Mr Chairman, I wish to inform this House that Mr M Y Baig, MP for Moorcross, has been appointed leader of the NPP by the party’s caucus today. [Interjections.] In view of this, Mr Baig will be the Leader of the Official Opposition in the House of Delegates.

Mr M Govender, MP for Umzinto, has been appointed Chief Whip of the NPP and Mr P C Nadasen, MP for Allandale, will retain his position as Whip for the NPP.

I must stress that all three appointments are subject to confirmation by Mr Speaker, who has been informed accordingly.

Mr Chairman, on behalf of the Minister of National Health and Population Development, I move Draft Resolution No 1 as it appears on the Order Paper, as follows:

Agreed to.

Mr Chairman, I do not like the word “yesterday” unless I can use it to improve today. If the hon member for Potgietersrus has satisfied himself with his own wrath, I want to ask him to sit still and think. The hon member shouted at the hon the Minister and his officials here yesterday, but he should rather reflect on the part played by him and his own party in the poor rand-dollar ratio and the consequent critical foreign exchange situation we in this country are experiencing.

Is it not precisely the persistent absolute partition policy of this hon member and his party, their absolute policy of apartheid, which has caused us to incur the ire of the outside world? [Interjections.] I want to tell the hon member for Potgietersrus that he must be careful to whom he hands out blows.

In my district we used to have a legendary person with the name of Spoorbek. It was said that this Spoorbek had superhuman powers, and I was told that someone had once stolen a bag of flour from his mill. When Spoorbek realised this, he took the man’s jacket which coincidentally had been left behind, and with a small stick he tapped the jacket lightly. Not long after that the man came running along, quite out of breath, and begged Spoorbek please to stop hitting him.

Mr Chairman, I want to tell the CP that that party’s political jacket is there for everyone to see, and they must not think that they are going to run away to a homeland or a heartland to get away from it. [Interjections.] I want to tell the CP that the outside world is going to deal with them concerning the policy that they adhere to so persistently. The outside world is going to give them a hiding. They must prepare themselves for that. [Interjections.]

You should rather go and fetch the outside world to help you govern the country! [Interjections.]

Do you really think you can threaten us with the outside world? [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, I want to come back to the debate itself. It is very clear that the SA Transport Services has entered a new phase of development which has led to the establishment of an enterprise which has been controlled, managed and operated according to the norms of profit and return on capital. As a business enterprise it is therefore intent on improving its profit position by means of productivity.

A resulting strategy is the elimination of uneconomic services, under which rail transport on branch lines receives high priority. The value of railway lines for rural areas has been acknowledged, however, and as a first step consideration has been given to the possible improvement of the profitability of branch lines.

The narrow-gauge railway line between Port Elizabeth and Avontuur was such an uneconomic railway line, and it was in great danger of being closed. Hon members will remember how other hon members and I appealed on numerous occasions for the retention of this and other branch lines during a period when this specific branch line’s total load had reached an all-time low in 1984 and 1985. There was also pressure on the part of the community and steam enthusiasts to retain the specific branch line.

Today, four years later, it is my great privilege to tell this success story on behalf of the SATS. It is a story that can be told because of the fact that the SATS did their homework. Not only is this the last remaining narrow-gauge railway line of the 19 that were originally built in South Africa and South West, but its story has enjoyed worldwide interest. I do not have sufficient time to give the whole history of this little train, but for the sake of Hansard I want to quote a short piece from Jose Burman’s book The Early Railways at the Cape:

It is strange that this railway line had to go through another phase of competition during the eighties; not with the ox-wagon this time, but with the road transport industry. Better roads and faster trucks drove clients from the railway line once again, until in 1985 we had the situation that the section covered only 27% of its cost. The train, as it was operated, had therefore become inefficient. Once again plans had to be made and negotiations held in order to get traffic back onto the railway line.

A bottom-line committee from the ranks of the SA Transport Services, as well as an action committee from among interested parties in the local community, were appointed to reflect on the upgrading and management of the section in order to make it more productive and ultimately profitable.

The more productive utilisation of people, assets and capital in the project played an enormous part in the increased profitability which the narrow-gauge railway line once again attained. The following steps inter alia were taken: Fixed and variable cost levels were reduced where possible; all movable assets were thoroughly checked and reduced where necessary; variable cost levels were checked thoroughly; and savings were effected by firstly, a reduction and a rescheduling of the trains, and secondly, the reduction and better utilisation of staff.

In addition the local needs of clients were studied, and adjustments were made so as to make better provision for their needs. Trucks were specially modified in order to deal with the palette packing of the citrus co-operative. Various forms of container traffic which fit into the broad-gauge railway line specification were introduced. This development promises exciting possibilities.

In addition better rendering of service to PPC, the cement company—a very important and valued supporter of the narrow-gauge railway line— was commenced. Trucks were modified to make provision for the bulk conveyance of grain and even for its transfer to broad-gauge trucks. In addition to the above, special marketing campaigns are being launched in order to attract additional traffic.

Thanks to all these campaigns, we can boast today not only of an Apple Train, but also a specially named limestone train, a citrus train and a trans-Van Staden Express which accelerates to the breathtaking average speed no longer of 14 km per hour, but of 60 km per hour. What is even more important is the fact that thanks to these campaigns launched by the SATS, the extremely negative performance of 1984-85, viz a cost defrayment of 27%, could be changed into a more positive achievement as quickly as 1987-88, viz a cost defrayment of almost 80%.

It is clear that there has been exceptional achievement in the case of the narrow-gauge railway line project—the result of a productive approach and hard work, to such an extent that the Cape Midlands region received a silver class award in productivity achievement in the National Productivity Institute’s annual competition.

This proves that where there is a will, there is a way, and if that is a cross-section of the general achievement of the SATS and indicative of the direction they will be taking in future, I wish to congratulate them sincerely on their achievement.

It is a privilege for me to support the Appropriation wholeheartedly.

Mr Chairman, it is with some sadness that I am taking part in the debate on the Appropriation of the hon the Minister of Transport Affairs today. As hon members already know by this time, the SATS Appropriation will no longer be introduced in the same way here. Before I continue speaking on the Appropriation, I want something placed on record here which makes me, and I believe the whole of South Africa, deeply unhappy. This is addressed to the CP.

Now that SATS and the NP have got rid of apartheid signboards on their trains to some extent, we find that the CP is starting with this type of apartheid signboard all over again. I want to address the hon member for Carletonville because this new craze has started up in his town. I should Eke to quote from a report in Die Burger of 28 February 1989:

This distress is indicative of the realisation among the business community that Black consumer resistance to the CP’s return to petty apartheid as in Boksburg has become a reality.

Among other developments at Carletonville are:

• — Nie ’n enkele Swart klant het gister (betaaldag) inkope in die kettingwinkel Pick ’n Pay gedoen nie;
• — Rye Swart minibus-taxi’s is in die strate geparkeer en hul bestuurders staan verveeld rond;
• — ’n Drankwinkel, wat op Maandae ’n fortuin maak, se geldlaaie was so te sê leeg;
• — ’n Blanke vrou, wie se klante “honderd persent” Swart is, sit met rakke skooluniforms opgeskeep …

“Daar was nie ’n enkele Swart klant in ons winkel op Carletonville nie. Ons het gemeen dat ons dalk nog die gewone toeloop in die etensuur en nā vyfuur sal ondervind, maar helaas,” het mnr Aubrey Zelenski, ’n woordvoerder van Pick ’n Pay, gister in Johannesburg gesê …

Die OK-winkel op die dorp was feitlik verlate.

Now hon members must listen to this—

Order! The hon member has moved away entirely from the Bill under discussion. Let us return to it.

I shall leave the CP at that and revert to them on another occasion.

It is clearly necessary now for the NP to stop the CP entirely in their conducting of petty politics. It is essential that the NP decide once and for all what they intend doing about the Reservation of Separate Amenities Act.

I now want to return to the Appropriation. [Interjections.] That hon member need not be concerned. I shall get to it in a moment. [Interjections.]

As regards the Appropriation, I want to say that the increase in rail tariffs, as announced by the hon the Minister, will of necessity cause a chain reaction which will result in other consumer articles remaining more expensive. I am pleased that, although there is an increase in rail tariffs, at least it is less than the inflation rate. Nevertheless it will once again have the severest effect on people who earn the least. The salary increase which was granted in October did bring a little relief and we want to thank the hon the Minister for it.

It is particularly encouraging that there were no serious strikes in SATS last year. Although there were minor strikes in East London, Durban and other places, they did not actually cause any large-scale disruption.

The new approach of Management of negotiating with trade unions to discuss problem areas resulted in the award of salary increases in October. I want to congratulate the hon the Minister because there was a greater degree of discussion with the trade unions and the Federation of Trade Unions. These negotiations produced positive results.

I next want to congratulate the hon the Minister on throwing all commuter and main line trains open entirely. I heard that only one incident occurred on a commuter train and no incidents on main line trains because people may now travel in carriages open to all. That in itself is proof that the people of South Africa are able to live and travel together harmoniously.

While I am referring to trains, I should like to request the hon the Minister to arrange for members of the joint committee, and at the same time I invite the CP too, to travel with us one morning on a commuter train from Cape Town to Khayelitsha and back to see how crowded our people are on those trains. In this way they will be able to see for themselves that our people are able to behave themselves decently in first class carriages. I should like to hear the hon the Minister’s reaction to this.

I now get to personnel matters. This is something about which I have the deepest concern. I want to ask the hon the Minister to examine the way in which job evaluation takes place. Shortly before lunch today I received a call from a small place rather distant from Cape Town. I am worried, however. We talk about job evaluation and, when we do so, we must see what we mean by this.

I am in possession of a letter which refers to a situation in which job evaluation took place and two persons doing the same work were evaluated differently. One man works in the office and he is a Brown man. The other person is an information officer and he is a White. In consequence of that differentiation there is also disparity in the remuneration of those two people.

I want to ask the hon the Minister something. A few months ago we spoke about the fact that there was total parity in the Transport Services except for travelling and medical schemes. I am prepared to furnish the hon the Minister with the information on where differentiation occurs between an information officer and a clerk who does the same work but is remunerated on a different scale.

I want to ask the hon the Minister to look into this as well as the facilities and conditions of our barrier attendants at Cape Town station. I know that job. In the early sixties I was a barrier attendant. We worked a split shift, which means that one starts work at five o’clock and goes off at eight o’clock, goes back on duty at four o’clock in the afternoon and then works until about eight o’clock in the evening. Those people have no facilities where those Who work a split shift and cannot go home can take a rest. I request that those circumstances be looked into so that those loyal employees collecting money for SATS from passengers and paying it to SATS in turn may make good use of their periods of rest.

A further request to the hon the Minister is to give us some information on what progress has been made at this stage in the introduction of a light rail commuter system in the country. I saw in a Sunday paper that a great fuss was being made about how this system would soon be introduced in Port Elizabeth and some of our other principal cities. I want to ask the hon the Minister to give us some information about this.

I want to take this opportunity to extend my best wishes to Mr Bertie Groenewald on his retirement. I hope that he will enjoy the rest. I also want to congratulate Mr Helmut Hagen on his appointment as Deputy General Manager: Technical Services.

Next I want to put a request to the hon the Minister and I want Dr Moolman to listen to this too, please. I was at Noupoort last weekend. I asked the hon the Minister last year to request his personnel, especially those concerned in operations, to examine the times of trains, especially at Noupoort, now that quite a number of main line trains have been withdrawn. I was informed at Noupoort last week that a family arrived from Johannesburg at Noupoort on train No 435 on 15 February. When those people arrived at Noupoort, the De Aar train had already left. That man and his family had to spend eight days—from Wednesday the 15th to Wednesday the 22nd—in a waiting room at Noupoort to catch a connection to De Aar.

I want to request the hon the Minister that when such cases occur, provision be made to transport those people by goods train to De Aar. There is only one passenger train every Wednesday connecting De Aar with Noupoort. When those people, who were en route to Prieska, missed the train at Noupoort as a result of one train that was late, they were stuck at Noupoort for eight days. This happened on 15 February and those people left on Wednesday, 22 February. They had to spend eight full days at Noupoort in a waiting room—a man, his wife and their children.

I should like to ask the hon the Minister to look into those circumstances so that, when trains reach junctions in particular, better arrangements will be made to avoid such an occurrence. If the train is unable to wait as a result of other circumstances, please make arrangements so that those people can reach the next junction, even if it is by goods train.

I should like to ask the hon the Minister something. This is a genuine request. We have contact with Africa, we have many units providing service in Africa. I now want to quote from an article in the Southern Africa Special Dispatch-.

Now Dr Moolman adds the following:

[Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, after listening to the hon member for Vredendal it appears to me that this hon Minister is being let off the hook to a great extent because the argument between the CP with their somewhat primitive viewpoints on transport matters and the other hon members of this House tend to take the heat off the hon the Minister and he is largely left alone.

The hon the Minister has been complimented about his new readiness to talk to the unions, and I hope that attitude of his is going to continue. I should also like to suggest that the hon the Minister take up the challenge of the hon member for Vredendal and organise a party to go to look at commuter facilities to Khayelitsha one morning. I think it would be a very good idea indeed.

