comes to exports. I am pleased that it nevertheless seems that progress is being made with the organization of our exports.

I am also pleased that good progress is being made with the implementation of the Act that we passed a year or so ago with regard to price fixing. It nevertheless seems as if good co-operation is being obtained from the various bodies, also with regard to initiating pro forma contracts for the various categories of timber. All these things cannot but bring about stability in the timber industry and encourage planting to the benefit of the country. I just wonder whether the time has not come for the Forestry Department to spread a positive message and that we should shake off the fear of surpluses and that, if we can produce surpluses, we should devote ourselves to processing them properly and selling them, whether it is in this country or in another and whether it is in the form of fuel or any other form. I nevertheless want to ask the department to give serious attention to the future cultivation of timber in our country.

Mr. Chairman, I want to congratulate the hon. member for Humansdorp on his speech on forestry, the activities of the department, the change in management and the new head, Mr. Sonntag. I also want to associate myself with his words of thanks with regard to the fact that we had the opportunity of visiting various places. We too want to say thank you very much.

I want to fink up my speech with the speech that the hon. member for Bryanston made. Unfortunately he had to leave to catch a plane. We know that he asked for leave of absence. The hon. member for Bryanston was anxious that a considerable amount of confusion would arise in dealing with the conservation functions of nature reserves or areas that fall under the trusteeship of this department, whilst others, for instance parks, fall under other departments, for instance the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries. We also want to say that we trust that in adding environmental conservation to this department, the heads of the department will realize that a greater task will rest upon their shoulders, viz. trusteeship of areas of great importance, areas that demand responsibility from this department. This chiefly concerns the level of the reception, organization, guidance and education of people who are entering these spheres. I just want to give hon. members brief statistics about people who entered these specific spheres, which the Department of Forestry controls, last year. The area covered by the twelve hiking ways accommodated 73 781 Whites and 6 331 Coloureds. Picnic and camping areas were visited by 69 320 people. In the rock and mountain-climbing areas, in the Sederberg and Drakenstein areas alone, there were 12 760 visitors.

It was possible to keep data on these controlled visits, but this does not include the visitors and climbers on Table Mountain. This is an enormous number of people, but if we are to convert these figures, process them in a different way for really practical purposes in order to calculate the damage to that area visited by so many people, we must take into account the number of fingers, feet and toes that finger, bescrawl, feel and trample the world. In that case there were 3¼ million such damaging instruments in those areas. Therefore we can ask: Why do people want to go to those areas? We appreciate the fact that the department has been generous enough to invite them, to open the doors to them, to open up the forestry areas so that people can visit them in order to appreciate the forests, to become more closely acquainted with the activities of the department, but also to be able to move around in those areas. I want to quote from a magazine published by the Department of Education in the Transvaal, concerning groups of young people who visited the veld schools. I quote—

In conjunction with this I should also like to quote another idea which conveys an elevating message to us in the same spirit. It is an extract from a speech made by General J. C. Smuts on the occasion of the unveiling of the Mountain Club War Memorial in 1923, and it acts as a foreword to the Report on the Future Control and Management of Table Mountain and the South Peninsula Mountain Chain—

This is how nature speaks to one and that is why one wants to participate in nature.

However, we have the problem of people acting in an uncontrolled manner. The department cannot exercise control over all the territories. It is a tremendous task if we think that the area which now falls under the department comprises 1 625 624 hectares. This is an enormous area, almost as large as the Free State. But something will have to be done because we are responsible for it.

We went walking in the Sederberge over the Easter Weekend. Many of the people walking there are like—I do not want to say like baboons, but they are in actual fact just as wild. It was during the dry season. If a fire had broken out, they would have burnt like torches. There were hundreds of people in those mountains over the Easter Weekend over whom the department had no control. We must also think of the pollution that takes place there. For instance, I am thinking of one particular small area, and the representatives of the department are aware of it. The Paarl Mountaineering Club erected a hut on the Krom River financed by themselves and they look after it. During a certain weekend, when members of the club arrived at their hut, there were 322 people there, uninvited. These people had opened the door, removed the gas cylinders and were having a braaivleis on the stoep. One of our Forestry Officers discovered one of them removing the gate with a monkey wrench. When the official asked him what he was doing with it, he replied: We are going to have a picnic, are you coming along?

We will have to exercise control some-where. We do not want the police state that the Opposition is so afraid of. The hon. member for Orange Grove will agree with me. [Interjections.] The Kogelberg reserve was closed for a while, and its wonderful vegetation has been restored.

