Mr Speaker, before I say anything specific about the Part Appropriation Bill, if you will allow me, I should like to say that whereas this is the first occasion that we meet to discuss a Ministers’ Council measure in this session of Parliament and whereas, in the interim, the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council has been elevated to the leadership of the NP, I should like simply to congratulate him on behalf of the Ministers’ Council and on behalf of all of us on this side of the House. We feel privileged that the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council finds himself in this elevated position. We are quite sure that he has the skill, the experience, the ability and the background to do this job also with great distinction.

*The purpose of this Part Appropriation Bill is to appropriate an amount of R2 509,773 million to finance the expenditure of those departments which fall under the Administration: House of Assembly until such time as the Main Budget of the Administration: House of Assembly for the 1989-90 financial year is agreed to.

The Part Appropriation Bill for 1988-89 amounted to R2 186,8 million, compared to the amount of R2 509,773 million that is being requested at present. This represents an increase of R322,973 million or 14,8%. This increase is mainly due to the carry-over costs resulting from the improvement of conditions of service, as well as the raising of social pensions and allowances. Provision also had to be made for funds to operate those hospitals which will be transferred to the Department of Health Services and Welfare as from 1 April 1989.

As hon members know, the amounts appropriated in terms of a Part Appropriation Act are regarded as advances under section 4 of the Exchequer and Audit Act, 1975, and the authorisation for such advances expires upon the commencement of the Appropriation Act for the financial year concerned. Payments already made at that stage, in terms of the Part Appropriation Act, are then deemed to be payments made in terms of the Appropriation Act. I would like to emphasise that we are dealing here with a Bill which traditionally contains only sketchy information, and the purpose of which is to authorise the current expenditure of the Administration: House of Assembly as from 1 April until such time as the Main Budget is agreed to.

†It must be borne in mind that the moneys which are now being requested for the Administration: House of Assembly must be regarded as a minimum amount required during this interim phase for the continued rendering of existing services. It is important to note that money appropriated by a Part Appropriation Act in terms of the said section 4 of the Exchequer and Audit Act, may only be utilized for services in respect of which expenditure was authorised by an Appropriation Act during the immediately preceding financial year or in respect of which some other authorisation by way of an Act of Parliament exists.

As far as the monthly rate of spending is concerned, the expenditure of the Departments of Health Services and Welfare, Local Government, Housing and Works, and of Budgetary and Auxiliary Services follow a fixed pattern. The spending pattern of the Departments of Agriculture and Water Supply and of Education and Culture, however, fluctuates. In the case of the latter, this is mainly due to the fact that subsidies in respect of interest on carry-over debts, Land and Agricultural Bank loans to farmers in designated areas are payable at half-yearly periods, namely in the months of January and July.

As far as the payments to universities and technikons which fall under the control of the Department of Education and Culture are concerned, the majority of the subsidies are payable at the beginning of each financial year due to the fact that these institutions operate from the beginning of a calendar year, as against the fiscal year of the State, which starts on 1 April.

On the other hand, the educational components of the Department of Education and Culture follow a fixed pattern of monthly expenditure, except for the months of April and July, when specific payments in respect of service bonuses and bursaries must be met. The effect of this is that the larger amounts are paid out in these months, as compared to the rest of the financial year.

The financing of the Revenue Account of the Administration: House of Assembly, in 1989-90 will again be dealt with in the same manner as in the past three financial years. Amounts for the 1989-90 financial year will therefore not be made available in terms of section 84(a) of the Republic of South Africa Constitution Act, No 110 of 1983, but only in terms of section 84 (b) and (c). Since section 84 (a) provides that funds are statutorily guaranteed in accordance with a specified formula, it follows that in the absence of formula legislation, funds for own affairs are negotiated as in the past in terms of section 84(b) and (c).

The hon the Minister is reading last year’s speech which we are following word for word in Hansard. [Interjections.]

It follows exactly the same pattern as last year. [Interjections.] This will endorse why we have often said in this House that a part appropriation debate should be done away with. It is a spurious thing and it should be a non-event, as it follows on having discussed the hon the State President’s opening address, a no confidence debate in all the Houses, and now we repeat the same performance, although we all know that it is purely a procedural matter in order to finance the next year’s expenditure. [Interjections.]

If hon members want to know exactly what happened and have questions to ask, we are ready to give account of ourselves in respect of any questions which they may ask. [Interjections.]

*Section 84(a) in essence provides that each of the three Houses should be assured of at least a statutory basic amount in regard to own affairs. For this reason, negotiations regarding the determination of formulas for the financing of own affairs are taking place all the time. I recently discussed the matter with the hon the Minister of Finance once again and the impression was created that we were indeed moving towards a solution. I shall probably be able to furnish further details in this regard during the debate on the Main Budget.

Finally, I should like to point out that the Ministers’ Council of the House of Assembly is very much aware of the gravity of the present exceptionally difficult financial situation, and I therefore wish to give the assurance that the respective Ministers and their departments will apply strict financial discipline throughout. The Ministers’ Council also gives constant attention to the priority classification of the respective services which have to be financed and …

Order! Hon members are conversing very loudly and should please lower their voices, so that the Chair can also hear what the hon the Minister is saying. The hon the Minister may proceed with his speech.

Wherever possible, expenditure is reduced by scaling down or reducing services.

Mr Speaker, in the light of the hon member for Yeoville’s interjection that the hon the Minister had repeated his speech of last year, I want to congratulate the hon the Minister from this side of the House. [Interjections.] I think he is one of the few hon Ministers in this House who holds the same point of view for a whole year! [Interjections.]

The hon the Minister must not expect us to react in detail to what he said here this afternoon. In reality he has no say in or influence on the financial policy of the Government. As an own affairs Minister he is not much more than a distribution clerk or accounting official who is attempting to share the crumbs that have fallen from the richly laden table of the hon the Minister of Finance among his people who are growing steadily poorer. The hon member for Lichtenburg once said that that hon Minister had far fewer powers to exercise than those of the mayor of Slaplaagte. That is why I want to confine myself to a different subject today.

Over the past few years, but especially recently, Dr Danie Craven has interfered in the politics of this country in an extremely arrogant way. In The Sowetan of 8 November of last year he not only said that the Group Areas Act should be swept from the face of South Africa, he was not only extremely friendly to the ANC in his statements, but also threatened that mixed school sport would be forced upon school principals and school children. The report involved inter alia reads as follows:

I think that all of us in this House have the greatest appreciation for what Dr Craven has meant to rugby in South Africa over the years but on the other hand I do not appreciate the reckless way in which he is abusing sport at the moment to promote his radical left-wing political objectives for South Africa. If he now goes so far as to attempt involving school children in his predominating obsession with integration in this country, I can do nothing else but tell him very directly and clearly this afternoon that we shall offer the most powerful resistance to having our children forced into a multiracial educational dispensation in South Africa through the medium of sport.

We also want to tell him that chances are very good that the CP will take over the reins of government in South Africa during his lifetime. [Interjections.] I am quite aware—I shall not blurt it out in this House—how old Dr Craven is at the moment. Then he will not have a free hand to accord a terrorist organisation an undeserved status and to threaten schools with racial integration.

I actually want to take this opportunity to dwell on the new school sports policy which was announced last year by the hon the Minister of Education and Culture. The hon the Minister disclosed that decision-making on mixed school sport would in future devolve upon school principals and on management boards. This change in management policy is in step with the policy of the devolution of power in other own affairs spheres as well. So for instance it was promised before the municipal elections last year that city councils themselves would be able to decide on certain matters. The NP election manifesto stated:

But now we have a problem with these undertakings which were given by the Government. When the CP town council of Boksburg exercised its local option, that was the very time when the NP and its television and its Press opened fire on Boksburg to try to wipe it from the face of the earth.

It then appeared that that promise that city councils themselves could decide whether their facilities would be open or not had not been meant seriously. In fact, it then appeared that that undertaking was only a calculated NP attempt to reassure the many deluded conservatives in its ranks. Can it then be held against the CP if we draw the logical conclusion that, when it comes to school sport, we shall be able to trust the hon the Minister of Education and Culture just as little as we can trust the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning in terms of his promises to city councils.

Boksburg parents are already asking us what will happen when management boards in Boksburg express their opposition to mixed school sport. Will our member of Parliament respect our right to decide on this or will he again join the same chorus of left-wing radicals and accuse us of racism?

Vereeniging parents are already asking us now whether the same boycott war will be waged in Vereeniging if they carry out the wishes of the vast majority of parents and refuse to take part in mixed school sport. Will our MP also jump down our throats as he did with the Boksburg town council?

Virginia parents are already asking us whether their MP was really serious when he promised that they could decide ourselves, without outside interference, intimidation and boycotts, whether their children could compete against those of colour.

We want to be informed urgently of the following by the hon the Minister of Education and Culture today. Will schools which exercise their choice in favour of separateness be left in peace to go their own way or will he permit the SABC, the Government Press and also his colleagues on that side of the House to victimise and intimidate those management boards as they did the Boksburg town council?

If the hon the Minister retains a scrap of reason, I want to ask him this afternoon whether any right-minded voter can be blamed if he deduces after the Boksburg victimisation that the Government does permit a local option but then only where it does not clash with a policy of integration. The Government must know this. We are telling them this openly this afternoon so that they cannot say afterwards that we were gossiping behind their backs. The CP will tell the voters from every platform available to it in South Africa that the NP crucified the Boksburg town council when it exercised its devolved power in favour of separateness. That is why it is only logical that the NP will crucify management boards and school principals if they are going to exercise their devolved power in favour of separate school sport in Vereeniging, Virginia or elsewhere. I challenge hon members on that side of the House this afternoon to tell us that they are not going to do so.

I challenge the hon the Minister—he is sitting mute now and not saying anything—to say that he is not going to do so. He cannot do this because they have become the party par excellence in this House about which it may be said with justification: As many standpoints as there are possibilities.

I should like to raise a further aspect of the Government’s sport policy. The Government says in its policy document on this that school sport and school cultural activities are an integrated part of the educational programme of a school. I am in wholehearted agreement with that standpoint. School sport is an extension of the process of education which takes place in the classroom. If that is so, however, and it is so, then the hon the Minister does not have the moral right to leave the choice to parents in one part of the educational programme—that is school sport—and not to leave the choice to parents in the rest of the educational programme—that is the part in the classroom. If one has made concessions about parts of the educational programme at some schools, that is the hon the Minister and his department’s concession as regards integration in school sport, moral grounds fall away if this is not also permitted in respect of the rest of the educational programme.

I am amazed at the inept way in which the Government formulates its policy. I am amazed at the lack of logic and consistency in the formulation of Government policy. I am also amazed that they have underestimated the Coloureds, Indians and Black people, who will not be satisfied with an inch but will want everything when it comes to education. Just listen to what a Black man says in The Indicator, as reported in the Sunday Tribune of 22 March 1987, arising from the Menlo Park episode:

As they have done now—

That is the point: “Education must be non-racial”. [Interjections.]

Order!

Perhaps there is one comment made by the hon member for Innesdal which the hon the Minister should note. He said a person could not carry out reform halfway; then one had to explain all the way. The hon the Minister could well turn his attention to this.

The demand that school sport be integrated so that South Africa may again be permitted to compete internationally is not acceptable to the CP. We are also fond of sport. We should also like our sportsmen and sportswomen to be able to compete against the best in the world.

Just as long as they are White! [Interjections.]

The price to be paid for this is too high, however, in the opinion of the CP, which has to think of all South Africa’s interests. [Interjections.] We have priorities which are higher than international competition. We want to retain our self-respect in this country. We want to retain our identity. We want to ensure our survival as a free people in a country of our own and under a government of our own in South Africa. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, if I understood the hon member for Brits correctly, he expressed criticism of the NP sports policy. He even extended his criticism to school level; he mentioned the Menlo Park High School by name.

What is the sports policy of those hon members, however?

Ask Frank le Roux!

Did they not apply it at Menlo Park and what were the consequences for that school committee which tried to apply it? Where are they today? [Interjections.] They have been entirely rejected—repudiated and lost through the CP’s doing! [Interjections.]

Are you in favour of mixed school sport? [Interjections.]

The hon member for Brits is obviously opposed to racial integration because he wants to bring about a pure situation in which there will be no intermingling. He is a separatist, of course, we find separatists throughout the world. All the hon members of the CP who are sitting there now are separatists. [Interjections.] We find three types or categories of separatists on the Opposition side. There are the Black pain people, the White pain people and the mixed pain people. What I mean in talking about Black pain CPs is the following. They are those CPs who want Black people to experience pain and inconvenience so that they can bring about a White homeland. They want to drive out the Blacks so that they can have their White homeland. [Interjections.] The leader among those who recognise that philosophy is the hon member for Lichtenburg of course. He is the one who explains how he intends moving all Black people. Surely he knows that, even if he moved 50 000 Black people every month, he would, after 10 years, still not have moved enough Blacks to be able to establish his White homeland.

Are you in favour of a Black State President? [Interjections.]

Order!

Mr Chairman, the damning statement comes from Prof Carel Boshoff of course. He says:

The Black pain CPs are condemned by Prof Carel Boshoff. He condemns them as immoral.

And he is their co-leader!

Yes, he condemns them as immoral. [Interjections.] I wonder what the hon member for Lichtenburg thinks of that statement of Prof Carel Boshoffs.

You are going to be moved from Klip River! [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, then of course we also have the White pain CPs. The White pain CPs are those who want White people to experience the inconvenience and pain so that they have to move to a White homeland. The foremost protagonists of this are the hon member for Bethal and the hon member for Ermelo. After all, they did write a little book. Witman, waar is jou tuisland? is its title. They are the ones who want to move to a small homeland. [Interjections.]

Thirdly there are still the mixed pain CPs too. These are the ones whose statements are so mixed that one does not know whether one should place them in the first or in the second category. [Interjections.]

The question now is where Prof Carel Boshoff fits in. Of course, he is pre-eminently a White pain person because, by means of the “Afrikanervolkstaat” which he has now proposed, he wants to lead White people into the desert. He wants to lead them right into the Kalahari, into Bushmanland and into the Namib desert. [Interjections.]

Now it may of course also be asked where the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition fits in. In what category should one place him? Because he makes so many statements about partition, I want to suggest that, because he has already commented and said that he cannot see how Black people can be moved on a large scale, he is a White pain person. That is why he is a White pain person.

Mr Chairman, if one looks at what Prof Boshoff proposes, the question is then whether this proposal is at all feasible. The hon the Leader of the Official Opposition says that he has no problem with this proposal. He therefore accepts the White homeland which is much smaller than the larger area.

Order! I am listening attentively to the hon member for Klip River. The hon member is talking about a White homeland which is being proposed. Could the hon member explain to me what bearing this has on the Bill under discussion?

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: I have been under the impression—as we settled last year—that one could go wide in this debate. In other words, it was not restricted in any way.

I appreciate the fact that the discussion in this debate is of a fairly wide nature. It also covers the political arena. It seems appropriate to me, however, that hon members should somehow tie their arguments up with the Bill under discussion.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: The mandate of the Administration: House of Assembly, whose Part Appropriation is before us now, is to watch over the specific interests of the White population group. I would therefore say that any plans of any other party which says that this is the best way to watch over the interests of the Whites are certainly relevant to the debate. [Interjections.]

Order! May I react to the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council? That is precisely the type of argument which I would expect from an hon member if he wanted to discuss such a case. He should at least say that it was in the interests of the White population group whose Vote is being discussed here now.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: This matter has been raised and ruled upon repeatedly and the ruling that has been given by Mr Speaker is that there is no restriction on the debate. Even if one thinks that it sounds better to mention money or the word “part appropriation” every now and then, it is still okay. The reality is that Mr Speaker has ruled that anything goes here! Whether it is a good or bad thing is another question. Anyone can talk on anything …

Order! The hon member for Klip River may proceed. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, Prof Carel Boshoff put forward a proposal which I am led to believe was rejected by hon members of the Opposition. I cannot understand on what grounds they rejected it. I should like to quote from a speech which was made by the Cape leader of the CP and former MP for Kuruman, Mr Jan Hoon, before the general election which was held on 6 May 1987. [Interjections.] He said:

[Interjections.]

He also said that, if the CP came to power and wanted to carry out the mandate of White Afrikaners and this clashed directly with that of the Coloureds, then the CP would say: To hell with consensus! [Interjections.]

The reason why I am quoting this portion is to show that separatists thrive on conflict. The CP knows that Afrikaners will not move voluntarily to Morgenzon or the Boshoff state or any homeland. The CP knows that the relocation of populations throughout the world takes place only by force. That is why the CP will seek conflict in order to make progress. They are a conflictseeking party because they know that they can only give substance to their statements in a violent situation. The CP will therefore incite violence and encourage revolution. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, the debate we have just heard between these two hon members just now was fascinating. Essentially it was a debate on degrees of racism. The part I found most interesting was when the hon member for Brits supported a statement made by the hon member for Innesdal. That hon member had said that if one reforms half-way, one will have to explain all the way. There are some of us who, on account of past experience, can testify to the validity of that statement. On my own behalf and that of the hon members of the PFP I associate myself with that statement. The statement that if one reforms half-way, one has to explain all the way, is apparently supported by all three parties in the House.

What does the NDM say?

We agree!

I want to resist the temptation of participating further in this debate between the NP and the CP. I wish to participate in the debate for quite another reason.

†I wish to pursue something that was raised yesterday in another place by my colleagues, the hon members for Johannesburg North and for Cape Town Gardens, namely the question of the hon the Minister of Education and Development Aid and the departments for which he is responsible. I want to state immediately that we are aware that the hon Jhc Minister cannot be here this afternoon and that our request that he should be here reached the NP at a time when he was already away and it was not convenient for him to be here. I record that before I continue but to us the urgency of the matter seems to be such that we could not postpone this intervention.

We think that it is urgent that the position of the hon the Minister is reviewed and that the appropriate action takes place. We stress that there is no question of any personal animosity on our part; on the contrary, we would like to say that we find the hon the Minister one of the most likeable gentlemen in the Cabinet. The fact is that the steady decline in the circumstances in and administration of both departments concerned is such that action becomes urgent.

The administration of these departments has been under a cloud—on and off—for some years. In the case of the Department of Education and Training it began in early 1987 when the journal Finansies en Tegniek produced stories about irregularities in the department with regard to the company Learntech. These were correctly referred by the hon the Minister to the Advocate-General, who was highly critical of the department in his report.

On 6 June 1988 the Joint Committee on Public Accounts expressed its serious concern at the fact that, despite the possible urgent need for interactive video and computer equipment, there was no proper follow-up in obtaining the approval of the State Tender Board in order to determine or ensure that the requirements were complied with. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I will not react directly to the hon leader of the PFP. I believe that other hon members on our side of the House will react to his speech later.

With reference to the speech of the hon member for Brits I should like to mention a few things. I think that the hon members on this side would regard it as a great disaster if the CP ever came into power. However improbable it may seem, it would be a great disaster.

Although it will be a disaster for South Africa, I want to say that if the CP assumes the reins of Government it would be a fatal disaster for themselves. It would be a disaster for them because if they were faced with the administration of this country and they tried to handle it the way they are doing in Boksburg, the reaction of this country and its people would be sufficient to make it impossible for them to govern this country.

The hon members of the CP naturally took cognisance of the latest news report on Boksburg. They know that the CP-controlled town council of Boksburg threatened the people of Reiger Park. Unless they made their purchases at the White businesses in Boksburg, their services would be curtailed. The hon members are aware of this threat. Is this the manner, method and impact that the CP will have if they should assume the reins of power in this country? That is why I say that the worst blow that could hit the CP would be to come into power.

The monuments which the hon member of the CP wants to erect for Boksburg will serve in history as proof that what the CP recommended as a practical alternative for the NP was not feasible.

What does the CP say? The hon member for Lichtenburg is unfortunately not present in the Chamber at the moment. What the hon member envisaged, as he saw the CP policy, was that it would culminate in 70% Whites in White South Africa and the Blacks in the minority. Even if it is a minority of Black people who have to be dealt with, how would the CP govern the country on the basis stipulated by the CP itself, viz fairness, non-discrimination and no domination, as far as those people were concerned? How will the CP coexist with those people? On the part of the CP there are of course the examples which are given to tell us how hon members would handle it. The example continuously given is that of Israel. Hon members will remember that the hon member of the CP told the NP two years ago to look at Israel and to learn from that country. It is interesting for me that there are also other leaders of the CP who hold up that lesson to us. I would like to quote a single example to the hon members from Hansard: Assembly, 21 May 1987 col 268, regarding what Dr Connie Mulder said:

He went on to say:

I think that it is fair if the hon members point out that we could consider such an example in the world. In the no-confidence debate during this session the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition said:

The example is being given again—

Now I find this very interesting.

What is the real example that Israel sets us? I made enquiries some time ago and, strangely enough, I also furnished the information in this House, but the hon members did not pay any attention to it. They continue to cling to this model.

I requested the Department of Foreign Affairs to make enquiries at the Israeli Embassy so that we would have the information at first hand, and this is their reply in regard to the franchise.

Everybody, also Arabs, are citizens and are entitled to vote. The last parliamentary election on 23 July 1987 resulted in the following according to this report:

Now the hon members cite this as an example for us to follow.

Why then the disturbances in Israel?

With this as example they will therefore allow Black voters to vote on one voters’ roll in their White homeland. That is the example they are holding up to. [Interjections.]

What is the basis of their policy further? Let us look at the third tier of government. In their Programme of Principles the CP says the following:

In a propaganda document they go further and ask themselves exactly how Blacks are going to be governed outside their national states. They give the following reply:

This is wonderful, but the CP continues:

Then they continue with the linkage idea:

Now the hon members know as well as I do that at this stage the national states—and this will also be the situation in future—are heavily subsidised by the government of this country in regard to these services as well. After all, they do not argue with us when we say that it must be continued, but now they come and state in a programme of principles that they foresee that aid will have to be provided by the national states on local level outside those national states. This is utter foolishness. They must ask themselves why then the extreme reaction in Boksburg. The answer is obvious. If the CP acts in the rest of South Africa as it did in Boksburg, it is going to have no end of trouble. [Interjections.]

It is interesting to see that the following proposal to CP town council members who might be elected appeared under the name of the hon member for Middelburg among the items on the agenda at the Transvaal municipal congress of the CP on Saturday, 12 November 1988:

He says that CP town councils must not participate in relations committees. Does the CP agree that this is the way in which to solve the problems of this country? I quote further:

There must be no participation in such committees. He has another method for liaison, and it is mentioned in the next point:

He is therefore acting on the assumption that … [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, it amazes me that the hon member for Fauresmith, who until very recently understood full well how separate development worked, both with regard to its moral basis and how it must be implemented, is now talking such absolute nonsense on the subject. [Interjections.]

This is the first opportunity I have had during this Parliamentary session to lodge a plea asking for urgent attention to be given to the droughtstricken and threatened White community of the Bushveld in the North-Western Transvaal. May I also take the opportunity to thank the hon the Deputy Minister of Agriculture for visiting my constituency last month. I hope that much good will come from this visit.

This afternoon I want to turn to the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council and I make an appeal to the new leader of the NP to heed the many CP requests, particularly those made over the past two years, to develop and implement a plan of action in conjunction with the Official Opposition, the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition, the hon member for Soutpansberg, the hon member for Pietersburg and myself, and also with interested bodies, to enable the Whites of the Bushveld, mainly the staunch Afrikaners, to occupy their place of honour once more. We must do this for the sake of the Bushveld, our people and South Africa.

The time for talking, investigating and taking action in the normal course of events is past. The Bushveld is experiencing a crisis, and we must recognise this for what it is. What is happening there is not a sudden, devastating flood disaster which momentarily arouses strong emotions and a sense of wanting to help. It is an exhausting, soul-destroying drought which has mercilessly drained both man and beast and our natural resources for almost the past eight years. Those who come to the Bushveld from time to time for brainstorming sessions, excursions and hunting expeditions, to get away from their familiar environment, very often do not see the real misery and threat to their existence behind the farmers’ hospitable smiles.

According to provisional figures of the NTC a maximum of 22% of the normal harvest is expected for this year. This is worse than last year, when the figure was 28%. We see on television that a few millimetres fell here and there, and then think that it has rained in the Bushveld. The small amount which fell there has made no impression whatsoever on the appalling conditions prevailing there. Auctions are taking place to an increasing extent. Apart from the enforced bankruptcy auctions, more stock auctions are also taking place at which breeding stock have to be sold because there is no grazing, and there will be none in the winter either. This is because there is no capital to purchase fodder and because the stock, which are capital assets, must be converted to cash in order to purchase essential provisions. This would be the equivalent of an urban dweller having to sell his car, his furniture or his house in order to buy food, clothes and groceries to live on. In the Eastern Cape three magisterial districts have been declared drought disaster areas. It is with conviction that I state that if the same were done in the Bushveld, it would not be enough. At most it would be a start. The current financial aid schemes appear to be inadequate for large parts of this area. The normal requirements of security in terms of agricultural value and loans in accordance with one’s ability to repay the loans, are simply not practical. A completely new approach is necessary. Bridging finance is only a part of the answer, but it is vital.