His case about the missed connection between Noupoort and De Aar is something which deserves attention because the care of passengers, specifically in the case of passengers who are not first class passengers on the main lines, is something that needs a lot more attention than it has received in the past.

It is my intention to talk about airways today, and specifically about the tariff increases which were announced in this hon Minister’s Budget.

During the 1986-87 financial year, SAA ran at a profit of R308 million. In the 1987-88 financial year they ran at a profit of R91,5 million. During the period from April 1988 to November 1988— just towards the end of last year—profit was already running at R82,4 million.

What does the hon the Minister do in the face of these very substantial profit figures? He raises tariffs yet again so that air services continue to operate on routes that are among the most expensive in the world.

We are looking forward to a good busy year ending in March 1990. Our aircraft are going to operate with maximum passenger loads or as near to maximum as possible, and everything appears to be set fair for a very profitable year. But what does the hon the Minister do? He raises tariffs.

The question I want to pose is: why are we in this position? Why do South Africans pay through the nose to travel on SAA when we are already making a substantial profit"’ The answer of course is cross-subsidisation of other less profitable services which the hon the Minister has always expressed himself as being against. He would like to have cost-related services operating. He talks a lot about it but he never does anything about it. We are also paying as much as we are because SAA is a monopoly. We do not have to face competition of any kind, and I am now referring to internal services. They can charge what they like because there is no competition and South Africans have no alternative if they want to fly.

It is far cheaper than overseas.

It is not far cheaper than overseas. If the hon member feels that, he should investigate a little further and he will find that things have changed a great deal since the old days.

One of the main reasons why we in the PFP have urged real privatisation of the service is because it is supposedly to be accompanied by deregulation and this would mean the possibility of competitors coming into the field. Competition inevitably results in increased efficiency and I hope that we are speaking on the same ground there. I hope the hon the Minister does agree that competition brings about more efficiency and brings about competitive price structures to the benefit of the consumer.

Any company which has competition is forced to operate efficiently at the lowest possible cost to the consumer or they just lose their business.

I would like to ask the hon the Minister when the SAA is going to become a separate company which will be divorced from the rest of the SATS? What is holding this hon Minister back? I think that the very least this House is entitled to is some estimate as to when we can expect some real movement towards this process of privatisation and separation of the SAA from the rest of SATS.

As the hon the Minister knows, we voted against the Legal Succession to the South African Transport Services Bill earlier during this session, partly because we regard it as an unnecessary step which created a wholly Government-owned corporation, removed to a large extent from any parliamentary scrutiny. There will still be scrutiny, but not at the same level as at present. There was no real indication of when the SAA would be separated from the rest and ownership passed on to the public at large. There was no real indication of deregulation which is a vital part of privatisation which enables the consumer to benefit.

I believe that the hon the Minister should stop this secrecy and tell us what his intentions are. People are going to continue to be suspicious of his motives as long as he plays the cards so close to his chest. They have every good reason to be so suspicious, because nothing appears to be happening. Reports in the Press, for example, indicate that the airline pilots themselves are interested in making a bid for the SAA. Could I ask the hon the Minister what is happening in this respect? Has such an offer or approach been made by the pilots and what is the Government’s attitude to such an approach?

The hon the Minister must please tell us, for all he appears to do when asked is to smile enigmatically and keep his mouth shut. Unfortunately I regard this as a disgraceful state of affairs. He knows very well that there are other air-carriers which are only too keen to participate on the main routes. At present they are in limbo and do not know how to plan for the future, or what to plan for. The tight-mouthed hon Minister is not saying anything at all.

If we do accept that the hon the Minister is sincere and that deregulation is going to come about, I believe that he must spell out the path which he is going to follow.

It is not necessary for him to deregulate to the extent that he opens all routes to a multiplicity of other carriers—our market is probably too small—but he must deregulate. Perhaps only two or maybe three different airlines should be allowed on the main routes. It is quite clear that at this stage he has got to indicate to potential competitors, to other companies in the business, what his intentions are because they too have to plan for the future. I have of course been assuming that the hon the Minister intends to deregulate. It is not going to be a bit of good if we privatise and replace a State-owned monopoly with a privately owned monopoly. There is no benefit in that to the South African consumer. But again we are totally in the dark and I must urge the hon the Minister to tell us what is going on. Other companies who could be planning for the future are being most unfairly treated. I must tell the hon the Minister they resent it and are very angry about it.

The next question I want to raise very briefly is the question of the shortage of air traffic controllers. This of course is the responsibility of the Department of Transport and not the SATS administration. However, my question to the hon the Minister is how much the delays resulting from this personnel shortage are costing the SAA. I happened to be on a plane this week on which the SATS general manager was a fellow passenger. According to the pilot the plane was delayed because of air traffic control problems.

How much do these delays cost the SAA? To keep a plane waiting for half an hour must involve costs and I would like to know what sort of costs are involved. Depending on the answer perhaps the hon the Minister, as being the Minister responsible for the Department of Transport and the running of our airports as well as the Minister for the SATS, should balance these losses against the costs of improving service conditions of employment for air traffic control personnel. Perhaps the hon the Minister can bring us up to date on just how long these difficulties are likely to persist. It is going to take time to train new personnel.

A third matter—in the time that I have left—has to do with safety considerations in the light of the spate of air disasters, particularly involving Boeing aircraft. I think that the public should be assured that every possible safety check is being undertaken on all our aircraft. I believe the SAA can be justly proud of the quality of the maintenance service that has been rigorously applied. I believe that the hon the Minister should at this stage take the opportunity of confirming that these high standards will continue.

A minor point that I have been asked to raise while I still have the time to do so, concerns a regular service to Plettenberg Bay. I understand that it was no longer economical for the company that used to run this service to do so because they are now operating larger aircraft. There is certainly a demand for this service, which tends to be seasonal. I wonder if any alternatives are envisaged and perhaps the hon the Minister could explore the possibilities of the restoration of this service. I realise that there are not all that many passengers, but it is a service of great convenience which would be helpful. People living in the area have asked me to do something about it.

Coming to the end of my speech I do hope that the hon the Minister will give us answers to major questions that have been posed by the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central and myself. In the past the hon the Minister has tended to answer only those questions which he wanted to answer, ignoring those which it did not serve his purpose to answer. I know his time is also limited, but the whole system of parliamentary scrutiny falls into disrepute when Ministers do not answer questions which are put to them by the elected representatives of the people of South Africa. I realise that it is the last time this hon Minister will be handling this level of parliamentary scrutiny of the affairs of the SATS. He is probably saying: Thank heavens for that! In future there will be virtually no time at all to discuss matters in the depth that we are now discussing them. Perhaps as a special treat and a last effort the hon the Minister will really answer all the questions that have been put to him.

I notice that I still have a little more time and I would like to add to the questions posed by the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central, concerning commuter problems from Hammanskraal and other stations to Pretoria. Evidently the situation there is not at all satisfactory. My information is that commuters were sjamboked onto the buses at various stations by the Bophuthatswana police, who did not allow any gatherings of discontented commuters to take place. I hope that the administration is doing everything possible to resolve these difficulties, because I believe a very serious situation exists there.

Mr Chairman, it is customary for me to compliment Ministers when some understanding is given to our call and recognition given to our aspirations. I was especially taken aback yesterday when the the PFP’s chief spokesman on transport called on the hon the Minister of Transport Affairs to resign. I do not think it is fair for such a call to be made in view of the fact that the hon the Minister is not responsible for the doings of his predecessors. Because of the amount of joy that we have obtained in the short period since he has been Minister of Transport Affairs, I think we need him more and more.

Our call when we entered Parliament to open up job opportunities in the various facets of the SATS met with great success. It is history that in the 79 years of the existence of the SATS nine Indians in Natal and six Coloureds in the Cape Province area were given the opportunity to be trained as train drivers. Another fine example is the board decision taken by the SAA to take on an Indian as a fully fledged pilot. In addition to this I have before me a list of other improvements that have taken place in this short space of time. As I have mentioned, in 79 years little was done, but in the past three or four years so much has been done. I think that this progress is in the right direction. In this light I think that this should be an example to other departments within Government circles. I am sure that there is now great hope for the future for all aspiring persons of colour.

I also wish to compliment the SATS for desegregating all train services. There are certain areas that still need to be attended to and I do not blame the hon member for Klipspruit West for his outburst yesterday in regard to discrimination because this still prevails in many other sections. I do hope that his call to the hon the Minister and his department will be taken heed of.

In connection with staff I would like to make this appeal to the hon the Minister to remove any barriers which presently confine members to only certain categories of work within the SATS and also to see that there is total parity in salaries and that various fringe benefits be brought into line with those of their White couterparts.

There has been wide publicity given in respect of the shortage of staff as airport traffic controllers. It has been shocking to note that a handful of staff have been working under tremendous pressure and that there have been a number of collisions. I do not think that this is in the interests of air passengers and there has been a great amount of dissatisfaction and doubt. I also understand that Zambians were brought to work here but they did not last too long because they found better pastures out in the Middle East. In respect to staff recruitment as air traffic controllers I would like the hon the Minister to invite suitable candidates from the wider spectrum of the South African society.

I would like to comment briefly on privatisation. I must confess that I am a bit apprehensive about its public accountability. If privatisation is going to create monopolistic tendencies where certain groups are favoured it will not leave an open market for free competition. This will militate against the principle of services at a competitive price. In the process of privatisation the SATS should not get rid of its asset but sound business principles should be applied to achieve maximum benefits. In South Africa we must realise that we have First World and Third World elements. Privatisation will be ideal if the historical imbalances between the Third World elements and the First World elements are removed.

The SATS must safeguard their responsibilities with regard to these very essential services such as commuter transport and look at the matter in the larger interests of the community and the South African economy as a whole.

Finally, I wish the SATS a very prosperous and fruitful new venture.

Mr Chairman, at the outset I wish to latch on to a point made by the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central yesterday in regard to the toll plaza debacle at Mooi River. I merely wish to reiterate that the toll fee of R8 is excessive and exorbitant and that there will be ongoing reaction to this fee as long as it remains at this high level. I appeal yet again to the hon the Minister to do something about it. The handling of the question of the toll at Mooi River can only be described as being pathetically inept.

Mr Chairman, the short time available affords me the opportunity to only peck relatively lightly at certain pertinent issues contained in the hon the Minister’s Budget Speech. In the first instance I wish to comment on the R1,27 billion loss on rail passenger services and the projected deficit of some R1,3 billion for the ensuing year. It has come to my attention that a strong possibility exists that enormous losses are being incurred on certain commuter lines through inadequate supervision of attendants at barrier points.

I would be interested to learn from the hon the Minister whether this is the case and furthermore what measures are taken, say in peak periods, to ensure that no irregularities take place. Will the hon the Minister also tell this House what action is taken against attendants who may be involved in fraudulent acts?

Perhaps the hon the Minister will also be able to indicate in his reply the number of transgressions that have taken place in this regard during say the past two years because it is important that this Committee gets an assurance from the hon the Minister that existing control measures are both effective and adequate.

Another matter that I wish to discuss with the hon the Minister is the future of branch lines in the privatisation process. I am referring in particular to those lines which are on the borderline of viability and which, if the principles of profitmaking are rigidly applied, could in time be faced with the possibility of closure. What I wish to stress here is that the State has a responsibility up to a point to ensure that certain established strategic communication links on which the public has been heavily dependent for many years— and I might add are still dependent—are kept functional even if this means a form of Government subsidisation similar to that applied in the case of commuter passenger services. The Government cannot summarily turn its back on this aspect now in that such an abrogation of its responsibilities would have disastrous effects on many rural communities.

I appreciate that steps have recently been taken by the SATS to market its services more vigorously. I welcome that. May I just add that the efforts that have been made in East Griqualand have been most heartening indeed. I must point out, however, that the losses being incurred on certain branch lines are primarily due to the deficiencies in the service that the SATS have provided in the past and the ongoing increases in transport tariffs. It is these two factors that have contributed more than any other to the dwindling utilization of many outlying branch lines. I still feel that the use of these lines can be increased through aggressive marketing by the SATS backed up by improved service. I am satisfied that in this way viability can be restored to many branch lines which may be under the spotlight for closure at present.

I now wish to turn my attention briefly to the question of the privatisation of certain narrowgauge lines in Natal.

I appeal to the hon the Minister to give specific attention to encourage the restoration and the use of these lines and to be more sympathetic to the requirements of local organisations that may be interested in resuscitating services that have been abandoned by the SATS. In this respect I would like to see locomotives and rail equipment which are presently not in use, made available at minimal charge in order to provide the necessary incentives for this to be brought about.

Mr Chairman, today I just want to concentrate on problems that have been caused by the Transport Services in the constituency of Genadendal.

Last year, the SATS stopped the bus transport from Bredasdorp via Napier, Klipdale, Rietpoel and Riversonderend to Cape Town. Buses are the only means of transport available between these towns. They were also the only means of transport to Bredasdorp, where the hospital, doctor and magistrates’ court are situated, and in response to representations which I received from my voters, I asked a private company to take over the service.

