Mr Chairman, allow me to deviate somewhat from the normal order of the debate. I do not intend to disrupt hon members by anticipating the debate. However, it is traditional for announcements concerning staff changes in the top management to be made at the beginning of the discussion of a Vote. Furthermore, I indicated during question time yesterday that I would make a statement today on the case of Mr Chiavelli, a person with whom the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central seems to have an obsession. I should like to keep this promise.

The first announcement concerning staff would normally have been made by the hon the Minister of Justice. However, because it also concerns the position of the present Director-General of Internal Affairs, it was agreed that I would deal with it today. The Director-General of Justice, Advocate J P J Coetzer, SC, decided quite some time ago that when he reached retirement age in June 1984, he would leave the service. He also informed the hon the Minister of Justice of this decision of his several months ago. The Government has just decided to request Adv S S van der Merwe, the present Director-General of Internal Affairs, to succeed Advocate Coetzer.

Advocate Coetzer rendered extremely valuable service to the State during his term of office, and some of the most important legal reform projects were launched during his period of office. The hon the Minister of Justice will more fully convey the appreciation of the Government of Mr Coetzer in due course.

To Advocate Van der Merwe, who is now returning to the department in which he received his schooling, we convey our sincere congratulations. We congratulate him, not because it is a promotion for him, because departments are all equal in status, after all, but because he will henceforth be at the head of a department in which he himself rendered sterling service over a period of decades. I hope that he will also find it satisfying to serve there in his new capacity. As regards his service as Director-General of Internal Affairs, I want to convey my sincere thanks to him on behalf of the Government, and in my personal capacity in particular. He rendered outstanding service in this position. His sense of balance, perspicacity, integrity and capacity for work make him an exceptional person. All these talents of his he used with great success to lead the Department of Internal Affairs with distinction. He commanded the respect and confidence of all with whom he came into contact. Our best wishes go with Mr Van der Merwe in his future career.

Mr Van der Merwe’s successor at the Department of Internal Affairs will be announced in due course.

However, the Government has also instructed me, by virtue of my involvement with the Public Service, to announce a few other changes in the top management. Dr T A du Plessis, Director-General of the Department of Industries and Commerce, has indicated that he wishes to retire from the service of the State at the end of June 1984. Dr Du Plessis underwent an open heart operation three years ago, and his medical history, together with the exacting nature of his functions in his present position, was taken into consideration in arriving at this decision. Dr Du Plessis is the most senior Director-General in the Public Service at present, and has rendered excellent service to the State for many years. As a competent economist and professional man, he has made valuable contributions to the formulation and implementation of economic policy, and the Government would like to thank Dr Du Plessis for the disinterested service he has rendered to South Africa, and to wish him everything of the best in the years to come.

The Department of Industries and Commerce is going through a particularly difficult phase at the moment in the light of the prevailing economic circumstances. The department was of the opinion, therefore, that a person with exceptional knowledge, experience and ability should be appointed to the position which would fall vacant on 1 July. After thorough investigation and consideration, the choice fell on Mr S J P du Plessis, the present Director-General of Mineral and Energy Affairs. As an experienced manager, first at the Treasury and then at the Department of Mineral and Energy Affairs, he is very well equipped to meet the high demands which are made on the office of the Director-General of Industries and Commerce. Mr Du Plessis is consequently being appointed in this capacity with effect from 1 July 1984. In his place, Dr Louw Alberts the present President of the Council for Mineral Technology, is being appointed Director-General of the Department of Mineral and Energy Affairs. I have no doubt that he will successfully maintain the high standard set by Mr Du Plessis in this department. My hon colleague will comment more appropriately in due course on those who are vacating their posts as well as their successors.

This brings me to the Chiavelli case, a case to which publicity has again been given recently, as the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central did yesterday by way of a delayed question. [Interjections.] Newspaper reports have appeared in which it is clearly insinuated—it does not matter whether it is intentional or not—that Chiavelli has repeatedly received unfair protection in that his right of permanent residence in South Africa was not withdrawn when this was possible.

From these reports, especially when they are read in conjunction with reports on other matters which have appeared during the same period, the reader gains the impression that there must be some sort of mysterious link between the Government and Chiavelli. By virtue of my portfolio, I shall confine myself mainly to the question of his right of permanent residence.

