Mr Chairman, on behalf of the hon the Minister of National Health and Population Development, I move:

Agreed to.

Order! I put the question. [Interjections.] It does not look as though we have a speaker. [Interjections.] It seems our first speaker is still on his way. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, I want to apologise immediately for my late arrival. I am really sorry, but, as usual, this is owing to the conduct of the National Party. The hon the Chief Whip of my party has only just received the speakers’ list for this debate. This very moment! [Interjections.]

No, I do not have it yet! I have still not received anything!

He says he still does not have it, Sir. He does not have it yet, even at this late stage. [Interjections.] What a disgrace! That such things should take place in the Parliament of the Republic of South Africa is simply disgraceful. [Interjections.] As if that is not enough, this Government has the temerity to refer disparagingly to someone who turns up late at an occasion of this kind. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, in my participation in this discussion I should like to mention a more pleasant aspect first. There are also a number of unpleasant things that I have to do this afternoon. [Interjections.] In the first place, however, let me refer to the more pleasant aspect. I should like to wish Mr Bertie Groenewald, Deputy General Manager of the SA Transport Services, who is retiring on pension today after 38 years of service in the SA Transport Services, a pleasant and peaceful retirement, and I wish to thank him for the positive contributions he has made to the SA Transport Services.

In the same breath I should like to congratulate Mr H S F Hagen, the present Assistant General Manager: Technical of the SA Transport Services on his appointment as Group General Manager: Technical Services of the SA Transport Services, with effect from today. We hope he will experience a very productive term in the SA Transport Services.

I have said that unfortunately I have a number of unpleasant things to do this afternoon. I want to talk about the foreign exchange losses of the SA Transport Services which emerged from the Cross Report—the report of a specialist committee—with reference to the mentioned losses. Before I come to that, however, I should like to refer to the fact that we are probably experiencing the last Transport Services Appropriation debate here today, that is if the Legal Succession to the South African Transport Services Bill is implemented before the next session of Parliament.

After that we shall no longer be able to discuss the appropriation of money in the minute detail in which this is done at present. We shall have only a more or less standard annual report and financial statements to debate. With the division between the railway commuter services and the other business units of the SA Transport Services, we can already expect a considerably increased contribution to commuter services from the taxpayer’s pocket, because according to the Government the whole idea behind the division is to end the cross-subsidisation of commuter services from the accounts of the other business units.

According to the Government the recommendations of Dr De Villiers with regard to this matter have been accepted. This entails in the first place that the specific capital-related costs in respect of commuter services will be calculated at the beginning of every financial year. In the words of Dr De Villiers, the SATS will—

He goes on to say:

So much for the De Villiers Report.

It is clear from this whole approach that the Treasury is being made the milch cow through and through for funds for the non-profitable commuter services, whereas the other four profitable business units, or those that have the potential—there are some that are not yet profitable at this stage, viz airways, harbours, pipelines and road transport—are grouped together in the public company, with the knowledge that it will probably make a profit also in cases in which it does not make a profit as yet. Those profits will not devolve to the central Treasury, however, but to the company’s own account. If, however, it does not make profits, the State guarantees the company’s solvency for as long as the State is the only shareholder.

I now come to the matter that I really want to talk about this afternoon. While this whole change in the SATS’ character is taking place, Parliament will have no access to the details of the business of the transport services company or the commuter corporation. As I have said, only annual reports and financial statements will be submitted in Parhament. Before I go any further, I want to refer to an interesting Hansard that I discovered. It is the Hansard of Wednesday, 23 February 1983, col 1688. The speaker was the former Minister of Transport Affairs. This was six years ago. [Interjections.] I quote:

He was referring to the present hon Deputy Minister of Economic Affairs and Technology, who was still a member of the NRP then and therefore was in the opposition benches. He said he was pleased to hear from the hon member—

It is six years later, and exactly the opposite of what the former Minister of Transport Affairs advocated is happening. It is interesting that this is happening to the Transport Services at this stage, because it is at this time that losses, unrealised losses and losses not taken into account, of R3,119 billion as a result of foreign exchange transactions of the SA Transport Services between 1982 and 1987 have come to light.

This whole saga has a long preamble. There was a Railways and Harbours Finances and Accounts Act, No 48 of 1977, which regulated the financial aspect of the Transport Services, and which was repealed in 1983, when the former Minister of Transport Affairs was still here in Parliament, and replaced by the South African Transport Services Finances and Accounts Act, Act No 17 of 1983. Section 12 of this Act, which was introduced in 1983, is the beginning of a totally new attitude and a new era in the policy and control within the SATS. This section now transfers so much authority for the loan and use of SATS money to the General Manager of the SATS that it is almost incredible. This fact was pointed out when the legislation was debated in Parliament. At that stage the hon member for Berea said (Hansard: Assembly, 23 February 1983, col 1673):

The hon member also requested that one consider this matter once again and that the permission of the Minister of Finance be made a requirement. The hon member for Mossel Bay then rose and gave a very enlightening reply to the hon member for Berea’s argument. He said:

If one reads the debate that ensues, almost every speech made by both the hon the Minister and hon members on the side of the Government is teeming with the word “flexibility” in the case of the SATS.

The present hon Deputy Minister of Economic Affairs and Technology himself issued a warning:

He carried on his argument in this way and concluded that control over the finance of the SATS should be exercised to a greater extent than ever before.

The hon the Minister then replied. He referred to certain clauses and subsections of clause 12 and said among other things (col 1686):

He went on to say (col 1688):

The last part of his speech is very enlightening:

The hon member for Yeoville also issued a warning (col 1787):

What happened then? With reference to remarks made by the Auditor-General in his report on the accounts of the SA Transport Services for the 1985-86 financial year, the Standing Committee on the Accounts of the SA Transport Services heard evidence in 1987 about the foreign exchange transactions of the SATS, in which regard considerable losses had already emerged. They requested that a specialist investigative committee be appointed, as suggested by the Auditor-General on that occasion, to investigate and evaluate these foreign exchange transactions and to report on them.

The present hon Minister of Transport Affairs, who had taken over the portfolio of Transport Affairs from his predecessor, Mr Hendrik Schoeman, less than a year earlier, then appointed such a specialist committee, with the instruction that it should try to report on its investigation by 1 January 1988.

I want to emphasise something at this point. As far as I could determine—I really went to some trouble in this regard—there was no indication during the preceding five years since 1982 that the then Minister of Transport Affairs was concerned about the SATS’s foreign exchange losses. Yet it later emerged from the investigation that by far the largest number of loss-incurring foreign exchange transactions took place during the last few years of that Minister’s term as Minister of Transport Affairs, which ended with his retirement from politics towards the end of 1986.

The initial target for this specialist committee’s report, viz 1 January 1988, came and went. In April 1988 the specialist committee made an interim confidential report to the Joint Committee on the Accounts of the SA Transport Services and of Posts and Telecommunications.

In the words of the specialist committee itself, the reasons for the delay in the eventual report were, and I quote:

The volume of the work and the complexity of the subject matter are understandable, but the comment that the SA Transport Services neglected to make certain information available within a reasonable period is an extremely serious charge against them.

The report of the specialist committee was submitted to the hon the Minister of Transport Affairs on 9 September 1988. Let me say immediately that we want to thank the specialist committee sincerely for an extremely enlightening and comprehensive report. When one goes into their backgrounds and present positions, it is clear that the chairman, Mr James Cross, and the members, Mr Helmuth Bahrs, Mr Bill Urmson, Prof Izak de Villiers and Mr C J Lourens, are all experts in the field of foreign exchange.

The report indicates that in the period from March 1982 to March 1987, the SA Transport Services concluded two kinds of foreign exchange transactions. The first involved ordinary longterm loans in foreign exchange and the second was what I want to describe as speculation in foreign exchange. With regard to the first kind of transaction, it is sometimes necessary to obtain foreign loans for large projects, especially for an organisation as large as the SA Transport Services.

The fluctuation in the relative value of the various monetary units with regard to one another is an omnipresent risk, which is accepted by anyone who concludes long-term loans abroad. The specialist committee says the following on page 21 of its report:

According to the committee, during the period from 1982 to 1987, these loans amounted to an average of 30% of the SA Transport Services’ total financial obligations.

According to the explanation of the present general manager of the SA Transport Services, the Transport Services speculated with foreign exchange in an attempt to restrict the foreign exchange losses on loans as a result of a drop in the value of the rand. This is the second kind of foreign exchange transaction that emerged from the investigation. This modus operandi was followed despite an offer of cover by the Reserve Bank for the SATS’s loans and in respect of the American dollar.

According to the Cross Committee, this cover would have amounted to only R467 million in respect of all third currency exposure. The SATS did not take up the Reserve Bank’s offer, however, even though it appears from the report that it must have been clear to anyone who is reasonably knowledgeable in this field that the Reserve Bank had made the offer precisely because the rand’s value was expected to drop.

The result of this decision was a catastrophe. During the period from 31 March 1982 to 31 March 1987 an abundance of profits and losses— when I say an abundance of profits and losses, I am actually referring to the losses—expressed in the currency in which the foreign exchange was originally purchased, were made and suffered by the SATS.

One finds a few examples on page 27 of the Cross Report. On 30 September 1983 no fewer than 140 foreign exchange transactions were concluded on only one day. Losses on that day in the German mark amount to 3 543 685 German marks. Losses in Swiss francs amount to 2 684 472 Swiss francs. Losses in British pounds sterling amount to 697 000 pounds. A profit in Japanese yen amounts to 2 497 285 yen. One loss in American dollars amounts to $922 500. Another loss in American dollars amounts to $302 000. Yet another loss in American dollars amounts to $107 300 000. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I want to associate myself with the words of the previous speaker with regard to Mr Bertie Groenewald. I want to wish him everything of the best upon his retirement and I also want to extend my most hearty congratulations to Mr Hager, who is to take up his new post.

Permit me to thank the hon the Minister and his officials for a very good and enlightening transport study tour last year. [Interjections.] We look forward to more such tours. Thank you once again. I shall touch briefly on certain aspects, and my colleagues will go into greater detail.

Today we have reached an historical milestone in the parliamentary history of the South African Transport Services. This is, in fact, the last time we shall be dealing with this Budget in the traditional manner, as we have done in years past. It fills me with a certain amount of nostalgia to see off this Budget, which was a parliamentary institution, at its last station today.

Debates on this Budget evoke many recollections, including for hon members on this side of the House, because it was during this debate that we were able to get onto the hon the Minister’s apartheid track and chase him full steam over the ridge until he was forced to give certain undertakings with regard to equality. There were some fiery debates. The hon the Minister will remember them well. There were also some wonderful moments, however, such as when announcements were made regarding the abolition of discriminatory practices. Moreover, one cannot easily forget the witticisms of Hendrik Schoeman. The present hon the Minister of Transport Affairs, who comes from the future White homeland, has indicated in his calm Namaqualand manner that he is a true son of the Cape. He deserves praise for a great deal of the progress which the SATS has made.

To come back to the Budget itself: Today we have reached a milestone which heralds a new era for the SATS, an era in which the SATS is to be created into a profit-seeking public company and in which it will have to compete on an equal footing in the transport market. It is a fact that with its five components, namely harbours, railways, airways, pipelines and road transport, the SATS affects the life of every inhabitant of the country every day. However, the public knows little about one of the most important components of the SATS, except when problems are experienced with it. This component is the SATS personnel. One thinks of the staff unrest which caused many problems not too long ago. This received attention at the highest level, however, for which a great deal of praise must go to the hon the Minister in this House today.

The hon the Minister recently gave the assurance that the necessary infrastructure had been developed to ensure that unrest would be dealt with. I should like to quote the hon the Minister:

I want to add that an agreement of recognition has been concluded between the management of the SATS and the SAA engineering association. An advantage of this agreement is that fixed guidelines for the process of collective bargaining were placed on a firmer foundation. This indicates progress by the SATS with regard to their personnel matters.