The private company submitted an application to the local road transportation board, and to my surprise the SATS objected. As we all know, it is stated in the Act that the SATS must be protected. The application was therefore refused. I should like to know what the hon the Minister is going to do about my problem. Bus transport services are now being privatised, and I should like to know whether the SATS are now going to undertake the transporting of school children, and whether the tenderer is still going to protect the SATS in the same way that the Act is doing at present. I also want to know whether the SATS is going to transport organised groups and whether they are also going to be protected.

I want to come to my following point, namely that of the pension fund for labourers. In May 1981, a senior ticket examiner, Mr Solomon Newman, who served on the route from Cape Town to the Strand, was shot at Tygerberg station. I received representations from his widow. She received R400 for the funeral and another R200 after five years. Furthermore, she receives a meagre pension of R200.1 want the hon the Minister to look into this.

I also applied for a subsidy with regard to a TV licence for pensioners. However, the pensions were then increased. I am asking the hon the Minister to look into the difference between the pensions which labourers receive and the pensions received by other pensioners. If they apply to the hon the Minister of Health Services and Welfare, they are considered for a subsidy for a TV licence and they also receive free medical treatment. I want the hon the Minister to make a comparison and to look at the degree to which the pensions for labourers are inadequate.

I wrote a letter to the hon the Minister about the shortage of sports fields in Klipdale, because 90% of my voters work for the SATS. The hon the Minister replied that he would negotiate with the divisional council, but it was a year ago that I touched on this matter during the debate concerned. Those people have nothing. There are no recreational facilities, not even a proper sports field. I want to ask the hon the Minister once again whether he will not be able to subsidise these people or help them in another way to acquire a proper sports field.

I now want to talk about housing. I say thank you for the funds that have been appropriated for the workers. We are really proud of the houses that are being provided. The workers have also asked me to convey their thanks to the hon the Minister.

Since 1984 I have been making annual requests to the hon the Minister for posts for matriculants, but he has not yet employed one of my voters to date. I now want to ask him whether employment opportunities are created only for labourers, or whether there are employment opportunities for matriculants. Last year I received a letter which stated that the weather bureau in South West Africa wished to employ one of my voters. To my surprise, one of the clerks at D F Malan Airport then telephoned him and told him that the post was no longer vacant. I want to ask the hon the Minister to look into these problems.

Mr Chairman, at the start of my speech I want to refer to the former Minister of Transport Affairs and the meeting he attended in Nigel last night. There, to the accompaniment of loud cheering, he launched an attack on the hon the State President and asked him to go. I just want to tell him and his fellow merrymakers that with people like that in his party he certainly does not need enemies!

At the same meeting the hon the Minister of National Education also referred to a clampdown on CP town councils because they were allegedly dragging South Africa’s name through the mud abroad-1 want to make it clear that the days of the NP sitting on two stools and being at odds are a thing of the past.

You are now on platform 7!

As long as that Act is on the Statute Book, the CP-controlled town councils will implement it. I wonder whether anyone in this House knows what the shortest route to Carletonville is. Do hon members not know? They should just follow the white lines in the road and they will get there.

That is a feeble joke!

There was also a reference to Carletonville, and certain reports were quoted. It was stated that a liquor store had lost R3 500 on a Monday. This is a wonderful example of who uses alcohol on a Monday …

Oh, no!

… and how much liquor is purchased on a Monday. An amount of R3 500 is spent on liquor! [Interjections.] Reference was also made to incidents on trains.

What does the legislation say about racial segregation?

Some people have very short memories. Last year White women were attacked in Boksburg when one train was late and the other was overrun by Biacks. There were incidents. [Interjections.] A little while later there was an incident at Roodepoort where a White woman was stoned and had to be taken to hospital. [Interjections.] About a month ago there was an incident at Homelake station in Randfontein when Blacks sitting in the train threw stones at people on the platform.

Ask why. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, that is assault with malice aforethought. [Interjections.]

Order! Hon members may not like what the hon member has to say, but as long as he keeps to the Rules, he enjoys freedom of speech in the committee. The hon member must have the opportunity to complete his speech. The hon member may proceed.

Mr Chairman, in this debate mention has also been made of good relations. Reference was made to how good the SA Transport Services’ workers are. However, if one goes into the matter, one comes to the conclusion that these are people who have no trade union experience. Last year, when salary increases were being negotiated, it was announced that there would be no salary increase for the Transport Services’ workers. These people adopted the procedure laid down in the Act, and eventually an arbiter was appointed who found that he could not make a determination because he could only do one of two things. Either he could give nothing at all, or he had to give the 17% that was being asked for. He did not even know what the duty of an arbiter was, because when an arbiter makes a determination, all parties must honour it. Another arbiter was then appointed who granted a salary increase of 12% on 15 September, but this salary increase should actually have come into operation as early as 1 April.

If one calculates what these SATS workers lost, from the time they should have obtained a salary increase until they actually did get it, it means in effect they did not even get an increase of 7%. It then goes further. The same Transport Services’ workers who usually negotiated for an increase in April and obtained it, can this year only get an increase on 1 July. They are again losing out on three months; in other words, no proper agreement was reached in the SATS last year.

Since this is the last appropriation of the hon the Minister of Transport Affairs, we hope that the same fiasco will not repeat itself this year. Give the people their increase. However, last year we passed a Bill in this Parliament. When the arbiter made a determination and granted an increase of 12%, the Blacks went on strike. What happened then? The Blacks went on strike and an average increase of 19% was granted; they did not abide by the arbiter’s decision, but no steps were taken against them. So got even more, but the Whites have obtained nothing more.

That is not true.

A great deal has been said about the air traffic controllers. We have heard that the hon the Minister said there was a new agreement for them. They are getting a better dispensation. Then the president of the employees’ organisation stated yesterday that he knew nothing about such an agreement. He said he did not know what they were going to get.

He fooled you nicely!

Last night it was again stated on television that there was to be a better dispensation. Labour relations can definitely not be promoted if this is the way people act. [Interjections.]

I want to devote a few minutes to discrimination. [Interjections.] A great deal has been said about discrimination. [Interjections.] Let us look at who is being discriminated against.

Against us all these years!

Look at Transmed, for example. Whites who belong to Transmed pay R10 a month in membership fees, and they must pay a disincentive levy of 25% on all their services. When they consult a doctor, they must pay a disincentive levy of 25%, and when the wife or child consults a doctor, they also have to pay a disincentive levy of 25%. [Interjections.] When they receive medicines, they must pay a disincentive levy of 25%. It is exactly the same when they consult a specialist. However, a person of colour pays 65 cents per month in membership fees.

What are their salaries?

In the annual report it is stated very clearly by the hon the Minister and his department that there is no longer any difference in salary after last year’s increase. There is full parity in the SATS. [Interjections.] Persons of colour pay no disincentive levy when they consult a doctor, and I must add that the system used is that of a panel of doctors. They do not pay a cent in lieu of a disincentive levy. They pay no disincentive levy when they receive medicines. Furthermore they can get free medicines at any dispensary in South Africa, without paying that 25%, after which the account is sent to Transmed. However, if there is no Transmed dispensary for the Whites, they have to pay the full amount, after which 75% of their money is refunded, but sometimes they wait three to four months for that money. If this is not discrimination, I do not know what is. [Interjections.]

As far as training is concerned, I believe that here Whites are also being discriminated against. I want to make an appeal to the hon the Minister to examine this issue. He is the only one who can rectify this. When a White undergoes training or attends a course and he does not succeed in getting promotion, he does not get a second chance. However, when people of colour do not pass the first time, they are repeatedly given another chance.

Another matter is that of housing. The hon the Minister has just been thanked for the home loans being granted. Again I want to make an appeal to the hon the Minister to examine the following matter. As far as I know, it can happen that a White applies to have improvements done to his house and that that loan is not approved. It is rejected on the grounds that he has a house and does not need improvements made to it. The Whites must be satisfied, while the others are given assistance. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Carletonville adopted the customary standpoint of the Official Opposition and that is to argue that there is so-called discrimination against Whites. He mentioned a few examples concerning Transmed. In the first place I want to tell the hon member this. He is a trade unionist. All the changes which have taken place regarding the Transmed scheme were cleared with the various SATS trade unions. [Interjections.] If he therefore says here that people are dissatisfied because they have to pay the disincentive levy, I want to tell the hon member that an appreciable number of new benefits have been added to the Transmed scheme which were not available to members previously. [Interjections.] The hon member did not mention this. [Interjections.] Allow me to tell the hon member that, if we had not introduced the disincentive levy of 25%, the finances of the Transmed scheme would have been exhausted to the extent that it would possibly not have been to the benefit of those people in the end. That is why we had to take these steps. A considerable number of comprehensive benefits have also been introduced for members of Transmed.

The hon member raised the question of training. As far as my knowledge of SATS goes, there is no discrimination against Whites in this respect. [Interjections.] I do not know where the hon member got hold of this. SATS has actually lost a considerable number of artisans recently, but steps have been taken again to encourage people to enter the various artisanships. Whether a person is Coloured or White, there is no discrimination against him. Everything takes place purely on merit and according to people’s ability.

The hon member also told us that Whites were not permitted to extend their houses. I wonder where the hon member got hold of such nonsense. [Interjections.] There are Whites in my own constituency who own houses in terms of that house owners’ scheme and they have had their houses extended. The hon member is probably using some isolated example or other in which somebody was perhaps not granted that loan for very good reasons. Now he claims that that is the general policy of the Transport Services. We are not prepared to argue on such grounds because it is definitely not a deviation from the policy if the hon member comes up with only isolated examples.

Most hon members have mentioned that this debate on the Transport Services Appropriation is to be the last in its current form. When the end of an era arrives, it is a nostalgic moment for all of us. There are numbers of us in this House who have attended and also taken part in these debates over the years. I myself was privileged to listen to 28 Transport Services Budget Speeches and shall have taken part in 10 of them after today. When one looks at this organisation, which came from very small beginnings, there were times when its establishment was approximately 280. That number has now reached 180 000 but the productivity of the Transport Services worker continues to rise. This is due to modem technical and technological adjustments which have been made and which also led to rationalisation and automation.

If one looks at this Transport Services figure of more than R14 000 million and we look back at 1910—we had a revenue budget of R23,4 million with total expenditure of R23,3 million; there was only a surplus of R100 000.

Today we convey about 600 million passengers and commuters annually. The number of kilometres of rail was 23 000 on 31 March of last year. All this is under SATS control.

An interesting aspect is that the old colonies and republics each had its own rail service before 1910. Strangely enough, the National Convention of 1910 did not issue any clear guidelines to determine how these services were to be linked. Everything, that means tariffs, regulations and instructions, together with a general transport policy, had to be made uniform only later. Management legislation for railways and harbours was not introduced until six years after the assumption of Union status.

As the country grew economically, SATS played its part in helping South Africa to develop. Its contribution is so great that it cannot be quantified. A further interesting aspect is that in the 14 years after Union about 8 800 kilometres were added to the network. As I have said already, the extent of our network is about 23 000 kilometres today.

The revenue tonnage—excluding the pipeline— is in the region of 161 million tons today. Rolling stock has increased fantastically. We handle 626 trains daily in Cape Town, 451 in Johannesburg and 392 in Durban. I could go on furnishing statistics about our 31 aircraft together with passenger numbers of 4,5 million and freight tonnage of almost 500 000 which SAA carries annually. I could also mention that at present 12 700 vessels call at our ports. Cargo amounting to almost 95 million tons is handled. It is no wonder that the hon the Minister could say in his Budget Speech that this service has a replacement value of R56 billion, excluding land.

†This organisation has been a Government business undertaking under the wing of Parliament for more that 75 years. Although it is so financially strong and independent I feel that it can be weaned away now. If not, how strong must an organisation then be before it can really be subjected to the free-market world? For this reason I have mentioned the statistics that I quoted:

For years the private sector agitated that the transport services had the protection of Government and could get certain concessions which the private sector could never get. The cry was and still is that the SATS had an unfair advantage over the private sector.

Now we hear that we will no longer be able to scrutinise the activities of the SATS when it becomes a company. However, this is not true. Apart from the fact that we will be able to have a clear insight into its activities through reports and debates because opportunities will be given in Parliament, it will be an essential mode of general transport of which the hon the Minister will remain the co-ordinator. All the other forms of transport which are in the hands of the private sector today cannot do what they like.

Transport Services will become a firm competitor in this field but will certainly not enjoy less scrutiny and monitoring. I think hon members should bear this in mind.

Secondly, it would have been absurd to embark upon a new free-market transport quality system while the SATS occupied a different position.

After all, the SATS themselves expressed the clear view that they wanted to be part of this free, competitive system and are prepared to give no concessions or receive any concessions, except to be adequately compensated for uneconomic services.

One should also bear in mind that the SATS played a prominent role in the National Transport Study. They concurred with the major recommendations and I therefore perceive them to be extremely keen to compete in an open market where all things will be equal.

The hon member for Roodepoort’s suggestion that the fiscus would become the milch cow of the Commuter Corporation and the company is to my mind completely ludicrous.

*Just because they ask to be paid for their services the hon member says the Commuter Corporation and the company will turn the fiscus into a milch cow. What is the true state of affairs in this regard, however? Transport Services make themselves unnecessarily unpopular among certain sectors because of cross-subsidisation. They would like to get rid of it themselves. Basically only about half of the losses on socioeconomic services are recovered; Transport Services have to cough up the other half themselves.

