Mr. Chairman, I request the privilege of the half-hour.

I notice that the hon. the Minister wears a very attractive flower in his lapel.

He must be careful; there might be a bug in it!

I really think he ought to give me one too. (Interjections.) In any event, I hope this is a sign that there is going to be a breath of new life in his reply to the debate today.

I also want to express my appreciation to the hon. the Minister and his department for making the annual report for 1981 available to us prior to the debate. It was very helpful. As usual, it is full of useful information and statistics which give an overview to the extent of the department’s work and its very wide and varied responsibilities.

On behalf of the official Opposition I also want to take this opportunity of welcoming Dr. P. S. Meyer as the new Director-General of the department, and to thank him and wish him well. I want to thank him especially for arranging for a group of us to visit the institutions in the Cape Peninsula which care for handicapped children. I gather that the hon. member for Virginia inspired this idea, and I should therefore like to thank him for that excellent idea. All of us who went there could not help but be moved very deeply by what we saw there, and by the work the Department of National Education is doing in this particular area.

I am also very glad that the budget of this important department has been increased by 23,4% to an amount, for the current financial year, of no less than R631 519 000. Clearly, the major reason for such a large increase is the improvement of conditions of service, including salaries, of teachers. This was long overdue, and therefore we welcome it very strongly. The other factor is, of course, the very high rate of inflation, and here we have a further indication of the far-reaching effects of this particular scourge.

Earlier in the session I asked the hon. the Minister certain questions concerning the developments flowing from the report of the De Lange Committee. In this reply the hon. the Minister stated that the working group had received more than 200 submissions and recommendations from various education bodies, persons and organizations. In addition the hon. the Minister said that the education working party appointed by the Government in October last year had not yet completed its study, but that as soon as it had completed its work, the Government itself would make its own decisions known concerning the De Lange report. In his reply to a further question the hon. the Minister made it clear that no legislation would come before the House during this current session of Parliament, i.e. legislation arising from the recommendations of this particular committee. He said that at the earliest—if then—we could expect such legislation to be introduced during the 1983 session of Parliament.

When the hon. the Prime Minister, however, appointed the inquiry into the provision of education in the Republic of South Africa, he stated that he expected the Committee to do its work as a matter of urgency, and added that he had asked for the report to be completed within 12 months. As near as dammit, in October 1981, the Committee fulfilled that request in that it reported more or less within 12 months. Thereby completing a very excellent job within a very brief space of time. But it is already April 1982, and we are no further forward. The Committee did its work in the required time, while the Government has taken a very long time indeed to make its response known. In fact, the Government continues to stall and to drag its feet. I want to warn the hon. the Minister that he must not imagine for a moment that the factors which led to the appointment of the committee have disappeared. They may not be as visible, but many of them still exist. In so far that the Committee was itself conceived in crisis, that crisis still remains, and it is high time that the Government expedited its final decisions regarding the Committee’s recommendations.

Already two major conferences have been held: one in Grahamstown and the other in Bloemfontein. The one in Grahamstown was, if you like, a national conference. The one in Bloemfontein, however, was what I would term—it was actually termed as such by the organizers themselves—a “volkskongres”. There is of course a world of difference between a national congress, which invites and seeks to incorporate all concerned, and the other congress, which was restrictive by nature. The first looks for solutions which are necessary to bind the nation; the other has as its chief priority safeguards for one small part of the nation. I hope the hon. the Minister will not be unduly influenced by this latter approach. The congress in Bloemfontein was clearly dominated by those giving allegiance to the CP and other far-right parties, and the Government must not allow the antediluvian and prehistoric mentality of those people to hold back the movement towards a more enlightened policy in education. The longer the Government delays, the more entrenched will be the opposition to the major enlightened proposals offered by the HSRC.

Because of the further delays, it will serve no purpose to discuss the various recommendations made by the HSRC. There is, however, one particular area in relation to the Government’s future plans that I wish to explore with the hon. the Minister. I take as my starting point the hon. the Prime Minister’s remarks during the debate on his Vote. In that debate the hon. the Prime Minister defined self-determination as follows (Hansard, col. 4628, Vol. 10)—

On that occasion I asked the hon. the Prime Minister the following question (Hansard, col. 4629, Vol. 10)—

The hon. the Prime Minister replied, and I assume the hon. the Minister will agree with this: “In a relative term, yes”. This is a very, very important statement, and there are many implications which flow from this. Under this Vote I am of course restricted to deal only with the educational implications, but the moving away from an exclusive White understanding of self-determination to a self-determination that is actually shared by White, Coloured and Indian, is by implication a major step away from separate development and towards a common society in South Africa. [Interjection.] If one follows the logic—which I know that hon. member will find difficult—one will find that what I am saying flows from the hon. the Prime Minister’s statement.

Don’t ignore the word “relatief” …

I notice a certain amount of nervousness on the other side of the House, Sir. [Interjections.]

In previous debates under this Vote, the hon. the Minister and his chief spokesman, the hon. member for Virginia, have persistently stressed that education must be grounded in the culture of those who are receiving the education. The hon. member nods his head; so I take it that he agrees with that.

[Inaudible.]

And that hon. slow member on that side says the same thing.

The Brentwood roller.

The Brentwood roller … I am sorry, Sir, the hon. member for Brentwood. They argued further that education, particularly at school level, must be rigidly separated into White, Black, Coloured and Indian. The basis on which they therefore build is culture, and as a result of that they create four different institutions.

That is still the basis.

Yes, it is still the basis, and it is their justification for this separate Department of National Education which means that we are restricted under this Vote to deal exclusively with White education.

Let us for a moment argue only in terms of the Coloured people, who, after all, share the same languages of the White community, and language is part of culture, and the Coloureds have no other language. They share the same history and, indeed, without the intervention of the White man, there would have been no history of a Coloured community, if hon. members follow my meaning. The Coloureds furthermore share the same music, art and literature of the Whites, and have no separate tradition. These things are all part of one’s culture. To a large extent they share the same faith, and have no other. According to the hon. the Prime Minister, who I now bring in as my chief witness, the Coloureds, together with Whites and Asians, are part of one nation that has the right to determine its own common destiny. In the light of those facts, where then is the justification for the separation between Coloureds and Whites? [Interjections.] How is it possible, Mr. Chairman … [Interjections.] I am quite prepared to have opposition, provided it is based on the logic of the Government’s own policy and its movement towards a new policy. How is it possible to continue separate education departments and schools for Whites and Coloureds in terms of the old dispensation, a dispensation which is now beginning to fall away? I ask the hon. the Minister to tell me specifically on what does he base this now. I put it to him that the new dispensation for Coloured people in South Africa must inevitably lead to an educational system which at least incorporates Whites and Coloureds together. If the Government is going to follow the logic of the hon. the Minister’s policy, not the policy of the PFP, and in the light of the changes which are going to come upon us within weeks, then there can be no argument that the Government must move in the direction of incorporating at least Whites and Coloureds together in the same system. We, of course, strongly welcome this—this will come as no surprise—and we hope that the prejudices of the past will not betray the logic of the anticipated developments. The only honest way in which the Government can justify its stance on separate departments is to admit openly that here is at least what they would term “necessary discrimination”, or what I can only term “racism”. It is based on skin colour, and can certainly not any longer pretend to be based on culture. I cannot any longer pretend to be based on the Whites’ right to have their own self-determination in order to carve out its own destiny for the future, because that is shared. That is what power-sharing is all about. It offers opportunities and it offers responsibilities. The Government will have to accept that it cannot claim for itself power-sharing and then draw the line which goes against all the logic of its own arguments. I urge the hon. the Minister to be courageous and to anticipate the implications of his own policy.

There are a number of other questions which I now want to move on to. I cannot go into them in any detail, but I would appreciate some comment from the hon. the Minister. Firstly, many of us have been deeply disturbed by the continuing friction in Capab. The hon. the Minister may well say to me that this is a matter for the province, but we cannot evade our own responsibility as the National Education Department provides a very large slice of Capab’s budget. In fact, this department gave an amount of R2 686 745 towards Capab’s total income for 1981. There is a deep and underlying growing concern about the way Capab is running its affairs, culminating as it did in the summary dismissal of the orchestra and opera director, Mr. David Tidboald. I hope the hon. the Minister will give the House the assurance that this money is being well and wisely spent.

Secondly, I have asked the hon. the Minister a number of questions during this session concerning the shortage and percentage of inadequately trained physical science teachers in White schools. It is clear from his reply that the percentage of inadequately trained physical science teachers is shocking and unacceptably high. For example, in the Orange Free State the percentage is 47,3; in the Cape, 44,8; in the Transvaal, 49,3; in Natal, 13,9 and in the Department of Education itself, 31,3. This augurs ill for the production of students who will be proficient in an increasingly technological age. I want to know from the hon. the Minister whether he is satisfied with the present situation, and if not, what he and his department are doing about it, because clearly the provision of matric level education in mathematics and science has reached crisis proportions, and this Committee must give its attention to a very serious and alarming situation.

Thirdly, in his latest annual report, Justice de Kock, chairman of the National Monuments Council, is on record as saying that the budget awarded to him by the Department of National Education is hopelessly inadequate for the employment of staff and for the maintenance of the very small proportion of historical sites directly under the control of that council. Even the annual report of the Department of National Education acknowledges that—

I hope that the hon. the Minister will have some encouragement for a small group of men and women who do a remarkable job and who struggle against impossible odds in order to preserve our cultural heritage.

Finally, I should like to ask the hon. the Minister to comment on the recommendation for exclusive school sport leagues as recommended by the Suid-Afrikaanse Onderwysbond, which represents White Afrikaans-speaking teachers’ organizations. In their official magazine, the Onderwysbond recommends the establishment of exclusive White, Coloured, Black and Indian, as well as mixed school sports leagues. This is clearly a rearguard action and certainly will not help the Government in its efforts to relieve racial tension, and it has all the imprints of the hon. member for Waterberg and his party. I hope that the hon. the Minister will not hesitate to exercise leadership in this matter and to join with me in calling on schools and parents not to prohibit so-called mixed sport, but actually to encourage it. It can only assist us in building a country based on understanding and co-operation, rather than on prejudice and division.

Mr. Chairman, to begin with I wish to associate myself with the thanks and congratulations conveyed by the hon. member for Pinelands to the hon. the Minister and his department for the outstanding annual report that has once again been tabled here. I agree with the hon. member for Pinelands that it is really a source of knowledge and is of great use to anyone who takes an interest in national education. Then, too, I want to associate myself with him by also conveying our congratulations to Dr. Meyer, who has succeeded Dr. Van Wyk. Personally I have no doubt that he will follow the illustrious footsteps of his predecessor and will develop this department further. We wish him everything of the best in the important post he now occupies.

Then, too, it is a heartfelt need to convey my appreciation here today to all statutory bodies concerned with national education in this country. In terms of the National Education Act there are several statutory bodies that act in some advisory capacity to the hon. the Minister, and it is with appreciation that we take cognizance of the exceptional work they do, and with them, the Federal Council of Teachers’ Associations, the top professional body, as also the various teachers’ associations in the different provinces which, as I know from personal experience, have the best interests of education at heart and are ready to sacrifice everything for education. Even though we may differ with one another from time to time, there is never any question of our doubting their bona fides in regard to this matter. Accordingly, we convey to them, too, the special thanks and appreciation of this side of the House.

Then, too, there are several parents who also make their contribution by way of specific control boards. Perhaps we are too little inclined to make mention of their specific contribution in regard to the overall educational set-up in this country. We therefore wish to convey our thanks to them as well.

Then, in the final instance, it is probably also fitting that we should all pay tribute to so many male and female teachers, English and Afrikaans-speaking, who give of their very best every day in the interests of our youth, whom we have entrusted to them. From this side—and, I believe, on behalf of all of us—I wish to convey our sincere thanks to them for their hard work, their fine work, the fruits of which I believe they will reap from time to time.

The hon. member for Pinelands almost succeeded in leading me astray, in that I may perhaps have wanted to reply in depth to many of the matters he raised here. I think that is just what the hon. member for Pine-lands would have wanted, because it would have kept me from saying what I personally had planned to say. However, allow me to say at least this. The hon. member pointed out that the De Lange Commission had done outstanding work by carrying out their extremely wide-ranging terms of reference in the most scientific way, and doing so within a period of between 12 and 13 months. However, he then said to the hon. the Minister that the Government should not drag its feet with regard to the implementation of its recommendations. [Interjections.] Give me chance. I did not interrupt the hon. member. Let us speak to one another without acrimony. The hon. member knows as well as I do that it took a large group of scientists, carrying out very wide-ranging terms of reference in a scientific fashion, 12 to 13 months to issue a report. The hon. member also knows that comment has been invited from anyone who wishes to comment, for the period up to 31 March. Now I ask the hon. member for Pinelands, in all fairness, whether it is reasonable to expect the Government to issue a statement at short notice in regard to what appears in that report. I also wish to say to the hon. member for Pinelands here and now that in point of fact, the Government has not dragged its feet, because the interim memorandum relating to the standpoints of the Government was issued simultaneously with the tabling of that report. I know that the hon. member for Pinelands will say to me: That is all very well, but those are only the basic points of departure of the Government. However, what else is it going to do? I just want to say this to the hon. member for Pinelands. I am quite convinced that the Government regards this entire matter as of the same fundamental importance as does the hon. member for Pinelands. However, the difference lies in the fact that this side of the House bears the responsibility, and this side of the House must, ultimately, account for the decisions of the Government. It is very easy for the hon. member for Pinelands to attack certain things here.

Why didn’t you call me in? I would have helped you.

Therefore all that I want to say to the hon. member for Pinelands is that he need not be concerned, because the matter will be attended to as soon as possible.

The hon. member for Pinelands also mentioned the two important congresses that were held; the one in Grahamstown held by the 1980 Foundation, and the other one in Bloemfontein. I do not want to blame the hon. member unnecessarily, but I did tend to get the feeling that he sought to give the impression that the congress in Grahamstown was, so to speak, international; it was broad, national, open. On the other hand, he mentioned—and he is correct—that in Bloemfontein it was only a section. I just want to say to the hon. member for Pinelands, if he has not discovered it yet, that the section that attended that congress in Bloemfontein was an extremely important one. It was a section of the Whites in the Republic of South Africa who are not ashamed of their contribution, not only at the educational level, but in regard to the total development in this country. Nor do I imply, when I say that, that we refer with contempt to the contribution made by any other population group. However, let us say to one another that that congress that was held in Bloemfontein, at which I was personally present …

I thought so!