I cannot see how the area can be stabilised if the Government is instrumental in services being curtailed. Postal and road transport, and in certain parts rail transport, are being scaled down. In the Legal Succession to the South African Transport Services Bill provision is being made for the Government to request the Transport Services to provide certain unremunerative or uneconomical services for a consideration. This sounds fine, but if those services have already been curtailed, and the Transport Services has not yet been transformed into a new public company, what reasonable expectation can there be that the Government will, in fact, subsidise these services at a later stage? The Government’s action simply makes no sense.

It was the hon the Deputy Minister of Agriculture’s task to announce on 25 January in my constituency that the Ministers’ Council had resolved to abolish the territorial allowance of R500 per month as from 1 April this year. There is speculation as to whether any alternative will be introduced at all; and if so, in what form. I should also like to express a few thoughts on this matter, but the critically important question is why this allowance was abolished before an effective alternative had been found and introduced.

Do hon members know what misery this is causing those involved? Do hon members know what this means to people who are, in point of fact, completely dependent on that allowance, people with children who go to school; who drive for kilometres to the closest towns and schools, at a higher petrol price than hon members are used to on the Rand and in Pretoria; who must have food and clothing to survive, and who must draw all this from that paltry R500 per month?

I make an appeal to the hon leader of the NP, also in his capacity as Chairman of the White Ministers’ Council: Do not abolish the present allowance before an effective alternative has been found. I am asking this because the feeling of desperation, which is now apparent in the border area, presages a drastic depopulation of the area.

This is something which, from a security point of view, we cannot afford. The people of the Bushveld form a buffer between the cold-blooded terrorists of the ANC on the one hand, and the densely populated White residential areas in South Africa, in Pretoria and the Witwatersrand, on the other. They are at the outposts. We cannot afford to lose them. In the interests of South Africa’s security and territorial integrity it must be made possible for them to remain at these outposts. The SADF itself has often stated in the past that the cost of defence in this area would be 14 times greater if the SADF had to undertake it without the active presence of the existing community. South Africa cannot pay this price.

I am also morally obliged to bring to the attention of the House the failure of the Rooibok 4, the landmine-proof motor vehicles used by the border farmers. As a result of the security situation and the essential safeguarding of border farmers and their families, a certain vehicle manufacturer, produced the Rooibok 4 in conjunction with the Government, the CSIR, the SABS and the SADF. The farmers had to buy it themselves, but the Government subsidised the price over a repayment period of five years. At the rate at which these vehicles are breaking down, the farmers and the State are already paying a high price for something that cannot be used and will eventually simply no longer exist.

Let me mention to hon members a few of the defects: The entire chassis is hopeless; the shock absorbers break loose from the chassis; the air filters fall off; the bumpers and the emblem regularly fall off; the bodywork breaks loose from the chassis; the bonnet catches break off; the diesel tank bursts open; differentials and wheelbearings give in; bodywork which is popriveted continually tears loose; water leaks in at the air vents and doors; the gearboxes of some vehicles are still giving problems; the tyres are too light for the vehicle and must be replaced after 15 000 kilometres; the tubes disintegrate—it sounds almost like the NP—spare wheels break off; seat belts are too large and cannot be adjusted; the batteries explode as a result of electrical wiring problems; the battery-holders break off; bullet-proof windows are cracked by small stones one could go on in this vein. Representations by the farmers to various bodies meet with a negative response.

So I can go on, but I conclude with two thoughts, because my time has expired. A new approach is necessary. The task groups of the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning cannot deal with the situation in a satisfactory way or quickly enough. Only a few of the initial expectations of a co-ordinated Government programme have materialised. I ask for the Official Opposition and all interested bodies to be involved in an urgent and imaginative effort to deal with this as a matter of the utmost priority. The people of the Bushveld are proud people. They do not expect alms. They ask for their territory to be protected. [Time expired ]

Order! I notice a tendency in the House for hon members not to pay attention when the presiding officer says their time has expired. Hon members must please keep to their allocated time, and if it has expired, they must resume their seat.

Mr Chairman, I have great sympathy with anyone who finds himself in any disaster-stricken area, whether because of drought, floods or whatever. Any properly adjusted human being would very much like relief to be brought to people in distress.

I want to tell the hon member for Brits, who addressed a large part of his speech to me, that I shall respond to this in greater detail at a later stage, possibly in the Budget debate or in the debate on my Vote. In the meantime I merely want to tell him that we have a certain cultural and sports policy which we adhere to. Yes, that sports policy acknowledges the principle of devolution of authority and therefore gives the management council, which is elected by the majority of the parents, the right to take certain decisions. There is clarity on that aspect.

This will take place as long as that management council consists of the representatives of the majority of the parents, as is the case in Pietersburg at present, where I understand there was an election of a management council at a specific school last night and eight out of the eight members were elected by the NP. [Interjections.]

Order!

As long as the majority of the parents have elected those representatives, the representatives will carry out their wishes by means of the management council as determined by the sports policy.

Anyone, whether an individual or a political party, who cannot accept and take into account the realities of the Republic of South Africa and the people who live here cannot proffer a solution to the problems of this country.

We live in a country rich in minerals and raw materials, but also rich in different ethnic groups. With my whole heart I believe that the future of this country will only be built by co-operation and by the acknowledgement of the rights of all groups, each with its own culture, customs and community life. That is a reality.

When I think of the Official Opposition or the PFP, I want to argue that the PFP has not acknowledged this simple truth over the years. The result is that it has become a struggling party, which eventually, after having been the Official Opposition, is going to be taken over by another party. I find it ironic that a once powerful party such as the PFP is going to lose its dignity and its pride by being taken over one of these days by what, at present, is a faceless party. This once powerful opposition party has been had its policy and party structure hijacked and has to sacrifice everything—its policy, its leader and its pride—to a phantom party with three leaders and four advisers. I contend that such a party is doomed to not being able to find a solution for the country, simply as a result of the fact that they want to create a faceless entity encompassing all different cultures. Despite its bravado, the CP will not be able to do so either. It will not be able to find a solution to the problems, because it too does not want to grant everyone the rights that such people want to command, because White domination dominates the thinking of the CP to such an extent that they are simply blind to the realities and will lead this country to chaos if they should ever come into power.

The CP is struggling with many leaders and advisers. The hon the Leader of the Official Opposition is struggling to steal the limelight from Mr Eugene Terre’Blanche. Fortunately for him there was such turbulence in the ranks of the AWB that he managed to get some breathing-space. As far as I know, however, it is a fact that there are still AWB members and/or supporters in the caucus of the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition. The question is what those hon members are doing. Do they reject this so-called cultural party which the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition made such a fuss about! Are they rejecting the cultural leader or do they still support the policy of the AWB? Of course the CP also has a third leader. We saw him in action here this afternoon. He is the hon member for Potgietersrus, who recently declared with conviction in the House that every town council member in his constituency was carrying out CP policy.

With reference to the debacle we have seen in the various town councils, I should like to ask the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition something.

Perhaps he should inform that hon member of his policy with regard to town councils.

He does not know!

We want to know what it is, especially with reference to the directives the hon member for Middelburg made known, and to which the hon member for Fauresmith referred. Is it perhaps that this policy may not be spelt out now? It was that same hon member for Potgietersrus who said in reply to a question at Hertzogville last year that it was an achievement to have kept CP supporters in the dark about the true meaning of partition for six years, before they began protesting about it. [Interjections.]

In reply to a proposal at the CP congress in the Transvaal that an urgent investigation be made into geographic demarcation, the hon the leader of the CP himself postponed his party’s official standpoint on secession until, and I quote it as reported in the newspaper, they had “taken over political power”. That is true, after all. Hon members know that. In answer to a request at the same congress that a constitution for the RSA be drawn up according to CP principles, the hon the leader of the CP indicated that the publication of such a document was no priority. My question is whether perhaps the CP wants to take over power before explaining to its voters what in fact they have been supporting.

The Official Opposition also pride themselves on their advisers. They have Prof Carel Boshoff of the Afrikaner-Volkswag and the Stigting Afrikanervryheid, who is regarded as the leading thinker. He is an exceptional leading thinker, and I want to refer to what he said in the first policy document issued by the Stigting Afrikanervryheid. I shall come back to that later. I quote:

The hon members of the CP should therefore not be at all surprised that there is a proposal which does not really—so it seems to me—appeal to the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition and of the CP.

They have other leaders as well. They have Mr Hendrik Verwoerd of the Oranje-Werkers. They have Prof Alkmaar Swart of Aksie Eie Toekoms, and of course they have the former hon member for Rissik, Mr Daan van der Merwe, who is the authority on separate cultural festivals. They therefore have a number of advisers. The question now is … [Interjections.]

Order!

If the CP is satisfied with the premise that a self-determining people should have its own fatherland, but is not satisfied with the arid, desolate and isolated White-man’s-land of Prof Carel Boshoff or with the Oranje-Werkers’ Morgenzon, it is their duty and responsibility as the Official Opposition to draw the boundaries now. [Interjections.] If the heart of their White homeland is territory which is in the possession of Whites at present, they must say at the same time how they are going to remove the people of colour—where to, where is the money going to come from, and so on.

The existence of ethnic groups in a multi-cultural country is a reality. The CP can say what they like, but the fact is that each of these groups is a minority group. That includes the Whites. The question and challenge is how to protect each minority group against domination by other groups—against baasskap, whether it is White, Black or Coloured. In my opinion the statement made by the hon the leader of the PFP that we should accept the Blacks as a majority group does not take into account the ethnic diversity within Black ranks. A further question—this is the challenge—is how one gives each group political rights, which is its right, without effecting domination of one group over another in the constitutional model. One cannot do this on the basis of real numbers, but on the basis of the acknowledgement of groups which have certain rights, such as political rights, an own community life, an own cultural life, own schools and equal opportunities. In my opinion this also forms the basis of the definition of an ethnic group. Past reproaches will not determine the future. Naturally one must learn from the mistakes of the past and from what was good, but to carry on with biting and sharp reproaches and condemnations from the past will not create a climate for resolute and balanced thinking about the realities of the day or for solutions to present and future problems. The fact is that the various groups rights must be acknowledged and that a joint effort must be made to build the future. Everyone has a contribution to make on an equal level. Power-sharing, yes, but still with the protection of minority groups. Rejection of White domination, yes of course, but not the replacement of that by Black or any other domination. [Interjections.] Only by acknowledging the rights—all rights of all ethnic groups—… [Interjections.]

Order!

… and by taking care of everyone’s interests can security, peace and progress be ensured in this country. [Interjections.] The solution does not reside in domination or in the denial of the different ethnicities and cultures, but in co-operation and in the acknowledgement that each group has a contribution to make in the interests of everyone who lives in this country. The Official Opposition are living in a dream world if they think they can lead this country with all its people to peace, prosperity and stability if they want to continue with White domination and if they want to take the decisions about the rights other population groups have. The CP-controlled town councils are the clearest proof of this. What is happening in practice in so many communities today is clear proof that the policies spelt out by the CP up to this stage simply cannot stand firm in practice. I can mention numerous examples, and since Welkom is my part of the world, I could indicate how those CP members declared categorically in the town council that they were not prepared to carry out the guidelines laid down by the hon member for Middelburg.

Piet, where do you spend your holidays? Among the apartheid signs in Kleinmond? [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Losberg can shout as much as he likes. He will not shout me down. [Interjections.] The hon member is hurting. That is why he is carrying on so. [Interjections.]

Order!

The fact of the matter is that that hon member is sitting in a party which he knows will lead this country to its downfall. [Interjections.] The CP will lead this country to its downfall if it should continue according to the policies spelt out here by those hon members. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, I want to conclude by saying that the only true solution to this country’s problems lies in our examining the problems together, in utilising the gifts at our disposal—whether these are personal gifts or riches which the good Lord has bestowed upon this country—and by seeking a solution together in utilising these gifts in the interests of everyone in this country.

Mr Chairman, unfortunately I do not have enough time to argue with the hon the Minister of Education and Culture about his motherhood and apple-pie speech on how to solve the problems of South Africa. I should, however, like to remind him, talking about reality, that his Government has been in power for more than 40 years and the only way in which they appear to be able to rule this country is by way of an ongoing state of emergency. If that is solving South Africa’s problems, I am afraid I have to look elsewhere for another solution.

That brings me right back again to the whole question of detainees and hunger strikes. I believe there is nobody in this House—indeed in South Africa; no sensible person anyway—who was not very relieved indeed to hear that the hunger strike among the 170 detainees at Diep-kloof, the Johannesburg prison, and the 107 detainees in the St Albans Prison at Port Elizabeth had been called of in response to the hon the Minister’s undertaking to review all the cases of those detainees on the list he submitted to Parliament last week—a list containing the names of about 850 people. Not all of those people are still detained, I want to say at once.

Alas, our relief has been short-lived, because now we learn that in Natal there are some 150 detainees who have embarked on a hunger strike—105 at Pietermaritzburg prison, 43 at Westville prison and some others in Durban and its environs. Let nobody in this House be under the illusion that the original hunger strikers will not resume their fast unless the next couple of weeks produce a very substantial number of releases, and without the strict restrictions which the hon the Minister is placing on people when they are released.

I want to tell the hon the Minister of Law and Order it is not a question of blackmail, which is what he said earlier this afternoon. It is a question of desperation on the part of those people. I want to tell the hon the Minister he should not be worrying about saving face in this situation. He must worry about saving lives in this situation. I do not agree with Brigadier Leon Mellet’s optimistic assessment that “the matter of the hunger strike and the detainees involved is now something of the past”. I believe that hunger strikes are going to recur again and again as long as there is detention without trial in this country.

My attitude towards detention without trial is on record since 1963, when I opposed the first 90-day detention legislation in this House, and was the only MP to do so, as the sole member of the Progressive Party. Since then my party has opposed every single abrogation of the rule of law and of habeas corpus. We are totally opposed to detention without trial.

On 9 February the hon the Minister issued a statement saying “there were no grounds for complaints about the circumstances of hungerstrike detainees and their physical needs and treatment, and that the authorities were committed to dealing with the situation in a humane and civilised manner as prescribed by international norms and standards.”

It is perfectly true that there were no complaints about the actual treatment in prison when I visited detainees at the Johannesburg prison a couple of weeks ago. That was except for the food, of course, when they were still eating. That is, however, not the case with the other prisons where there are very strong complaints from the detainees. At St Albans prison the detainees complain bitterly about the medical treatment and the attitude of the doctor in charge. They say that given his political attitude he is more of a health risk than of assistance.

That is Dr De Kock for the hon the Minister’s information. It is alleged that he actually moved detainees who were in hospital, out of the hospital, when they went on a hunger strike! He said that he was not a member of Masa and he did not care what Masa thought about things.

Their attorneys state that the 104 detainees at St Albans have throughout their detention—as I mentioned earlier, some of them have been there for some 32 months—been confined to four crowded cells where they have no privacy, sleep on mats, eat bad food, have no proper study facilities, and have inadequate recreational facilities and unsatisfactory visiting facilities.

Detainees at Westville Prison—there were 111 on 12 February, of whom 43 are presently on hunger strike—are demanding an impartial commission to have free access to the prison to examine and report on conditions there, and that detainees should be allowed to see doctors of their own choice and that the district surgeon, Dr Meer, should be precluded from attending to detainees.

The hon the Minister stated in that statement and again this afternoon, that the hunger strikes are orchestrated from outside the prisons, and I believe that the reply of the detainees at St Albans, issued on Saturday, 11 February, which I now propose to read to this House, is the appropriate answer to the hon the Minister. They say:

[Interjections.] That is the crux of it! The frustration of indefinite detention without trial and the injustice inherent therein.

I want to advise the hon the Minister to read the book by David Beresford called Ten Men Died. It is a book about the Irish hunger strikers at Long Kesh prison in 1981 in Northern Ireland. [Interjections.] The hon the Minister would be appalled at the suffering that hunger striking actually entails. It is not something that anybody can simply and lightly embark on. To the strikers themselves it entails irreversible physical damage, and their families watch with agony how these people die. It also has devastating effects on society such as hatred and the ongoing escalating violence which results when death overtakes hunger strikers and martyrs are created.

There is a cardinal difference between the hunger strikers in Northern Ireland and those here in South Africa. The Irish hunger strikers were all convicted criminals, convicted of serious crimes such as murder, bombing and sabotage. They were striking for special status within the prison. They wanted to be distinguished from ordinary criminals.

South African hunger strikers are all in prison without trial. They are striking for their release, and they have the sympathy of the civilised world.

The only way to prevent the ongoing crisis of hunger strikes is for the hon the Minister to indicate unequivocally that it is his intention to release or charge every detainee on his list, and his priority in the interim should be the immediate release of all detainees under the age of 18, all those who have been detained for lengthy periods, and the considerable number of school pupils—99 in Diepkloof alone, 33 in St Albans in the Eastern Cape—who have lost one academic year and will soon lose a significant part of another. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Houghton addressed my colleague the hon the Minister of Law and Order, so she will excuse me if I follow another course.

*The hon member for Middelburg, who is the chairman of the CP’s municipal committee, issued an instruction to CP town councils and councillors after the general municipal election in which he said, inter alia:

Sabra is the CP’s think-tank, is it not, and it seems to me as if they are in urgent need of money to round off their partition plan which they still have to submit to the people of South Africa.

I agree with what my colleague, the hon the Minister of Education and Culture, referred to a moment ago. The CP has now been in existence for virtually seven years and the Whites in South Africa still do not know where they will find themselves in terms of the CP’s partition plan. [Interjections.] I think it is vital for the CP to tell the Whites in South Africa what their position will be—and at what price and cost—in the South Africa the CP wants to create.

That is unnecessary. They know!

The hon member Mr Derby-Lewis definitely does not know where he is. [Interjections.]

He is neither fish nor flesh!

I just want to say, in passing, that hon members of the CP, particularly the hon member for Lichtenburg, have on more than one occasion scornfully referred to the NP’s system in the Transvaal, a system in terms of which they designate custodian MPs to furnish services to members of the NP. The hon member for Middelburg, however, in the instructions he issued, said the following, inter alia:

What is wrong with that?

I have no difficulty with that, but that is merely mimicking the NP. There is nothing original that they can suggest! [Interjections.]

Yes, but your Transvaal custodians live in the Cape!

Order! The hon the Minister must be given an opportunity to proceed with his speech.

I should like to refer to the election manifesto which the CP published during the municipal election. In it the CP said that for specific reasons it rejected the system of regional services councils. They said that it was an expensive system in terms of which multiracial local government would be promoted. They also said that it was primarily being established to employ White tax revenue for the establishment of facilities for other population groups.

Is that not the truth?

On 10 February 1989 the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition said that he was also inclined to use the so-called White money for the development of other communities.

What matters is the amount involved! [Interjections.]

Oh, I see. It now has a new dimension, because what is involved is the amount. That is built-in discrimination. The document the hon member sent out as a manifesto, went on to state:

Hear, hear!

In its present form!

In its present form? Oh? The hon member for Ermelo will therefore establish another form of regional services councils. I quote further:

That is in conflict with what the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition said in the no-confidence debate. Secondly it cannot be determined. The CP is hoodwinking the general public.

After the municipal election the CP also gave instructions to the CP town councils in connection with regional services councils, saying that they should ensure that CP councillors served on the executives of the regional services councils. A member of the municipal committee told the CP town councils that in these councils consideration could not be given to negotiating White interests in a multiracial set-up, while the hon the leader of the CP said they would only participate in regional services councils to watch over the interests of the Whites and to ensure fair play. These are not only completely contradictory statements that are being made, but also confusing guidance being given to local authorities.

It is specifically stated in this document, which is apparently a great source of frustration to the CP because in total, according to their view, they control less than a third of the voting power in the regional services councils:

Surely that cannot be correct!

We therefore know now that the CP does not participate in regional services councils on a constructive and co-operative basis. The quoted passages are specifically aimed at frustrating or blocking any activities and development. The CP wants to destroy a mechanism for development that exists in areas and regions in our country that are development-orientated.

As they did with development boards!

We also say that we are entitled to put certain in-depth questions to the CP, because the people—including the Whites—whose lives are affected by the decisions taken in the regional services councils surely have every right to know what the CP’s standpoint is, because the budgets of nine regional services councils in the Transvaal—I do not even have all of them to hand—totalled R374 million.

There are 12!

I know there are 12. The hon member does not need to correct me there.

The CP says that if it came to power, it would abolish the regional services councils and also take away the R374 million that is only available for development in a portion of the Transvaal. Is the CP then going to use other “White money” to replace this amount for development, particularly in less-developed areas?

Look at the budget of the Western Transvaal Regional Services Council which totals more than R32 million. This money is apportioned as follows, inter alia:

Has the amount been spent?

In a similar vein I could go on mentioning examples. The hon member knows how a budget works. What are involved are the capital projects for this year. [Interjections.] Don’t feel so cut up about that.

I want to ask the hon member for Potgietersrus, amongst others, whether the CP—because the majority of the councils I mentioned are CP-controlled councils—is going to excise these areas from the system of regional services councils in accordance with the written standpoints that have been put forward. Is the CP going to leave these people to their fate? Is the CP going to leave the Whites of Ventersdorp to get by, without electricity in the future, because these people cannot pay the account themselves, or is the CP hoodwinking themselves and their supporters? If the CP does not take these steps, surely it will not be keeping its election promises which it made in the election documents. According to the views and statements of the CP, is it not so that the aforementioned town councils must not use this money for development any longer.

I am asking what action the CP envisages in connection with this development and capital that the regional services councils are making available to the benefit of the White town councils and the inhabitants of White towns.

You are trying to put us at a disadvantage!

The hon the Chief Whip need not concern himself, because I enjoy speaking to the hon member for Middelburg.

Last week the hon member made an announcement to Business Day, and I take it, also in the light of the instructions that were issued, that local councils must now preferably advertise in Patriot or in English-language newspapers and not in Beeld, ie if I accept that the hon member was quoted correctly.

I said so, yes.

I quote from Business Day, dated 10 February 1989:

That is a declaration of intent which has already been put into practice, whilst the NP promotes development by establishing mechanisms such as the regional services councils and rural councils that make a contribution towards enhancing the quality of life of people, and this is also still being done in the interests of those Whites who cannot afford to pay for it themselves. The CP is purposely attempting to wipe out these opportunities that also exist for Whites.

I am asking where the Whites of Migdol are going to get R300 000 for that community hall. Where will Ventersdorp be given an opportunity to get that contribution for electricity that they cannot do without? [Interjections.]

It is easy to state the position. The NP generates the wherewithal and is developing South Africa, and the CP is thwarting efforts to develop positive models for development, development for the Whites too.

I want to refer to this mechanism of rural councils that are now being introduced. [Interjections ] The hon member is very worried about that, because the CP is opposing the establishment of rural councils. [Interjections.] If the hon member is in favour of that, he is making it very much easier for me to say what I want to say.

The rural councils are being established in the White areas and the rural areas outside local authority areas. It is an opportunity and a mechanism for obtaining direct representation for agriculture and the rural communities in regional services councils. The regulations were promulgated in December, and my department, the Ministers’ Council of the House of Assembly and I are ready to establish the rural councils.

[Inaudible.]

The hon member is being a little ridiculous now.

Are they for Whites or are they to be mixed bodies?

They are for the Whites. I am speaking about the Whites. Are we not debating own affairs at the moment? This is an own affairs mechanism, which confirms that we are also developing the right to self-determination of those Whites who do not have representation. [Interjections.]

Why are you then providing a mixed rural council?

The hon member for Ermelo is a legal man, but he honestly does not bother to read the Acts passed in this Parliament. [Interjections.]

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

Mr Chairman, there are many aspects I still have to mention, and I therefore cannot answer the hon member’s question.

These rural councils give the rural inhabitants an opportunity, by way of a rural council, to determine priorities in a regional services council, priorities involving, for example, roads, abattoirs, fresh-produce markets, ambulance services, large-scale water services and electricity. I am now asking whether the CP is going to give those people an opportunity to serve on the rural councils and to participate in the activities of the regional services councils. If I remember correctly, hon members opposed this legislation. It would be interesting to see whether the hon member would also allow territorial development in these areas in which rural councils are established.

How many of them have already been established?

We are in the process of doing so. [Interjections.] We have received requests from certain communities, and we know where the CP members are doing their scaremongering. I just want to say that we are serious about promoting this concept of rural councils, which will extend further the right to self-determination amongst the Whites.

Our approach and our actions are geared to the promotion of mutual trust amongst citizens in South Africa and to co-operation aimed at promoting the interests of our country. For us in the NP co-operation is a key word and fundamental act in the future pattern, in the South Africa of tomorrow and the day after.

The declared aims of the CP are specifically the non-promotion of mutual trust; in fact, co-operation is being blocked. I cannot but come to the conclusion that for the CP its own ideology is more important, and not the actual problems of South Africa. I think that that is why the CP is still, to this very day, holding back its constitutional plans for South Africa. [Interjections.]

The NP says our country is greater than we are. We are geared to the promotion of the interests of the country and its inhabitants and their welfare, so that everyone can enjoy a good life in an atmosphere of freedom and stability. The difference between the CP and the NP is this: The CP puts itself first and the NP puts South Africa first. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, I do not want you to fall off your Chair in shock, but I intend to talk about the Bill before the House and about own affairs. [Interjections.]

Firstly, I would like to draw attention to the plight of the aging White population, elderly people and pensioners and to the difficulties which many old-age institutions have. I would like to suggest to the hon the Minister that attention should perhaps again be given to the question of assistance to those people who themselves have financial difficulties but keep their parents at home, so that the pressure on old-age homes may be relieved.

