Mr Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity you have afforded me to make a statement about this matter. An extensive tour of inspection of the Eastern Transvaal, Northern Natal, Kangwane and kwaZulu, the areas hit by the cyclone Domoina, was undertaken by members of the Cabinet Committee and other interested persons. The aim of the investigation was to obtain an overall impression of the damage caused and to consult with community leaders.

There has been considerable loss of life and several people are still missing. Once again I wish to express the Government’s sympathy with the next of kin, friends and acquaintances of those who lost their lives in the cyclone.

Some communities were cut off entirely from the outside world as a result of their communication links having been washed away. The top priority of the SA Defence Force and the SA Police in the emergency action was to minimize further loss of life and supply food, medicine and other supplies, as well as medical and hospital services, in the area in question.

Apart from the personal damage suffered by individuals, there is also the damage and/or loss of road and rail links, agricultural land, crops, implements and equipment, dwellings, pumping installations, irrigation systems and other waterworks, fences and soil conservation works.

The damage, while widespread, was concentrated in various river basins.

Road and rail links damaged or destroyed in the area are being repaired with the minumum delay and the primary consideration is the provision of at least one access route per community, after which further attention will be given to the permanent repair work. Prompt attention is also being given to the repair of telephone communications and power supply.

The Government places on record its appreciation of the outstanding services provided in that area by the SA Defence Force and the SA Police in extremely difficult circumstances. We convey our sincere thanks, too, to the other persons and bodies, such as the civil defence associations, that furnished assistance.

The Government is particularly sympathetic towards those people who suffered damage. As regards personal damage suffered by individuals, the Government has decided to recommend to the State President that the event be declared a disaster in terms of the Fund-raising Act, 1978. By means of the Disaster Fund the Department of Health and Welfare will utilize donations received to the best advantage of all. As in the past, the welfare organizations will provide voluntary assistance, and the Government is sincerely grateful for that. The extent of the damage is great, but one is confident that, as occurred during the Laingsburg flood in 1981, the people of South Africa will spontaneously open their hearts and their purses to contribute towards alleviating the plight of those who have been hard-hit.

As far as agriculture is concerned, the first priority is to have farmers producing again as soon as possible. The precise formulas in terms of which assistance will be granted to farmers by Government bodies have not yet been finalized, but are already receiving attention. Surveys of the damage are at present being carried out, and as soon as full details are at hand, an announcement will be made concerning the assistance to be provided. Clearly, however, as has been the case in the past, there can be no compensation for crop damage.

Many local authorities have begun to put their shoulders to the wheel with a view to achieving self-sufficiency once again, and the importance of the effective functioning of civil defence efforts was evident once again in this instance. There is a heavy responsibility on the communities and their leaders to find their feet again, and I wish them everything of the best in that regard.

Widespread flood damage also occurred within the territories of kwaZulu and Kang-wane. Action to relieve the emergency and furnish assistance is being carried out on an on-going basis as part of the total action, and at the same level as elsewhere in the disaster area, in co-operation with the Governments of kwaZulu and Kangwane. Both Governments are fully aware of this and are being kept informed at all times.

Assistance is also being furnished to the Government of Swaziland, at its request.

The Government is deeply aware of the damage that has been caused, but there is also considerable cause for gratitude in view of the supplementing of our water supplies and the prospect of the recovery of grazing.

The cyclone has shown once again that South Africa is a country of extremes, and this brings home to us afresh the realization of our insignificance, of the might of the elements of nature and the dependence of man on God.

Mr Speaker, I move:

Mr Speaker, as the hon member Prof Olivier and the hon member for Sea Point both pointed out at Second Reading, we support this Bill, mainly because of the positive attitude which was adopted by the select committee, more particularly by hon members on the Government side, who accepted a number of amendments during its deliberations—amendments that were moved by Opposition members in the select committee, and also amendments which were suggested, as the hon the Deputy Minister knows, by the Urban Foundation, which played a very positive role during those deliberations.

We hope that the development boards which are going to be set up in terms of this piece of legislation will continue to act in a positive fashion—in the same fashion as the select committee—and that they will not acquire the rather unfortunate image which was acquired by the administration boards, which they are replacing. All of us are aware that the administration boards all acquired a very unpopular image with the residents over whose lives they held sway. I have only to mention that officials of the administration boards—in 1982; the latest figures that I have—were actually responsible for 112 646 arrests in terms of influx control and pass laws.

I very much hope that none of that is going to attach to the new development boards and that they are not going to have the unpleasant task of administering laws that are so obviously unpopular with the urban residents. We hope they will busy themselves with development, with creating entrepreneurial possibilities for the Black residents in the urban townships, such as were mentioned by the hon member for Sea Point during the Second Reading debate. We hope too that they will be very busy indeed providing much needed housing for the urban townships, while also encouraging, in every way possible, the Black residents of the urban townships to become home-owners. We believe that all these things will help to establish a stable and permanent urban Black population.

One of the good features about this Bill, which is one of the reasons why we supported it, is that it does put the recognition of the permanent urbancy of Black people into a legal framework, which was set in motion a few years ago by the recognition and granting of 99-year leasehold in those areas.

My hon colleague also mentioned during the Second Reading debate that there were a number of unsatisfactory matters that required amendment, and during the Committee Stage of the Bill we did attempt to move amendments and effect improvements. Unfortunately, the hon the Deputy Minister did not see his way clear to approve of any of the amendments that we moved, and therefore a number of matters are still very much up in the air—in thin air, I might say. We really do not know very much at all about the funding of these development boards. We know that there will be a revolving fund that will emerge from the sale of houses. That money will be paid into a revolving fund to provide finance for the building of further houses. As I say, we do not really know how these development boards are going to be funded and exactly what role the Department of Community Development is going to play in this matter.

There is also the very complicated matter that we raised during the Committee Stage in regard to the question of the inheritance of 99-year leasehold. I believe that that still has to be clarified. There are also problems regarding the definition of the permanency of residents in the urban areas and there is the uncertainty which still hangs over the Western Province as a Coloured labour preference area, because of the provision which permits certain areas to be excluded from the provisions of the 99-year leasehold scheme. These are all aspects of the Bill which I feel require clarification.

Of course, discussions have been hamstrung because we have really been discussing two Bills which are dependent upon a third. The Black Local Authorities Act became law in 1982 and we are now dealing with the second of the trilogy of the Koornhof brainchildren. [Interjections.] I see that at last I have managed to gain the attention of the hon the Minister. One ear is sufficient to listen with, I see. [Interjections.] Well, I think this Bill should be important enough for the hon the Minister to listen to what I am saying in regard to the views of the official Opposition. As I say, these three measures are closely connected. We have discussed two of them, but both of them are really dependent upon the third. It is very difficult indeed to amend a Bill which, for instance, contains provisions relating to the Blacks (Urban Areas) Consolidation Act of 1945 when one knows that the third Bill is going to repeal the whole of that Act. We have therefore found ourselves in a very difficult situation and the sooner the select committee gets on with the job of examining the Bill that we have not yet seen, the sooner we will know whether there is indeed going to be a positive aspect to the other Act, and to the Bill we are discussing now, which is soon to become an Act. [Interjections.] For example, there is clause 52 of this Bill which is closely linked with the Blacks (Urban Areas) Consolidation Act, and many other clauses besides.

There is also the burning question of freehold which we are told is being examined by the Cabinet Committee which is suddenly in a flurry of activity, having been appointed at the beginning of last year and since then, so it appears, having been totally dormant or practically so.

The committee is working hard.

The hon the Minister says the committee is working hard, but we should like to see a few positive results from this Cabinet committee on which so many things now depend.

There has been one important issue that has been left out of consideration altogether and this is the whole question of the rights of Black women in the urban areas, particularly as far as the acquisition of mortgages for home ownership is concerned. The hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning will know that the select committee decided not to touch on this matter because he said—the select committee agreed with him although I did not—that this is being dealt with by the Select Committee on Matrimonial Property Law.

But they have considered the matter.

No. Having been a member of the Select Committee on Matrimonial Property Law I know perfectly well that that select committee has passed the matter on to the Law Commission, which is supposed to be examining this question as a matter of urgency. Well, several months have already passed but the urgent matter is still with the Law Commission. I think hon members here do not realize how difficult it is for Black women to acquire 99-year leasehold, because they cannot get mortgages.

The hon the Minister the other day gave us figures relating to the number of houses which have already been registered under the 99-year leasehold and I think he will agree the position is not satisfactory. In Soweto alone there are about 107 000 houses and of those, only about 3 500 have been registered under this great new deal where people can buy the houses they are living in at reasonable prices, and they are reasonable.

A large number of people living in Soweto who are tenants of those houses are women. More and more are women becoming the wage earners. I think a survey by the West Rand Administration Board a few years ago revealed that something like 28% of the heads of households in Soweto are women, the sole wage earners. Therefore it is enormously important that these people be enabled to get mortgages. Building societies tell us that they are not prepared to grant those mortgages because of the nebulous position in law in which the Black women find themselves. They are married, as of norm, out of community of property but with the retention of the marital power. Therefore they have no contractual capacity without their husband’s consent. Well, if they can get that, they can get a mortgage.

The position of women who are unmarried or widowed or married by customary law, however, is extremely difficult and because they are perpetual minors, the building societies are not prepared to give them any mortgages in case their customary union husband appears on the scene and claims the house over which the building society would then have no security.

I should like to ask the hon the Deputy Minister please, as a matter of real urgency, to try to jog the arm of the Law Commission to give us a report on this matter as soon as possible.

The main objection which we had to the Bill can only be ironed out when we deal with the third measure and therefore we shall have to wait and see. The main objections relate to restrictions on mobility, to curfew, to the retention of 99-year leasehold instead of freehold and to the question of the Coloured labour preference area in the Western Cape. All of these are matters which will have to wait until we have dealt with the Orderly Movement and Settlement of Black Persons Bill or whatever that new piece of legislation is going to be called.

Finally I want to say that the Black urban community and its contentment does not depend on legislation such as we have already passed either via this Bill or via the Black Local Authorities Act. I want to point out that the poll at the elections which were held last year for those local authorities was unsatisfactory. The average poll of some 29 council elections was only 21% and the poll in Soweto, which is the largest urban area for Blacks, was only 10%. Sir, this hardly shows that this particular measure has been accepted with enthusiasm by the Black urban communities. Ultimately the contentment of these communities, like the contentment of all communities will depend upon decent housing, proper transport facilities, decent health services, proper education and equal opportunity. All these things will ultimately decide the contentment or otherwise of the Black urban communities. We must also recognize the fact that the aspirations of the Blacks in regard to their political future are not going to be satisfied by giving them a vote in local government in the urban areas and a vote on a national scale, for the assemblies in the Black states. Until these facts are accepted by the Government I do not think we are going to find a great change in the general atmosphere in the Black urban communities in South Africa.

Mr Speaker, I want to congratulate the hon member for Houghton on the exceptional moderation and reasonableness she displayed in her speech. This can only be an indication that the legislation now before us is such good legislation that she is unable to criticise it. She need not worry about the role the envisaged development boards are going to play. Over the years the Administration Boards have played a commendable role in improving the Black man’s position in the country, and the development boards are going to do far more to uplift the Black people, as I shall indicate during the course of my speech.

One is grateful for the positive spirit which, generally speaking, has prevailed during the debate on this measure. Apart from the negative sounds that came from the CP, the debate was particularly constructive, and it is a good thing that this was the case, because this is an extremely important piece of legislation. It is important because it deals with the greatest problem in our country, namely the regulation of the Black man’s position and place in so-called White South Africa. It is also important because it seeks to meet the future expectations and aspirations of the Black people outside the national states.

As far as the national states are concerned, we have, in recent years had a tremendous development policy, and it is now essential that we establish more concrete things, in the first place, to satisfy the social aspirations of the Black people outside the national states and, in conjunction with this, to satisfy their political aspirations as well. Whereas in previous decades attention was primarily given to the development of the homelands and the independence of peoples, in the decades ahead emphasis will have to fall more on the regulation and improvement of the position of urban and other Blacks outside the national states. The hon member for Rissik has to agree with me that this is the case. [Interjections.]

I want to tell the hon member that this legislation is a very important step in this direction. When I was in Europe a month ago, political and business leaders told me that they were impressed with our new dispensation. However, they wanted to know why the Black man was being excluded. They wanted to know why provision was not being made in the reform measures for Black people. My reply was that the Black man was not being excluded; on the contrary, many Black people had already achieved self-government and independence before expression was given to the new dispensation for Coloureds and Indians. I also told them that the Black man was now being given autonomous local authorities and that no one in South Africa would lag behind as far as political development was concerned. In the same way that the Coloureds and the Indians will come into their own, the Blacks outside the national states will also come into their own.

In recent years the Government has already begun with important initiatives which spelled out very clearly to everyone that the Government was very serious about regulating the position of the Black man in the so-called White areas. The enquiry of the Wiehahn Commission led to a totally new concept of manpower in South Africa. It led to the recognition of Black trade unions, to greater labour mobility and to the better training of Blacks in the work situation. We also had the Riekert Commission, which investigated all the problem areas with regard to the Black man in South Africa. From this enquiry resulted the most far-reaching and comprehensive legislation for the improvement of the living conditions of Black people.

The legislation before us is also a result of the Riekert Report. Further legislation of this kind will shortly be introduced in Parliament. The Black people in and around our cities are a permanent and inherent part of our economy. Without them our economy would collapse. The hon member for Rissik would do well to listen to what I am saying. If he does not agree with it, he is living in a dream world.

According to the projections of experts, 30 million Blacks in our country will have been urbanised by the end of the century. An acceptable living milieu will have to be created for them. Social structures and facilities will have to be provided and their living conditions and standard of living will have to be improved. We shall also have to create a vision of the future for these people which is able to satisfy their aspirations effectively.

The legislation before us is creating the first piece of machinery to achieve these goals. In the past Administration Boards played an indispensable role in our country’s administration. These Administration Boards made a unique contribution to the peace and tranquillity in our Black communities today. The Administration Boards will now perform a further praiseworthy task under a new name and in a new guise, namely as development boards. The new aims of the development boards are defined so well in the Bill that I should like to quote them to the House. Clause 16 of the Bill reads:

Where could one find more commendable aims with regard to Black people in this country? [Interjections.] The hon member for Houghton agrees with me.

One may now ask what these development boards are going to do to create a better dispensation for the Black people. The task of the development boards will be to ensure harmonious, happy and prosperous Black communities. One may also ask how they are going to do that. I shall now tell hon members how.

Until such times as full-fledged local authority status is granted to Blacks in terms of this Bill it will be the responsibility of the development boards to prepare, inform, educate and train local authorities on the obligations and responsibilities which constitute the task of full-fledged local authorities. Because these people still lack expertise to a great extent, the important task of the boards will be to assist in bringing Black leaders forward and in training the necessary Black staff to do this important work.

The other day in Bloemfontein a dignified Black leader told me that for a while we would have to hold their hand because they still had a great deal to learn. This is a task the development boards will definitely perform. They will lead these people to greater self-reliance and independence.

Where are they going to find the money?

They will definitely find the money. We can discuss that later.

You hold his one hand and put your other hand around his neck.

Has the hon member for Langlaagte no confidence in the Black people? [Interjections.] Apparently he trusts nothing and no one. We, on the other hand, have confidence in them and we are prepared to create the opportunities for them. If we create the opportunities for them, you will see how they develop and grow. They should not be suppressed.

As far as certain functions are concerned, the development boards will have to lead the Black local authorities through the entire process of decision-making to self-sufficiency. This assistance will take place on the basis of gradual withdrawal, in other words assistance will be given until it is no longer necessary. Assistance will only be given with regard to those functions which Black communities are not yet able to perform themselves in the best interests of the community. In other words, they will be led to a point where they can take over for themselves.