An application by Benito Marino Chiavelli for permanent residence in South Africa was submitted at the Johannesburg regional office of the Department of Internal Affairs on 22 April 1980. The application was approved by the Immigrants’ Selection Board on 16 June 1980. After reports on Chiavelli had appeared in the Sunday Express, a certain well-known journalist made certain documents available to the department. Arising from these, and also as a result of an interview conducted with Chiavelli’s attorneys at departmental level, it came to light that Chiavelli had had a number of convictions in Italy, while on his application form he had replied “No” to a question whether he had ever been convicted of any criminal offence. In terms of section 8 of the Aliens Act, the Minister may cancel a permanent residence permit issued on the basis of an application which contained inaccurate information. For this reason, a comprehensive investigation was instituted by the department into all the circumstances. In the process, a great deal of documentation was obtained. Subsequently, I also heard verbal representations by Chiavelli and his attorney.

Having considered all the known facts and representations, I decided on 2 May 1983 not to cancel Chiavelli’s permanent residence permit. In arriving at this decision, I took into consideration the nature and the period of the convictions recorded against him. The only serious conviction took place more than 30 years ago, when he was about 20 years old. In addition, there was satisfactory proof that the other convictions might quite possibly not have been criminal convictions in South Africa and were, in any event, of a less serious and more technical nature. The decision I took was in accordance with the approach which is normally followed in comparable cases and cannot possibly be regarded as privileged or preferential treatment.

On 13 July 1983, two of Chiavelli’s legal representatives paid a visit to departmental officials in Pretoria and told them that in addition to the inaccurate statement relating to convictions, his application for permanent residence had contained some other mistakes as well. They wished to disclose the mistakes. They were advised to do so by way of a memorandum which would then be submitted to the Minister. They were told that if this were done, it was likely that the Minister would once again have to consider, in terms of section 8 of the Aliens Act, whether or not he wished to take any steps.

On 22 July 1983, the memorandum was received under cover of a letter from Chiavelli’s attorney. The memorandum contained an explanation of alleged mistakes and inaccurate statements in his application as well as circumstances which had allegedly caused Chiavelli to sign the application in that form. The department submitted the document to me under cover of a memorandum and expressed the opinion that it would not have made any difference to the decision of the Immigrants’ Selection Board to authorize permanent residence if the information contained in the memorandum had been known to the board when it took the decision. The facts that had been corrected were of such a nature that they were not of any importance in the selection of immigrants. The department recommended that I as Minister should not direct that Chiavelli’s permit be cancelled. That was the decision I took.

This account which I have now given hon members is perhaps somewhat detailed for an occasion such as this one. However, the fact is that it is only a very concise version of events that took place over a period of months, events to which many officials and others devoted their time and in which many facts and arguments were involved. However, I want to give hon members this account in an attempt to demonstrate that the matter went through the normal channels and received the concentrated attention of those people who had some responsibility or other in the process. On every occasion, therefore, the decisions taken by me were taken after consideration of facts and arguments which had been submitted to me, because in every case the Minister was the person designated in terms of the Act to take these decisions.

I now wish to make certain statements against this background. I tried to take every decision about Chiavelli as objectively as possible and in accordance with firm guidelines and established policy. The fact that a person is extremely wealthy should not place him in a less favourable position, just as the fact that a person is extremely poor should not exclude him from fair and consistent treatment. Chiavelli is apparently an extremely wealthy man, and in addition, he uses his wealth in a way which many people dislike. But this, too, does not deprive him of the right to have his affairs dealt with in an objective and equitable way.

†Mr Chairman, I hold no brief for Chiavelli, and I prefer it that way. On a personal level, I do not know him and I have no wish to change that situation. My contact with him was limited to a few occasions and, on each of those occasions, legal representatives and senior officials of my department were present. Any deduction, allegation or rumour that the Government affords special or privileged treatment of whatever nature to Chiavelli outside normal customs, norms, rules or regulations is devoid of any truth. I hope that hon member for Port Elizabeth Central will now get the Chiavelli bee out of his bonnet and that he will concentrate with the rest of the House on the important facets of Internal Affairs which so immediately affect the lives of millions of people.