Secondly, I would like to refer to the question of the lifting of rent control where representations are often made by landlords only. I think that an opportunity should be given to tenants to also to make representations. I want to quote an example of a tenant who has been in occupation of the same flat for 48 years and who is not protected because of the income earned but who now has a choice of either buying a flat and not having the money to support herself or alternatively having the money to support herself, but having to leave because somebody else is able to buy the flat and then not being able to find accommodation at the right rate. I think the necessity to hear tenants is absolutely vital.

The third point that I want to raise is the question of the hospital services and in particular the situation of the Johannesburg General Hospital. This hospital, against the building of which I originally pleaded in the Provincial Council, as members here will know, and forecast what the cost would be, what the consequences would be, now has empty beds, unhappy staff yet dedicated staff, and it is something that to my mind is a very serious problem that needs to be looked into.

I also want to draw attention to the plight of private schools as many of them are struggling to maintain themselves, their money is in short supply and they have very great difficulty in dealing with their situation.

May I lastly draw the hon the Minister’s attention to the fact that when I said his speech was the same as it was last year, there was one major passage that was different. He said then (Hansard: Assembly, col 1807):

relating to the formula—

I stress “concluded”—

This is somewhat different to the reality it has now turned out to be from what the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council said here today. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Yeoville was the first and the only member who talked about the Bill, and for that reason I should like to give my colleague the Minister of the Budget an opportunity to reply to his speech.

I should like to react to what the hon member said about the aged. We realise that there are quite a number of problems in respect of the aged that must receive attention. That is why we considered it necessary to appoint an interdepartmental committee under the chairmanship of Dr Jannie Pieterse, the head of the department of Health Services and Welfare, to make a thorough investigation into the entire question of the aged.

Members from the Department of Local Government, Housing and Works, as well as from the Department of Budgetary and Auxiliary Services will also serve on this committee. A very important directive of this committee is to investigate and evaluate services to the aged in their totality and to examine the aspect the hon member mentioned when he said that there were children who were prepared to take their parents into their homes so that those elderly people could remain in the community for as long as possible. We would like to formulate a national care-of-the-aged policy in respect of Whites.

The other directives given to the committee resulted mainly from problems being experienced in practice. There is, for example, the care of the chronically ill aged, there is the establishment of geriatric units at some of the 44 own affairs hospitals, there is the categorising of the aged with a view to their being admitted to and cared for in old age homes. There are uniform tariffs in respect of the declaring of an elderly person to be indigent with a view to the provision of medical services. There is also the payment of fees by indigent elderly persons in respect of medical examinations, treatment and medicine. There is also the provision of community services and affordable housing.

When I mention these matters it is clear that through this committee we want to give real attention to our aged in order to ascertain whether we can relieve their distress and can find solutions where problems really exist. [Interjections.]

Will a report on this be tabled?

We will publish a report after the committee has completed its activities. The first meeting has already been held and the committee is now working flat out. If possible, we would like to table such a report.

This afternoon the hon member for Brits made a statement here. He said that the NP had crucified Boksburg. The hon member made me think back to my childhood. When we had been naughty and were caught out, we accused each other, because we did not want to be blamed.

The CP contested the election in Boksburg and suddenly realised that they had won it. They were in control of the town and town council, and without consulting anyone properly—as I see it—that town council simply went ahead and implemented certain things. Now they find that Boksburg is not what it used to be. After all, Boksburg was a peaceful and forward-looking place. I went there frequently. As recently as the beginning of October I opened an old age home there.

Now Boksburg is not the same anymore. Now the hon member for Brits is having a field day, because a scapegoat must be found, so they are accusing the NP! The NP is crucifying Boksburg, but those persons controlling the town council—those persons who are responsible for what is happening there—are sitting back and saying that it is the other people, the people in the opposition—the people who do not have those powers—who are crucifying Boksburg.

I saw on television that the town council of Potchefstroom was a bit cleverer. I think it was the chairman of the management committee of Potchefstroom who said that they could not close their facilities, because they were a university town and many other non-Whites came there, and because non-Whites came from other areas and other countries, those facilities had to remain open.

I submit that the CP town council of Boksburg made a cardinal mistake and that is the same mistake the CP is always making. They are putting the interests of the CP first. They have a burning desire to be in power. They want power, and to achieve this certain things must be done. They do not consider the consequences.

Now I want to state today—vje can test this—that in the 40 years it has been in power the NP has made itself subservient to the interests of South Africa. [Interjections.] The NP has never put the interests of the party first, but has always put the interests of South Africa first. [Interjections.]

Over the years the basic point of departure of the Government, and consequently of the NP, has been that every action, and every deed and every statement and every decision had to promote the interests of South Africa and all the people of South Africa. [Interjections.] Nothing was done which harmed the interests of South Africa. [Interjections.] The NP was not sectional either, we did not promote the interests of one population group only. Of course we promoted the interests of the Whites, but the interests of the Coloureds were also promoted, as were the interests of the Indians, and the interests of the Blacks. The interests of the Black peoples in this country were promoted.

The NP said: “We put the interests of South Africa first.” What Gen Hertzog said, namely “South Africa first”, we have consistently implemented and carried through, to this day. We put the interests of all the people first. There is no Boksburg in the history of the NP. [Interjections.]

Order! The hon the Minister must be afforded an opportunity to make his speech.

There is only development and prosperity which everyone shared in, which the entire country shared in, to be found in the history of the NP! Because this was the basic point of departure of the NP, we believed that stability and growth had to be promoted over a wide spectrum throughout the country. We did this in respect of all the population groups. [Interjections.]

Order!

In the social sphere the Government intensified its efforts to uplift all our communities. I challenge any of the hon members to deny that upliftment work took place during the past 40 years and that communities changed. [Interjections.]

Order!

Even the community the hon member for Green Point came from, Williston, shared in this. If the hon member for Green Point would look after his constituency better, the communities he represented would also be able to make more progress. [Interjections.] After all, these hon members of the PFP do not look after the people they represent. This afternoon the hon member for Houghton stood up here and had an opportunity to talk about people outside prison, but her entire speech was devoted to people in detention. [Interjections.]

In an endeavour to achieve its objective of giving everyone in South Africa social satisfaction, education, training, social services, health and housing improved. Who wants to deny this? In respect of the Whites education, social services and housing did, after all, improve. If we look at the other population groups, precisely the same thing happened. Let us look at Cape Town and its environs, in which fine new communities have developed and are still developing.

Such as District Six.

Yes, even District Six. I knew District Six in Cape Town and I know what state it was in. [Time expired.]

Order! Before I call upon the hon member for Carletonville to speak, let me make it clear that although there are different parties in this House that obviously will not agree with one another’s standpoints in all respects, I cannot allow a chorus of comments from one party, that wants to express its difference of opinion, when a speaker from another party is speaking. This is done by means of debate.

Mr Chairman, when I listen to the hon members on the opposite site of the House, I am reminded of a person walking through a cemetery who is so afraid that he does not want to walk one step further, but who does not wish to show the people that he is afraid and therefore makes any sort of sound in order to fool himself into thinking that he is not afraid. The hon member for Klip River made such a great fuss about pains that he himself later developed a pain in his neck and was forced to sit down, unable to utter another word.

The hon member referred to homelands and said that if the CP came to power, there would be revolution and removals accompanied by violence. [Interjections.]

Order!

However, let us go back into the history of South Africa, to a time when the NP was still the party for the Whites in South Africa. Who initiated the homelands then? Was it not the NP?

At the moment we have ten different homelands, one for each population group, and we in the CP say that we grant every people one of its own. All we are going to do, is to use those millions of rands that have been spent by the NP on buying up land—and it is still buying up land—productively, so that those people will be able to go there and so that every people will be able to govern itself. [Interjections.] There will be no revolution. Furthermore, we shall not make use of violence, as the NP has made use of violence in the past in order to remove people. Now they are sitting there with sanctimonious expressions on their faces and saying that there is going to be violence. [Interjections.]

The hon member for Fauresmith also referred to our actions in Boksburg. What did we do wrong in Boksburg? [Interjections.] We quite simply did nothing wrong in Boksburg.

Ask the businessmen!

I am being told to ask the businessmen. We could go and ask thousands of businessmen, and they would tell us that they are completely satisfied. However, it is the liberal businessman and the NP businessman who is kicking up a fuss, because he is being instigated to make a fuss. He does not have a problem; when one goes and looks around in Boksburg, one sees that there is nothing going on there that is any different to what went on in the past. [Interjections.] People are still conducting their business, but one does find those few old mongrels who are always prepared to bark and who do not know when to stop. They have now left Boksburg alone because they can see that they will not be able to achieve anything further there. Now they are attempting to pick away at other places, and this is also going to make them look foolish.

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

No, Sir, I am not interested in the hon member’s questions. The hon member should go and look at what is going on in Benoni. We have already said that all the CP need do in the wards of the municipalities is to apply the NP’s policy.

How many have you suspended so far?

I now want to ask the NP: Can any one of them stand up today and say that they are now going to repeal these laws which they say are discriminatory? The hon member for Kuruman said it and he almost burst into tears. The hon member for Innesdal made a great fuss about it, but not one of those hon members has as yet stood up and said that they are going to satisfy the liberals in their party and that they are going to repeal these laws. No, as usual they are going to keep it a secret until the next election comes along.

Whilst I am on the subject of an election, it is being said that the CP has lost support. The easiest way to test this is to hold an election. We must have an election soon, unless the NP are going to kowtow to the leader of the Labour Party once again in order to postpone the election so that their life may be extended. Surely it is possible to test whether the CP has acted wrongly or whether it has acted correctly. If the hon members are not afraid that they will lose their seats, this is an ideal opportunity to show South Africa and the world that the CP has acted wrongly.

I now come to the hon the Minister of Education and Culture. The hon the Minister said that the devolution of power in the field of sport had been delegated to the boards. Let us quickly go back to Menlopark. There was a democratically elected committee there. When they decided that that little Black boy could not run onto that field, the NP newspapers, the NP itself and every liberalist made a great song and dance about it. It had to do with the devolution of power. It was the hon the Minister who threatened that he would introduce legislation to prevent this. Let me put it to hon members this way. With regard to local government and in the area of schooling, one is right as long as one carries out the NP’s policy. However, if one wishes to exercise one’s democratic right to go against the NP, then one is wrong, then one is causing problems in South Africa, then one is giving rise to rebellion and war is sure to follow. They cannot find enough words to say this. We in the CP have spelt out to South Africa and the world what our party’s policy is. We are implementing it everywhere, in all the town councils on which we have the majority of councillors. I do not want to boast about Carletonville, but there we have achieved ten out of ten. I challenge everyone to come and look at what is going on there.

Order! There are some hon members here whose voices are being heard far too often.

Both the hon the Minister and the hon the Minister of the Budget and Works referred to power sharing and the protection of the Whites in South Africa. The hon the Minister said yes to power sharing, but has any one of those NP members who has had a chance to speak, both now and in the past, ever had the courage to stand up and tell us how they are protecting the interests of each population group so that there is no domination? No, they have not done so. If anyone is practicing closet politics, it is the NP. No one can have faith in their credibility any longer. [Interjections.]

The hon the Minister of Local Government and Housing said that so many millions of rands had been spent, and he mentioned certain towns. The hon the Minister neglected to mention to what use the money had been put in Ventersdorp, for example. He did say that it had been used for electricity, but where was the electricity laid on? In the Black area. [Interjections.] It is a pity that he did not say that Carletonville had received R90 000. What was this used for? For a Black taxi-rank. [Interjections.] The hon the Minister says that the money cannot be identified. In the past the money was always identified as White, Coloured, Indian or Black money. With the computers we have today, this is the easiest thing to do. A question that is being asked, is where the money for the remuneration of the regional services councils is coming from. [Interjections.] We all know full well that it is coming from businesses in which the Whites form the majority. It is coming from householders, and the White householders are having to pay. It is the White farmer who is paying the people in his employ. The greater portion of the money for the regional services councils is coming from the Whites in South Africa. Let us have no illusions about that. [Interjections.]

Furthermore, mention has been made of developing areas. Quite a few million rands have been spent by the regional services council on Bekkersdal, the Black residential area on the West Rand. In the same area there is one of the most underdeveloped White communities, Venterspos. Not one cent has yet been paid for this area. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, in reply to the last speaker I just want to say that any party’s political policy will only survive if it is accepted by the public in general. I think that is something that should be borne in mind.

Mr Chairman, having listened intently to the political content of most of the speeches up to this stage I am inclined to agree with the hon the Minister of the Budget and Works that the significance of this debate fails to do justice to the subject that is before this House.

I also want to break with tradition as the hon member for Yeoville did and turn apologetically to the Bill itself. There is one particular aspect that I wish to raise and I will do so directly with the hon the Minister of Agriculture.

I wish to refer to one of the most topical matters that is doing the rounds in the agricultural circles today and that is the degree to which the Government intends to privatise certain essential services that are presently being undertaken by the State.

This is relevant to this debate today, and I hope that as this session of Parliament unravels the picture will become clearer in relation to what the Government has in mind in this regard. I deliberately raise this matter at this point because I want to warn the Government against acting too hastily by, through privatisation, shedding or releasing itself from the responsibility of controlling services which are vital to the overall interests of the agricultural industry and to the country as a whole.

Mr Chairman, in the first place I want to react to the hon member for Mooi River.

†The question of the privatisation of essential services in agriculture is something we do not simply take for granted. We will undertake an in-depth study of this and in later debates I will answer fully in connection with how we intend to do this. There are some services from which the private sector derives all the benefits. The private sector can afford to pay for those services which enlarge their income. In those cases we can consider privatisation. In other cases we cannot do so. It is a matter, however, which we will discuss at length later on when we discuss agriculture in the appropriation debate.

*Mr Chairman, I should also like to express a few thoughts about the argument of the hon member for Potgietersrus who mentioned certain aspects with regard to his constituency. I shared the problem of drought with him. I went on a visit to that area and therefore have a relatively good first-hand knowledge of what is going on there.

The hon member said this was an eight-year drought which the farmers had really survived. My question is how those farmers survived for eight years. How is it possible that there are still farmers in that area? I think hon members in this House will agree with me that if the Government had not had mercy on those farmers, as well as the farmers in the designated area, there would no longer have been any farmers.

That cannot be the only reason! [Interjections.]

No, of course not. Without that supportive reason, there would hardly have been a single farmer left in the rural areas of the Republic of South Africa. The Government will not run away from the problems and the dilemma of those farmers. I call the hon member to witness that when I went to speak to the farmers there, I did not make promises and present all kinds of wild and fine ideas to the people. I dealt with realities. Sometimes I also had to tell people unpleasant things—inter alia about the regional allowances, which at first were an auxiliary measure for farmers who could not make the grade financially. Initially this allowance was allocated, according to earnings, to farmers who did not have sufficient money to buy food. Later, however, it degenerated into a regional allowance which was received by everyone, rich and poor. I said we did not have money to subsidise rich people and that we would have to reintroduce a merit basis for this. I also said that we would present this basis to the people in question. It is not pleasant to tell that kind of thing to the farmers who receive this allowance.

With reference to financing we made it very clear to the farmers there that we could help farmers on one basis only, viz that their income from their farming should be able to pay for their obligations. We can try to make this easier by means of a soft loan. We can increase the repayment period, but in the end the cost related to financing should be within the farmer’s financial capacity; if not, we would be dealing in negatives and we would destroy our agriculture.

This aspect is critical in the designated area. I agree with the hon member. It is not easy at all. That is why we have a task team to advise us. There are not only members of the department in that task team, but farmers as well. The team contains a variety of people from the communities there—people from agriculture, the Defence Force, planners and so on. Coincidentally all the problems enumerated by the hon member for Potgietersrus were considered by this task team yesterday. Proposals were made on how to tackle these problems. These proposals will be submitted to the Cabinet as well as to the Ministers’ Council, after which we shall consider their implementation. Nevertheless the hon member will realise that this is no easy matter.

This task team consists of interested parties from the various departments, the SA Agricultural Union and the Transvaal Agricultural Union, as well as representatives of the local joint management systems, the district development associations and local communities. I think we shall gain a lot of clarity on this matter during the next few months, because this is the first really comprehensive study to address the problems of the designated area. I think we shall get answers from this.

I have sympathy for the way in which the hon member did this and I understand that when one is putting the problems of one’s constituency, one always reaches toward the ideal situation, to the attractive and best solution; nevertheless I want to appeal for understanding for the answers I have to give which are based on the realities that I have to deal with within the financial capacity of this country. We shall have to meet one another somewhere between these two poles. I do not want to say any more about this, because there is a variety of other aspects that I want to broach briefly.

The recent political discussion—in agriculture we get very little time really to talk politics—has rather amused me. At the beginning the hon member for Brits said the NP made promises which it never kept. [Interjections.] When I think of statements usually made by the Press with regard to people who do not stand by their standpoints and readily exchange one standpoint for a better one, that label does not apply to the NP, but rather to the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition who conveniently changes his tactics every time. [Interjections.]

When we look at what has been said in CP ranks since 1982 with regard to their principle of partition, we see that they say there must be separation. We on this side of the House have always asked where this should take place. The answer is always “somewhere”, but we are never told where in fact it should take place. [Interjections.] We said they should draw the boundaries for us.

Boundaries were drawn in 1987 to encompass the area which would be covered by the Boerestaat under the CP. This included the Transvaal, the Free State and Natal, where there was a majority of Blacks. [Interjections.] That was not good enough. The hon members were not satisfied with that, because the CP rejected these first boundaries, or do they still stand by the first boundaries? [Interjections.] The Cape Province was left out of the first proposals and left to its own devices.

Then there was a second set of boundaries which excluded the Transvaal, but included the Cape and part of SWA. This was according to the plans of Prof Carel Boshoff. This was also rejected! [Interjections.] Where is the White homeland then if the one including the Transvaal as well as the one including the Cape has been rejected? Where will the homeland be? [Interjections.] That is an illusion! Surely boundaries must be drawn somewhere, or is there perhaps a part of the country that I do not know about?

This homeland in Namaqualand reminds me of something else that came out of Namaqualand.

Some time ago there were illusions. Promises were made and people were taken in tow with the idea of making money easily. One simply had to take some milk and some liquid and a few other things and put them in a glass, and one could make money. The kubus! Do hon members remember that? [Interjections.] They farmed with kubus in that area and people tried to make money and were misled by promises. [Interjections.] In their heart of hearts the people knew that those promises would not be kept, but in some or other way they carried on. They borrowed money and got themselves into debt. [Interjections.] Expectations were created by means of a good emotional onslaught. In the CP plans I smell something of the rotten milk culture. [Interjections.]

Just like the kubus culture held promises which could not be made, the CP is making promises today. Listen to what they say: “We shall make South Africa a country for the Whites again.” Do they argue? Is it possible to do this? Is this not kubus politics? [Interjections.] The CP say they will implement partition and keep all these promises! That is kubus politics! The CP makes promises they cannot keep. [Interjections.] Then they say they are going to make the towns White again.

Take a look at Boksburg!

Then I merely listen to the hon member for Lichtenburg, the deputy leader of the CP, when he says that trade unions will not be permitted under the CP, that all State subsidies for Black transport and housing will be abolished and that land ownership in White South Africa will the right solely of the Whites.

Was that Arrie talking?

Is that not kubus politics? Promises which cannot be kept are made and the emotions of the voters at large are addressed and echoed so as to mislead them indirectly and put them on a track which will ultimately mean the downfall of the Whites in this country. [Interjections.] That is why, when those of us in this House talk seriously about the future, about power-sharing and about how to co-operate with the other peoples in this country, we in the NP are dealing with the real essence of things. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, we have heard the illusions and hon members will agree that they are illusions. They will disappear as the mist disappears before the sun. Let us face the realities of South Africa. Let us talk about the Group Areas Act and about squatters. [Interjections.]

We had two very verligte speeches to start off the session, namely that of the hon the new leader of the NP and that of the hon the Acting State President. There was also the speech of the hon the Deputy Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning on the Group Areas Act on 7 February 1989.1 quote him from his uncorrected Hansard, as follows:

They are not going to scrap it but they are not going to apply it rigidly either.

I just want to ask a question of the NP. That is what the leaders in this Parliament are saying and have said. I accept it at its face value. I just want to ask them whether they have told the members of their own party that. I want to ask them. I want to ask them whether they have, for example, told the members of the NP in Pinetown that they should not be active in persecuting those Indians who are living in White areas. Have they told the hon members of the NP in Natal, who have to reply to applications under the Group Areas Act, that they should not respond by blanket rejections? Have they told the NP members in Umhlatuzana and Pinetown that they should not be acting against the assistant-priest of the Anglican Church in Pinetown, who happens to be an Indian and wants to live in a White area? Have they told them that? If they have not, they are guilty of as much illusion as they accuse the CP of. [Interjections.]

Order!

Let me come to a far more serious topic—the question of squatters.

Are you a member of the AWB?

The squatters in the Durban area are a fast growing population. It has in fact recently been calculated that the influx of people into the Durban area at present makes it the fastest growing urban conurbation on the surface of the globe and that by the year 2000 there will be 7 million people living in the Greater Durban area.

The question of living conditions and land is terribly important. I just want to deal with one particular case, that of a community called Luganda. Like the one called Enzemusha which I brought to this House last year and that landed up on the front page of the newspapers, I regret to say that I think this one is going to do the same, simply because the NP cannot act fast enough.

Luganda is a community that has been there since the 1850s. They are on land that has now been subdivided and a section has been placed aside as a group area for Indians. It was sold recently—at the end of 1986 or the beginning of 1987—to a developer, for Indian housing. It was sold in vacant possession. That means that the agent for the seller had to get the squatters off the land. In February 1987 the agent wrote—I have copies of the letters he wrote—to the Natal Provincial Administration but he got no reply. He wrote a second time but again there was no reply. A court case against the squatters took place in November 1987 and the sellers were granted the right to make the squatters leave. In March 1988 the squatters wrote to the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning and I followed that with a letter to the hon the Acting State President. By November 1988 nothing had been done. In December 1988, a week before Christmas, the demolition was privatised. Bulldozers moved in and 35 homes were demolished and possessions destroyed. Shotguns were used by a private security company.

There were forced removals that were due to take place. A final demolition date of 15 March has been given. A nearby piece of land has been offered. It is unacceptable to the squatters because of the state of the land and the community currently living there.

I want to say that a local newspaper reported the following a week before Christmas: “Bullets and Bulldozers at Luganda”. Homes were bulldozed. We talked about front-end loaders but now they are bulldozers.

Is that private land?

Private land! The important thing that I am now saying is … [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, following the hon member for Pinetown I do not have much time to comment other than on the question of squatting on private land. He knows as well as I do that if someone squatted on land owned by him he would take steps to have him removed.

They had been there since 1815!

Order!

I would like to congratulate the hon the Minister of the Budget and Works on the clear and concise manner in which the mechanics of this Part Appropriation Bill has been explained, and it seems that some hon members of the opposition needed to have it explained to them again. [Interjections.]

Firstly, I would like to deal with matters falling under the control of the Department of Education and Culture. Last year in the debate on this Bill the hon member for Durban North vociferously claimed that the Government had scant respect for educationists. This was borne out, he said, by the Government’s attitude to teachers’ salaries as well as a failure to realise that a crisis had occurred in education. Furthermore he claimed that the Government was also trying to create a false impression as to why teachers were leaving the profession in their droves.

Being an ex-teacher the hon member was obviously highly sympathetic to the cause of the teaching profession. I have no hesitation in saying that I share his concern but the Government, knowing full well that the education of all our people is the lifeblood of our country, dealt with this vexed problem against a background of financial constraints in a responsible and on an ongoing basis. I believe that the hon the Minister of National Education must be congratulated on handling a thorny problem with absolute aplomb.

As individuals many NP-members of Parliament addressed meetings of teachers, met with Ministers and made representations on behalf of the profession. At most meetings proceedings were conducted with professionalism and courtesy but at a meeting at Edgewood College near Durban emotions were whipped up by certain rabble-rousers who will remain nameless.

That is no way to talk about your colleagues! [Interjections.]

The parrot-cry of opposition parties on so-called gross Government overspending went on unabated without any substantive information to back up the lie, claiming that it is this overspending that prevented any increase in teachers’ or public servants’ salaries.

What are the real facts? Expenditure on education now takes a larger slice of the expenditure cake. Percentagewise, expenditure on administration continues to diminish. Of exchequer personnel nearly 27% were employed in education at the end of the past financial year.

As to the number of teachers leaving the profession, many misleading and incorrect statements have been made. At the end of June last year the statistics of teachers leaving the profession make interesting reading, but to save time I will confine the statistics to Natal, although the other provinces have similar percentage statistics. In 1986, 138 men and 399 women left the profession; in 1987, the figures were 180 men and 427 women; and in the half year to June 1988,54 men and 131 women left the profession. Clearly the slightly increased trend in 1987 reversed in 1988 in spite of claims to the contrary.

When one takes into account transfers, retirement, deaths, further studies and marriages the department is of the opinion that less than 25% have moved into other career opportunities. This number is quite normal I believe in any other profession.

With the upswing in the economy which is clearly shown to anybody who can read, sales turnover, production and tax collection revenues show through their graphs over the past six months that it could be expected that if the entire remuneration package of educators was too low, they would have deserted the profession in droves.