Yes, but the hon. member read nothing about it because I went there out of interest, as the chief spokesman on this side of the House, to go and listen to the heartbeat of the people who represent a very large proportion of the people in this country. I am by no means sorry or ashamed that I was there. It would also have been important for the hon. member for Pinelands to go and take a look—perhaps he did do so—at the atmosphere with regard to specific questions, specific proposals and the resultant outcome. I did not find it surprising. It is not surprising to me that that congress agreed wholeheartedly with this side of the Government in the most cardinal points.

No.

Oh yes, and I challenge the hon. member for Pinelands in this regard. If I have time, I shall indicate to him what I meant.

It is the right wing.

I shall come to that.

The hon. member will be making a mistake if he wants to write off that congress as merely another section that has expressed its opinion on national education in the country. This I say to the hon. the Leader of the Opposition: Perhaps the reason why his party stays just where it is is that they deny this important sector.

But your party is dwindling! So we are still better off.

It was no news to me that the hon. member for Pinelands raised the matter of the statement made by the hon. the Prime Minister in reply to a question put to him by the hon. member while he was replying to the debate on his Vote. In fact, I had expected him to do so.

You are a little concerned about that, are you not?

No, not at all.

Did the hon. member also read the contribution made by the hon. the Prime Minister after the adjournment for lunch that day? The hon. the Prime Minister then defined in detail what he meant by his reply to the question of the hon. member for Pinelands, viz. that it was relatively—I do not want to stress the word “relatively”, but the word was nevertheless used by the hon. the Prime Minister—true that White, Coloured and Asian could in a certain sense be seen in a national context.

Who spoke to him during lunch?

The hon. member must give me a chance to continue.

The hon. member will agree with me that the hon. the Prime Minister was spelling out the interdependence between Black, White, Coloured and Asian in this country. This side of the House has never denied that all these different population groups make a specific and strong contribution towards ultimate peaceful co-existence and survival. Indeed, it is this very hon. Prime Minister who stressed this point very strongly last year, and this year, too, on the occasion of the no-confidence debate. The hon. the Prime Minister states that we recognize this, and it is futile for one group to think it can survive without taking into account the contribution of the other groups. That is what the hon. the Prime Minister stressed. After the adjournment for lunch he stressed that standpoint once again.

The hon. member for Pinelands must know that when we make that acknowledgment on the basis of the right of self-determination, as it is seen by this side of the House, it does not signify the negation, the undermining of the right not only of the Whites but also of the Coloureds, the Asians and the Blacks, to work out their right of self-determination. In harmony with one another we recognize each other’s contributions, but this does not mean that the endeavour to affirm that which is one’s own, is taken away.

Order! The hon. member’s time has expired.

Mr. Chairman, I rise merely to afford the hon. member the opportunity to continue with his speech.

I sincerely thank the hon. Whip on that side. I have allowed myself to be led astray by the hon. member for Pinelands after all.

And what is more, he is a clergyman!

I should like to refer to the HSRC report, which is undoubtedly the most important event in recent years as far as national education is concerned. The decision of the Government to issue that directive to the HSRC was due to the fact that the Government realized that there were deficiencies and that education, too, should adapt to the needs and demands of the times. That is why the terms of reference were so widely framed, viz. to report and give a decisive answer on the guiding principles for a feasible educational policy in order to improve the quality of life of all the inhabitants of the country. It gives expression to and proves the good faith of this side of the House that it wants the other peoples to have what it demands for itself. This is also aimed at the improvement of the quality of education in the Republic of South Africa. However, it is not merely a matter of the improvement of the quality of education, but also the achievement of an equal quality in the education of all population groups. This will be dealt with again later. A comprehensive, sound and in-depth scientific report was issued by a large group of expert researchers under the leadership of Prof. De Lange. However, at this point I want to issue a warning. We must guard against the idea that everything in the existing education system is wrong. That is certainly not so. We have sufficient evidence that what we have had in education up to now is most definitely effective. That is not to say, however, that there have not been deficiencies as well. It is in that light that we must approach the whole matter. This report was drawn up in an effort to identify the bottlenecks in education.

There is a second warning, too, that I should like to issue. I want to warn against the fragmentation of the report. It would be a mistake to take just one part of the report and then seek to draw certain inferences. The report must be seen as a whole, not only as a report in itself, but also in the context of the principles and points of departure of the Government of the day.

The educational system of any country—not only that of the Republic of South Africa—forms part of the political structure, and I think the hon. member for Pinelands will agree with me in that regard, even though he does not agree with the educational system or the political structure. However, it is a fact that those two elements form part of one another, and for that reason the recommendations of the report and the implementation of the recommendations accepted by the Government must take the political structure into account. For that very reason the Government tabled an interim memorandum together with the report, a document in which the Government intimates that it accepts the principles for the provision of education in the Republic of South Africa—I shall come back to these principles for the provision of education shortly—but it accepts them subject to the points of departure on which the Government has already decided. I have said that I shall come back to the principles of the provision of education. It is important that everyone interested in education should draw a distinction between the principles for the provision of education on the one hand and principles of education on the other. Principles of education deal more specifically with the philosophy of life that finds expression in education, as against the principles for the provision of education, which are concerned with the method whereby one provides education to the various population groups in this country. I think we shall have to agree on that difference.

Let us consider for a moment the educational principles as contained in the interim memorandum. There are eleven of them, but due to a lack of time I cannot go into all eleven. I shall only single out three or four of them and focus attention on them. The first very important principle is (page 2)—

In recent times this has been taken totally out of context, as if it would necessarily mean that a specific standard would be departed from. Let us be honest with one another. This usually means a drop in the standard of the White to enable the Black man, the Coloured or the Asian to reach the White’s standard. The hon. member for Pinelands does not do so, but in some cases this is the fear that is expressed. However, it is an unfounded fear. This has never been the intention on this side of the House. I do not think anyone in his right mind would want a drop in the existing standards of White education to enable parity to be achieved with the other educational systems.

This brings me to another important principle, Principle No. 3—

There are also certain people who maintain that there is a danger that the Government is on the way to giving parents, in the societal context of their own area, the right to decide who they want to allow to go to a specific school—in other words, total integration at the educational level in a specific local environment. This side of the House, the Government, has spoken out clearly against the principle of free association and freedom of choice or, more specifically, freedom of parental choice, as stated by the report.

That was last week. What about next week?

The hon. member would be surprised. He will get so old that his head will shake, or he will not even be here any more, but when his child comes here, the same position will still be being maintained, with certain non-negotiable aspects. The hon. members make the mistake …

Like job reservation.

… of not being able to draw the distinction between what is not negotiable and what can in fact change in the interests of all groups. However, I leave the matter at that.

I want to single out another principle—

I just want to say that this also means a joint responsibility in regard to financial aid. In all countries, and not only in the Republic of South Africa, education has become an expensive project; so expensive that even in mighty America it is recognized today that the State can no longer afford education. Our people in the Republic, too, will simply have to realize that each of us—White, Coloured, Asian and Black—will have to make greater financial sacrifices in regard to the education we want to offer our children.

I hasten to draw attention to the Government standpoints which were published together with the De Lange report. It is well known that the Government stands by the summary in the National Education Policy Act of 1967 to the effect that our education has a Christian character—with recognition of religious convictions—and that the Government also stands by the principle that education must have a broad national character. We are not prepared to relinquish that.

Self-determination!

This necessarily means—and the Government says so in the interim report—that it also stands by a third very important principle, viz. the principle of mother-tongue education. We will not allow that to be tampered with either. What is also important is that due to the fact that the Government bases its policy on the principle of ethnic diversity and the principle of the self-determination of peoples—not only of the Whites—the Government states that it stands by the principle that separate groups should have their own schools and education departments. In this way the policy of the right to self-determination is already confirmed. For that reason this side of the House is content with that.

But it is one nation.

I have already discussed this. The Government also finds the principle of the freedom of choice of the individual and of the parents acceptable in educational matters and in the choice of a career, but again, within the framework of the policy that each population group is to have its own schools. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I should like to request the privilege of the second half hour.

I should very much like to associate myself with the hon. member for Virginia in connection with the HSRC report. I should also like to associate myself with his welcome to the new Director-General of National Education. We hope that it will be very pleasant for him to be in charge of this post. We wish him, as well as his staff and everyone involved in this matter, everything of the best. The education of our children is a matter of deep concern to all of us in this country. It is very important to us.

I should like to express my appreciation for the fundamental standpoints which the Government laid down in connection with the HSRC report. Education is such an extremely important facet of our modern-day structures that we certainly cannot say enough or exchange enough ideas about this very important subject. Firstly, I extend my sincere congratulations to the HSRC for disposing of a Herculean task so expeditiously. The committee did this extremely rapidly and effectively. A great deal of evidence was obtained and many inputs were made in this important matter by the committee under the chairmanship of Prof. De Lange of the RAU and we must have appreciation for this. They were without doubt in great earnest about this matter. That was why they finalized it in such a short space of time. The report is a scientific report, and we should also like to participate in the discussion revolving around this report.

In the first place I should like to discuss the Christian National concept, because it determines a way of life for us.

For the Afrikaner, and indeed for all Christian nations, religion and culture comprise the profoundest religious impelling force through which the actions of a person or a nation must be determined. A person’s faith and his religion must also leave its imprint on his education. This is very important. It implies that national identity is essential for every nation. A nation must live according to God’s law because that particular national group has a special calling. Separate nations are part of the Creator’s plan for this world. The Christian and unique national character of nurturing education must be maintained throughout as the first principle. For us this must predominate over all other principles.

Nurturing education must therefore correspond to the norms of the Bible. This we, as Christians in this country, believe. An individual must perform his formulative labour obediently in the first place, to the Law of God, and in the second place in implementation of what has been decreed by his Creator; a cultural decree, as we find it in the first chapters of the Bible.

Unfortunately materialism, in our times, has an influence on our Christian culture. Prosperity, in which the amount of profit which is made, is predominant, has become the most important consideration, to which all other things are made subordinate.

Another matter is our mother tongue education. There is a wonderful old verse which goes as follows—

The mother tongue begins with the new-born baby. The language of the mother is the way in which she nurtures her baby, the way in which she baths, dresses and cares for her baby. This physical experience of the infant is already an experience of the language of the mother. A dedicated mother does these things for her child, and they are self-evident in her actions and in the feeling which the child experiences. At a later stage the child sees the language as an action of his mother in all the things she does. Still later he begins to make use of language, and reacts to his mother’s commands. The language of the mother continues, and it is not long before this child begins to speak his own language; first falteringly, and sometimes even incomprehensively; but slowly it progresses. In this language the child learns to eat, sleep, play, communicate and pray. In this language he learns to practise his religion. He learns to read his Bible. He studies in this language. Language is therefore an unmistakable element of the culture of this individual. So, too, religion, the way of life, the economy, the unique history, and the ties with the past and with traditions are also elements of the culture of the individual and the nation.

Mother tongue education is consequently recognized by the Government in its interim memorandum when it states—

Now I just want to say something specific about my own mother tongue. This language was born from the soil, from our very lives. It evolved from the history, the experiences of the Afrikaner nation. Consequently it is a living language. Fanus Rautenbach puts it so well when he says—

This same feeling which we have in regard to our language we should also like to grant to every other national group in this country. We want their language to have the same value for them and to arouse in them the same feelings which our language arouses in us.

Each one of us also accepts the principle of equal education and the Government recognizes the principle of separate schools and departments of their own for each of the groups. Here, however, we must emphasize once again that we should no allow any allegations to be made that the standards will be lowered. There are those who allege that separate education cannot be equal, but nowhere in the world has it ever been proved that separate institutions cannot provide education of an equal standard. We therefore wish to see equal opportunities as adequate opportunities for every population group. We should like to see control over education on all levels remaining in the hands of the separate groups, as is in fact recommended in the memorandum, and that any co-ordinating body which is envisaged shall not be of an executive nature, but will only act in an advisory capacity.

A reference was also made here to financing. The standpoint that the users of teaching facilities should make a greater financial contribution and should to a greater extent be liable for funds is a very healthy principle because equal opportunities, facilities and remuneration should be gauged by equality of service rendered, equal standards of work, equal results, liability and productivity. After all, that which one pays and works for, one appreciates far more. A great deal can still be said about this and a great deal of research can still be done.

The question of contributions by private bodies for training purposes is a very important question, and I consequently wish to ask that such funds should be administered by the Government so that they cannot be used for the wrong purposes, as is the case with funds from the World Council of Churches, for example.

The individual who pays in part or in full for his own education and training enjoys the successes he achieves far more than the person who receives everything for nothing. Consequently greater parental involvement, financially and otherwise, could have very great value.

The provision of manpower also receives attention in this report, and it is undoubtedly true that it is extremely important. However, we must never exaggerate manpower needs. Development and the economy are there for the sake of the individual; the individual is not there for the sake of the economy and manpower. One must envisage all these other things. It is not essential that individuals should be subordinate to or should be there for the sake of this education. Mankind is there for his own sake. It is essential to meet our manpower needs because we probably need this very badly, but at the same time it is important to take cognizance of the needs of the country and to realize that it is necessary to concentrate on academic training, but that we should also ensure that skilled labour is produced in all spheres.

The lowering of the compulsory school-attendance limit requires careful attention—mention is made in the report of nine years—but such a step must not be taken at the expense of quality. The idea of career-orientated schools is not unacceptable, provided it is at least possible to maintain a matriculation standard.

As far as education itself is concerned, culturally active fulfilment, for example one’s own language, religion and way of life, one’s own history and traditions must be represented in education, and that is why one’s own schools, departments and educators are very important. We must strike a sound balance between adherence to the eternal and the lasting things on the one hand, and the “openness” of a productive future on the other. The changes made to what is one’s own, entails that a successful outward realization of the individual without fear for oppression when the child is older, is very important. The firm foundations are what is one’s own. If the child has those firm foundations, he can live without fear in the outside world. He will then already have a love for what is his own and be a successful and culturally mature person who will strive for independence, who will live in the outside world and make a good contribution in society.

I now want to come to the teachers. On page 180 of the HSRC report the following is said about the training of teachers—

In this connection it must be mentioned that it is very important that recruitment, selection, training, as well as other facets, must be accorded a very high priority. The persons and bodies involved in the education and training of the child are the parental home, the teacher in the school, the churches and the community, and none of these persons or bodies should underestimate their involvement. It is very important to realize that what one is going to become in life one day, is already dormant in the baby whose development is determined by the parental home. It is extremely important that the physical and spirititual development should take place simultaneously. This brings me to the part played by the school. If one bears in mind that the preservation of the Whites as rulers over themselves lies in the hands of the youth, one realizes that this is a tremendous task which makes heavy demands on the teacher who has to prepare the child for his life. The calibre of the nation depends on the calibre of its youth, and for that reason it also depends on the calibre of our teachers. The educator therefore has an extremely important task. The educator is in fact guide and leader, but he is also a bearer of authority and a ruler in the sphere of education, inter alia, to inculcate knowledge. Knowledge is only valuable if it is absorbed in order to achieve practical results. For the ideal teacher education is a process of unfolding and unlocking the potential inherent in the child. Self-control and self-respect are two primary cornerstones on which character is built. Self-activity is promoted, but the child must also be led. By whom? For the child the teacher is the bearer of knowledge and virtue. He must cultivate in the pupils the desire to learn, and he himself must continually involve himself in his subject, study further and acquire more knowledge. He helps to build the moral character of the child.