In order to enable the development boards to perform their important development role, they will inter alia be authorized, with the approval of the hon the Minister, to perform the following important functions: They will be able to develop towns and housing schemes; erect buildings; help to provide or cause services and facilities to be provided; lay out streets and provide facilities for the erection of houses and other buildings. When the development boards undertake this commendable task of uplifting a Black community, surely no one can object to it. Surely the hon member for Houghton will not then be able to say that the development boards are not being given the right and the opportunity to uplift the Black people. The conditions will be that when they perform this work they will do so in consultation and in co-operation with local authorities, so that these people can gradually learn for themselves and become more mature.

This legislation, which has now reached the Third Reading Stage, is a giant step forward in the development of the Black man in the urban set-up. It is wonderful and good legislation which must and will have one important result, namely more peaceful and happier Black communities with a better attitude towards their White neighbours and resultant better relations between Blacks and Whites in this country.

We should like to congratulate the hon the Deputy Minister, who dealt with this legislation so ably, as well as the hon the Minister of Co-operation and Development and the department, on legislation like this. We hope and trust that the implementation of this wonderful legislation will be crowned with success.

Mr Speaker, at the outset I wish to refer to a few remarks made by the hon member for Houghton in connection with the third Bill in this trilogy of Bills emanating from the Government benches. She indicated, I think, that she looks forward to the introduction of the third Bill with a certain amount of quiet confidence. [Interjections.] After having read the memoranda on the third Bill, I think she can rest assured that, as we know the hon the Minister, he will succumb to the pressure that is being brought to bear upon him in this connection in the same way as he has succumbed so often in the past and moved away from the policy of separate development in which we all used to believe. So she need have no fears: That Bill will be emasculated to a large extent.

*The hon member for Bloemfontein North began by referring to the Administration Boards and the good work they have been doing over the years. We are in full agreement with that. We referred very specifically to this during the Committee Stage. We said that those officials, together with the police, form the first line of contact with the Black people in the Black residential areas. They know the language of those people, they know what is going on in their minds and they deal with them every day. They are carrying out a tremendous task. The boards and the officials meant a great deal to South Africa, particularly in the year 1976 and afterwards.

We pay special tribute to them and we are sorry that to a certain extent, as was apparent from the evidence before the select committee, the new development boards are bringing about their own demise in the process of the development of Black communities. To a certain extent it is a pity. They are going to be reduced in size and the number of their officials is going to diminish. Another important contact with the feeling of Black people in the Black residential areas is going to disappear.

Furthermore, the hon member also said that the most important which was being concentrated on in present Government policy was the development of the Black people outside the national states. The hon the Minister also emphasized at a Press conference yesterday that the development of the Black people outside the national states was now the priority. We are not resisting the development of the Black people outside the national states, but we say the priority should continue to be the national states.

The hon member for Newton Park said the other day that the people in the urban areas outside the national states should not be left to fend for themselves there, but that one should deal with them there. We do not agree with them. We say: Develop the attracting force in the national states; develop the industrial axes, as the hon the Deputy Minister said, in the direction of the national states. The unemployed people in the urban complexes outside the national states should be channelled to the national states as much as possible.

Furthermore we say that the hon member for Bloemfontein North is preparing the way for the political rights of Black people outside the national states. I should like to know from him whether he still believes that the political aspirations of Blacks outside the national states can only be satisfied in the national states. Is that still his policy? At this stage he is trying to conceal it. He does not confirm it because the NP is moving away from that policy. That is the point.

About 30 years too late.

No, we say the NP was right all the time, but that it is now wrong.

In a certain sense it is a pity that this legislation is being discussed at this stage, ie before the Cabinet Committee, that has to give finality on the planning in respect of Blacks outside the national states, has presented its first reports or has given an indication of the lines along which it is thinking. So many of the problems in connection with leasehold and clause 52 would have been eliminated if we had known in what direction that Cabinet Committee was thinking. We would have saved a great deal of time on the select committee, during the Second Reading as well as during the Committee Stage.

On the other hand, however, it is being argued that development must be stimulated. We agree with that. The CP repeats that it is in full agreement that the quality of life of Black people outside the national states must be improved. We want to emphasize this very strongly. We agree that we cannot sleep peacefully at night if the Black people have to do without amenities. But when we advocate that preferential areas for industrial development for Blacks should be identified, we are labelled as racists. It is that term of abuse which the NP had to listen to over the years to its great frustration. The hon member for Innesdal now comes forward and says:

[Interjections.] According to the policy of the NP more than 300 000 Black people in the Western Cape are temporarily present here. These are the consequences of NP policy. [Interjections.] The Black people on the Witwatersrand are there permanently and they are being granted leasehold.

Mr Speaker, I should like to ask the hon member whether the permanence of people is determined on the basis of the land title which they hold or on the basis of section 10 of the Act.

The position is that certain people qualify in terms of section 10(1)(a), (b) and (c) to live in urban areas in the Transvaal. The same also applies to the Cape. In the Transvaal, however, those people are receiving leasehold.

But that is something else.

Why is it something else? Is a Black man living on the Witwatersrand in terms of section 10(1)(a), (b) or (c) a different type of Black man to the one residing in the Peninsula in terms of the same provisions? [Interjections.] If we say that Blacks throughout the country should not be considered to be permanent inhabitants, then it is racist, but if 300 000 Black people in the Western Cape are not considered to be permanent then it is not racist. A person is not a racist if one considers portion of the Black population in White South Africa to be temporarily present and the other portion not, but one is a racist if one considers all the Black people in White South Africa to be temporarily present. It is racist if one wishes to stimulate industrial development in and around the national states at all costs, but it is not racist if one wishes to stimulate this development in White South Africa, quite probably at the expense of the development of national states.

Frank, surely you know that that statement is not true.

This is precisely what NP policy is. Surely our policy is pre-eminently that of decentralization, even as far as White industrial development is concerned. The PWV area has almost reached saturation point. [Interjections.] In fact it has already reached saturation point. But according to this legislation the possibility exists that industrialization is going to take place in the Black areas, in the PWV area as well.

Where do you see that?

In terms of clause 35. [Interjections.] The hon the Deputy Minister should then have accepted my amendment to clause 35. [Interjections.] It is racist, however, if we consider decentralization to be the highest priority. Can one imagine greater foolishness than this? [Interjections.] I should like to know who is speaking, the hon the Deputy Minister or I?

The CP wishes the envisaged development boards every success. We emphasize that Black people in White South Africa, that is to say, outside the national states, should remain orientated to their respective national states. Is there any person who does not agree with that? Hon members opposite are as silent as the grave now. I repeat that as far as the political aspirations of the Black people are concerned, the CP emphasizes that Black people outside the national states should remain orientated to the national states. Do hon members of the NP agree with that? [Interjections.] Does the hon member for Virginia agree with that?

In the old days we would have heard a chorus of voices from those hon members saying that of course they agree that the Black people should realize their political aspirations in the national states. Now that we are on the way to integration, and now that the NP is waiting for the Cabinet Committee to furnish it with guidance again, those hon members are afraid. They are afraid to say that the Black people should realize their political aspirations in the national states.

We would like to think that the body established in terms of law, for which provision is being made in clause 51, is also the Governments of national and independent states. It is imperative that development boards should make development aid available outside their areas to urban complexes in the national and the independent states.

I should like to refer to the important evidence given by Prof Coertze before the select committee in this connection, and I should like to quote it. He said:

And the hon member for Bloemfontein North now wishes in fact to place further emphasis on the further distortion of this already distorted process. We want to emphasize that that development should at all times be accorded the highest priority in the national states. The honeypot should be the national and independent states. Influx control is going to become difficult if the opposite happens. This kind of encouragement is particularly necessary in respect of the Black entrepreneur. Since the hon the Deputy Minister has now rejected our amendment in regard to clause 35, and once again referred glowingly in his reply to regional growth points and development axes, the CP wants to request him urgently to adhere religiously to these priorities if he wishes, in any way, to assure White South Africa of a safe future.

The Government considers the Western Cape to be a preferential area for Coloureds. That is not racist. We consider White South Africa to be a preferential area for the White worker, and we refuse to accept that this is racist. [Interjections.]

Recently we have been watching the impressive TV programme on the late Mr Vorster. What was illustrative of his viewpoint as a Nationalist, in the finest sense of the word, was when he related how he was asked to say grace, during the Bridge Conference in 1975. He did so in Afrikaans. On the television programme he added that people appreciated it when a person displayed love for what was his own.

According to the new National Party idiom, this is now racism. [Interjections.] We are worried about the contemplated establishment of even more areas like Soweto on the East Rand, in the Western Cape and elsewhere in White South Africa. [Interjections.] We expressed the hope … [Interjections.]

Order!

We express the hope that the development boards will, with great dedication, enthusiasm and devotion, also take the future of White South Africa into account. [Interjections.]

Mr Speaker, we listened attentively to the speech of the hon member for Brakpan, and I should like to put it to him that no-one on this side of the House has any fault to find with the general sentiments he expressed in his speech. However, he made a few factual errors which it is necessary that we discuss.

I want to begin by referring him to the grace said by Mr John Vorster, according to him in Afrikaans. The hon member for Brakpan asked whether that was racist. Not a single member on this side of the House is at all bothered by an English-speaking or Afrikaans-speaking person in South Africa giving preference to his own language under any circumstances and at all times, when it comes from the heart. Surely the hon member for Brakpan and other hon members of his party must realize that fully. [Interjections.]

I want to make an appeal to hon members of the CP, particularly the hon member for Rissik, concerning the image of the Afrikaner. I say with the utmost humility that, like them and like hon members on this side of the House, I have a great deal to do with Black people. We have spoken to Black leaders like Bishop Tutu. We have also spoken to leaders who are regarded as radicals by many people. One thing has become very clear to me over the years. It is that many Black people and Black leaders have a certain antagonism towards the Afrikaner, and I believe that this is not right. Many of those people have a perception—the wrong perception, of course—of the Afrikaner as an oppressor. Many of them mistakenly pursue the Afrikaner as one who denies people’s rights, as one who denies human dignity. I want to appeal to the hon member for Brakpan and the hon member for Rissik to help one another, at least as Afrikaans-speaking people, to correct entirely that distorted image.

As hon members of the CP have often done in various debates recently, the hon member for Brakpan once again, in my humble opinion, confused totally the concepts of conservatism and racism. One can be the best and finest conservative, in the fullest and truest sense of the word, without needing to bear within one even a hint of racism. Unfortunately there are people in South Africa who regard racism and conservatism as synonyms. I have such people in my constituency. Every hon member in this House has people of that kind in their constituencies. They are people who believe that one can only be a conservative when one is against other people. They think one can only be conservative when one inveighs against other people. They think one can only be conservative when one says unpleasant things about other people; when one lords it over other people. I believe in my heart that the hon member for Brakpan does not personally share sentiments of that nature. Therefore hon members of the CP must help us to rectify those distorted images and perceptions, not in the interests of the NP, but in the interests of the Whites in South Africa.

The hon member for Brakpan said once again here today that by way of this legislation we were moving on the road to integration. There is a term I should like to employ for the edification of the hon member for Rissik. Let us just take this term and incorporate it in the thinking of all political parties. If we do so, we shall gain a better understanding of the realities of South Africa. The term is totality politics. Let us look at South Africa from the angle of totality politics, meaning that we do not fasten on specific problems in the economic, political or other spheres, taking them out of context and making political capital out of them. We must try to invisage where the standpoints of each political party fit into the whole and where the Government’s actions fit in. Let us, then, criticise the actions of the Government, if there is no sense in them when seen as a totality, but let us not use words like “integration” to kick up a fuss in an effort to scare one another. In my humble opinion the spectre of integration lost its impact in South Africa politics a long time ago. I recall an occasion many years ago, when I was still working in the Department of Co-operation and Development, when I sent one of the service officers, a very reliable Black man, old Jacob, to the typists with a document. I said to him at the time: “Jacob, this thing is extremely urgent. You must be very quick.” Old Jacob stood and looked at me and said: “You know, Mr Nothnagel, the word ‘urgent’ lost its meaning in the Public Service a long time ago.” I now want to say to the hon members of the CP: The word “integration” lost its meaning and its political impact long ago. We might as well shake it off, because we no longer frighten our people with it. The people in our cities in South Africa see and experience the fact that we in South Africa have people living close to one another and alongside one another, people who go to school close to one another and alongside one another, people and peoples that have their own identity and that constantly meet one another along the way, experiencing no difficulty in doing so. However, it seems to me as if certain hon members of the CP experience tremendous difficulty with regard to meeting in all spheres. Let us say this frankly to one another. The hon member for Langlaagte will not take it amiss of me when I say that when I said to him in lighter vein that he belonged to the left wing of the CP, his reply, in the same vein, was: Yes. What the hon member meant thereby was that he saw the sense in many of the things we are doing.

I should like to put a question to the hon member for Langlaagte with regard to the question of giving Black people leasehold in urban areas. What does he say about it? Is it right or wrong?

The hon the Minister can ask me. I do not speak across the floor of the House. [Interjections.]

I also want to ask the hon member for Langlaagte whether I may quote what he said to me yesterday from the bench next to me in the course of a private discussion. [Interjections.] I am asking the hon member for Langlaagte. The hon member for Langlaagte said a very sensible thing to me yesterday. He said that he personally had no problem with leasehold. He went even further. He said that if one had granted leasehold … May I say it?

Say just what you like and I shall say whether it is right or wrong. [Interjections.]

The hon member for Langlaagte is a very decent man. He said that leasehold was much the same as freehold. Is that correct?

Of course. [Interjections.]

I do not take that at all amiss of the hon member for Langlaagte. I say that that is a very sensible viewpoint. It seems to be now that we have a dilemma, because according to the right wing of the CP, leasehold is not freehold, whereas the left wing of the CP says that leasehold is indeed freehold, and provision is made for that in this Bill.

Now we come to the hon member for Brakpan. I do not wish to play politics, but I do want to put a question to him, in all decency, because I suspect that he agrees with this. I want to ask the hon member for Brakpan whether he agrees with the granting of leasehold to Black people in urban areas. [Interjections.] The existing leasehold granted to Black people will, therefore, be withdrawn by the hon member’s party?

The hon member has already had my reply. [Interjections.]

I do not wish to become involved in a personal altercation with the hon member. Together with hon members on this side of the House I want to discuss the problems we are all struggling with. We are all insignificant people. When we leave here in the evening or when, at the end of a session, we return to our constituencies, each of us realizes that he is only an insignificant nothing in the eternal world we are living in, but the problems of our country march on. I have often said to my son in the course of conversations with him that I wonder what people will say in a hundred years’ time about the policy we are following in South Africa today. I refer to us as a Government, all of us in this House.

The point is that hon members of the CP are accusing us in 1984 of things that they regard as liberal, that they regard as leftist. We on this side of the House have the courage to do those things in the interests of South Africa and I honestly believe that we in South Africa, as a Government, are not doing anything too fast with regard to the Black people in the urban areas, but rather that as far as certain matters are concerned we shall have to move much faster on the road ahead.

This legislation ushers in a new era. We must read this Bill in conjunction with the Black Local Authorities Act. We must also read the Bill in conjunction with the Orderly Movement and Settlement of Black Persons Bill, which is still under consideration. We must also see the Bill against the background of the referendum. I do not think that anyone in this House could argue if we were to say that last year’s referendum gave Black political consciousness a dramatic impetus. We must also see the Bill against the background of the new role that we as politicians have to play.

There is something that the hon member for Brakpan said today that I heard with profound gratitude. Some of the statements he made in respect of Black people reflected compassion and that attested to a spirit of human fellowship which, I believe, augurs well for us on the road ahead. I thank him for that because in the new dispensation we as politicians have a tremendous role to play with regard to relations and attitudes.

The Bill at present before this House is like everything that the NP does. I want to thank the select committee, the hon the Deputy Minister and everyone who worked on it. This is pro-active legislation, and that is the spirit in which the NP wants to do things: Pro-active and not reactive. The legislation is positive and it is typical of the Government’s totality politics, viz not only the question of what the political rights or the probable political rights of Black people are, but where those people fit into the economic picture and where those people fit into the social picture. The NP knows that we in South Africa can no longer do or say anything in isolation. We must see ourselves in a world context. We must see ourselves in the context of Africa, but in particular—and to us that is the most important—we must see the relations policy in the context of the realities of the country, and it is in that spirit that we do so. We in South Africa must display more judgment than prejudice with regard to ethnic relations. I want to appeal specifically to the hon member for Rissik, too, who has made a few wild statements this session, to display more judgment than prejudice.