It is clear that private enterprise went all out in their search for skilled personnel, and yet at the beginning of the 1989 school year only the Transvaal had any staff shortages to speak of, and those were minimal.

The outcry from the Natal Teachers’ Society through their at times venomous mouthpiece Mentor never fails to amaze me. I have no doubt that Mentor is no longer representative of the majority of members of the profession, especially as it virtually admits that it has become an embarrassment to the NTS because of its political bias. In the last issue of Mentor in 1988 the 7% increase in career-specific adjustments awarded in December 1988 was sneered at and the promised 15% increase which became payable in January 1989—together these amount to an effective 23%—was also dismissed as placing ideology first.

The English-language Press also grabbed the chance to slam the Government for increasing salaries of teachers and public servants as an election ploy, and yet no election was approaching. Considering that the press had initially conducted a running battle over quite a period for increases on many fronts, such as teachers and nurses, what hypocrisy that was! For those of us in the Government benches who had fought tooth and nail for what we believed were legitimate increases which we knew could not be paid until funds were available the opposition attitude was sickening and typical of those who have run out of constructive ideas.

There are certain matters on which Mentor and the NTS have my support. White teachers are losing their jobs as the White school-going population declines. We must find ways and means of utilising these skilled persons in other groups’ schools, where there is a critical shortage not only of teachers but also of properly qualified teachers. As for the under-utilisation or even closure of many White schools and colleges, we cannot afford to waste these precious facilities. I am convinced that teacher training colleges must be treated as are other tertiary institutions and selected colleges such as Edgewood opened to all groups, but I stress that admission must be on merit and not on the basis of reverse apartheid which, as is admitted by many academics, is rapidly reducing the standard of our universities.

I read in the winter issue of the NTS publication Mentor that the editor is due to retire from that position. I cannot say I am dismayed, for contrary to what he believed, which is supposedly democracy in the profession, he did much to bring the teaching profession and the NTS in particular into disrepute. Let us take just one example of this, and I quote from the winter issue of Mentor-.

The following sounds like Karl Marx:

Coming from a so-called man of learning this is absolutely mind-boggling. It seems, in terms of his philosophy, that one can keep one’s mind open only by reading anti-Government ideology. This is how teachers are encouraged to brainwash children at our schools, so much so that some now celebrate Biko Day. One school in Pietermaritzburg, through the instructions of its lady principal … [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, concerning detainees, even if a total of 13 detainees are released from gaol by 17h00 this afternoon, one still has to direct attention to the fact that all 13 will on release in fact be subject to restrictions at their home addresses. In other words, even though they have been released from gaol, they have not really been freed.

†Besides these 13 there are hundreds of former detainees who today suffer under the cruel system of what I call home imprisonment. By, inter alia, restricting people to their homes between 18h00 and 06h00 the Government is turning people’s homes into jails. Bearing in mind all the other restrictions applied to them, these exdetainees are banished to an unnatural twilight existence, the sort of thing that the communist USSR does to its political dissenters.

Reggie Oliphant, an ex-detainee from Oudtshoorn and a school-book representative, cannot earn a living because he is restricted to the Oudtshoorn magisterial district—for what crime?

Amy Thornton, chairperson of the Cape Democrats, may in terms of her restriction order not even attend meetings of the organisation she chairs. For what crime, Sir?

Home imprisonment may be less harsh than jail but it still wrecks people’s ability to live a normal, free life with their families—and for no crime. One day this Government will have to account for the misery and hardship that they have caused.

The harshness of the detention is illustrated when one looks at the UDF leader, Trevor Manuel, who between 1985 and February 1989—a period of 40 months—has spent 29 of those 40 months in detention for no crime. Now—I saw him this morning at his home—he is again under severe home imprisonment. He may not leave his home at certain hours unless he reports. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: The list which has been circulated indicates clearly that after the hon member for Claremont comes a PFP speaker.

Order! There has been a change in the order.

Mr Chairman, when we attempted to change the order in the past we were told it was not allowed.

Order! Yes, unfortunately it was due to an error by the Chair. That is why the change occurred.

Mr Chairman, unfortunately I cannot say that it is a privilege to follow upon the hon member for Claremont. However, I can say that we did hear him mumble. Anyway, what he said was not intended for the House, but for outside consumption.

Today, we once again listened to the emotional attacks of the right-wing radicals who have become so obsessed with race that South Africa’s position in the international world is no longer taken into account, but is virtually being sabotaged in their attempts to stir up emotion. I am referring particularly to the arrogant voice of the hon member for Carletonville which seemed to emanate from the previous century. The tragedy is that they are conveying to the world a draconian image of the Afrikaner from which we on this side of the House dissociate ourselves completely.

I should like to give hon members an example of something that I experienced personally only a few weeks ago. I was driving through Carletonville—I mention that because the hon member for Carletonville spoke this afternoon—and saw the park in the main street that is now closed to Blacks and people of other population groups. It was a Saturday morning and literally hundreds of people of all colours were moving in different directions through this park. I stopped because it was a sight to see.

These people were allowed to walk through the park, but on one of the lawns there was a man in the uniform of the traffic police. Hon members will not believe me, but I was under the impression that he was there quite by accident. However, after a few minutes I realised that he was there for a reason. He was there to ensure that Black people did not loiter there or sit on any bench or on the lawns. They were only allowed to walk through the park. However, the funniest part was that there were Black people sitting on the grass in the middle of the traffic island in the street, and there they sat and rested only a few metres from this forbidden park, but there stood the little speedcop to prevent them from sitting there. They were only allowed to walk. [Interjections.]

Now We may find that ridiculous. It is. It tickles us, but it is a tragedy, because not a single hon member in this House can defend or justify this sort of 18th century attitude towards anyone. It shows a mentality which reflects on the whole of South Africa, and particularly on the Afrikaner, of which I am one. [Interjections.] I take exception to that.

Another matter that I should like to give attention to is the relationship between the CP and the AWB; a matter which has never really been clarified from the ranks of the CP and the AWB in this House. The hon CP members were very quick to divide up the NP into clubs after the election of our new hon leader. I can understand that, because since 1987 those hon members have certainly had experience of clubs in their party. They have a club 5, 6 or 7; I am not sure because they themselves do not want to say anything because they are ashamed of how many AWB members they have. They will not let on.

I want to tell hon members that we have a very interesting book in our possession. If hon members asked me where it came from, I would tell them that it leapt into my hands quite literally, & la Hartzenberg. The book was written by Adv Chris Beyers and Dr P J Kotze, and was published by the Oranjewerkerspromosies in Morgenzon and was printed in Hendrina under the title Die Opmars van die AWB. It finally lifts the veil on the relationship between the CP and the AWB, and in particular between their leaders.

Apparently there are very few copies of the first edition available because as a result of the recent fiasco, they only printed a few copies. However, I ask hon members to be patient while I quote just one little passage from this book.

[Interjections.]

I am waiting for a “Hear, hear!” [Interjections.]

[Interjections.]

[Interjections.]

I repeat: There are no conflicting interests between the AWB and the CP. [Interjections.]

That is what the two AWB members say. I want to know what the CP says to that. I just want to tell hon members—my time is running out—and I quote:

[Interjections.] I wish I knew how that back was going to be protected.

My time has expired and I should like to conclude by wishing these two like-minded leaders—who are in fact birds of a feather—everything of the best in their harmonious togetherness, as it is described in this book. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, I will not pursue the line of reasoning adopted by the previous speaker …[Interjections] … other than to say that I find it something of a cultural shock to once again be participating in a debate in this House dealing with White own affairs exclusively. We have often said—I repeat—that this form of racial exclusivity is farcical. Ethnic politics do not and can never reflect the reality of South Africa.

Urbanisation and the resultant issues of housing, health services, education and job creation, represent the greatest challenge of our time. Local authorities who are in the forefront are unable to deal with this problem effectively because of an artificial, superimposed ethnic segregation. The system of government cannot cope with the process of racial integration which some people practise through voluntary association. Attempts to categorise communities into neat, racially pure little boxes are proving to be exercises in stupidity. I wish to cite the example of Klipkop which is a small community of a 127 residents within the municipal boundary of Grabouw. There are some 18 families and most of the adults have resided there for 10 years. They are a settled and respected community and serve the town of Grabouw and the surrounding farms. No less than 57 are gainfully employed in the district. Intermarriage has occurred in this community between the so-called Coloured and Black inhabitants and they have become well and truly integrated.

These people now have to move as the farm on which this community is situated has been sold. The fact of the matter is that they have nowhere to go. There is no provision for housing for Black people anywhere in the entire Grabouw area. There are no facilities for Black or mixed communities in the Caledon Divisional Council area. The only alternatives offered these people are as far afield as Lwandle in the Strand and Khayelitsha on the Cape Flats. In both instances they would lose their jobs.

The net result is that these people have decided as a settled, integrated community that they are not prepared to condone discrimination against some of their members who may be deprived of the right of continued residence in the Grabouw area.

I would ask whether any of us would do otherwise?

Whose problem is this? The options appear endless. The property falls within the domain of a White municipality. The management committee is responsible for those affected who are Coloured. The CPA is responsible for Black housing. Situations such as these make a mockery of effective local government. They are not unique; on the contrary, they are occurring more and more frequently.

Ultimate responsibility for resolving this mess lies with the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning, but own affairs administration is intimately involved and cannot abrogate its share of responsibility. A way has to be found to resolve the critical land shortage and resultant housing crisis, as ethnically-based local authorities, intent on serving their own people, are incapable of resolving this problem.

Debate interrupted.

Mr Chairman, on behalf of the hon the Minister of National Health and Population Development, I move without notice:

Agreed to.

Mr Chairman, before I present the Part Appropriation Bill to the House there are certain necessary formalities that I wish to take care of.

Since 1 February 19891 have had the privilege of being the Acting Minister of Budgetary and Auxiliary Services standing in for the Reverend A A Julies, who has been indisposed due to illness. My friend and colleague has been ill since 19 January 1989 and I wish to bid him a speedy recovery. While he is indisposed, I wish to give him the assurance that I will do everything in my power to carry out the duties attached to his portfolio to the best of my ability so that when he returns, which I am sure will be soon, he may carry on as if he has never been away.

I also wish to express my sincere gratitude to the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council, for the confidence he has in me by having appointed me officially to stand in for Reverend Julies.

The portfolio of Budgetary and Auxiliary Services is a challenging one which, in this short period, certainly has given me new insight into our accountability as public representatives.

It has also renewed my appreciation of the great responsibilities that rest not only on the shoulders of the Ministers in this House, but also on the shoulders of every public representative in this House.

*Hon members know from experience that the Appropriation Bill of the House of Representatives is promulgated when the State’s financial year has already started. This means that there is a transitional period within with certain expenses have to be met in order to enable the Administration: House of Representatives to continue its services until the promulgation of the Appropriation Bill. In order to enable the Administration: House of Representatives to carry out its financial obligations, legal provision has to be made for this—this takes place on an annual basis—by means of the adoption of the Part Appropriation Bill (House of Representatives).

†I wish to point out that in terms of section 40 of the Exchequer and Audit Act, 1975 (Act 66 of 1975), moneys appropriated by a Part Appropriation Act may only be utilised for services in respect of which expenditure was authorized by an Appropriation Act during the immediate preceding financial year, or in respect of which some other authorization by Act of Parliament exists.

The Bill before this House has the object of providing moneys to be utilized by the Administration: House of Representatives during the period 1 April 1989 until promulgation of the Appropriation Act, 1989. It is expected that the amount of R929 000 000 will be sufficient to cover the financial obligations of this Administration during the said period. This amount is R167 204 000 higher than the amount appropriated in the Appropriation Act (House of Representatives), 1988.

*For the information of our new hon members in particular, I should like to mention that the following persons and bodies, inter alia, will benefit from this legislation: The Administration’s teaching corps, consisting of 37 960 teachers; its administrative machinery, consisting of 17 204 officials, 842 630 pupils and 19127 students in 2 179 pre-primary, primary, secondary and tertiary educational institutions. In addition, 263 533 recipients of pensions and allowances as well as 399 welfare institutions—this includes old age homes, creches, children’s homes etc—including 21 national organizations with 437 subsidized professional (welfare) posts, will benefit from this appropriation.

†The provision that has been made to tide the administration over the next two months or more is in line with LP policy which incorporates two basic ideals, namely to improve the quality of life of needy and disadvantaged people and to rid the country of every vestige of discrimination.

Striving to fulfil these ideals is without a doubt easier said than done and there are many interrelated factors which must be taken into account. Firstly, we are faced here in South Africa with antiquated attitudes, especially among those in positions of authority. However, it does seem as if we are on the threshold of a new era of enlightenment. I, of course, base this assumption of mine on the recent policy statements by the hon the Acting State President, Mr Heunis, the hon the new leader of the NP, Mr F W de Klerk, and the hon the Minister of Finance, Mr Du Plessis, who was also a convincing runner-up for that leading position. We as a party, however, are looking forward to positive signs.

Secondly, the shortage of funds and eroding effects of sanctions and disinvestment have made the going very tough. As a developing country we still depend on funds from abroad to stimulate our flagging economy. This lack of foreign aid together with inflation has taken its toll and the bigger percentage of the people of South Africa are poorer today than they were, for example, a decade ago.

The Government of the day therefore has no option but to give the reform process a new lease of life so that we do not have to depend on surreptitious dealings with foreign states. We will be on the sidelines, seeing foreign aid streaming into the new state of Namibia when it comes into being. This will be the direct result of a positive change in attitudes and policy.

To return to the business at hand, and bearing all that I have said in mind, the increase in the provision is a clear indication of the advantages of our negotiation strategy. It also shows that we are still on our chosen path to provide adequately for the great need that exists among our people.

The three cardinal principles contained in the constitution of the LP of South Africa are the motivating force behind all our parliamentary endeavours. Allow me to emphasise these three principles: Firstly, the establishment and promotion of human dignity, rights, socio-economic and cultural welfare of all South Africans; secondly, the promotion of the economic, social and cultural development of all; and thirdly, the establishment, maintenance and extension of social security for all, with special provision for the aged and handicapped.

*In conclusion I want to request hon members not to calculate percentual changes and then to come to conclusions as to possible allocations in the Main Budget. This will only lead to speculation and may create expectations that it might be impossible to meet.

Mr Chairman, as a responsible opposition we are going to support the piece of legislation under discussion and in no way oppose it. It is as plain as a pikestaff that when it comes to finance for our people, we want to get every cent we can from the State.

Before I go any further, I ask the House to support me wholeheartedly in our condemnation of the campaign against my people on the SA Deciduous Fruit Board which is taking place in Britain at the moment. Last night on television we observed, with sadness, the attacks that are being launched against this industry. I want to make it quite clear this afternoon that the Coloured farm labourer in the Western Cape is going to be very badly hurt by this campaign. In this regard I am thinking specifically of constituencies such as Pniel, Berg River, Daljosaphat, Rawsonville, Esselen Park, Robertson, Bokkeveld, Wuppertal and Vredendal. If this anti-apartheid campaign is successful, I foresee a tremendous unemployment problem which will affect hon members directly, since our towns and cities are going to be flooded with unemployed people.

The hon the Acting Minister of the Budget said—and I am glad he mentioned it—that this piece of legislation is a challenge because he will have to make do with the funds at his disposal in the interim period, until the Main Appropriation is submitted. Nevertheless, I would ask him to regard certain aspects as priorities in the utilisation of these funds.

We agree with him about the pensions, but I am thinking here specifically about education, with regard to which I want to mention two cases. In the Main Appropriation it was indicated that two hostels were to be built in the rural areas, one in Ashton and the other in Touws River. At the moment nothing is happening about these two hostels, because there are no funds available for staff or provisions for the pupils. Once again the rural areas must be brought to a standstill while buildings are being erected and summarily occupied in the cities. I entreat the hon the Acting Minister of the Budget to give urgent attention to this matter because those pupils are going to suffer greatly as a result and will have to travel long distances on buses to get to their schools.

I want to point out to the hon the Acting Minister of the Budget that in the Part Appropriation tabled by him, more decentralisation is taking place, particularly in the rural areas, because we find that within his Ministry, regions such as Paarl, Worcester, Springbok and Beaufort West are subordinate to the main central region of Bellville. This results in a tremendous amount of time being lost in the conduct of certain business. Even amongst the ranks of the LP there are hon members who have been waiting for as long as six months for allowances to be paid out to them for meetings of the teachers’ council. [Interjections.]

Mr Ismail also says so.

Mr Ismail pays his electricity bill. [Interjections.]

Therefore I am urging the hon the Minister, although he has these super-regions, to decentralise the funds as quickly as possible in all fields—educational, social, etc. Then our people in the rural areas would be able to come into their own. I therefore close with a request to the hon the Minister to make provision in his Main Appropriation for an improvement in the situation in our educational system, in addition to what we have already achieved. May I again make the point, by way of a plea, that the rural areas have an urgent need for certain facilities which the cities do, in fact, have at their disposal. [Interjections.]

Two years ago I used to drive past Montana every day. Houses were being erected there and when they had been completed, a primary school was built. In many of the constituencies of hon members of this House not a single primary school has been built during the past 10 years. The plans are always shelved. The hon the Minister must give attention to this matter, and I again advocate that the rural areas get their fair share.

Mr Chairman, I am grateful for the opportunity to participate in this debate on the Treasury and funds voted for the Administration: House of Representatives. However, I must say at the outset that it is a fact that the funds allocated to our department are less than the funds allocated to the other Houses, especially the Administration: House of Assembly.

We have additional problems, viz that in our communities we do not have the right to live where we want. We have to depend on laws that do not inhibit other communities as it inhibits us. I am referring to the Group Areas Act. At the present moment many people move to Johannesburg, seeking for job opportunities. When they get there they have to find a home to live in. Most of them—approximately 20 000—are people from the Cape and all over who live in the city of Johannesburg, Hillbrow, etc. The reason why I am saying this is when it comes to the allocation of funds, for instance for the improvement of our townships, they do not count the 20 000 living in the city of Johannesburg. The average is always taken from the people who live in our townships, who are obviously not officially there. These people are supposed to be either living in Upington or other places. Therefore, when it comes to Johannesburg and the allocation of funds one will find that Johannesburg always receives less than what they actually should receive. It therefore makes life in Johannesburg difficult for people who live there at the present moment because they cannot qualify for all the facilities that we are going to demand from the hon the Minister.

Allow me to enumerate. Eldorado Park has, according to the city council, an official population of 147 000, but as far as I am concerned that figure should be 200 000.

If one looks at that one will find in this huge place we were fortunate again last year—for that we say thank you—to have five schools, including two at Klipspruit West, built simultaneously. I must say thank you because it was a miracle. Three high schools and two primary schools were built in that area. That was good.

We do not have a hospital there. Whenever I speak to some hon Ministers they say no, it is not their business. I went to all of them and they all said it was not their responsibility, I should go to the hon the Acting Minister of the Budget. He also feels he cannot even get enough funds for a hospital. There was always confusion as to who was going to build a hospital in Eldorado Park. The province say they would like to do it but it is not really their business. There is land available which was acquired in 1978 for building a hospital, and every year when we meet the officials of the Province of Transvaal we keep asking when we are getting our hospital. They keep passing the buck.

I remember we had a debate here once and our hon the Minister was going to have a health centre built in Eldorado Park. Everything was planned and everything was rosy, but somewhere along the way something was lost. I shall be happy to hear that that thing has not disappeared completely and that it is still going to appear some time.

Again in this House it was said to us at one time that we were going to be given a teachers’ training college in Eldorado Park. That is fine. I did not want it so much because I have many people there. A teachers college was going to be well needed, however, because there are many people living there. I told the hon members there were officially 147 000 people living there. I think we have more than 10 high schools, if one includes Klipspruit as well. That is a lot of high schools from where there will be people who will be able to go to this training college. They do not have to travel at all, they can simply walk to get there.

Of course it was planned that apart from the college we would like to have a trade school, for instance, for the boys who did not have time to go to school, or those who ran away. There are also people who could not continue their schooling. There is land available for a trade school in Mansfield. The people who did the planning in the area were quite clever. There is land for a trade school there. Somehow nobody seems to be interested in it, however.

The people of Eldorado Park came along of their own accord and said it was fine to have some of our children going to Wits University and some going to RAU. It was very nice—they could see the goodwill of the Whites who accommodated them beautifully. However, that was a privilege reserved for those who could afford it. Those children coming from poorer homes, such as those from Kertsiga, for example, although they are very intelligent, are a different case. I know one child from that area who attends the University of Cape Town. Those children cannot go there because it is either too far for them or they cannot go to town in short pants.

When I spoke to some of the very intelligent officials in our department they asked me what I wanted an ethnic university for. I do not want an ethnic university because in the Administration: House of Representatives we do not have ethnic schools; all the schools are open to anyone who wants to go there. Therefore we can never have an ethnic university.

I know the Administration: House of Representatives does not have money to build a university, but what they can do is to support us. The city of Johannesburg and all the other cities in the Transvaal are prepared to build a university there, just like they built RAU. It does not have to be in Eldorado Park. We should like to see progress in that regard. We do not want people coming to us saying they do not want an ethnic university; it is going to be corrupt because it is run by coloured people. I am saying that a university is a university. We do not always want to feel as if we are second-class. We also want to share with other people. We do not only want people coming to us saying that we must come and share their things. We want to share our facilities with other people as well. That is my philosophy.

Therefore I should like to state in this Budget debate that we would like to have more next year. Apart from that we would like to see more money going to the Transvaal. We have everybody coming to the Transvaal. Let us share in this Budget so that statistics will not say that we only have 10% of this community in the Transvaal.

Mr Chairman, there must be a serious reassessment of the utilisation of schools for Coloured people and Whites in my constituency. Briefly the situation is that there are practically no more children in the White schools, while the schools for Coloured people are full to overflowing. Where schools do not exist, children must be transported for many kilometres and at high cost. Surely it is ridiculous to go on like this. It is a waste of money. The solution is to make White schools which are not being used available to Coloured communities.

Let me give hon members the example of Long-lands where more than 197 pupils are transported every day to and from the school at Delportshoop. This is a distance of 36 kilometres, and the costs are carried by our Department of Education and Culture.

Order! Would the hon member for Tafelberg please come here. The hon member may proceed.

These costs are carried by the department … [Interjections.] These pupils have been transported in this way for the past six years, and there are problems with the buses as well. The buses break down and the children usually get to school late, at times not turning up at all. The school at Longlands was destroyed by a fire in February 1983 and of necessity the children had to be transferred to the primary school at Delportshoop. In 1987 the department’s transport costs amounted to approximately R148 000.

In contrast there is a White school building on the outskirts of Longlands which is standing empty. The school has three classrooms which can comfortably accommodate 135 pupils. However, it is completely empty and our children have to be transported—36 kilometres each day. Costs would therefore be cut considerably if the school building were to be put at the disposal of the Coloured people. However, there is a flat refusal even to consider such a step, despite the fact that that school is now standing completely empty as a result of the removal of the pupils.

The same is true in the case of Holpan, but to a greater extent. There is also a White school which has now closed as a result of the lack of White schoolchildren. However, 156 Coloured schoolchildren are transported every day to Wincanton because their school building collapsed last year. [Interjections.] Costs amounting to thousands of rand are also carried by our Department of Education and Culture. Could the White school at Holpan not be put at the disposal of the children of Holpan? After all, it would be to the benefit of our country as a whole.

Then there is also the case of Strydenburg where the White school, which has 21 classrooms and a hostel, is being used by only a few White schoolchildren, while more than 600 Coloured school-children go to school in a tumbledown building belonging to the NG Church. There are not even enough classrooms. Tuition takes place under the trees. Now there are plans to erect a new school for Coloured people at great cost. This is a tremendous waste of money because the Coloured children could simply take over the White school and the few White children could be accommodated in a house or any other suitable building, and there are many of these in the town that have fallen into disuse. [Interjections.] They could go to school together, because our schools are open to all races. To me it is utter stupidity to waste money in this way. Furthermore, I regard these cases as being indicative of obstinacy.

Mr Chairman, the prosperity of any country in the world is determined by the state of its finances. Every year, population growth takes place, which requires planning. The South African economy must be turned around and more job opportunities must be created for the poor.

Hon members have seen the sorry sight of the terrible conditions of starvation and deprivation that exist, in particular, in areas nearby. However, one must first take cognisance of the causes before the problem can be solved.

One of the causes is the depopulation of the rural areas and the migration to the cities. As a result of this a housing shortage develops which results in overcrowding and squatting, as well as unemployment.

The apartheid system is considered the most important cause of the impoverishment of our underprivileged people in South Africa. One can take it for granted that people who are starving will not be deterred by moral considerations from accepting food or financial help that is offered to them. The poverty is so great and so widespread that it is impossible to offer relief.

The economy is also not creating sufficient prosperity to make an attempt of that nature affordable. Once again, a distinction can be made between relief and eradication. In order to relieve the misery of our people who are living below the breadline, a rearrangement of the State’s expenditure priorities is necessary without an increase of the total expenditure.

Actions which are being initiated to develop the poor communities to a level at which they will be able to help themselves, will have to be continued over a long period. Therefore, to permanently eradicate poverty is a different kettle of fish.

The hon the Minister must tell me what the Ministers’ Council is going to do to contain this problem. Hon members were sent here firstly to attend to the interests of our people who are crying out from the desert of poverty and misery. We must assist them. We shall have to humble ourselves and join hands, put our pride in our pockets and, like our Master, join the ranks of the few. Only then will we be able to build a new South Africa. However, it will take a long time to remove the problem.