There is also another side to this Budget debate that I wish to sketch. For 40 years it was, in my view, the most important budget in the Parliament of the White population. It is true that the Government used this department largely to help the poor Whites, the shiftless and those who were unwilling or unable to make progress in the academic or other fields. Despite all the legislation that was aimed at uplifting the Whites, despite the fact that there was legislation such as that pertaining to job reservation to afford the Whites every possible opportunity, this department was also used to create the first and the best opportunities under the South African sun for them.

What now gives me hope for the future, is the fact that the Government has come to the realisation that it has made certain mistakes which have done a great deal of damage to the country, by wishing to give preference to a certain group, without regard to productivity and without regard to other conscientious citizens who wish to build up the country economically with love and loyalty. The SATS was simply a service department in South Africa, with the object of providing the poorer class of Whites with work and prosperity. Today the economic realities dictate that everyone, regardless of colour, must do his share and that he must be productivity-conscious.

This Budget reminds me of certain events of years ago, when the hon the Minister of Transport Affairs used to deliver his budget speech. For those few hours the railways came to a standstill and everyone sat by the radio and listened attentively to whether there was a little something in store for them.

Now we in the Republic of South Africa are entering a new era, that of privatisation and deregulation, and the SĀTS, as the largest State department, is the first to be affected.

The first question that came from the White trade unions was what was to become of their rights and privileges, a question just like that of a bunch of spoilt children. The people of colour heard what our White working friends were complaining about, and they simply smiled and said: “What are you worried about? We have never had rights and privileges, but we know that if one does one’s work conscientiously and correctly, everything will be all right”. In other words, they know the real circumstances with regard to how things ought to be in a normal non-discriminatory situation.

That is the background with regard to how things were. That is why the White right-wing parties are still fighting for more protected White welfare departments, something which is hurting their policy economically because the voters know that it is political mutiny.

Today I want to touch on certain matters relating to privatisation. Firstly, the Cabinet and the Government have very courageously granted recognition to the fact that the non-White component of the population has been neglected and that real attention must be given to decreasing or wiping out the backlog. This is definitely being done, and those who deny this and who fail to see this, will die blind. I want to make an appeal here today that whenever the State issues shares or privatises, it should please adopt a more compassionate attitude towards the position of the people of colour, because otherwise we shall start off with a backlog in this regard as well, due to a policy which everyone now despises.

The LP has nothing against privatisation. We believe in a free market system, but due to our history we must be treated with a greater degree of sympathy in order to display our love and loyalty towards the RS A to the fullest extent. This immediately makes me think that if we allow this capitalist system to go its own way, eight or 10 companies will have everything and the rest will have nothing. That is to say, our country would later be heading in a different direction. Let us guard against that.

As I have already said in my statement on behalf of the LP with regard to the hon the Minister’s speech, the harsh reality is that any increases in transport tariffs hit our communities particularly hard owing to the fact that we have had to endure forced removals under the Group Areas Act and we therefore live far away from our places of work. I once again appeal to the hon the Minister to kindly introduce a better subsidy of our commuter services. In the same breath, I want to say that we appreciate the amount by which we are now being subsidised, but it really is not enough.

I have taken note of the recommendations contained in Prof Franzsen’s report on commuter services, which was tabled 10 years ago, but I am of the opinion that they have become obsolete and that new recommendations will now have to be made, which could possibly lead to an improvement in the services.

Increases in transport tariffs are always a contributory factor to the inflation rate. They also have a psychological effect in that some of the increases immediately effect consumers. They create the impression that prices will suddenly rise further. Although these increases are lower than the inflation rate, they could be detrimental to prospective purchasers. I trust, however, that no further increases will be announced in the course of the year.

I accept that the SATS have to perform certain essential services, particularly in rural areas. This is increasingly giving rise to large losses. I want to suggest that a penetrating look be taken at the scheduled routes. These routes should be rescheduled and use should be made of smaller vehicles.

Fanners are being cross-subsidised from all sides. A railways bus or a train transports a mail bag or two and a can of milk at a loss to the State, but at a profit to the farmer or the businessman. A more thorough investigation could be undertaken so that the SATS could play a more versatile role in order to effect financial savings.

Another aspect I should like to mention, is that we welcomed the opening up of trains, in so far as a person’s ticket determines in which class of coach one has to travel, with great joy.

It was with deep regret, however, that I heard from a couple of deeply disappointed women that they had purchased first-class tickets from Cape Town to Bloemfontein. Their names were affixed to the windows of the compartment and they were permitted to board at Bellville station. When they approached Worcester, they were insulted by the conductor and removed. The following words were said: “Wat dink julle Hotnots julle sal ons Witmense se geriewe gebruik.” [Interjections.] The White chef and the bedding attendants on the train felt sorry for them and helped them. What a fine gesture!

The irony of the matter is that when it became dark, that very same conductor came and made strange suggestions to them. This makes one wonder. This incident occurred on 12 December 1988. The train left Bellville station at 18h57. I trust that the hon the Minister will investigate this sort of behaviour and that he will make a concerted effort to have everyone treated with greater respect, in order to develop a better image for this organisation.

While we are on the subject of the image of the SATS—if we work at this, we shall win more friends among our neighbours in Africa, as well as overseas. Our transport diplomacy is important, particularly because we have a very sophisticated transport system and our routes are strategically well-adapted to our neighbours, a facility for which they really have a great need.

I think the world should know that the SATS has many business agreements with most African countries and that it renders assistance to them in the form of several thousand trucks, as well as locomotives. I believe that such gestures ought to be appreciated.

I am mentioning the facts here. Last year I was in Malawi, where we spoke to many of the world’s ambassadors and high commissioners, who simply could not understand the attitude of certain countries in the economic sphere. Even the representatives of African countries speak strangely about their own governments’ policy statements regarding South Africa. I want to mention briefly that bridges might be built through this department which will reap much fruit for South Africa as a whole in the long term. Our great task, however, is to improve human relations within our own country.

I believe things are going well with the airways and pipelines, and that is why I have referred to the other divisions. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, this being the last occasion on which this debate will take place in this Chamber I would like to take this opportunity, on the behalf of my colleagues, to express our appreciation to the hon the Minister for the fact that facilities have been provided for Muslim pilgrims in our airports. This is something that was asked for and we are indebted to the hon the Minister for having made these facilities available.

Over the past four years, whenever the opportunity presented itself, we have asked the hon the Minister to give serious and urgent consideration to the possibility of providing employment opportunities in the services of the SAA for the various population groups in our country. I think that it is fitting and proper that on this occasion I should also acknowledge the fact that there is now ample evidence that a programme has been instituted and that people from the Black, Coloured and Indian communities are being given the opportunity of making a contribution as employees of the SAA. To cap it all, the fact that only recently an announcement was made that a man of colour had been employed as a pilot I believe answers many of the reservations we might have expressed in the past.

All I can say is that hopefully we will see an increasing number of people obtaining employment with the SAA on the basis of merit at all levels.

Whilst dealing with this question, it is pleasing to note that the SAA has posted a profit of some R102 million. The question that I would like to pose to the hon the Minister, more particularly in the light of the recent unfortunate developments overseas, is what the policy of the Government is with regard to the replacement of aircraft. Only this morning a commentator indicated that it might be necessary to scrap aircraft after 20 years of service because of the possibilities of stress and metal fatigue and likely damage.

I would also like to know from the hon the Minister whether it is true that money from the annual profits of the SAA is set aside as a replacement reserve to pay for new aircraft. What is hon the Minister’s policy with regard to the funding of new aircraft?

I also notice from the financial report of the Ministry that harbours have again shown an increase in profit. On the basis of projections it would appear that the profit could well be R600 million for the financial year. The question I would like to pose to the hon the Minister is this: With regard to the fact that in 1987 and 1988 there was a substantial increase in the net surplus on the harbours’ account, is any consideration being given to reducing rates of wharfage or landing charges or any harbour charges with a view to helping the growth of our export commodities? I would also like the hon the Minister to consider whether some assistance could be given to imports which are costing us much more than a few years ago as a result of the exchange rate of the rand.

This inevitably has a bearing on the cost structure of commodities and finished products in South Africa. Perhaps the surplus or some of it could be used both as an incentive to the exporter to help him to compete in the markets of the world and, secondly, also to importers to cushion the effects of high costs which are a contributory factor to inflation in our country. I pose these two questions to the hon the Minister.

I would also like to ask whether having regard to the fact that a sizable acreage of land previously used for storage and shed facilities and also as marshalling yards around the Durban harbour in the Point area what steps are to be taken to make use of this land so that instead of being an eyesore it could be turned into something which could contribute in the way of funds to the resources of the Ministry. I believe that you are aware, Sir, that in many parts of the world redevelopment programmes are afoot to resuscitate the use of facilities in harbour areas. On a recent visit to Baltimore there was evidence of what can be done to an area which is really dying. It could be switched on to becoming a thriving business area giving people opportunities to do business, providing employment and also providing additional recreational facilities for people all through the year—every day, day and night.

There is reference in the hon the Minister’s report to cross subsidisation in regard to losses sustained by rail passenger services. He mentions the fact that a loss of R1277 000 000 is projected, of which the amount of R644 million will be subsidised by the State and the remaining R633 million will have to be found from internal resources.

The question I pose is this. How long is this going to continue and is it fair that someone has to be burdened with the subsidy which in turn creates problems for commerce and industry and for the public at large? Is there no other way of funding this loss without imposing additional cost charges on commuters, business and commerce and industry?

The SATS is a vast business undertaking and I would like to believe that even after the reporting in this House has come to an end, the opportunity will be provided to members of Parliament not only to question what has been reported, but also, in the light of experience, to make suggestions—which I sincerely trust that the hon the Minister will take into account—on the committee responsible for examining the accounts of their administration.

As I have suggested here on the basis of the figures presented that if a harbour service could provide a surplus of R600 million, I think it is only reasonable to consider whether some of that surplus could be used to the benefit of the country in examining incentives for exports. Some consideration could be given to this so that it could serve as an incentive and because in the final analysis we all profit—the country profits; the businessman profits and the foreign exchange earnings of our country could benefit from the consideration extended to importers and exporters by the hon the Minister.

Mr Chairman, I want to begin by referring to the hon member for Roodepoort. That hon member adopted an arrogant attitude here about the documents which had not reached his Chief Whip. I have received documents from my Chief Whip indicating that as early as yesterday afternoon—Tuesday, at 14h12—that hon member’s Chief Whip received the documents, and all he had to do was fill them in. I think, however, that that party has become so accustomed to the good service furnished to them by the hon the Chief Whip of Parliament that they have grown altogether too lazy to go into the matter any further and read what is contained in those documents.

I also want to say that if that hon member has an incompetent Chief Whip, he should not state the fact here. He is wasting the time of the entire House.

You are wasting our time, you blockhead!

Oh, Sir, the hon member for Overvaal calls me a blockhead. I do not want to tell him what I would call him; you know what I would call him. [Interjections.] Since he now has so much to say, and has mentioned blockheads, I also want to ask the hon member: Is he satisfied with the new homeland that Dr Boshoff has worked out for him?

Yes, we shall send you there.

It is very gratifying to see that that homeland does at least have two harbours. They did not make the mistake that others made with their homeland. Looking at that homeland, however, I could possibly also imagine the stones there crying out: “Homeland, where is your White man?”, and not the reverse. [Interjections.]

Since the hon member has so much to say, I want to ask him to have us discuss the transport in that new homeland, since we are discussing the whole matter here. I think that in the course of the next few Votes, this homeland should be analysed item-for-item. I shall begin today.

[Inaudible.]