In general this legislation is concerned with three concepts. The first is that of recognition, the recognition by the Whites of the position of the Black people in our cities. The hon member for Brakpan asked a question about permanence, but I should like to say to him that to us in the NP it is no longer a question whether these people are or are not here on a permanent basis. The question is whether we, in our own interests and in the interests of our children, and in the interests of the other people, are to design structures which will see us through. [Interjections.] I want to say to the hon member for Bryanston that we in the NP do not want to make an international drama of every political school concert in South Africa in the future. We have passed beyond that part of our history. We as a party do not wish to deal with the Black people in the urban areas on that basis, one of making an international drama of a political school concert.

We honestly believe that we must get away from the concept of paternalism. That is why we are coming forward with development boards. We are appointing a development board; not an administration board. The emphasis does not fall on the administration of Black people; the emphasis falls on the possibility that can be created by those boards for Black people to develop on the road ahead in their own right according to their talents.

We believe that with the acquiescence of the Whites we are increasingly making place for the concept of human dignity. One need not integrate if one says that one stands for the concept of human dignity. The hon the Prime Minister has done a tremendous amount to bring that concept home to the people of our country, and we shall continue to do so until everyone in South Africa makes that simple political concept part of his process of thought and will be prepared to recognize the human dignity and equality of people. We on this side do not believe in the kind of petty apartheid that has caused problems for our country in the past. Figuratively speaking, we should like to convert petty apartheid into major co-existence. I say that there are three concepts that go hand in hand with this legislation. Recognition is one of them. The second is the involvement of Black people. We should like to afford the Black people the opportunity, by way of business activities in the Black areas, by way of the security afforded them through leasehold, the opportunity to develop, to develop the best of their talents in the interests of South Africa. The third concept that goes hand in hand with this legislation is action. Listening to people in South Africa talking, we find that the word “problem” is prominent in most of their discussions. I wish to state, in all courtesy, that when we consider the position of Black people in our urban areas, we must not use that word. What we are faced with is a tremendous challenge and not a nightmare. That is why the word “challenge” is also written across this legislation. We live in a land of problems in which we have to look for many solutions. What we in South Africa need is more picks and shovels. Instead of wanting to control people, we come forward with this legislation and say that our people, including the White people, must help to generate. We must give the word “generate” priority over the word “control”.

Where are we heading? There are people outside, people in my constituency as well, who see the Black people as enemies. There are many political parties—unfortunately they are to be found in this House as well—whose brand of politics, as conducted outside this House, reflects the idea that the Black people in South Africa are our enemies. If it were true that the Black people per se were our enemies then there would be no positive measure, this one included, that would see the White man through. We on this side believe that the Black people are people like us and, as such, must be partners in a future in which everyone can have a share. The hon member for Brakpan spoke about political rights for people. A Cabinet Committee has been appointed to investigate political rights for Black people. I want to say to the hon member that the question in 1984 is not whether the Black people in the urban areas must obtain political rights, but what structure must be established. To me the question is not whether all Black people must be linked to the Black states for all time in the political sphere. We on this side have recognized as a principle that we also listen to what other people have to say. Therefore, in this process of development, we are also prepared to listen to what other people say about their own future. By means of this legislation, in terms of which we are establishing the development boards and instituting a revolving fund into which the State can deposit money, we believe that we can help to destroy the potential for revolution in this country, even if the legislation is perhaps still deficient.

A perception of “total liberation” prevails among many Black people. The view that all that can save them is total liberation is acceptable amongst too many Black people in South Africa. By means of this legislation we are saying that we are in favour of all people in South Africa being liberated. The White people in South Africa were the greatest freedom fighters. Therefore, when we speak about the concept of total liberation, we say that we want to liberate our people from an involvement in or a mobilization by enemies and communism. We want every Black man, Brown man and Indian in our urban areas to be free in this way and see in all of us such an example of the democratic system, such an example of the free market system, such an example of the values we believe in, that with these things in their hearts they may be liberated from communism, which seeks to enslave them. We believe that there are still major questions that have to be answered. As far as this legislation is concerned there is the major question of how we are going to structure the political rights of Black people. Over the past few sessions the hon member for Bryanston and other hon members of the PFP have taken delight in saying that the NP has lost its way and has taken over their standpoints, hook, line and sinker. The hon member for Bryanston was sitting there fast asleep while the policy of the NP developed in every sphere, while our policy was being put into effect dynamically, while we, who believe in what we want to preserve, worked to create machinery to enable Black people to obtain a better dispensation.

I shall conclude by asking that we in this House, as politicians—this Bill makes it possible for us to do so—should forget our prejudices and take our ideals with us into the future. In many respects everyone in this House has the same ideals that we should like to see realized for our children.

Mr Speaker, I think there must have been times when the hon member for Innesdal must have been a very frustrated man sitting in the benches of that party. Certainly his enthusiasm and the direction in which he sees the country moving is more in keeping with the current climate and moves by the Government.

We in these benches have no fault to find with the legislation before us in general. My hon Leader who is not with us today has made several points which I will reiterate for the record. However, the hon member for Innesdal is always interesting to listen to in his enthusiasm for reform. I think that sometimes he must be tugging the whole NP along with him. Being a former wrestler, it no doubt keeps him fit. There were days, especially in terms of what the hon member has said this afternoon, when the NP was in fact linked to anti-Black sentiments. Happily those sentiments are behind them. I think they are emerging like a chrysalis that has just shed its skin and is looking bright and shiny. All those things that we on these benches hope for appear to be becoming a reality in the near future, something which has taken years to achieve. I think the hon member’s explanation that his party knew exactly where it was going and that they have been planning this all these years, requires a considerable stretch of the imagination. We will accept the change, because I think that if there is anything in this world that is certain and constant, it is change. It is for that reason that hon members of the CP have such problems with the events taking place in the country today. They all have a very high resistance to change and are clinging desperately to their old total separation of people idea. They find it extremely difficult to keep pace with events and to look at things realistically.

Would you call us the old NP?

Sir, I am going to say something nice about that hon member shortly. Even the Conservative Party is not today where the old National Party was. Even they try to meet the challenges in their approach to Black affairs. They voted for some of the provisions in this Bill at a time when they were members of the National Party. They were also faced with the challenge to change with the time. What is important is that when one changes, one makes the correct change at the right pace and that no changes take place at the cost of stability because without stability there can be no economic progress and there can be no hope of meeting the great challenges in South Africa which requires a great deal of economic effort, apart from changes in an outworn ideology.

The hon member for Brakpan had a lot to say about the establishment of industries in terms of this Bill. He is being unrealistic because of the fact that one cannot bend the economy. One cannot stretch it beyond certain limits by artificially creating industries in such a way that their creation is so artificial that it is in fact a burden. People will gravitate towards economic well-being and opportunity like moths towards light and there is no force on earth, no legislation, that can prevent it. One can attempt to achieve viable economic development in the Black states and one can do one’s utmost to assist them to generate their own development, but one can only take it so far.

The urbanization process of the gravitation of the population towards economic opportunity will continue relentlessly and will settle itself at its own level like two vessels containing different levels of water once they are linked up. On that basis the most urgent attention to the urbanization process is what is needed and requires all our energies.

This Bill is of course trying to cope with the existing situation and one hopes that when the third of the three measures comes forward, we will have a “new look” approach.

I must say that I do not like the title. The “orderly settlement and movement” of people sounds a little bit too regimented. I would rather see the word “urbanization” in the title of the Bill. We must face the problem squarely and give it a title which has the look about it of being a new approach.

I would like to place on record that we in these benches, as the hon the Minister knows, have a difference with the Government concerning the question of freehold. We believe that in the very near future the Government will see its way open, as a result of these measures being finalized here today, to introduce freehold title. The 99-year leasehold system must remain because it has obvious advantages, such as less cost and far less survey involvement. With both those forms of title available, we will have the best of two worlds to cope with the Black urbanization process. We will be in a better situation than having only freehold title.

It was interesting that on Tuesday night—no, that was Dallas night; so it must have been Monday night—in a TV programme about this Bill, two of the participants were the mayors of Alexandra and Soweto. The mayor of Soweto, when questioned about influx control, indicated that a form of influx control was definitely necessary; that one could not have people streaming into the urban areas thereby compounding the already existing problems. The mayor of Alexandra agreed that influx control was necessary, but the colour aspect of it should be removed and it should be applied to all people. There one has the two most recently elected leaders of the largest Black communities in South Africa coming to grips with the reality of the urbanization process. The parrot cry for the blanket removal of influx control is not a sensible way to approach this matter. We have to replace it. We on these benches have asked before for an urbanization strategy in which influx control will be replaced and will be linked to the question of the availability of work and accommodation and will not be linked in any way whatsoever to ideology so that people can see it for what it is in this country of ours where we have such different value systems between the First and Third World members who go to share the country.

It is of course absolutely true, as was mentioned by the hon member for Houghton, that we have a very knotty problem in relation to the Black women and their marital status. I happened also to serve on the committee dealing with the Matrimonial Property Affairs Bill. It was an interesting and rewarding experience and the law advisers at the time indicated to us how very vast, deep and complicated a subject it was and that it required specialist attention, and very urgent attention at that. I should just like to add that in the part of the world where I come from—and I think that others who come from that part of the world will agree—the women of the Xhosa nation, for instance, are the nurses and the teachers, but particularly the nurses, for that nation. Those people are the breadwinners and the most stable influence in the life of that nation. It is in fact they who are going to be the greatest force assisting in the creation of a stable domicile for their families, in the acquisition of property and in enabling the maximum use being made of the very positive aspects of the Bill before us. So we, too, feel that the question of Black marriages is a very, very urgent one and that, if the relevant Act is not reformed, that will be a limiting factor in giving full expression to the contents of this Bill and other reform measures in relation to the Blacks of this country.

I think other hon members have covered this Bill extremely adequately. The areas that remain, such as its implementation and the actual services of the development boards, are still going to be challenges in themselves. The creation of a development board itself is by no means anything other than a very small beginning in meeting the enormous challenges of being able to cope with the pressure of humanity in so many of these areas. I think we are quite obviously going to meet with failures in some of these community councils. We are then going to have to pick up the pieces and start all over again. The Natal provincial council has had the experience that Indian community councils there which had great opportunities to go ahead on their own were not able to make the grade. The Development and Services Board has had to step in, sort things out and start them on their way again. Whilst it is easy to sit back and say that these people are not in fact up to managing their own affairs, the challenge to us is to assist them to achieve success, and we have much pleasure in supporting this Bill as one of the measures aimed at achieving that success for the Black communities throughout South Africa.

Mr Speaker, the hon member for King William’s Town made the statement that hon members had already discussed the Bill fairly exhaustively, during the Third Reading Stage as well. I do not want to waste the time of the House. Basically I only want to make two points which we may have missed or which may not have been emphasized strongly enough in evaluating the effect which this legislation will have.

The first one is to some extent in line with the idea expressed by the hon member that this is the first turning point in the change that is taking place in a philosophy, a change from influx control which is merely intended to keep people out of an area to the realization that we are caught up in a process of urbanization. I think that is what he advocated. When we consider what we are dealing with in this second Bill of the trilogy, it is clear that what is being created here is merely a mechanism which is to support the third piece of legislation which is still to come and which is actually going to regulate the process of urbanization. In terms of this measure, however, a mechanism is being created which can provide a substructure which will be better able to accommodate the process of urbanization and to allow it to take place in an atmosphere in which people can experience greater satisfaction.

This is confirmed—I just want to refer to this in passing—by the explicit recognition of the permanence of Blacks within the community, but also of communities themselves. It is also being recognized in the adjustment of the leasehold system in terms of which the leasehold term is automatically renewed when the title is transferred from one person to another. I think it is very important that we should take cognizance of the emotional resistance to leasehold which existed at first, because it was to be something temporary which could at some stage disappear into thin air. This emotional attitude is being counteracted by the fact that the permanence of these people is indeed being confirmed now. In future, the leasehold will only lapse in the case where a man who had the right registered in his name at birth attains the age of 100 years and there has been no transfer during that period.

The other important aspect is the fact that the development boards which have been established create the possibility that a large number of urban foundations, if I may use that concept, may in fact emerge which may do very positive work in the respective communities. Reference has already been made to the positive work which has been done by the Urban Foundation itself, but I believe that this legislation is in fact creating the opportunity for the establishment of a large number of urban foundations.

The second important point which I should like to emphasize in considering the effect of this legislation is the fact that the endeavour to create a strategy for the provision of job opportunities—on which a White Paper has been tabled—is associated with another, broader objective. It is not concerned with the provision of jobs merely for the sake of jobs, but for the sake of community development. That is the concept which I should very much like to emphasize. We must not think of those people only as entities, numbers or machines. We are concerned with the development of a community consisting of individuals.

Hon members of the CP have had a good deal to say about the question of priorities, about what we should really be working on. The question is whether it is a matter of urban development or industrial development in the cities or whether we should concentrate primarily or exclusively on the development of national states or rural areas. The hon member for Sea Point also referred to the fact that there is a separation between urban and rural development and said that he would prefer to see a comprehensive development plan. The hon member went further, of course, and referred to the various population groups which he would want to involve in a single development plan, if we were to consider the urban groups in isolation. I think we should be making a mistake if we emphasized the one at the expense of the other. It is true that we have been talking about the development of national states for years, and that for years, there have been shortcomings in the implementation of that policy, in respect of which there have been new initiatives in the form of the provision of incentives and the careful planning of a policy of decentralization. This is not a question of decentralization alone, but also of the separation between urban and rural development. Indeed, we now have strong support for the development of urban communities by means of the establishment of these boards. What we still need, however, is for similar boards to be established for the development of rural communities. This is indeed a shortcoming, for our whole approach to the development of the rural areas and of the national and independent states in particular is to some extent an industrial approach. If we have the opportunity of conducting an in-depth debate on the White Paper on a strategy for job creation, I want to plead that we should try to ascertain whether it is not possible to give more attention to rural development. In the interests of the communities, the development should not only be in respect of job opportunities, but should also involve development of the communities themselves. It should also involve the development of the people against the background of the cultural milieu in which they find themselves. I submit that we should place a little less emphasis on the traditional Western approach to development, so-called industrial development, and that we should emphasize the development economy.

There are many things one could dream about, of course, but I do want to advocate that we should consider establishing something in future along the lines of departments such as those which one finds in several overseas countries and especially in developing countries, such as a department of development co-operation, a department which will be able to take a comprehensive view of development, one which will not be limited merely to economic development, and this applies in particular to “economic” in terms of First World concepts. It should be a comprehensive approach in terms of which development is not concerned only with the creation of material wealth or with the generation of prosperity in the narrower sense of the word, but also with the total development of communities wherever they may find themselves.

The points I have made are points which I should very much like to emphasize. This legislation is a particularly positive development. I take pleasure in supporting it, and I believe that we all look forward to the third of the three Bills.

Mr Speaker, this Bill provides for the replacement of Administration Boards, which have been rendering services to Blacks since 1972, by development boards to promote the development of Black communities outside the national states. As is quite clear from the Bill, the development boards will be composed of experts in fields relating to the development of Blacks.

[Inaudible.]

The hon member for Rissik was not seen by the Chair, and I very courteously request him to accept this and to be quiet now. [Interjections.] It serves no purpose for him to quarrel with me because you, Mr Speaker, did not call upon him to speak.

The steps which are to be taken in terms of this legislation will ensure that the emphasis will be shifted to the development of the Black man and his environment. [Interjections.] Mr Speaker, may in enquire of you how many Speakers there are in this House, because it would appear to me that the hon member for Bryanston and the hon member for Yeoville are also trying to maintain order in the House.

Order! The hon the Deputy Minister may now proceed without any further disturbance.