*Before I sit down, it is my sincere wish, at the beginning of the debate, to convey my thanks, not only to the Director-General, but to the entire staff of the Department of Internal Affairs, for a year of constructive activity, a year in which great demands were made on them as a result of the referendum. They handled that extremely complex matter with great distinction. When it was over, there was nothing but praise for the innovative methods used during the referendum. At the moment, they are again caught up in an enormous task with regard to the first Indian and Coloured elections in the near future, and that task, too, they are performing very effectively and with distinction in a very limited time. I wish to thank them sincerely in my personal capacity as Minister, but also on behalf of the Government, for the outstanding work which they are doing. They are a credit to the Public Service.

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

In the first place, on behalf of this side of the Committee, I also wish to convey our thanks to the Department of Internal Affairs and its senior officials, including the Director-General, for the service they have rendered during the past year. I think everything indicates that it has been a particularly difficult year, a year in which exceptional demands have been made on that department, especially in the light of the referendum and the preparations for the forthcoming Coloured and Indian elections. We also wish to record our appreciation for this. In particular, we wish to congratulate Mr Fanie van der Merwe on his appointment as Director-General of Justice, and we wish him well when he takes up that position.

I want to react briefly to the hon the Minister’s reference to Chiavelli. We listened with interest to the lengthy account he gave of the position, especially in view of the fact that this person has again become controversial over the last few weeks and months. I do not wish to react to it in detail at this stage, but there are just two points that I wish to make. If I have to take the hon the Minister’s word for it—and I do—I must say that our immigration policy is perhaps a little less strict than I always thought it was. The second point I want to make is that Mr Chiavelli shows an astonishing tendency to furnish incorrect information when he is required by official organs to furnish information. One hopes that in future, wherever he may find himself, he will learn to be a little more accurate in this connection. I assume that his position will perhaps be further dealt with during the discussion of other Votes, but I shall leave the matter at that for the moment.

This is probably the last occasion on which the debate on the Department of Internal Affairs will include the education and welfare of the Coloured and Indian groups respectively, because the indications are that these matters will henceforth fall under the jurisdiction of the other two Houses of Parliament as own affairs. In that respect, there fore, this is a historic occasion.

However, I now want to confine myself to the important events which will precede these important constitutional changes, and in particular the forthcoming elections. It goes without saying, of course, that the political status which is being conferred upon the Coloureds and the Indians is regarded by them as inferior and that this may have a drastic effect on the forthcoming elections. However, this is a matter of a constitutional nature which cannot be undone now, and it would not serve much purpose to discuss it at this stage. There are other aspects, however, which could indeed cause further problems. In the first place, I want to refer to the delimitation of seats and the registration of voters. We have debated these matters before, but I think they merit our attention again.

To begin with, it was a mistake not to have had a general registration of Coloured voters in particular. I am referring specifically to the Coloureds because a very long time has elapsed since the last Coloured registration and because it is a long time since they were last involved in an election. The Minister’s excuse was that it was the function of political parties to register voters and that a general registration was too expensive. However, this excuse never prevented the Minister’s predecessors from having a general registration of Whites. If the Coloureds and Indians should feel that they have not been property treated in this regard, they probably have good reason. It is already clear at this stage that registration among the Coloureds is most inadequate and that in spite of the optimism on the part of the department as well as certain political parties, the registration figure is likely to be around 50%. This figure can hardly be regarded as satisfactory, because it means that the potential for participation in the election by Coloureds is limited to half the number of people who are entitled to vote. A poll of less than 50% would mean that the elected members of the House of Representatives could be representative of only a quarter of the Coloured population. As far as the Indians are concerned, the position is unfortunately not much better.

The delimitation of constituencies for the two new Houses is also developing into a hopelessly unbalanced situation, and allow me to add that this has nothing to do with the Delimitation Commission as such, but that it does have to do with the new constitution and perhaps to some extent with the decision to conduct the delimitation on the basis of the population register. The quotas determined for the House of Representatives indicate that on average, there will be four times as many voters per constituency in the Cape Province as in the Free State. Furthermore, if one takes into consideration the fact that certain constituencies may be loaded or unloaded, there may be six times as many voters in a Cape constituency as in a Free State constituency. In fact, the preliminary delimitation for the Cape Province indicates that I am right in this respect. More than 16 000 voters have already been allocated to certain seats in the Cape, a situation, in other words, which is comparable with the number of voters represented by a member of this House at the moment. I am convinced that this state of affairs is going to become a bone of contention, especially in view of the fact that in the Free State, unloading may have the effect that a constituency may have approximately 2 500 voters. As I have said, this big difference between constituencies is going to develop into a problem for us, because it would surprise me if everyone in those communities were prepared to put up with this state of affairs. I am afraid that we have evidence here of an arbitrary approach on the part of the Government.