In the first instance, we therefore ask for more facilities to be created in the areas to which we invite the public, facilities that are not luxuries, but that offer the basic facilities, for instance toilets and water. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, it is always a pleasure to be able to speak after a fellow-Eastern Transvaler, like the hon. member for Standerton.

Particularly when he talks about the mountains of the Boland!

I should like to exchange a few ideas about import replacement of timber products. There are two angles from which one can approach the subject. In the first place, one can look at the matter in the global sense, in view of the industry as a whole; i.e. how our total imports of forest and timber products compare with our total exports of such products. I know that South Africa has traditionally been an importer of timber products. In earlier times, for instance, we were 100% dependent on the countries abroad for our paper requirements. As afforestation increased in our country and as we began to establish our own industries, however, we became increasingly independent of imported products and we also began to export our own timber products. 1979 was an important year for our producers and timber processors because in that year our exports exceeded our imports for the first time in history. It has been calculated that our total imports of timber products for 1979 amount to approximately R185 million whilst the exports will amount to R186 million. This is a milestone of which our country and our entire timber industry may be very proud.

Secondly, one can look at import replacement from the angle of replacing particular products that we are still importing at present. If one looks at the type of products that we are still importing, one finds that in 1979 we imported bleached pulp to the value of R86 million, paper to the value of R57 million and sawn timber for special use, chiefly for the furniture industry, to the value of R15 million. Speaking of timber for furniture, I think that all of us who possess articles of furniture made from indigenous wood, should look after them very well because they are becoming some of the most valuable items that one can find. I recently read that embuia for instance, which we used to import and probably still do, is so scarce today that the furniture manufacturer has to pay R960 per cubic metre for it.

There are many reasons why we are still importing timber products today. As far as bleached pulp is concerned, our own factories do not have a large enough production capacity, nor do we have enough of the right type of trees and timber which can be used for this. As far as paper imports are concerned, with regard to certain types of special paper it is not economically justifiable to manufacture them ourselves in South Africa, chiefly because our consumption of those special types of paper is too low. That is why it is more profitable for us to import them. As far as sawn timber is concerned, there are special types of timber, like the timber for the manufacturing of furniture, for the manufacturing of veneer and profiling and railway sleepers, which are either not manufactured locally at all, or are not available in sufficient quantities. Therefore, if we want to replace imported timber products, we must devote ourselves to the type of timber products that I have referred to in particular.

One may ask why we should try to replace our imported products. I believe there are four main reasons why this should be done in the interest of the country. I shall point them out very briefly. Firstly, we would be saving foreign currency. Secondly, we would be stimulating our own industries. In doing so, we would not only be developing existing industries, but even establishing new ones. Thirdly, we would be utilizing our own natural resources effectively. We would then use our own timber products and we would be in a position to absorb surpluses building up in our plantations. Obviously it is also in the interest of the timber producer, because he would have a larger market for his product. Fourthly it creates more employment opportunities which in a country like ours, and in the circumstances in which we prevail today, is of the greatest economic importance. I note in the annual report of the department that a committee has been appointed within the department to investigate the degree to which South African paper mills can contribute towards replacing these imports. It is said in the report that this committee was still engaged in its investigation in March 1979, and perhaps the hon. the Minister can tell us today what progress this committee has made since then. Another question that we can ask, is which steps we must take to bring about the maximum replacement of imports. I want to suggest three important steps that we ought to take, viz. proper planning, intensive research and development of our factory capacity. Fortunately, the department and bodies in the private sector are giving serious attention to these matters. As far as planning is concerned, a special division of National Forestry Planning was formed by the department last year with the aim of formulating long-term goals for the South African forestry and timber industry on an ongoing basis. I am sure that this division will give attention amongst other things to the question put by the hon. member for Humansdorp, viz. whether we are planning ahead in order to have adequate land under the right type of timber for our export industry.

As far as research is concerned, the National Timber Research Institute of the CSIR is engaged in a number of research projects. I just want to mention one of them. For instance, they are doing research with regard to laminated pine sleepers to be used by the S.A. Railways. Sleepers are one of the articles that are still being imported on a very large scale at the moment. As far as the development of our factories are concerned, one is delighted to read that we have announced the establishment of two large pulp manufacturers and that they are going to spend a total of R650 million within the next five years in developing, modernizing and improving their plants. We hope that we can take another big chunk out of the large-scale imports of bleached pulp with the aid of such an increased production capacity. Another sphere in which imports can be replaced, although not imports of timber products, is that of the manufacture of liquid fuel out of timber products, fuels such as methanol and ethanol. We can replace very expensive oil imports through this. I feel I have indicated that the timber industry in our country—and we must bear in mind that it is an industry with a turnover of more than R700 million per year—has faced large, but very fine challenges. The Forestry Division of the department has a special role to play in this regard, to be of service to the timber industry as a whole, from the producer to the manufacturer.