It is estimated that from the year 1981-82 until the year 1989-90 losses will run to R7 964 million whereas Government compensation will only amount to R4 842 million. The balance of more than R3 000 million is made good through crosssubsidisation. It cannot be argued that SATS should not be compensated in full for this. If it is argued that SATS should not be compensated for this—this is what I deduce from the hon member for Roodepoort in that he said we would turn the fiscus into a milch cow—the Official Opposition once again does not want to turn SATS into a milch cow but a beast of burden. SATS crosssubsidisation will remain a bone of contention under their policy. We shall then find that the most prosperous components of SATS can never be privatised. They will then have to stop carrying the weaker ones, as the position is today.

The Official Opposition’s real objection—they only have to say this—is that commuter services convey Blacks to urban complexes. I honestly have to admit that I no longer understand them because commuter services should actually suit their book. Surely the so-called bullet trains are their solution to urban “verswarting”. I want to ask them who will pay for this—SATS or the Government? Do they not want any Blacks in the factories and business world or will they expect the bosses to accept sole responsibility for this?

The hon member for Port Elizabeth Central in his turn mentioned the tariff increases which were imposed last year and said that the current tariff increase of 8,7% should be added to them. What the hon member did not say is that prior to October 1988 there had been no increases for 17 months.

†The last time we had an increase was in July 1987.

*The inflation rate has certainly not stood still since that time. In addition the statistics he used to prove his point cover two financial years.

†Obviously the SATS does not like to increase rates and tariffs because we know that rail increases will cause other increases—nobody doubts it. If all economic sectors could keep their increased costs within reasonable limits then there would be a stable rate of inflation if it did not actually decrease.

Our income this year will rise by R495 million or 4,2% as a result of tariff adjustments. Tariff adjustments will on average be 8,7% but we need the additional income to cover rising costs. We are more the recipient of inflationary costs than their cause. We feel the effects of an increase in fuel prices as much as any other business. Energy, electricity and fuel are components in our production cycle which are essential to keep our wheels rolling. Notwithstanding the increases in labour and finance costs, material and stores, the SATS normally through savings and increased productivity does its level best to balance the books. Therefore a small surplus is envisaged for 1989-90.

I was very disappointed, however, with the remarks made by the hon member for Klipspruit West about the SAA. To suggest that they are going backwards is not warranted. To single out one unhappy incident of a delayed plane and to generalise is not a worthwhile debating issue.

After all, more and more people want to fly. Tourism within our borders has increased. Apart from technical reasons delays are caused by more passengers on flights too. Delays caused by technical reasons, those which relate to the safety of our planes, should really not be a cause for criticism because, after all, the safety of the passenger and the safety of the crew should be paramount to all of us.

One should also never forget that 40% of the people who fly in South Africa fly at one or other ofourmany concessionary rates. They do not pay the full fare. Only about 56% to 60% of the passengers pay the full rate.

Secondly, there has been a vast improvement in our on-time departures and consequently in our on-time arrivals too. These are monitored continuously.

Finally, the change of the SATS’s status is inevitable. Today we are taking the first steps towards freer competition in a previously over-regulated transport market. Other countries have been successful with their deregulation and privatisation. After all, the Government really has no business to do in commerce and industry.

We also have men at the head of the SATS who would be proud assets in the private sector.

We must now give them the opportunity to show that they are not scared of real competition. Those hon members of this Committee who are indecisive and against a change must bear in mind this old saying: A man who insists upon seeing with perfect clearness before he decides never decides.

Mr Chairman, I should like to agree with the previous speaker’s comments about the successful outing the hon the Minister recently arranged for members of the Joint Committee on Transport and Communications. It is only during an outing of this kind that one can get a good idea of what is happening in certain sections of the SATS.

In the short time at my disposal I should like to make a few comments about the SATS. The fact that the hon the Minister made provision in his budget for funds for the extension and maintenance of steam-driven locomotives makes me very happy. Just imagine the fascination experienced by young and old when a steam train comes chugging along from far off with smoke billowing out of the chimney. This is the kind of picture we should try to preserve. Think too of the advertisement for oats which appears on television some mornings. Steam trains must under no circumstances be phased out. More trains such as the Banana Express, the Apple Train and so on should be put into operation. This would serve as a further drawcard in attracting tourists to our beautiful country. The trains should be marketed along with our nature reserves, wild flowers, winelands and wonderful sunny weather.

The Western countries have left us in the lurch with their sanctions and boycott actions. We now have to look to the east, to foreign countries that trade with us, and we must persuade them to visit our countries as tourists. Tourism in our country is expanding tremendously.

Let us make more use of steam locomotives to draw passenger coaches and goods coaches instead of shining them up and mounting them on our stations’ platforms as museum exhibits. Only those that cannot be repaired can be used for these purposes. Our workshops are capable of repairing any old broken locomotives.

In my opinion SAA’s air hostesses are among the best in the world. They must be congratulated on this. Hon members who have had the privilege of using other airlines will agree with me. We must therefore do everything in our power to try to maintain this high standard.

I am also pleased that there is no discrimination to be seen in the SATS. Over and above the ground staff there are also White, Black, Coloured and Asian air hostesses in the service of SAA, and they render excellent service. A serious appeal is made for more people of colour who comply with the high requirements for training to be accepted. This also applies to the training of other Airways staff such as air traffic controllers.

The salary adjustment in respect of air traffic controllers which has just been announced by the department will encourage staff of a high calibre to stay and work in our country instead of joining foreign airlines.

Another point that counteracts discrimination is the recent appointment of an Asian pilot who will be piloting a Boeing 737 shortly. We are very proud of this.

In conclusion I want to say that this should not be a mere gesture. People who apply for work must be considered in an ever more favourable light.

Mr Chairman, I must express my surprise at the fact that the hon member for Carletonville used Transmed as an example of discrimination against the White man. Interestingly enough, I have prepared my speech today in such a way that I will be using Transmed as an example of discrimination against people of colour, as he calls them. I shall prove this later.

The attempt by the hon the Deputy Minister of Transport Affairs to launch a counter-attack upon him with regard to Transmed was, in my opinion, a very poor one. He attempted to justify the additional payment of 25% which the White members of Transmed now have to pay for certain of their privileges. Not only did the hon member for Carletonville make incorrect statements, but he either does not know what he is talking about, or he has kept quiet about what he knows, because he did not tell the whole story.

I have here before me everything with regard to Transmed, because I prepared my speech. The first example that I want to mention to hon members, is that of a new personnel member of the SAA, namely an Indian pilot. Let us look at what his advantages would be if, for example, as a member of Transmed he applied for medical treatment.

†I would like to quote the medical benefits for Coloured, Indian and Black employees and their dependants. It was very interesting that the hon member for Carletonville never mentioned the dependants. That is because he knows that the discrimination against the dependants of nonWhite Transmed members is one of the worst forms of discrimination in South Africa.

This Indian pilot pays a monthly contribution of R1,50. The same amount applies to Coloured or Black employees. From their date of employment, they are entitled to the following benefits for themselves:

If he were White, he could go to a practitioner of his own choice. Whose discrimination is that? The second item is:

Yes, he does not pay 25%. I agree with that.

What about his White colleague who is flying an aeroplane? He can go to a specialist and be treated in a private hospital and it will be paid for in full by Transmed. That might not sound too bad but let us look at the situation of the dependants of Coloured, Indian and Black employees. This is just another catalogue of racial discrimination, set out by the department of the hon the Minister. If one is not White, there are four different groups of dependants. If you are White there is only one group. White dependants of Transmed members have exactly the same benefits as the member has.

The first category refers to dependants of Indians employed in Natal. They operate separately and they have their own medical scheme. They do not make any additional contributions towards the fund. They do receive medical treatment by medical practitioners nominated by Transmed. They are entitled to such medicines as may be prescribed and to hospital treatment only if a member is referred by the nominated doctor.

This does not include specialist treatment in private hospitals.

There is a second category and I think my hon colleague might be interested in this. This category refers to dependants of Coloured employees with five years’ service. In other words, they have to wait five years before they qualify for medical benefits. I should like to know from the hon member for Carletonville if this represents the same treatment as that of White members of Transmed. Is that discrimination in favour of Whites, or is it in favour of Coloureds? The hon member should answer me. [Interjections.]

Allow me to tell the hon member what benefits they get. They have to pay an additional 65 cents. They can receive medical treatment by a medical practitioner nominated by Transmed and they can get such medicine as is prescribed, but they do not get hospital treatment. Where is that hon member’s reverse discrimination?

There is a third category, namely that of dependants of Coloured, Indian and Black employees, other than an Indian employed in Natal, with two years’ service who are resident on the SATS premises. In other words they have to live there. Do White dependants have to live on the SATS premises? These people have to pay an additional amount; they get everything else but no hospital treatment.

I now come to the fourth group of dependants. They are dependants of Coloured, Indian and Black employees not classified under category 1, 2 or 3. In other words, they are not Indians and do not live in Natal. They are not Coloureds who had been employed for a period longer than five years; they are not dependants of the different racial groups who have had two years’ service and who live on the SATS premises. In other words, they do not qualify. The additional contribution for this category of members is nil. This group does not get medical treatment by a medical practitioner nominated by Transmed; they do not get medicine as may be prescribed; and they do not get hospital treatment either.

Therefore these employees’ dependants have absolutely no claim to any services offered by Transmed. I think the hon member for Carletonville owes us an apology for not stating the facts here today because I am sure that he knows the facts. I would like to say to the hon the Minister that I do not think they have anything to be proud of either.

May I give hon members the example of the Indian pilot. If he lived …

You are a paternalist!

I am amazed at the hon the Minister’s comment. [Interjections.]

Order!

The hon member for Port Elizabeth Central called upon the hon the Minister to resign but after what he has just said I think he has no choice but to resign.

The dependants of this South African pilot, the Indian, who has exactly the same responsibility to fly all the dependants and members of Transmed—and even the hon members of the CP unless they are going to tell me they are not going to fly if there is a non-White pilot in the SAA and would rather get out of the plane—are treated totally and utterly differently to the White pilot’s dependants. Not only that; he himself cannot even go to the doctor of his choice and will not get specialist treatment.

I am not finished with the hon the member for Carletonville. The hon member said that the White members of Transmed now have to pay 25% of all the benefits they receive but he knows that is not true. Yes, they have to pay 25% of the fees for consultation and medicine. Let me give the hon member a good example of what these members and their dependants get free and have to pay not even 25% for. Transmed remains liable for the total cost subject to the scale of benefits in respect of the following: Services rendered in registered hospitals and nursing homes.

Therefore, they get full payment for hospital treatment and if they undergo a cardiac or an open-heart operation, they have to pay the hospital fee. What form of racial discrimination is the hon member talking about that is not in favour of Whites? They get accommodation in general wards, theatre fees, operations, procedures and treatment, blood transfusions, medicine and dressings. They get all those things for nothing. [Interjections.] I would like to say to the hon member for Carletonville that he totally misrepresented the facts here today and that his speech cannot be taken seriously, and my party and I feel that his party cannot be taken seriously at all.

I believe that the SATS is doing its best in order to achieve parity. I realise that they are also talking to trade unions. However, I feel that it is rather sad to read the following, and I quote from a letter from the SATS’s medical scheme:

I think that is not good enough. I believe that any employee of the SATS who is a member of Transmed and who has dependants should be treated equally and should have the same opportunity to benefit from the best medical treatment available in South Africa.

I would like to tell the hon the Minister that I have the habit of repeating the same topic every year, and I will speak about this again next year. I will haunt the hon the Minister as I have haunted him about smoking on flights of the South African Airways. One thing the hon the Minister did that I approve of is that he allowed the SAA to put a stop to smoking on flights. In the beginning there were quite a few arguments about it but later on everybody settled down and today everybody is happy and satisfied that smoking is not permitted.

I still cannot believe that a Government department can advertise smoking at airports and stations, while we know of the harmful effects. I would also like the hon the Minister to get waitingrooms and waiting areas to follow the lead of the Cape Town Municipality so that we can have areas where non-smokers can enjoy the benefit of clean air. The Cape Town Municipality is showing his department what can be done. I think it is essential that the hon the Minister should also care for those who do not like to be poisoned by the noxious fumes blown at us by people who are totally inconsiderate.

Mr Chairman, allow me to dwell for a few moments on the hon member for Carletonville. I dreaded the day when that hon member would have a chance to speak here in a joint meeting. What I have heard about him thus far was today proved beyond any doubt to be true.

I want to appeal to the hon member for Carletonville, if he eats bread—it does not matter whether it is white bread or brown bread—to stop doing so, because Black people bake it. He will not be able to drink milk either, because Black people work at the dairies. If he has a servant of colour he must get rid of her as soon as possible and see whether he cannot get a woman of his own colour to come and work for him.

What is his colour? [Interjections.]

The hon the Minister is going to deal with this Appropriation Bill with us for the last time. I want to ask the hon the Minister a favour. When a train enters the station there is fellow who goes along tapping the wheels …

He pumps them! [Interjections.]

… and there is another fellow who listens. Now that the hon the Minister is going to privatise he must not abolish that job of the fellow who sits and listens, so that when the voters of Carletonville get rid of that hon member we can reserve that job for him. [Interjections.]