Order! The hon member for Overvaal is making too many interjections. He must stop doing so. The hon member for Primrose may proceed.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: May I ask what these remarks by the hon member have to do with the Transport Services Appropriation Bill?

Order! The hon member is making some reference to transport. I shall listen carefully to what further comments he has to make about that.

Mr Chairman, as far as I know I am dealing with the Transport Services Appropriation Bill. I am dealing with harbours! I am simply not covering the whole of South Africa! At the moment I am only dealing with the White homeland, but in time we shall be moving out of the White homeland and into South Africa as a whole. The hon member need not be concerned about that! If he is incompetent, he need not give further proof of this here, as he has previously done.

The hon member for Roodepoort also said that this was the last debate on the SA Transport Services Appropriation. That is correct, but I cannot agree that this is an ending characterised by sad tidings. I think we are on the threshold of a great future as far as the Transport Services under the new dispensation is concerned.

I also want to say that what the hon member said here was not quite true. In future the audited statements will still be discussed, and we can still test the hon the Minister’s knowledge of any aspect of the Transport Services or any other transport in South Africa at present.

Where will we get the time from?

We shall ask for the time. If the opposition asks for enough time, there would be enough time. [Interjections.] We adapt our time to hon members’ needs. If hon members, as opposition members, have nothing to say, it is unnecessary to waste further time on that. Surely that is a simple enough principle. The hon the Chief Whip of the PFP knows that, does he not, or has he also forgotten it? Do not let me fling the same accusation at him that I have flung at the hon CP Whip. I would not like to do that.

In Joint Debate we have 20 minutes maximum!

I should like to go further and say that I share the sentiments expressed here towards those who are retiring or resigning. We want to express our thanks to them. To those who are being promoted we want to extend our sincere thanks and wish them everything of the best in their future task of building up the Transport Services in South Africa. I am just worried that if the hon the Minister continues with deregulation and everything that entails, and does the job successfully, as I expect it will be done, the hon the Minister will ultimately no longer have a job! That worries me!

I am glad the hon the Minister has also been given the Manpower portfolio. He will now also occupy himself with that.

At this stage we have heard a great deal of criticism from various quarters about small aspects of this budget. Everyone was satisfied with the budget in the sense that it kept well below the inflation rate. Today, however, I want to dwell on one important point. The most important point is mentioned on the very last page of the memorandum that the hon the Minister distributed.

There is a wonderful graph stretching from the 1978-79 financial year to the 1987-88 financial year—it is such a pity that the press and television reporters did not publish or televise this graph. Hon members must remember that the services of the SATS are a derivative component. The SATS is the major consumer of fuel, steel and electricity, and when all is said and done, the costs of those products have increased much more over the past ten years than have the SATS’s tariffs. At a later stage—if there is time— I shall dwell for a moment on the exact figures involved. It is—and remains—a fact that the SATS cannot, of its own accord, escape inflationary pressure. It is also true that an increase in the SATS’s tariffs can also act as a stimulus for other price increases. I therefore want to make an appeal: Since the SATS’s tariff adjustments at this stage have been much lower than any of the other rates that have been mentioned, the public should please take this into account if other tariff adjustments take place and not simply say that this is in line with the inflation rate. After all, the SATS’s tariff increases are much lower than the inflation rate.

The most important additional comment I want to make at this stage is that in this case the SATS has, in fact, made a contribution towards applying a braking effect to the inflation rate and preventing it from increasing too rapidly.

If everyone in South Africa were to increase his rate by only 9%, there would be better prospects as far as the inflation rate was concerned.

The Legal Succession to the South African Transport Services Bill is ushering us into the new era.

We have discussed that Bill and finally voted on it, and I hope that it will, as quickly as possible, be signed by the hon the State President and be placed on the Statute Book so that we can proceed to have it implemented.

I want to refer to two aspects of that legislation which are still of importance. This budget indicates why it is essential for us to have to implement that legislation. The first aspect involves cross-subsidisation. Hon members know of the huge amount that is going to be used to subsidise commuter services.

I should like to dwell for a moment on the question of commuter services. It is true, is it not, that in the case of first-class commuters the fares only cover 21% of the total cost. It is also true, is it not, that in the case of third-class passengers the figure is only 34%.

You are subsidising the Whites more than the Blacks!

There is no longer any question of “Whites and Blacks”. The hon member must please catch up with the times! I do not want to cross swords with him today. He must stop making these senseless interjections.

If we wanted to correct overnight those problems the CP attacked here today, it would mean that the present tariff structure for third-class commuters would have to treble. No commuter using that service at present would be able to afford the increase. Let us acknowledge this to one another. It is impossible to have a trebling in the present tariff structure. I am not saying that this could not happen in the very long term, but we can forget about it as a short-term or medium-term prospect.

This brings me back to the reason why it is essential for us to continue with the restructuring of the SATS and for the commuter corporation to take up a position on the sidelines so that we can deal with this as a separate issue and not detract from the competitive position of the SA Transport Services from the point of view of crosssubsidisation.

I shall return to the question of cross-subsidisation in a moment, in particular the cross-subsidisation that took place in other spheres. I shall then refer to pipelines and harbour tariffs.

Now I first want to say a few words about foreign exchange losses. As the chairman of the subcommittee that dealt with that matter, I want to put a few matters straight.

I want to express my gratitude to everyone who co-operated in addressing this problem. Let me say frankly that mistakes were made. Those mistakes have been rectified. I want to express my thanks for the fact that those mistakes received immediate attention and that the relevant action was taken. Over the next 10 years it is going to cost us approximately R300 million per year to iron out those problems. It is easy to talk, is it not. “Hindsight is a most exact science.”

Let us take a brief look at the future. We have calculated here what would happen if we wanted to purchase two new aircraft at R2 200 million. The period of the loan is 12 years and the cost of Reserve Bank forward cover for that period, on last week’s figures, is 5,3% per annum. If we have to spend $880 million—because at an exchange rate of $1:R2,50 an amount of R2 200 million is $880 million—we are faced with a dilemma. What decision do we now take about the year 2001?

It depends on whether we have any more Rubicon speeches.

There the hon member is wandering off at a tangent again. Let me ask him to tell us what he would do.

The loan is for an amount of R2 200 million. If we were to take out the term cover, this would involve us in a further R1430 million, giving us a total cost of R3 630 million in the year 2001. The rand value in that year would be R1:$0,24.1 am now asking whether we should take that cover. Can we imagine that by the year 2001 the rand is going to be worth $0,24? Hon members must not talk about the mistakes; they must ask what we are going to do in the year 2001, because that loan must be negotiated now.

I am waiting for the hon the Chief Whip of the PFP, who is to be the next speaker, to commit himself one way or another. I expect it of him.

What I also want to say is that I am personally opposed to the fact that when the Reserve Bank covers this loan, the taxpayer must stand in for it. For me it is important that an undertaking that uses this services and gives rise to these losses should bear those costs. It is better to have it vested where it originates rather than to ask everyone to contribute if losses were to occur.

Hon members must remember that losses must be recovered from some source, whether from the SATS or the Reserve Bank. When losses do, in fact, occur, someone must carry those losses. That is merely a brief comment to add a bit of sparkle to the debate. Let every hon member commit himself in future. In this case I would have said that I would, at a later stage, have made my announcement about how I viewed this matter, but the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central has the answer. We would very much like to hear from him what the answer is.

The corrective steps taken in the case of the foreign exchange losses are set out in a report. That report was adopted. Certain technical errors that were made have been corrected, and in the various committees we heard that it could not happen again. The necessary expertise was brought in after such expertise was acquired. Again I just want to dwell for a moment on the hon member for Randburg. I want to single him out, because in Die Transvaler of 23 February he made a statement as one of the leaders of the three-headed party. This three-headed party is a three-headed dragon that is being bom—the Democratic Party. The hon member said that he was particularly unhappy because tariffs for commuters were once again being increased, because those who are less well off are hardest hit. On the other hand, however, the hon the Minister should be congratulated for having kept the tariffs below the inflation rate. I agree with the last part of what the hon member said. I also agree with the first part, but if cross-subsidisation did not take place, or if that portion of the money were not recovered from the commuters or the Treasury, where would we obtain the other two thirds of the tariff structure? I hope the hon member heard me saying that only 33,3% was recovered from the commuters.

It must come from somewhere. Until such time as this burden is borne by the new commuter corporation, the SATS and the State must bear the burden. I do, however, want to pose a question. Why did the so-called new party vote against the Bill, since they specifically say that the State should bear the burden? We must not always oppose everything merely as a matter of course. We must also look, for a change, at what it is we are opposed to.

[Inaudible.]

The hon member’s new party voted against the Bill. Now, three or four days later, he agrees with me. No, I have problems with the Democratic Party, but I shall leave them alone for now and come back to my speech.

I want to dwell for a moment on the labour situation. I want to express my thanks to the hon the Minister and the trade unions for a very restful year. I also want to express my thanks to every employee who loyally performed his duties. I think that in any event they deserved the increases they received, if one looks at the high level of productivity and efficiency which has been maintained in the SATS over the past year. We not only take note of this high premium which is placed on peaceful labour relations, but we all appreciate the fact that we have had a service without disruptions, riots, arson or strikes. I hope this will be the future pattern too.

There is a great deal to say about the pipelines and the large profits made from them. I merely want to put one question in this connection to the hon the Minister, a question he can answer when he furnishes his reply. What price reduction could there be on the cost of one litre of fuel in the interior if the pipelines were run on a break-even basis? I would be glad if we could obtain that figure so that the debate could focus attention on it. I personally do not have all the figures, because I do not have the volumes with which the amount can be divided, but my guess is that if the pipelines were run on a break-even basis, this would not result in a price decrease of more than one or two cents. I do want to ask, however, that when the company starts working, we try, in the case of the pipelines and the harbours, to move closer to the cost price than we are at the moment.

When we establish the commuter corporation and the hon the Minister of Finance has made good that portion of the losses, let us try, in the case of future tariff increases and the determination of the pricing policy which can be left to the board of directors, to give them guidelines and to ask them to move closer to a policy which would allow the user of those services to get the benefit of the cross-subsidisation that falls away. I am now referring to the pipelines and the harbours which have, over the years, borne a fairly heavy burden in regard to this aspect of commuter subsidisation. For that reason I hope that the whole aspect of commuter subsidisation will very quickly vanish from the SATS’s books and from its system.

Another point I want to touch upon here briefly relates to the problem involving ad valorem. The same request that I have thus far made I also want to make in regard to ad valorem harbour tariffs. I know why we impose ad valorem tariffs. There are good reasons for doing so, but when circumstances change, we shall also have to examine ad valorem levies. Ad valorem levies must not be employed more often than cross-subsidisation to cover those costs that are not borne directly by the service.

That is also the case with the road transport services. The road transport services of the SATS constitute a particularly small percentage of the total transport market. If I have the time, I shall deal with that aspect here, but in the 48 seconds remaining to me, I just want to dwell on the cost-covering aspect in the case of the road transport services. Since the road transport services furnish many social services at the moment, let us also see whether we cannot, in this sphere, move closer to getting the average 90% in the case of bus passengers closer to 100%, and in the case of goods services, where 93% of the road costs are covered at the moment, let us see whether we cannot move closer to 100%. This is also for the sake of the competition between the various sectors that is going to take place out there. At this stage my plea is that in this process of moving closer, we ensure that competition between the SATS’s road transport service and other private hauliers takes place on an equal footing.

It is a pleasure for me to support this budget, and I hope that the SATS—whose last budget this is—will rise to greater heights in the future, will make greater profits and will pay more taxes to the Treasury when we implement the new legislation, which proposes the establishment of a company, in 12 months’ time.