Who wrote the speech?

I am not stupid.

A large contribution to the infrastructure and the upliftment of the people will have to be made over a long period. However, one now has the problem of how this development task should be approached and by whom. This, however, is left unanswered and whether the economy can meet the demands of the great variety of social matters, is also uncertain. The Ministers’ Council has a duty to create employment by introducing public works programmes and thereby also to overcome the problem of poverty. The Ministers’ Council must also ensure that expenditure with regard to education, health, welfare and housing, which are thorns in the sides of those in our areas, is improved. A food stamp programme must be implemented for the poor and the unemployed. A national feeding programme must be introduced in schools. This would contribute considerably towards the relief of starvation.

The housing formula creates problems. This must also be looked into, because it is calculated according to gross income and our people cannot afford it. For example, if a tenant earns R130 per week, his rent is calculated at R58.28 per month. Services which are added to that amount to a further approximate amount of R72 per month. That amounts to R130 per month without electricity and then we might be talking about a man with a wife and five children. How can people keep their heads above water with such a high inflation rate on top of that?

According to Die Burger of 10 February 1989, the hon the Acting State President made it clear that the Government was committed to the removal of discrimination because it could not be justified in any way and was not acceptable. According to Die Burger of 12 February, the new chief leader of the governing party identified three laws as stumbling blocks in the reconciliation process, namely the Reservation of Separate Amenities Act, the Group Areas Act and the Population Registration Act. However, here the Government has given us something to gnaw at.

In Die Burger of 12 February, it was also pleasing to read that the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council had said that in a changed South Africa people would have to realise that they would have to compromise. We will have to accept the inevitability of the process of give and take. There will have to be a willingness to take others into consideration. What I find most significant, is that the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council accepts that the South African community cannot be changed completely overnight. It is, therefore, the motto of the Democratic Reform Party of South Africa that we must negotiate in order to reach our goal. Confrontation and boycotts will be to no-one’s advantage. They can only be detrimental to our own people and we will be doing them harm.

Mr Chairman, we fully support and stand by the hon the Minister in his request for us to accept the Part Appropriation Bill which he has presented in this House. Whatever is said by the hon opposition and independent members, our hon Minister of the Budget should be congratulated on the manner in which he has always done his utmost to provide in the needs of and bring relief to the other departments of our House.

How often have our ex-members, who have now become our opposition, not gone to the hon the Minister’s office to seek help and relief for their constituencies. Very few have ever left his office disappointed.

But he is the Minister; he must be there. [Interjections.]

Some of the hon independent members are so useless that they serve no purpose in this House.

If the Official Opposition is dissatisfied with what has been presented to us then they should lay the blame at the door of the hon the Minister of Finance who even last year denied and took away that which should have been given to the aged and disabled. Therefore any shortage of funds is because of the National Government’s policy. It is petty for the Official Opposition to oppose the Part Appropriation Bill merely for the sake of opposing, because they were singing praise to our hon the Minister of the Budget a short while ago. [Interjections.] If hon members want me to do so, I will open that opinion poll again. [Interjections.]

If ever there is a community in this country which is faced with a dilemma, it is ours. Some of us are thinking and wanting to be Black, yet they are truly not prepared to share their wealth with the Blacks, whilst others—particularly the “have-nots”—are crying out for improvements and opportunities. Although we are not completely satisfied with what we are getting in a discriminatory part appropriation package, we must take what we can get at the moment and we must continue to show our dissatisfaction by asking for more.

In the past our community has always been hoodwinked by our own political touts who were well paid by English-speaking candidates. Just when we thought we were well organised and that unity was within our grasp, those touts moved in to create division within our community. Even the so-called Coloured communists were at one time divided …

You were part of it.

So was that hon member’s leader. They were divided into three different groups, viz Marxists, Trotskyites and internationalists. [Interjections.] If people in the White community are experiencing difficulties in making ends meet, what about those who are not classified as White? The latter groups are receiving far less, yet they have to pay more for less in this discriminatory society. To send away a simple telegram even costs us more because of the many stupid and lengthy names of most of the areas in which we are living.

What about the cost of transport? We are even paying more for a plot of land or a house than the Whites are paying. [Interjections.] Yet the Opposition is blaming us for being party to the discrimination used against those who are not White. I want to repeat once again that the Nationalists and their apartheid policies are responsible for the discrimination against us. We want a united and free society in this country of ours.

Mr Chairman, I would like to thank the hon the Minister in the first instance for having provided me with a forward copy of his speech. I should also like to associate myself with Mr Fred Peters when he says that one should not oppose for the sake of opposing. We are not here to do this. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: The hon member should refer to me as the hon member for Silvertown and not to Mr Fred Peters.

Fair enough; the honorary member for Silvertown. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: There is a big difference between an honorary member and an honourable member. There are no honorary members in this House. One is either a member or one is not a member of this House. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, I want to tell the hon member for Southern Free State, who keeps on interjecting, that we are trying to discuss matters in a responsible way in this House. I am a responsible person who pays my bond—I hope that hon member pays his rent—and I pay my pledge to the political party that I belong to. [Interjections.] That hon member should rather pay his pledge … [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, I know what I am talking about. I can prove it and I can even bring documentary proof that the hon member for Southern Free State has never paid his pledge to his political affiliation. [Interjections.] I have copies of such documents in my possession.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: I challenge that hon member to bring documentary proof of what he is saying. Furthermore I am asking him to repeat what he has said outside this House.

Mr Chairman, I should like to confine myself to the hon the Minister’s address. After all, he has put a lot of work into this and he did not waste his time.

When we criticise strictly according to the hon the Acting Minister’s address we will do so in a constructive manner and with a view to helping wherever we can because we are a responsible opposition. Therefore we will be supportive. Wherever we find that we agree with the hon the Acting Minister we will say so and will be supportive of him. [Interjections.]

Order!

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: Is the type of debate which has just taken place allowed? Hon members were shouting to one another about paying their rent and threatening one another instead of keeping to the subject matter. Must we not ignore what that hon member said?

Order! I have already requested the hon member to refrain from such remarks.

I am going to ask you, Sir, to ask that hon member to refrain from telling me to sit down. First please tell him to sit down, Sir. I hope that you are not going to impinge on my time because I want to finish off. [Interjections.] Sir, please discipline that hon member for once.

We carry on and look at certain aspects of the hon the Acting Minister’s address here. On page 2 where the hon the Acting Minister says:

and this we underline—

I cannot agree with him more. What he says is absolutely correct. I have to agree with him and if any hon members here perhaps disagree with him, I am going to challenge them by saying if they want an election they should not vote for this Budget.

On page 3 towards the middle of paragraph 2 the hon the Acting Minister says:

I agree with him here again and I say to the hon the Acting Minister, not in any destructive way but in a manner of constructive criticism, that we do not want to face that fiasco again that we had last year with the R36 million where our pensioners almost did not get that increase. I know that the hon the Acting Minister will take this in very good spirit.

On page 4 I take note of what the hon the Minister said in paragraph 1. The only thing that I would like to know is what has happened to the statement of the hon the Chairman of the Minister’s Council in which he spoke about 2 500 teachers being laid off for some reason or other. In the second last paragraph on page 4 the hon the Acting Minister says:

He has our full support there.

On page 5 where he talks about antiquated attitudes we take note of his remarks in the good spirit in which the hon the Acting Minister made them. In the next paragraph on the eroding effects on sanctions the hon the Acting Minister knows my party’s attitude toward sanctions. Everybody knows our attitude toward sanctions and where the two major parties in this House do not find themselves in disagreement, and therefore we can only say we commend him for including this paragraph. He has acted very responsibly here to bring these things to the attention of our people because not only the hon members in this House are going to read this speech. This speech is going to be read all over South Africa. Therefore I am glad that the hon the Acting Minister of the Budget has seen fit to introduce this particular clause. If there are any stooges here that still want to shout about it, let them go destiny’s way.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: There are no stooges in the House, with the exception of one.

I prefaced it with the words “if any”. If the cap fits, he must wear it. [Interjections.]

Order! Hon members in this House are not stooges, nor are they hon stooges. [Interjections.] The hon member for Matroosfontein must please withdraw that remark.

Mr Chairman, I did not say there were stooges here. I said “if any”.

Order! The hon member must withdraw that remark.

Mr Chairman, I withdraw it.

If the cap fits, let the hon members wear it.

Heaven knows, I will not stop them. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Matroosfontein must withdraw his whole statement. I do not accept a partial withdrawal.

Order! The hon member for Matroosfontein may continue.

I want to quote from the hon the Acting Minister’s speech where he said:

*I regard this as a plea by the hon the Acting Minister directed at all hon members. We support that.

†I wish to commend the hon the Acting Minister of the Budget on the job that he has done so far, especially as it is not actually his job. He had to stand in for someone, and he did the best he could. We therefore give him our support.

Mr Chairman, I want to congratulate the hon the Acting Minister of the Budget on the Part Appropriation Bill he introduced today. We want to give him the assurance that we share his sentiments and support this Bill wholeheartedly.

In recent months we have been bombarded with banner headlines in newspapers regarding conditions and the shortage of money at universities. However, I think only one side of the case has been put. The public did not get the right picture regarding what happened. For example, banner headlines like the following appeared in newspapers: “Bakhand-dosente wil weg uit agterste ry”, “Universiteite is onkant betrap”, “Ouers moet UWK steun”, “Students forced to squat”, “Mediaraad sit nd klag van UWK oor berig”, “Toe busman nee sê vir pos aan universiteit”, “Rector is blamed for tensions at campus”. I could carry on in this vein. There are any number of banner headlines dealing with subsidies, mismanagement and squatting in hostels, etc. A finger is being pointed at the legislators and the decisionmakers in this country. It is, however, gratifying to learn that undue preference is not being given to certain universities in the allocation of university subsidies.

The subsidy is not based on race or colour, but on a formula which applies to all universities. Prof Pieter Booysen, the chairman of the Committee of University Principals, said in Johannesburg that there was no political agenda for the allocation of university fees. This was stated in the Cape Times of 15 February 1989. He went on to say:

The Committee of University Principals even formed a task group with the Department of National Education to assist in investigating the financial affairs and the allocation of funds to universities.

I appreciate the fact that problems in connection with accommodation and salaries cannot be ascribed to racial prejudice. It is important to us that universities throughout the country receive equal treatment. The funding of universities takes place according to a formula. If there are cutbacks, all planning is hampered, with the result that the small and poor universities are hard-pressed, and for that reason it would not be fair if universities for people of colour or the small universities were prejudiced. All universities must be treated the same.

However, the hon the Minister of National Education has voted an additional R27 million to help these universities out of their financial crisis. Nevertheless the universities were caught unawares. There is, for example, the salaries which universities pay. The remuneration of university lecturers is not yet in line with that of the private sector. The story is told of a South African university which advertised a lecturer’s post for which a person who was well qualified, but who was a bus driver, applied. However, the bus driver found out the salary for the post and withdrew his application, which shows that university lecturers are far worse off than their counterparts in the private sector.

It is said that they have to stand at the back of the queue, but they recently realised that they would always be at the back of the queue unless they stood up for their rights. That is how the trade unions uplifted their people. That is how the trade unions raised the salaries and wages of their members, and the university lecturers must simply put up more of a fight for their people.

I just want to mention what this formula is based on. We must be sympathetic about the encouragement by the Government. The Government says they must rationalise. There must not be so much duplication. Why must the three universities in the Western Province each have their own faculties and facilities, whereas they could share certain facilities? These facilities must not be duplicated, because that is where the money goes. I also believe that the duplication of facilities and particularly of study facilities is simply serving to promote own affairs, and we in this House are opposed to duplication.

There is rationalisation in the Public Service department and we are avoiding duplication. The private sector is also avoiding duplication. I cannot understand why certain facilities cannot also be handled in this way. My colleague and benchfellow said a moment ago that there were educational facilities standing empty; why can they not be used by other population groups? The same applies in this case. There should not be so much duplication of education facilities at universities because these facilities can be shared. The overlapping must be eliminated.

We see that subsidies are allocated for success. The first criterion is the number of students enrolled and the second the success achieved. Thirdly, if the university does research and publishes it, this is taken into account in determining its subsidy. If a student passes, the university receives the full supplement for that student. However, if the student fails, the university gets half the subsidy for that student.

There is an outcry because university subsidies are being cut back. We are never told why the subsidy is being cut back. We do not hear what their results were or that a specific university does not do research and that their senior people do not publish their research. This country is poorer if we do not have lecturers and senior students who do research and publish it to the benefit of future generations.

This is what the subsidy is based on. This is what causes a university to receive a higher or lower subsidy. We would like to endorse the idea of rewards for success. Personally I support the idea that when success has been achieved it must be rewarded. I also support the idea that universities must publish their research so that we as the people and the community of this country can all benefit from it.

I want to get back to the crux of the argument. Universities must return to their calling, namely to encourage fundamental scientific education and research. They must encourage scientific research and education and scale down activities which are not of importance to the university. [Interjections.] They must scale down those activities and address their determined and Godgiven task to do the best for our students. [Interjections.]

I have spoken about the universities that are shouting, complaining and condemning and are creating the impression that their subsidies are lower because they belong to another race group. I have tried to prove that subsidies are not based on colour, but on the quality of the work done at the universities. [Interjections.] If universities do it for this reason, they are helping themselves to get back to what I call the fundamental scientific education and research which is the pivot around which all universities revolve.

Mr Chairman, it is indeed a great pleasure to follow on the hon member for Grassy Park. [Interjections.] The hon member has given a clinical analysis of what should be done to universities and tertiary institutions.

I want to make use of this opportunity to support the Bill wholeheartedly and to congratulate the hon the Acting Minister of the Budget on his performance here today. We are all aware that the hon the Minister of Health Services and Welfare, in addition to his own demanding job, is at present standing in for the hon the Minister of the Budget who is indisposed. I trust that that hon Minister will have a speedy recovery and be back with us soon.

The amount of R929 million is far too little for this Administration to function. However, I am aware that it is bridging finance and I therefore trust that we shall be allocated much more money in the Main Appropriation. However, I fear that the amount asked for will not come close to meeting the needs, particularly in terms of housing, the erection of schools and clinics and the other institutions we so urgently need.

The backlog in housing amounts to millions of rands, and if we ever hope to meet those needs, I suggest that more use should be made of the private sector. We shall not, in the foreseeable future, be able to cope with the housing crisis in which our people find themselves and that is why I believe that the only way to do so is to make use of the private sector.

I want to ask the hon the Minister for an investigation into the payment of boarding fees, particularly in the case of the people with whom the child is boarding in the rural areas. I was in my constituency during the past few weeks and one of the problems I experienced there was the regular late payment of the boarding fees to those providing the accommodation. Our farm children who attend school in the towns and board with private people, are suffering as a result.

Furthermore, it is very difficult for these people because they take in one or two of our farm children on the understanding that boarding fees will be paid to them. If these boarding fees are not paid, it is again the farm children who suffer. Will the hon the Minister please ensure that this state of affairs in our rural towns receives attention.

As the hon member for Griqualand West also pointed out, I find it a cause for concern that only 34 White pupils are currently receiving tuition at a school in Niewoudtville—a large school that can accommodate approximately 600 pupils and a hostel with accommodation for 200 boarders. I visited this school, I went to have a look at the conditions there and found that that school and its accommodation could be used, which would mean that our children would no longer have to board in private homes.

There is a hostel for White children at Niewoudtville, and that hostel is used only from Mondays to Fridays. On Friday afternoons the parents of the White children come to fetch them to spend the weekend on their farms in the area, and then those facilities are unutilised.

I want to ask the hon the Minister to ensure that accommodation is shared in circumstances such as this in which there is more than enough accommodation available. We are not asking for the children to be lumped together at random, but we are asking for proper steps be taken so that our children can make use of those facilities.

I also want to ask the hon the Minister to ensure the security systems in our schools, particularly at our high schools in the rural areas. I foresee problems, because headmasters here told me that they cannot employ enough people to ensure to the safety of the State’s buildings. Hon members are aware of the fact that we are dealing here with elements that are not kindly disposed towards us. The first thing they do is to try to damage State property. I want to ask the hon the Minister to ensure that headmasters are not hamstrung when they ask for security staff to be employed at their schools.

I trust that I shall get the opportunity to speak again in the Main Appropriation when I shall go into more detail about the hon the Minister’s Vote and I want to express my thanks for the opportunity to speak here.

Mr Chairman, South Africa’s economic progress must be shared with everyone who has made a contribution to building up our beautiful fatherland and to its growth. We were born in South Africa and therefore have the right to share in the wealth of the country. Our people are being done an injustice and do not share in the prosperity of South Africa. That is why we are here in Parliament to dismantle apartheid and to promote the socio-economic progress of our people. We are not here to change South Africa’s name, but to change the way of life in South Africa. We are here to ensure that justice prevails.

With the end of the P W Botha era and the start of that of his successor in sight, our country needs more than just good prospects. During recent times the economy has struggled to show significant growth and has suffered under effective sanctions as a result of our country’s apartheid policy. We shall have to cross the Rubicon ourselves, because we can no longer allow our people to pay such a high price for apartheid. We cannot build the future on poverty, and we must therefore get a larger slice of the financial cake. Until all discriminatory laws have been repealed, we shall continue to be at odds with the White people, here where we can be seen and can be clearly heard. [Interjections.] We shall not allow the internecine strife in the NP to delay the advent of a new South Africa.

I want to thank our hon Minister of the Budget today in his absence for the valuable service he and his department provide not only for our community, but for South Africa. May I also convey a special word of thanks to Mr Sarnie, Mr Ohlson and Mrs Maytham for the efficient service I receive from them in the interests of my voters.

Owing to the fact that job opportunities in Dysselsdorp are very limited, many of the residents are unemployed. The fact that so many breadwinners are unemployed is cause for concern. Consequently I have declared war against poverty. There are too many of our people who still live in a subculture of poverty as a result of the Government’s apartheid policy. I have noted with appreciation the DM1,1 million which was obtained from the Kopling Trust in Germany to train artisans in order to create job opportunities for our people there. There are plans to erect a training centre at Dysselsdorp this year which will also provide 40 young men with sleeping accommodation. The training centre will also include the following: Three instruction rooms, a workroom, a prayer and meditation room, three recreational rooms, TV rooms, a large dining room, and office, a flat and a kitchen. We shall be building the training centre not only for Dysselsdorp, but for South Africa.

It will be noticed that an amount of DM150 000 has been obtained from abroad for the erection of this centre. At present we are teaching our people how to catch the fish, and therefore we have already started with the establishment of small industries. This is why I want to appeal today to our clergymen who get millions of rands from abroad, not to use this money merely to serve their own interests, because it is a biblical injunction that we help our people in need.

They must also stop advocating for sanctions abroad because this only leads to poverty and unemployment. Many clergymen who are advocates of sanctions, live in luxury. Southern African cannot exist without South Africa. It is also ironic that some African countries are so keen to join the sanctions chorus when they can literally and metaphorically not afford to do so. [Interjections.]

Today I again want to make a serious plea to overseas countries not to boycott South Africa’s deciduous fruit industry. [Interjections.] Thousands of our people …

Order! Hon members must please lower their voices. The hon member for Dysselsdorp must please address the Chair.

Thousands of our people, particularly in the Western Cape, are dependent on the deciduous fruit industry. If sanctions were imposed on our deciduous fruit industry, our people would be hit the hardest. Today I want to tell these advocates of sanctions that they must take note of the critical economic realities, because their actions only cause the vicious circle of poverty to get bigger.

Estimates indicate that South Africa’s population will almost double in the next 30 years, and in a country with limited agricultural land, a permit system of landownership and little water, we are now faced with the problem of producing enough food for our rapidly growing population. This is why we are also going to investigate the potential of breeding freshwater fish in Dysselsdorp. [Interjections.]

I should like to know from the hon the Acting Minister of the Budget why the security staff at Môrestêr Senior Secondary School, some of whom have given more than four years of satisfactory service, have not yet been granted permanent appointments. The secondary schools in Oudtshoorn are full to overflowing and this is also one of the major causes of our low pass rate in secondary schools. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, it is a privilege for me to participate in this debate. At the same time, however, I find it disappointing to have experienced that, while we are yearning for solutions to South Africa’s problems and must display more earnestness in order to solve those problems, the debate which took place here today was of a deplorable standard, probably the poorest in the four years the tricameral system has been in existence. [Interjections.]

The involvement of hon members in this debate depends primarily on the contribution of the Official Opposition. I am saying this because during the difficult period after the last Parliamentary sitting they repeatedly flashed full-page advertisements in the newspapers about what they were going to do to this side of the House.

I find it a pity that the Official Opposition has up to now not come forward in any way with any policy in respect of how they are going to continue the negotiation processes. None of them availed themselves of the opportunity today to come forward with an economic policy or with proposals to replace what we have put into operation.

We advocate every day that we must give everyone an opportunity to have representation in this Parliament. I am sorry that the Official Opposition cannot set an example to people who are not here yet of how to use their time to plead for the success and the aspirations of their people. [Interjections.]

We are here without forgetting what our objectives and reasons are for our participation. We had an Official Opposition. I am sorry to say that I miss that Official Opposition, because one could expect to get speeches of high calibre. All we are getting today are thrust out tongues, laughter, jesting and attacks on matters that are not of any importance in regard to the problems of our country.

Order! Did the Official Opposition not indicate that they were supporting the Second Reading of the hon the Acting Minister? [Interjections.]

That could be entirely correct, Sir, but the hon member …

Order! Wait a minute. What did the hon member just say?

He can go sidling up to them if he likes, Sir. He is not going to get a position. He is not going to get a ministership.

Order! That has nothing to do with this matter. [Interjections.)

I ask that member to withdraw the words “sidling up to them”, because I think he is insinuating something. The hon member must improve his language.

Order! The hon member must proceed. I have already asked him to weigh his words.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: If anything goes wrong in this House we expect the Chairman to rectify it.

Order! No! Do not try to teach me. I know what to do. [Interjections.]

I should very much like to ask the DRP what package they are offering us in order to continue the negotiation process with the NP? What did they want us to do for the voters? [Interjections.] I merely want to remind them that we on this side of the House …

[Interjections.] … have despite everything remained loyal to our voters. We have remained loyal to the people who voted for us. We have remained loyal to the policy of the LP. If we formulate a new policy, we will put it to the test in an election.

Put it off then!

We do not allow ourselves to be ruled by a sham Official Opposition.

Order! The hon Chief Whip can be given an opportunity if he wants to make a speech.

We shall challenge the NP to an election, and not the Official Opposition. We shall leave the back door open for them to continue to remain here before we hold the election.

Let me come back to the speech made by the hon the Acting Minister. I want to compliment him on a well-considered speech which he presented here. While we are being accused of not being able to meet the needs of our people, the hon the Acting Minister of the Budget succeeded in introducing a part appropriation which was R167 million more than the previous appropriation. That is why I like the LP—we fight in politics, but we also look after our people effectively. We shall remind those who cut the cake of their responsibility towards the other groups.

We know that the political system in this country…

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: The hon member …

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: The hon member for Esselen Park must return to his seat. He cannot stand there in the aisle and talk.

Order! That is correct. I thought he wanted to come and fight with me. [Interjections.] Hon members may not put a point of order in the aisle.

Mr Chairman, I am very impressed by the speaker because he simply calls an hon member by his name.

Order! No, that is not a point of order. The hon member must please resume his seat. The hon member for Mamre may proceed.

Mr Chairman, I always respected that hon member as an “oom”. Things are hotting up here, but that cannot be helped. Where one sits and what one says must not cause one to become hot under the collar. They are going to walk out one by one—the second person is leaving now. [Interjections.] I am not referring to the independent member, but to the Official Opposition.

What are we striving for? We have stated once again that we are here to improve the quality of the lives of our people. Therefore I cannot but say that the LP is as ready for an election now as it was in 1984. What we are concerned about are not the things which benefit our own convenience, but things such as elections of management committees and the question of pensions. What we are concerned with is what we want to obtain for our people. Our strategy of seizing the NP by its throat and strangling apartheid makes it inconvenient for those hon members to be with us.

Order! I am sorry to have to interrupt the hon member, but see how far down the aisle he has come by now to make his speech. [Interjections.] The hon member must remain standing next to his seat when he speaks.

Sir, I take up quite a lot of space. I apologise for that.

Order! The hon member must simply do what the rules prescribe.

Mr Chairman, today I want to say that our department has a proud history of what we have accomplished in education. I want to thank the hon the Minister of Health Services and Welfare for what he did for the people in Atlantis. In June 1988 there were 100 breadwinners receiving assistance. Fortunately the people of Atlantis know that they must get stuck in and help themselves so that today there are only 59 breadwinners receiving assistance. On average 73 people were given assistance amounting to R30 000 per month. I want to thank this hon Minister very sincerely for this amount of R30 000 which he gave to the people in Atlantis.

An average amount of R418 is paid out every month. This is how this party and the hon Ministers look after the affairs of its people. Since we were elected to Parliament we have proved that the tricameral system would not have survived the winters of the past without the LP. [Interjections.] During the winters of the past we were at the helm of the tricameral system. [Interjections.] We were not bent on destroying South Africa. [Interjections.] We led South Africa in the direction of security and prosperity for all. [Interjections.] We even caused the Government to embark on a new course—“The change of heart in the Government is due to the strategy of the LP.” It is a pleasure to be a member of the LP! [Interjections.] The LP is still going to lead this country to its final destination, namely an integrated South Africa. After all, we are the integrated South Africa. Look at us—those members included. [Interjections.] It is also important that we should not become afraid if the politics become stormy; then we stick to our course. This party has a history of involvement in the community.