†It is necessary that the Government should realize that both in the political and a technical sense they have made many mistakes that are going to affect the viability of their new constitutional venture. It is even more important that the Government should avoid mistakes that could create further difficulties in the election process, and it is necessary that the Government should do certain things to improve the atmosphere for democratic activity in a general sense in the next few months. Let me mention a few matters by way of illustration.

In the first instance the maintenance of some order in the course of the election process is obviously important. Without such order democracy cannot function properly. However, I want to warn the Government urgently not to become heavy-handed in their approach. The maximum degree of freedom should be allowed to political parties and candidates to canvass support and also to those who advise voters to abstain. Abstention from voting is a legitimate approach and it is a long established right for organizations to organize and to propagate an abstention from voting. A newspaper as prominent as The Star did just that during the referendum. Calls for abstention should therefore not simply be seen as intimidation and be dealt with as such. Nationalist members are all too prone to talk about intimidation whenever they deal with an organization or a point of view hostile to their own, while they ignore the very real intimidation sometimes exercised on the behalf of the Government itself.

Do you support abstention?

In most cases I do not believe in abstention. It is only in very rare circumstances that I do.

And in this case?

For years members on that side of the House have complained bitterly that the PFP is whispering things into the ears of the Coloured and Indian populations; that we tell them what to do. However, now they ask us to do that very thing and are terribly upset when we refuse to do so. Surely the Government must make up its mind what it wants from us. We will not prescribe to any of those people what they should do in the forthcoming elections and what they should do about the institutions that are being created for them.

The Minister will be well advised to tell the Minister of Law and Order not to interfere in legitimate political activity and to act only in the clearest cases of illegal behaviour. Members of the Nationalist Party in general—I refer in particular to those members who took part in the discussion of the Law and Order Vote yesterday—should try and look beyond their apparent paranoia about the UDF, and to do their best to ensure fair treatment of all political interests in the coming months. Nobody can deny the relevance and legitimacy of political organizations functioning outside the institutions of government. The Labour Party itself chose to operate as such for a number of years. That is history today. Such organizations should be allowed to function normally and not be subjected to the harassment of banned meetings, detained leaders and other forms of authoritarian interference. If the Government should heed my warning in this respect, I believe that the coming elections may produce some very valuable experience and insights into the relative strengths of movements operating both inside and outside of the new system. I believe that this can only advance the cause of democracy in South Africa.

Secondly, I want to refer to the Prohibition of Political Interference Act. The hon the Minister should have known for some time that this ridiculous piece of legislation is going to prove an embarrassment, not least because one of his own members said so some time ago. I refer here to the hon member for Randburg. The Minister now faces a situation where the authority of that Act has been challenged in several ways. Although he appears uncertain about the scope of the Act in some respect, he made it clear that it is, for example, a contravention of the law for Indians to join the Coloured Labour Party. Obviously the Government is not keen to disturb relations with those parties that wish to participate in the coming elections, but the Minister is saddled with a law that is a misfit in the present situation. I can only suggest that he should rise above the practice of petty politicking and face-saving and remove this Act from our Statute Book without delay.

Finally, I must come back to the vexed question of restrictions imposed on Indians in the Free State. The Minister can no longer duck behind the excuse that he has not received representations in this regard. He knows that no self-respecting Indian can accept that restriction and he knows that it constitutes petty race discrimination in its worst form. Can we conceivably face a situation of having Indian members of Parliament, and possibly Cabinet Ministers, being treated as undesirables in one of our provinces? The Government should take immediate steps to remove those restrictions. In doing so they will unlock a fresh store of goodwill that may well be significant in the coming elections.

Mr Chairman, I listened attentively to the standpoints of the hon member for Green Point. With certain of these standpoints, and particularly the spirit in which they were stated, we have no fault to find. We associate ourselves with his remarks on the possibility of intimidation and the way in which this must be dealt with.