Mr Chairman, as we all know, we are going through a period of political change in this country. We are also all aware that a negotiating climate has been created. To have a healthy and good negotiating climate in this country, we have to look at certain aspects around us.

First of all, we look at the airports in our country. They are all named after NP leaders. Hon members will see: D F Malan, B J Vorster, J B M Hertzog, J G Strijdom, Ben Schoeman, Jan Smuts and Louis Botha. [Interjections.] What is the hon the Minister going to do about the J G Strijdom Airport in Windhoek? What is going to happen there? Is he going to retain the name of the NP leader or is he going to change it?

We will have to look at this type of thing in our country, so that we can have healthy negotiations in the future. If we do not do that, I am afraid we will not have a healthy climate for negotiations.

I want to go on to the debate. I want to take the hon the Minister back to the time when we came into this Parliament. In the first year we came along and pointed out to the department and the hon the Minister the problems—that apartheid and the apartheid signs on the trains in South Africa are unhealthy.

In the second year we came back and told the hon the Minister that those boards would have to be removed because we would not be able to negotiate if they were not. In the third year we came back and demanded that the hon the Minister have them removed. I called for the hon the Minister to resign if he did not have them removed. The hon the Minister did not resign. The hon the Minister, however, decided to remove the boards in the fourth year but did not remove them in to to. In the fifth year the hon the Minister decides to get rid of Transport and wants it to be a public company. The hon the Minister has, however, not solved the problem concerning transport. The hon the Minister has removed the boards on the local trains and no problems occur. Nobody has lost their colour, nobody has lost their culture and nobody has lost their identity. Everybody has remained the same and it has rather brought us closer to each other. We understand each other better, we know each other’s problems and can listen to those problems on that train.

Let us look at the mainline trains. The boards have not been removed from these trains. The hon the Minister is still scared that somebody is going to lose their colour. They will not lose their colour. That mainline train has to be declared open to all. If the hon the Minister wants the SATS to be a public company and wants it to be a success, he must get rid of all apartheid on the SATS—everything, whether it be in employment, on the trains or wherever. Apartheid has first to go to make the SATS a success or the SATS will not succeed.

Just to get back to the removal of the boards on the local trains, I would have liked to have been there when those boards were removed and burnt so I could watch the hell that was caused to me over the past years by those boards that were put up being burnt. I would like to have witnessed and seen them disappear, but since I was not present, it still hurts within me to see the boards on the mainline trains.

They do not have boards for the CP.

While we are busy with those mainline trains, we might as well have a look at what is happening on them. Your bedding boys, who are so-called Coloureds, have to sit in a compartment in the so-called international section. They kneel there and 99,9% of the time they get fish and chips.

Then one must have a look at the White staff. When everybody has finished eating they may sit in the dining-room and have whatever they want. That is not fair. That is a form of discrimination.

One does not find a chef of colour. The cooking is done by two cooks and 99% of them are non-White. They cannot be promoted to become chefs. I do not know why they cannot be promoted, because they are the people who actually do the work.

In the peak periods when the trains are full, the bedding boys have to wait until everybody has finished in the dining-room before they take blankets and sleep on the dining-room floor to make space so that the coupes and compartments can be filled up. In the light of the fact that the White employees can sleep cozily in an compartment put aside for them, that is not fair. That can no longer be tolerated.

I hope the hon the Minister will tell us by the end of this debate that the first and second international classes will no longer exist. We cannot go into this public company with those international classes. There is no such thing as an international class. One is either South African or not, and all of us here are South Africans.

I want to move on to the train section. They removed boards from the stations. At Park station all first and second class bookings are done in one place, which is an improvement. However, if one looks at the lay-out of the trains one still finds that people buying at the same ticket-office and standing in the same queue have to get off at a different place lower down on the station platform.

*They have to get off at the tail-end of the station. †That is unacceptable. We cannot go on with that type of discrimination.

When the Whites get off the train, they have a porter waiting for them who loads their luggage and takes it away. This does not happen to us, but we are paying exactly the same fare. There is no difference in the fare. We have one shower to four coaches, while in the White section every coach has a shower. In a public company that must cease totally. There should be no discrimination, otherwise one writes off the public company. Personally I would advise people not to be a part of the public company if that continues.

Let us look at the layout of the board of this public company. Everybody who pays tax contributes to the SATS. There is no colour in tax, because everybody has to pay it. However, the board consists only of Whites. Nobody can tell me that there is nobody from the other population groups who cannot do that type of work. There are many of them, but they chose to use Whites in order to keep it a White organisation. That is not acceptable either. We are in a changing South Africa and if we are to change, then we must change totally. We are not going to change in bits and pieces.

When one looks at the hon the Minister’s speech in this House the other day, one sees that he said he agreed with the hon the Acting State President that we have to uplift our people in the country. His exact words were: (Hansard, Joint Meeting, 9 February 1989, Col 318)

If there is now to be discrimination by SATS while this type of speech is being made, we have a contradiction. Either the hon the Minister must make a verkrampte speech, or he must make a verligte speech, and be a verligte, but we cannot allow this situation to continue.

I wrote a letter to the hon the Minister some time ago questioning him on certain things that are taking place at the airports. On Friday the Director of Transport was on a plane with me that was supposed to leave at 18h00 and left at 18h45. This did not inconvenience me as I remained in South Africa but there were a lot of people from other countries on that flight and those people missed their plane at Jan Smuts. They missed their plane because of the delay in the SAA flight. Those types of delays are not called for. They must not let a plane come in and then load immediately and go back. That could also cause problems with the overworking of that plane. That plane has to stand for some time. It is not acceptable to bring in a plane, clean it up quickly, get into it and go back.

Why not?

If I want to talk to that hon member I will pull the chain. The hon member is not part of the ruling party. The ruling party is the NP and I have nothing to do with the hon member.

When we went for our baggage in the past it came very quickly. On Friday night we waited up to three quarters of an hour. This did not only happen on Friday night; there were many other nights that this happened. Instead of the SATS’s services going forward they are moving in a backward direction. That is not good for this country. At one stage our airline was the best one could find. It had the best of everything but things are deteriorating, I would not say because of bad management but there is definitely something wrong there and it has to be looked at and rectified so that we can go on with the South Africa that we are looking forward to and all want to live in and enjoy.

If one looks at the salaries of the employees of the SATS, there are 11 258 people who are earning just on R6 000 per annum. If one goes further there are 16 058 people earning R6 001 to R6 999 per annum.

If one looks at these people, one will find that they are all from the non-White group. This is not a salary that anyone can live on. If one wants to compete on the open market, one will have to pay salaries that are comparable to those that are paid in the open market. One will have to uplift these people and not put them in different categories.

A locomotive driver and a steam engine driver do exactly the same work, but if they are from different population groups they are paid different salaries. This is one of the issues that the hon the Minister will have to look at and get rid of.

There are many more examples within the SATS that can be debated. Many discriminatory laws are applied within the SATS and one will have to get rid of them. They have to go if we want a better country which all of our people can live in and appreciate.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Klipspruit West who has preceded me spoke about discrimination on the SATS. I want to say to him that we also have been calling for the removal of discrimination on the SATS for a long, long time. I personally have been doing it since 1980, and it is with an immense amount of pleasure that I am able today to congratulate the hon the Minister as well as the SATS on the fact that there is no official discrimination on the SATS as we stand here today. There is no discrimination on commuter trains, no discrimination on the SAA and no discrimination on the mainline services of the SA Railways. I asked the question specifically at the joint committee meeting and I find it very heartening indeed that that is the case.

The hon member for Primrose challenged me on a little inflationary foreign exchange problem which I am quite happy to talk about. Some nine years ago in 1980 when the rand bought $1,30, nobody would have thought that by 1989, only nine years later, the rand would only buy about 40 American cents.

Under those circumstances 24c for a rand in 12 years’ time sounds actually like a pretty good buy and that is the way I tend to see things because I actually do not think that the days of Rubicon speeches are over. I wish they were.

I would like to congratulate the staff of the SATS on their services for the past year and also thank them. I would like to single out the General Manager of the South African Airways in this regard because over the past two years—since he has been in the hot seat there—he has accomplished a very noteworthy turn-around in the situation. It appears that he is budgeting for an even better turn-around in this coming year. I think that should be noted.

It appears that this is to be the last Budget of the SATS to be presented to the South African Parliament. It is the closing of an era in which the Railways and Harbours and the South Africa Airways have played an enormous part in developing South Africa and, in fact, Southern Africa. With the increasing flow of road transport and the high standards of the roads in South Africa the strategic importance of the SATS has been reduced and it is no longer necessary that the State should continue to control this major transport organisation. Thus while the Bill recently passed in Parliament to turn the SATS into a public company does not accomplish privatisation I sincerely trust that this will be the ultimate effect and I would urge the Government to ensure that this effect is not too long delayed.

Do not let us make the mistake of thinking that the SATS was not profitable. They produce these figures showing that they have made losses or that they are budgeting to make losses but of course they are hiding their profits. In this coming year’s budget there is a hidden profit of R960 million—just short of a billion. This they are taking in depreciation over and above the normal depreciation which is running at something of the order of R500 million. So they are profitable.

What I greatly fear is that instead of identifying small, easily digested businesses to be privatised, the strategy has been to retain the SATS at its present enormous size, which makes it very difficult if not impossible for the private sector to acquire sufficient of an interest to ensure that the SATS is no longer a subsidiary of the State.

We have after all discussed privatisation for so long without seeing anything worthwhile happen, that one begins to despair that anything will happen and one doubts the bona fides of those who are responsible. Ultimately, of course, the hon the Minister must bear that responsibility not only for privatisation, but also for other sins and omissions.

This brings me to the matter mentioned by the hon member for Roodepoort, namely the foreign exchange losses and the Cross Committee Report. The report of the Cross Committee presents a very, very sad picture, and further, the report recently tabled by the Joint Committee on Public Accounts gives an indication of the scale of the inefficiencies. Hon members must please bear in mind that these are members of Parliament in a joint committee where the House of Assembly is represented by NP members who are in the majority—in other words the hon the Minister’s own colleagues. Let me quote from the conclusions of the joint committee in which they say:

1. (a) the SATS failed to establish timeously adequate administrative machinery to ensure efficient management of this risk and to exercise effective control over it;
2. (b) the facility in regard to Dollar/Rand exchange rate cover available from the South African Reserve Bank was largely unutilized;
3. (c) the accounting policy generally accepted for the accounting of exchange losses was not followed in compiling its financial statements; and
4. (d) considerable inadequacies regarding the timeous recording of the results of foreign exchange transactions entered into in the financial records of the SATS.

It is indeed a tale of woe and very serious accusations which are presented in that Fifth Report of the Joint Committee on Public Accounts.

While the prime responsibility rests with the management of the SATS, the ultimate responsibility for these losses rests with the hon the Minister. I understand that I was mistaken in blaming the Railway Commissioners for this debacle as I have been informed by them that their statutory duties do not include control of this type of function.

I apologise for having blamed them. The fact that they are not responsible, however, is patently the Government’s fault, and they certainly should be responsible for all the business activities of the SATS. To have the equivalent of a board of directors without proper and functional control is ridiculous. The ultimate result, of course, is that the SATS—and therefore, ultimately, the SA public—have lost R3,100 million. In fact, it is in excess of that figure, and if one looks at the Cross Committee Report, one finds that the losses were R3,134 million—an incredible sum of money.

Talking of increases in expenses which we are going to have to pay as a result of these losses, we must also note that there has been an increase in tariffs, which the hon the Minister proudly announced will average only 8,7%. He goes on to say that the increase is much lower than the rate of inflation. That, of course, is not true. I fear that the hon the Minister is misleading this Committee and the nation. I say this because on 1 November last year SAA fares were increased, and on 1 December all other tariffs were increased by approximately 9%. Thus the cumulative increase is in fact the best part of 18% in the past few months, and if that is interpolated to be over a year, it would be considerably more. Therefore the increases in the SATS in the past few months have been considerably greater than the rate of inflation.