I want to thank the hon the Minister. I see that the uniforms for the respective posts the people hold, now all look the same. This is a definite step in the right direction. We thank him for this, but the hon the Minister had occasion to tell us that he had a programme of equalisation. The time has now come for the hon the Minister to explain to us on this last historic occasion what progress has been made with that equalising programme. He must also explain what progress has been made with the equalisation of ranks—specifically what the other hon members also talked about—and precisely where we stand with regard to the housing subsidy for the different groups. What are the travel benefits like, specifically those of people of colour? Are the travel benefits of the employees of the SATS the same as those of their colleagues?

The hon the Minister will have to make a serious effort to talk to the different industrial sectors. When we ask for more trains the hon the Minister says it is only during peak periods. Somewhere along the line we will have to hold discussions with people who employ large numbers of people so that half of them can start working at 5 o’clock and stop at 2 o’clock and the other half can start at 9 o’clock and stop at 6 o’clock. I want to tell the hon the Minister that matters have become unbearable.

We cannot emphasise the problem our people are experiencing too strongly. As an example I want to mention the train from Strand to the hon the Minister. By the time it reaches Firgrove Station there is not place for a mouse. It must still stop at Eerste River Station, and now we have the people from Blue Downs who must also use this train. The people are trampling on one another. They are being assaulted. They are being robbed. They are being indecently assaulted. They cannot move a muscle. They are packed in like sardines and nobody can do a thing. The hon the Minister will definitely have to give serious attention to this.

Here I want to link up with the hon member for Vredendal. We must get up early and go, and then we must travel a few days running. We must travel a few afternoons running, and the hon the Minister will find that there will not even be place for his bodyguard on the train—that is how full it is. People are getting hurt on those trains and they are blaming us. They ask what we are doing about it. We are being criticised, and specifically after the rapid development in the Blue Downs area.

The same number of trains which did service in 1978 cannot still do service in 1989. There are ten times as many people in that area. We have an urgent need there. The hon the Minister must come and take a look. If he just informs me, I will accompany him.

We can say that the hon the Minister has sold the SATS, but there is something worrying me. We see the fine advertisements on television in which reference is made to deregulation and privatisation, but the hon the Minister has a Road Transportation Board which would seem to have preferences, or “friends” to whom road transportation permits may be issued.

Minibuses are a means of self upliftment, because a person who is unemployed can obtain a minibus in some way or other. However, the nearest he gets to a road transportation permit is at the local authority which allocates him a taxi rank. However, then his nightmare begins, because he then comes up against the Road Transportation Board. They reject your application and if you make enquiries they tell you you are free to appeal. It has become customary to use a specific attorney, because then the application goes through without much trouble. This is causing suspicion and the hon the Minister will have to take an urgent look at this. I am not saying that we must hand out taxi licences left, right and centre, but it is not fair either if I apply today and my application is refused, but my friend applies tomorrow, and his application is approved. Nobodyneed ask for reasons or give an explanation.

Something which is worrying me—this has been very noticeable recently—is that when trade unions start holding discussions with the department on service benefits they always get the cold shoulder, but the moment threats are made the increase is suddenly granted. Last year we had an example of this. Must we resort to arm-twisting, or is there not someone who can see for himself that the people have a valid point when they start negotiating? Now we again have the example of the air traffic controllers who were raising their voices this week. The pilots wanted to flee the country. Hon members can think for themselves what would happen if a pilot were to decide in Paris that he is simply going to stay there; he does not even want to bring the aircraft back, because the salaries are definitely far better there. We must pay these people a decent salary which is in fine with their status and responsibility.

What would happen if that pilot were one day to think the same thing I frequently think while sitting in an aircraft, namely that all our lives are in his hands? We must pay him, because he must always be prepared. Whether it is the hon member for Carletonville in the aircraft or whether it is I sitting next to him, that pilot is not interested in any one person. He is trying to the best of his ability to get everyone where they have to be, in good time.

What does the hon member for Carletonville say? Ask him what he thinks!

The hon member for Carletonville will have another chance to speak in this Chamber, and then he can react.

I want to tell the hon the Minister that when we proceed to privatise, we must be careful not to privatise apartheid too, because, as the hon member for Parktown pointed out, there are definite hurtful measures, even as regards Transmed. If we privatise and transfer these matters as they are, it means we are actually retrogressing. In effect this will mean that we are privatising apartheid.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Macassar will forgive me if I do not react to his speech. I do want to tell him, though, that I think we all agree particularly with what he said at the beginning of his speech. We can fully understand that. He initially made a plea on behalf of his people, and if I now make a plea on behalf of my people, I hope he will also have the complete understanding that I have for him.

Over the years the SATS have rendered an exceptional service to South Africa; to our entire country with all its people. I want to emphasize that. I believe the SATS have really opened up our country.

Right at the beginning, with the building of the first railway line from Cape Town to Wellington, there were, in fact, quite a number of misgivings because the farmers were up in arms about it, saying that a railway fine over their farms was a monstrosity because the engine which would traverse it at the frightening speed of 30 miles per hour would in any event trample all the pigs, chickens, cattle and donkeys to death.

In reality, the converse was true. Although they also complained that the value of the land would drop because there would now be a railway line running across the land, this was not so. In the long run the value of the land increased and the farmers very quickly discovered that the fine running across their farms was a particular asset to them. This was because the railway line offered them transportation at a reasonable tariff, and it was efficient.

Just as important to agriculture was the transportation of bulk cargo, upon which the farmer is still just as dependent today, and which was delivered at a subsidised tariff and at a cost to the farmer which was ultimately far lower than that at which he could transport it himself. Under those circumstances, therefore, the train ran regularly and everything under the sun was transported. The service that was rendered to South Africa and to its agriculture, was of inestimable value. Everything, right down to the mail and packages and the smallest of things, was regularly delivered to the four corners of our country.

It was therefore an era in which everyone in South Africa enjoyed these services without ever worrying about tomorrow. Over the years, however, a few things happened which altered the idyllic picture of the transport services throughout the country. Firstly the transport services adopted the policy that cross-subsidization had to be phased out. It had to come to an end and every service therefore had to ultimately operate without losses. Wherever losses still occurred, someone else had to make good those losses. Logically enough, this resulted in some of the services becoming too expensive for agriculture.

Owing to the fact that farmers began to transport more and more goods themselves, or to hire contractors to do it on their behalf, there was consequently a decrease in transportation by the SATS. It is tremendously difficult to determine whether this situation arose because the SATS pushed up their tariffs too high or, on the other hand, because the farmers began to use the SATS merely as an emergency chemist, so to speak. The fact is, however, that the SATS’s infrastructure is being under-utilised today, and this is the case throughout South Africa. This has caused farmers to complain that there is a shortage of services. They are complaining about tariffs that are too high, and they have complained throughout that the mail delivery is poor.

Without searching for the culprit, without attempting to determine whether the chicken or the egg came first, I want to tell hon members that the development of our country, with the concomitant high demands that are being made in all quarters, has resulted in the SATS no longer meeting the basic needs of agriculture today, and also in it charging tariffs which are sometimes unaffordable. All of this creates a problem for us. On the other hand, I want to state that it is impossible for the SATS to render all these services simply for the sake of rendering a service, without making a profit and without at least covering their costs.

These divergent interests worry me personally because I am involved in agriculture. I cannot accept that simply closing down or scaling down is always the best option. Likewise it is difficult to accept that the infrastructure of which I made mention earlier, should simply stand and rust away. Without traffic, a railway line rusts. A closed station still requires at least maintenance costs, and a truck that is standing idle is a dead loss. However, it does no good for agriculture to criticise the SATS without searching its own conscience, and that is what I should like to do today.

After all, a railway system cannot allow a truck to run unladen simply to please people. Such trucks are running empty because we in agriculture are not really supporting our national transport system. Since the SATS are moving in the direction of ultimate privatisation, this brings us to the future. What will the view of this new structure be with regard to tariffs—specifically for agriculture—in the future? What will consequently be the view of agriculture, and what support may be expected from it with regard to this new organisation? When I think about this and attempt to visualise what will ultimately happen, it makes me even more concerned. This concern motivates me to appeal for two things.

First of all, I want to appeal to the SATS, both now and in their new form, to reconsider their costing methods. I referred to this last year, and to the fact that in advancing this argument, I was fully aware of the SATS’s problems. I nevertheless wish to state that I honestly believe that the costing is capable of adaptation.

Secondly, I want to appeal to my fellow-farmers. I realise that a motor truck of one’s own is a wonderful convenience. I realise that it can sometimes be cheaper and that it is definitely a faster transport system. I want to state in all responsibility that I believe few farmers actually do a costing on their own transport—on what that convenient transport of their own actually costs them. I therefore wish to make the appeal, for the sake of South Africa, and specifically its agriculture, that the SATS will take another look at this costing system of theirs and that they will reflect on tomorrow’s transport needs—those of South Africa and its agriculture. In making this appeal to the SATS on the one hand, I also want to make an appeal to my fellow-farmers.

This year the SATS have come forward with a budget in which meat transportation costs, for example, have risen by only 5,8%, fertilizer transportation costs by only 5,4%, and maize transportation costs by only 9,8%. Everyone will admit that these price increases are extremely reasonable and well below the inflation rate.

When one takes everything into account, even those instances in which transport costs have been increased by higher margins, such as the transport costs of cattle fodder, which have risen by 10%, and those of fruit and vegetables, which have risen by 12%, the increases still remain below the inflation rate. Agriculture in South Africa has much to be grateful for with regard to this appropriation.

Finally, I shall content myself with an appeal to my fellow-farmers to judge what came first—the chicken or the egg. I want to appeal to them to support our own transport system, even in a new form. It is going to benefit everyone in this country, and particularly those of us in agriculture. It is going to be in the best interests of us all.

If we in agriculture do not wish to do that, we should at least scale down our complaints.

Mr Chairman, the SATS’s foreign exchange losses have been very widely discussed, not only during this debate but at the joint committee, and they received extensive press coverage. As a result of the forex losses the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central strongly called upon the hon the Minister to resign.

I want to point out that this matter came before the Joint Committee on Transport Services and Communication in Pretoria and a report was furnished to each and every member.

Before the report could come before the committee it was discussed widely in the newspapers. However, I want to say that there is some confidentiality in respect of these reports that are given to members, and reading between the lines, one can deduce that this was given to the newspapers with a view to gaining political mileage.

There was also a call yesterday from the hon member of the House of Delegates for Reservoir Hills for the resignation of the hon the Minister. Today we have had another member of the PFP asking for his resignation. I read in this morning’s newspaper that the calls for his resignation were being widely discussed. I hold no brief for the hon the Minister, but I must say that we have an hon Minister who controls two large departments on transport matters—the SATS is an enormous business operated by the Government, and the other is the Department of Transport which controls roads and other matters. I think he has now been given an additional portfolio to look after, namely Manpower. If he were a useless Minister, I do not think they could have given him the additional portfolio to look after.

In the course of my experience, contact and dealings with the hon the Minister, I have found him to be forthright. He has attended to all matters in regard to which representations have been been made to him, and he has been consistent and conscientious. It is therefore very unfortunate that his resignation has been called for. However, what is strange and surprising is that when each Minister comes up with his Vote here, they find some fault and call for his resignation. However, they never spell out what the next government will be, and who will be in charge of these portfolios—this is also interesting.

The forex losses were very unfortunate. This has largely been due to certain loans that have been taken up by the SATS and as a net result of the weakening dollar and rand and the poor current exchange rate the South African Government has to contend with losses.

Pressure was applied upon the Government in many ways. There were sanctions and other political pressures applied upon the South African Government. Therefore one has to realise that the South African Government has been under severe pressure and that if it wanted to obtain the necessary facilities from overseas it had to pay the price. I do not think, therefore, that it is fair to call for the resignation of the hon the Minister. I think all of us must help and co-operate in order to build up some form of stability for our South African community.

I want to deal very briefly with the hon member for Reservoir Hills. I think the PFP is a sort of band in which all the members have to play an instrument. The hon member for Reservoir Hills has not served on the Joint Committee on Transport and Communications, so he knows nothing about the SATS. For him to call for the resignation of the hon the Minister is therefore absolute nonsense. [Interjections.] This must be said in no uncertain terms.

Before I conclude I want to take the opportunity to thank the leader of the NP for spelling out very clearly at a large meeting in Nigel what he has in mind for the entire community of South Africa. He said, inter alia, that he was going to continue the reform initiatives. I think this is a very bright sign for the whole South African community.

The meeting was held in Nigel, a town controlled by a CP municipality and yet the attendance and the ovation he obtained were tremendous. We thus have a leader of a ruling party who has preferred to continue with the reform processes and I think in a reasonable period of time one will find the entire community with its Coloured, Black, White and other population groups enjoying the same facilities and stability in this country.

I, on behalf of the ruling party in the House of the Delegates and the national leader, wish to congratulate the national leader of the NP for all his efforts as far as his initiative programme is concerned.