There is no doubt that as far as the coming Coloured elections are concerned, we in South Africa are heading for a very emotional period, a period of great political tension. All hon members in this House and all outside bodies and organizations that will participate in this election must be mindful of the fact that we shall be involved in a new system the moment the election is over. Through this election we should like to incorporate people in this system. It is necessary for every Parliamentary or political system to function properly and to rest on the firm and balanced foundation of the support of the general public. We really hope that once the Coloured and Indian elections are over a wonderful asset will have been added to democracy in South Africa, instead of our heading for a situation of conflict and tension.

I now want to refer to a few matters under the Internal Affairs Vote. In passing, on behalf of our study group on this side of the House, I want to tell the hon the Minister who co-operated with us throughout the year, that in these days when there are all manner of newspaper reports we still support him. I should like to state in public that not one of us in this House doubts his integrity and strength of character. We stand by him in all respects.

In the second place I want to wish the outgoing Director-General, Mr Fanie van der Merwe, everything of the best on behalf of this side of the House in the new position he is now going to occupy. Admittedly it is not a promotion, but all hon members, and you, Mr Chairman, who worked with him in the Department of Justice, know that this department is one of his great loves. We wish him everything of the best for the future and we are looking forward with great expectations to the person who is going to be appointed to his present post. Allow me to say something about Mr Van der Merwe which is not always said about people while they are still alive. Someone who knows him well and who is a good judge of human character, once told me that of all the people he had ever met, Fanie van der Merwe was the person who maintained the best human relations. If one takes into consideration who said that, it is saying a lot. We also found him to be like that.

It is a pity that such Van der Merwes are so rare.

That also applies to that hon member with the red flower in his buttonhole. Because my time is limited I shall not pursue this matter now.

I also want to bring it to the attention of Mr Van der Merwe that earlier this year a private member’s motion was moved in this House which unfortunately could not be discussed owing to lack of time. We would appreciate it if he would let the officials in his department know, by means of a circular or whatever, what the gist of that motion was. The motion read:

These words apply in particular to the excellent officials of the Department of Internal Affairs.

Some of my colleagues will deal with certain specific matters in detail. I want to refer in general terms to the magnitude and enormity of the task of the Department of Internal Affairs. The amount voted for this department is the fourth largest single amount in the entire Budget. The work of the department is of enormous magnitude and is also very sensitive. The tasks of the department include racial reclassification, passport control, the granting of visas, immigration control and both Coloured administration and management as well as Indian administration and management. When one considers this, one realizes how tremendously sensitive the activities of the department are.

We did not want to drag politics into this debate today. Because this is, however, the final opportunity to discuss Coloured administration as a facet of this department here in this House, it is necessary that we express our grave disappointment at what we see happening on the political scene outside. The hon member for Green Point referred to the tension that is building up around the Coloured election. There are also tensions in White politics, something which we are actually far more worried about, and I should like it placed on record that every White person in this country with any sense should feel profoundly alarmed and seriously disturbed about the emotions which are being stirred up in the ranks of White voters— even at this stage while we are faced with the accomplished fact of Coloured and Indian elections later this year—over the new dispensation we are entering. In the interests, not of the National Party but of South Africa, I want to make a very serious appeal to the hon members of the CP for us not to debate and argue about the new constitutional dispensation any further. [Interjections.]

The hon member for Soutpansberg said “Albert America”. I want to invite the hon member to my office because I should like to show him a large number of newspaper reports. I do not think that he or any other hon member of his party or all those members put together have during the past 10 to 14 years—that is how long I have been in politics—tried to acquaint themselves with and bring themselves up to date on such a wide spectrum of matters on the basis of information and facts gleaned from South African newspapers, ranging from the Patriot to the left-wing Sowetan, as I have. I want to tell the hon member for Soutpansberg that his remark is typical of the politics we can expect outside. We shall deal with it. [Interjections.]

As far as the CP is concerned, there is a point I should like to make quite clear. While on the left-hand side, we have the UDF and other left-wing organizations advocating that Colourds should boycott the election we still have White political parties— after the referendum in which more than 60% of the voters voted yes—that at their congresses simply spurn, reject and ignore the essence of the voters’ decision in that referendum.