The Government accepts the fact that there are Black cities in this country with Black people living in them. We accept—and this is not a new statement—that those people are in this country to stay. In the political sphere, no distinction has yet been drawn between their rights and those of the Blacks in the national states, but in spheres not connected with politics, Blacks are acquiring more and more rights and privileges, and more and more responsibilities too—which is as it should be. So this Bill links up with the Local Authorities Act, and it also links up with the pattern which has been created in this country by the Whites and which characterizes White local authorities as well. We have established Black local authorities, therefore, on the same basis as that of White local authorities. The new dispensation is based on the White system of government and this should be accepted as the de facto position. The people are here and they have to be governed. They must also be given the responsibility of taking charge of their own community development, and of improving their own circumstances in life. By means of the Black Communities Development and Revolving Fund we are providing bridging finance, so that all sites in Black townships can be developed and surveyed on a systematic basis. The shortage of surveyed sites and the high cost of surveying when undertaken on an individual basis has hitherto prevented the rapid implementation of the leasehold system. The value and negotiability of a right of leasehold are being increased by this legislation in terms of the provision that when a right of leasehold is transferred to another competent person, it is granted for a further period of 99 years. At the moment there is a decrease in the value and the negotiability of the leasehold site during the course of the 99-year leasehold.

Furthermore, I wish to convey my heartfelt thanks to the hon the Minister of Co-operation and Development for the confidence he showed in me by allowing me to handle this legislation in this House. It has been a great honour and privilege to me to have an active share in this important matter.

This legislation has been referred to on several occasions as a cornerstone of the development of Black communities. This is very true. However, I should be neglecting my duty if I failed to thank all the members of the select committee for the very important role which they played in the formation of this cornerstone. I believe that the consensus which there has been at times in this debate, which has extended over four days, has in fact been possible because the Bill was first considered by the select committee. Of course, we still have fundamental differences with regard to many aspects, as has been evident again this afternoon. What I find encouraging, however, is the fact that we all agree that there should be development in Black communities so that the respective Black communities may themselves be able to improve their quality of life. It is in this spirit that the Department of Co-operation and Development and its officials wish to implement this measure.

The Department of Co-operation and Development is often regarded with mistrust and very often, too, the department is accused of a whole number of things without any justification. I want to emphasize an aspect, which has perhaps not received the attention which it deserves. I want to emphasize what the hon member for Helderkruin said in this House a few days ago about the precise objective that we wish to achieve with this legislation. With the passing of this legislation, as the hon member put it, nine other laws are being completely removed from the Statute Book. Apart from the nine laws that are being repealed, this measure, which consists of 70 clauses, brings about the deletion of more than 200 sections in other laws and their replacement by the 70 clauses in this Bill. This is worth mentioning.

These statistics prove that in spite of the fact that the department is often accused of failing to promote the interests of the Blacks, it has in fact managed to rationalise and to streamline the administration of Black affairs in this country. This statistical achievement has been made possible by dedication, teamwork and scrupulous attention to detail. All the credit must go to the officials of the Department of Co-operation and Development.

I come now to the speeches that have been made here by hon members. Many of the points that have been made were also made during the Committee Stage and were answered during that debate, so I do not intend to reply to all the matters point by point.

†I am also very gratified that the hon member for Houghton spoke positively in regard to the attitude of administration boards. They had their shortcomings, they were unpopular, I admit, but they had to deal with very unpopular measures. That is true. However, it is a pity that the hon member was not here during the first two days of the Second Reading debate. Had she been here, she would not have raised all the points that she did raise here this afternoon.

*I really do not want the hon member to misunderstand me when I refer to a particular animal, and to think that I am comparing her to that animal. We have a humorous saying in Afrikaans to that when one comes across a pig, one should kick it at once, because it is either on its way to do some mischief or it has just done some.

†I also feel that one should always clout the hon member for Houghton verbally when she is present in this House. The hon member was absent for two days and I cannot believe that she was absent because of a lack of interest. She was probably up to mischief somewhere else.

You are so right! [Interjections.]

If the hon member was in Pinetown then she must really have been up to mischief. However, I am pleased that my perception proved to be correct.

This is certainly not the time to discuss all the points raised by the hon member. As I have said, most of them were discussed during the debate on the Second Reading as well as at the Committee Stage. However, I do want to refer to certain points because they are important.

The hon member expressed her concern in regard to the funding of the development boards. The legislation provides for certain grants and loans by the Government and, as I said during the Second Reading debate, the Croeser work group has made some very interesting proposals to the Government in regard to the funding not only of these boards but local authorities in general. The hon member will, of course, understand that I am not at liberty to discuss these matters at this stage.

As far as freehold is concerned, the allegation has been made that the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning said that the question of freehold would be discussed by the Cabinet Committee. I think that this has created a wrong impression in regard to what the hon the Minister intended saying if those were in fact the words that he used. What is going to be considered by this Cabinet Committee is the whole question of land title should representations be made to the Cabinet Committee by Black leaders or other instances. [Interjections.] Yes, I realize that. However, I think that the intention was that the whole question of land title would be discussed including, of course, the question of freehold. However, leasehold is also part of land title. As has been rightly pointed out, the question of the permanence of Blacks in this country does not rest with the title of the land on which they live. It is dependent upon section 10 of the Urban Areas Act in 1945.

That is going to be repealed.

Yes, but it will be replaced by something else. We do not intend leaving a vacuum there, and of that the hon member can rest assured.

The hon member also referred to the rights of women, particularly the rights of married women. Unfortunately I do not happen to agree with her, but I am certainly not going to argue with her because this is a matter, as she herself said, for the Law Commission.

I just want you to tell them to get on with it.

I am very pleased that I have nothing to do with it for the simple reason that I have seen the arguments on television. It looks to me that we are going to have a war between the sexes in this country before that legislation is passed.

She also referred to the low percentage poll during the elections. This is nothing strange in local authority elections; we also experience it in White local authority elections.

Not 10% though.

Well, I am speaking under correction, but I think in Johannesburg it was as low as 30%. It was very low indeed.

*The hon member for Bloemfontein North put the role of the development boards in a very positive perspective, and he was quite right in saying that these boards are going to play a very important role in the development of Black communities. Of course, he did the hon member for Houghton a disfavour and gave her the kiss of death by complimenting her on her speech. I think I have saved the day and given her the kiss of life again by attacking her, because that is what she is interested in.

Just don’t overdo the kissing. [Interjections.]

I want to refer to the hon member for Brakpan. He adopted a very strange attitude in this House this afternoon. He made the statement that the number of officials of the development boards would be reduced. This he infers from the reduction in the membership of the development boards. The hon member is now doing something which he urged us not to do the other day, and that is to create uncertainty in the minds of these people.

The uncertainty already exists.

The hon member must give me a chance to finish my speech.

He argued the other day—I wholeheartedly agreed with him—that we should remove and uncertainty which there might be in the minds of officials of Administration Boards, but now he alleges that the number of officials will be reduced.

What is the reason for the uncertainty?

What are his grounds for making that allegation? There is uncertainty because people like him are creating that uncertainty.

You agreed that there was uncertainty.

Yes, I agreed that the people were uncertain and I said that we would remove that uncertainty. However, the hon member is now aggravating that uncertainty after receiving assurances from us. I want to repeat that there is no question of any reduction in the number of development board officials. There is no question of that. In fact, we must expect that with regard to development boards and Black local authorities in general, there will have to be staff increases everywhere, because more staff will be required for the administration of the Black local authorities as well. So there is no question of any reduction in the number of these people. I am sorry that the hon member has raised this matter once again this afternoon.

Mr Speaker, if that is the case, may I ask the hon the Deputy Minister why there is any uncertainty in the minds of the officials?

Surely the hon member must understand that whenever a new dispensation is being introduced, there is always uncertainty in the minds of certain employees because they cannot identify their position under the new dispensation. That is the reason for uncertainty. Remarks such as the one made by the hon member this afternoon in stating categorically that they are going to reduce the numbers simply aggravate that uncertainty. The hon member is certainly not making those people feel more secure in this way. Would the hon member agree with me that this is the effect of his remarks?

No, not at all.

The hon member cannot agree with anyone but himself. He is not capable of agreeing with anyone else.

The hon member also talked about the question of permanence. He proceeded from the false premise that permanence is determined by the land title which people have in this country. Surely this is an utterly false premise. As an attorney, the hon member should know this much better than I. The performance of Blacks in South Africa is determined by section 10 of the Blacks (Urban Areas) Consolidation Act. Therefore one cannot judge their performance from any other point of view. I want to ask the hon member a further question. This permanence of the Blacks which the hon member denies …

We do not deny it. You deny it in the Cape.

The hon member alleges that we are denying their permanence in the Cape Peninsula because we are not granting leasehold rights to Blacks in this area. However, I have just told the hon member that the permanence of people is not determined by leasehold, freehold or any other kind of land title. This is laid down in section 10 of Act No 25 of 1945. Why does the hon member persist with his argument, or does he not agree with this either?

What rights of occupation do Blacks have in terms of leasehold?

The hon member for Brakpan also proceeded from the false premise that the Cape congress of the NP had opposed leasehold in the Western Cape because it refused to accept the permanence of Blacks in this area. Once again, this is a ridiculous statement which is not true. The Cape congress rejected leasehold and certainly did not give its opinion on the withholding of section 10 privileges. Where does the hon member get the idea, then, that the Cape congress does not regard Blacks in the Cape Peninsula as permanent residents?

The hon member said something else as well. Like his hon deputy leader, he took it for granted that we were going to establish large industrial areas for Blacks around Soweto—he specifically mentioned this. Where does the hon member get that idea from? The hon member should know that there is not an inch of land available for that purpose. He knows it, but he repeats that allegation uncritically.

Where do you get that idea from?

The hon member does not know what he is talking about, and the hon member for Langlaagte knows even less. The hon member for Langlaagte knows absolutely nothing about what is going on here. I am not even prepared to argue with him about Black affairs, because he knows absolutely nothing about them.

You are the worst Deputy Minister I have ever seen in my life.

And the hon member is the worst member of Parliament I have ever seen.

We on this side of the House stand accused of not promoting the development of Black states to the maximum extent. It is said that we should much rather concentrate our development effort on the national states. The hon member for Randburg was quite right in saying that these two things should go hand in hand, that the one should be done and the other should not be omitted. We should not emphasize the one and not the other. I tried to explain the matter in the Committee Stage, apparently with little success. The development boards must have the right to establish certain industrial areas for Blacks in Black townships, for the simple reason, and I really tried to spell this out quite clearly, that in every Black community—the same applies to White communities—there is a micro-economy which generates smaller industries. I mentioned the case of the person who repairs motor vehicles. There tinsmiths (“blikslaers”), and I am not referring to the type of “blikslaers” that we find among the hon members of the Conservative Party, but to the people who really work with tin. Surely these are people who have the right to practise a certain trade, and I tried to indicate that it was essential, in the interests of good order, that these people should be given an area in or adjoining their residential areas where they can also promote and enjoy a certain degree of industrialization. These are powers which these development boards are going to have, not the power to establish large steel factories around Soweto and Daveyton and those places because there is simply no room for them.

I want to mention a few figures to hon members. Unfortunately, the figures were not available to me yesterday afternoon, but I just want to demonstrate to hon members the dramatic success which this Government has achieved with its decentralization initiative. Between March 1982 and March 1983, 777 new industries were established in our border areas, at the decentralization points. These created job opportunities for 65 342 people. The capital investment involved amounts to R2 459 755. Between 1 April 1983 and 31 December 1983, 1 028 applications for aid were received. Of these, 816 were approved. When these are ended to the 777 of the first period, one arrives at a figure of around 1 600. One hundred and twenty-four applications are standing over until more information concerning them has been obtained. The 816 applications that have been approved involve a total capital investment of R864 million and will create jobs for 50 060 persons.

In the light of these facts, one simply cannot imagine that there can be any criticism of the degree of development which is being stimulated by initiatives taken by this Government. People, such as the members of the Conservative Party, lecture us and pretend to have been the originators of this initiative, the people who first thought of it. Sir, while they were still plotting and scheming, we were already working on these things.

The hon member for Innesdal referred, among other things, to the permanence of the Blacks in this country. There was a time when prominent politicians in this country spoke about the presence of Black people outside the national states as though they were here on a temporary and casual basis. There were such people who said things to that effect.

[Inaudible.]

The hon member should not open his mouth too wide; he may fall in.

As the hon member for Innesdal rightly remarked, we should not debate the question today of whether or not they are permanent. Today we should debate methods of trying to reconcile the right to self-determination which we as Whites have claimed for ourselves, and our insistence on preserving our rights and identity, with the demands of the Blacks. This is no easy task. The Blacks living outside the national states are not there as a result of the policy or actions of the Government. It is simply a reality which we must take cognizance of. It is our fate, and the challenge with which we are faced is for those people …

What about the Western Cape?

What about the Western Cape?

Is that not a reality as well?

Well, how are we approaching it? In any case, who is speaking? What objections does that hon member have to the way we are treating the people there? Are we not treating them as if they are permanently there? Why did we start with Khayelitsha? That hon member always has a lot to say about things he knows nothing about. [Interjections.]

*The fact that there are Blacks in these areas is not the fault of the Government. However, it is the duty of this Government to respect the claims and the rights of these people and to reconcile them with the rights of the Whites, as I have already said. The problems involved must be solved in a meaningful way without confrontation, for if we adopt a racialistic attitude, we shall be seeking confrontation, and if we are paternalistic, we shall be creating frustration which will lead to confrontation.

Co-operation on the basis of self-determination and the development of our Black communities without any loss of our identity, our right to self-determination and our right to survival, will lead us to peaceful and orderly coexistence, and that is what we are striving for in this country.

Are these permanent Blacks South African citizens?

We shall achieve that, too, in spite of the PFP and the CP. I want to tell the hon member for Bryanston that this Bill concerns different matters. I wish the hon member would confine himself to legislation which he knows something about, which he is capable of knowing something about. The point is that he should please not express an opinion …

I put a simple question to a simple Minister.

I shall give the hon member a very simple reply: He should stick to matters that he knows something about. I cannot put it any more simply than that.

I wish to thank the hon member for Rand-burg for his contribution. He referred to the fact that these three pieces of legislation, two of which have already been passed, while the third one is in the process of being drafted, are interrelated, and that we must read them together if we want to see the general policy in respect of the Blacks in White South Africa, ie outside the national states, in the right perspective. We must be very clear about one thing: In my reply to the Second Reading debate I referred to the fact that influx control was not necessarily negative. It may have negative elements, but it is not necessarily negative, because it also affords protection to those Blacks who have acquired rights in these areas in terms of an Act created by this Parliament.

Our intention with this legislation, therefore, is to develop these Black communities to the maximum. At present, every Administration Board has a director of community development. We are realising an ideal, because we believe that we can only improve the circumstances of these people if we can persuade them to get involved in their own affairs as communities and if we can encourage them to develop themselves. I believe that this legislation is a milestone which can only benefit this country.

Question put,

Upon which the House divided.

As fewer than fifteen members (viz Messrs S P Barnard, F J le Roux, Mrs E M Scholtz and Mr H D K van der Merwe) appeared on one side,

Question declared agreed to.

Bill read a Third Time.

Mr Speaker, I move:

Mr Speaker, we have come to the end of our discussions on a very interesting Bill, and I should like to make a few comments on how the provisions of this Bill should be applied.

In terms of clause 1 the Administration has now been given the power to collect any debt or loss from pension moneys, and I want to ask the hon the Minister to make absolutely sure that this power is not abused. Indeed, I intend to put questions on the Question Paper every year to find out how much money has been collected in this regard and from how many persons. This will also ensure that the hon the Minister does not allow this power to be abused.

In clause 2 we deal with the economic valuation of the pension fund. This has become very important because there are many pension funds that are not really viable. I should therefore like to hear from the hon the Minister whether he is absolutely certain that the new fund and the old fund are both viable. I do not know whether he has done an economic valuation lately, but it is quite possible that these funds are not viable and that the commitments that the SATS have are so colossal that it might even shake the hon the Minister. It is a well-known fact in the USA that if 75% of the top 500 companies’ balance sheets showed what their pension commitments were, their financial state would be very parlous indeed. I think therefore that it is absolutely essential that the hon the Minister should tell the House when a economic valuation is done and, when he introduces his budget, what the actual situation with regard to the SATS pension funds is.