You were not there!

It makes no difference where I was; I am here now! [Interjections.] That hon member is no longer here. That is why he can now say that I was not there. [Interjections.]

Let us consider how this party has conveyed its message to the NP during the past four years. The first year our congress theme was reconciliation. During the first year, as members of the LP, we conveyed the message of reconciliation. Who failed to take that message of reconciliation to heart and carry it out? Was it the LP? Was it us? No, it was not us. What is more, the hon member for Bishop Lavis helped me to organise that successful congress in Goodwood. [Interjections.] That hon member believed in the message of reconciliation. [Interjections.] What was our next message? It was: “Now is the time for change.” Who did not get the message? It was the Official Opposition and the NP. [Interjections.] [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, it indeed a pleasure and an honour to be able to speak after the hon member for Mamre. It is actually a privilege which one should not easily pass up. If we listened to the positive message …

Order! The hon member for Elsies River must restrain himself. The hon member for Mamre made no reference to him. The hon member may proceed.

Hon members have listened to the voice of reason and progress, which indicated the direction in which the LP was moving with regard to South Africa. [Interjections.] I am not going to stoop to the level on which the hon member for Matroosfontein conducted the debate. [Interjections.] I am not prepared to do that.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: That remark of mine to which he is referring, followed the remarks that he made about me with regard to the renting …

Order! The hon member must give me a chance. The hon member was speaking about the quality of the debate. I do not know about the previous remarks, but he did not say anything about them now. He was speaking about the quality of the debate and he did not refer to the hon member personally. [Interjections.]

I want to repeat that I am not going to stoop to that level. However, allow me to …

Order! Would the hon member for Dysselsdorp please take his seat and refrain from egging on the hon member for Southern Free State.

However, allow me to say the following. While the hon member for Matroosfontein was speaking, I was transported to something which happened many years ago. I saw myself as Mark Antony. [Interjections.] I saw myself entering that room in which what I was striving for, was lying on the ground. I saw that the man who had trod the same path as me in order to realise what I wanted for my people in South Africa, was on the ground. He had been stabbed in the back and blood was seeping from his wounds onto the floor. [Interjections.] That which I had worked for and looked forward to, and the expectations of a beautiful South Africa that I had cherished, lay there, degraded. This was done by somebody who had made the journey with me.

At the same time I was transported and I thought of the words that Mark Antony had uttered: “O! pardon me, thou bleeding piece of earth, that I am meek and gentle with these butchers …”.

That which we are striving for and which we would like to achieve in this world, has been stabbed in the back, as it were, by means of personal attacks here. [Interjections.] However, I am not going to stoop to that level. I am not going to ask: “Et tu, Brute?” or “Are you also involved?” [Interjections.]

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

No, Mr Chairman, I do not have the time. If it were a sensible question I would react to it, but I do not have the time.

I want to return to what is important, to the crux of the matter. I rather want to deal with the Appropriation itself now. However, before I do so, allow me to congratulate the hon the Minister on what he has submitted to us in his acting capacity. It shows us once again what sort of material, what type of person and character is to be found in the LP. Here is a man who was given a responsible task at short notice and who did not hesitate to accept it. Here he has submitted a concrete, positive Appropriation to the House. Listen to what he says. He says that the LP is not deviating from what it is striving to achieve. We are taking what we have here and we are going to work with that in order to uplift our people and to place them on a level where we should like them to be. Our aim is to create a non-racial South Africa in which everyone will be equally important. I say thank you very much for a man like that.

At the same time I want to say once again to the hon the Minister who is actually responsible for this portfolio, that we wish him everything of the best and hope that he will get well soon and take his place here again one of these days.

I also want to wish the officials of the department everything of the best and thank them for the quality of work that they produce for us in that office. [Interjections.] I do not want to react to the opposition; I shall leave them alone. They are finished.

I want to say thank you today for what we were able to achieve with the funds that were allocated to us. By making use of current funds we were able to work on the housing project at Luckhoff, where we built 38 houses. At Diamanthoogte and Koffiefontein, 50 fully serviced houses were built. [Interjections.] I am not going to talk about the 15 000 people who live in a certain place and are now experiencing problems with regard to funds. I do not want to speak about those things and stoop to that level. I am asking the hon member rather to keep quiet. By making use of these current funds, work was also done with regard to the provision of services on additional erven which are required to resettle people who remained behind in Black towns. These funds are also rather limited and it would be appreciated if they could be increased as quickly as possible in order to complete the outstanding projects in the Southern Free State.

The upgrading of existing services, the provision of electricity, sewerage schemes and services for additional erven in Philippolis, Trompsburg, Edenburg, Rouxville en Luckhoff are urgently required. We say thank you very much for the funds that were made available by the Administration for the provision of services in Sandershoogte and Jacobsdal. They are being put to good use. I shall probably never be able to emphasise sufficiently the demand for housing in Jagersfontein and Zastron. The application of the two towns for proclamation and township development has progressed very well. I want to repeat my request to the hon the Minister this afternoon to give preference to the funding for these two towns. Our people there are living in shocking conditions. The proclamation is being actively attended to and we would appreciate it if all went smoothly with regard to the provision of funds after the proclamation. [Time expired.)

Debate interrupted.

Mr Chairman, this is the first opportunity that this House and I have to express our sympathy with and support to the people of Ladysmith, Mooi River, Estcourt and other places that were recently subject to flood damage.

Before I go on to my budget speech I would like to add to the answers given by my colleague, the hon the Acting Chairman of the Ministers’ Council, on two very important issues raised by hon members in this House.

Disciplinary action as a result of the James Commission was taken by the Administration. In the case of certain witnesses who appeared before the James Commission and whose evidence and allegations were very damning, the Administration took certain disciplinary action.

The hon member for Mariannhill requested a local affairs committee for Cato Manor. Both the Cato Manor Residents’ Associations were totally opposed to a local affairs committee for Cato Manor and the Southern Durban local affairs committee to which …

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: There were no residents in that area and I do not know who they consulted because there were no people in the houses that had been built there.

Does Cato Manor have no residents?

You were talking about Cato Manor earlier on.

I am talking about Cato Manor.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: As I understand matters this is the Part Appropriation debate and I find that the hon the Minister is now meandering around Cato Manor.

Order! Hon members are aware of the fact that the Part Appropriation debate is a reasonably wide-ranging one. If the hon the Minister prefers to start off the way he has done, he is at liberty to do so. The hon the Minister may proceed.

Thank you, Mr Chairman. I think the House needs to know this because of certain misinformation. The Southern Durban local affairs committee was approached by the province and requested that Cato Manor be a ward of Southern Durban. Southern Durban was opposed to Cato Manor being a ward of Southern Durban LACs. The CMRA, the Cato Manor Residents’ Association, also opposed the establishment of a local affairs committee in Cato Manor. I hope I put that quite clearly.

[Inaudible.]

If the hon member does not understand, he must not blame me.

Hon members are aware that this Bill is in terms of section 4(2) of the Exchequer and Audit Act intended solely to authorise expenditure by the Administration on existing services until the main estimates are approved. Hon members can therefore rest assured that they are now being requested to approve funds only for services of which they already have knowledge and which have been debated in this Chamber.

I estimate that an amount of R325 million will be adequate for the period 1 April to 31 July 1989. Because spending does not take place at an even tempo throughout the financial year, hon members should not attempt to extrapolate this amount in a straight line to arrive at what they believe may be expected in the main estimates. Variations in the year-on-year requirements of departments add to the hazards of drawing premature conclusions based on the percentual share each has in the total part appropriation. Bearing these factors in mind, the following is a breakdown of the amount of R325 million that is requested:

Vote No 1: “Budgetary and Auxiliary Services”

R5,5 million or 1,7% of the total as against R4,6 million or 1,6% of the total in 1988.

Vote No 2: “Local Government, Housing and Agriculture”

R46,6 million or 14,4% of the total as against R61,2 million or 20,6% of the total in 1988.

Vote No 3: “Education and Culture”

R203,9 million or 62,7% of the total as against R171,4 million or 57,9% of the total in 1988.

Vote No 4: “Health Services and Welfare”

R69 million or 21,2% of the total as against R58,8 million or 19,9% of the total in 1988.

With the exception of Vote No 2—“Local Government, Housing and Agriculture”, hon members will observe that the percentual share of the total is in each case substantially the same as last year. The decline in the percentual share of Vote No 2 in no way signifies any slackening off in the Administration’s programme, particularly in the fields of housing and agriculture. It is simply a reflection on the ability of the Housing Development Fund to meet its capital commitments during the relevant four month period with less exchequer augmentation than last year. Nothing sinister whatsoever should be read into it. My colleague, the hon the Acting Minister of Housing, will deal with this fully in his policy speech later in the session.

The amount of R325 million requested is R29 million or 9,8% higher that the figure of R296 million voted in 1988. I need not burden the House with another macro-economic analysis of the South African economy. The hon the Minister of Finance has already ably given such an overview in his speech at the Joint Meeting of Parliament on the 13 of this month.

Viewed against the anticipated inflation rate and other parameters having a direct bearing on State expenditure, I believe that the 9,8% increase in our Part Appropriation—always stressing the inherent incompleteness of such a fiscal picture—is modest and reflects the administration’s desire to assist the hon the Minister of Finance in keeping State expenditure within affordable limits.

Mr Chairman, speaking on a Part Appropriation Bill has always presented difficulties to the hon the Minister of Finance and more recently, to hon Ministers of the Budget. We are very like fashion designers who may never reveal their new summer wardrobes ahead of time. Everyone would like a sneak preview of the main estimates for general and own affairs alike but I would ask hon members to be satisfied at this juncture with the traditionally inconclusive glimpse of the fiscal creations to which final adjustments are at this very moment being made.

If these had been ladies’ fashions or designs, I would have obliged the hon member for Reservoir Hills with a sneak preview.

Mr Chairman, as has been stated, this subject has scope for wide-ranging discussion. I would like to quote from the speech made by my colleague, the hon the Minister of the Budget which states:

The hon the Minister sums it up very well by saying that we are very like fashion designers who may never reveal their new summer wardrobes ahead of time.

First of all, in supporting this Part Appropriation, I merely want to remind my hon colleague that over the years this House has realised that there are problems which communities have been subjected to. I want to itemise two problems today as there are various other budget matters which will come forward in this House.

One is that notwithstanding the Housing Board’s limitations, school hall facilities are becoming absolutely imperative. Areas are now being developed and people are crying out for facilities. In many under-developed areas it is not possible for communities to have separate hall facilities and therefore on the basis of the share-concept, I would like serious consideration to be given to these much-needed amenities within these communities.

With respect to the hon member—and I know he is looking at me—I mentioned something which concerns parliamentary staff last year. Most members of the parliamentary staff in Cape Town who serve the various administrations come from Durban and they spend a period of approximately eight months in Cape Town.

We as members of Parliament have the opportunity of returning to Natal every weekend but the members of the parliamentary staff receive only two air tickets. Looking at the circumstances of the staff, some consideration could be given to additional mobility to their homes whenever necessary.

I would like to come back to the hon member for Reservoir Hills. On 10 February—I am glad he is smiling—he made some strong statements in this House, and I want to put the record straight. In the first place, a commission was established very much as a result of the calls made by the hon member tor Reservoir Hills. Let me quote from the terms of reference of that commission:

The hon member made a statement in this House to this effect:

Now, here is a case where a great deal is wrong. Both of those hon members are intellectuals. The whole of last year, debates were taken up with issues, and one of the most important issues that this House was occupied with, was with regard to commissions. Fair enough, the hon the State President found it fitting to appoint a commission. What was its purpose? How many times did that hon member for Reservoir Hills go to the commission and provide the input that was required? If there was any substance to the statements made against me in this House by the hon member for Reservoir Hills, should he not have gone to the James Commission? The James Commission report as a whole does not even reflect my name. I do not sit in this House as a mention of Parliament who runs offices and a business. I work seven days a week. I do not run offices and businesses according to a Parliamentary programme. Nevertheless an hon member of the standing of the hon member for Reservoir Hills sees fit to level accusations at me.

I want to make it very clear in this House that the former hon Chairman of the Ministers’ Council owes me nothing, and I owe him nothing.

Hear, hear!

Not loyalty?

When it comes to loyalty, some hon members are not aware of what a party means, and they are not aware of what loyalty means. The hon former Chairman of the Ministers’ Council is one man; the party does not belong to one man. Let us get our priorities right. [Interjections.] I will resolve those issues. [Interjections.]

We talk about taxpayers’ money. We are aware of what the James Commission has cost, more or less. Even to make utterances in this House that have no substance in relation to the welfare of people in this country is tantamount to wastage of taxpayers’ money. What is one trying to prove by making allegations against me in this House? Is it simply because I remain loyal to a party? I want to make it very clear that I have been sent here by a constituency. If I am not easily manipulated, then I become subject, perhaps …

But you are manipulated, but not easily? [Interjections.]

… to such allegations as were made by the hon member for Reservoir Hills.

I think it is absolutely uncalled-for and I want to make it very clear, more so for the information of the hon member for Reservoir Hills, that the former Chairman of the Ministers’ Council has done me no favours and whatever statement he has made here has no basis whatsoever. I do hope the hon member will take cognisance of that. On the other hand, I belong to a political party and I have an obligation to that political party. I will take my decisions regarding my participation guided by what is best for my constituency. However, for hon members to come into this House and cast a reflection simply because they believe that I have some allegiance to a particular hon member, is absolutely unfair. I want to appeal to the hon member not to make such statements. I am prepared for him to put it in writing so that we can deal with it in the other forums where it should be dealt with.

Could we have another inquiry?

Does the hon member want another inquiry? He can call for an inquiry at my expense!

We will take you up on that!

The hon member may take it up—if these are his venues to serve his society, community and country he can go and do so, and spend the next 6 months on the same issues that he intends to involve himself in. I hope some hon members will also respect the boundaries of their constituencies more than anything else. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, at the outset this afternoon the hon member for Springfield and also the hon member for Reservoir Hills made reference to the need for some action to be taken following the findings of the commission with a view to satisfying the concern of the community in regard to matters which led to the inquiry by the James Commission and its report. I want to say that immediately we have stability in this House and hopefully that will be in the not too distant future as leader of this party I want to give this House the assurance that I will not rest and neither will my party until the question-mark that remains is addressed and clear-cut assurances can be given to the community that whatever wrong was committed over the past 4’/2 to 5 years will be remedied. [Interjections.] I go so far as to say that if it is necessary to have legislation enacted in this House in order to do that, we will do it. This concerns those who sought and gave political favours, thereby harming innocent schoolchildren and innocent people waiting for justice to be meted out to them—I am talking about displaced traders or anybody who expected a fair deal from the authorities and who has not received that fair deal. Such people will not be ignored. It is the duty of this House to ensure that the necessary steps will be taken and those measures will be instituted to grant redress to all those who have been harmed or hurt over the past 4 years. I will stand by that commitment. I am not interested as to whose head will roll.

Yesterday, during the joint meeting, an hon Minister in the Assembly indicated that some nine people in one Department were sidelined because their actions were questionable. It is when that kind of thinking permeates this House that we will have no nonsense from people within and from without—that goes for hon members of Parliament as well. We have a responsibility to be the watchdogs and to ensure that it does not happen.

Do not pay their wages at public expense. [Interjections.]

I think that makes the matter clear. I would also like to make an appeal that we should carry on with our work on the basis of what I have said and that we should not fling accusations across the floor. I believe the James Commission has done the work and has opened a new door. Let us make use of that door and complete our tasks—that is our responsibility. At the end of the day everything will fall into place and everyone will know where he stands. I think that is important. That is the first task that we should address.

I now want to address the hon the Minister of the Budget and the message is also intended for the hon the Acting Minister in charge of housing. As I see it, when one examines press reports with regard to housing we will either be commended for what we have done or alternatively—notwithstanding the enormous amounts that have been spent on housing—we can really create resentment. These are the two results—either satisfaction or resentment. Resentment is increasingly manifesting itself. One goes out of one’s way to secure land, raise the money and build the homes but then one encounters the problems.

I think it is important to remember that as a Government we have a responsibility to help those who cannot help themselves. I think it is important that no homes should be planned which are beyond the ability of what an individual can pay. If the rental should not be more than 25% of a man’s income then a house with a rental of twice that amount should not be built. [Interjections.]

We should be clear on this and the public should also understand it. Otherwise one gives people who are not really interested in providing homes the opportunity to use the situation to create problems and to have a field day. This matter could manifest itself all over the country and we want to avoid it.

Secondly there has recently been a report in our newspapers about the successes of the Urban Foundation through Innova Homes. I think the Housing Ministry should become another wing of Innova Homes and then by applying their methods we can deliver the goods.

I think Innova Homes have demonstrated that all people have the desire to help themselves and to live within their means. People are purchasing stands where foundations are being laid and where they are building their homes. They are working after 5pm and over weekends. This can be called “sweat equity” and it has to be introduced into low-cost housing because that is what it is all about. If anybody looks to the Government for assistance the input must be firstly from himself. People must be taught to help themselves and thereby the cost of buildings will also be reduced. I do not think it is beneath the dignity of the individual to paint a small three-bedroomed home—it is a challenge.

The people working with the Urban Foundation are demonstrating in a monumental way what I am saying now and what has been said by a former Minister of Housing, the hon member for Red Hill, namely that we should present the individual with the challenge to improve his home and in the process learn the skills of doing some building work too.

If that kind of thinking would permeate our society we would soon have community help in building homes. These homes would be built faster and cheaper and there would be a stake in such a home for the man who occupies it. He would not look at that home as though it belonged to somebody else or to the Government. It would be his own home because his hands had helped to create and decorate it and to make it a true home.

Furthermore the cost of land, of servicing and of money is escalating all the time. Unless one is prepared to innovate or at least to emulate some of the achievements of the well-meaning people who are also attempting to provide homes but within the means of the individuals who are to occupy it, we will be failing in our duty.

I hope that when this Budget is debated in the House the hon the Acting Minister will be able to respond and to comment on some of the submissions that I made. I consider them to be important and I am sure that my sentiments will be echoed by many people.

I think the hon member for Red Hill has said the same thing before in this House yet we as the State have not done anything substantial in providing this challenge for our people to develop.

Mr Chairman, education is another matter that was referred to in the House of Assembly. What information does the hon the Minister have to make available to the community and the party representatives present here about the young people who leave our schools—whether they be students of technical high schools, academic students or from the university—with technical skills, etc. If we are to adapt our education to meet the demands of the marketplace, then we must know what is happening to the products of our institutions. I suggested here two years ago that a statistical survey be conducted via the principals of schools, for them to ascertain from the brothers and sisters or the parents of children who qualified at the schools as to what has happened to those children.

Let us take a technical high school in Merebank or Clarewood where some 100 or 120 lads completed their training as fitters and turners, TV technicians or carpenters. It is necessary to find out if these lads actually got apprenticeships, whether they got jobs, or whether they have found work in a field totally removed from the field in which they were trained. It is very important to know this because on the one hand we are told in Parliament that there is a tremendous shortage of skilled manpower, people with technical and vocational skills, and on the other we are training people, not knowing where they are going and what happens to them.

I believe that those who trained them have the responsibility to find out exactly what is happening to those people so that we can then institute measures to help them to obtain work opportunities. Secondly, if there is a dead end in that area at present, maybe we can adapt or direct them to another field. It is a continuous process of adaptation and change to ensure that our young men and women, for whatever purposes they have trained, are not walking the streets because there are no opportunities for them. I again commend that to the hon the Minister of Education. I suggested this here two years ago and I would like to know where we stand. If such a survey were done in one or two schools, it will be a sample that will help us to evaluate the position properly.

With regard to the opening of section 19 areas, I am aware that 90 odd areas have been opened throughout the country. In some areas this has come about more quickly than in others, yet in many areas the opening of the section 19 areas has not really facilitated the kind of development which was envisaged initially. I understand that permit control does exist in certain areas, which impedes the carrying out of the programme that was envisaged when these section 19 areas were identified. Yesterday when I met with a member of the Durban Chamber of Commerce and Assocom, it was made very clear to us that their experience is that notwithstanding the provisions of this law, there are still problems which are being experienced by people who want to purchase and occupy land. Having listened to the hon member for Innesdal in the House of Assembly, I believe the thinking is clear and that all these restrictions must disappear and areas once open must be available without restrictions. The Government is talking about the need to find answers to the problems involved with the Group Areas Act, the Population Registration Act and the Reservation of Separate Amenities Act. In fact, the first moves can be made in regard to this provision of the Group Areas Act so that it is wide open and they can demonstrate to everybody that they really mean business and that people will be able to purchase and occupy premises without undue restrictions. In other words, what has really happened was that whereas at one stage as far as the Group Areas Act is concerned, the hon the Minister involved and regional representatives were responsible for permits, now the Administrator is playing the same role, because he too is subject to political constraints in certain areas.

There has been change, I admit, but I believe that in the present climate we want to see an open-ended policy in regard to section 19 areas.

There has been a hue and cry with regard to pensions, but I think we need to emphasise over and over again that saying that pensions must be equal is just a short-term solution. We need a long-term solution, which is simply that every man who takes up work must contribute to a pension scheme, his employers must contribute and at the lower level of employment, even the State as a third party can contribute. Furthermore, a pension must be transferable, so that ultimately, when a man retires at 60 or 65, irrespective of the number of employers he might have worked for, he will be able to receive with honour what is rightfully due to him.

It is also a well-known fact that in certain circles people tend to dispose of their assets in order to fall within that category which qualifies them for a State pension. That is not right. A State pension is for those who unfortunately were not provided with a pension scheme. When people liquidate assets merely to qualify for a State pension, I believe that is wrong. Therefore we must solve this problem. Ultimately the State will not be able to provide pensions for the entire South African population. This has been said here by the hon the Minister of National Health and Population Development and it is a truth which we would ignore at our peril. [Time expired.]

Order! I just want to draw the hon member’s attention to the fact that section 19 areas and the identification thereof fall under the purview of the general affairs ministry.

Mr Chairman, I just want to respond very briefly to the hon the Minister of Local Government and Agriculture. A Minister must be prepared to take it on the chin. Of course, the question I put to the hon the Minister went under his skin and touched a raw nerve. While he was speaking, the thought that occurred to me was: “Methinks the lady doth protest too much”. I made no statement or allegation concerning the hon the Minister; I merely asked a question. He still has not answered the question and I leave it to him to answer it. However, I do not think that he could disagree with me when I say that no hon Minister, indeed no hon member of Parliament, if he is in a position of authority, should allow himself, his family or his company to enter into any trading relationship or contractual relationship with any organ of State. I do not think he can disagree with that, but if he does, he is not fit to be a Minister.

There was a report in The Citizen—and some newspapermen contacted me in that connection—which apparently stated that the two members of the PFP are supporters of Solidarity. My response to the newspaper reporter was: I still am the leader of the PFP in the House of Delegates and I did not authorise any such statement. If the statement attributed to the leader of Solidarity was in fact made by him, he did not have my authority to make such a statement. We will deal with issues. We do not support any political party in this House, except the PFP. However, on any issue, we will support whoever is right on that particular issue. Therefore no one should think we are against them and no one should presume to think that we are with them.

The hon leader of Solidarity, of the majority party in this House …

The hon member for Glenview.

The hon member for Glenview. You see, Mr Chairman, when I move away from Durban for a short while, by the time I come back, funny things happen in this House.

I was away last week, testing, among other things, the reaction of the community at grassroots level to what happened in this House when a particular motion was defeated after a tie.

Of course the reaction of the community was that they could not believe it. The community was thoroughly disgusted that this House could have been so indecisive on such a vital issue. The hon member for Glenview spoke the truth when he said that if it was necessary we would have legislation.

In August last year I took the trouble of drafting a piece of legislation designed precisely to undo a fraud which had been committed upon the Housing Development Board and upon the taxpayer at the behest of the former hon Minister of Housing, the hon member for Arena Park, which hon Minister in collusion with another party, perpetrated the fraud. Because the property had been transferred out of the ownership of the State, the matter could not be dealt with administratively. It had to be dealt with legislatively. The hon the Minister of the Budget who is a member of the party of the hon member for Glenview, gave me the rather silly legal opinion that it should not be done.

Order! I just want to draw the attention of the hon member for Reservoir Hills to the fact that he said another hon member of this House committed or perpetrated fraud in collusion with others. The hon member that he referred to is still a member of this House and he must please withdraw that remark.

Mr Chairman, I was merely quoting what the James Commission had said. The James Commission said the entire transaction was fraudulent and that was under the imprimatur of the acting judge of the Supreme Court.

I did not realise that the hon member was interpreting something from a document. If that is so I accept the hon member’s explanation. He may proceed.

There is another one. A contract was entered into—I believe the contract may be attacked because it was fraudulent—whereby property in Chatsworth that was worth at least R1 million was to be sold for R400 000, defrauding the fiscus of R600 000. There may be some argument as to whether that contract is enforceable. If necessary, this House should legislate to invalidate that contract.