The hon members talk about a White homeland here. I want to tell the CP members that this concept of a White homeland which they proclaimed at their congress last week, is the greatest capitulation statement ever made by a White person in the history of South Africa. It is a disgrace to every White person in this country for us to say in our own country that we want to work for a White homeland. Conflict is inherent in that standpoint of a White homeland. With it we are telling every Black and Coloured person—and it is the Coloureds who are under discussion in this vote—from north to south and from east to west in South Africa that they do not have a place here. In the discussion of this Vote we should really have the interests of the Coloureds at heart, but now there are those people who say that they want to force those people into a homeland against their will and in spite of the referendum. We could debate many political points with the hon members of the CP, but when we are dealing with the interests of the Coloureds in South Africa—and this annual report shows clearly what is being done for the Coloureds—it is necessary for us to realize that the political emotions we are stirring up outside will most certainly have an effect on the administration and governing of South Africa.

Because we are discussing this Vote for the last time, we as members of this side of the House want to say with reference to the department and the officials who have worked for so many years with Coloured pensions, Coloured education, Indian education, Indian pensions and related matters: We are entering a new political dispensation and we should like the spirit of that new dispensation to be the spirit which has been shown by the excellent and positive work done by this department for so many years on behalf of these people.

During the recess last year we were privileged to be able to visit the University of the Western Cape, and I should like to mention it here as a symbol of the work that has been done. I am referring to the wonderful Project Plato. Phenomenal progress has been made in the field of computerized education. Every hon member in this House should go and have a look at this, because I believe that what is being done there is in the interests of Coloured education in general. This also shows what can be done at every White school and university in South Africa.

Mr Chiarman, I should also like to congratulate Mr Van der Merwe, the new Director-General of Justice, on this additional feather in his cap. I want to thank him for the good work he has done. He and his officials are good officials who carry out the policy of the governing party to the best of their abilities, but on the other hand they are also always friendly and helpful towards members of the Opposition parties, I want to wish him and his family everything of the very best.

The hon the Minister has had a very difficult year. I thought of him while I was preparing for this afternoon’s debate, and a specific passage in Julius Caesar by Shakespeare came to mind. I looked it up. I should like to cast myself in the role of the soothsayer and the hon the Minister in the role of Caesar. The soothsayer said, when Caesar walked past: “Beware the Ides of March”. To which Caesar replied: “He is a dreamer; let us leave him”. In act 3 Caesar says: “The Ides of March are come”, to which the soothsayer replies: “Ay, Caesar, but not gone”. I want to tell the hon the Minister that I am addressing those same words to him which I addressed to him long ago. The position in which he has found himself recently, reminds me very much of a period in the NP in 1976 and 1977. If a time were to come when he found himself alone, there would always be hands to help and welcome him. [Interjections.] The hon the Minister was very close to Advocate Strijdom, and I should therefore like to quote to him what Advocate Strijdom once said. After his election as Prime Minister he said:

[Interjections.]

If only you had followed that advice instead.

We did follow that advice, and we still do. [Interjections.]

I should like to put a few other aspects to the hon the Minister. It is very difficult to deal with all the departments involved in a large number of facets of the lives of the Coloured and Indian populations, as well as the Department of Internal Affairs. I think the hon the Minister must forgive us if within the short time at our disposal we cut across all the departments. A sensitive matter which struck me was the large number of Cape Coloureds who have been reclassified as Whites over the past two years. Last year there were 722 cases, and this year 462. I want to ask the hon the Minister a question which I have frequently put to other leaders of the governing party in the past. If the Coloureds are part of our culture—if they speak our language and fight on our side and work with us—why is the Government placing them in a separate Chamber in the new dispensation? Since we draw a distinction between the various population groups, do we not have the right to ask the Government why the Coloureds are being placed in a separate Chamber in the new dispensation if they are the equal of the Afrikaners in everyway, as Advocate D P de Villiers said? Why should they be placed in a separate Chamber? It seems to me as if this is only being done because the NP are pigmenta-tionists—at least quite a number of them are. The hon the Minister should therefore tell us why the Coloureds are being placed in a separate Chamber. On what basis is the hon the Minister continuing with population classification as regards the Whites, the Coloureds and the Indians? I should also like to know from the hon the Minister what the situation in regards to the Coloureds and the Blacks is going to be because miscegenation is occuring among them as well. There is, however, no population classification for this group and no Mixed Marriages Act or Immorality Act either. How does the hon the Minister visualize that this is going to be dealt with in the new dispensation?