I should like to deal also with clause 6 which deals with the exploitation and the commercial development of immovable property owned by the SATS. The SATS have been in existence from colonial days to the present time. They have had the opportunity of acquiring many of the prime sites in South Africa and should be an enormously rich organization in respect of ownership of land. They are now a business organization, but I want to know from the hon the Minister whether they really have much experience in the handling of property development. This is highly experienced task and it requires people who know something about it. It is not a subject that can be run by regulation, and I should like to advise the hon the Minister that he should make use of a property consultant in order to ensure that whatever development they are going to do, will not only be to the good of the community as a whole but that it will also be highly profitable. The main considerations for success in property development are location and administration, and if the SATS have one advantage, it is the advantage of location.

Furthermore under Administration, the leases that the SATS must draw up, must be properly drawn up in terms of present-day leases where provision is made for growth of income with adequate escalations. The SATS should not merely consider that they are doing the public a favour. This requires proper leases and proper clauses in a fair contract, but always with the Administration in control. As I have said, the SATS have prime sites all over South Africa, and if the Government had passed this particular piece of legislation 32 years ago, I doubt whether the SATS would have had the deficit that they have had. I am almost certain that with the prime sites that they own and the rentals that they could have obtained, they would have earned millions and millions of rand a year.

Allow me to state in conclusion, Mr Speaker, that I hope that when this private development is done it will be done to supplement private enterprise and to compete with it. In that respect I hope that the Administration will take cognizance of the problems that it might create should it undertake something in competition with private enterprise.

We will support the Third Reading of this Bill.

Mr Speaker, I should like to thank the hon member for Bezuidenhout for his support of the Third Reading of the Bill under discussion. I agree with the hon member when he says that when these leasing agreements between the SATS and future lessees are concluded, provision will have to be made for the modern leasing agreement technique which is based, for example, on a percentage of the turnover. In this way the SATS can make provision for revenue to keep pace with the turnover, which in turn keeps pace with the rate of inflation.

The hon member for Bezuidenhout said that if the Government had made provision 30 years ago for this activity, as part of the accounts of the SATS, we would not have had any problems now. This just goes to prove to the hon member all over again how good a man the present Minister of Transport Affairs is. [Interjections.]

This Bill was discussed very thoroughly, particularly yesterday in the Committee Stage but also, of course, during the Second Reading debate. With all the assurances the hon the Minister gave, with all the amendments he accepted, I think that most of the kinks have now been ironed out of this measure, particularly the question of pensions and the whole question relating to pension benefits. I also want to express my thanks to the hon the Minister for having proceeded with the introduction of a widows’ pension scheme for Coloured, Indian and Black workers of the SATS. This equalization of service conditions must not simply be allowed to pass unnoticed. I believe that this laying down of conditions of service, which has now been taking place over a relatively long period, deserves more attention, and with the SATS playing the leading role in the South African economy at this stage in the harmonizing of job remuneration and job responsibility amongst the various race groups, this is a further contribution. I believe that the SATS serves as an example to numerous other employers in the private sector who are experiencing problems, as is apparent from the recent strikes involving benefits to be granted to workers.

At the moment the SATS finds itself in deep waters. We recall this fact from the hon the Minister’s budget speech last year. Last year’s budget, I believe, made provision for a deficit of approximately R600 million. The figures that the hon the Minister makes available in the Press from time to time, however, reflect an encouraging trend, and that is that the deficit will apparently not be all that great. I also agree with the hon member for Bezuidenhout that if we had, at an earlier stage, made provision for certain activities which are now being provided for in clause 6 of this Bill, this would have solved a very big problem and we would perhaps not have suffered any deficit this year at all.

Since I am busy referring to clause 6, I should also like to dwell briefly on the envisaged new paragraph 26 which is going to be added to section 9 of the principal Act. Yesterday this new paragraph elicited a tremendous reaction from hon members of the CP. The SATS is run on business principles, and those business principles are also contained in legislation passed by this House in 1981. I am now referring to Act No 65 of 1981 in which the new structure of the SATS is set out in its entirety. In section 7 of that specific Act it is stated very clearly what the objectives of the SATS are and how its finances must be organized. One of the things very clearly set out in this specific section is that the revenue must be sufficient to cover costs. The fact that railways everywhere are in a precarious state is a trend one can observe throughout the world. The situation is so precarious that certain railway lines and sections of line have even had to be closed down in some overseas countries. In South Africa, of course, we have not yet reached that stage. That is something we are very grateful for at this stage. This brings me to the point of saying that I support clause 6(b), as contained in the present legislation. It is a world-wide trend that if one has buying power, or can get it together, one taps that buying power. I see nothing wrong with this principle employed by the SATS. The result of the buying power is indeed being utilized, together with the concomitant facilities that can be created, is that we are brought into line with trends overseas, where a start was made as far back as 10 or 15 years ago. The Hamburg transport service is regarded as one of the best transport services in the world. A large portion of Hamburg’s revenue, which protects them against any deficit, is not obtained merely through the running of the transport services, but also through the utilization of facilities in the form of land. They do not run a single shop, but they rent out the available space they have. In clause 6(b) of this legislation it is made very clear that exploitation by private enterprise will take place. The criticism levelled in this connection, ie that the SATS is now going to involve itself in liquor sales and grocery sales, simply does not hold water. Anyone levelling such criticism has not read the legislation.

The CP’s objection in this connection, which amounts to the fact that there will be overcrowding, does not hold water either, because at the moment there is overcrowding without there being one single shop. We all acknowledge the fact that there is overcrowding. If one looks at the SATS appropriation tabled here each year, including its capital programme, one sees that the SATS is making on-going contributions towards relieving this overcrowding. The longer sets and larger units/coaches are being put into operation. The hon the Minister has also imported a new coach concept from overseas, and these coaches are now being tested in South Africa to facilitate speedier transport. Overcrowding is a problem characteristic of transport because in transport one is dealing with peak periods. All of us want to get to work at the very last possible moment each morning, and all of us run to catch the train at the same time. That problem of peak periods, which the SATS is struggling with, will not be solved or aggravated by the creation of facilities belonging to the SATS outside the station premises. An example of this is the beautiful garden outside the Cape Town station. If underground parking space for which a fee is charged were provided, the gardens would still remain, with merely the underground space being utilized.

Apart from the State, the largest landowner in South Africa is probably the SATS. We only have to think of the value per square meter of the land comprising Braamfontein’s shunting yards. We therefore know that the capital account of the SATS ought probably to be one of the soundest capital accounts in the world. I therefore support the fact that one should purposefully strive for the utilization of land that is not being utilized at present.

A further important point is linked to the example of the Johannesburg station. Land utilized there is not, after all, confined merely to that of the Johannesburg station. There is also land in Soweto. There is, after all, also land in Indian towns, and also in Coloured towns. One of the finest examples of this kind of development is that of Mitchell’s Plain, with its main station integrated with its main shopping centre. I think that is one of the best developments to date from the point of view of public transport. It is not only a shopping centre; it is also a centre integrating various transport modes. One can obtain a taxi there, catch a bus, park your private car there or catch a train. I am of the opinion that if, in future, we utilize the available space on SATS property and create more of these facilities, this would not only be to the benefit of the passengers, because the leasing would also financially benefit the SATS. I therefore want to ask the hon the Minister not to pay too much attention to this criticism and to go ahead with this development.

A further senseless point of criticism was that private initiative is being squeezed out. If that same private initiative, which is now going to be established on SATS land, were to be established just opposite the station, then private initiative would no longer be squeezed out. I cannot understand that logic, because whether it is on SATS land that is leased, or across from that land and leased from private individuals, the influence on all surrounding economic activity in the broader sense would remain the same.

Lastly, I agree that future utilization of available land should take place in accordance with city council or town council planning. One must not move beyond the ambit of these town planning or land utilization schemes. I also support the idea of having these people pay rates because they are making use of city council services such as water, electricity, streets, sewerage, etc. I support the idea that they should also pay rates, just as the SATS, when it leases land, also pays rates in the same way that an ordinary private owner pays rates on his land.

The establishment of commercial facilities definitely does create problems under certain circumstances, and this is something we have to accept. At the moment there is space that can be converted, but I am quite certain that both the SATS and the Ministry will see to it that wherever this is possible in practice—I emphasize “wherever this is possible in practice”—these facilities will indeed be created. The point of departure should be that these facilities are only created where it is possible to do so in practice. That is the hon the Minister’s viewpoint, and there is also the assurance he gave us yesterday. I think it is enough to be able to use that assurance as a guideline.

Further criticism levelled at the hon the Minister was that the commercial activities could harm smaller shops. At present smaller shops are being harmed by large ones establishing themselves amongst such smaller ones. As far as that point of view is concerned, I have no problem. Whether the hon the Minister decides to establish larger or smaller shops, as long as the rental is an economic rental, I can foresee no great problem.

I support the principle that all those assets—there are other assets that we shall be discussing at a later stage—which are not being used at present, but which could very fruitfully be employed, should be utilized by the SATS as a source of revenue benefiting both the SATS accounts and its workers. The SATS must tackle the first few projects as quickly as possible to see how this works in practice. I therefore support the Third Reading of the Bill.

Mr Speaker, in the discussion of the Bill we ranged very widely in the sense that there were many matters that were investigated. Starting with clause 1, we see the problem of the worker. As the hon the Minister has said, 1% of those in the employ of the SATS are scoundrels who do not pay up. They do not pay their debts. If those who do not pay the debts they have incurred by taking a loan from a pension fund comprise only 1% of all the officials, I think the hon the Minister can deem himself lucky. If one introduces legislation to get at that 1% it is, in my view, a retaliatory measure and not one aimed at collecting debts. One of the things I find incomprehensible is that the attitude of an employer towards his employees has sunk so low that he can tell his employees that although 1% of them are in the wrong, he foresees the possibility of each and every one of them treading the same path some time or other. If one of them were to have an accident whilst driving a motor vehicle, the recoverable losses will be recovered from that employee.

Now you are talking nonsense.

It is no use telling me it is nonsense; the legislation is prescriptive. One can suffer losses as a result of the actions of one’s employees. What losses? Is debt a loss or are there other losses involved in such debts? We must not be over-sensitive when the truth comes to the fore.

If a person’s debt and the interest involved could accurately be determined, whether it be R10 or R10 000, that would be another matter and one could obtain the money by way of a cession. Then an employee would know what it was he was signing. With this measure SATS employees are being placed in a dangerous position. If an employee did not want to sign, he would be acting quite correctly, because only a madman would sign a document stating that losses for which he is liable in the job situation can be recovered from him. The hon member Dr Welgemoed is very glad about clause 4. He spoke of the equalization process. He spoke of the pensions of the widows of Coloured, Indian and Black employees. In this connection he did, in point of fact, point to the narrowing of the wage gap. I have no objection to that if it takes place on the basis of productivity. I want to issue the warning, however, that it should not take place on ethnic grounds. People should not be given improved benefits merely because they belong to a certain colour group if productivity does not increase accordingly. That is inflationary in the worst possible sense and effects everyone in the country. For the first time in the history of the SATS pensions were paid to the widows of White employees in 1965. In this Bill, however, shortly before the advent of the new dispensation, similar benefits are being proposed for the widows of other employees. It seems to me as if humane feelings have changed since those years. This takes my mind back to that lengthy period in which Railwaymen used to struggle and in which no pensions were paid to the widows.

Clause 6(b) introduces a totally new principle, that of the development of private initiative on Railway land. Does the hon the Minister of Transport Affairs agree with free enterprise in South Africa having precedence? The hon the Minister is free to answer. The hon Minister would not permit free road transport services. He would not repeal the Road Transportation Act with all its permits. He would not abolish the thousands upon thousands of road transportation permits, the issuing of which takes up many man-hours. No, he would prefer to retain that monopolistic power. People have to beg him. That is the devil-take-you system of government. Yesterday the Minister said that if one did not beg, one got nothing. What kind of Government is it which proceeds from the view that if one does not beg, the devil take you? That is the standpoint of a Government which has been in power for too long, the standpoint of an hon Minister who does not confine himself to the actual task of the SATS, and that is to establish an improved rail, air and road transport service. The hon the Minister dodges round that and starts moving in a sphere which he has not as yet mastered and where big problems could develop for the SATS, the workers and the passengers. Passenger safety is jeopardized. According to Die Vaderland the hon the Minister himself said the following:

I predicted as much only the day before, and there the hon the Minister announced it. I now want to ask the hon the Minister whether the task of the SATS, ie the improvement of travelling facilities for rail, air and road passengers, has changed?

With the decrease in the fuel price the hon the Minister said he could do nothing, although in the previous budget he had said that 40% of the cost structure was comprised of expenditure on fuel. The hon the Minister says, however, he can do nothing to decrease tariffs. He gives the country the lead and quashes the hon the Prime Minister’s effort to reduce inflation. He said he could not decrease tariffs, so no one else can do it either. What private company will say that it will reduce its transport tariffs if the Minister does not want to do so? The hon the Minister’s reply was that there was outstanding debt. Is it such a wonderful thing to have debt? Can he not accept the responsibilities of a Minister merely because of debt? There are great problems involved in a situation like this.

I also want to refer to the position of Railway Policemen. They must patrol the whole area of a railway station and guarantee the safety of the passengers. Pick ’n Pay and other companies, for example Solly Kramer which sells cheap liquor, are now erecting buildings. The entrances to the stations are now being blocked by people entering station premises to make purchases at these undertakings. Those people will obstruct access routes to the platforms to such an extent that people will not be able to achieve their prime objective, that of obtaining transport to their places of residence.

Last Saturday I took the 8 o’clock flight—I think it was flight 304—to Jan Smuts Airport. The whole aircraft, an Airbus, which was full, was delayed for half an hour. Do hon members know what for? To load flowers and fruit. Does the hon the Minister have so little regard for the passengers who have already had to pay R370 for a ticket? Passengers pay R370 and then still have to wait half an hour longer. I would rather not say what has happened to our food, for example the plastic eggs we get these days. What has happened at Jan Smuts is shocking. When we came in to land, those sitting up front in the aircraft could see the ground. For some or other reason we then went up again. It was a great shock …

Order! I request the hon member to come back to the Bill.

I just want to state that the object and principle of this Bill is the provision of better transportation and better benefits for the SATS staff. On that morning the aircraft soared into the sky … [Interjections] … without our being told a single word. Sir, that almost gave rise to one of the biggest accidents we have ever had in South Africa. If a “fly-past” is being arranged, one warns the passengers and tells them: “This morning we are going to have a ‘fly-past’.“ One does not simply fly 200 feet from the ground and then suddenly climb again without announcing what you are doing. An Airbus is not built for that. Just remember what I am saying today: It was very close to a serious accident. There was a pilot sitting with me who said: “He overshot the runway.” My reply was: “No, I do not think that can have been the case.” Then the captain apologized and said: “Sorry, but I have received instructions to go up.” If a vehicle had been crossing the runway, I would have said “thank the Lord”, because then that person would have saved our lives. Then we should, however, have been told. We then had to circle for 25 minutes because the aircraft could not go in. [Interjections.] I wonder what hon members are laughing at. Have they ever been in an aircraft accident? Is that the attitude in this Parliament when an accident almost occurred? Hon members sit laughing. [Interjections.] I find it tragic that this is now happening here. We circled for 25 minutes … [Interjections] … before we could land. What right had anyone, without our permission, to go up again when we had almost landed … [Interjections.] No, we circled for half an hour …

Order! Before the hon member for Langlaagte lands, I want to ask him to get back to the Bill.

Sir, I just want to make the one point. I was more than an hour late for an appointment with a lawyer. They have no right to do that, to waste a person’s time like that.