In the heartbreaking world of today, with its divorces, child neglect and unhappy homes, the teacher is sometimes the only light in the dark world of the child. This is a world in which the child is confronted with the demands that he adapt himself to ever more rapidly changing circumstances. Today there are so many demands made on the lives of our children. His time is taken up by sport and other private things, and he has hardly any time to be a child and to play. Having said all this, I want to suggest that tribute must be paid to the teacher of today for the enormous task he acomplishes, for his enormous contribution, for his sacrificial service, for his enjoyment of life and for the image he presents. The image which radiates from the educator, determines how much success he will have with his task, for actions speak much louder than words. I want to ask that we ensure that the teachers are happy people. I ask that they should be relaxed people who are able to perform their tasks without financial worries. Make our teachers happy and we shall have happy young people who will be able, with sparkling eyes, to go forward to meet the future and satisfy the demands made on them; each for the welfare of his own people; young people who will preserve the heritage they received and build upon it a bright future for what is their own. I wish to add that I also grant this to every other nation and national group.

In the short time I have left, I would just like to quote to hon. members this declaration of dedication which the teacher makes. It reads—

This is the declaration of dedication which teachers make on the eve of their acceptance of office as mature educators of the children of our nation.

Mr. Chairman, we on this side of the House want to congratulate the hon. member for Germiston District on her position, as main speaker on behalf of her party. We have known her for many years as an excellent teacher, and here in all sincerity she again devoted herself to those spheres in which she did such wonderful work over the years.

However, the hon. member is in that party now, and they have only recently occupied those benches. They have therefore not yet made a real study of their obligations in this House. Last year each of them received a copy of the estimates of expenditure. This document is given to us every year by the Department of Finance and in it Parliament votes a certain sum of money to the Minister of National Education and his department. Actually the hon. the Minister of National Education must account for the funds appropriated to him for the past financial year. I do not hold it against the hon. members for not having been able to think of that yet.

There are quite a few hon. members who are still going to speak.

However, the hon. member for Pinelands has more experience. I do not want to say the hon. member was rather sly, but he avoided this field and by so doing he in fact evaded his duty. However, I shall return to him in a moment. Hon. members on that side of the House can argue meaningfully with the hon. the Minister today. If they would only open their eyes and look at this side of the House, they would see who is sitting here. A Government is sitting here. Sitting here is a great party which governs this country, and those hon. members can fight about integration until they are blue in the face, they will not be able to change the policy. Within the framework of the policy they must fall in with us and work with this policy. Only then can they criticize us.

Those hon. members can for argument’s sake tell the hon. the Minister that the formula for financing our universities is not correct. [Interjections.] See how the Iscariots are agreeing with me. [Interjections.] It is their duty, but I do not want to encourage the hon. the Leader of the Opposition in the harm they are doing. [Interjections.]

Order! What does the hon. member mean by “Iscariots”?

Sir, I withdraw it and refer to them as birds of a feather. [Interjections.] If the hon. member for Pinelands used the argument that we must look at the formula and that we need not necessarily base the formula and the financing of the universities on the number of students enrolled, then we have an argument.

The hon. member for Germiston District referred to a few matters. Inter alia, she referred rather subtly to the lowering of standards as if this was an object. The object is not to lower the standards. Nowhere in this fine document is the idea expressed that the standards should be lowered. There is no question of that. What we must be aware of, however, when we refer to equal standards in education is that while, for argument’s sake, we do not begrudge the Whites their standard of education—this is the responsibility of this department—the object should also be to improve and uplift the education of the other population groups, where necessary and where possible, to achieve in order a satisfactory standard.

To us or to them?

The Government and the people involved. Would the hon. member please not interrupt me. It is essential that this be done. There is no question of sacrificing standards.

When we consider what this report, this splendid investigation, is concerned with, we must seek a more deep-seated reason than the problem which has recently prevailed in education. I want to tell the hon. member for Germiston District that she should not disparage the manpower needs and development of our country or possibly dismiss them as being of no importance. The need to develop manpower for a stable State in future—not only for the RSA, but also for the RSA and the national States—is linked to the quality and the ability of the people in this country. As far as I am concerned this need for manpower development for the years ahead is the sounding-board for this entire discussion.

The hon. member for Germiston District also referred to compulsory school-attendance. There is the six-year phase plus the three-year phase. As far as I am concerned this is an interesting and refreshing new idea, but to this we must link the idea of young children’s readiness and maturity for school-attendance. This is an equally important facet.

It is an irrefutable fact that many of our students could at an earlier stage have been guided towards a more meaningful field of study where they could have been more successful and could have been a greater asset to themselves and the entire country. I think the intrinsic idea here is that we should be able to differentiate at an earlier stage. We have the expertise to be able to do this. Naturally I am not referring to watertight compartments, because we are working with people and people are God’s creations and each have their own special abilities. However, we must identify these abilities as early as possible so that they can enter specific fields of study so as to enable them to make a greater and more meaningful contribution. Surely it is a well-known fact—it has been pointed out frequently in this House—that there are students who although they have completed their university training cannot find a niche in society in which to make a useful contribution to the civic task.

I must say a few words to the hon. member for Pinelands. I greatly appreciate the open-hearted discussions which were held at the Grahamstown gathering, but the hon. member cannot merely decry the Bloemfontein National Congress as being a congress with a prehistoric character.

I do not want to sound racist now, but Afrikaners have always been deeply and closely involved in the education of their children. This is absolutely true and that is why they brought forward the best of their young people from among their own ranks to serve in the teaching profession. See how many teachers are among our number here. At the Bloemfontein National Congress our people spoke candidly to each other and wonderful discussions were held; not what the hon. member for Pinelands wants to associate with it. I think the hon. member can learn a lesson from this; there is an important lesson to be learnt from it.

Tell us what the lesson is.

That he must make his contribution, but I have already told the hon. member that.

I want to express a few ideas on equal standards in education. I wonder if we should not define this specific sentence a little differently. We could define it as follows: Equal standards in the provision of education. I feel this would fit into the framework. The hon. member did not receive the interim memorandum on the report of the Human Sciences Research Council on the investigation into the provision of education in the RSA …

I did; here it is.

But then he did not read it. He would do well to make a study of it. [Interjections.] We are given these documents so that we can study them.

We must discuss matters within the framework which has been established. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, in the first place, on behalf of the NRP, I want to convey my sincere congratulations to Dr. Meyer on his appointment as Director-General of this very important department and tell him that we are impressed by the fact that we have received such a good and timely report from the department. There are many important and very illuminating factors in the report, and for that reason the department deserves our congratulations.

The hon. member for Standerton, of course, was right on target when he said that we should talk about the universities, since this is the very subject I want to talk about, and in this regard I want to associate myself with the argument he tried to initiate. Before it could get into its stride properly, he shied away from it …

To get at me.

… to associate himself with the hon. member for Germiston District on policies with regard to the education of, in particular, the Whites and the younger child.

We noticed that the hon. member was in an embarrassing position, because hon. members of the NP do not differ with hon. members of the CP with regard to educational policy. They agree with each other 100%. This is of course a dilemma which the hon. member for Standerton and his colleagues have. In the words of the hon. member for Virginia, the De Lange Committee examined a wide field of investigation in depth and brought professional know-how to bear. They gave Parliament a magnificent report, but despite that, that side and the hon. the Minister nevertheless questioned the general principle embodied in the proposals of the committee. [Interjections.] It is true.

Let us discuss tertiary education for a while. There was, of course, also the Retief Committee of another department.

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

Not right now. My time is very limited. When the hon. member talks again later, he is welcome to put his question. It was the Retief Committee which submitted proposals on departures from the present Government’s principle of tertiary education.

The Buthelezi Commission as well.

Yes, several expert committees and commissions … [Interjections.] … have suggested that there must be an alteration of this unilateral concept of universities on a population basis. However, I shall come back to that later.

For the moment I should just like to link up with what the hon. the Minister said and ask him to examine carefully the position of the financing of our White universities in particular.

†Let me tell the hon. the Minister that we are shortly going to face a very serious financial crisis in our White universities. Obviously the same applies to the other universities, but I am precluded from discussing them in this debate. The report indicates—as we have been saying for many years—that the intake at White universities is starting to decline. It is therefore axiomatic that the cost per student will increase. We believe that it is going to increase to such an extent, in the next five years, that the present average cost per student per annum of R3 500 will increase by a minimum of 20% per annum. This department and the fiscus will not be able to meet the financial requirements of the universities. There is already considerable evidence in this year’s report from the department that it was unable to grant the financial requests of the universities. In fact, of the R73 million requested by the universities—and I refer hon. members to paragraph 3.1.1 on page 34 of the report—the department was only able to grant them an amount of R42 million. When we look at the fiscus, we see that in each case the department was unable to provide the full amounts requested. If one adds escalating costs for capital programmes and escalation in salaries to pay the staff properly and if that is combined with a declining White university population, it is evident that the Government is going to have to take a very serious look at the financing of White universities.

We believe that in principle there is a very important factor that the hon. the Minister and his department will have to consider. I am referring to the principle of rationalization versus regionalization at purely ethnic universities. At the moment our universities operate on a regional, ethnic basis. I believe, however, that the time is right to have a look at a rationalization of White tertiary education at university level. Every one of our 10 universities offers a B.A. course and every one of our universities offers a B.Sc. course, and they are all very similar in each case. I would therefore like to ask the hon. the Minister whether the time has not come to move away from regionalization towards the rationalization of courses offered by the different universities in South Africa. Virtually every faculty, with a few exceptions, is duplicated in at least half of the 10 universities, and this must contribute significantly to the per capita cost of running the universities.

The concept of the University of Port Elizabeth, which is a bilingual or dual-medium university, is I believe the long-term answer within the prescription of White universities. The question that must be asked is whether we can still afford to have ethnically exclusive universities when it comes to the two language groups. I am not saying that we must deny each language group its right to education in its own mother-tongue, but has the time not come for us to look at the concept that we have at the University of Port Elizabeth, which is a dual-language university?

If the English universities had done this in the original phase of their development, South African university development could have been completely different.

Yes, probably. In fact, absolutely. The hon. the Minister is right. I think we must go back and correct the mistakes that were made earlier on. We must, however, also look at the rationalization of faculties and rationalization when it comes to the duplication of courses offered. Otherwise we are going to find that the parents of the majority of students in South Africa who are academically qualified to go to university, will not be able to meet their increasing commitments to send their children to university. Very recently we accepted the principle that at the primary and secondary levels of education for Whites the parents must make a greater contribution.

It has been repeatedly said by the Government that the State alone cannot finance education. We believe that the greatest portion of the 20% escalation of costs per annum will have to be borne by the parents. At the moment 1,82% of the White population in this country is at university. That has grown from 1,47% in 1970. I believe that that sort of ratio must be maintained if our nation is to have the leadership, expertise and skill which we get from university graduates. I believe that the cost of R3 500 per capita will rise to within the region of R5 000 within the next five years. That is going to place university education beyond the 2% that should have it unless the State makes a greater contribution. As far as the State’s contribution is concerned, already 66% of the current budget for this department is spent on university education. Like the Minister, I do not believe that the responsibility should lie entirely with the State fiscus. Therefore my appeal to the hon. the Minister is that we should move away from regionalization and ethnic universities to a rationalization. I ask the hon. the Minister what his thoughts are on that and whether the University Council cannot initiate a full investigation into the rationalization of faculties and courses offered.

Mr. Chairman, I do not want to deal with the subject the hon. member for Durban North dealt with, although I, too, want to talk about universities. I want to discuss university planning.

To start with, I just want to say something about the task of the university. Looking at the development of universities in South Africa, one finds that it is the ideal of every university to be an all-encompassing institution which provides the community it serves with as complete a service as possible. The Holloway Commission of 1953 emphasized the university’s task with regard to the local community it serves. In contrast the Cilliers Committee of 1963 formulated a far wider view of the university’s task. The committee said that the university had the task of bringing culture to the entire community and the entire population.

The mechanism by means of which a university expands its facilities for training, amounts to the establishment of new faculties and new departments; this is controlled by the Universities Act of 1955 in terms of which a university may not establish a new faculty or, as it is put, a subdivision of a department without the prior approval of the Minister. The reason for statutory control lies in financial considerations, because universities cost the State a great deal of money. In this connection I want to quote from the 1981 annual report of the department. Paragraph 3.1.2 reads—

It is general knowledge that in the past that universities frequently gave their local interests priority above the national interests of tertiary education. There are many reasons why this happens. In the short time at my disposal I shall only refer to a few of them. One of the reasons was that the universities did not all make the same effective submissions with regard to applications for expansion. Another very important consideration is that a tremendous number of bodies are interested in university training, and that a very wide variety of bodies exerted pressure and made representations in connection with the expansion of facilities. Here we think for example of churches, various cultural bodies, State departments, statutory bodies, etc. In the past it was also true that the Minister and the Department of National Education did not really exercise effective control over the establishment of new facilities at universities. Since 1928—to give an example—14 official investigations into university training in South Africa have been carried out. Only five of these investigations were initiated by the Minister or department responsible.

When the Van Wyk de Vries Commission published its report in 1974 it referred to the shortage of reliable and continuous planning with regard to university development in South Africa. On the basis of that report the Universities Advisory Council was established in 1978. This council is also served by professional staff. As far as the committee of University Principals is concerned, it has been said that this committee frequently represents conflicting interests in connection with university development, and cannot therefore play a very important role with regard to university planning in the wider sense.

The Directorate for University Affairs was established in the Department of National Education, at the same time as the Universities Advisory Council.

I now want to make a few remarks on the planning framework which was thus established to carry out overall planning of university development in future. In the first place, the Directorate of University Affairs of the Department of National Education introduced a new information system in 1978. It is known as the Information System for Post-secondary Education Institutions, and I came across details in this regard in a newsletter of the Committee of University Principals. It is dated March 1979. According to this letter the information system was designed to meet the information needs both of the various universities and of the authorities. I should like to quote from a paragraph on page 7 of the relevant newsletter, as follows—

In addition to this information system which was introduced, there is also a manpower study, details of which will be available in a few months time. The hon. Minister of National Education is on record as having said in public that this manpower study will contain information which will enable the Universities Advisory Council to regulate the tasks of the universities with regard to the training of professional manpower.