Mr Chairman, I listened with interest yesterday to the hon the Minister’s statement that racial discrimination no longer existed on the SATS’s stations. One must grant him that as far as apartheid signs are concerned, any visible evidence of apartheid has been removed, but although I am saying that any visible signs of racial discrimination no longer exist, I nevertheless want to say that there are many signs of hidden or invisible racial discrimination. I shall deal with this aspect this afternoon.

This morning I briefly walked around Cape Town station to see what the situation was there. In the main concourse of the station, on the Adderley Street side, there are yellow signs at all the gates which give access to platforms one to 24. The signs read: “Entry only for commuters with first-class tickets.”

Third-class passengers may therefore not walk through these gates to their third-class coaches, but have to climb the stairs up to the station roof, walk across the roof to the other side of the platform and then go down the stairs again to the ground level in order to reach the same train as the first-class passengers, but from the opposite direction and over a distance of 450 metres. Apart from the inconvenience, particularly for older people, of having to climb two flights of stairs, the third-class passengers have to walk 450 metres over and around the station to get to the third-class coach. If those passengers were permitted to enter the platform of the main concourse, they would only have to walk 135m, in other words a distance three times shorter than that of the other route.

When a third-class commuter arrives at Cape Town station by train, he is again not permitted to leave the platform through the Adderley Street entrance to the station because the sign on the platform indicates: “Exit only for first-class passengers”. The result is that instead of having to walk only 135m to leave the platform, the third-class commuter again has to make the long detour of 450m in the wrong direction. In one working day a third-class commuter therefore has to walk a distance of 900m to and from his coach, while the first-class commuter only has to walk 270m. The latter distance is approximately four times shorter than the former one. I think this is indefensible. Since more than 90% of those who travel third class are Black, and virtually all the Whites travel first class, this devious arrangement has the effect that the first-class part of the platform is White and the third-class part Black. [Interjections.] I am not saying that this is the object, but it is the effect. It is indefensible that third-class commuters—people who are generally poorer and who work from early in the morning until late at night—are forced to travel these additional long distances to get to the same train. No wonder many of them are late for work.

It is nothing short of a concealed form of racial discrimination. I earnestly but kindly want to request the hon the Minister today …

To resign!

… to abolish this discriminatory system. No, he doesn’t have to resign. He must simply abolish it.

The retention of this system gives ammunition to people like the communists who tell us that the struggle in South Africa is not a racial question, but one of class. By implementing this system and continuing with it, the foundations are being laid for a class struggle, and I do not believe the Government wants that.

I am asking seriously why a third-class passenger must put up with that inconvenience. Why can he not use the same platform to get to and from the station? He has to use his own third-class coach in any event. Why must he walk three times as far to get to the third-class coach? Nothing is going to happen to those of us who are standing on the first-class side. [Interjections.] It is concealed apartheid, because 90% of the third-class passengers are Black.

All the classes have a long distance to walk!

No, that is not true!

Mr Chairman, allow me to join the hon the Minister of Transport Services in the sincere gratitude expressed towards his hon Deputy Minister and the three Commissioners of the South African Transport Services Board for their outstanding and proficient services in the previous financial year. I share the same sentiment.

As hon members know, the SATS is a national transport undertaking and comprises a national railway system, together with a comprehensive road transport service, principal harbours, airlines and pipelines. This is a huge undertaking and requires exceptional business skill. Nevertheless, I shall restrict myself to passenger services.

The first paragraph under “Passenger Services” in the SATS report strikes a poor note. It stipulates a decrease of 40% in the number of passengers utilising main-line trains.

The reason is ascribed to fewer second-class and third-class short distance passengers. To me this is terrible and no business can be run on these lines.

The first question that comes to one’s mind is: Why? What is wrong with the management? A drop of 40% in the number of commuters is far too high a figure. It simply does not happen overnight.

All over the world and particularly in the European countries the railways are a source of national pride and are fully patronised. Besides, they are reliable and the cheapest mode of transport. The opposite is the case in South Africa. Why? Why the losses?

The answer is not an intricate one. The problem is apartheid. The SATS has rigidly conformed to the monster of apartheid. This monster has crippled the SATS. The taxpayer now has to pay the penalty for this. The duplication of services throughout the country has been a co-monster and this duplication is indisputably a very expensive commodity.

It is good that the SATS has now opened its eyes but it is too late. Empty coaches do not collect revenue for the SATS. Thousands of rand in taxpayers’ money has been utilised for duplication rather than improvements. Because of this people sought better alternatives. They turned to road transport—hence all the buses, mini-buses, combis and cars.

Needless to say, the SATS never attempted to suit the needs of the commuter. In most cases— especially in small towns on the platteland—it appears as if selling a ticket to a non-White is doing him a favour. It is also true that attitudes have changed.

What is required of us is to popularise the train services. Timetables should be easily available.

I find it very difficult to be persuaded that the capital budget was compiled after careful study and planning whilst the number of passengers has decreased by 40%, irrespective of class. The hon the Minister has found it expedient to increase the fares by 10%. This 10% merely serves as a catalyst to drive away those who would have been passengers of the SATS. In this way the SATS plays into the hands of shrewd and diligent taxi owners. This rise may sound economical, as it falls below the inflation rate but in reality it is inflationary. Hardships are directly attached to it. It is ironic that the fares paid to mini-buses and taxis are far below those of the SATS, hence the drop in commuters. Who is to blame? The owners of private taxis or the SATS?

The problem of reform in this apartheid situation has brought about irritation amongst some employees. Promotions amongst people of colour are very, very slow and the cry is for upward mobility. It can also not be denied that certain jobs are still reserved for Whites. The hon the Minister must tell us how long this situation is going to prevail. We would like to see a change. Historically the SATS has been in existence since 31 May 1910. Since 1910, almost 79 years ago, no people of colour have been appointed as station masters or railway foremen, just to mention a few. These jobs have been reserved for Whites. The hon the Minister must please tell us why this has taken place. We would like to see people of colour in these jobs.

Training should be open to all and merit should be the criterion. Artisans and technicians should be drawn from all population groups. This taboo that has existed since 1910 should be changed radically.

In conclusion I wish the hon the Minister a peaceful and economically healthy financial year ahead. He should take advantage of the change of heart and attitude and the healthy prevailing winds of change as demonstrated by the hon leader of the NP. This is the vision of a new South Africa for which we have been waiting for 40 years.

The hon leader of the NP had the following to say in his speech in Parliament (Hansard, 1989, col 199):

I would like to see this change properly interpreted and translated in transport affairs.

Mr Chairman, like other hon members, allow me to say thank you to the hon the Minister, the hon the Deputy Minister and the management of the SATS for the information tours that we are taken on. Two hon members who also occasionally undertake these tours, asked me to make an appeal to the hon the Minister and the management to allow us to examine the new train service between Johannesburg and Sun City this year, while we still have the opportunity. I have undertaken to place the request on record on behalf of the hon members for Riversdal and Dysselsdorp.

To be speaking at this time of the afternoon makes me think of the days when I was still a little boy and went to visit my grandparents on the farm. This is the time when the sun begins to set and the chickens have to come home. In those days, the old people did not keep the chickens in cages all day; they scratched around in the farmyard and pecked at pieces of greenery. When the chickens come home and climb onto the perches for the night, they make a terrible noise. Hon members who stand on the podium to speak, probably feel the same way as I do at this time of the afternoon. The chickens are going home; some are packing their briefcases, and it is difficult to get the attention of hon members.

I should like to take this opportunity to speak to the hon member for Roodepoort. I should like to let hon members know that the members of the joint committee have gained the impression, particularly over the last two years, that this hon member is hell-bent on commuter services. He alleged that commuter services could definitely be operated at a profit.

The bullet train!

Hon members are referring to the bullet train. When the First Reading debate on this specific legislation began yesterday, I waited with great expectation for the hon member to tell us how the services could be operated profitably. Not only would he be the hero of South Africa, but also of the whole world, because all over the world railway services are still seeking the secret recipe to make commuter services work. I also discussed the matter with my colleague the hon member for De Aar, and he said that he understood it. He told me that he had the support of CP members and that the situation was different. Once again this is a case in which if there is no tree, they will find one. The issue is that of the bullet train concept, with their total compartmentalisation of different population groups and the policy of bullet trains, according to which people commute from their so-called homelands to their places of employment—say for example, in the PWV area—which they put to us in 1987. Atthisstage they must already say that it could happen and if they ultimately find out— in the unfortunate and impossible event of their coming to power—that these commuter services by means of the bullet train cannot be run profitably, they will simply have to find another tree. I expect that the hon member will be able to react to this later. The hon the Minister, the management and the members of the joint committee are looking forward, in particular, to the moment when he produces this magic formula to help them out of their dilemma.

The hon member for Roodepoort also voted against the Legal Succession to the South African Transport Services Bill. I have always had problems with the hon member. I could not follow what he said yesterday about cross-subsidisation, but I want to tell the hon member that the envisaged commuter corporation is the best thing which could happen to the SATS, so that this millstone around their neck may finally be removed. I believe that before the idea of deregulation and ultimately of privatisation was considered, this millstone around their neck had a terrifically negative influence on the morale of the management. It does not matter what is done with the airways, pipelines or road transport; if they make a profit, cross-subsidisation must follow, and that money must then be used to subsidise these commuter services. I do not think that is a good motivation. I want to congratulate the hon the Minister on the fact that the personnel of the SATS saw the opportunity and made use of it, because it appears to me that a large obstacle has been removed from their path.

I am very sorry that the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central is not here today. I should like to associate myself with the hon member for Kempton Park, who made the remark here yesterday afternoon that the only way the new Democratic Party which is to be formed could get rid of the Cabinet, would be to demand that every hon Minister resign. The hon member for Port Elizabeth Central referred to a few instances in which Ministers resigned in order to set certain criteria according to which a Minister must resign if there is something wrong in his department.

He mentioned, inter alia, the example of the Japanese Minister of Defence who resigned a few years ago as a result of an aeroplane crash in which one of his airforce planes was involved.

I do not think we should compare the ethics and morality of the Japanese with ours. We only have to refer to the Second World War, in which the Japanese, when they were in trouble at a stage, trained young pilots by means of a crash course and turned them into kamikaze pilots. That meant that they loaded a plane with explosives, and the pilot then dived into a target and thereby committed suicide.

In South Africa we do not think like that. When we are involved in a war, we try to safeguard the lives of our soldiers. [Interjections.] Yes, that is something else. To the Japanese there is nothing wrong with committing hara-kiri.

If the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central expects this Government to commit hara-kiri, he is making a big mistake. I want to ask him to lay down these criteria according to which the hon the Minister must accept responsibility for a problem in his department. Must this hon Minister resign when two trains collide somewhere and a few people die? Must he resign then, or must he resign when a yellow truck drives in front of another vehicle and the person in that other vehicle is killed? Is that why he must resign? The hon member must help us in this regard. I am glad that he is now entering the Chamber.

Let me tell hon members that this witch-hunt that is being conducted by the opposition parties is a very dangerous thing. If these standards are spelt out here by the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central, he can make them as low as possible. He can make his criteria the case in which that yellow truck, with a W as the last letter of the registration number, drives in front of a vehicle and a member of the public as a result of the driver’s negligence is killed. However, it is then also not impossible for the Official Opposition to plant a person or persons in every Government department to embarrass a Minister, and when such an occasion arises, to return to Parliament and tell the Minister that he must resign as a result of that incident.

[Inaudible.]

Mr Chairman, I see my time is running out. Last year, I paid tribute to the employees of the SATS—specifically those in East London—and this was placed on record. I know them better than the people in other constituencies. I again want to pay tribute to their high productivity. We can see this from the figures. I want to assure hon members that they are dedicated people. They are people who tremble with excitement at the mere thought that they are eventually going to enter a market in which they will be able to compete freely. At the moment, they are unable to compete freely; they have one hand tied behind their backs, specifically when it comes to the expertise of so-called transport brokers who walk into the marketing offices of the SATS and establish what the tariffs are in order to undercut the tariffs that the SATS quote. I hope that the local divisions, when we have deregulated, will enjoy greater freedom of movement when it comes to negotiating tariffs with clients. I hope that will be possible. I should very much like the hon the Minister and his department to pay attention to that.

I just want to tell the hon member for Northern Transvaal, who spoke before me, that we do indeed have artisans from other population groups who are being trained at the Electric Light and Power Training Centre in East London, which belongs to the SATS. He must make sure of his facts before he is given the floor, and I want to suggest that he discusses the matter with his colleagues on the joint committee.

Mr Chairman, listening to the hon member for East London North, I recalled the words of the late Cecil John Rhodes. His words were, of course, “Go north, young man.” However, I think that Rhodes’s advice to that hon member, encircled as he is with the corruption and mayhem in East London City and the surrounds, would be, “Go south, young man.” That is the only area where a NP man will survive in the future. [Interjections.]

Referring to the Budget of the hon the Minister, I would like to put on record that I believe that the responsibility for the problems of the SATS rests on the fact that it is headed by a Minister who has not the vaguest notion of how to run a business. The SATS is the biggest business operating in South Africa. Last year, the hon the Minister will remember, I called for his salary to be reduced by 50%. I must confess at this stage, after looking at the record, that I overestimated his worth. This year I will therefore recommend that his salary be adjusted or reduced by the amount lost in defective forex deals, although they were not his fault. In other words, he will be in the red for the rest of his short career in Parliament. [Interjections.]