What the most important aspect of the new legislation boils down to is that on SATS land they are going to erect buildings which are and will be incompatible with town planning schemes. The right to erect such buildings is implied in this Bill. Only SATS rights are registered on that land in a municipal area. If that land is going to be used for any other purpose, it must be zoned accordingly, and as far as zoning powers are concerned, I want to point out that in terms of the new local authority legislation, the Minister or any of his officials can be appointed a local authority. Then he can zone the area for whatever he wishes. Free initiative will then be something of the past. The biggest problem still is: What about the passengers, what about their convenience, and can we ensure their safety in that sphere? I want to point out again that the hon the Minister is tremendously concerned about the 1% that could possibly be lost in terms of clause 1. In the case of clause 13, however, the hon the Minister sticks to the Act. This clause gives the General Manager the right to write off an amount of up to R10 000 if he feels so inclined. We know that there are thousands of cases where such write-offs can take place. This legislation, however, grants the hon the Minister the right to remit any amount without obtaining the House’s prior approval. That is shameful. In my opinion it is a circumvention of parliamentary rights. We as members of the House of Assembly should have the right to discuss a matter such as this in the House. It must not merely be reported. That is not good enough. Even if it is reported to the Auditor-General, it still remains our task to look after taxpayers’ money. The hon the Minister was tremendously concerned about the possible R10 000 or R20 000 that could disappear from the pension fund, but says nothing about the R2 million or R3 million that he may remit.

On an earlier occasion I asked for an investigation into the supply of peanut butter the SATS had purchased. In Spain a similar instance occurred with oil a few years ago. People tasted the oil and said it did not taste nice. It was not, however, withdrawn from the market and eventually 300 people died. The State did not want to take action against the manufacturers. Sir, do you know who is now taking action against them? The family members of those who died.

Yesterday the hon the Minister said that it is 1,5 million tons that one … [Interjections.]

It is not 1,5 million tons.

He said one would have to eat 1,5 million tons of this peanut butter before one would be poisoned. [Interjections.] That is a farce. Hon members are free to go and read about that. Let me quote from a newspaper report under the heading “CP insulted the farmers”:

[Interjections.] What are hon members laughing about? The hon the Minister of Health has at least done his job and appointed inspectors to remove products from the shelves if the aflatoxin level is too high. Farmers do not make peanut butter. The ones who make it are the “fat cats”, the big bosses. They are the ones who are being protected. The big businessmen are the ones who make and sell peanut butter. The important point is that the hon the Minister is making a joke of this.

It is a co-operative that makes that specific peanut butter.

That hon member would do well to keep quiet.

It is not the “fat cats”, but rather the co-operatives that make peanut butter.

I want to tell the hon the Minister that the same kinds of jokes were made in Spain in the case of the oil, and what happened there? Three hundred people died when the oil merely deviated one degree from the norm. The hon the Minister will say that aflatoxin do not kill a person within a day or two, but a reasonable quantity can cause a child to develop liver cancer over a period of 15 years. It initiates a process. It is not a poison that has an immediate affect, causing one to keel over as if pole-axed. [Interjections.] The hon the Minister should not treat such a very serious matter as a joke. If newspapers carry headlines such as “Perhaps more poisoned food off the market”, then …

Order! Let me now ask the hon member for Langlaagte for the third time to come back to the Third Reading content of this Bill.

Mr Speaker, I agree with you that the hon the Minister went off at quite a tangent and I should like to reply to him, but I will abide by your ruling.

I want to ask the hon the Minister not to make things more difficult for Railway officials and not to adopt such a flippant attitude towards questions affecting the SATS, because then the officials would not do their work properly. One has to be particularly serious when it comes to the Airways, because an airline pilot must be on his guard every moment because he is responsible for the lives of 300 to 400 people, and this also applies to drivers of passenger trains. I therefore make a serious appeal to the hon the Minister to give attention to the matters I have referred to.

Mr Speaker, the hon member for Langlaagte really entertained us this afternoon. If the subject we are discussing were not such a serious one, one could say that the hon member’s stories were more or less like the stories of “Oom Kaspaas en Nefie”, ie slightly far-fetched stories. At one point in time the hon member’s aircraft was flying near the ground, but thanks to the smart tactics of the pilot, the aircraft did manage to ascend again.

This afternoon the hon member repeated virtually all the things he had already said on a previous occasion. He said, for example, that clause 1 was a retaliatory measure and that if an official owed the SATS money and resigned from the service, the hon the Minister was not entitled to recover such money from the official. The hon member has had it explained to him repeatedly that this is normal procedure. If the Railway officials themselves objected to this procedure, one could understand the hon member’s argument and sympathize with it. The Railway officials, however, accept this provision. After all, the SATS does not only make money available for housing loans and so on. The employees of the SATS often need money for a variety of purposes and it is advanced to them. In the report I see, for example, that benevolent funds have been established with the purpose of granting financial assistance by way of donations and interest-free loans to employees, ex-employees and next of kin. So diverse assistance is granted by the SATS to its employees.

If an employee of the SATS were to resign whilst still owing money which he had borrowed, it must surely be recovered in some or other way. In terms of the Bill, the person’s pension money can now be used for that purpose. I am convinced, however, that the SATS will not do anyone down because, after all, it is its own employees it is dealing with. Besides, it is, in the first instance, the SATS that made that facility available to its workers. In other words, the employee also has an obligation towards his employer; he cannot simply receive without also meeting his obligations.

The hon member for Langlaagte tries to imply that an employee can borrow money for some or other purpose from the SATS, yet when he resigns from the service, no one has the right to remind him of the obligation he still has towards the SATS. He wants that debt to be wiped off the man’s slate. That is, in point of fact, the way the hon member for Langlaagte argues. How would a single business undertaking function under those circumstances?

Ask him about Corlett Drive.

Well, I do not know whether Corlett Drive operated under those circumstances. I do not believe, however, that the hon member for Langlaagte’s argument holds any water. The amendment that is being introduced is, I believe, reasonable enough. I also think that SATS employees will be satisfied with it.

The hon member for Langlaagte also started up a massive argument about the question of buildings and other property that can be leased for business purposes. According to him, railway stations will now be inundated by thousands of people. I have taken the trouble, however, of checking on the debates that took place when Act 65 of 1981, the South African Transport Services Act, was being discussed here in the House. In clause 9 of the then Bill the right being granted to the SATS was probably better defined than in any previous piece of legislation. Not a single hon member of this House still sitting here today, hon members of the PFP included, not the hon member for Langlaagte or the hon member for North Rand, who was the chief NP spokesman on transport matters, said a word about it. In the discussion of clause 9 of the then Bill there were other powers about which a great deal was, in fact, said, powers of the SATS such as that of expropriation, etc. They were indeed discussed in the 1981 debates. Not a word, however, was said about clause 9(22) of that Bill.

How many buildings did you erect and rent out then?

That was envisaged even at that stage. I do, however, want to take up the matter further with the hon member for Langlaagte. In 1983 we brought about further amendments to the aforementioned Act. In the marginal notes on clause 6 of the Bill under discussion the hon member for Langlaagte can see what amendments were brought about to the principal Act in 1983. Then, however, there was no single word of objection forthcoming from him, not from him or from any other hon member of his party. But today he objects …

Why are you then inserting clause 6 in the Bill if the SATS already has these powers?

Mr Speaker, the explanatory memorandum states clearly why this is being done. It is being done because extended provision is now being made for this so that trade can take place and so that accommodation for trading on SATS property can be leased. Let me say very clearly and unequivocally that that is the reason why it is being done in this way. The explanatory memorandum does, after all, make it very clear. The hon member for Langlaagte does not, however, want to accept it as such. I think I know why the hon member for Langlaagte is acting the way he does. This is merely political opportunism on his part. If it were not political opportunism, the hon member would have objected to this in 1981 and in 1983. Today he objects, however, merely to create the impression that the Government is permitting integration and crowding out by groups of colour on an ever-increasing scale. That is the reason why the hon member is adopting this line of conduct. He has no conception, however, of the fact that the SATS has a problem as a result of a recession in the country and overseas. In fact, the SATS wants to improve its present-day financial position. Why does the hon member for Langlaagte not want to allow the SATS to do so? In the meantime he is creating the impression of being the SATS employee’s friend. All these things could better stabilize the position of the SATS employee. The better the income and the future prospects, the better off the employees will be, and also those who make use of the SATS services. These aspects ought surely to weigh more heavily with the hon member for Langlaagte than the petty political opportunism he is now displaying in regard to this matter.

We on this side of the House support the legislation under discussion because we believe it to be good legislation. It is in the country’s interests, in the interests of the SATS and in the interests of both the employees and those making use of the SATS services.

Mr Speaker, when a pilot wishes to take out a licence, one of the first things he learns to do is circuits and bumps. I think that this Bill here before us this afternoon has certainly gone through its fair share of “circuits and bumps” in relation to debate particularly when one thinks of the speech made by the hon member for Langlaagte. I think that his problem was that he was trying to land with his undercarriage up, his flaps up and his stall hooter buzzing all at the same time. In fact, he was liable to land right in the peanut butter while he was doing it! [Interjections.]

This has been an interesting debate because this is an interesting Bill. I want to tell the hon the Minister that I believe that his approach has been a very sound one. As the new hon Leader of this House he has set a tone in that he has listened to the amendments proposed by the Opposition parties, he has considered them carefully and he has adopted quite a number of them. I congratulate the hon the Minister in this regard and I hope sincerely that this will set a new pattern for future debates in this House.

While I accept the fact that the hon member for De Kuilen probably raised some very valid points in respect particularly of clause 1, I am very much afraid that we cannot see eye to eye with the Government as far as clause 1 is concerned. We feel that when one starts looking at pension money in regard to the recovery of debt or loss, one must remember, as the hon member for Amanzimtoti said yesterday, that one is dealing with money that is sacrosanct. I am being quite sincere when I say that the hon the Minister and the Administration are going to find that over the passage of time this particular provision is going to cause some grief. I also feel that it is going to cause a certain measure of ill feeling particularly on the part of good servants of the Administration who retire and find themselves in an embarrassing situation. I sincerely hope that I shall be proved wrong because the sufferer is going to be the man who retires and not the Administration. I hate to think of such a person as being the sufferer but that is in fact what the case will be.

Clauses 1 and 6 are the clauses that have seemed to occupy most of the time of this House during the Second Reading and Committee Stages. Both of these clauses have also been thoroughly debated now at Third Reading and I do not intend to discuss them except to refer to that portion of clause 6 with which this party has concerned itself. I am referring here to the usage of the SATS tugs.

We greatly appreciate the fact that the hon the Minister could see his way clear to accept the amendment which the hon member for Amanzimtoti moved yesterday afternoon. This amendment was formed, I must admit, with some measure of haste by the hon member for Amanzimtoti and myself here in the Debating Chamber during the course of yesterday’s Committee Stage. By the way, I just want to mention to the hon the Minister that we did in fact receive the same telex as was sent to him. The hon the Minister was quite right and I freely admit it.

We are very concerned about the fact that there has obviously been a certain spirit of animosity that has crept in between, shall we say, the Administration and the commercial enterprises that operate large salvage tugs off our South African coastline. This is an unhealthy situation and is not one that augurs well for the safety of shipping around our coastline. We rightly believe, I think, that there should be a healthy spirit of competition at all times among firms such as Safmarine and Land and Marine Salvage, to mention but two, which operate heavy, well-equipped sea-going tugs for heavy work such as executed in respect of the giant tanker with which we had a problem some months ago off our West coast, as well as the Venpet to quote another example. We know that these heavy salvage tugs have to be laid up for long periods of time awaiting possible salvage jobs. I believe that with the sort of coast that we have, we have to have that type of tug on standby something which the SATS can ill-afford to have. SATS must rely on independent organizations to operate those units and to have them on call otherwise we are going to run into trouble.

Their problem is that they believe that the SATS, were this Bill to go through in its initial form, could have operated unfairly in competition against them. Thanks to the hon the Minister’s acceptance of the amendment whereby he agrees that tariff charges which will be tendered will be those normally charged for harbour services by the SATS, we know that the SATS is not going to go in and, as has been suggested by some—I do not say this is necessarily true but I say it has been suggested by some—try to undercut these people. The SATS may have been able to undercut as they are using smaller tugs which are possibly not as well equipped. This is not a criticism because I say “possibly not as well equipped” and I do not think the hon the Minister will take exception to that remark because he will concede that obviously our harbour tugs cannot be as well equipped for that type of operation and we do not expect them to be. By virtue of that situation they are able to go out and to undertake a job at a cheaper rate, but in the long run this will not be in the best interest of shipping off the South African coastline.

Having said that, I want to say that we also appreciate the hon the Minister’s very sincere undertaking to monitor the situation and to ensure that our SATS tugs, when they do offer services outside of our ports, are properly equipped to undertake such services and that they will not attempt undertakings where they might fall short of the requirements of the tow or salvage.

I have made these remarks because one of the effects of the Bill, I sincerely hope, will be that there will in future be a healthier situation and a healthier relationship between the SATS and the independent salvors who operate out of our ports. I make this call not only upon the Administration, but also upon those independents. I ask them, in heaven’s name, gentlemen, please try to improve your relationships with the SATS. I am sure that my appeal will not fall upon deaf ears when I call upon the SATS to do their bit in order to reach a happier state of affairs with these gentlemen.

I thank the hon the Minister for listening to my remarks. Obviously there is no other clause on which we should like to address the House during this Third Reading. As I say, we have been very interested in the subject matter of this Bill. It has been a nice debate and we wish the SATS well with the amendments which have been brought about.

Mr Speaker, the Bill before us today is a very effective and essential piece of legislation. Under the circumstances it is a pleasure for me to speak after the hon member for Umhlanga. One could consider all the amendments being effected here, but at the moment I am thinking in particular of clause 8 in terms of which in section 40 of the principal Act the word “fire” is now being replaced by the word “sabotage”. This is an absolutely essential substitution in the times in which we live.

There is also a further aspect, namely that if it cannot be proved that the SATS or its employees were responsible for any loss of or damage to property, the SATS will not be liable for damages. In my opinion the amendments effected by clause 9 to section 44 of the principal Act are equally essential. The new subsection (6A) reads inter alia as follows:

may be searched. Just think of the Stander case we are reading so much about at the moment and what action the South African Police and the Railways Police take in an attempt to prevent cases of armed robbery for example. The facts that a robbery has already taken place at Jan Smuts airport while many people were present, and that the robbers got away, explain the necessity for this clause.

I should like to say a few words about a matter which was also raised by the hon member for Umhlanga. Clause 6(a) has to do with towage and salvage services within a harbour and services performed on request outside the area of jurisdiction of the South African Transport Services. I want to point out to the hon member that for many years now, since 1910, in fact our tugs have been providing services of a very special kind along our South African coastline. It was the policy, and no one objected to this, for multipurpose tugs to be stationed at commercial harbours which had both the towage and salvage capacities to be able to provide such services. The SATS has a long record of excellent services provided by harbour tugs.

There are tugs at Richard’s Bay, Durban, East London, Port Elizabeth and Cape Town. There are also tugs at Saldanha, and in Walvis Bay I had an opportunity to go on a trip out to sea in one. This clause is now making provision for these modem and powerful tugs to be used for salvage purposes on the open sea as well. I want to ask that salvage tugs registered abroad, and flying foreign flags, that have made their appearance here since the closure of the Suez Canal and that enjoy free access to South African harbours, should not object now. Here we are concerned with the interests of our country and our own tugs. Our tugs are needed on the open sea. In emergencies our tugs have to be able to provide towage and salvage services. Why cannot a harbour tug, which is nearest to a disaster area and better equipped than another tug, be requested to provide towage and salvage services? Surely our tugs are not trespassing if their assistance is called in and they are after all not a risk to ship owners. Our harbour captains are not poaching work or competing unfairly. As has been emphasized here today, the SATS is a business undertaking which has to be managed according to business principles. The SATS is entitled to provide services when ship owners approach it for assistance first. It is therefore in the interests of the country for this provision to be included in the legislation.

I should also like to react to what the hon member for Langlaagte said. He and I served together on the Johannesburg City Council for many years. I therefore feel that I also have a reasonable knowledge of circumstances there. Although we fought together for things then, but disagree with each other today, I hope he will understand that we are dealing here with a matter which is of very great importance. As far as Johannesburg station is concerned, I am only thinking of the employees working there. How far do they not have to walk if they want to do some shopping. One has to cross Plain Street, De Villiers Street and Bree Street, and it is only when one gets to Jeppe Street and Pritchard Street that one finds a decent shopping centre.