The third leg of the planning initiative in this field comprises the space and cost norms designed by the Department of National Education in 1979, in co-operation with the autonomous universities and the Committee of University Principals. When one applies these norms, together with details on the full-time equivalent students—as they are called—studying at the universities, it is possible to ascertain what physical space is needed for the training task of universities. The physical space needed can be compared with the available space. If one also knows what the manpower requirements are, it is possible to determine what the task of a certain university is as regards providing graduates in a specific field. Then, when one applies the space norm, one is better able to assess requests by universities for their physical space to be enlarged.

At present, in contrast to the situation in the past, there is a very good framework for future planning. Whereas in the past there was a tendency, as far as the expansion of universities was concerned, to place local interests above the national interest, I want to appeal to universities to keep their future applications realistic and to take the national interest into consideration. At one stage the hon. the Minister of National Education was the rector of a university and I therefore feel that he is excellently equipped to give guidance to universities in this regard.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to thank hon. members for the contributions that have been made up to now. I can give them the assurance that this little adornment I am sporting on my lapel was given to me by my staff and carefully stripped of all thorns in advance so that I could engage in this debate in the right spirit.

I should like to associate myself with various hon. members who tendered their congratulations and expressions of thanks to our new Director-General who, together with his senior officials, are supporting us in this debate today. I should also like to express my appreciation to him for the guidance which he has already given in the short while he has been in charge. I also wish to thank him for the way in which he supported me personally. At the same time I am also proud of the fact that he is a scientific educationist in his own right, as became apparent during the past week when he accepted an invitation to attend an international conference in Germany in connection with education for exceptionally gifted children. He was invited to take part in this conference, not because he was the head of a department, but because he did internationally recognized research in that field himself. That is exactly what one would like to have in the Department of National Education, viz. that the senior officials will not only include competent managers and administrators, but that there are some of them, as professional experts too, are held in high esteem at home as well as abroad.

The hon. member for Virginia in particular referred to the large number of volunteers who assist the Department of National Education on numerous statutory and other boards and fulfils its task in the various spheres. I should like to associate myself with the comments made by the hon. member in this connection, because I do not think that we take cognizance frequently enough of the great contribution which these people do make, not only to education on the various levels, but also as far as the promotion of culture and sport is concerned. They assist the department as experts, without any material compensation, and frequently with great personal sacrifices in respect of time, energy and personal expenses, and we cannot convey enough appreciation for what they are doing. The involvement of these people emphasizes the fact that the promotion of education and culture is not solely a State matter, but something which must be tackled in a partnership between the State and the various non-State enterprises in the community. Consequently the State undoubtedly needs outside experts to evolve the necessary policy and to promote the implementation of that policy. On this occasion I consequently wish to express my cordial thanks to the hundreds of volunteers who serve on the various bodies, statutory and otherwise, which assist the department in carrying out its functions.

The hon. member for Standerton correctly pointed out that we are dealing here with an estimate, and the hon. member for Pine-lands consequently pointed out with appreciation that, in spite of a difficult financial year, 23,4% more is being appropriated under the National Education Vote this year. Hon. members realize, of course, that this is considerably higher than the average increase in the estimates as a whole, which the Minister of Finance mentioned earlier this session.

I should like to single out a few programmes and sub-programmes in the estimates for elucidation as far as the financial aspects are concerned. In spite of the remarks made by the hon. member for Durban North, I must point out that the universities this year received a larger increase than the average, viz. 28%. Although this is not the full story, of course, one must also note that the university estimate in reality comprises 62,2% of the total estimates of the Department of National Education. This is perhaps just a figure, a statistic, because provision is of course made for most of the White schools in the budgets of the respective provinces and it is consequently not reflected in this estimate. Nevertheless I think this figure is a very clear indication of the serious approach of the Government to the financing and promotion of the efficiency of what is the leading element in our entire education system, viz. the universities. The Van Wyk de Vries Commission rightly stated that an education system can only function well if the authorities ensure that full justice is done to its leading element, the universities.

The formula subsidy in respect of the universities is that portion of the subsidy which is paid according to the formula recommended at the time by the Van Wyk de Vries Commission, as adapted from time to time by the Universities Advisory Council. It is interesting to note that this portion increased by an even greater percentage this year, viz. by 33,25%. The increase in the formula part of the subsidy was 33,25%. By way of explanation, I wish to remind hon. members that apart from the formula portion of the subsidy there are also quite a number of amounts which are known as ad hoc amounts, for example the Government’s contribution of 85% on the interest and redemption of approved loans raised by universities which, I think, amounts to R58,6 million this year. I am referring here to interest and redemption on all outstanding loans, and not to the actual loans raised in the year in question. In this category one also finds contributions in respect of housing, pensions and other matters pertaining to conditions of service, as well as contributions in respect of special activities initiated by certain universities at the request of the State and for which provision cannot be made within the normal subsidy formula, but for which an additional ad hoc grant has to be made.

In fact, I have emphasized more than once that the subsidies of universities were drawn up in a set of different circumstances to those prevailing at present, and that it is imperative that the basis of the subsidy formula should be revised. During the previous debate on this Vote I said that I would give attention to this matter, and I can now inform this House that the Universities Advisory Council and the Directorate for University Matters in the department have in fact been directed to revise the university subsidy formula in such a way that it will, with effect from the next financial year, be linked to a lesser extent to growth in numbers. In other words, it must make provision for the fact that a measure of stabilization is expected in the growth of universities and that this should not lead to universities being financially prejudiced. I hope that the Universities Advisory Council will be able to complete the inquiry before the end of the year and, provided the Treasury concurs, I hope that we shall be able to implement it next year.

For the sake of a proper perspective, I wish to point out to hon. members that the subsidy formula for universities actually contains three variable factors which fluctuate from year to year. The one factor is the growth in student numbers, and because universities in South Africa experienced such a spectacular growth in student numbers during the past two decades, we were given the impression that the formula was simply linked to student numbers. But that is not entirely true. The two other variable components are great improvements on the old formula which applied prior to the time of the Van Wyk de Vries Commission. Every time a change occurs in the salaries, the salary component in the formula, in respect of which quite a number of items are calculated by way of percentage, is brought up to date and augmented. In the year in question, the universities are given the benefit of the increased salary component over the entire front of the formula. I believe the fact that the salary component does not remain fixed for five years, as was the case under the old dispensation, but is adjusted from year to year, thanks to the recommendations of the Van Wyk de Vries Commission, is the most important factor in ensuring that our universities, in spite of the levelling off in their growth in numbers, did not really find themselves in such a financial crisis as the hon. member for Durban North implied.

There was, however, a third change in the formula, which was that the cost increases in respect of some items, for example laboratory expenses, the purchase of library books, the maintenance costs of buildings, etc., are also adjusted according to an index which is worked out in consultation with various economic advisory bodies, by the Universities Advisory Council, subject to the approval of the Treasury. This was not possible under the old dispensation either. Under the old dispensation all the cost factors remained static for five years. Consequently, the growth in numbers as well as any change in the salaries, as well as increases in respect of specific cost components, are imcorporated in the formula annually. That is why the subsidy formula for universities shows an increase of one-third this year as against last year, which I think is really very favourable from the point of view of the needs of the universities and also, I think, from the point of view of what the country is capable of offering. A Government which did not really care for the universities would not afford this degree of financial support in difficult times. If I may add something to this, I wish to refer in passing to the remarks made by the hon. member for Durban North, who referred to the fact that considerably fewer new capital loans were approved this year than the universities requested. I must say here in all honesty—and I am speaking from experience here—that there was never a year in history when the demand of the universities for capital provision was not considerably greater than the State was able to provide. This is nothing new. Under the present circumstances I am convinced, after a careful study of the various loan applications for capital development which went before the Universities Advisory Council, that the urgent capital requirements of the universities were anticipated, by funding the projects which are already under way at present. This capital provision is intended to enable the universities to continue all their existing projects, with a single restriction which I do not wish to elaborate on now, and it was accepted last year and this year that the tremendous growth of universities during the past 10 years was such that we could expect a measure of stabilization in the expansion of their physical facilities as being reasonable, especially—and I said this last year as well—because the technikons had in the more recent past not undergone a comparable growth in respect of physical facilities as the universities had undergone. Approximately five years ago the Government decided that a new phase should commence in respect of tertiary education, viz. a phase in which more attention would be given to the backlog of the technikons and in which the universities would therefore, as far as new buildings were concerned, have to mark time for a while. There are the four major campus projects for technikons which, in the past, did not really have proper campuses, but were accommodated haphazardly in old buildings in various parts of the city centres. These are the four new projects in respect of the Cape Technikon, the Natal Technikon, the Witwatersrand Technikon and the Pretoria Technikon which during the next ten years, will cost quite a few hundred million rands. My discussion with the chairman of the Committee of University Principals and his colleagues in their executive committee earlier this year revolved inter alia, around this subject, and basically they conceded that universities would in the immediate future have to concentrate, as far as capital requests were concerned, on maintaining the standard of facilities within the buildings to an optimum extent and keeping them internationally competitive, and that they would provisionally have to accept that only in really urgent circumstances could there be any expansion of the buildings and the physical facilities. That is all I have to say about universities.

Allow me to point out to hon. members an apparently less favourable aspect of the budget. I am astonished that one of the big guns on the opposite side has not yet fired this shell at me. I am referring to programme 3: Post-school education. All the hon. members probably read with dismay that as against the average budget increase of 23% for our Vote, post-school education, i.e. education for technical training which includes the technikons as well as the technical colleges, increased by 6,2%. If they were to look at the sub-programme for advanced technical education, i.e. the technikons, hon. members will probably have noted that the provision there decreased by R3,28 million to R61,9 million. However, I am pleased that I am, as it were, able to get in the first shot in this connection by explaining that this is merely a technical reduction. It is attributable to the fact that no Government loans were made to the technikons this year, while last year R16,4 million was made available to the technikons by way of Government loans. However, these Government loans have not simply fallen away. They have been replaced by an alternative form of financing, viz. authorization by the Government for raising State guaranteed loans in the private sector. They received authorization to raise R19,2 million themselves in the private sector this year. They received precisely the same subsidy on a State guaranteed private loan as on a Government loan, viz. 85% of the annual interest and redemption. The technikons themselves requested that, in exactly the same way as the universities, they may be allowed to move away from Government loans because Government loans can only be obtained if the Government has sufficient money available in that year in order to make it fully available in this capital form, and in fact to act as a provider of capital. This is not always possible. The universities do not fall under this system and in this respect enjoy greater autonomy, viz. to look for loans on the private money market with a guarantee from the State and to raise such loans, whereupon they then receive the 85% subsidy on interest and redemption over the approved period after the loan has been paid out to them. If we add this R19,2 million in capital which is in fact being provided this year outside the budget estimates in which it was available last year, then the increase in connection with the provision of funds for postschool education is not 6,2%, but 24,4%.

I should also like to point out that as far as the technikons are concerned a subsidy formula is also in operation which with certain deviations is based on the Van Wyk De Vries formula of the Universities and if one glances at the formula subsidy again, one will find that the technikons also have a 28,3% increase as far as their formula subsidy is concerned.

In addition I think I must point out, arising from the trend of the argument of the hon. member for Durban North, that the increase in student numbers at the technikons during the past few years was 13,9%, while the increase in student numbers at the universities has actually stabilized at 3%. Consequently it is clear—and in addition I think this is a desirable trend—that the numerical growth on the tertiary level in future will be channelled to a greater extent towards the technikons than towards the universities. I wish to emphasize that this does not mean a neglect of or under-emphasis of the importance of universities. I think we can very readily accept that there are more students at the universities than there are those who have a reasonable chance of completing their university studies successfully. In fact, I was informed by a deputation from both the Committee of University Principals as well as the Joint Matriculation Board that provisional research had indicated that pupils who had university exemption in the matriculation examination with a pass percentage of an average of less than 50%, had a very slender chance, according to the statistics, of making a success of their university studies. According to the data at their disposal, most of those students who did not at least attain a pass mark of 50% in the matriculation examination—as hon. members know, the minimum aggregate pass mark for university exemption in the matriculation examination is 45%—have a very slender chance of ever obtaining a degree in the minimum studying time for a degree, plus a further two additional years added for mishaps. Actually it is misleading to send such students to university with a matriculation pass mark which creates the impression that they will be able to achieve success at university. The universities, in conjunction with the Matriculation Board, are reconsidering this matter. I referred to this matter earlier this year as well, on the occasion of the opening ceremony of the University of Stellenbosch.

However, it would be unrealistic to expect the universities to initiate a stricter admission process—which, I think, will incidentally contribute to the channelling of students who are perhaps primarily not university material into the more appropriate technical direction of other training institutions—if they penalize themselves in that way, through a reduction their student numbers which would influence their subsidy formula. For that reason, too, it is important that the relating of the subsidy formula to numbers should be reviewed in order to encourage better justified selection at universities.

I return now to other programme items in the budget. In the case of education for handicapped children—this is of course something which to a great extent is treated with sympathy and compassion by all of us—I wish to point out that there was an increase of 35,7% this year. As for the education of children in need of care—that is, children referred to industrial or reform schools in terms of the Children’s Act—there was an increase of 29%. The advancement of culture is a matter which has to suffer quite considerably in times of economic cut-backs, but with the co-operation of the hon. the Minister of Finance we have nevertheless succeeded in effecting an expansion of 29% this year.

Under Advancement of Culture there are three aspects I should like to outline. The first aspect deals with a matter which hon. members will find denoted in programme 6 as a South African Bibliographical and Information Network, abbreviated to Sabinet, for which an amount of R759 000 is being made available.

This is an important matter which I should like to say more about at this stage. Sabinet is a computerized co-operative system for the joint cataloguing, purchase and indexing of bibliographical and other sources of information. The system was worked out by a committee of experts under the chairmanship of Prof. M. C. Boshoff of the University of Pretoria and under the guidance of the National Advisory Council on Libraries, which gave its attention to this matter over a considerable period of years. If it is successfully implemented the system will support the various libraries in the country, and particularly the more specialized libraries by way of centralized co-operative methods of rationalizing to a greater extent their ordering and cataloguing functions in respect of sources of information.

In addition it will also enable the State Library to make the collective catalogue of all library sources present in South African libraries, which is kept at the State Library, as well as the national bibliography of all documents published in South Africa and edited by the State Library available more rapidly and in a more effective way.

Sabinet will not really establish a new function but will be an important aid to the libraries and all the various information services in mechanizing and carrying out their existing functions more efficiently and in a more modern way, and particularly in doing so in such a way that all information-seeking bodies that wish to plug into this network, will, on a continuous basis, be able to obtain information from that network for their own use on where information or library sources are available in other libraries and in other information services.