The hon the Minister will remember that I asked many questions concerning his department last year. If I had to comment on all the answers received, I would need hours in which to do so. My colleague, the hon member for Middelburg, has asked me to tender his apologies for his absence and to raise certain matters on his behalf. This will also restrict the time I have.

When the hon the Minister took over this department, the SATS had an apparent policy to keep the first class rail tariffs below the economy class tariff for air travel. In an answer that I received to a question which I put, No 1345,1 was told that before March 1986, this was always the case. In July 1987, however, for some strange reason, the hon the Minister decided to make the first class rail fare from Johannesburg to Cape Town, for example, coincide exactly with the economy class air fare from Johannesburg to Cape Town. We all know that, in addition to an equal fare, it is actually placing upon the passenger services the burden of having to sell a product which is more expensive and less favourable as far as the public are concerned.

To travel by train from Johannesburg to Cape Town is comfortable. I agree with that, although it is becoming rather unbearable with the racket which one picks up on the stations as one stops on the route down. In addition to the racket which is on the increase, we have the situation of meals costing in excess of R30. We also have bedding, and based on the present tariffs of the SATS for economy class air travel and first class rail travel, it will now cost R290 to travel first class rail and R270 to travel economy class by air, the difference being 26 hours as opposed to 2 hours. I would like to know how the hon the Minister expects the rail passenger services to compete with the air services on that basis. I would like an explanation as to what the motivation is for this.

I want to raise another point on mismanagement regarding the very important aspect of security. On 24 February I received an answer to a question which I asked the hon the Minister as to whether regular checks are carried out on the security fences at Jan Smuts Airport; if not, why not; if so, at what intervals; and whether an unauthorised person gained access to a runway at this airport on or about 14 January. I received the following answer:

What a pity. Sir! [Interjections.] As a result of the braking, two tyres required replacement and the cost of the damage was approximately R1 200.

If the hon the Minister is shocked at my remark, he would maybe have been more shocked had this individual had a bomb in his hand and thrown it at the aircraft, blowing the people in it to kingdom come with the concomitant international repercussions this would have had for South Africa. [Interjections.] Thank goodness that only R1200 worth of damage was done. That hon member talks about a disgrace, but I think it is a disgrace that this sort of thing can happen. [Interjections.]

Order! I am not at all prepared to allow this debate to become a shouting match. Every hon member is entitled to speak in comparative silence and to be heard. The hon member may continue.

I would like to repeat that we can be thankful that only R1 200 worth of damage was caused and that the incident did not result in the loss of the lives of a considerable number of passengers in that aircraft. As I said, we can all appreciate and understand the implications of the international repercussions, because some clown further north would have turned around and said that we had actually arranged that on purpose because it was an Air Zimbabwe aircraft.

I also want to talk about the implications of these tariff increases on the price of petrol. There is no doubt that the price of petrol is going to be increased. The only doubt concerns when it is going to happen. We know that the proposed increase is one cent per litre.

*I just wonder whether the Government will be able to resist the temptation to milk that financial cow once more, as was the case recently. The South African vehicle owner has absolutely no defence against fuel price increases.

†During this time our neighbours sit in the lap of luxury with regard to petrol prices. In Swaziland, for example, the price of 93 octane petrol is 75 cents per litre and 97 octane costs 80 cents. Does the hon the Minister want to tell me that even Swaziland is being run better than South Africa under a NP Government?

The hon member for Bryanston comes with his fancy ideas of the SAA being isolated from the rest of the SATS so that air tariffs may be reduced. He and his party must come clean on this matter. It is obvious where the problem lies. Air, road and pipeline services are already running at a profit, but it is the rail-passenger service which hangs like an albatross around the neck of the rest of the department.

The hon member and his party must now state clearly whether or not they are in favour of increasing the fares which are the most heavily subsidised by the SATS—those of the third class passengers whose fare is one half of the tariff of second class and one third of the first class tariff? In other words, first class passengers have to pay three times what third class passengers have to pay to use the same service. I think that it is about time they made themselves clear on that issue.

I would like to say to the hon member for Primrose that he should pay more attention to seeing that the hon the Minister improves Transport Services and leave the salvation of the White fatherland to us. He must not pretend that he does not understand CP policy. He knows who owns the land which will form the basis of the White fatherland, or does his party intend taking that land away from its White owners and also redistributing it in the way it is now redistributing the wealth? [Interjections.]

The hon member should rather assure us that no further corruption bombs are going to explode, or tell us which NP-controlled municipality has opened beaches and which has closed them. Perhaps he can tell us which leader is in control in South Africa. Is it the hon the State President, the Acting State President or the head of Club 69, who had to recruit the senior citizens resident in the whole of the East Rand recently to attract sufficient people to a meeting in Nigel? [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I am grateful for this opportunity to speak. The speaker before me expressed some contentious and most regrettable sentiments, and I just hope the CP will not agree with those sentiments.

I should like to thank the hon the Minister for the detailed report he has submitted to us. I particularly welcome that aspect of it in which he spelt out the promotion of labour relations to us. The steps that are being taken to bring about industrial peace in the country and in the Transport Services are deserving of praise.

The grievances of the workers are coming under the spotlight and it is the industrial action of certain groups that has led to this and actually compelled the Transport Services to act in such a way that labour peace and labour stability are already visible to us on the horizon. I trust that they will continue with this.

When we take the example of the hon the Minister of Finance and those South African economists who are appealing for the redistribution of wealth in this country, which will be conducive to the promotion of productivity in our industries, this is something which, in turn, will lead to wealth for everyone in the country. The welfare of South Africa lies in this policy direction.

There was a time when we were completely dependent and reliant upon manufacturers in Great Britain and Japan. It was only the danger of the German U-boats and the blockade around South Africa that forced us to come to our senses and to become self-sufficient. I think the time has now come to do so once again. Influential people are supporting the policy and the standpoint of our economists who are not going to sit in a corner and cry about the threat of sanctions and about the lack of foreign loans. The economists are appealing to us rather to set to work in order to negate these storm clouds.

I particularly want to congratulate the hon the Minister on the civilised, enlightened and modern labour policy he is developing. Labour relations will improve if he continues to encourage communication between management and the workers, and to present courses in negotiation skills to the supervisors.

An aspect of the report that has a profound effect on me, however, is the fact that a sensitivity is being developed, particularly among supervisors, with regard to the striving for human dignity among Black workers, and also the fact that various experts in labour relations are being consulted. These things are helping us to implement and to practise an enlightened labour policy. If the hon the Minister persists on this path, South Africa will reap the fruits of reconciliation and industrial peace. The uplifting role which the SATS are playing in Africa is undisputable. Rolling stock and expertise are being provided to Africa, and it is known throughout the world that this is being done, although many countries deny it.

We are nevertheless pleased that the Prime Minister of Zimbabwe, Mr Mugabe, said at a recent congress in Harare that he did not wish to take the lead in the sanctions campaign against South Africa because his country’s trade with South Africa was increasing daily. What is the reality? I am not mentioning these things to run down South Africa’s policy or to disparage the SATS. I am mentioning them to prove that there is a good reason why South Africa is doing this.

What is the real state of affairs? Every day there are some 8 000 South African units and rolling stock to the value of R700 million on the railways of South Africa’s neighbours. They, too, have their problems. We are familiar with some of their problems, such as attacks by terrorists, for example. It is not only we who are being threatened by terrorists. They, too, are being threatened.

There is also the problem of management skills. As young Black countries in Africa, who have simply been left behind without the elementary education, expertise and responsibility, which the colonial powers denied them, they have not been able to develop these skills. That is why I am pleased that South Africa has accepted the responsibility for this, and is rendering assistance to these African countries.

It is true that we earn a great deal of money from our harbours and railways, but the service we are rendering in Africa is praiseworthy. It is praiseworthy to help those states, because we are Africans from Africa and we must help Africa to develop to its maximum potential.

Mr Chairman, it is an honour to follow a gentleman such as the hon member for Grassy Park. It is an honour and a good thing to listen to somebody who compliments an hon Minister for what he has done well. I also agree with him that we must help Africa although in some cases it is very hard to do so.

It is a pleasure to follow such a gentleman but I truly would have preferred to follow the hon member Mr Derby-Lewis. I love the way he starts by saying “Go north,” or “You should get out of your constituency and go somewhere else” and this from a man who went west in the last election. I also like the way he gave us good advice about how to run a business. I know that the SATS is a very big business. I have not detected so far anywhere in the hon member’s background any business that he ran better than our hon Minister is running the SATS. [Interjections.]

We have also heard some very sharp political nonsense spoken in this Chamber today about the forex losses incurred in 1983-84. Any political party that attacks this Budget this year for something that was done that long ago has not got a lot to say about what is wrong with this Budget today. [Interjections.]

The hon member for Port Elizabeth Central demanded that the present hon Minister resign for the mess about the forex. I’ve got news for that hon member: The hon Minister who made the mess about the forex resigned a long time ago. He was Mr Hendrik Schoeman. [Interjections.] I don’t think we should ask this hon Minister to resign for what another Minister did. The only trouble is that the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central admitted in the very speech in which he told our hon Minister to resign that the hon the Minister had done a pretty good job.

The hon the Minister follows a pretty conservative way of marking down his assets—depreciation. If we had not followed that conservative policy we would have made a very big profit indeed this year—about R1 billion.

The other thing I like turned up when I was looking through Hansard of 1983 and 1984. Guess what the same hon member for Port Elizabeth Central said! He said we depreciated our assets too quickly. Hon members should know that the PFP really does not have many original thoughts as the years go by.

The hon member for Roodepoort also went back seven years to attack this Budget of the SATS. He did not seem to know that his party had supported the very Bill which made it possible for our people at the back here to handle their finances. In 1983 the Bill was approved, supported by the CP, so that this matter could be taken out of the Minister’s hands and handled by officials. The hon member said it was our fault.

The hon member for Potgietersrus had a tiresome argument about the fact that no policy had been laid down for the handling of foreign exchange transactions and argued whether four or ten officials were assigned to the department seven years ago and who was responsible for it.

I said nothing of the sort!

But that hon member is not the hon member for Potgietersrus. [Interjections.]

It is all very much like arguing which Springbok rugby side was responsible for Gareth Edwards’ Lions beating the Springboks seven years ago.

I am very impressed by the analysis that Mr Cross made of those far-off mistakes and events. I was very impressed with the man himself when we met him and I must say that when one talked to him, he was far less harsh on the people of today than the critics that we have in this House. He understood what happened in those times, he was sympathetic of those times and he was not purely critical of those times.

From these hon members and research into the Hansards of the time, a very clear picture of what happened has emerged. The SATS by its very nature has a duality. It is a Government department headed by a Minister but at the same time it has got to pay for what it does. It is self-supporting.

Stretched on the rack between these two forces, it is easy to understand the financial policy of the time when decision-makers made use of forward cover afforded to them by the Reserve Bank which could be cheaper than other banks, but which was proscriptive at that time.

At that time they also did what every good businessman does everywhere—they were a business—which is to take a chance when one thinks it will pay off. They looked at the rand and when they thought it was not going to lose value during the ensuing period they did not take out forward cover.

Those handling the foreign exchange transactions for the SATS exercised three options. They worked through the Reserve Bank and other banks and took calculated risks. The mathematics they had to face were frightening. First of all one had to buy one’s goods in the currency of the country that supplied one’s locomotive for instance. Then one had to calculate the possible interest rates in that country’s currency for the next ten years. Then one had to convert the currency into dollars and calculate what one thought the dollar interest was going to be for the next ten years. Then one would convert the dollars into rands and work out what the interest and cover were going to be in rands over the next ten years. When one had put all those figures together, and I really believe our department had the expertise to do that, then one had to take your chances and take out cover.

Nine years later hon members of this House tell them they made a mess. What they could not do, was see into the future. Nobody at the time could see into the future. No newspaper warned the SATS of any danger. “Covering forward”, “forex” and “exchange losses” were not buzz-words at the time. They were not decisive factors then and certainly no one in Parliament warned us of the dangers which we were facing. Hansard does not show one word about forex. Many of the members of the opposition as well as of our own side talked about the hard times the SATS were having then, but not one person talked about forex losses when it was happening.

It is quite interesting to see the advances we have made with issues of those times. We were discussing licensing taxis, the La Merci Airport, the Sishen to Saldanha railway line, the Vryheid to Richards Bay railway line and containerisation. Most of these strides forward were ignored by the CP whose only concern was that only Whites should be allowed to work on the boards of the SATS in future and that there must be racial segregation on platforms and trains.

Mr Hoon, the former—I am pleased to say— member for Kuruman, issued a grave warning that in future a piebald committee of public accounts would examine the SATS accounts. I would like to say to Mr Hoon across the years: “You are right, Mr Hoon, and they are making a damn good job of it!”. However, nobody had a single word to say about foreign exchange losses. We were still living in the dreamy years of neocolonialism, and communist imperialism was still something conservatives imagined took place underneath their beds.