Every single service station site which is available or will become available in the future should be sold by public auction. Let the highest price be obtained so that the Housing Development Board can plough that money into the job it has to do, namely to provide housing.

Here I want to take issue with the hon the Minister of the Budget. He says there is a R29 million increase over the R296 million budgeted for housing. The hon the Minister is an experienced businessman. He knows full well that the rate of inflation in the past 12 months has been 13,8%. Therefore, if there is a purported increase on paper of 9,8% that is an actual decrease of 4%. They intend to spend 4% less money on housing during this period. That is disgraceful. At a time when money can be saved in other areas, we ought to be spending more money on housing. There is a shortage of 36 000 housing units in the Indian community alone.

I would like to agree with what the hon member for Glenview said about Innova Homes. I had the honour of being a founding director of the Urban Foundation and when I was also a member of its Regional Board in Natal it was I who suggested to Allan Mountain that a genuine utility company—not a fraudulent or cheating utility company like the ones we have in the Transvaal—should be formed by the Urban Foundation; and Innova Homes has been doing excellent work. There is no reason why the hon the Minister should not allocate land to Innova Homes which, being a completely non-profit organisation, is able to provide houses without making a profit for themselves.

The department was to provide serviced sites in Cato Manor at a cost of R8 000 each for the end user. The former Minister of Housing made that promise at a meeting in Durban.

We applauded him for that, but nothing has happened. Like so many other promises; this turned out to be pie crust; maybe because individuals were not able to make a personal profit for themselves out of that.

When the hon member for Glenview said that nobody should be entitled to profit from wrongdoing, he also said that this applied to hon members of this House. Similarly, hon members of his party must not come here and shed crocodile tears and say a particular man should be allowed to continue so that he can draw his Parliamentary salary. They must not say he should merely be suspended in order to give him a chance of drawing a Parliamentary salary. That will be hypocrisy of the highest order!

A man who has committed misdeeds should not be permitted to draw a single penny at public expense for any period longer than absolutely unavoidable. That money could be used for providing houses for the poor. If a single house is provided with the money thereby saved, good will be done for the community instead of perpetuating evil. I challenge hon members of Solidarity on the other side not to shed crocodile tears.

The hon member for Springfield has given notice of a motion. Tomorrow we will know whether the Chief Whip of the House and the hon the Leader of the House will allow that motion to be placed on the Order Paper. If they do place it on the Order Paper, we and the public at large will see how it is voted upon. The public is watching.

As I have said earlier, I have been taking a reading at grassroots of what the reaction of the public is. The public remains disgusted. We must perform a cleansing operation so that part of that disgust will be removed.

I just want to say this: When the hon the Minister says that there is going to be an expenditure of R325 million, it sounds like a great deal of money. However, when one considers that it is considerably less than what the Department of Law and Order is going to spend, that is not a great deal of money. If we as a nation are going to spend three times as much in keeping people in jail—some of them necessarily so—surely they can spend more money on providing schools.

A certain gentleman will probably go to jail when he is prosecuted. This is another cause for regret. That gentleman has deprived the community of large sums of money. It looks as if the community, the public at large, will have to maintain him in board and lodging in due course. The money which the hon the Minister asks for, regrettably we cannot deprive him of. In due course we shall propose that his salary be reduced to R1—not out of this particular Part Appropration, but when the main Appropriation comes along.

We intend—and I give him advance warning—to propose that his salary be reduced. However, he must not simply take the blandishments of the hon the Minister of Finance that money is not available, because he must know that the hon the Minister of Finance is in a position where he cannot give money freely. Other Cabinet Ministers fight for money for their respective departments. If the hon the Minister finds himself too junior, or if the hon the Minister in the House of Delegates is unable to complete with other Cabinet Ministers, he must confess that. He must tell us that he is, as the Zulus say, hlulekhile. We will then understand the failure.

I want to make one reference to welfare. The hon the Minister of Health Services and Welfare took a serious gamble when he did me the honour of appointing me to the Welfare Advisory Committee. However, when the chairman of that committee said at the committee that certain things could not be done because the money was not available, I said: “The hon the Minister knows me. He took the risk in making me a member of the committee, and he will have to put up with it.” On that committee I promised the hon the Minister that we were going to adopt a completely impartial, objective but critical stance—not critical in the sense of criticising. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, it is a real pleasure to be able to follow on the hon member for Reservoir Hills. The James Commission’s report has been made public and plenty has been said. I hope that this House will realise the defects, such as many promotions which were made, and I feel that the entire education fraternity must be carefully looked at. Many things have been done in the past by the hon former Chairman of the Ministers’ Council and we have been reading a lot about what the James report quite clearly says.

We in our community are suffering the disgrace which this has brought us. To protect its image the House of Delegates is lying very low. It is now our duty to bring it back to the top. How do we go about this? We need to look at a complete restructuring—from top to bottom. How do we do this? We definitely need a new election and the electorate must give us a completely new mandate. I have no difficulty because at the constituent level I do my homework. My constituency will bring me back here—not only for a first term but also for a second and third term.

I am afraid that there are people who have not been around in their constituencies. More time is spent here in Cape Town than back home.

Nature has taken its course with the people. Recently we had devastating floods in our area. Last year we had a flood in my area. The hon former Chairman of the Ministers’ Council walked into my area, told lies—I am going to use the word lies—to the unfortunate people. He said: “Don’t worry. I am going to the State President and I will see that the State President’s Fund will accommodate you”. He told lies to the community, and the hon former Chairman of the Ministers’ Council has also been going around the country at the expense of the taxpayer.

Order! Did the hon member refer to the hon former Chairman of the Ministers’ Council by saying that he told lies?

Yes, Mr Chairman.

Order! I want the hon member to withdraw that.

Mr Chairman, it is very difficult for me to withdraw it because I am quoting …

Order! The hon member must withdraw it because the hon member for Arena Park is still a member of this House.

Mr Chairman, I will withdraw it but the hon former Chairman of the Ministers’ Council has been telling untruths in certain areas and has been flying at the expense of the taxpayer. One minute one sees him in Johannesburg in Lenasia with his brigade where he says that he is building houses. [Interjections.]

Look at the mess he has created in Cato Manor with pink, yellow, blue and green houses. We should ask ourselves why the poor people are not paying their rent. There is no boycott. It is just that they cannot even afford to put a bed in the home which they are moving into. What he has done is a disgrace to the Indian community in South Africa. We had better homes without the help of the Government. If they gave that land to the Indian community those poor people could put up formal housing—be it wood or iron—but the homes will be in a reasonably better condition.

Mr Chairman, I would like ask the hon member whether the present or former hon Chairman of the Ministers’ Council was responsible for the houses in Bonella, or if it was the hon Minister before him?

It was the hon former Chairman of the Ministers’ Council. He was the bully-boy of the Ministers’ Council. Everything was his decision. The former Chairman, Mr Rajbansi, had the Ministers’ Council under control.

Order! The hon member must refer to Mr Rajbansi as the hon member for Arena Park.

Mr Chairman, it is not I who says that; it is the James Commission that said that he was the bully-boy. He controlled the Ministers’ Council. He controlled housing, and he was the man in charge, unfortunately.

Let us take a look at the education system. Unfortunately I do not think we have a clear policy as regards the education system at the moment. I wish to talk about what happened to me in my area, Isipingo. I do not know exactly what is happening. In Isipingo a little Black child went to a day school. Immediately he goes to the day school, he makes friends with the children going to the primary school. What happened to this child? At that level the child was thrown out. Why? What is the policy? Here we say that if the principal has place, that child will be accepted at the school. The principal did have place; there is place at the school. Who gave that directive? I really do not know; I am trying to find out. I sent one representation which had to be worded somewhat harshly, and after that that child was accepted. Immediately, in the same school, next door, two children were turned down.

When are we going to start fixing this? We persist in shouting that we must scrap apartheid.

Mr Chairman, may I ask the hon member, in view of what he has said, whether he does not agree that the hon the Minister should be sacked? [Interjections.]

I want to find out exactly who is giving such directives. Is it the hon the Minister in charge of education or the Director of Education? There must be a very clear policy directive in this regard, because when we came here in 1984, we denounced apartheid and demanded equal education, equal housing etc. However, now that we have the opportunity to start this, we are not doing so.

We have our own apartheid!

Yes, Mr Chairman, we have our own apartheid. How, then, do we go about eradicating it?

Who created apartheid?

We entered the apartheid system of the tricameral Parliament—the three-legged horse; obviously it would not run.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: Is it permissible for an hon member to refer to the institution of Parliament as a three-legged horse?

Mr Chairman … [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, it is a pleasure to speak after my colleague, especially since he is in such a fiery mood this afternoon.

Right at the outset I wish to set a few records straight. In the first instance I want to say that I have a lot of respect for Mr Roland Parsothan as a community leader for Cato Manor. I have had occasion to work with him and I have had occasion to bring him into contact with the hon the Minister of Housing. I have found him to be a reasonable man—one who is interested in the community and the welfare of the community. Let us not, therefore, be under any illusion that we on this side of the House have any difficulty in working with Mr Roland Parsothan.

Obviously I would advise the hon the Minister of anything he might be unaware of. However, the point I am making is that the former Chairman of the Ministers’ Council regrettably dismantled a committee which was meant to act as a catalyst, in the first instance, between the residents’ association and the Ministry. Unfortunately, for reasons best known to the former hon Chairman of the Ministers’ Council, this committee was disbanded. Therefore, to put blame on the previous hon Minister is grossly unfair because the former hon Minister of Housing and Chairman of the Ministers’ Council took it upon himself to take full charge and control of housing, for reasons best known to himself. To an extent his reasons were revealed in the report of the James Commission.

I also want to make it clear for the benefit of the hon member for Reservoir Hills that we on this side are shedding no crocodile tears. He is under the misapprehension that as regards the question of expulsion and suspension we are shedding crocodile tears because of any financial losses that might be sustained by the hon former Chairman of the Ministers’ Council, if such a suspension or expulsion were to take place.

However, for the benefit of those who are not aware of it, if one looks at financial consequences, either decision—expulsion or suspension—will not affect the person financially. It will not affect anybody financially. One only has to do a bit of homework.

I also want to say that the hon member for Glenview’s speech has now brought a breath of fresh air to this House. There is a glimmer of hope that maybe, after all the dramas of the past four years, we might at least have some chance of being on the right path.

I think we should now stop talking about the Rajbansis, the wheeling and dealing, the carrotdangling and the horse-trading. Let us not waste our time on the De Pontes and the Rajbansis. I think the community of South Africa as a whole has had enough of this kind of nonsense. We owe it to the community and the taxpayers in general to do something more constructive, more tangible and more acceptable for the benefit of the community at large.

Let us get down to our main task. I want to say that personally I find it very difficult—in the sense that I was asked: Why are you not taking part in debates, etc. I get the impression whatever we say in this House, insofar as the public is concerned, has now become irrelevant. I also get the clear impression that whatever we say in this House does not seem to reach the authorities as it ought to have reached them and that it is not as effective as it ought to have been. The problem is that we have been quibbling and fighting among ourselves. For what reason? Only for selfish, self-centred interest. I believe that must now be brought to an end.

I think after the findings of the James Commission and its report, our constituents have built up tremendous expectations. They feel and hope that we would be able to deliver the goods that they have been waiting for for the past four years. That is the challenge facing all of us. Before we can put pressure on the NP and the CP—that has a certain influence on policy-making and decision-making in this country in respect of its racial prejudices—I appeal to every hon member in this House that we must equally remove the fences and barriers that some people would like to cultivate among ourselves. These barriers are based purely on linguistic lines, religious lines, etc. We must remove those barriers before we can ask others to remove their barriers.

Having said that we have to forget about the Rajbansis and the De Pontes, I acknowledge that in terms of the report of the James Commission the Ministers’ Council and its members were under duress and pressure. The hon former Chairman of the Ministers’ Council had an overbearing influence on the decision-making and bad decisions could all be attributed to him. It may be correct in most cases but in some instances he might be a scapegoat. I do not know, but what I want to say, is that he is no longer in control. He has been removed from that position, therefore that excuse will no longer be saleable to the community. We must get that absolutely clear.

I believe that the Ministers’ Council now needs to engage itself in certain realistic and tangible programmes.

I want to acknowledge the private member’s motion on parity in pensions moved by the hon member for Mariannhill. After four years we are still talking about parity in pensions.

It is a shame!

That should have been a fait accompli and is something we ought to have delivered to the community. Now the Ministers’ Council has the challenge that they should, in fact, be looking at ways and means of removing this anomaly that exists in the payment of pensions based purely on the question of race and not on any other consideration.

The hon member for Springfield has also moved a motion asking local affairs committees not to take extended delegated powers. The hon the leader of Solidarity spoke in the joint debate of the outmoded local affairs committees system. In this day and age, so many years later, we are still going to debate the issue and appeal to people not to take extended powers because that will be detrimental to the community whom we represent in this Chamber. Four and a half years later we should have been in the position of direct representation at local government level.

Let me remind hon members of what the hon the leader of the NP, the Minister of National Education, had to say in the Chamber the other day. He spoke of group identity and said it signified change and a new dimension. If that is the case, we as an Indian group should be represented on one council and not in a separate local authority.

I want to challenge the new thinking of the NP. If within their own parameters—not that I agree with it or think that it is the ideal—they are really sincere they should allow people of colour to be represented on a common council. The people of Chatsworth should be represented on the Durban City Council and not on some puny appendage such as a local affairs committee. That is the challenge.

I would like to know what the Ministers’ Council has done. We have a Ministry of Local Government. Has it developed any programmes and strategies to achieve these objectives? The answer is none.

All that I hear about is who will be in power tomorrow and who will not. All I hear are invitations to hon members to become part of new permutations of the Ministers’ Council. This is what is going on all the time.

One can ask anybody in the streets about this. It is no longer only the talk in the Parliamentary corridors—it is the talk on every street corner in the country. It concerns all kinds of new permutations. One is invited to join a group on linguistic lines so that a certain linguistic group can exist in the Ministers’ Council. Another group will constitute another type of Ministers’ Council. What nonsense! What utter rubbish!

I would also like to appeal to the Ministers’ Council that we should not be tempted to project our own images. We should not use the TV for this. The TV is a very useful weapon insofar as media communication is concerned. It is very effective.

Police File!

Yes, if one is a wanted person it is even more effective. I would not be surprised if there are very many wanted persons—I hope not from this Chamber.

I would like to say that it is an effective form of media communication. However, people must not continue building houses on TV screens. People want homes on the ground. They want a roof over their heads. They want to be able to walk through a door and enjoy the comfort of their home. That is what they want. They are not interested in the image-building. They have caught on and they have become aware of it.

I appeal to hon members to bury their differences. Let us unite and work together in the interests of the community. It does not matter who is a Minister and who is not. Let us pool our resources and support the issues that are right. I agree with the hon member for Reservoir Hills. Let us support that which is right and condemn that which is wrong. It seems to me that some of us unfortunately for reasons known to ourselves seem to be passing a vote of confidence in that which is wrong. This is regrettable. [Interjections.] I want to say to the Ministers’ Council that they also need to address the other problems which are facing the community, eg the housing issue.

I do not want to repeat what the hon the Leader of Solidarity has already said. I just want to say that the community has been perturbed and concerned by all the problems relating to education. I am not blaming or castigating anybody. If the department has been unfairly criticised I believe that—notwithstanding the James Commission which had its own limited parameters within which it could investigate—the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council should appoint a committee of inquiry with the members of the teaching fraternity sitting on such a committee.

Let it be open to the public and let all those who have complained about what is wrong with education be given an opportunity to present their cases. An independent tribunal will examine all the evidence that is put before it and once and for all make a judgement, an assessment, to see where we are going right and where we are going wrong, right from budgetary measures to teacher promotion and syllabuses etc. Let us not confine it to teacher baiting for political purposes. That is not the only aspect of education that we need to investigate. I commend to the Ministers’ Council that the community wishes to be sure that education is in good hands. A lot of damage had been done by the nepotism, allegations of nepotism and allegations of political favours, which I believe all has to be put to rest if we want to bring some credibility and stability.

Again, on the allocation of land, I am not saying hon members of this House are guilty. I am not accusing anybody but there is so much talk going around that land has been allocated to people who did not deserve to be allocated land. Let there be an inquiry into the matter, let there be an investigation. The hon the Minister of Local Government and Agriculture was upset and agitated earlier, so put it before the commission and let him come clean out of that. Let him walk tall.

At my expense.

No, I said walk tall. However, I say, when it comes to the James Commission, anything that has success has too many fathers. The James Commission attributed guilt to the hon previous Chairman of the Ministers’ Council. He was found guilty, so he lost his position as Chairman of the Ministers’ Council. Therefore, what I am saying is that everybody will say: I did it; it was my doing. Everybody wants to take credit, but I know who has been responsible. I know whose affidavit worked. I know what happened and I believe the hon former Chairman of the Ministers’ Council himself, by making interjections at me across the floor, brought about his own downfall. Everybody wants to take credit. [Time expired.]

Order! While the hon member for Isipingo was addressing this House, there was a point of order taken by the hon member for Lenasia Central on the question of a statement made by the hon member for Isipingo in regard to the tricameral system, which he referred to as a three-legged horse. I uphold the point of order taken and call upon the hon member for Isipingo to withdraw the statement.

Mr Chairman, I withdraw it.

Mr Chairman, firstly I must express my regret that while I wear three different caps at the moment, I have only eight minutes to speak and reply to many questions asked in this House. However, that being so, I will do my very best within the limited time.

Now that we have the James Commission report before us, give us some time to look into it carefully and we will assure this House that whatever action has to be taken against people who have been found guilty of the misdemeanor of corruption, the action will be taken to correct matters.

Much has been said this afternoon about core houses, education and other matters, but I want to deal with core-houses first. My colleague, the hon the Deputy Minister of Housing, Local Government and Agriculture and I are very much aware of the fact that core housing is one of the aspects that we must look at. We are not deviating from that fact, but are looking at areas where we can commence this kind of project.

Core houses make a great deal of sense, but the poor, who should be keen on them, are not really. As far as the Department of Local Government, Housing and Agriculture is concerned, it has examined and ascertained, via studies done by local authorities serving Indian communities, that such a project can be put into operation. We aim to try this out at Ladysmith, if my colleague agrees and if the opportunity presents itself, and probably, if it works well there, it can work in other areas as well.

Mention was made of the trading sites and other matters. I can assure hon members that although some of these matters are already a fait accompli, it does not prevent the Administration from asking its legal advisers to go into these matters and investigate it all over again. I can assure hon members that that is happening at the moment.

My colleague, the hon member for Isipingo, dealt to some extent with the admission of Black children to our schools. I want to say to him that I am the first Minister who made such a provision. No other Minister has made provision for the admission of Black children to their schools. We have noted the remark made by Dr Dhlomo at a function a few days ago that there were more Black children in White schools than in our schools. I can assure the hon member that I have written to him, saying that there are more Black children in our Indian schools than in schools of any other department.

I want to tell the hon member that we have a policy of zoning, and if that policy applies to the Indian children, it must also apply to the Black children. We cannot allow a child from one zone to travel to another zone when educational facilities are available in that particular zone. That will apply to Black children as well. My good friend might note that we have ascertained that the children from a certain area who have made applications have school facilities. Why should they not go to those schools? Having ascertained that, my department has refused them, in keeping with a policy the Minister has made.

I want to tell hon members, once and for all, that I will make my policy available to them. They have had it before, but we will keep their minds fresh as far as that is concerned. What applies to our children, will apply to those children as well, in the same manner as has been done in the past. The effect is that there is a zoning rule, that it must not involve travelling from one area to another; it must not entail having extra teachers as a result of bringing children from another area; the facilities must be available at the school; the child must be able to fit into the class according to his language ability; and he must not transfer himself from one area to another just for prestige. I just want to clarify that.

The hon member for Stanger mentioned, and I agree with him, that past matters should be past matters. Let us leave them behind and look ahead for the welfare of our community. I do not think we can stress that more than has been done this afternoon. Our community is looking for that kind of support; otherwise we will find ourselves quibbling here in this House as we had done in the past. We want to put that behind us and look ahead to a brighter future for our people.

I want to stress what the hon member for Glenview said, namely that we must be aware of the fact that we should educate our children in the right direction. We are trying to do that to the best of our ability as far as education is concerned, but the employment opportunities do not always exist.

South Africa is sitting on a “time bomb” because there are no employment opportunities, especially among the non-White communities and in particular the Black communities. They are being educated in their masses but what will the end result be? Where are they going to be employed? That is a very important question.

No-one will deny the existence of this problem. Few will refute the allegation that the number of unemployed people is on the increase daily. The socio-economic ills that flow from such unemployment are commonplace everywhere in the world but it is particularly a problem in South Africa. Only an economy which shows reasonable growth will result in greater employment of the bulk of our able-bodied persons that are out of work.

The problem is becoming more and more complicated because the ranks of the unemployed are being swelled by the well-educated youngsters who have matriculated and who have, in many instances, acquired tertiary education. These youngsters are not only potential leaders, but through frustrations—this is the important thing—because of their inability to earn an honest living, they are providing enlightened leadership to the radical masses. If that happens, what I said earlier on can become a reality. This tendency needs to be curbed as soon as possible through the Government’s following a more enlightened economic policy in this country.

I now come to the training of technicians. The potential among Blacks has admittedly been tapped to a greater extent than in the past but the begged question is whether enough is being done for them. If enough is not being done, the country is looking for trouble because they will join the radicals.

A deliberate policy of training technicians in the different fields has to be formulated. In the absence of such formulation they cannot be given guidance as to the right directions of study. I appreciate the fact that a Government White Paper prescribes the official Government policy and the role of the National Training Board through close co-operation and liaison with education departments. However, to date little has been done in this respect and little has materialised. The time for action is now, otherwise we shall be missing the boat. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, we in the House of Delegates must be mindful of the fact that we are judged by the community on the basis of how much security we bring in the fields of education, housing, social welfare and pension. This is how we shall be judged. Moreover, the community is aware of the fact that we in the House of Delegates are responsible for these portfolios and therefore the Ministers responsible in many respects have to make more demands on the treasury for the finances that is required to run their departments.

As much as I do not envisage this system to continue to exist, we in the House of Delegates shall have to do much more than we are at the moment if this tricameral system is to work at all. Ultimately unitary parliamentary system must come into being so that we shall not triplicate the work and the amount of taxpayers’ money that is being expended. Whilst I say this, I would like to appeal to the hon the Minister of the Budget that there are many areas where one can make concessions.

However, with regard to these matters which concern the lives of our people very closely and very intimately, we have to ensure that adequate funds are required, and that which is required by hon Ministers must be made available by the Treasury.

I am dismayed at the appalling state of affairs in the field of education where a number of qualified teachers are either unemployed or employed on a temporary basis. I am told that at the moment there are approximately 300 qualified teachers in the queue for employment in various positions. This is indeed most disgusting. Is it not possible for the hon the Minister of Education and Culture to ask for more than what he is allotted in that department, so that he can accommodate these unemployed teachers?

Earlier on the hon the Minister of Education and Culture said that if the services of a teacher are not required, he does away with those services? These are qualified people. They have spent large sums of money to qualify. How could the services not be required by his department? I cannot understand this. A teacher does not specialise in one subject only but can teach various other subjects as well. I think such a teacher should be accommodated in one way or another. When a professional man is told after 10 or 20 years that his services are no longer required, it sounds ridiculous.

They expect him to plant carrots!

I therefore wish to ask the hon the Minister of Education and Culture not to take that kind of drastic action, but rather to accommodate these professional people.

Leading on from here to the field of social welfare and pensions, I am afraid that there is a lot left to be desired for the community. The issue of pensions is one of the many contributing factors in emphasising and bringing about polarisation in our community. In order to bring about healthy relationships this gap must be narrowed. Four years ago we were told that disparity would be eliminated over a phase of five years. However, it is still existing.

Let us examine disparity. As far as old age pensions and pensions for the blind are concerned, Whites receive R251 per month per person, Indians and Coloureds R200 and Blacks R150. As far as disability grants are concerned, Whites receive R250, Indians and Coloureds R195 and Blacks R150. May I ask the hon the Minister how much a White man pays for a loaf of bread, and how much an Indian, a Coloured and a Black pay for a loaf of bread? What does a litre of milk cost? It is the same for all!

Why should there be disparity when a man is down and out, ailing and disabled in the twilight years of his life? This is a great injustice. The Ministers’ Council should therefore take upon itself the responsibility to ask the responsible Minister and the Treasury to eliminate this disparity. This has been a cry for the past four years.

I know the hon the Minister of Health Services and Welfare always told us that he was doing his very best, that he was making representations to the Ministers’ Council, and that the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council had made representations to the Cabinet to eliminate this. However, nothing has happened and we are about to go to the polls again! What are we to tell the electorate?

Tell them that all the money was stolen!

Disparity is still rife. Earlier on the hon member for Isipingo said he will come back maybe another three or four times, but the point is this: How many others will come back if this kind of situation prevails in the House, when we cannot bring some parity to people who are in the twilight years of their lives and who are disabled?

Insofar as local government is concerned I emphatically say that direct representation of local affairs committees in local authorities should be the norm. There is no need for management committees and local affairs committees. These only represent a duplication of services and act as an ineffective negotiating arm. If local affairs and management committees are so effective, then why is there no upgrading of facilities and establishment of recreational areas for Indians?

If one looks at Isipingo, then one must wait for more shark attacks and deaths before shark nets will be installed.