The effect of this on the SA economy as a whole will be inflationary in the extreme. Virtually every commodity is transported at one stage or another, so virtually every commodity will have to be increased in price. This is also, of course, true of the petrol price, which will also drive inflation up, and the whole vicious circle gains a swift upward kick from this budget.

The hon the Minister is ultimately the man who has to take the responsibility for this. He takes the responsibility for the forex losses, and with his other hat on as Minister of the Department of Transport he has to be responsible for the absolute debacle that is currently occurring over the toll road situation, particularly at Mooi River. The hon member for Klipspruit West also mentioned the problems relating to toll roads in his area.

Ministerial responsibility is a very clear principle. It is a matter of the convention that demands the resignation of a Minister who is responsible not only for the general policy of his department but also for the specific actions of his officials. I am grateful for an article in last Sunday’s Sunday Star, which was written by the hon member for Johannesburg North, for a couple of examples of this.

A certain Thomas Dugdale, a British Minister in the early 1950s, resigned merely because an application lay on the desk of one of his senior civil servants for a long period causing the applicant a considerable amount of inconvenience. We had the recent example when Lord Carrington resigned as a result of the Falklands invasion. He was not responsible for that invasion. Then there was the Japanese Minister of Defence who resigned 10 years ago when two military aircraft collided in mid-air. He had no personal involvement in the incident but the convention demanded his resignation.

It is in that spirit that I believe we should demand the resignation of the hon the Minister of Transport Affairs. I want to tell him that I have nothing against him personally but I believe that the convention of parliamentary and ministerial control is such that he has to carry the can for this debacle which has happened within the SATS. Therefore I believe he should resign.

There is another matter that I had not intended to speak on but I must draw it to the attention of this Committee. About 10 minutes ago I received a very urgent message saying: “Please can you help. The SATS have closed down part of a Northern Transvaal line and now there has been rioting and the police have moved in with teargas. It is a total disaster. Over 5 000 commuters are affected”.

A colleague of mine immediately phoned through to Pretoria to find out what the story was and I understand it is a commuter line from Belle Ombre to Hammanskraal, Kekana, Bosplaas, Gammabaan, Pienaarsrivier and McKenzie. I understand that this commuter service has been closed down by the SATS with very little notice and that the commuters are now being told that they must use the bus service. Apparently they have been told that there are two reasons for this close-down. One is that there are no coaches available and that the SATS are having to use mainline coaches and the other is that it is uneconomic.

Sir, all commuter services are uneconomic and we all know that. It is the Government’s duty to subsidise them and it is the hon the Minister’s duty to provide sufficient subsidies for the SATS to continue its services.

I also understand that the difference in tariff between the commuter train and the bus that they are now going to have to use is the following: For a 31 day ticket it will cost them R25 per month by train and for a 26 day concession by bus it is going to cost them R40! We are approaching a doubling of the amount they are going to have to pay per month. What is more, the train service is far more convenient for them as it picks them up fairly close to their residential areas whereas to catch the buses they have to move some considerable distance. I believe the hon the Minister should give that his attention as soon as possible.

There is another matter I want to discuss with the hon the Minister and that is an expense described as being the “Office of the Minister and the SA Transport Services’ Board”. Their estimated expenditure for the financial year we are in, is R2,38 million and for the coming year it is R3,09 million! This is the hon the Minister’s expense and that of his office and the Railway Commissioners. They are increasing their expenses by no less than 29,83%, which is almost 30%, in one year! That comes to a total of R710 000 extra. I want further details of this from the hon the Minister because I was unable to get these figures from the General Manager. When I asked him for them he said that he had no control whatsoever over this account and he said: “We just receive the figure and we pay.” So I think we deserve an answer from the hon the Minister as to what the situation is. Three million rand is not a large sum in terms of the overall Budget but I very greatly doubt how productive this expense is for the SATS.

Another matter on which I would like an answer from the hon the Minister is in relation to the pension position of the SATS. We know we are moving towards privatisation. Last year the hon the Minister informed us that he had ordered an actuarial report. It was long overdue; the previous one—which was not a very good one—had been in the previous decade. I want to know what result has been achieved from this actuarial report. Did the hon the Minister have it done and what was the result? Is there an enormous problem in funding the pensions of the SATS employees?

I think that is all I have time to handle at this stage. I will get on to the next section of my speech when we discuss the schedules.

Mr Chairman, when I heard that I had to speak after the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central I said to myself that he would certainly deal with all the controversial issues so I had better deal with something else— if there is anything else left for me to deal with.

I want to say to the hon member for Klipspruit West that one should rather be late than “the late”! I believe the delays are the result of extra safety checks that are now being implemented at all our airports. Minor malfunctions, which are accepted internationally, are no longer allowed on the SAA. Therefore the hon member should not get upset if his flight leaves a little late because he will get home in one piece.

Today is a historic day for South Africa and for South West Africa in that Namibia’s Pretoria-sponsored interim government handed over power to the South African governor yesterday. This is the start of a phased withdrawal by South Africa and the first step towards UN-supervised independence.

I do hope we will still provide that country with whatever transport and other services it might require, not free of charge but maybe at an agreed fee. The SATS plays a major role in providing transport in the sub-Saharan region. I will come back to this.

I want now to look at the Budget. Any increase in tariffs in any sector is unpopular, more so in public transport because those who are the hardest hit are the less affluent people of the country. They will have to face the ripple effect of these increases which will affect every commodity including basic foodstuffs.

I believe the increases in the Budget introduced by the hon the Minister of Transport Affairs on 22 February 1989 were somewhat softened, because they have successfully been kept considerably lower than the expected inflation rate for 1989.

It is true that the SATS do not operate in isolation from the South African economy. The increase in the price of petrol early this year and the more expensive electricity also mean greater expenditure for the SATS, which has to be recovered in some way or other to make the books balance. In addition to these increases the effect of the staff salary increases granted recently did not help to balance the books. However, I welcome the staff salary increases, because they will help the staff to make ends meet.

In his Budget Speech the hon the Minister said, in dealing with prospects for 1989, that it was foreseen that the economy would cool off in this financial year. The reasons given were the expected decline in real consumer spending, a higher rate of inflation, the effect of certain control measures and the pressure on the Republic from abroad.

I want to deal with this “pressure from abroad.” In no way should we bow to pressure from abroad. I have always said, and I say it again today, that the problems in our country can only be solved by South Africans. There is no magic formula to solve South Africa’s political and constitutional problems, least of all sanctions and disinvestments which have already proved to be counter-productive. I believe the key factor for this lies in the intellectual predominance of ideas which will result in society adhering to a set of values and norms which gain the respect of most people, including essentially the Government.

Individual freedom is attained in social life when the ideas favourable to freedom gain intellectual predominance over other ideas. In most cases it is the fundamental ideas and values of a society which dictate its fundamental form. Freedom cannot be imposed mechanistically from above by a government or parliament. It takes more than the stroke of a pen to implement a successful movement towards freedom. It is an evolutionary process which requires time.

I therefore want to appeal to the hon the Acting State President and the hon the Leader of the NP this afternoon to put the wheels in motion to work towards this goal if it has not already been done. I believe the Government must rid itself of its fears, for almost all fears fizzle out. In the end about 80% of all fears are non-existent and only 20% remain.

Like the hon member for Glenview I want to place on record my sincere thanks and appreciation to the hon the Minister and the top management of the SATS for appointing a South African Indian, Mr Moonsamy Chetty, as the station master at Winkelspruit on the Natal South Coast. I am trying to pronounce the name “Winkelspruit” in Afrikaans for the benefit of my colleagues in the CP.

Recently another South African Indian, Mr Naseem Mahomedy, was appointed by the SATS as its first Indian pilot. I believe he will be in the flight deck of a Jumbo jet by the middle of next month. I appeal to the hon the Minister to continue carrying on in this direction. It will all help to lessen the pressure from abroad.

This is the last time that we will take part in a debate such as this one before the SATS is registered under the Companies Act as a public company with the State as the sole shareholder for the time being. Later shares will be sold to public investors and employees of the SATS. I must warn that this will happen when the SATS makes a profit. If there is no profit there will be no takers and—most important of all—no jobs. That is the axe that will be hanging over the management’s head and those of the thousand or more senior staff members who opted to give up the security of tenure and who could now be fired at will.

I said I was coming back to transport in the sub-Saharan region. A more efficient transport network in sub-Saharan Africa would benefit South Africa and the soon to be privatised South African Transport Services. Africa has 93 000 km of railway line of which 42 000 km or 45,1% is in Southern Africa. Only 10% of the 16 countries south of the equator possess commercial harbours and the entire subcontinent is served by only 15 harbours of note. Six of those are in South Africa. I believe South Africa’s position at the hub of Southern Africa’s transport system is the country’s most powerful tool in overcoming political differences. We must continue to assist all countries in the sub-Saharan region.

The question I am going to pose to the hon the Minister may be a difficult one for him to answer during the course of his speech later. I would like to know how many of the SATS’s trucks and passenger carriages and trains are in African countries.

South Africa’s position at the hub of Southern Africa’s transport system is the country’s most powerful tool in overcoming political differences. More than trade tendencies and labour links, it is South Africa’s sophisticated transport system, strategies and routes that its neighbour needs.

I want to move on to the next part of my speech concerning the conservation of our stations. It is a tribute to an era when men built things to last. The old heavily subsidised South African Railways and Harbours spared no expense to ensure that its buildings were maintained in pristine condition. Today many of South Africa’s railway stations are among our best architectural links with the past.

It is therefore unfortunate that the SATS have apparently begun to demolish many suburban stations systematically. Automation in SATS has done away with the need for local stationmasters and staff and the buildings have become an expensive burden and the haunts of vagrants and vandals. Taxpayers have long had to foot the bill for the railway subsidies and are no doubt glad to know that the SATS want to be rid of the responsibility for all these old buildings. Yet it should be asked whether the railway authorities had really tried other alternatives before they called in the demolishes.

The latest to fall to the demolisher’s hammer has been the gracious old Sea View Station building. Surely it could have been put to some practical commercial use, viz as shops or community centres. Durban’s workshop complex has become a widely praised symbol of how old railway buildings can be recycled, and how the charm of another era can enrich the present one in a practical and profitable way. The workshop is, moreover, reported to be a far greater business success than many of the modern buildings in Durban’s central business district. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I am honoured to have the opportunity to follow on the hon member for Umzinto. However, I will not comment on his speech but would rather like to react to the speech of the hon member for Klipspruit West. Tlie hon member said that SA airports are named after leaders of the NP. I should like to point out to him that Mr Louis Botha and Gen Smuts were never members of the NP. They were Prime Ministers of SA and the airports of this country are named after the Prime Ministers of South Africa.

I would also like to thank the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central for the stand he took on discrimination in SATS. I must admit that it was quite unexpected. I never expected him to express such views, and I thank him for that.

As far as the rand-dollar exchange rate which the hon member referred to is concerned, I would just like to draw his attention to the fact that since his party has come into being, they have only deteriorated. If that is the set pattern I would also agree with him that a buy of 24 American cents for a Rand would be an extremely good buy especially if the new tri-headed dragon party that he is a member of would make any political progress. The hon member’s mania for taking points of order has now expressed itself in his call for the resignation of Ministers as well. I suggest to the hon member that he may think his only chance of getting into Government will be if everybody else resigns.