We expect to obtain the co-operation of virtually all interested information services and libraries in the private as well as the public sectors. Consequently this system has been recommended to the Scientific Advisory Council of the Prime Minister by the Priorities Committee for initial financing by the State. The amount which appears in the estimate this year is intended to make the initial financing of this system possible. The idea is that ultimately the users of the system, the various libraries, will have to purchase or pay for the services on an increasingly more economic basis. However, the Scientific Advisory Council recommended that the State should help to build up this service during its first few years until it was functioning well enough to be largely or completely economic. I should like to pay tribute to the guidance of the National Advisory Library Council, and particularly to the person who developed this system, Prof. Boshof of the University of Pretoria, for this wonderful piece of work which has been done and which, in my opinion, is going to bring about a great measure of rationalization for our library and information system. All information services throughout the country will in this way be made directly accessible to users in remote areas or places where such services are not available. It is hoped that it will also bring about rationalization in the purchasing process, for at present there are indications that library and information bodies without knowledge of one another’s purchasing policies are unnecessarily duplicating expensive material in their purchases, while the funds could eventually be distributed more rationally in order to purchase a greater variety of sources. I hope that we shall hear a great deal more about this matter in future. I also hope that hon. members will show a critical interest in this development. I should very much like to receive suggestions—if need be, admonitions as well—from them so that we can make a success of this matter.

†Allow me to refer to the hon. member for Pinelands’ request for information about Capab. I should like to point out—I am referring to programme 6, “Advancement of Culture”, in the budget—that the performing arts councils of the different provinces this year received an overall 18,75% increase in their grants. This is rather less than the average of the budget, but it should be seen in conjunction with last year’s 44,1% increase. I should also like to mention that the Advisory Committee on Performing Arts is at present engaged in an in-depth investigation into the post structures and the provision of posts in the various performing arts councils’ organizational set-ups. The Government has accepted the principle of better support for the basic staff need, and I am referring to the need for administrative and management people as well as artists. In trying to work out a feasible formula, it appeared that the organizational structures of the different provincial councils differ so drastically from one another, and appear to show up such apparently irrational differences, that the Advisory Committee on Performing Arts has set up a working group, in which the different performing arts councils are represented, in an endeavour to achieve a clearer organizational structure which is acceptable to the performing arts people and which could therefore form the basis of a hopefully improved subsidy policy on the part of the central Government. As is customary in the case of the performing arts, this subsidy will naturally have to be matched by a similar subsidy from the provinces, which in the long run comes, of course, from the same kitty.

This brings me to the position in the Cape Performing Arts Council. As the hon. member for Pinelands rightly pointed out, this is a matter that falls under the jurisdiction of the Administrator. The fact that the funding is largely provided by the central Government does not entitle me, as Minister of National Education, to get involved in internal organization problems there. I should, however, like to give the assurance that I have taken the opportunity of availing myself of the hon. the Administrator’s offer to discuss the matter with him. I can therefore state very unequivocally and with conviction that I have full confidence in his ability to handle Capab’s matters in the best interests of the performing arts and the public. I have full confidence that he made a very incisive study and has gained a very clear understanding of the problems in this organization and I am looking forward to his successful solution of them.

*In the context of the advancement of culture I also wish to refer to our promotion of cultural relations with foreign countries, in respect of which hon. members will note that there is also a large increase in the budget, an increase of 44,5%. Inter alia, this is related to the fact that from this year onwards we have a cultural council in Bonn, where there has always been one, and also one in London. We are very pleased that Prof. Muller Ballot of the Potchefstroom University went to Bonn and that Prof. Mike Leighton of RAU was prepared to go to London. We are also finalizing the establishment of a cultural council in South America. This is an area in which we are at present still preceding with care, but we hope that it will soon be finalized. We also received an invitation—I wish to emphasize this—from the Austrian Government to establish a cultural attaché, or cultural council in Vienna. In spite of the sensitivity of official cultural relations between South Africa and other countries, we are nevertheless trying informally and with the help of our ambassadors to expand as many cultural relations as possible with countries with whom South Africa would like to form such ties. We shall continue in this way. My department is also fortunate in that we are able, every year, to welcome a variety of authorities, cultural leaders, as well as student and pupil groups, to this country under the budget item “cultural relations with foreign countries”. We are very grateful for the amounts which Parliament makes available to us for this purpose.

†In connection with the question of the promotion of cultural matters I should, with specific reference to the budget, also like to refer to the introduction of a new formula for subsidizing cultural institutions. They are formally called “declared” institutions. However, that sounds a bit indelicate and we prefer to call them cultural institutions declared as such in terms of the Cultural Institutions Act. Thus far these institutions have had to work on a subsidy increased by 7% per annum. Until a few years ago the annual increase was only 5%. This in fact left these institutions in an increasingly more difficult financial and management position. Towards the end of last year we succeeded in working out, in conjunction with the heads of these cultural institutions and with the approval of the Treasury, a new formula based on a recognition of the diversity of needs of these institutions, their staff needs, their administrative needs, their needs in connection with the restoration and maintenance of the objects they collect, their needs in respect of purchases of new items for their collections, and so on. This improved formula, if it had been applied immediately this year, would have meant an extra R2,5 million for these institutions. Unfortunately, we could not get the whole of this increase, but we obtained the Treasury’s approval to implement the first of, hopefully, three phases and got about R400 000 for phase one of the new formula. That is R400 000 over and above what these institutions would have got under the old 7% increase. I think that this is an improvement of considerable importance and I hope it will lead to more manoeuvreability and also flexibility—it is a more flexible formula and is not so much tied down to specific items. I hope, too, that it will enable and encourage these cultural institutions, which include museums, libraries, the zoo at Pretoria and similar institutions, to expand their work and increase further the splendid quality of their service to the public.

*Under programme 7 I just want to refer to “supporting and associated services”, where the increase is also considerably less than the average—only 14,2%. The reason for this is primarily that the money which was voted last year for the Republican Festival and for the reorganization of our computer services did not, of course, have to be made available again this year. Under the same programme I also wish to refer to the Human Science Research Council, which again receives a considerably increased amount this year, an amount which represents an increase of 35,6% in the HSRC estimate. And of course one must also bear in mind that the HSRC received an increase of 14,8% last year as well. The recommendations of the Priorities Committee of the Scientific Advisory Council in this regard were very positive and were an indication of the very high standard of work which the HSRC is performing in a great diversity of spheres in the interests of South Africa.

The last of the programme items—Sport Promotion—presents a less favourable picture. In this case the total amount was reduced by approximately R113 000, for with the fact that we do not again need a large amount for the S.A. Festival Games is partially responsible, and also the fact that the amount which was made available last year in connection with the independence of Ciskei, does not recur. However, I must also confess that some of the items, together with some of the items in the estimates of other departments, were pruned by the Treasury in view of the drastic reduction in State revenue.

In spite of the fact that some of our auxiliary services in connection with sport have to make do with a reduced amount of money this year, I nevertheless wish to express my appreciation for the fact that the Treasury in the end granted us considerably more money than was initially envisaged. In fact, I am convinced that it will be possible to maintain the essential services. I am referring to the essential services of voluntary organizations, particularly international liaison, coaching, and a contribution to the travelling expenses of sports men and women when they attend major national meetings, in which case of course they also contribute a great deal of the costs themselves. However, I assume that we shall be able to discuss the question of sport further and in detail at a later stage of the debate.

I should now like to refer briefly to the question of remuneration in the teachers’ profession. When I say this, I wish to convey my gratitude once again to the teachers’ profession, as almost all the previous speakers in this debate have done. This is a profession which continually has to renew itself. The teaching profession, more than any other, I think, is constantly exposed to the pressure of new demands—new demands in teaching as well as in society; new demands, too, owing to the personal circumstances of the pupils themselves. Teaching must constantly be renewed; the teaching profession can never remain satisfied with what it learned in the past, and consider that to be currently valid teaching practices and techniques. In addition, teachers are also people who, in the difficult circumstances in which South Africa finds itself, must concentrate personally—and, of course, help their pupils to do the same—on the need for preparedness and also on a frame of mind and specific approach which will enable the people of South Africa to survive in a very difficult and exacting future. In fact, people in the teaching profession must have a vision of the future. The educationist is not dealing only with today. It is true that he derives a great deal of his education vision from the past, and bases it on the present. Ultimately, however, his vision must be directed at the future. With the future full of uncertainty and challenge, the task of the educator is truly a difficult one. The educator must bring stability in the midst of confusion, stability in the midst of confusion in a diversity of spheres in South Africa.

Therefore I sincerely hope that, in spite of political differences, the various political organizations and parties will act in a responsible way and will refrain from the political cultivation of teachers as teachers in all kinds of conclaves, away from the eyes of the public. The teacher definitely has a responsibility to take an interest in politics as well, but then this should be done in an open way, together with his fellow citizens.

When I thank the teachers, however, I should also like to point out the exceptional demands which the human material makes on them owing to our cultural diversity and owing to the difficult social conditions which many young people experience at home, as well as the demands of a knowledge explosion and to the tensions which are an inherent part of the South African situation. For all these reasons, therefore, we are greatly indebted to the educators for their contribution to standards in education.

We are also grateful that great calm and satisfaction now prevails in the profession, thanks to the improved salary and post dispensation which was introduced last year in April. We are grateful that the teachers are able, as a result, to concentrate on their professional task and on the promotion of education, and need no longer devote their energies, through all kinds of pressure groups and activities, to the creation of a favourable climate for an improvement in their conditions of service.

I should like to point out that the Government has in the meantime seen to it that, over and above the improvements which came into operation on 1 April 1981, further improvements were made to the conditions of service of teachers. In this the Educational Structures Committee, known as ESC, i.e. the co-ordinating committee which deals with these matters within the Department of National Education, played a very important part. I shall mention only a few of the improvements which have been announced in the meantime. In the first place there was the elimination of anomalies which arose as a result of the system which came into operation on 1 April. These anomalies were identified and had been eliminated by November of last year, with retrospective effect to 1 April. We received special assistance in the identification of these anomalies from the Federal Council of Teachers’ Association.

In the second place I wish to refer to the considerably improved grant—I emphasize “considerably improved”—for supervisory or resident hostel staff. In addition there was an improved housing subsidy which became applicable to teachers as well with effect from October 1981. This subsidy was expanded and now includes a group for which the teaching profession has advanced pleas for a long time, viz. the unmarried teacher.

I am also referring to the general increase which teachers received this year, along with the rest of the Government sector, and with which, according to what I have heard, there is general satisfaction, particularly in view of the difficult and pressing financial situation in which we now find ourselves. Something which we might have forgotten already is the activation of the ninth notch in his scale for the teacher in the classroom, i.e. at first post level. Hon. members will recall that two extra notches were added to that scale last year. The first additional notch, the eighth notch, was added last year. This year a ninth notch was introduced.

In addition it was with gratification that I saw the letters which the hon. the Minister of Finance received from retired teachers, thanking him for the improved pension system in terms of which they now receive an increase of 10%, plut 1% for every year after retirement. This brought about great satisfaction among veterans of the teaching profession, people to whom we as a nation owe a tremendous debt of honour, and whose financial position had in some respects deteriorated to such an extent that they were sometimes living in straitened circumstances. This decision by the hon. the Minister of Finance was, I believe, the fruits of the labour of spokesmen in the teaching profession who worked in the interests of these people for a long period. This work has now led to this considerable improvement and I think greatly alleviated system of pension adjustment in respect of civil pensions in the public sector.

I want to admit, however, that there is one aspect in regard to which I am a little disappointed that we were unable to announce anything positive this year. The Educational Structures Committee, to which I have just referred, has during the past year given attention to two matters which are still receiving further attention, viz. firstly, certain dissatisfactory results which arose in places in the general post structure as a result of the new system which came into effect on 1 April 1981 and which is causing irritation. I am not going to explain everything that this entails now, because if I mention one thing and omit to mention another, some people will perhaps think that they will not be in the picture in future.

Secondly, the Educational Structures Committee also gave attention to the phasing in of a further step on the road leading to salary parity for women. This is a principle which the Government confirmed last year on receiving the report of the project committee. Owing to the difficult financial circumstances prevailing at present it was unfortunately not possible to make any progress with these two matters this year, viz. with the few irritating and unsatisfactory aspects of the new dispensation and with the progress towards parity for women. We are of opinion that in view of the limited funds, priority should rather be given this year to the highest possible general increase for teachers in general, particularly in view of inflation.

The hon. member for Pinelands put questions in regard to methods which could be applied to keep existing and attract prospective science teachers. I should like to point out that the Government requested the various departments of education and the professional teachers’ associations to give attention to the proposals made by the project committee which were submitted at the beginning of last year in favour of salary differentiation for teachers in certain subjects where the remuneration, on the basis of the market situation, has been demonstrated to be lagging further behind comparable posts in the private sector and the rest of the public sector than in the case of other teaching posts. As hon. members know, the profession and the departments of education are not in favour of such salary differentiation. However, we felt that the project committee had undertaken such an exhaustive investigation and had put forward such strong arguments that everyone concerned should look into the matter again. I can inform hon. members that the matter is receiving further attention and that I hope to take the matter further during this present round of salary inputs.

At this stage I wish to content myself with what I have had to say so far.

Mr. Chairman, we have heard an interesting review of many of the programmes of the department by the hon. the Minister this afternoon. He ended by talking about the schoolteacher and the important role which the teacher plays, with which we certainly heartily agree.

I was also pleased to see that even in the field of education, policies for which the PFP have been pleading for many years are now being implemented. I think in this regard for instance of moving towards equal pay for women teachers.

There are two things which have happened which I particularly want to welcome. The first is the fact that a housing subsidy for single teachers was announced last month. I think that is a great step forward. The second point mentioned by the hon. the Minister is the improved Civil Service pensions, particularly for the older pensioner, teachers who retired 10, 20 or 30 years ago. I think it is important for us to realize that part of the image of the profession of teaching is formed by the way in which we treat the pensioners. Young people see the way that the authorities look upon the pensioners and their interests and deduce from that what kind of status the teaching profession has. For that reason, amongst many others, I welcome the considerable improvement in their position in this respect.

I wish to talk, firstly, about teacher shortages, and in this regard I want to mention one aspect. There are certain categories, in the Cape, for instance, the category of English-speaking male primary teachers, in which there is a severe shortage of teachers. What I want to plead for today is greater flexibility in terms of the regulations that apply to the appointment of these teachers. I should like to illustrate this point by way of an example.

A man from England with a matric equivalent plus a two-year teaching diploma, who subsequently attained a B.A. degree through Unisa, who has 25 years teaching experience, experience as a headmaster in Rhodesia, and who is a person of outstanding calibre, was under our system rejected as unqualified and unsuitable and therefore ineligible for a permanent post as an ordinary teacher.