Mr. Chairman, other hon. members have had a great deal to say about the beauty and excellence of the region that I have the honour of representing. This makes my task much easier this afternoon. We spent a pleasant Saturday there, and many hon. members have referred to it here. Once again this afternoon, in the short time at my disposal, I want to draw attention to the two areas there which fall under the control of Forestry. Those two areas comprise thousands of hectares of land. The first is the Hottentots-Holland mountain range, from the Franschhoek Pass at Nuweberg to the Kogelberg reserve, and the second area is the one which stretches from Walker Bay and Pearly Beach to Quin Point, which is a coastal region of a different type, bordering on the high-watermark. The former consists of acid soil lying far above sea-level, with a high rainfall. From another angle,—and I say this without apologizing for it—it is one of the most unproductive regions in the country. The second region, as I said, is the coastal region where operations to prevent driftsand have been in progress for as long as the past 50 years. A tortoise cannot five in the former area, as the old people said. However, nature has compensated for this and it is one of the areas with the richest vegetation in the world. Here one finds most vegetation per hectare of any region in the world, and we have a great appreciation for the way in which the vegetation in this area is being controlled and protected by Forestry. This area is the habitat of the protea, erica, mimetes, the mountain rose and the everlasting, as well as the habitat of the leopard—which is still often seen close to the town—the lammergeyer, the mountain eagle and other fauna that we do not see every day. The fact that this inaccessible region has remained so undefiled in such close proximity to a metropolitan area, is, to my mind, a fantastic achievement. Forestry is doing valuable work here to keep out the enemies of nature. Years ago, as a young provincial councillor, we held discussions in a place in Wale Street when the province wanted us to put an end to wild-flower shows. There was a Mr. Duckitt of Darling who one day told me that the biggest enemies of nature were “the cow and the plough”. I still remember those words well. However, as a person who came from that inhospitable mountain region, I did not know how one could reach that area with a cow and a plough. In our area the enemies are not the cow and the plough. The enemies are invader plants, veld fires, poachers and driftsand. A great deal has already been said about invader plants, and therefore I just want to refer to them in passing. For instance there is the hakea and the Port Jackson. We are very grateful to note the work that Forestry is doing in the Kogelberg area to keep invader plants out.

We are also very pleased to learn that a new approach has been adopted with regard to veld fires. The old idea that mountains must be burnt for pastures, is something of the past. One no longer has people who want to enter the inhospitable mountains with their cattle. The only income that a private owner can therefore obtain from such a mountain, is to sell the flowers, which he protects there, and this is profitable. Consequently fires are no longer made in those areas, but now and again there is an accident and then thousands upon thousands of hectares of land with buildings and fences are destroyed. With the present-day prices of fencing material and labour, it is often scarcely worthwhile to re-fence areas when fences bum down. There is a new method of fire control, and with other methods of fire-fighting, one can expect great progress.

The flower industry is a growing, profitable one. I read that the protea cynaroides sell for as much as R7 each in Germany and Holland. Dried flowers, but particularly proteas, earn millions of rands for our country, and it is alleged that 65% of this is earned by the sale of cultivated flowers. I read in Die Burger this morning that a cross between a protea eximia and a protea magnifica has been cultivated at the research station of the Department of Agricultural Technical Services at Tygerhoek. I am proud of that. We must realize that the mere fact that something can be earned from this, obviously encourages protection of these flowers.

I now want to refer to the question of poachers. I do not think we can expect Forestry to patrol those extremely widespread areas and protect them from thieves. Last week there was a big fuss about the fact that rogues made off with large loads of erica pilansii. The hon. member for Orange Grove referred to this too. I want to suggest that stricter control be exercised on roads and depots. The people who remove the flowers there in order to sell them, must surely sell them somewhere. I think that more attention should be given to this.

I now want to refer to the valuable work which is being done by the nurseries at Highlands and Grabouw where seed is collected and shoots are cultivated. For those of us who need these things, it is a great help and I therefore want to refer to it with a great deal of appreciation.