*To turn to the debate which is occupying us here now, I want to say that it is a privilege to be able to take part. The Legal Succession to the South African Transport Services Act has already been agreed to by Parliament. SATS is on the threshold of an exciting new era of effective service to the transport industry of South Africa. The Appropriation gives evidence of optimism, initiative and zeal as regards the challenges of the future. The report of the SATS Board projects a positive spirit. This report points out a few very important aspects in connection with personnel and personnel motivation. It is linked squarely to the management system. The new SATS group management system which is in full swing is already showing results. It has the particular effect that personnel are motivated positively and an element of sound competition which is starting to take root among the five business units can be noticed in the results produced. Spin-offs from this, as well as from the implementation of the South African Transport Services Conditions of Service Act, Act 41 of 1988, are that a remarkable period of labour peace has been experienced for the past year. A new image is developing among SATS workers and Transport Services itself.

SATS is a large employer, according to certain standards possibly the fourth largest company in the Republic of South Africa. Labour peace and a motivated, happy and satisfied work force in this large undertaking is of immeasurable value to the Republic of South Africa and a very large source of job creation. In spite of the fact that personnel decreased by 12 955 units during the past year, it is equally true that the quality and status of many remaining posts have increased greatly. That is why the statement may be made with justification that the provision and creation of job opportunities will increase in quality continually. Hand in hand with this one can visualise that remuneration packages will keep pace and that through this SATS will make a perpetually growing contribution to the improvement of the quality of life of workers and people in the Republic of South Africa.

SATS has top quality personnel. To maintain and develop this state of affairs, great care is taken to obtain the right person for a position. Potential employees are selected scientifically in order to determine their suitability for posts. In this regard a psychometric determination of a person’s abilities and aptitude is done, the results of which are supplementary to a specifically directed employment interview.

In this way it is ensured that the person involved may grow and develop in the work situation as well as laying a foundation for his meaningful promotion in this organisation. After being employed and during the person’s career he is exposed to various programmes to promote his job preparedness. In this way for instance he receives training and retraining at a training college or a branch college which may be compared with the best in the world. This training covers a broad front and includes specific technical and non-technical facets. Another facet for example is the training of apprentices, the high standard and thoroughness of which is well known nationwide. Time is spent on honing an employee’s skills as far as management and supervision are concerned. In this respect he is exposed to a series of relevant programmes which internationalise and build his expertise. He also acquires knowledge and expertise as regards finance, interpersonal skills, labour relations and client relations.

Great emphasis is laid on the academic progress of employees and all are encouraged and supported in improving themselves in this regard. Bursaries and training schemes on a full-time and part-time basis are available to increase the level of scholastic quality. Aid schemes for advanced tertiary training are available to make growth at this level possible too. SATS is certainly a leading organisation as regards the training and development of people.

The success which the department of labour relations has achieved during the past year deserves a mention. An example is the collective bargaining power which the Labour Board gives the employee as well as the employer and how this was used to reach a solution to the wage dispute in October 1988.

The process of renewal, the breath of fresh air discernible in SATS, is heightened by technological progress, the improvement of infrastructure and greater effectiveness. Examples of the these are the triple-deck container trucks for the transport of livestock which are still being tested. In addition there are the piggyback-truck and roadrail concepts, the 200-truck trains, signalling systems, safety performances and client service centres. As far as its personnel and infrastructure are concerned, SATS is prepared to be able to act most competitively in the deregulated transport market. I foresee that SATS personnel will become increasingly proud of being employees of this new company. It will be a privilege for many an employee to be in the service of such a company. People like being associated with success stories and in addition to have the opportunity of being shareholders, that means joint owners, in such a successful undertaking.

The Northern Cape region recently won a number of prizes to which I should like to refer. The Lombaard trophy for the best SATS marketing region in the Republic was won by this region. Mr Beyers Venter, the station master at Belmont, a small station in that region, was singled out as the best marketing station master of the region. The Northern Cape region also won the J P Hugo shield for operational safety performance and the operations division at De Aar won the safety shield for safety performance for category B areas in the Republic.

I take pleasure in referring to these examples as two of the railway stations which won prizes are situated in my constituency. I want to use this in support of the statement which I made in my speech because I know how SATS employees feel. I visit all SATS employees from all population groups at their places of work and note the attitudes prevailing there. I am proud that SATS personnel in the De Aar constituency form part of the new SATS image. I want to extend my congratulations to the personnel because they are working at this enthusiastically and because they furnish a great service.

At this stage I should like to appeal to the transport modus in SA to link initiative and inventiveness in order to evolve a plan to help the Department of Posts and Telecommunications in the distribution of post and printed news media in country districts. The Postmaster-General says in Die Transvaler of 23 February that Transport Services are no longer effective as regards the distribution of post. I want to endorse this. My people experience it. We cannot permit country districts to become further isolated because we can no longer have post, newspapers and periodicals delivered fast enough.

Mr Chairman, I further want to refer to the great contribution which SATS furnishes in the Southern African context to the economy of this region. We may speak with justification of a growing region and at the same time note the stabilising influence which SATS has on the area. I should like to draw the Committee’s attention to the fact that 8 000 SATS units, to the value of R700 million, are used by other railway services in Southern Africa. Further it is worth noting that in 1987 7 000 wagons and trucks plus 50 locomotives were hired out, which provided SATS with an income running to R180 million in 1985. During the 1987-88 financial year SATS transported goods with a mass of 3,6 million tons for Southern African states and earned R300 million in this way.

Maintenance work to aircraft of neighbouring states which was done at Jan Smuts airport generated an income of R3,1 million. R443 000 was earned through training the crews of foreign airlines.

SATS is recognised as a world leader on the various levels of transport and provides services such as track repairs and repairs to bridges after derailments, floods and collisions. Repairs to rolling stock are done and we are also leaders in the field of containerisation.

The two concepts of “trade” and “transport” have become practically synonymous. History has taught us this. That is why, with the enormous commercial potential of Southern Africa waiting to be exploited, the role to be played by SATS can hardly be overestimated. Of the 93 000 km of railway line in Africa, which the previous speaker also spoke about, 45% is in Southern Africa. We must make full use of the opportunity which we have with the available transport infrastructure and with its strategic importance to serve as the focal point of development in Southern Africa.

The flow of rail traffic between the RSA and its neighbouring countries, excluding Lesotho, takes place in terms of business agreements. SATS recognises the standpoint that assistance is given to the railway and harbour authorities of neighbouring countries if it is requested and when SATS is able to help. This assistance is furnished on a business footing. SATS is compensated for it. A deregulated transport market and the opportunity for competition can actually help SATS to play its part optimally in Southern Africa to our own direct and indirect advantage.

Mr Chairman, in the first place I am going to stick to the bread and butter issues affecting our people.

I wish to say something regarding the socioeconomic services of the SATS which involves the commuter services. This is one field which I feel is definitely going to be affected now that everybody is discussing cross-subsidisation. As we all know, South Africa is a developing country and is forced to provide essential transport services to the user who can ill afford the full economic services. The third class transport passenger is currently paying only about 38% of the total cost of providing these services. This loss has amounted to approximately R630 million, which is about 70% of the total loss.

The real reason for this—we know it is a fact—is low salaries and the fact that our people, through the Group Areas Act, live far from their places of work. As a result, commuter services are very important to us.

*Many dastardly acts have taken place in connection with these commuter services and it is a pity that we have to rake them up here again. It is a fact that these commuter services have become most unsafe for us recently. I would appreciate it if the hon the Minister could tell us whether this has recently—he probably intends telling me— been laid at the door of the South African Police. The lack of safety has resulted in our people being prepared to use Kombi taxis in preference to trains because their lives are in danger.

I should also like the hon the Minister to tell me— I would appreciate his telling us—how many of his conductors have been assaulted this year while they were trying to carry out their duties. The main reason why the passage of Kombi taxis to the cities has increased is the lack of safety of inter-city passengers. This has left the city with the problem of finding parking for these vehicles. It is of the utmost importance that this matter definitely be seen in this light.

In the past I asked the hon the Minister whether it would be possible to institute an intensive investigation as regards this problem which has not been successfully solved up to this point. I am certain the hon the Minister is aware of the great problem which has arisen there and I think that these problems’have also cropped up at his office. I put this request in the past as well, but up to this point nothing has come of it. We keep finding that people encounter that problems there from time to time.

I can do no other than to discuss the commuter service this afternoon. Our people make use of it and we suffer as a result. I have mentioned before that these trains do not stop long enough at the moment. Children going to school in the morning are trampled by other people but nothing is done about it.

A further problem regarding these trains is that dagga is smoked freely on them. No supervision can be carried out because the trains are chock-a-block. Something must be done about it. Raids are carried out but they are ineffectual because the trains are so full that one cannot move on them.

Barrier attendants have been withdrawn and vandals have taken over on stations. I should like to re-emphasize that the safety of our people is of paramount importance.

Another great problem is that people have to queue for hours at the end of the month to buy their tickets.

I should like the hon the Minister to tell me whether he knows about the two students who were recently murdered between Belhar and Bishop Lavis. This state of affairs cannot be tolerated.

†In his Budget Speech the hon the Minister also made mention of labour and personnel. In the Legal Succession to the South African Transport Services Bill it was indicated that upon the transition to the company the rights and obligations of the staff would not be affected. In a document that the hon the Minister gave us in 1987 or 1988 he outlined the policy that was adopted whereby the salaries and conditions of service of the various population groups were going to be brought in line with those of their White counterparts. In this particular document he gave us a fair explanation of how it would be brought about in five phases.

The question which I would like to ask with reference to this particular document which provides the deal for the non-White worker, is whether the hon the Minister is prepared to give an undertaking as to whether, when this new company takes over, this particular package deal will still be continued until all the discriminatory measures, about which we have complained in the past and which are indicated in his document, are eliminated.

In this particular package deal in the programme supplied by the hon the Minister, he has stated the programme for the equalisation of salaries and other service conditions which I think he has worked on to a certain extent, judging at the rate at which progress has been made I just want the assurance, however, that this particular package deal will remain and the members will benefit from it.

There are still discrepancies regarding the medical benefits for the White, Coloured and Indian employees, as well as regarding travel concessions. Is the hon the Minister still going to keep them as part of the deal?

The hon the Minister in his speech also spoke about the very important processes of privatisation and deregulation. We know, of course, that the whole process of privatisation and deregulation depends on the willingness of the entrepreneurs in South Africa to take part in meeting the challenge, as well as the availability of capital. We are however aware of constraints on the market, but having read this whole document before me, I came to a section by a certain Maria Rehner. The USA, of course, has been the forerunner in the field of deregulation and privatisation. She states:

Mr Chairman, as a regular user of the SAAI want to put a complaint to the hon the Minister and he must please convey it to the hon the Minister of Law and Order. It concerns the latest total onslaught of a sticker brigade which operates at all our major airports. This group crowds all the entrances and when one gets there, they distract one’s attention and at the same time stick something on anything that one might be carrying without any regard to texture, shape or size. Anything gets that sticker.

It is quite apparent—I have observed this very carefully—that the objective must be to get rid of an excess of promotional material which I think the hon the Minister of Law and Order must have left over from the 75th birthday celebrations because every article gets a sticker but is not inspected in any way whatsoever.

As far as durability is concerned, the police certainly got a good bargain because these stickers are virtually indestructible. I have had several on my luggage. I could not remove them. One can recognise any user of SAA now through the stickers on their briefcases, handbags, duffel coats and rucksacks. Even bunches of flowers or smoked snoek parcels get these stickers. I guess they will have a marginal effect of security because I am sure that any limpet mine would be rendered totally useless by these stickers because they would certainly stop them from fragmenting. I do not think many people actually get scared to death by a muffled pop in their vicinity.

I also wish to refer to the controversy surrounding the foreign exchange dealings. While it has been pointed out in the report that there were book-keeping practices which were not as good as they should have been—one agrees that they should be rectified—it is my contention that blaming the management of SATS for the so-called losses is a fallacious argument and that the real culprit is in fact getting away.