In 1985 events took place which only the communists could have forecast—the total onslaught. Local South Africans were whipped into violence. ANC terrorists descended upon the country from all directions. The communist-socialist media machine, which had so successfully isolated Vietnam, Taiwan and Israel, among others, also isolated South Africa, and the dictatorial liberals of America launched an economic war against the Republic [Interjections.] Sanctions, boycotts and cutting off of South Africa’s credit facilities followed. If anyone in this House believes that the Republic’s credit was called in because it could not pay its debts, then firstly I shall elevate him to the top of the list of many politicians in this Committee who know nothing about economics; and secondly, I shall make him the “soutie” of the week. [Interjections.]

Mr Ronald William Bethlehem is a writer who starts his book, Economics in a Revolutionary Society, with a quotation from Alan Paton—he is no Nationalist. He writes:

The closing of our credit avenues was a premeditated act of war, and threats to those who would have taken over the lending confirm my conviction. The long and the short of it was that the value of the rand came down because the Americans moved in against us.

Why?

Here again we are dealing with the political lunacy of the PFP—and, perhaps, that hon member as well. The hon member for Port Elizabeth Central ascribes the fall of the rand to one speech made on 15 August 1985 in which President P W Botha stated emphatically that the Rubicon had been crossed, and that all groups within South Africa would have to gain political rights.

The fact that 120 people had already been killed in the riots did not count with him. Only one speech did. Revolution and the media of the world had sustained an onslaught against South Africa for two years. Has the hon member ever thought how much work goes into organising just a small sports get-together? Does he really think that the revolution and what happened at that time came from one speech, and that quarter of an hour after that speech the revolution started and the rand went down? It was a premeditated total onslaught.

On apartheid.

Apartheid is our fatal flaw and we are working on it, believe you me. [Interjections. ]

Then, with equal brilliance, the hon member for Potgietersrus said that the value of the rand had collapsed because the Government had allowed the UDF and the trade union movement to develop. He accused the Government of not being strong and tough enough at that time. The rand collapsed from 90 to 50 American cents and every dealer in overseas forward cover was left holding the baby. Amongst those caught were the SATS. Quite intelligently they decided to recoup some of their losses when the rand went down to 50c. They decided to accept the reality of the 50c and still make a profit. That was a business decision. People can say what they like now, but I think it was a good one. The result was a loss of R3,1 billion but if we had taken forward cover on everything we bought we would have paid R1,5 billion anyway and that can be found in the Cross report. R1,5 billion at that time at normal bank rates would have worked out to nearly R3 billion in ten years’ time. Everybody can work that out. We did not lose as much as everbody says.

What I do like is that all the people who are now criticising are the people who voted for the South African Transport Finances and Accounts Bill.

The PFP member for Pietermaritzburg North said that it “empowered the SATS to regulate its finances properly as a financial institution.” The PFP supported the Bill which gave us the right to deal with the forex as we do. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I would briefly like to refer to the unfortunate and uncalled-for comment by the hon member Mr Derby-Lewis. He said that it was unfortunate that the plane did not run over the Black man. [Interjections.] What a shocking remark! What an atrocity! [Interjections.] This sort of racial remark will not promote good human relationships. [Interjection.] It is a very sad remark. The hon member slipped up very badly.

As regards the Transport Services Appropriation Bill, I do not agree with the hon the Minister’s justification for the 13,1% increase in rail tariffs or with the fact that he said it is under the envisaged 19% inflation rate. Tariff increases by the SATS contribute to the increase in inflation. After all the SATS is the hub of the South African economy. The last thing the hon the Minister should have done was to increase rail commuter tariffs.

It hurts the man in the street. The man in the street, the poor man, has to bear the brunt of the increases in fuel prices, basic food prices, interest rates, rent, water and electricity. Therefore, a rail commuter tariff increase is the last straw!

Wages and salaries have not gone up in keeping with inflation. I think it will be a very sad state of affairs in the country if the large masses of the people are discontented because discontent will lead to frustration, agitation, aggression and even violence. Therefore, money well spent will pay dividends.

I should think that the SATS should manage their affairs in a more business-like manner. I am glad about the privatisation and deregulation and all the efforts that are being made to improve the situation. However, I want to ask the hon the Minister to look into unproductive services. There are too many managers managing too few people and there are too many people doing too little work for too much salary. A lot of office space is not being utilised. I thought I would mention a couple of those things so that we could balance our books and care for the welfare of the large masses of people who are in an unfortunate situation.

On the other hand, I would like to commend the hon the Minister for examining and activating the question of joint operation between the SATS and the deregulated services. I refer to the Black taxi operation as an example. This development is most welcome and hopefully the implementation will serve as a practical example of a working arrangement and participation between developed and developing sectors of the economy. It will be an example to business, commerce and industry to emulate.

Deregulation in particular has opened new horizons to the Black entrepreneur. The growth of Sabta is a classic example of the emergence of the businessman in the Black sector. They have great opportunities to acquire wealth and improve the quality of life. With the improvement of the quality of life there are bound to be certain demands made. With increased status and class we can expect the emergence of the middle class and with the emergence of the middle class there will be more and more sophisticated demands for basic democratic rights.

Therefore we must adapt to the 21st century. We must cast away our prejudices and recognise a person’s right to live and share with others in a democratic system.

In the past few decades the SATS has played a meaningful role in providing transport services to our neighbouring foreign states. Harmony existed between the states and South Africa. I do not say the harmony disappeared; it is still there. However, I would urge the hon the Minister to continue with this goodwill and service in helping these land-locked nations. Political differences and expressions of opinions should not deter our determination to serve and help the nations in Southern Africa.

We should improve our harbour activities. I know this sector is not very busy and therefore not very profitable, but efforts could be made to improve the facility in order to provide services for the rest of Africa and to operate on a profitable basis. However, profit should not be the entire motive. The key word should rather be operational harbours which will help our neighbours as well as our own people in the form of economic development, job opportunities etc.

South Africa has the technical skill, the expertise and the resources in rail service maintenance and even in the manufacturing industry. We could share some of these technical skills with the Southern African nations. We could assist in training workers so that the neighbouring states could maintain their own skilled services. Workshops could be established in convenient places and those students interested in learning the technical skills invited here so that they could benefit. In that manner we could carry our free enterprise system across our borders.

Southern Africa needs us for its economic upliftment. We can play a vital role in this respect. The rest of the world even acknowledges that South Africa has the expertise to help the underdeveloped nations in Southern Africa. We should take advantage of this. Let us not be selfish. I hope the hon the Minister will give this matter his attention. I also wish the SATS well.

Mr Chairman, I would like first of all to congratulate the hon member for Overvaal on the acquirement of a new relative in the House of Representatives, namely the hon member for Vredendal. It is not often that we have such endearing terms especially about that hon member as we had this afternoon when the hon member for Vredendal referred to him as “Oom Koos”. I think that is definitely progress. [Interjections.]

Then I would like to come to the hon member for Potgietersrus. He is unfortunately not here this afternoon. I would like to refer to the speech he made yesterday and I quote from the unrevised Hansard:

This statement is completely untrue because one of the members of the specialist committee was specifically asked the question whether there was any speculation. The answer to this was in the negative. There was no speculation. I refer here to Mr Bahrs.

To put the matter further into perspective, all moneys borrowed on the overseas market were for specific projects. Furthermore, those projects were approved of by this House in the capital Budget.

I want to come back to another matter mentioned by the hon member. He said:

I want to advise the hon member that the unrealised losses were shown as footnotes on the 1984-85 and the 1985-86 balance sheets. The hon member was wrong once again. I want to ask the CP whether it was a genuine mistake or was it purposefully wrong for the sake of political mischief?

I would like to come to the hon member Mr Derby-Lewis. He accused the hon the Minister and the SATS of not knowing how to run a business. Maybe at some future date he could elucidate to uninformed hon members on how to run a butchery, as I believe he was involved in one at some stage. I would also like to say that we on this side of the House absolutely deplore the statement he made about the airliner. It just goes to show that his party is completely irresponsible and have no attitude towards life. When I say life, I particularly refer to non-Whites. I think that hon member is the best equipped member in this House to give us a very good definition of what a racist is.

Much has been said about the SATS’s unrealised losses on foreign loans. It is true that the losses are quite substantial but the SATS was certainly not the only organisation that got caught up in circumstances where political events completely dominated the economic scene.

The specialist committee investigated the period April 1982 to March 1987. Looking at the rand-dollar exchange rate during this period, a very interesting and important fact comes to the fore. For the period April 1982 to the last quarter of 1983 the rand-dollar exchange rate remained fairly stable around the level of R1:$0,90.

In the first quarter of 1984 the rand started tumbling. In a matter of months it devalued to a level of 47 American cents in January 1985. Since January 1985 the exchange rate has fluctuated between 40 and 50 American cents to the rand. The average figure for January 1989 of 45 American cents is in actual fact the same as that for July 1985.

What caused the dramatic drop in the level of the rand-dollar exchange rate? Surely this was not caused by economic factors only. As had been the case for many other businesses in South Africa, this drastic drop in the rand value over a period of months also caught the SATS unawares, resulting in heavy unrealised exchange losses. Had this drastic drop in the rand value not occurred, it might well have been so that the SATS portfolio over the full period would have been in line with the finding of the committee in regard to the situation that existed up to 1983. The committee indicated that the results of the portfolio management for the period up to 1983 were within acceptable limits.

There is another important fact that should not be overlooked. Had the SATS taken out full cover with the Reserve Bank, the major portion of the loss of R3,1 milliard which is at present been borne by the SATS and, therefore, its users, would have become a burden to be borne by the Reserve Bank and, ultimately, the taxpayer. There is no way that South Africa could have escaped the consequences of the sharp drop in the rand value. It is therefore just a question as to where the burden of this cost should rest. I submit that it should rest with the users of the SATS and that the taxpayers should not be the ones to carry the burden.

On page 48 of the Report of the Specialist Committee on the Foreign Exchange Activities of the SATS it is stated categorically that, firstly, “management considered it unnecessary to establish policy in regard to the management of this risk”; secondly, “little or no administrative support was given to the dealing operation”; thirdly, “the apparent disregard for the facility made available by the South African Reserve Bank pertaining to USD/RAZ cover is difficult to justify”; and fourthly, “whilst the accounting policies generally accepted for the treatment of foreign exchange losses allow for certain flexibility” the policies adopted by the SATS “do not conform with even the broadest interpretation of these conventions”.

If the evidence led before the joint committee had fully substantiated the comments of the specialist committee, I think I would have been very disturbed indeed. Going through the evidence led before the joint committee, it becomes quite clear, however, that it is a pity the specialist committee did not—as was originally envisaged at the first meeting between management and the chairman of the specialist committee—liaise with management before it arrived at a final conclusion.

As a result of this there are important details that were only brought to attention when evidence was led before the joint committee. From the evidence led by the management of the SATS, it would appear that a policy document for the management of the foreign loan portfolio was drafted during 1979 and implemented only after discussions with the then Director-General of Finance. The main features of the policy were also set out in a letter from the Minister of Transport Affairs to the Minister of Finance.

With hindsight, it can be said that although the policy was not perfect, it gave good results up to the end of 1983, as is borne out in the report of the specialist committee. The reason why the policy did not work so well after 1983 is because, as indicated earlier, the ball game suddenly changed. After 1983 politics started to dominate the economic scene.

From the evidence led by the SATS, I find it very difficult to appreciate why the specialist committee accepted at face value the statement of the staff involved that senior management ignored their requests for additional staff. Surely an increase of 300% in staff over the two-year period 1984-1985 proves just the opposite.

Looking at Appendix K of the joint committee report, it can be seen that a further 50% was added to the staff complement after 1985, bringing the total for 1988 up to 15 units compared to only 3 in 1983.

The specialist committee came to the conclusion that the SATS apparently disregarded the facility made available by the Reserve Bank pertaining to the dollar/rand cover. In evidence before the joint committee, documents were provided which proved that the management of the SATS gave a clear and very specific instruction to the staff involved on how to evaluate and handle the facility offered by the Reserve Bank.

As a State business enterprise the management of the SATS acted very responsibly and in a businesslike fashion and I can find no reason to disagree with their approach. In practice, events changed so drastically that sound economic analyses and scenarios fell by the wayside. At best it could be argued that the parameters used by the SATS and its advisers from the private sector to construct the economic scenario did not materialise. It cannot therefore be concluded that the facility offered by the Reserve Bank was ignored.

From a control point of view the management of any organisation must of necessity depend to a large extent on the figures reflected in the final accounts. A great responsibility therefore rests on management to ensure that the correct accounting instructions are issued. On the other hand, it is not possible for management personally to ensure that accounting instructions are applied correctly. In this regard management must depend on its auditors and once the final accounts and balance sheets are certified as being correct, management has no reason to doubt the financial results portrayed by the accounting figures.

The specialist committee was especially harsh in its comment on the accounting practices followed by the SATS. From the evidence led before the joint committee it is however apparent that the undesirable state of the accounts was not on account of an incorrect instruction issued by management, but on account of a correct instruction having been applied incorrectly. The result was that the accounts did not reflect the true position and management only became aware of the situation when certain loan accounts reflected debit balances.

Although I fully agree that the financial picture portrayed by the accounts was incorrect, I differ from the findings of the specialist committee that management is to blame. It appears to me that it is a matter that should rather have been addressed to the Auditor-General.

Debate interrupted.