The catchment areas to which I referred, are protected and preserved by Forestry. I now want to pass on a message to the Minister of Water Affairs to thank the Minister of Forestry for everything that he has done. These catchment areas are the source of water for the metropolitan area. If we in the Western Cape want to make progress, we must put a very high value on the water that is being conserved there.

As far as the prevention of driftsand is concerned, I want to tell the House a bit of history. About 50 years ago, in the early thirties, my father wrote a letter to the late Major Piet van der Bijl. His people and mine have been living next to one another for five generations, but of course in other respects we are not as close to one another as the good neighbourliness prevailing amongst we farmers might lead one to think. In that letter my father asked him please to use his influence in order to ensure that the driftsand problem along our coasts be combated—we already owned land there at the time and still own it today. These were the good old days when the UP was still strong and one could go to one’s UP neighbour who represented one, and ask him something. The same person was later here in the House as the member for Green Point. I was his representative at the time and then he could write such letters to me if he experienced problems.

On 2 May 1934 this hon. gentleman delivered a speech on this subject in this House. I do not know whether he spoke English or Afrikaans, but in his English Hansard we find the expression “driftsand” whilst the word “stuifsand” appears in his Afrikaans Hansard. It is strange what a battering language sometimes takes over the years. Nevertheless the result was that a start was made with planting and establishing indigenous vegetation above the high-watermark. This was done during the depression years and Whites were used for the work. It provided a living for farm foremen, smallholders and people who had been phased out of other industries. They and others who fall under the same category, are still working there today and are very happy. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I would like to exchange a few ideas with the hon. the Minister on what I want to describe as our greatest, most important natural historical heritage, viz. old Table Mountain. For those of us who love Table Mountain, it hurts to hear a journalist—and a responsible one at that—refer to this mountain as “our moth-eaten mountain”. We all stand accused here, particularly those of us who are still responsible for it at the moment. This article asks what is going to happen to Table Mountain.

This cultural heritage has now become the responsibility of the hon. the Minister and his department, and consequently it will also be the responsibility of the hon. the Minister and his department to reply to the question: “What is going to happen to Table Mountain?” It is a very topical question for those of us who are interested in the conservation of nature in this part of the country, particularly in such a sanctuary, if I may call it that, as Table Mountain. I am just touching on this because in terms of legislation which will probably be introduced to the House next year, the hon. the Minister and his department will create the machinery for determining what exactly is going to become of Table Mountain, what is going to happen to the control of Table Mountain in the future, and what can be done in order to ensure that it remains less of a moth-eaten mountain.

In this regard I should also like to put a few ideas to the consideration of the hon. the Minister. A specific part of the legislation comes from the Hey Commission which investigated the future control of the mountain and made certain recommendations. The one recommendation by Dr. Hey, viz. that the mountain should be placed under the jurisdiction of a single authoritative body was not entirely accepted by the Government, in the sense that it was decided that this department would now be responsible for it and that the machinery will also be created to determine exactly now control is to be exercised.

There is another recommendation that Dr. Hey made which I should like to bring to the attention of the hon. the Minister. Dr. Hey said that the ultimate control body which is appointed should please be Cape-orientated. Dr. Hey went on to recommend that the necessary powers and funds should be provided for fulfilling all managerial functions which would be entrusted to this body, and also that it should be properly equipped in order to exercise the proper control over natural or artificial facilities that are considered necessary and desirable for human use of the mountain range. Here Dr. Hey’s report puts a finger on the deficiencies which are the cause of the present condition, of having a moth-eaten mountain, because the present control is poor and in particular there are not adequate funds to give proper attention to protecting the mountain and saving it from further degeneration.

Nevertheless a great deal is being done and I think that we must recognize what has in fact been done in order to eradicate exotic vegetation and replace it with indigenous vegetation, and also to decrease the number of ugly phenomena appearing on the mountain. However, this body does not have enough teeth. The present control is inadequate and is not equipped with funds or adequate auxiliary methods to do so properly.

Various proposals were made, and I assume that the proposed legislation will provide for the fact that Table Mountain will be declared a nature reserve and that a management committee will be appointed, which will confer and furnish the hon. the Minister with advice as to exactly what the ultimate form of control should be. I hope that that process will be followed through and that people who intend to make a contribution, will be able to raise their ideas.

Business interrupted in accordance with Standing Order No. 22.

House Resumed:

Progress reported and leave granted to sit again.