The argument is not as to how the SATS could have prevented these losses, but who was responsible for the drop in the value of the currency. The SATS had no control over that. They did not enter into the foreign exchange dealings as a speculative participant only to get their fingers burnt. They were in legitimate business which they had to conduct in foreign currency.

It is the Government of this country that has brought this upon us and the real losers are the people—collectively. Whether the Reserve Bank and therefore the general body of taxpayers carried the losses or whether this bill was footed by the SATS users through higher tariffs, it would actually boil down to exactly the same thing because one cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, separate the one from the other. In the end the SATS input into the economy is on such a scale that one simply cannot distinguish between the SATS users and taxpayers. Eventually it all becomes a matter of book entries and juggling with figures, because these losses could not have been evaded in respect of the economy or the people as a whole.

*If the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central has sacked the hon the Minister, I think we had better reappoint him. We might be better advised to sack the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning and perhaps also the hon the State President if we have to blame somebody.

The hon member for Primrose also raised some dust about the NDM press report in which we said that we objected to the increased tariffs for commuters. He then tried to relate it to hon members of the PFP who opposed the legislation. He said that, if the new legislation had not been passed, one could not have got rid of crosssubsidisation. There are three points in that connection. Firstly, the hon the Minister of Finance could have made good the losses at any stage, even under the old dispensation. We did not require new legislation for this.

The second point is, as the hon member himself said, that it is the poor, who are the main users of commuter services, who are already hardest hit by inflation, etc. The position at present is that third class commuters receive a lower subsidy than first class commuters as regards every journey. It is once again a case of the poor becoming poorer and the distribution going the other way.

Thirdly, the hon member for Primrose must also know that the opposition to the legislation was not actually based on the division of SATS into two components but the point at issue was chiefly the control which was being removed from Parliament. I am obviously in agreement on that. As long as SATS is wholly owned by the State, I would say that control should remain in the hands of Parliament. We request the hon the Minister that we negotiate for far more time than is available for discussions on Eskom for example.

We discussed privatisation in the joint committee. I think that the other role of Parliament should be the ability to discuss policy as it affects privatisation. Pipelines, harbours and operating railways as such, for example, are not good candidates for privatisation because we shall merely be changing a public monopoly into a private one. Actual candidates are obviously bus services, roads, construction and other miscellaneous services which SATS could positively distribute among a number of smaller owners.

Mr Chairman, with reference to the hon member for Greytown’s allegation that the losses in revenue are the fault of the State, I should like to know from him who is responsible for the losses in the private sector? Is it also the State? This reminds me of the saying that all men must marry, because there are certain things one cannot blame the Government for.

Red Riding Hood!

I am not going to react further to the hon member for Greytown’s attempt at humour. I prefer to turn to something more serious, namely the fine effort by the SATS to go ahead with privatisation at this stage. Last week the SATS took the initiative in respect of privatisation when the Legal Succession to the South African Transport Services Bill was dealt with in the House. This paved the way for a new approach to the involvement of the State in the economy of the country.

At this stage there is very great appreciation for everyone in the SATS who was involved in the conversion of this enormous undertaking into a structure which can function in independent business units. I want to express the hope that this is only the beginning of a totally new spirit of enterprise in our country. A very great task rests on the shoulders of the hon the Minister, the hon the Deputy Minister and the officials of the SATS to do this pioneering work and eventually to assist in establishing more widespread enthusiasm in the community.

The time is ripe for the Government to concentrate in the main on its State function by means of a drastic curtailment of its obligations in the economy of the country. However, this means that citizens will seize the opportunity to harness their creativity and ability to innovate to the utmost in order to establish a spirit of entrepreneurship in all spheres of society. The State has two functions, namely a State function and a non-State function.

The State wields the power of the sword and is the only cohesive force in society that can maintain authority and the law in the community. The dual character of the State, namely power and the law is not unlimited. Only when the correct ratio exists between power and the law can a society develop in which the State carries the sword to enforce the law without assailing the sovereignty of the other cohesive forces in society, while at the same time seeing to it that every cohesive force recognises the sovereignty of other cohesive forces and each carries out its responsibilities and realises its specific vocation.

This also applies to the economy of our country. It is only the Government which has the authority to lay down the powers of the respective cohesive forces in the Statute Book, as happened with the said legislation.

The Government also has a non-State function. It is very important for us to consider what this really involves, because this is where problems frequently crop up. This involves the protection of the non-State interests and the welfare of the nation. For that reason it is also necessary for the Government sometimes to have the foresight to initiate certain tasks, as has happened in the RS A, because this is in the general interests of the State and civilisation. In the early years of this century the authorities started undertakings such as the Transport Services and other State corporations in South Africa. This was the right thing to do. During times of social upheaval there is always a need for greater involvement of the Government in the economy. Unfortunately it is also true that an inflexibility exists in respect of the reduction of State involvement when the crisis has passed. For that reason it is gratifying that the Government now realises that the time has come for it to reduce its involvement in the economy and we are grateful that the Transport Services is one of the first spheres which is being led to be independent of the State.

The Government must always evaluate its involvement in its non-State function on the basis of what is in the interests of a mature degree of civilisation; otherwise it can lead to a regression in civilisation and dependency on the State.

It is, however, not only the Government which must see to it that it does not become trapped in the vicious circle of a welfare state. The individual himself has a responsibility to guard against his socialistic calls for State generosity, the so-called “hand-outs” by means, inter alia, of subsidising, leading to a welfare state.

Eventually this can lead to a strong measure of totalitarianism because Graham and Clarke say the following in their book The New Enlightenment-.

In the long run central planning of any economy is fatal to individual freedom. A developing country like the RSA has to deal with additional factors which result in the Government to a great extent having to become involved in the creation of infrastructure and the supplying of services, particularly with its large Third-World component of the population, but when the time comes when the undertakings can wholly or partially be transferred to the private sector, it must not hesitate to do so in a responsible manner.

Mr Chairman, I now return to the individual. The employee of the State is frequently hesitant to accept the idea of privatisation with its associated free-market principles, because this means change and therefore uncertainty for him. This is understandable when a system which has developed progressively over the years, is now reversed and one has to face the unknown.

It is particularly difficult when certain groups like the Official Opposition confuse the worker with emotional disinformation and continue to propagate socialism. Every employee of the SATS therefore has a task to perform. The convincing must be done by getting the system to work.

Madson Pirey said that privatisation was addictive. Once one has started implementing it, the success achieved makes one want to do more. The best justification for this is that it works. We must move away from a strictly regimented community. Centuries ago Thomas Aquinas pointed out the harm in this and added the following: “The cause of the wealth of nations is human creativity.” According to him this human creativity is also “extinguished within a person in a system of excessive bureaucratic centralisation”.

In an article in Black Enterprise it is said: “South Africa is in the throes of an entrepreneurial revolution.” We must exploit this. Most developed and many developing countries in the world are already doing so. The ecstasy engendered by the establishment of a welfare state, which is one of the greatest evils of the twentieth century, has waned.

The original concepts of individual freedom, as formulated by John Locke, finked to the free-market ideas of Adam Smith, have come strongly to the fore. This new philosophy of the New Enlightenment on which Thatcherism is based has brought a re-evaluation of the role of the individual and the balance between the State and the individual, with emphasis on the responsibility and the freedom of the individual.

During the Second World War in the West and particularly in Britain the belief became established that the State could serve the general community better by means of the redistribution of wealth. In contrast with the decline in the British economy before Mrs Thatcher turned it around, there was phenomenal growth and recovery in a war-ravaged Germany because one of the greatest leaders in Germany, Konrad Adenauer, and his Cabinet member Ludwig Erhardt based the rebuilding of Germany on a policy of participation in growth and not on redistribution—probably because there was nothing left to redistribute in any case.

The population of South Africa is expectantly watching the further course of privatisation in the Department of Transport. In the not too distant future we will look back on the pioneering work being done here.

Mr Chairman, it is a pleasure to speak after the hon member for Kempton Park. I just want to inform her briefly that it is because of the circumstances in our country that our people, who fall into a lower income group, experience this problem daily. The vast majority of South Africans are not asking for hand-outs. It is as a result of an unacceptable political system—because equal opportunities are denied to us—that a large section of our population receives a lower income. Subsidies will therefore be necessary until the large backlogs have been made up.

I am going to concentrate on the SATS’s Brown Book—on the details of projects included in the capital budget for 1989-90. This is important to me, and I should like to thank the hon the Minister for writing to me in connection with upgrading our station in Bloemfontein. We now have another problem, however. My colleagues have said that the station is being used to a greater extent now because more of our people try to commute. We now have the problem, however, that the throwing open of trains has meant, for example, that more of our people have to stay overnight at specific stations. What has happened in practice, is that, as the hon member for Klipspruit West mentioned, when the train pulls in next to the platform, our people are right opposite our waiting rooms. The Whites then get off at their waiting rooms. I want to congratulate the hon the Minister on having the signboards removed, but the waiting rooms are still closed; they are locked. This causes the problem that these waiting rooms are underutilised and I think that opening these waiting rooms will result in a great saving for the SATS.

I asked for upgrading in Bloemfontein. I want the hon the Minister to indicate precisely what this upgrading is going to entail. It is very important to me to have a general idea of what is going to take place.

Further, I should like to enquire about item 70 on p 10. The intermediate diesel depot at Bloemfontein is to be enlarged. I want to know whether the diesel is being stored for vehicles or locomotives.

I also want to know how many of our people are undergoing training courses as stokers at present. Have our people done good work up to now and is the hon the Minister satisfied with the standard of our stokers after their training? I also want to ask the hon the Minister to make more posts available to our people because I believe that we will be an important factor in future, particularly in the development of Southern Africa. Some of our people could perhaps be employed in other categories, as train drivers, etc.

What also interests me very much is that a new automatic exchange is going to come into operation in Bloemfontein. I want to know whether the old system was faulty and whether its replacement by the new system could not perhaps have been postponed until the next financial year. Was it justified in this time of economic problems?

On p 15, under item 120, provision is made for spray-painting booths. I want to ask the hon the Minister whether these spray-painting booths were used when the carriages which are being sent to Australia were rebuilt or restored. At the same time I want to know what costs were related to the rebuilding and restoration of these carriages and what our profit was after selling them to the Australians. I also want to know whether there are any more orders to be carried out, because the income will mean a great deal to us in exchange for the loss of those carriages.

It is also important that the hon the Minister informs me about the following. I saw on television that a new type of carriage is being built in South Africa. I think it will be an aluminium carriage, if I remember correctly. The hon the Minister must please tell me what the advantages will be to us as commuters, particularly in the event of a collision. Will our people be safer in these new carriages? This is of cardinal importance to me, because I gathered that these carriages will be lighter and will cut costs of electricity as well as diesel where this is still being used.

Next, I want to refer to item 193—“Upgrading of vehicle test centres”, on page 24 of the relevant document. It is also important for the hon the Minister to tell me where these centres are situated in the regions, and what this specific upgrading comprises. I appreciate this step, because it means that the S A Transport Services want to ensure that the standard of their vehicles remains very high. I want to ask the hon the Minister whether any of our people are involved in providing services at these test centres.

Then, I want to refer to item 210—“Additions to and replacement of harbour craft” on page 27 of the relevant document. I want to ask the hon the Minister how long these vessels had been used, and how the present vessels compare with the old ones. This is very important to us, because if we want to make an investment, we must be very sure that we are investing in a good vessel. I know that the SATS would have made sure of this. I just want to know whether these vessels will have the same lifespan as the old ones because they are modem vessels, and whether they perhaps have other disadvantages.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for De Aar, who was one of the previous speakers, referred to the tremendous delays in the delivery of mail by the SATS. I want to associate myself with those ideas and make an appeal to the hon the Minister to clarify the matter during this debate.