I should also like to point out to the hon the Minister that in the new dispensation the Department of Internal Affairs will fall under general affairs. Because this is the case, I assume that the State administration will obviously be mixed, because this is a new nation that is involved here. The Minister of this department may be a Coloured or an Indian, depending on the decision of the new President.

I actually want to discuss the entire matter of immigration to South Africa. The department gave a very good analysis of immigration and emigration. Can the hon the Minister tell me what “other” people from Africa and also from Asia means with regard to the percentage of people indicated as not being classified under their country of origin—and I am referring here to page 145 of the report. Does the hon the Minister have information on what population group it is that came to South Africa? Are they Indians, Coloureds or Whites?

By law the ratio between the respective population groups is 4:2:1, and in terms of the new dispensation Indians are also being given representation in Parliament. Can the hon the Minister tell us how the Cabinet is going to be constituted? Is he going to use the same norm? However, I want to refer specifically to immigration. If we are seeking consensus, good relations and attitudes, and if we work on the basis of 4:2:1, will the hon the Minister not agree with me that as far as immigration is concerned, the Indian population will have the right to demand that for every four White immigrants there should be one immigrant from India?

[Inaudible.]

The hon member for Welkom should not become so fidgety; I shall get round to the Free State later and to his leader as well. At present the ethnic norm is 4:2:1. The Indians are the 1 component of this new nation in which the NP wants consensus. Would it therefore not also be ethically correct, since the Department of Internal Affair is going to fall under general affairs and an Indian may become both Minister of Internal Affairs and of Immigration, for us to tell the Indians that for every four White immigrants they are morally entitled tu allow one Indian to immigrate from India? [Interjections.]

There is another matter I should like to mention. When one looks at the immigration figures it is rather interesting to note that the second largest percentage of immigrants in fact came from Zimbabwe. That is the country where we had the wonderful policy of power-sharing; the wonderful policy where the Ndebeles, the Shonas and the Whites were united in one nation. Why is there such a large number of immigrants from Zimbabwe?

I have never been insulting towards the hon the Minister, and am again asking him in a friendly manner to quietly reconsider those matters in regard to which he has allowed himself to be placed on this course of mixed government and mixing by the leftwing liberals of Keerom Street? He would be well advised to quietly reconsider not only the history of his own people, but also the history of Africa. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, in the first place I, too, should like to convey my good wishes to Advocate S S van der Merwe. I believe that his departure is a loss for the Department of Internal Affairs. However, I feel that it is a considerable gain for the Department of Justice. We wish him everything of the best.

Our election system in South Africa has over the years been applied, developed and improved very satisfactorily. However, we find ourselves in the era of the computer, and already at the time of the referendum last year we departed drastically from the normal election procedure by making use of the identify document at the polls. In that way voters were in fact able to vote anywhere in the country, at whatever polling station suited them best. Although we recognize that in electing representatives of a specific body we are in fact bound to constituencies, and, to a certain extent, to voters’ rolls as well, I nevertheless wish to urge the hon the Minister to consider a revolutionary change, bearing in mind the possibilities of the computer. I just want to suggest one example to hon members in this regard. In South Africa, with the aid of credit cards, we can buy or draw money at virtually any place in the country. Bearing this in mind one realizes the possibilities of the computer in this regard. Those possibilities are absolutely phenomenal.

Unfortunately the time at my disposal is very limited. Therefore, before elaborating on this further, I wish to point out a few specific defects in our present Electoral Act as they come to light when the Electoral Act is read in conjunction with the Population Registration Act. My remarks must be considered in the fight of the fact that the voters’ rolls are compiled on the basis of the population register. There are three ways in which one can have one’s name included on the voters’ roll.

In the first place there is the ordinary application form RV1, which is used by those who do not possess identity documents. In the second place there is the form that appears in the back of our identity documents. This is used for an ordinary change of address in the population register. In the third place there is an attractive little postcard which, basically, is also only used for changes of address. In my humble opinion the ordinary change of address is quite sufficient as far as the population register is concerned. However, I have a specific problem with regard to a change of address of this kind when the voters’ rolls are compiled on the basis of the population register.