Standards are certainly necessary, but at the same time South Africa needs all the teachers we can get. There should be a procedure whereby exceptions can be intelligently evaluated. A book of rules applied to the letter is often not the best way of optimizing the use of scarce resources, particularly when one is dealing with professional people who are in short supply. I hope the hon. the Minister will look at this because this blanket provision of a two year qualification should not apply. I know the background to this matter and I know that in the United Kingdom some people do not require matric in order to acquire that qualification. Therefore I know why the general rule applies. I do not think it is a bad rule, but flexibility should be built into it because I do not think that we can afford to lose these people from the profession.

The second aspect I should like to talk about is school secretaries. Last year I spoke on this subject and I should like to remind the Committee of the important role vis-à-vis a school principal and the effective administration of a school that a school secretary plays. These people remain classified as grade I clerical assistants, the lowest grade, and they have no prospect of attaining a higher grading. They are paid a pittance, less than a junior copy typist in the Public Service. Last year the hon. the Minister, in response to my plea, replied—

I accept that the hon. the Minister is a busy man, but I have still received no letter and I am not aware of anything having happened in this regard resulting in any improvement in the situation. I would be grateful if the hon. the Minister would comment on this matter when he replies to this debate at a later stage.

The other subject which I would like to discuss briefly is the new buildings for an expanded technikon in the Cape. Last year it was mentioned in the hon. the Minister’s speech that technikon development was receiving high priority. I think that is a very wise move. I would like to focus my attention on the Cape Technikon and firstly on the sitting of the technikon in District Six. I feel very strongly, more strongly than many others, about the removal of the tens of thousands of people that took place and the manner in which it was done in District Six, but I do not propose to pursue that aspect of the matter in this debate because I do not think that it relates to the National Education Vote. However, just for the record I should like to make that clear.

Firstly, I should like to point out to the hon. the Minister the effect on Cape Town of building a technikon in District Six. The proposal for District Six was for a high density residential area close to the central city. Irrespective of the race of the residents, that high density residential area is needed to play an important role in the revitalization of commercial activity in the city. The technikon site of approximately 17,8 ha would use up nearly 25% of the available area in District Six. This is most unsuitable in town-planning terms and it would have a severe adverse effect on the city’s commercial life. The City Engineer of Cape Town, in commenting on the new proposals—the ones that came out earlier this year—said the following—

The mistakes that we make in this regard in respect of town-planning we shall have to live with for decades. The hon. the Minister will know that cities throughout the world are struggling with the problem of inner city decay and related matters. Here in Cape Town we have a golden opportunity to prevent that happening. My plea to the hon. the Minister is that we do not miss this opportunity.

Secondly, besides the effect on Cape Town as a city I should like to talk about the effect on the Cape Technikon itself. I believe that whether we like it or not, that technikon will lose an enormous amount of goodwill to which it would normally have been entitled if it ends up being built in District Six. It will struggle with fund-raising because of the stigma which will inevitably be attached to the technikon because of its controversial siting. Whether one agrees with it or not, I do not think anyone will deny that this is a controversial matter. I appeal to the hon. the Minister to use his influence in the interests of Cape Town and the Cape Technikon to have the technikon sited elsewhere.

Of course money is involved but some R60 million has already been spent on District Six and it is of paramount importance that the area be developed properly in the interests of the people of Cape Town. Cape Town is not flourishing economically and we need to keep the city and its environs commercially as active as possible. To lose the opportunity that District Six presents would be a tragedy and would do great harm to Cape Town.

I urgently request the hon. the Minister to look at the whole question of siting the technikon in District Six once again. I do not wish to score any debating point in this regard and I think the manner in which I have presented my case makes that clear. However, I do want the best that we can get for Cape Town, educationally and otherwise.

The remarks that I have made about the new technikon in District Six apply irrespective of the race of the residents of District Six or of the students of the technikon. At the same time, however, I should like to ask the hon. the Minister to ensure that wherever the technikon is eventually sited it will be open to students and staff of all races. We cannot afford the inefficiency and racial divisiveness that will result from yet another segregated institution. I hope that at this time where a greater flexibility is being displayed by the Government, the opportunity will be seized upon to establish the new technikon on a non-racial basis from the start and, in doing so, contribute towards the possibility of racial reconciliation in the Western Cape. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, we on this side of the House share the concern about the shortage of English-speaking teachers in our schools. I should like to make a friendly request to the hon. members of the Opposition to make repeated public appeals to their English-speaking countrymen to become teachers.

I am sure the hon. the Minister will be able to reply to the question on the location of the Cape Technikon.

Along with the hon. the Minister it is a great honour for me to congratulate Dr. Meyer, Director-General of the Department of National Education, most sincerely on the honour which befell him to be invited to give a lecture in West Berlin on the education of the gifted child in South Africa during the recent Second Federal Congress on the Gifted Child. Along with my congratulations I also want to express the heartfelt and sincere thanks of all gifted boys and girls in our South African schools to Dr. Meyer for his tremendous contribution to the pioneering work done during the past two years by the departments of education in three of our provinces to give real attention to the needs and problems of gifted children in our schools. Time does not allow me to describe in detail what has already been done in each of the three provinces, in spite of problems and obstacles, and what is being planned for the future. The problems that are being experienced are problems unique to all forms of pioneering work where new paths must be found and new guidelines laid down.

I should like to mention a few of these problems. In the first place: Who and what is a gifted child and how can this child be identified as gifted? In the second place: To what extent must existing syllabuses be meaningfully enriched for these children? In the third place: Is there staff available for this tremendous task of guiding the gifted child?

I content myself with saying that in spite of all the problems, and albeit to a great extent unco-ordinated, a firm and sound foundation is being laid in each of the provinces, a foundation on which it will be possible to build further.

Who and what is a gifted child? The generally accepted opinion is that the gifted child is simply the so-called “clever” child, who with little effort does exceptionally well scholastically in one or several or all of the school subjects. However, we must remember that the so-called gifted child is far more than just a child who does well scholastically. It is very difficult to define “gifted”, and “exceptionally gifted”. This includes, inter alia, (a) above average mental or intellectual ability in perhaps only one subject, for example mathematics, or in two subjects or in all conceivable subjects or fields of study; (b) exceptional creative ability in one field or in all spheres of life; and (c) special or exceptional talents in respect of the five arts, music, handwork, drama, mechanics or even physical ability for example.

The Greek philosopher Plato called gifted children “children of gold”. I want to refer to them as, until recently, the most neglected, most wronged group of pupils in our schools.

We have special schools and special classes staffed by teachers specially trained to deal with every form of deviation, whatever that deviation from normality may be. These special schools with their specially trained teachers are a great credit to the State and the authorities. The work done in these schools is far more praiseworthy laudable than can ever be expressed in words. The staff in these schools deserve the greatest thanks and appreciation for their dedicated and unselfish services.

Having said this, I am surely entitled to ask that no sum of money should be considered too large and no effort as too much trouble to meet the requirements of this special group of pupils in our schools, the gifted children. We cannot spend all our energy and money on polishing glass, no matter how praiseworthy this may be, and leave our diamonds unpolished. After all, this group of gifted pupils contains the leaders of tomorrow in all spheres of our national life, the leaders whose exceptional talents and ability must be developed to the full in the interests of our country and all its people.

I am afraid that under our existing system of education which is aimed at the interests, problems and needs of the average pupil, the interests of the gifted group have until very recently been completely forgotten and neglected.

That is why I want to express my great appreciation for the fact that the Department of National Education directed the HSRC at the beginning of 1982 to make a scientific and co-ordinated investigation into (a) the current situation with regard to the education for gifted children in schools under the control of the various departments of education; (b) the nature and quality of the programme at present being offered; (c) the availability and training of teachers for gifted pupils; (d) research projects with regard to gifted children at present being undertaken at universities and teachers’ training colleges; (e) norms and techniques to identify the gifted pupil; and (f) didactic procedures at present being applied in schools to meet the needs of gifted pupils. These terms of reference in connection with the investigation, which has to be completed within 18 months—and I almost feel like cheering about this—covers the entire spectrum of the present problems surrounding the education of the gifted child. The findings and recommendations are being awaited with great interest.

In conclusion I just want to indicate that I am not advocating special schools. I am merely advocating special opportunities, by means of enrichment programmes in existing courses in the schools, because leaders are not trained and nourished in isolation from followers. [Interjections.] That is why these people, our children of gold should be afforded special opportunities at the schools in order to develop their special God-given talents and abilities to the full.

In conclusion I want to ask that our universities and teachers’ training colleges undertake more research in connection with this matter, which is of overwhelming importance. We must undertake research because we want to know what becomes of these gifted people when they leave school. We do want to know what happens to these people when they arrive at our universities. We must know what becomes of them in later life.

Mr. Chairman, in this House very important matters are discussed from time to time, but the matter before this House today is of the greatest importance, because it involves the nation of the future, the young people upon whom we fasten our hopes for the years that lie ahead. It is they who will be the nation of the future. In the future it is they who may reap the benefits of the discussions which thus far today have taken place at a very high level. They are the citizens of tomorrow. They are the people who must be best equipped to face the future. Those people are in the hands of the teachers of South Africa. I doubt if there is anyone in this House who will disagree with me when I pay tribute to the teachers, both male and female, who are in the forefront of the training of our youth of today. In order to give some idea of the deep feeling of compassion and sincerity in our own hearts towards education, I must quote from a poem by G. A. Watermeyer entitled “Gietvorms”—

This high regard for the teacher was even felt in the days of President Kruger. When President Kruger felt there was a shortage of teachers in the young republic of the Transvaal, he imported teachers from Holland. The reason I know a great deal about this is that my father-in-law was one of the teachers who was brought from Holland to South Africa by President Kruger. In the years after the Second Boer War, too, there was an acute shortage of teachers. Even then the erection of a school was an act of faith. I can only refer to the Volkskool at Heidelberg which was established in 1903, its pupils the orphans left by that devastating war. The school was established in the Keldersaal of the well-known Klipkerk at Heidelberg. It was an act of faith.

I should like to thank the hon. the Minister for visiting the industrial schools in my constituency some months ago. I took cognizance of the trouble he took for those schools. I want to thank him for the progress which has been made since his visit. I shall always remember it. I wonder how many people today realize what wonderful work the industrial schools do for the children of our nation. The teachers there are not educators for part of the day only, but for the entire day. They are in every way the parents of those children.

There are children there who not only receive the ordinary education which children at ordinary schools receive, but also training in a trade. If one goes into this one arrives at the following figures: 60% of the children in those industrial schools are there directly or indirectly owing to circumstances beyond their control or owing to their parents’ problems, for example, divorce and separation, which are not the fault of the child. 30% are there because of trouble they got into in the neighbourhood they grew up in; and 10% are there for a variety of other problems.

I believe the hon. the Minister can help us to rectify a certain matter. I am confident that he will go into this. Teachers at industrial schools are at a disadvantage in comparison with other teachers. Because they are on duty 24 hours a day, they cannot, for example, buy themselves a house in town. They have to live on the premises, and for this reason they miss out on the housing subsidy the hon. the Minister referred to recently. It passes them by. As I said, the teachers who live in are on duty 24 hours a day. If they live in a hostel they still have to pay R80 a month although they are in fact on duty and have to be available at all times if anything should happen.

I realize that funds are a tremendous problem nowadays. Although we are in the process of approving the budget, I want to express the hope that the next budget will be much better, and that more funds can be voted for the provinces. I want to ask if consideration can be given to voting more funds for the provinces, because we know that the old schools, for example the Volkskool at Heidelberg, to which I referred a moment ago, have certain defects, because whenever funds are voted for them, the budget is revised in the light of the services which must be rendered, and they never remain at the top of the list. For example, in that specific school a complete programme was worked out and budgeted for about six years ago, but it could not be implemented. This happened again last year. I therefore want to ask if more funds cannot be voted for the provinces for this purpose.

The hon. the Minister had a great deal to say about the salaries of teachers. We want to convey our sincere thanks to him for this. We are extremely grateful for every word he uttered in this connection. We are grateful for the improvement which can already be detected. However, if we take note of the tremendous rate at which inflation is overtaking us and how salaries in the private sector are rising, it seems that the State simply cannot keep pace with it. When the private sector really needs someone it merely buys what it needs. Therefore I should like to suggest that we draw a few comparisons. I want to use a typist as an example. We all have the greatest regard for typists. I myself was a businessman for many years and therefore know what a tremendous asset a good typist is to a businessman.

In what way?

In all ways connected with her work. [Interjections.] A good typist or secretary is always an asset to a business undertaking. That is why a typist receives a good salary. We do not begrudge her this salary. However, typists usually have only one year of training after matric, whereas nowadays a teacher must have three years training after matric. In the Transvaal in particular of course, salaries are much higher in comparison with those in other provinces. In the large cities, too, high salaries are paid. I am not referring to rural towns now. In this respect we find that there is a tremendous backlog in development, which could possibly cause us problems in the future.

This brings me to another matter to which I should like the hon. the Minister to give his attention. I have heard from reliable sources—I do not know if this is quite true, but I have no reason to doubt my source—that the book Cry, the Beloved Country, which was written in 1948 by Alan Paton, one of the biggest liberals of this century, has been prescribed as an optional book for schools in the Cape this year. By the way, this book was banned for many years. We know, for example, that this book fans the Black Power movement’s hatred of the Whites.

Have you read the book?

Yes, I have.

It is a very good book, is it not?

No, it is very poor, and dangerous to good race relations. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I have no fault to find with the contribution which the hon. member for Nigel made to the debate. After all, it is true that he and the hon. members of his party ought to join us in addressing this House on those matters on which we are agreed. I also listened with close attention and great appreciation to the speech by the hon. member for Kimberley North. With reference to his speech I should like to say something about the activities of the Cultural Affairs Branch, and the matter of the gifted child, who will, of course, be the leader of tomorrow in South Africa.

The Cultural Affairs Branch has eight regional offices and six suboffices and seeks to liaise with the leaders of various cultural organizations. The Cultural Affairs Branch can call on the services of a large number of outside experts and is involved with projects by means of which the high level of the training of leaders can be maintained. The branch limits its activities to adults, post-school youth—both students and working young people—and extra-murally to school-going youth. I have a list of the names of an entire range of organizations that actively participate to keep the activities of the Cultural Affairs Branch going. I found it interesting to see what they had been engaged in doing during the past financial year. Among their activities were, for example, introductory courses in the running of seminars, an advanced course in the running of seminars, business training seminars for the managements of organizations, leadership courses for Voortrekker officers, Land Services courses for adult and junior leaders, leadership courses for school-going children and office-bearer’s courses for the managing bodies of organizations, as well as courses in procedure, business and duties of office-bearers at meetings. A total of 113 projects were offered during the course of the past financial year. A total of 9 099 persons attended these courses. The money available for their projects amounted to R171 000. I see that in the present budget R180 000 is made available for the Cultural Affairs Branch. I shall refer to this aspect again later.