Have hon members ever seen—I have, because I walk that way frequently—women carrying children and pushing prams, being forced to walk that distance to do their shopping? The same applies to Black people who have to buy food and who are exploited in their own areas. Why cannot they also have something nearer to them? After all, they also need food and other commodities.

Recently I again travelled on the Trans-Karoo and noticed a few things. One arrives at a station such as Kimberley, where one cannot even buy a newspaper because everything is closed. However, then one arrives at stations like De Aar where there are private businesses and where the train passengers queue up to buy magazines and newspapers. Services like these can therefore be provided to the travelling public.

I see the situation at Johannesburg station in the following light. If we want the Metro express trains to be a success, there has to be more parking space. I know that people are parking illegally at Johannesburg station. There are parking garages in the parking areas of the Johannesburg City Council. Why cannot these parking garages be enlarged so that people can drive right to the station and then travel by train from there. These Metro express trains will then be a great success. There are already hairdressing salons, chemists and large businesses at Johannesburg station. We should therefore expand private undertakings and private initiative because this would eventually be in the interests of the country.

In this legislation the SATS is adapting itself to industrial and agricultural development. At one stage, when maize had to be exported, the SATS fixed a low tariff which resulted in the farmers producing more and the consumer benefited. As the hon member Dr Welgemoed also said, the following is stated in clause 127 of the South Africa Act, and so far no one has objected to it:

In other words, joint services have to be covered and there has to be exploitation, maintenance and improvement. The more the effect of fixed costs can be deminished by the reduction of liabilities invested in Railways assets, the stronger the SATS will be. Not only inherent in the financial sense, but also from the point of view of competition with other means of transport.

We shall then eventually have a labour account which will enable the traffic to develop further. Then our general economic programme will be able to develop better at national level and then our revenue can be supplementary in poor economic conditions, as is the case today. That is what top management is there for. Dr Grové and a wonderful team of people would be hard pressed to determine the exact role of the SATS and its development services any better.

With its new inputs, exploitation and development the SATS is going to make an important contribution to stability. Every department can now be carefully studied by experts. A team of capable and dynamic managers is now emerging. There are now unequalled technical achievements.

Recently we travelled on the Sishen line, and what an experience it was to see what the SATS had already achieved. There is now heavy traffic, speed and handling of traffic in this energy crisis. There are also computer systems with sophisticated signalling systems. Over and above all that, as the hon the Minister has already mentioned, one has the loyalty of the workers, a model of good labour relations and as such a security factor.

That is why it gives us great pleasure to say that we shall continue to act in this way. Let us serve South Africa through the SATS. There are many things I could criticize the hon the Minister about. There are many things I do not like. But one thing is certain: The SATS is in the process of placing itself in a position to make a name for itself in the world and to become a factor in the world because with its people and their loyalty we are dealing here with an undertaking which is unique in the world.

Mr Speaker, I want to thank the hon member for Bezuidenhout for supporting this Bill. Actually, he had no choice, because I accepted all his amendments. He asked whether the pension fund is a viable fund. It has been evaluated recently and I can give him the assurance that it is definitely viable. He also asked us about property development. I can give him the assurance that this matter will be arranged in collaboration with experienced developers and not in competition with them. We will ask them for their co-operation.

*The hon member Dr Welgemoed dealt with the Hamburg railway line, which makes good its losses by leasing property. I should just like to bring home the message that the SATS has expropriated land for the construction of railway lines over the past 70 years. It can happen that when a railway line traverses a person’s land, he says that his land has become an uneconomic unit. In that case one purchases the entire piece of land. In the days of the steam engine farms were purchased so as to obtain water. They were purchased for boreholes and for dams. As a result various pieces of land are dotted all over the country. The SATS owns a tremendous number of properties all over South Africa, not necessarily only properties adjoining stations. When one travels by train from Cape Town to Simonstown, this beautiful route running alongside the mountain with the sea on the left hand side, one frequently sees land belonging to the SATS. If one is accompanied by an expert, he can point out this land to one. This is the position all over the country. Is it wrong, therefore, if I tell our management sitting round a table, “let us lease the land or sell it on tender”? Is it wrong when I say: “Let us see in what way we can utilize that land to best advantage”? One pays an alarmingly high interest rate on one’s loans. Now one can lease some of that land. One can even erect buildings oneself and lease them. When one meets with the nine trade unions round a table they always ask one about the state of the finances. This is the first question the railway worker asks, because he knows his salary is dependant on the profitability of this operation. In that case one can tell him: “We can make a great deal of money by erecting a building and by leasing it as an office complex or as flats”. One can also lease the land to a person who erects the building himself. One can even enter into a partnership with someone in which one makes the land available and that person erects the building. One can reach an agreement in this way. It is a business undertaking. That is why I am pleased that the hon member Dr Welgemoed referred to Hamburg.

I want to thank the hon member for De Kuilen very much.

Are you now going to use the capital…

Sir, I have decided that I am going to contain myself. I am going to remain calm. I am not going to speak of plastic eggs and all that jazz. I want to raise the level of the discussion of SATS matters.

Hear, hear!

The hon member for De Kuilen replied conclusively to all the questions which had been put. I want to thank him for that. As chairman of our group, he makes a study of these matters.

†I agree with the hon member for Umhlanga that he and I do not see eye to eye on clause 1. The one who will suffer will be the man who retires. I can, however, give him the assurance that the man who retires and who does not owe us a cent is a happy man. If he owes us money and does not want to pay, we must have some lever and be able to say to him that we are deducting the money he owes us from his pension. However, we will not be unreasonable.

I want to tell the hon member that our tariffs will definitely not be of such a nature that we will compete unfairly with Safmarine, Land & Marine or any such company. We will not undercut prices, as is indeed stated in the amendment. We will tender on an equal basis. I can give him that assurance and I thank him for supporting the Bill.

*Oom Sporie’s first love is the SATS. He dearly loves his wife, of course, but I am sorry to say that I am of the opinion that he loves the SATS more. I really enjoyed listening to him speaking about the tugs. We speak of “Oom Sporie” of Rosettenville, but in fact we should rather speak of “Oom Skippie” because he is as well-informed about tugs as he is about every other facet of the SATS. I shall miss Oom Sporie the day he no longer participates in the debates on the SATS.

I thank all hon members for their contributions and for the fact that this legislation will be agreed to without a division being called for.

Question agreed to (Conservative Party dissenting).

Bill read a Third Time.

Mr Speaker, last night, before the House adjourned, I was reacting to the speech by the hon member for Bryanston. I believe he will pardon me if I do not refer to his speech further. I think, moreover, that in the circumstances in which he made his speech, he may prefer to forget about it.

There are certain aspects of this Bill, in so far as they relate to the amendment of the Education Services Act of 1976, that interest me particularly. I should like to outline these aspects briefly. The first is the provision made for the Department of National Education to conduct national examinations for other bodies and issue diplomas or certificates to those who have passed such examinations. In my opinion, this is a provision which accords well with the demands of the times. An employer who wishes to employ a person must be able to judge whether such a person complies with the requirements which the post in question will set him or her.

It is true that there are several means at the disposal of such a person. For example, he may conduct a personal interview. He may also require that tests be written. However, one of the most important criteria is still the trade of certificate training handed to him by the prospective employee. Uniformity of examination and certification, which is made possible by this measure, gives a specific value and significance to certificates that are issued. It makes them a usable instrument in the labour market. On the other hand, the lack of uniformity merely causes confusion. To tell the truth, it means that certificates are largely useless for the purposes of employers.

Of course, more uniform examination will have other additional consequences. Training institutions will adapt and raise their standards, because after all, if they do not do so their students will not pass the examinations. All this is in the interest of the employers and employees and in the interests of the whole of South Africa. The fact that an agreement in this regard has already been negotiated with a neighbouring state, Bophuthatswana, also deserves special mention. We know that the diverse communities and population groups that have to share the territory of the subcontinent of Southern Africa have a great deal in common. We know, too, that the destinies of all of us are interwoven to a large extent. For example, we also use the same labour sphere, and therefore it is as well to know that we are cooperating in the field of education in the interest of all of us living here. This co-operation has already begun. At the end of last year it became possible to implement this and I am informed that from the outset it has functioned extremely satisfactorily. Accordingly I feel that we owe a debt of thanks to everyone who assisted in making this possible, and the Ministers and officials of both Governments in particular deserve our high praise. The whole idea of the coordination and standardization of examinations and of qualifications at the post-school level is a sound one. In my opinion, this is such a good idea that we would do well to take it further in future and involve other levels as well.

This afternoon I should like to break a lance for the 72 technical colleges in our country, because they perform an exceptionally fine service for their different communities. In particular, I appreciate what they are doing in the field of the so-called enrichment courses, inter alia pottery, painting, sculpture and flower arrangement. The quality of life of many people has been improved by courses of this nature, and they have assisted many people in using their free time meaningfully. These courses are not subsidized but are self-maintaining, and there is stiff competition for the services of experts able to offer these services. Therefore I am of the opinion that it is a very good thing that the colleges are now being placed in a position to compete freely in the market place for those services.

The fact that technical colleges will shortly be financed in accordance with a subsidy formula, together with everything that this legislation will entail, must, in my opinion, be welcomed as well. It will give rise to greater responsibility, and in my experience, greater responsibility almost always also brings with it greater efficiency.

As far as I am concerned, this is a meaningful, sound and necessary measure and as such I take pleasure in supporting it.

Mr Speaker, the CP supports the Bill as introduced by the hon the Minister, but I do wish to make a few remarks about the amendment of the Heraldry Act of 1962. The Heraldry Act and the way in which it was drawn up gave rise to very good work being done in South Africa. Those who are concerned with this matter are indeed authorities in their subject, and as far as heraldry in South Africa is concerned, they do work comparable with the best in the world. The quality, the standard set and maintained by the committee in question is very high, and I think that we in South Africa, particularly those of us who take an interest in heraldry, are proud of the work they do. Therefore, if this amendment can result in further improvement in the handling of the activities of the committee in question, then we are prepared to be of assistance in that regard.

We also take pleasure in supporting the amendments relating to the technical colleges, education services and so on. This is probably not the time to discuss the different policies on education of the two parties. A private motion will be discussed at a later stage, and we shall be able to discuss that then. We can also raise it when the White Papers and the Vote of the hon the Minister are being dealt with. At that time we shall indicate in what respects we differ with the hon the Minister. However, what I wish to say to the hon the Minister at this point—and this is a standpoint on principle that we adopt—is that we in South Africa have a diversity of peoples, and that each of those peoples has an education facet in its pattern of life. Apart from that, we in Southern Africa have a historical confluence of people from Europe, from the East and from Africa itself. There is also a considerable degree of economic interdependence among the various groups, and all these facts make the planning, the standardization and the quality of education a difficult matter. In spite of all these things I believe that one may, while recognizing the separate sovereignties in the field of education as well, strive to do so in such a way that the separate population groups are able to stimulate one another and be of assistance in that regard. In his Second Reading speech the hon the Minister referred to the fact that an independent state, Bophuthatswana, which became independent due to the policy of this Government, requested assistance. I believe that this is one of the finest examples of the fact that states can become independent, that peoples can become independent, whereas in an intimate facet of their pattern of life, eg the field of education, mutual assistance can still be provided. In this way we can try to give Southern Africa as a whole a high standard as far as all the population groups are concerned, particularly with regard to education—indeed, all the facets of education. The fact that Bophuthatswana has approached us for our assistance, particularly with regard to this facet is, I believe, a very good thing.

Therefore I trust that the Government—and I believe that the hon the Minister is prepared to do this—will co-operate in this regard as well to maintain the sound relations between ourselves and the other population groups.

Then, too, I want to refer briefly to clause 11. This clause deals with training which is not provided at a technical college. In this regard, too, I want to give my full support to the hon the Minister. I believe that it is important that we in South Africa should not permit bodies or people who are primarily concerned with self-enrichment to enter the field of technical education. This would indeed have the general effect of lowering the standard of this kind of training. We in this party feel very strongly that if anyone in South Africa gains a degree or a diploma or some other qualification, the qualification that he does acquire should really be of a standard and of a quality that we can all be proud of.

We in the CP support this legislation.

Mr Speaker, on behalf of the NRP I wish to indicate to the hon the Minister that we will be supporting this measure. We have listened very carefully to the motivation given by the hon the Minister in his Second Reading speech, and I should also like to indicate that we believe that the amendment affecting the Heraldry Act is indeed a procedural improvement, and something which, I am sure, the people involved will welcome.

There are three aspects of this amending Bill which we should like to support in particular, and I want to tell the hon the Minister why we want to support it. The first aspect is of course the fact that one department will be responsible for the setting and maintenance of standards of examination. I believe this augurs well and that it is probably consistent with the trend-line for educational standards which one would expect when the new dispensation becomes operative in South Africa. Although there may be various and different departments of education in South Africa there can be no question about it that particularly tertiary education—non-university tertiary education—like other levels of education, should have a common standard for examinations and for the issuing of certificates. We certainly welcome that provision.

I am also sure that the other two Ministers who are responsible for educational functions have recognized that the infrastructure and the history of this particular department make it eminently suited to fulfil this task. The fact that an outside state, such as Bophuthatswana, wishes to become associated with that procedure, I believe, is also highly indicative of the fact that our neighbours are interested in a sort of confederal relationship with South Africa on a matter of common concern. All the citizens of our surrounding states, and those of South Africa as well, obviously have to compete in the same Southern African market, and it is therefore to be welcomed that we should have standardization of certificates and awards for tertiary education as such. On thing that has always bedevilled the medical profession throughout the world is the differential standards of proficiency of doctors. It is well known that one can go to India and become a qualified doctor in between four and five years, including one’s internship. It is also a well known fact that in other countries the curriculum is not as comprehensive and therefore one has the problem of the mobility of labour between the Western and Third World countries as such. I think we would be wise to avoid the situation where, for instance, a plumber or electrician who is trained in a neighbouring state or a different part of South Africa should have a differential standard of proficiency in order to obtain a certificate. We certainly want to welcome that.

The second aspect which we also welcome is the devolution of power to the technical colleges and their councils so as to enable them now to determine certain fees for themselves. The concept of academic administrative autonomy is, of course, as the hon the Minister knows, something that we have fought for a long time and therefore we shall support this amendment. I am sure that the technical colleges themselves will welcome the increased autonomy that they will enjoy because of the policy of the Government towards them.

The third aspect that we welcome in this Bill is that regarding workmen’s compensation. I do not think that this matter has caused any grievous loss or any injury to any person in the past but one does want to be prepared to meet every situation. The only comment I can make in this regard is in connection with the paragraph in the Second Reading speech of the hon the Minister in which he says that it is expected that the compensation claims which the fund will have to meet will be less than the contributions forfeited. This is a form of self-insurance where one accept the risk factor, and I believe the hon the Minister is right. When one looks at the record of the type of employee who will be covered in respect of this aspect by the Workmen’s Compensation Fund then I believe that the hon the Minister is correct arid that there will be considerable savings in respect of subscriptions without any loss of benefits.

Without further ado, Sir, I want to say that we welcome these amendments and that we will be supporting the Bill at Second Reading.

Mr Speaker, I should like to convey my very sincere thanks to hon members who acted as spokesmen for their respective parties and pledged the support of their parties for this Bill. I am referring here to the hon member for Bryanston, the hon member for Rissik and the hon member for Durban North. I should also like to thank my hon colleague on this side of the House, the hon member for Stellenbosch, for his skilful support of this Bill. I should also like to emphasize that in particular I welcome the enthusiasm of all the hon members who participated in the debate for greater autonomy for our technical colleges. I think that that reflects the conviction of all parties in this House of the importance of promoting technical education which is offered by technical colleges as an essential basis for further economic development and social development in this country. It is generally accepted that our development is going to experience problems in future because we are not making enough people available on the level of technical college training. For that reason I am particularly pleased that we have the unanimous support of all groups in this House for this matter.