The hon member for Roodepoort asked for an effective accounting by the Government and the hon the Minister for the huge foreign exchange losses suffered by the SATS. He quoted figures to support these statements. The fact that the hon member for Primrose saw fit to try to condone this is beyond me. I think he either did not understand the Cross Report or he was deliberately trying to distract attention from losses totalling more than a billion rands as a result of speculation on the foreign exchange market. What is more, the Cross Report disclosed that transactions of this type did not diminish as it became clear that heavy losses were being suffered in this way.

The contrary occurred—after 1982 the transactions progressively increased in number until they reached a peak in the third quarter of the 1984, and that level was maintained until the debt standstill towards the end of 1985. At the peak of these activities in 1984 a total of 1 261 transactions were completed in the fourth quarter of that year alone, while the period within which foreign exchange was bought and sold became progressively shorter. By 1984 the majority of cases had occurred within a question of days. The Cross Committee condemned this level of activity in the foreign exchange market and found that this increase in transactions since 1982 indicated a change of policy since 1982, when a more conservative policy was still being pursued and longterm forward cover positions were being adopted. By 1984 and 1985 the SATS was trading actively on the market in order to make profits on exchange movements. The present General Manager of the SATS says this was done to restrict losses. To us, however, and then we are putting it very mildly, it seems like gross negligence and a complete absence of sound judgment on the part of the person responsible. To speculate with money one receives from the taxpayer and the consumer on the highly uncertain exchange market in an effort to restrict losses resulting from exchange fluctuations, while refusing an excellent “insurance policy” with a low premium in the form of cover by the Reserve Bank, is unpardonable.

Owing to the great exposure to losses as a result of fluctuations and the tremendous extent of the liability of the SATS in respect of loan obligations one would at least—as the Cross Report in fact found—have expected, given the decision to enter the speculative sector of the market, that a policy in respect of activities to restrict the risk of losses in this area would have been established on the highest level within the framework of the SATS. One would have expected that clear guidelines of policy in this regard would have been laid down and monitored on an on-going basis. As the report indicates, one would also have expected the officials charged with the administration of these risks to have worked under strict financial supervision.

What were the finds of the Cross Report in this connection? I am quoting two sections on page 23 and 24:

1. (A) there was no formally documented policy as regards the management of the foreign currency risk exposure in SATS throughout the period;
2. (B) there is no evidence to suggest that those involved in the day to day activities relating to the foreign exchange market, were subject to any direction or control in terms of a mandate to operate according to laid down maximum exposure or risk taking.

It appears, furthermore, that only four officials were involved here. They were responsible for cash management, domestic capital market activities, foreign loans and exchange management. They had more or less no clerical assistance. This is not hearsay; it is one of the factual findings of the Cross Committee.

The Cross Committee also found that these four officials had declared that senior management were aware of their problems in regard to staff, but that several requests for additional staff were ignored by senior management.

What we find striking is that the present General Manager subsequently denied this finding and complaints from the officials before the Joint Committee on Public Accounts. On page 6 of the report of the joint committee the General Manager states that the overseas division of three persons in 1983 grew to 10 persons in 1985.

The question still remains, however: Is the Cross Committee wrong or is the General Manager wrong about the actual number of staff in this division? Who is telling the truth?

The fact of the matter, however, and nowhere is this disputed, was that there was no question of the supervision and control one expects with exchange activities of this magnitude. In fact, from the findings of the Cross Committee on the accounting policy adopted one gets the impression that the true position was concealed from Parhament, because the losses were not reflected in statements at the time they were suffered and when Parhament had to be informed about them. We first had to catch them out. First that had to happen, and then we had the Cross Committee.

The present General Manager says on page 8 of the report of the joint committee:

He went on to say:

What was the result of these transactions? A loss of more than R1 billion in respect of trading activities, and a further loss of more than R2 billion as a result of the depreciation of the rand against the currencies in which the loans were taken up. It therefore means a total loss of R3 billion plus, or rather three thousand million rands.

If one considers these matters, one shudders at the thought that this is probably the last occasion on which Parliament is still able to exercise its parliamentary control.

If one considers the facts, as reflected in the Cross Report, one shudders at the implication that parliamentary control is going to be removed. This is just one more example of the incompetence of the Government. It would simply be doing South Africa a favour if it disappeared from the scene.

I could not find the passage, but I recall the present hon Minister of Transport Affairs thinking fit to say last year that the man in the street did not understand the proper value of money. I think I am quoting him more or less correctly. An amount of R3 000 million! The ordinary man thinks this is a great deal of money, but to the hon the Minister and to this Government it is probably petty change.

We see ex-Minister Hendrik Schoeman is appearing more and more frequently at public functions and on the SATV.

So what?

I shall tell hon members what. We know what this type of behaviour by a former politician usually means. We want to tell him that he retired from politics not a moment too soon, and he must not even consider coming back to this exchange debacle. [Interjections.] Only his retirement prevented him from being personally charged here today with extreme incompetence as a Minister. It would do him good to disappear quietly from the scene and to hope that in time the voters forget the thousands of millions of rands which disappeared down the proverbial drain during his time. However the Government in its entirety must accept coresponsibility for this debacle. That is why we shall be voting against this Appropriation Bill.

In all fairness I want to refer to the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central—if he was correctly reported in the Press—and his efforts to make the Transport Services Board co-responsible for what happened in this connection. They have no executive powers and act merely in an advisory capacity. I do not think that would be fair criticism.

In the time at my disposal I cannot allow the opportunity of referring to the hon member for Primrose to pass. He is priceless once he gets going. He appealed to us not to discuss the errors of the past. The hon member said we must not talk about the errors of the past. I know it hurts, but we shall discuss the historically proven mistakes of this Government until the voters accord it the rejection it deserves. [Interjections.] I know it hurts. [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member may proceed.

Mr Chairman, I know it hurts if one talks about the mistakes of the past, because this Government’s record is that it inherited political stability which it converted into political instability in a record time. This Government inherited economic stability and relative economic growth in relatively peaceful conditions in this country and converted it into economic chaos in record time. [Interjections.] We know the mistakes of the past hurt. Before the CP was established this Government inherited a South Africa in which the activities of the ANC were confined to the minimum, and in record time it succeeded in allowing the internal wing of the ANC, the UDF, to grow into a real threat, with more than 600 affiliated organisations.

What was the hon member for Primrose asking? He wanted the CP to indicate what it was going to do from the present day until the year 2001.1 shall tell him what we are going to do. The CP will continue to bring the mistakes of the past to the attention of the voters; we shall ultimately reject this Government at the polls … [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I think some hon members might recall that I mentioned in this House that I am a South African and not an Indian in political or national terms. Not so long ago, when I was at the Madras railway station, some money was peeping out of my back pocket. A gentleman tapped me on the shoulder and said to me: “Sir, it is obvious that you are a foreigner. Will you please put your money away otherwise you will go back to your country and say all the Indians are rocks.”

If a person goes to any SATS office—one of those tall buildings—in South Africa, he will find that the menial workers will be Black or Brown.

However, when one goes to the middle management or executive level one would think that one is living in Europe because there is nary a Brown or a Black face to be seen. The hon the Minister owes an explanation to the country—to South Africans—for this rather sad state of affairs. We realize that South Africa has moved away from “baasskap”, but we are told that South Africa must move away from racism. This must be translated into reality in every sphere of life in South Africa. We do not merely want to hear sweet and pious words. We want those words to be translated into positive action. Nobody can tell me that there are no qualified Brown and Black people capable of filling posts at those levels. We have a large number of university graduates; we have men and women who have engineering skills, who are diplomates of business schools of management and if the hon the Minister finds he is unable to recruit staff he must tell me. I will get the staff for him—on a non-radal basis. I am not suggesting for one minute that any White man or woman should be deprived of his or her livelihood, but this must not be maintained merely—somebody is trying to form a political party for purists—for White purity.

There is another thing I would like to ask the hon the Minister to please do. The SATS has an abundant supply of water tankers. We need water tankers to convey water to certain people in Windmill Park and to certain people in Kraaifontein, where in an act of utter and callous barbarism, the drinking water supply has been cut off from the homes of decent, loyal South Africans and good human beings. Let the barbarians continue with their barbaric acts, but the people must get water. And if the water is cut off by municipalities, which are Fascist and Nazi in their outlook, the SATS can come to the rescue of the people and provide water.

You know, Sir, not even the savages in the jungle will deny water to another human being. Yet we have people in this country who want to do that kind of barbaric thing.

In South Africa we are constantly lamenting the fact that economic growth is limited. We are constantly warning ourselves that unless there is greater economic activity, the Black masses will not be able to rise economically and therefore social progress will be retarded and orderly political progress will be inhibited. However, what are we doing with the opportunities that exist on this African continent? India is selling rollingstock and locomotives to Africa. The Nigerian railways depend upon supplies from India, and so does the East African railway system. We in this country could be selling the rolling-stock and locomotives. The money could be coming to South Africa and work opportunities would be created for South Africans. If that uplifts this country economically, everybody would benefit, not just the Black or the Brown people. The White people will also make more money. However, what do we do? Because of the stupid system of apartheid which some barbarians want to re-enact, the economic opportunity for entering Africa is limited. I am not saying that it is denied, but it is limited.

I want to refer to one point made by my colleague, the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central. He called upon the hon the Minister of Transport Affairs to tender his resignation because of the very sad and unfortunate activities within his department. I, too, have the highest respect for the hon the Minister, but I suggest to him that he must not follow the bad example of some hon members of one of the Houses of this Parliament who have tom up conventions and trampled on traditions of Parliament. I ask this hon Minister to set an example to everyone else by following the traditions of Parliament and heeding its conventions and saying to the world: “The buck stops here. If things go wrong in my department, I will accept responsibility and therefore I will tender my resignation.” [Interjections.] If he does, it will be up to the hon the State President to decide whether he is going to accept that resignation or not. However, we need a return to the ordinary parliamentary decencies in this country so that the hon members of that House could be taught an object lesson in regard to what parliamentary decency is.

I want to deal for a moment with a purely parochial matter. I would like the hon the Minister to come to Durban where I will have the opportunity of showing him around and where he will see for himself the lack of proper commuter train services. There is a service to KwaMashu but it does not traverse—the hon the Deputy Minister can come along if the hon the Minister resigns; if the hon the Minister resigns I will be happy to welcome the hon the Deputy Minister. The railway system to Umlazi also does not traverse all the units of Umlazi. Chatsworth is reasonably catered for but only on the spine. Phoenix is not catered for at all because there is only one railway station with the result that it is not adequately used.

I would like to express a wish that Newlands West, the large new housing development which is taking place, will also be provided with a commuter service. I understand that it is in the planning stages at the present time but the planning should be accelerated.

Why do I ask for the additional commuter services for the people living in the suburbs of Durban? Most of them live in the suburbs far away from their places of work not out of choice but because of the operation of the Group Areas Act.

However, they need fairly rapid transit from their homes to their work-place. Moreover, if the transit capacity is increased and if there is an adequate system of rail services, there would be less dependence on motorcars and motorbuses. This country will then be able to save a large amount of foreign exchange. Who knows, if that is instituted we might even be able to recoup the foreign exchange that was lost as a result of carelessness in the SATS. Thus the people will be assisted and the SATS itself will be assisted because it has the capacity to provide the additional community services and the country will benefit by saving foreign exchange.

The people of this country are all South Africans. They are not Dutch, German or Portuguese. Therefore they must be treated as South Africans and each of them must be given a reasonable opportunity to share properly in the transport services. Sea View, Malvern and Amanzimtoti in Natal are well catered for by commuter trains. Why should the other areas, simply because they are inhabited by people who are not White, not also receive similar facilities? [Time expired.]

Debate interrupted.