Particular emphasis is placed inter alia on the spiritual preparedness of leaders, and in the evaluation report of the Cultural Affairs Branch one sees quite clearly that there is a great need for leadership projects in South Africa.

As far as the secondary and tertiary education programme is concerned it is fair to say that through these programmes 2 000 people—and I am making a conservative estimate—who can certainly be considered to be leadership material are introduced into society every year. In this education programme they undertake all forms of leadership training—from class leaders to prefects, and from house committee members at universities to chairmen of student councils. Is there, however, any place in this education programme where it will be possible to utilize and round off this leadership potential to such an extent that it can become a permanent asset to South Africa? In the first place the question arises whether, in the very full academic programme of our education, there is still an opportunity to make place for the spiritual building material which is so essential for the moulding of leaders, and from which the leaders can learn the spiritual value of their leadership. Does the career aspect of the teachers’ training programme have an adequate spiritual content to bring out the leadership potential of these people? This is something we must take particular cognizance of, because the teacher must in the first place stimulate the spiritual life of the child, into which he must fit his academic values.

A third question which arises from this is whether, in the national interests, there should not be a better follow-up of advanced material and better co-ordination of all sound data so as to develop those persons who have leadership potential into leaders of the Republic of South Africa. Cannot there be an interaction between all this established leadership material we find in secondary education and the community at large? In this way people who have leadership potential can in fact be best utilized. It is in this regard that I should like to agree with the hon. member for Kimberley North who said that here we are also dealing with South African gold.

It has been said that every nation must prepare at least 4% of its population to act as leaders. Unfortunately the young people of today are the victims of a hitherto unprecedented onslaught of permissiveness. The latest information from the USA indicates that 9% of the 18-year-old citizens of that country have not yet registered themselves as such, in spite of all the appeals President Reagan has personally made in this connection and in spite of the severe penalties imposed if they fail to register.

There is very interesting reading matter on Taiwan and the re-emergence of Japan after the Second World War. One also reads, inter alia, of intensive programmes these two countries have concentrated on their youth, aimed at kindling in them a love for their nation and country and giving them what they need to face the opportunities with dedication and enthusiasm.

However, what is the position in South Africa in this connection and are we giving sufficient attention to this matter? Of course the circumstances in Taiwan differ vastly from those in South Africa. We have a heterogeneous population composition but we also have unlimited mineral wealth. In addition it is relatively easy and requiring very little effort to find a job which pays a reasonable salary. However, it requires too little effort and too little brain power from a young man to allow him to come to the fore as a leader and to rise above material matters, something which is so important to him. I also wonder whether all bodies should not give serious attention to meeting this need. Has the time not come for the Cultural Affairs Branch of the Department of National Education to have more influence outside? The Cultural Affairs Branch is prepared as far as staff and organization are concerned and has everything at its disposal. At the moment they are promoting natural sciences, social sciences, family education and home-building, literary art, music, graphic art and youth work. These people are absolutely prepared. I therefore ask: Should we not launch an intensive programme in South Africa to investigate the liaison between formal education and the private sector of which the child must eventually become a part? Should there not be greater liaison and should we not make better use of the Cultural Affairs Branch so that we can make better use of our advanced leadership potential, the benefit of our country?

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Nigel referred to Alan Paton and his book Cry, the Beloved Country. Alan Paton is one of South Africa’s most distinguished scholars, philosophers and authors, a non-racial giant amongst racial midgets. His book Cry, the Beloved Country should not only be a textbook for all schools, but also for the CP. Maybe they can then learn what suffering and harm their form of racialism will bring to our beloved country.

I should like to reply to the hon. member for Kimberley North and the hon. member for Brentwood, although in so doing I shall speak on a subject which is in a sense the opposite of what they spoke about. They referred to the gifted child in South Africa. Of course we support everything they said regarding the need for education and other forms of assistance to these people. The hon. the Minister referred to his department’s duty towards the handicapped and said they needed sympathy, compassion and help, and we on these benches support that view.

The hon. the Minister and his department are responsible for schools for special education. This includes the sensory handicapped, both visual and oral, and it includes schools for the neural handicapped, cerebral palsy, infantile autism, the physically handicapped and epileptics. The hon. the Minister and his department are also responsible for schools in terms of the Children’s Act, namely reform schools and industrial schools, and, finally, they are also responsible for schools and training centres for the training of mentally retarded children. Unfortunately however, the hon. the Minister’s department only controls White schools falling into these categories.

It is important that one realizes that when one talks about the handicapped or the retarded one must not concentrate on what they have lost but on what is still left. The public must also be educated to see things in this light. A blind person has good hearing and sensory abilities—he can feel—and therefore the education is directed towards what is left. This is why adequate facilities are necessary because the condition of the majority of these children with proper education can be improved and many of them can be returned to responsible positions in our society. We on this side of the House want to pay special tribute to all the devoted people responsible for the education of these children. One has only to visit these centres to realize that the people working there are special people. Their total devotion to and their love for the children and their all-embracing work for these people is something that must be admired, and we should like to thank them for what they are doing.

For future planning the hon. the Minister must look at the incidence and causative factors of many of these conditions. As far as the growth rate of South Africa’s White population is concerned it is basically zero. The number of children born with these conditions will not increase rapidly. Also on the medical side we will find that many conditions that are responsible for causing these diseases are rapidly diminishing. For example, one thinks of infections, the early diagnosis and treatment, the early inter-uterine diagnosis of conditions such as Down’s Syndrome, where, with a legal abortion, this type of condition will not be part of our society at a later date. Therefore, in giving these few examples, it is my opinion that the annual increase in the conditions leading to the birth of these retarded or handicapped children will be much less than before.

The annual report of the Department of National Education confirms that there are satisfactory staffing facilities except for some pupils who have difficulties in learning and for some of the infantile autistic children. I should like to ask the hon. the Minister, as a responsible member of the Cabinet, whether he is satisfied that similar educational facilities are available to Coloureds, Asians and Blacks? Recently I visited Port Elizabeth and I was really saddened by the lack of facilities in that area for Black mentally retarded children. These unfortunate children have to be referred to Cape Town and Pretoria and long waiting lists make placing nearly impossible. In view of the recommendations of the De Lange Commission I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether he is satisfied that an already handicapped Black child should be further handicapped because of the pigmentation of his skin. Must these children remain retarded because of the political retardation of the NP. Cannot there be one department with facilities shared by all handicapped and retarded children? The hon. the Minister’s own department includes sport. The handicapped of South Africa led this country in accepting non-racial sport. The hon. the Minister knows about it and I think he is rightly proud of what the handicapped of South Africa have achieved on the sportsfields, not only of South Africa but all over the word. If the handicapped can play together, I should like to ask the hon. the Minister whether they cannot be educated together as well. There should be one department, one facility, one system of planning and one system of co-ordination. All these people should be grouped together. Who does the hon. the Minister have sympathy for? Is it only for the Whites? I am sure the hon. the Minister also has sympathy for Blacks, Coloureds and Asians. Does the hon. the Minister not realize that the facilities for Blacks will have to be increased because the number of Blacks requiring facilities in the future will increase? What I said with regard to the lower incidence of handicapped children among Whites certainly does not apply to Blacks.

In the very short space of time still available to me I want to talk about optometry and optometrists. On page 326 of the annual report of the Department of National Education we read that 187 students are studying optometry at technikons for diplomas and 13 for advanced diplomas. I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether he has received any representations from the Society of Optometrists about their conditions and education. The position in South Africa is very interesting because at present one can only obtain a university degree in optometry if one is either Black or Asian. It is also important to realize that the first two optometrists with university degrees were Blacks. I am sure the hon. member for Houghton will be very pleased to know that these were two Black women. However, as far as the White group are concerned, they can only obtain diplomas.

Time does not permit me to discuss the need for and the importance of optometry in South Africa. In fact, it would be a wonderful thing if we could obtain the services of some political optometrists to cure hon. members on that side of the House of their political myopia. Of course, that is not possible. However, if the hon. the Minister could institute a course of that nature at one of our universities, I would be very grateful. I want to say that optometrists can play a vitally important role in the health of people of all races in this country who need this type of assistance in respect of eye conditions and also to enable them to enjoy better health generally. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, it is a pity that the hon. member for Parktown tried to introduce the colour issue into this discussion on education this afternoon. In a sentimental way, he tried to drag in the blind and the handicapped. I think that if the hon. member were to read the reports of the various departments, he would see that handicapped Blacks, as well as handicapped Coloureds and Indians are being amply cared for by the various departments.

Earlier this afternoon the hon. member for Pretoria East referred to the universities. A section of the HSRC Report deals with technical education, and this afternoon I wish to say a few words about the technikons in South Africa.

I am very sorry that the hon. member for Cape Town Gardens has once again dragged the issue of the new technikon being planned for Cape Town in the political arena. He complained about the site where this technikon is to be built. It is true that the Government has accepted that part of District Six will be White—a part of it will also be a Coloured area—and that the new technikon will be built in the White area. I think that the site where this new technikon will be built, is very centrally situated. It will be near the station and there will be sufficient parking space for the students. We shall have to train more technicians and skilled workers in order to meet our manpower needs. If we reckon that South Africa’s average growth rate will be 4,5% a year, we will require 23 000 skilled workers and 9 500 technicians annually in South Africa. If we look at the present figures, then we see that only approximately 10 000 skilled workers and approximately 2 000 technicians are being trained annually; in other words, our annual shortfall is more or less half of what we require. Apart from that, the training of engineers is also inadequate. According to the results at our universities, it appears that only half of those who enrol in engineering faculties eventually complete their courses. If we compare South Africa with Taiwan and Israel, which are more or less on the same level economically, we find that considerably more technical people are being trained in those countries. We in South Africa only train 11% of the technical people they do. In future, many more technical teachers will be required and this need will escalate. That is why it will become necessary for us to give more attention to the training of technical teachers in our technikons as well. At the technikons in Cape Town, Port Elizabeth and Durban, teachers are already being trained in the fields of commerce, physical science and technical subjects in co-operation with the local universities. Fortunately, interaction and parallel co-operation is taking place between the universities and the technikons.

If we look at the number of students registered at our universities and technikons, we find that in 1980 there were 142 800 students registered at our universities, 43 400 at our technikons, 50 800 at our technical colleges and 26 900 at our technical institutes. The hon. the Minister pointed out earlier this afternoon that at the technikons there had been a growth of 13,8%, despite the levelling off in the economy, while there was only a growth of 3% at the universities. On the other hand, we should take into account that only 14% of White pupils are taking a course at the technikons. As far as this is concerned, a greater percentage of students will have to be channelled to the technikons. Unfortunately it is true that over the years, a strong resistance to technical education has been built up in South Africa. There is too much snobbery attached to academic training and to overcome this, the Department of National Education will have to adopt a large and well-planned publicity and guidance programme to place technical education in its correct perspective. More attention will have to be given to guidance at the primary school level to introduce technical education, in order to identify and advise the pupil who has a technical aptitude or interest at an early stage.

Vocational education will have to play a greater role in our school, as vocational education is not only a function of the State or the school; it is also the function of industry and the parent. A more active role will have to be played to fulfil the manpower needs and to find a strategy for solving the problem.

It is a pity that a large section of our population receives no education or training after St. 10, because too much emphasis is placed on academic training in the primary, as well as the high schools.

During the past few years, a great deal has been done to increase the status of the technikons and to promote vocational education after St. 10.

Science, technology and management are the most effective, if not the only means available to man of improving and enriching the environment he finds himself in. The fact that these three means have not been fully mastered and do not form part of the culture of the developing countries, is the basic reason why such countries do not develop further economically.

In my plea for the technikons, I do not wish to detract from the advancement of the universities, but I think the technikons should play a greater role so that the universities will eventually be provided with better students.

The technikon should serve as a bridge so that the student is better equipped when he gets to the university. This system is already being used with a great deal of success in Israel. The Rand Afrikaans University is now recognizing a five-year chemistry course at a technikon for admission to an M.Sc. degree course at the university.

Perhaps we should have a look at the subsidies payable to our universities. Is it not time that we relate the subsidies to the number of students who obtain degrees? By doing this, we will ensure that not too many students take a particular course of study and we will be preventing unemployment among the educated.

It is also the function of the technikons to ensure that people are taught how to carry out their task and how to use their skills and energy profitably. In this respect, the technikons are producing students who are practically-orientated and scientifically balanced.

Mr. Chairman, I hope the hon. member for Alberton will forgive me if I do not react directly to what he said, because my time is limited to ten minutes this afternoon.

What I would, however, like to do, is follow up on a matter introduced by the hon. member for Pinelands earlier today. I am referring to the question of a single education department. By way of argument he raised the question of a single education department for Whites and Coloureds, pointing out that they essentially spoke the same language, had largely common origins, the same religion and, according to the hon. the Prime Minister, shared the same future.

The same nation.

The chief spokesman on that side of the House did not answer this question, and I certainly hope that there will be somebody on that side of the House who will answer it today. [Interjections.]

Very briefly, the recommendations of the De Lange Committee on this point were that there should be three different levels in the control of education. There should be a central level dealing with broad policy decisions and policy aspects. The hon. the Minister should, in fact, agree with this recommendation because this would give him a bigger empire to control. At the second or regional level, provision would be made for education in defined areas. The commission did not say whether this should be on an ethnic basis or not, but obviously we on this side of the House do not think that ethnicity should be a prime consideration at all. At the third level there is the basic unit of management which is the school where parents and teachers would exercise as much autonomy as possible. Unfortunately the hon. member for Virginia clearly expressed himself as being opposed to this.

This afternoon I should like to make a plea to the Government to reconsider the decision they have already taken in this regard. In making this plea I am also aware of the recommendations of the “Volkskongres” in Bloemfontein. I would, however, like to repeat what the hon. member for Pinelands said here by asking the Government not to take those recommendations too seriously. There are a number of reasons for this. Firstly I understand that a minority of the people at the congress were educationalists as such. Secondly, many of those people had not had an opportunity to study the report in detail. Thirdly, the views and opinions expressed at the congress can, I believe, be accommodated very largely within the framework of the recommendations of the De Lange Committee. I think the approach of the congress was one aimed at maintaining Afrikaner identity, at Afrikaners having their own schools, their own education department and Christian national education. Here I should like to tell the hon. member for Standerton that we have no quarrel with that. It is their democratic right to propagate that particular approach. The only quarrel we have is with their imposing that sort of attitude or approach on other people. I really do think that their requirements can be accommodated within the framework of the recommendations of the De Lange Committee.