The hon member for Stellenbosch put it very well when he said that greater responsibility also brings greater efficiency. Therefore I am particularly grateful for the confidence which hon members are placing in the responsibility and in the expertise of the boards of the technical colleges to take a greater measure of responsibility themselves for decision-making, and particularly, too, financial responsibility.

Furthermore, I should also like to associate myself with the hon member for Rissik and express my appreciation for his recognition of the good work done by the Heraldry Council. I want to tell hon members that it might be very interesting if they could on some occasion pay a visit to the offices of the Heraldry Council in Pretoria to see what excellent work—as the hon member for Rissik indeed said—is being done there.

I want to give the hon member for Durban North the assurance that the reference to the Workmen’s Compensation Act was not included in this legislation because we expect the kind of risks which occur, for example, in public schools in a large part of America and in the United Kingdom today, where a teacher is really not assured of the safety of life and limb, owing to the kind of disorder and lack of discipline which prevail in those schools. We are very grateful that in this country we have a tradition of sound discipline in education. Consequently this has nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that an arrangement is now being made here with a view to possible employment risks to the personnel concerned at the institutions which we are concerned with.

I should like to avail myself of this opportunity to place particular emphasis and express appreciation for the standpoint stated by the hon member for Rissik. I hope that in future, in our debates with one another, we will take this as a constructive point of contact. The hon member said that although we in South Africa had separate and differentiated education systems, according to the cultural diversity or the population group diversity, there was nevertheless a need for us to work together, for us to support one another and for us to strive together—he also emphasized this—for the preservation of proper standards. I hope that in this sense we get away from the impression which was perhaps created in debates last year that we wished to seal off various education systems from one another so hermetically that there was no opportunity for this kind of constructive co-operation which the hon member, to my delight, emphasized to such an extent here. I thank him for that very sincerely.

†I regret, however, that the hon member for Bryanston again found it necessary to politicize the debate by coming back with his obsession that the only remedy for the improvement of education in this country is that there should be one single education department responsible for the total administration of education for everybody. Why can the hon member and his party not accept the overwhelming decision of two-thirds of the electorate in the referendum last year supporting the concept which has been enshrined in the new constitution that we have a differentiated education system in South Africa dealt with as an own affair for the different population groups concerned? Why do we not co-operate on the basis of what has been decided and work constructively together to improve the different education systems accepting this as a fact rather than coming back again repeatedly to matters which have been clearly, definitely and on good grounds decided both by a large majority of this House and by a large majority of the electorate?

Question agreed to.

Bill read a Second Time.

Committee Stage taken without debate.

Bill read a Third Time.

Mr Speaker, I move:

The proposed amendments seek to extend the period of office of the present South African Teachers’ Council for Whites and to effect certain improvements and rectifications, the need for which has become evident from practical experience, relating to the council’s powers and exercising of discipline.

The adjustment of the date of commencement of the period of office of the present members of the council, as contained in clause 2(2), has the effect that this period of office will now expire only at the end of March 1987 instead of March 1985. In the light of the publication of the White Paper on the provision of education in the Republic of South Africa, 1983, it is essential for the council, together with other bodies, to give urgent attention to the matter of working out further details with the view to drafting legislation, especially for the establishment of a professional registration body in respect of teachers of all population groups as well as professional councils for each specific population group. An election in 1984 extending over virtually the entire year, and the concomitant change of councillors, will inevitably give rise to disruption in the critical transition period and in the contribution which the council is to make towards working out a new dispensation.

Moreover the possibility is not excluded that the existing Act will have to be amended so as to amend the constitution of the council without affecting its character as a teachers’ council for Whites. Consequently, if an election were to be held in accordance with the present period of office, this would mean that a further election of councillors would have to be held within a year or two. This amendment is being proposed at the request of the SATC.

There is a shortcoming in the present legislation in that the grounds on which the council may refuse to register any person or to register such a person provisionally are limited to that person’s being convicted of any offence or of any contravention of the professional code of conduct. The proposed extension of section 17 will enable the council to refuse also the registration or provisional registration of persons convicted of misconduct by an employer in terms of any law governing education. The council’s discretion is furthermore restricted unnecessarily in that in exercising its discretion, it is limited to choosing between registering a person or refusing to register him. The proposed amendment to section 16 will empower the council to register on probation, subject to specific conditions and for a specific period, any teacher who has been convicted but who is nevertheless deemed fit to teach.

†Section 16 is also supplemented to encourage persons who are not in possession of a professional teachers’ qualification to obtain such a qualification. This is done by limiting the continuous period of provisional registration of a person without a professional qualification to four years. Provision is, however, made for the extension of the period in deserving cases. The South African Teachers’ Council for Whites can at present only hold a disciplinary inquiry if the accused person is registered or provisionally registered. Should such a registered person request that his name be deleted from the register, the council is, in terms of section 15, obliged to delete his name and the inquiry consequently has to lapse.

The proposed amendment of section 17 provides that a person whose registration is cancelled at his own request before the termination of a disciplinary inquiry already instituted against him, shall be deemed to be guilty of a contravention of the professional code of conduct. This will put the procedure of the council on a par with that already applying in the case of the Department of National Education and the Education Departments of the Orange Free State and Natal by virtue of the ordinances governing those cases. The choice between submitting to a full inquiry into the complaint or charge laid against him or being summarily deemed guilty of the charge therefore rests with the accused.

The council is of the opinion that it is unnecessarily restricted by the present grouping of penalties provided for in section 18(b), and it is therefore proposed that authorization be granted for a variety of combinations of existing penalties. A more realistic maximum penalty of R500 is proposed instead of the present R50.

*Regulation 14(2) of the regulations for the holdings of inquiries, made in terms of section 27 of the Act, provides that if the disciplinary committee concerned is of the opinion that it is in the interest of the proper execution of its duties, it may prohibit the publication of any information likely to reveal the identity of a particular person, excluding the accused. On closer examination, however, it became evident that there was no criminal sanction in the Act or the regulations whereby to enforce the order of the disciplinary committee in terms of the regulations. This power is required especially to provide that the names of schoolchildren who may be involved in investigations are not revealed where this is deemed necessary by the council.

Consequently it is proposed that section 19 of the Act be supplemented by providing that the provisions of section 154(3) and (5) of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1977, be made applicable in order to afford the necessary protection to witnesses under the age of 18 years on a basis which is already widely encountered in our judicial system and which is valid.

Mr Speaker, we will support this legislation. However, we have one very serious reservation and we have a comment to make regarding an opportunity with which the Government was presented and which it once again did not take.

There was recently a debate in this House about a speech made by the hon the Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs in which he dealt with the demise of apartheid. He said that apartheid was no longer a part of the political scene in South Africa and that it was incorrect to ascribe that terminology to our society and our system. Throughout his speech he emphasized that there was no longer any apartheid in South Africa. However, every action and every statement of policy of this Government confirms the existence of the system of apartheid in South Africa. When the Government gets opportunities, by way of amending legislation, to remove apartheid, they do not do so.

The hon the Minister has presented to Parliament an amending Bill dealing with the South African Teachers’ Council for Whites. This surely presented the hon the Minister with an opportunity of establishing a South African teachers’ council for all South African teachers, irrespective of race. That would have been a step away from apartheid and it would have been evidence which the hon the Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs could have used to prove his contention that apartheid was disappearing. The hon the Minister, on the other hand, presents legislation to Parliament which proves the contrary of what the hon the Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs wished to say. The hon the Minister of National Education presents to Parliament a Bill which confirms the existence and continued existence of apartheid. In all seriousness, I would like to say to the hon the Minister that if he wishes to bring about a better understanding among the teachers of all races in South Africa, if he wants to bring about effective communication among these teachers and bring about a situation where White teachers can assist Coloureds, Indians and Blacks and where Coloured, Indian and Black teachers can appraise White teachers of the particular problems that they experience in their field, then the first requirement is the establishment of a body where all teachers can communicate with one another, extend their studies together and share experiences and attitudes. The hon the Minister had not done that.

Just the other day, I was speaking to some White teachers who are teaching in schools in Soweto. They told me that they are experiencing certain difficulties arising from their inability to understand the culturally based attitudes of Black teachers. There is a gap in understanding, a gap in communication, between Black and White teachers, something that is to be expected, something one can readily understand. One must bear in mind that those Black teachers and those White teachers throughout their lives were prevented from communicating with one another by the system of apartheid. At school, residentially and socially apartheid prevented them from communicating with one another and from getting to understand one another.

Now that there is a need for teachers in Soweto, White teachers are put into Soweto to meet that need. I think it is a very good thing indeed and we should all be grateful to the White teachers who are prepared to go there and to do a job of work to the best of their ability. However, when they arrive there, they experience for the first time in their lives an inability to grasp the different cultural background and attitudes from the point of view of Black teachers and Black pupils. It is not their fault. It is not that they are unable to grasp those things. The reason is that the Government has made it impossible for them to be able to achieve that communication and that understanding. I believe that it is absolutely essential that the Government should be prepared …

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

Oh, please! The hon member must sit down. I have said previously that I will with the greatest of pleasure answer questions coming from the Government side, but it is very difficult to answer questions coming from one of those pathetic little surrogates of the Government.

You are a pathetic little twerp!

Order! The hon member for Umhlanga must withdraw that.

I withdraw it, Sir.

Sir, I believe it is absolutely vital that the Government should show an understanding of this requirement in South Africa because, until that is done, one cannot expect progress in interpersonal relationships between teachers across the colour barrier in our society and one cannot expect that the problems which flow from that will be effectively dealt with.

The very serious reservation we have concerns clause 6, which amends section 17. What this effectively means—and the hon the Minister very clearly confirmed it in his speech—is that, if a teacher is guilty of some form of misconduct and an investigation is instituted into that misconduct, the teacher can in fact avoid the consequences of the investigation by requesting that his name be deleted from the list. In those circumstances this amendment in fact provides for that person to be deemed to have been guilty of the contravention. I believe that this is a very, very bad principle indeed because a teacher may ask for his name to be removed from the list for many reasons other than his being guilty of the misconduct with which he is charged. He may be fed up with the Department of Education. He may feel that the cards are stacked against him and that there is no purpose in going ahead with an investigation. In fact, here the person is being declared guilty without having been found guilty. I believe it would be different if the person withdrew his name and at the same time admitted his guilt. If there is an admission of guilt, one can record the person’s guilt. One can accept an admission of guilt and record his guilt. I do not believe, however, that one can declare a person guilty purely on the grounds that he has asked that his name be removed from the register of teachers. I believe that that is an extremely bad principle and totally unacceptable under these circumstances.

We have had an experience just recently in the Johannesburg City Council where the leader of the National Party withdrew …

What about Rand-burg?

I can tell the hon member all about Randburg, but now I am talking about Ventersburg. [Interjections.] The leader of the National Party in the Johannesburg City Council withdrew as the leader of the National Party and from the Management Committee, but he has not admitted his guilt. He has not said that he is guilty. He has not said that is why he is withdrawing. One cannot place on record that he is guilty just because he happens to have resigned from those positions. I am just trying to illustrate to the House he was not found guilty. Irrespective of what Miss Wandrag might have had in her affidavit he was not necessarily found guilty by any investigating authority.

We will introduce an amendment to attempt to improve this particular provision. As it stands at the moment we cannot accept it. Other than that I think the legislation is necessary and we will support it.

Mr Speaker, at the outset I want to congratulate the hon the Minister and his department on the amendments in this amending Bill. I am convinced that each one of these amendments is not only to the benefit of the relevant council but also to the benefit of everyone concerned.

In reply to the hon member for Bryanston I want to agree with what the hon the Minister said to the hon member when we were discussing the previous piece of legislation, namely that the hon member once again made it his task to state his party’s political standpoint on the education policy. Of course the hon member has every right to do that. I am not quarrelling with him about that. However, I want to tell him with all due respect that there will be times when we shall be able to cross swords on this matter across the floor of this House.

I do not want to reply in detail today to the political philosophy of the official Opposition with regard to education matters. However, I do want to say that when the hon member refers to apartheid, with reference to a speech made by the hon the Deputy Minister of Co-operation, and alleges that he said apartheid was dead, what the Deputy Minister was referring to was the caricature of apartheid created by some people that was dead. [Interjections.]

This side of the House still stands by the policy of separate development although the CP will not want to accept that. Our Philosophy, as it has already emerged in all the various types of legislation, is in fact based on that principle. We also find this in our education legislation, in the recognition of the right to self-determination, in the recognition that education is part of the culture of a specific national group, in the recognition that for that reason one must have separate schools and in the recognition that for that reason one must have separate professional councils.

Is that not apartheid?

No, it is not apartheid in the sense in which the hon member for Bryanston sees it. I in fact want to try to draw this distinction. We say that the caricature of apartheid is dead. What was hurtful to other population groups is dead. However, it is not apartheid when we grant a specific population group the right, with regard to education as well, to exercise control within its specific education system in the way it sees fit. However, I do not want to pursue this matter. We can debate it again at a later stage.

Of course we shall also disagree with one another as regards the idea of one teachers’ council for all population groups. The hon member for Bryanston argued that this was the right time to establish such a council. I am sure the hon member has already read the White Paper which the Government published with reference to the De Lange report and that he is fully conversant with it. That White Paper has the new constitution as its basis.

The new constitution was approved with acclaim, as the hon the Minister also indicated. Of course it would be of no use for us to debate that. If the majority of the people accepted the constitution it is logical that other legislation will also have the new constitution as a basis. That is also the case with regard to the education legislation and this Teachers’ Council.

I now want to return to the legislation before us. This specific Act was passed in 1976. The first South African Teachers’ Council for Whites was established in 1977, and this evening I want to praise those persons who established that council and who have led it thus far, for the excellent work they have done. Mr Villiers Terblanche was the first chairman of the council; at present Prof Van Loggerenberg occupies this position. In my opinion these two gentlemen and the members of the council deserve particular praise for the way in which they conscientiously pursued the aims of this council. For example one of the aims was to enhance the prestige of those persons served by the council, and another aim was to expand, maintain and promote respect for education and the teaching profession as such.

The first chairman of the council pointed out that there was a possibility that a structure, a council, would be created in future which would lead to closer co-operation between the various education systems or professional councils. In 1977 he foresaw the possibility of a co-ordinating or umbrella body, as he put it, with a view to bringing about closer liaison. Now, in terms of the amending Bill, amendments are being effected which, as the hon the Minister indicated in his Second Reading speech, provide for the development which will take place as a result of the White Paper, inter alia to extend the period of office of the present Teachers’ Council from 1985 to 1987.

It is important to note that the SA Teachers’ Council for Whites is the only professional council in existence at present. It is therefore the only council which already has experience in connection with the achieving of those goals for which professional councils should actually strive. It goes without saying that the council’s inputs and assistance would therefore mean a great deal to the Government if in the future it were, in terms of the White Paper, to establish a central registration body.

I should like to refer hon members to page 10 of the White Paper. There it is very clearly inicated that a central registration body has to be established. That central registration body will consist of representatives of the various professional groups of the Whites, the Coloureds and the Indians. That body will then relieve the separate professional councils of the registration function because it is important, as the hon member for Bryanston also mentioned, that there should be debate on specific points of contact in the respective systems which will be beneficial and lead to closer co-operation and which will be to the benefit of everyone concerned.

In terms of this White Paper the respective professional councils for the separate population groups will continue to exist. They will also continue to perform their professional functions. It is therefore only the registration function which will be removed, in terms of the premise and policy of this side of the House that there should be separate education systems for the separate groups.

In his Second Reading speech the hon the Minister mentioned, and I also want to emphasize, that if the composition of the South African Teachers’ Council for Whites were possibly to change in future, in order to meet its needs, it would still remain a professional council for Whites. Its composition is not going to change in the sense that other population groups may possibly be included. I therefore believe that the amendment now being moved, will be to the benefit of everyone concerned.

In my opinion it is desirable for the Teachers’ Council for Whites to receive greater discretionary powers in terms of clause 5. They have proved that they can act responsibly enough to be given these powers which they did not have in terms of the previous legislation.