They want to put the mayor in the shark nets.

Mr Chairman … [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, unless sanity prevails in this House, we cannot blame the community for the criticism outside it. I would simply like to say that it is high time that we should concentrate on problems and issues which affect our community and the people of South Africa at large.

I would like to share these thoughts with all the humility which I can command and I would like to reiterate what I said once before in this House. Speeches made in this House are being screened in London and in Washington and very often hon members who use this House despite its shortcomings take tremendous joy—or is it sheer irresponsibility—in condemning this House.

I think it is time we examined our own conscience on this issue. We know the shortcomings. Yet, if one looks back at the the community’s negative point of view, I would probably have done the same thing and looked at the negative side of this House, had I not been a part of it. In recent months people have only been talking about the James Commission and the few people who have blundered.

I want to say, and almost all the hon members will agree with me, that we use this House to expose many shortcomings. We have used this House to repeal many Acts and to replace them with good Acts so I think there is a need for a more positive, a more constructive—if I may say a more responsible—approach to our problems from the floor of this House. Looking at it from that point of view, while we are discussing this Part Appropriation Bill here this afternoon, I think we can concentrate on many useful issues.

We have a tremendous shortage in the field of housing, tremendous mismanagement in the field of education and in other fields. If one looks at these shortcomings, these problems and reflects on the positive issues—like we should do in the future—I think it will do this House a lot more good than to continue talking about one or two people who have been, shall I say, absolutely irresponsible, absolutely self-interested and, for that matter, unscrupulous. I do not think those few people or what has been done should completely take away the direction of most people—if not of all of us.

J would like to go further. I made a call in this House—I think it was in 1986—for the parties in this House to sink their differences and join hands, if in that way we could perform more positively and constructively to the good of all whom we want to serve. People did indicate at that time that the stumbling block was the hon member for Arena Park.

That is true.

Mr Speaker, I say today that it is a known fact that the hon member for Arena Park has been stripped of his offices, and that in terms of the James Commission report, he could not be entrusted with any official or semi-official position as such. If we take that into account, is there no ground or room for people in this House to join hands? I say this for one very good reason. In contrast to the House of Assembly, in this House there is no demarcated differentiation as far as policy is concerned. I mean that there is not that kind of ideological difference. We can still make our contributions, we can still utter our criticisms, and we can still do what we want to do with good intentions, because I really do not see the need for so much fragmentation of this House.

[Inaudible.]

Yes, but I can think. Possibly some hon members cannot, unfortunately!

If only hon members would assess what has happened this afternoon. I do not want to put it strongly and say it is a shame, but it is a pity.

I wonder whether after four years we should not invite some experts to come and tell us how we should employ an important occasion such as the one we are debating this afternoon—the Part Appropriation Bill. We must issue directives. We must in fact reflect and focus on our objectives for the coming year, rather than merely meddling and fiddling and getting lost in regard to some nonsense that happened in this House. If we have vultures’ eyes, we will only look at carrion and filth, and not at something that is good and will be better for our people in the future. I want to say in all humility that we have the best intentions for this House and the contributions that we can make for our own people and all the people in this country.

Mr Speaker, you will forgive me if I take this opportunity to comment, right at the outset, on some of the things that have been said by speakers who have participated in this debate before me. In particular I would like to react to the many things said here this afternoon by the hon member for Cavendish, some of which I agree with, while others I do not. As regards the conclusions that can be drawn from them, some of them I also agree with, but others, unfortunately, I do not.

I must agree with the hon member for Cavendish when he says that we have been meddling and fiddling in this House in such a manner that we appear to be lost. With great respect, Sir, I would like to tell the hon member that some of us have not been meddling, some of us have not been fiddling, and some of us have not been lost. Perhaps that hon member may be lost; perhaps he may have meddled and fiddled. Certainly however, as far as the two members of the PFP in this House are concerned I can state categorically that we have not meddled, nor have we fiddled, nor are we lost. We came here with one purpose in mind, and that was to try, in some small way, to highlight the irregularities, as we considered them at the time, in this Chamber that was provided for us.

We have consistently done so. At every available opportunity, as Mr Speaker will agree, we have tried to get this administration and the hon the State President to appoint a commission of inquiry. Belated as it may have been, the outcome was sure and we were responsible for the constitution of a commission of inquiry in this House. The consequences speak for themselves. We are quite satisfied that we have been vindicated in that regard. I would like to tell the hon member for Cavendish that perhaps when he speaks in such terms he is referring to himself. He certainly does not refer to the two members of the PFP in this House.

He touched upon a very sensitive issue in the community at the present time, that is the lack of stability and the sanity or lack thereof that prevails in this Chamber. I want to make it absolutely clear that it disgusts me when I go outside of this Chamber and I have to objectively assess what is being done by some hon members in this House. I think it was the hon member for Stanger who said that the dramas we have experienced in this Chamber over the past four years have come to an end. He also said what had been responsible for all the dramas were the carrot-dangling, the wheeling and dealing, etc. I must agree with the hon Chief Whip of the majority party in this House when he says that. However, it is not enough for us to identify the causes of the instability. It is now for us to remedy that situation.

It is my humble submission that there is only one way in which to remedy the situation and that lies fairly and squarely in the court of the majority party in this House. I think they owe the reputation of this Chamber, themselves and the community at large to make one firm commitment. That commitment is that there will not be any carrot-dangling, they will not offer any hon member of this House any position in exchange for support in this House and they will, in fact, not alter the status quo in this Chamber with regard to the positions. Only if the hon Chief Whip of this House makes that commitment on behalf of the present ruling party in this Chamber, will his words ring true. Only then will the community at large once again begin to give us a chance to function in accordance with the purpose for which we are here.

With those few words I would like to address hon members in the debate before this House this afternoon. I should again like to make the point that whilst we are here concerning ourselves with finicky little parochial issues, which concern hardly anybody else but some members of the Indian community, there is a wider debate taking place outside of this Chamber. It is in fact taking place in the community from which we come. This wider debate relates to what is going to happen in this country once apartheid is removed. We also know that there is a firm commitment on the part of the majority of the hon members of Parliament that apartheid will and must be removed. However, the question that is uppermost in the minds of people—this is the debate that we should be addressing ourselves to—is what this administration does insofar as preparing a community, which it purports to serve, to address itself to the changing situation.

I want to make the point that insofar as the small Indian community is concerned it will either have to move voluntarily in the positive direction of non-racialism in this country or it will be rudely kicked in that direction by the very forces of change that have brought us here to this Chamber. Therefore I believe that a tremendous responsibility rests on the several and individual hon members of the Ministers’ Council to ensure that they use their roles in the system to prepare members of the Indian community for a postapartheid era.

In this regard I believe that the role of the educationalists will become more and more important as the days go by. Not only will educationalists be called upon to persuade members of the Indian community to free themselves of the prejudices that constrain them but such educationalists will also be called upon to prepare the children who are in our schools at the present time to take their rightful place in the postapartheid society of which we have all been talking.

In this regard I want to express to the hon the Minister my utter disappointment that despite his commitment to loosen the nuts and bolts of apartheid he has failed to give not only his department but also hon members of this House any perspective for the future in this regard. He has failed to tell us for example what his department intends to do about relaxing the rules governing the admission of all children to schools under his control.

It is of no use for us to talk of loosening the nuts and bolts of apartheid when in fact we do not do so. It is one thing to admit to our school some children who in the words of the hon the Minister are non-Indian—I shall return to this presently—but it is another thing to do something positive about generally relaxing the rules regarding the admission of all children to Indian schools which fall under the control of the hon the Minister.

I also believe—and I say this to him in the spirit which I intend it to be—that he has failed to tell us what he intends doing to motivate his department to endeavour to bridge the cultural and the social gaps that have been imposed upon us as a community by a system over very many years. He needs to tell us and the community at large what he intends to do in that regard. I do not have to tell the hon the Minister that various social and cultural bridges have been opposed by the system of apartheid under which we have laboured thus imposing great constraints on all of us. We need now to retrain our young people in particular to overcome those gaps.

He has also failed to tell us how he intends preparing the children in his charge to take their rightful place on the sports fields. Whilst I am speaking on that I must acknowledge that at the present time we have some councils which are multi-racial. We have for instance councils which fall under the control of the hon the Minister such as the Council of the M L Sultan Technikon which is now a multi-racial council. The Council of the University of Durban Westville is also a multi-racial council.

I am aware that in terms of legislation he has the prerogative to nominate certain members to those councils. What has the hon the Minister done to ensure that we have a non-racial council? Why should it only be a multi-racial council consisting of White and Indian members? Why should it not be a council that is composed of the wider community that make up South Africa? Because, after all, if one looks at both those institutions today, one sees that they are populated by members of every section of our community.

Mr Speaker, is the hon member aware that I have appointed certain lecturers now?

Mr Speaker, the hon the Minister asks whether I am aware that he has now appointed certain lecturers. Of course I am aware of it, but that is not the point I am making. I am not making that point. In any case, I would like to think that the councils of those institutions which have been appointed by the hon the Minister were in the first instance responsible for the employment of these lecturers that he mentioned. I commend to the hon the Minister that in this changing situation he gives thought to in fact making councils non-racial. I promised to come back to another matter. [Time expired.]

Mr Speaker, the hon the Minister of the Budget is requesting this House to approve the appropriation of an amount of R325 million to tide the Administration over in its short-term needs. I will be pleased to know from the hon the Minister what amounts he envisaged allocating to the various departments. It is also important for us to know what amounts are being earmarked for major projects in the Administration. I want to put on record my disappointment that in the past four years, particularly in the Transvaal, this Administration has not tackled any major development programmes apart from projects involving the development of infrastructure for residential sites in Lenasia and on the East Rand. I understand that there is also a major development of a similar nature being envisaged in the Pretoria area. Perhaps the hon the Minister will in his reply elaborate further on these projects. I wish to re-emphasise that these envisaged projects entail the provision of infrastructure, which of course is necessary in order to execute residential development.

Hon members are aware of the tremendous housing shortage in the metropoles of the Transvaal. In my constituency alone there are 566 municipal-built flats, the first of which were constructed as far back as 1971. Some of the residents who moved in at that stage are still tenants in the flats. The flats are comfortable for as long as young couples and perhaps middle-aged people with no children could utilise them as a transition towards the eventual ownership of a house. However, in the case of Actonville, families and growing families have remained stuck in them for lengthy periods of time, thus creating an overcrowded situation. Resultant social and other problems have emerged. There are at this stage between 800 and 1000 families practically begging for accommodation in these flats. In some other debate I will try to deal with our social and other related problems which give rise to great concern. The last time monies were allocated for housing in my constituency was in 1987, when R1 million was utilised for the construction of 40 ground-related dwellings.

Benoni, as hon members know, in view of its location, has been a haven for people from other parts of the country who come there in pursuit of better economic opportunities. This fact, coupled with the lack of land, has exacerbated the housing problem. After Villa Lisa was identified as a large area which could provide forward planning in 1985, it is a crying shame that as a result of all types of unwarranted interferences, it was only proclaimed in April 1988. Two and a half golden years were wasted and in this time building costs accelerated by almost 50%.

However, I want to congratulate the Department of Housing on acquiring 749 hectares of land. On approximately 31,7% of this area, the development of the first phase has been planned. The civil engineering works contract has been awarded and contractors came to the site in January 1989 and are currently servicing 2 267 sites.

In view of the sordid history of lack of housing in my constituency, I want to request that of the money being appropriated, sufficient funds must be made available for the provision of at least 800 economic and sub-economic houses. I believe that such a scheme can be implemented now simultaneously with the provision of infrastructure. This would no doubt represent a giant and visible step by the Administration. Statistical data is being collated at this stage and the Johannesburg regional office will probably have it in a few weeks’ time. Only if this Administration embarks boldly on addressing these bread-and-butter-issues will credibility within the community be obtained. Politicisation for the purpose of achieving short-term goals will not pacify our people out there.

It is also disappointing that while the barriers precluding the settlement of our people in the Orange Free State were lifted some three years ago, no forward planning has been provided for an anticipated influx there. Two areas on the Orange Free State goldfields and two areas in Bloemfontein were investigated by a committee of the Group Areas Board during December 1988 and February 1989—this month. I want to request the hon the Acting Chairman of the Ministers’ Council to see to it that funds are earmarked for the development of at least one area in Bloemfontein and one on the goldfields. It must be remembered that most of our people settling there have done so in pursuit of better economic circumstances. I have been told in the past that the Department of Housing does not have the funds for such developments. This is completely and totally unacceptable.

In Bloemfontein some 40 children need to be schooled. Whilst 80% of the parents of the children attending a White school have no objection to brown-skinned children being admitted, the authorities seem to have all the problems. What galls me is that when the parents of these Indian children, who are by no means financially well-off, approached an official of our Department of Education and Culture, they were told to send their children to a boarding school in Rustenburg which is a distance of about 500 kilometres away. When that official was asked whether he would send his children there, he said no.

Presently the community conducts school classes at the Madressa premises, which is a religious school, at a cost to individual families of between R300 and R500 per month. The department has requested them to register as a private school in order to obtain a subsidy of about 40%. Why must this be so? Why can the Department of Education and Culture, for as long as the own affairs concept is in operation, not run the school? I want to ask hon members how this can be justified. The hon the Acting Chairman of the Ministers’ Council must provide funds for the education of these children. I believe this is the department’s obligation and it rests squarely on the shoulders of this House. I am aware, in the case of White children, that the State goes to great lengths to provide education, irrespective of the number of children involved. Even if it is only one child, he will be given the required education. Let us help to create a better tomorrow for these unfortunate children of ours.

I also wish to touch on the issue of the role of the ministerial representatives, as well as Ministers vis-a-vis Parliamentary colleagues. There is a tendency among some of our hon Ministers to visit our constituencies on invitation of some individual organisation or person. There have been cases where such hon Ministers lacked the courtesy of requesting such organisation or individuals to liaise through their locally elected MPs who, in fact, are the only competent representatives in the House of Delegates.

I also want to warn some of our hon Ministers that we know our constituents. Some hon Ministers seem to lack good judgement as some rather dubious people have been seen associating with them. One is often judged by the sort of company one keeps. An Afrikaans saying goes as follows: “Meng jou met die semels, dan vreet die varke jou.” I want to issue a friendly warning. Hon members know what happened to someone else who did not listen to good advice.

*Just look at him now!

†Regarding ministerial representatives the hon the Minister must spell out what their specific role is supposed to be.

Now the Volksparty …

Yes, that is the Volksparty. The Volksparty is only one party. It is a different thing when a member goes from one party to another. I was a member of the Labour Party and since I left that party I was independent all the time until I formed my own party, the Peoples Party of South Africa. I did not go from Solidarity to the NPP, from the NPP to the PP and then return to Solidarity. I do not do that kind of thing and for an hon Minister to do that would be very shameful. [Interjections.]

Regarding ministerial representatives the hon the Minister must spell out what their specific role is supposed to be. I, as well as certain other hon members, am not happy at all about the role of some of the ministerial representatives. If we have to appropriate their salaries, we need to know what their role is. We also need to know what the total expenditure has been on maintaining the three ministerial representatives. I leave the matter at that.

Mr Speaker, I want to bring to the attention of the hon the Ministers concerned, as well as to the Administration, the sad plight of Pelican Park. This whole drama started when the hon member for Red Hill was the Minister of Housing and it continued from there.

On 26 May 1985 services to 284 erven commenced in Pelican Park. I might add that I am given to understand that Pelican Park has land sufficient for the needs of the community for the next 25 years if group areas will remain as such for the next 25 years.

On 10 June 1986 the House of Delegates gave approximately R5 million for the contract and the services were accomplished. Several meetings were held with the former hon Minister of Housing, the Ministers’ Council and official of the Administration: House of Delegates. Time and time again attention was drawn to the fact that the sale value of those erven far exceeded the price of property in Zeekoevlei, the White section, where a three-bedroomed home with a swimming-pool cost R80 000.

The Administration, via the city council, was wanting R50 000, R60 000 and R70 000 for empty erven—they called them “prestigious sites”, to the extent that the hon leader of Solidarity, the hon member for Glenview, clearly stated in the House that if this was the position, we should not touch it. We concurred with him.

However, what amazes us is this: All of a sudden, after it was agreed that the Ministers’ Council had come to some sort of an arrangement with regard to the sale of these erven, how they would be sold and how the prices of those erven would be redistributed, as late as 28 December 1988 we were given to understand that that land had not been transferred to the Cape Town City Council. It is a shame! I agree with the hon member that this is a shame. We were led up the wrong garden path all along.

Over and over on television, as well as during speeches here, we were told that these were prestigious sites. This matter is now becoming a hot political issue, because people are now trying to doubt us. Now, when one cannot get an erf because the land does not belong to the city council, there are developers who would develop the land, but who would make it a condition of the deed of sale that transfer will be given to you when the whole township is registered and transferred to the developer of the municipality concerned.

My question is this, and I want the hon the Minister of Housing to answer this very clearly: I think we have been misinformed. I do not want to use a word which the Chair will rule out of order, but we have been misinformed. I do not know if the word “misled” is unparliamentary, but we have been misled. According to the documents received from the city council, the local authority is sick and tired of the way the Administration: House of Delegates has been dealing with this issue. Moreover, it is costing the local authority R120 000 per month on interest. That burden has to be borne by the local people who buy these erven.

What is shocking is that besides this, we have a further 433 erven in Pelican Park that are being developed by the regional services council, but these have been lying there for five years. Electric lights are burning during the night, roads have been surfaced, but no decision has as yet been made as to what is going to be done with this. We have had meetings and I am sure my hon colleagues in the Ministers’ Council will agree with me that we all sat in a meeting. Where is the fault? I am not accusing hon members of the Ministers’ Council only. I am saying that there is a collective responsibility.

Is something wrong with the National Housing Board? I do not know whether one calls it the Housing Board: House of Delegates. There are so many housing boards in South Africa that one gets confused. Is it the fault of the Ministers’ Council?

[Inaudible.]

I am not answering any questions. The hon the Acting Chairman of the Ministers’ Council will have the opportunity to reply. I am not taking any question. He has enough time to reply. What I am trying to find out is this: Is there something wrong with the administrative staff? Who is taking us for a ride? Who is doing it? It is useless for the hon the Acting Chairman of the Ministers’ Council to put his hand up now. He had a wonderful opportunity to put these things right. It is no use blaming one individual. I say it is a collective responsibility, and according to collective responsibility things should have been put right, because we raised these issues way back in 1984.

We raised them in 1986. We raised them in 1987. We raised them in 1988 and today in 1989 we are still raising these issues. We are told over and over again that throughout South Africa we have a land availability problem; we have a land identification problem. Then we are told that we have a problem with regard to the establishment of a township.

I understand that, but here in the Cape Peninsula we have got “land for the Indian community for the next 25 years”. Last year we were told that R18 million was set aside for services and the erection of homes for that financial year. It was announced on television as well as in the press that this was the case. Besides the first 220 homes and the next 138 homes, nothing has been done up till this moment in time. I would like to pose these questions to the hon the Minister.

We are given to understand that when an application has to be made for services to be put into operation in the township here, the city council will have to draw up the plans, submit them to the management committee, submit them to the housing committee, and thereafter the full council has to take a decision. The executive committee then has to take a decision. Thereafter it has to go to the Regional Director of Administration in the House of Delegates and thereafter it has to go to the head office of administration in the House of Delegates. Look at the bureaucracy.

I would like to give the hon the Minister a copy of this memo given to me by the city council, of the dates in chronological order as to the problems that the local city council has been facing even to get a reply from the House of Delegates. This is the bureaucracy.

We are all talking about devolution of power and about deregulation but to get things going is impossible. We have been saying that housing is a very urgent need among our people. We have got everything. We have got more than 500 serviced erven lying empty, but nothing is being done about them. I can assure the hon member for Actonville that 2 000 erven will lie there for the next 10 years. If they cannot get rid of 284, plus another 500, which gives 784 for the last five years, he will sit with his 2 000 erven for the next 12 years.

Mr Speaker, it has often been said that an Englishman’s home is his castle. This does not apply to the English alone but to mankind as a whole. The shortage of homes, as we are all aware, has become an international problem. We in this country are no exception.

The Indian community alone in this country requires between 36 000 to 40 000 homes.

The scarcity of land for Indians in the Western Cape goes back a long, long way. It was soon realised that the residential areas of Rylands, Cravenby and Gatesville had reached saturation point. I am going to give some statistics which hon members must please study along with what my benchmate, the hon member for Rylands has just said. If they come across statistics which I am repeating, they must remember that repetition is good for the soul, or that it could be interpreted as emphasis.

A vast stretch of land known as Pelican Park, covering an area of approximately 602 hectares and having a housing capacity of more than 32 000 people, or 5 761 dwellings, was proclaimed in 1981 and will provide homes, as my hon colleague has said, well into the 21st century.

Pelican Park falls within the area of jurisdiction of both the Cape Town City Council, that controls 80%, and the Western Cape Regional Services Council which controls 20%. The development has been a joint undertaking.

From 1985 approximately 5 000 residential plots were earmarked for development, while approximately 2 000 were fully serviced with tarred roads, kerbing and street lights. However, from the time it was serviced and almost ready for occupation or building, when I came along, the Port Jackson was ankle height. It then went up to knee height, then shoulder height, and now it has reached door height. Before long it is going to be at roof height, and these areas have not, as yet, been utilised. The tragedy is that if they are going to start building, problems may arise because these lands have been serviced, sewers have been laid and water and electricity have been laid on. These Port Jackson roots may or may not have penetrated the supply lines.

A fully-fledged Ministry of Housing was established and a Minister of Housing appointed. Members serving on this body comprised members of the city council, Ministers and a number of members of Parliament seated here. No fewer than five meetings have been held, and prices have been finalised, while there are over 2 500 people on the waiting list. That figure may be a little higher by now.

Repeated requests were made to the former hon Minister of Housing to expedite the sale of these plots and to have the buyers kept informed through the media of any delays. Sad to say, this has not been done. In the meantime the housing backlog continues.

An appeal is made to the hon Acting Minister of Housing to expedite these sales since homes are badly needed, building costs are escalating and inflation is playing havoc. Moreover, the hon Acting Chairman of the Ministers’ Council, in his capacity as the hon the Minister of Education and Culture, along with his department, and assisted by the hon the Minister of the Budget, not so long ago brought about a meaningful change in my constituency, North Western Cape, as far as an education matter was concerned. The people were extremely delighted. This goes to show that if an appeal is made to them, they will pursue the matter to its logical conclusion.

Hon members may find it interesting that the development of Pelican Park is divided into six phases. Phase 1 will be very well known to all of us. Services were installed as far back as 1985. There are 260 erven made up as follows: Eight erven for ministerial homes; 100 erven for parliamentary homes; 197 single residential erven, ranging from 500 square metres to 1 000 square metres; and 20 special sites for group housing. Phase 2 comprises 243 erven consisting of: 149 single residential erven; 93 special residential erven for group housing; and one existing home that will not be demolished. Phase 3 comprises 205 erven consisting of 126 single residential serviced erven; eight existing dwellings and 71 public housing units. Phase 4 consists of 195 single residential serviced units.

The Cape Town City Council, which provides 80% of the housing, would be responsible for 5 000 erven—a large number. Of these, 217 were referred to as prestigious sites, but I have scored that out and put down “waterfront sites”, because some people prefer waterfront sites to prestige residential sites.

There are 220 “assisted” units—that is interesting. Then there are 138 sites for the middleincome group. Finally, there are approximately 384 plots bordering the beachfront and the lake. These will be disposed of in time.

It goes without saying that the plots and homes for the lower-income group and the middleincome group are of paramount importance at the moment. Everything possible should be done to make the land and the homes mentioned available as soon as possible to the public that so badly needs it.

May I in conclusion make a special appeal to two important hon Ministers in this House—that is the hon the Acting Minister of Housing and the hon the Minister of the Budget—to expedite the matter so that we may reach finality.

Mr Chairman, the most important question facing the Indian community today is a shortage of houses. As a result, many landlords are exploiting tenants. Especially in my constituency of Chatsworth and the constituencies of many of the other hon members, some people have to live in an outbuilding or a little garage and they are being exploited.

At the moment, the poor communities of Chatsworth and Phoenix need more homes. The shortage of land is also a major problem. The huge housing schemes in Chatsworth and Phoenix have reached an end and immediately new townships for Indian housing are urgently required. The Group Areas Act must not be a Government excuse for not providing adequate land for our housing needs. Around Durban I have seen a number of areas which could be allocated to our community for building purposes. I am talking about Mariannhill, Camperdown, Hammarsdale and Umkomaas along the South Coast.

The real culprit for this shortage of land is undoubtedly the Group Areas Act and that is one of the main reasons for the Indian community’s hatred for this Act. Many years ago, before the passing of this Act, we lived together with people of colour in Natal without friction or a shortage of land. The hon the Acting State President himself admitted that the Group Areas Act is an obstacle to peaceful negotiation among the various groups. It is therefore incumbent on the Government to repeal this Act during this session. That will open the way for a speedy solution to our housing problems. It is an important question.

The House of Delegates must also look into the question of companies that claim to be developers to make sure that these are bona fide contractors. The James Commission has exposed a number of dummy companies and many irregularities. In many instances the result has been the gross exploitation of people trying to get homes built for themselves at a reasonable price.

Debate interrupted.