There are also a number of other reasons why I believe that the Government should seriously reconsider its approach in this connection. First of all it is the Government’s stated policy to provide equal educational facilities for all. I do not believe there is any disagreement on either side of the House about the fact that up to now educational facilities have not been the same for all. It is important that everyone should also perceive them to be the same. The current system is treated with a lot of distrust by most people. The reason why the facilities should be perceived to be the same—I have said this before, but I am repeating it in the hope that it might get through—is that the educational system very largely grades people into jobs, and it is a person’s job that gives him a certain status in the economy and also gives him his income. It is, in effect, the most important thing in his life. If a person fails to get a job or progress in the economy, he must have himself to blame. He must not be in a position to blame the system as such. That is why it is so important, in fact imperative, for everyone to see the system as a fair system. I believe that this can only be done within the framework of a single Education Department.

Secondly I believe that we should realize that we are all in the same economy and that we are all going to work shoulder to shoulder in the same work place, exercising the same skills. This has been recognized very clearly by the hon. the Minister of Manpower in the legislation he has piloted through this House in the past few years. I believe that we should also recognize this in the educational field.

Thirdly—I think this is the most important aspect of the lot—there is the question of increasing polarization in this country. It is important that we all begin to understand one another and get to know one another better. This is especially important at the secondary and tertiary levels. The recommendations of the De Lange Committee, if implemented, would in fact begin to achieve this. I just wonder how long we are going to remain blind to certain reports. We have all read, I hope, the recommendations of the Buthelezi Commission and we have seen how polarized and how radicalized young Blacks are becoming. These are particularly the educated, urbanized young Blacks. If we could get, or start getting, our youngsters together into the same institutions, we would be able to help reduce the actual polarization.

Another point is that I believe that the creation of a single education department would be an act of good faith on the part of the Government. It would clearly demonstrate their commitment to providing equal educational facilities for all. I also believe that a devolution of power, as recommended by the De Lange Committee, would mean that certain aspects, e.g. Christian national education, would not necessarily have to be applied to all. It would then be open to schools with their parents and teachers to decide on the type of education they wanted to implement in that school. This would also serve to remove friction. It would be welcomed by, for example, a lot of English-speaking people. They are not against Christian education or national education, but obviously different people have different interpretations of what is actually meant by that.

A further point is that I think that decentralization is very important in regard to universities. They should be free to choose their own students. We have heard today that universities are not, in fact, registering the same number of students as before, so there is in fact going to be extra place available. There would be greater competition for places, something which I believe would help reduce the drop-out rate which the hon. the Minister mentioned in his speech earlier on today.

Another point is that universities should get together communities of interests, although students may in fact come from diverse backgrounds. This can only enrich the university as such because those people, as I have said earlier on, would in fact be exercising the same skills in the same economy. The universities are also there to serve the needs in the society in which they are situated. For example, in 1975 White universities trained 142 White doctors per million people in the White population. In the same year only 0,45 Black doctors were trained per million people in the Black population. There is obviously some misallocation of resources in this particular situation. Here I agree with the hon. member for Durban North who said earlier on that we should, in fact, rationalize different departments, in the provision of training at universities.

In conclusion, I sincerely hope that the Government has not finally closed the door on a single educational system. This idea enjoys a broad measure of support. The recent congress in Grahamstown supported this idea. I know that The Black Teachers’ Association supports this idea. I also know, for example, that different trade unions associated to Tucsa support this idea. I really believe that this is in fact a powerful body of opinion which cannot be ignored in the provision of education in the future.

Mr. Chairman, I trust the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg South will pardon me if I do not react directly to his speech. However, there is a very urgent and important matter which I want to bring to the attention of this House as well as the hon. the Minister. I feel that it is a matter which I can feel free to mention in the discussion of this Vote. In the process of educating our children, every parent has a tremendous responsibility. Of course, there are many do’s and don’ts, and, of course, parents do constantly point out to their children the dangers they may encounter.

Today I wish to mention one of these dangers, one of these don’ts, which constitutes a major threat to our youth, viz. the so-called “dragon rallies” and “rhino rallies” which are taking place so frequently nowadays. In the first instance, parents should forbid their children to attend these rallies. They can be of no benefit whatsover to our youth. Parents should use their influence to point out the dangers these rallies constitute to their children. They should motivate and influence their children not to attend them.

High school pupils in particular ought to be made aware by their teachers of the unsavoury things which happen during these rallies of motorcyclists. Teachers, too, should discourage the older children from attending these rallies. Personally, I strongly object to these rallies, since what takes place during these gatherings, is certainly objectionable—and that is putting it mildly. The perversities which are rampant at those motorcycle rallies, bode ill for every civilized society. It is scandalous that educated people can sink so low, that they can simply throw all their morality overboard.

Such a rally is being planned in my constituency for the weekend of 20 till 23 May. It is being planned to hold it at the Flamingo resort next to the Vaal River. As I have already said, I am opposed to the holding of that rally. A delegation of the community there came to see me and they have expressed their disapproval. They have also requested that the organizers of the rally should not be allowed to continue with the arrangements. I cannot defend the holding of such organized, or disorganized, gatherings, where the morals of our people are corrupted. I must disapprove most strongly. In the times we are living in, we cannot allow matters of this nature to have a negative effect on our society.

Moreover, I believe that this is playing into the hands of the communists, and it creates a breeding ground for the destruction of our Christian beliefs and our fixed principles. We must guard against this, and compel the organizers of these motorcycle rallies to call a halt now. If they do not do so, drastic action will have to be taken against them.

Action will even have to be taken against those who are so quick to make their premises available for these rallies. After all, it is merely a money-making racket by both the organizers and the owners of the sites on which these rallies are held. These people do not care what happens during these gatherings. They are blithely unconcerned about the perversities, the unhygienic conditions, the disturbance and environmental pollution, and the objections of people in the area. They could not care less what damage the owners and occupants of neighbouring properties suffer. A great deal of damage is done to neighbouring properties and even to the towns. After such a weekend, the organizer of the rally, who is known as Ma Jones, leaves with bags of money. Of course, she does not care at all how the area has been ravaged and harmed by this evil with which it has been afflicted.

That Mrs. Jones is only interested in the money, is confirmed by her own remark to a newspaper reporter to whom she is alleged to have said that if the rally could not take place, she would lose large amounts of money. Application was made to the chief magistrate of Potchefstroom for a permit to hold the rally during the weekend of 20 till 23 May. He rejected the application. I support him in all respects, and I endorse his decision. Mr. Wessels, the chief magistrate of Potchefstroom, can be assured that I support him in all respects in his refusal to approve that application. I know that he did this because he is, in fact, acting in the interests of the general public. Moreover, I am convinced that he was acting in the interests of our youth by refusing permission for that rally.

Of course, young people will not understand this at this stage. However, I am convinced that as they realize that the morals of the people are only corrupted at such rallies, they will, in fact, appreciate the fact that they cannot be permitted.

Let us just take a brief look at the amounts of money involved in rallies of this nature. Firstly, a motorcyclist pays a R10 entrance fee. His passenger pays R5. If we take into account that it is estimated that 4 000 motorcyclists will attend this rally, it means that they alone will give Mrs. Jones an income of R40 000. If only half of those motorcyclists bring passengers with them, this would mean a further R10 000 in income for Mrs. Jones; a total income, therefore, of R50 000.

Supposing the damage to buildings and the site during such rally amounts to R30 000 or even R40 000, the organizers—in this case only one organizer—make a profit of R10 000, and the worst of it is that she earns it by breaking all the rules of decency and orderliness.

A further question is whether the organizer pays tax on this income, and what control is there over this income which she earns? I maintain that she also disregards and ignores the laws of the land.

Let us take a look at how matters progress during these motorcycle rallies. On the first day, things go reasonably well, but from the second day matters start getting out of hand and for the rest of the weekend, things are very rough indeed. Litres of liquor are consumed. In fact, I was told that at one similar rally, as much as R72 000 worth of liquor had been sold by the morning of the third day to the people who attended this rally. By this time, there was no more liquor on the premises and they rode in groups of 80 to 100 to the neighbouring towns to get to the bars and liquor stores. If they had only bought liquor there and came back, it would still have been in order. However, they also left those stores in chaos and what is more they took a considerable amount of liquor without paying for it.

Let us look at how these people arrive at these venues. Firstly, they wear leather jackets covered in badges and with a skull or some or other slogan on their backs. In fact many of them are armed, sometimes with a revolver or two on the hip, a long knife attached to the leg and, of course, a chain over the shoulder. It is therefore obvious that these people are not to be trifled with. By the third day, still armed with weapons and liquor, things really start to happen. A reporter who was an eyewitness, had the following to say—

Apart from this, for example, a shot was heard by a man and his wife. They looked around to see where the shot had come from. A while later, the man realized that his foot was hurting badly, and then he found that the bullet had pierced his foot. [Interjections.]

However, the worst is that men and women walk around completely naked during these rallies. I have evidence of this and it is therefore not hearsay. I was given photographs taken during such a rally. I seriously object to such actions, and these people will have to be prosecuted in order to curb this evil.

As far as injuries at such rallies are concerned, I wish to quote from a report which appeared in The Star of 13 April 1982 in which, inter alia, the following is said—

[Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I should like to convey my sympathy to the hon. member who has just spoken, but I shall not deal further with the rallies to which he referred. I take it that these people arrive at the rallies on their motor cycles, and therefore I shall merely sympathize with the hon. member and express the hope that such a rally will not take place in the Losberg constituency.

I should like to discuss another matter which is somewhat removed from these shooting, naked dancing men of the hon. member for Losberg. I should like to discuss the principle of continuing education, known in Afrikaans as “voortgesette onderwys”. It is known by various concepts in various languages. In English it is known as “extra-mural studies” or “recurrent education”. It is, therefore, extra-curricular or non-formal education. This education is chiefly aimed at affording further training to those who have already completed their studies at a technikon or university or at any other post-school institution. I believe that education and training generate their own prosperity. There is a time lapse, but the advantages do appear after a period. Because I believe in this statement, I should like to air a few ideas in regard to this aspect.

The training of people is the key to all development. Because I believe in that, I should like to mention one aspect covered by the HSRC report. In my opinion, due to various circumstances and reasons, the HSRC report did not give sufficient attention to continuing education. I repeat: There are very good reasons for this. For example, one of the reasons that could be mentioned was advanced by Mr. Robin Lee, who was also a member of the working committee. He writes as follows in Aambeeld, No. 4 of 1981—

The writer goes on to indicate what the Urban Foundation has done to investigate this particular problem and make proposals. I do not wish to elaborate on it any further, but will continue and say that despite the good reasons that existed, I do want to make a plea today that we should take a fresh look at continuing education. This kind of education contributes towards the economic development of the RSA, it provides the necessary manpower which eliminates manpower shortages, and every individual can realize his potential with the aid of recurrent education. It is a recognized fact that there is severe pressure on education in this country. Everyone who studied the HSRC report and has listened to expressions of opinion on the report in recent times by, inter alia, the hon. the Minister, will know that education is one of the central issues in the RSA. As a result there is severe pressure on the available funds and financial resources of the RSA, and particularly on the financial resources of the State. Knowledge is not static; we are living in a period of an explosion of knowledge. Because an explosion of knowledge is taking place, it is essential that there should be continuing education and that it be offered on a structured basis by various bodies. In this regard the most important thing to bear in mind is that continuing education is for the most part an extension of a specific institution, and does not stand apart from it.

In practice, continuing education is offered by various bodies. For the most part, however, I wish to confine myself to universities and their role. This training may assume various forms and have various objectives. To begin with, I want to confine myself to the objectives. The objectives are to investigate the current problems, fields of study and requirements in the economic, cultural, social, political, religious, educational, technological and professional spheres by way of programmes. These programmes are in the form of public lectures, conferences, symposia and seminars. Usually the seminars are held during the vacation schools. In the Cape the concept of “vacation school” is widely known because the University of Stellenbosch and the University of Cape Town offer such vacation schools. Some vacation schools are know as “spring vacation schools”, some as “winter vacation schools” and others as “summer vacation schools”. All this is seen as part of continuing education. I wish to convey my thanks to the Committee of Heads of Education and the Universities Advisory Board because they have done a great deal of work in the past to investigate the problem of continuing education. The hon. the Minister of National Education has received a number of the recommendations made by these two institutions concerning this aspect in the past. This aspect is so important that next week, for example, another seminar is being arranged at the University of Stellenbosch by the Committee of Heads of Education in an effort to resolve this issue between the universities. I wish the convenors of and participants in that seminar every success, and I hope that that seminar will give rise to conclusions which will assist in regulating this matter more effectively in the future. When statements from the past are analysed—I am concentrating on the past at the moment; next week there will be more emphasis on the future—it is evident that the universities are convinced that they must do the following: Firstly, that continuing education falls within the sphere of the university and that accordingly they must perform that task themselves; secondly, that it is desirable that the universities should concern themselves with it, and, thirdly, that the financing aspect of this activity should be reconsidered. It is the last point in particular, the financing aspect, that I wish to dwell on once again. At the moment this aspect is the coup de grâce for continuing education at our South African universities. Accordingly I should like to dwell on the problem of financing of continuing education.

This problem demands the attention of the hon. the Minister of National Education, but I think that he should also raise it with the hon. the Minister of Finance, who must make certain concessions from his side, and I want to make a plea today for those concessions. The universities must be involved in continuing education because they already have the trained staff. Some of the best trained people are employed by our universities, and therefore I think it is also appropriate that these specialized people and their knowledge should be available not only to the student, but also to the broader community. The broader community forms part of the university, and universities, wherever they may be situated, pride themselves on serving the interests of the broader community. Therefore continuing education must continue. I want to distinguish two cases preparatory to dealing with the financing. The first is that continuing education, which is of exceptional importance to the community and the economy, must be offered by the universities, which, more than any other institution, has the trained people at its disposal. The second relates to the activities that traditionally form part of university activities, of which the academic level forms part of university work. The best example of the result of this was when there was an opportunity to offer extraction mineralogy, which promised major advantages for the Republic of South Africa, with its vast resources. In this way people were trained in the new technology which had come to the fore during the previous five years. Therefore I want to ask the hon. the Minister to request the hon. the Minister of Finance to allow the financing of the first case I mentioned, viz. the case where it is only to the benefit of the community, to be regarded as part of the tax concession, which is not the case at present, and, in the second case, where these people operate at their normal university level, that a subsidy be made available to the universities. I know that university subsidies are causing major difficulties at this stage. [Time expired.]

Business interrupted in accordance with Standing Order No. 22.