In the first place I want to point out that in terms of the Electoral Act, the form RV1 is available for inspection by political parties. However, section 17 of the Population Registration Act prohibits parties from examining the change of address of a specific voter.

In the second place the form RV1 in fact contains a declaration by the voter that the facts he provides are correct. A witness also has to sign that form to confirm that the signature of the applicant is correct. What I wish to do now is very unpleasant. However, I only do so in order to indicate to hon members what malpractices may take place.

In this regard I want to refer specifically to an incident during the by-election in Rosettenville. One Clive Derby Lewis is the candidate of the CP in that by-election. I note in passing that the NRP has also put up a candidate in that constituency. We and the NRP know each other pretty well by now. Therefore I want to ask them to co-operate to prevent the electorate being told untruths. I read yesterday in the Citizen:

†In fact, Mr Chairman, that particular NRP candidate happens to live in my constituency. He lives at Olifantsvlei, quite a long distance away from Rosetten ville. I have indeed checked that out.

He is still from the South.

Mr Chairman, why does the hon member for Langlaagte now want to defend the NRP? The hon member seems to be very pleased that they have put up a candidate there. Be that as it may, I shall rather leave that hon member there. [Interjections.] In today’s Citizen I read:

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

I do not wish to reply to a question because my time is very limited— I have only five minutes left.

I referred to this in passing, and I just want to ask the hon members to stick to the facts.

I now return to the case of Clive Derby Lewis, who is now standing for the CP. This gentleman comes from Edenvale, and he moved into a flat in Rosettenville overnight, a day before the closing of the voters’ roll on 29 March. I have no fault to find with that, but on the basis of a court order that has come to our notice, this gentleman was divorced from his wife on 21 March. That is eight days before the day he moved in …

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: I request your ruling in regard to the handling of personal matters by individuals in the Committee with regard to the matter that the hon member is dealing with at the moment.

Order! I shall allow the hon member for Turffontein to proceed, but must point out that we are discussing the Internal Affairs vote and I should be obliged if the hon member would come back to the Vote. I do not quite understand what he has in mind in discussing that gentleman now.

Sir, I shall come to the point immediately, and I shall confine myself entirely to Internal Affairs. I am referring here to a malpractice.

Mr Clive Derby Lewis registered his divorced wife, too, at the address where he lives. All I ask is that whereas we are able to inspect the RV1, the ordinary application for a registration, we should also like to inspect the card signed by that woman when she registered at that address, because in the course of the normal procedure we approached the woman in question at her address in Edenvale, 22 Nicholl Street, Bedfordview, in order to arrange a postal vote for her. According to our information she was absolutely amazed that her name appeared on the Rosetten ville voters’ roll.

Now you are talking nonsense.

No, it is absolutely true. I make the categorical statement that that woman lives at 22 Nicholl Street, that she is registered in the Rosettenville constituency and that a divorce order has been issued to the effect that she is divorced from her husband.

I am only asking that an investigation be instituted. The only other thing I ask is that this type of change of address, in terms of which the voter in question does not sign a declaration, nor does he sign a declaration before a witness to declare that that is his or her signature, be investigated, because there are people who abuse this procedure. [Interjections.]

Order!

Then, too, as far as this change of address card is concerned, I also just wish to ask that the hon the Minister investigate this matter. On the postcard I have before me it is specifically requested that the voter fill in either his identity number or his date of birth. I quite understand that voters who lack identity documents—probably there are still about 50 000 voters without identity documents—will also register by way of the postcard. Because they lack an identity document they merely fill in their dat of birth, but then one has difficulties getting those people onto the voters’ roll. All I ask is that the hon the Minister and the department investigate this matter so that we can have a standard registration card capable of covering both situations, both the RV1 situation and the change of address situation for the purposes of the population register. I should also like to see that when a voter wants to effect a change of address he should at least sign a declaration to the effect that the information he has filled in is correct. There must also be a witness who will confirm on that card that that voter who signs on that card is indeed the right person.

Mr Chairman, I also want to commence by adding my good wishes to Mr Van der Merwe on the occasion of his new appointment. I should like to say that I hope that his successor, who has not yet been named, will be as pleasant and co-operative a person as I have found Mr Van der Merwe to be. I would also like to congratulate the members of the staff on the pleasant way in which they have dealt with the various problems that I have raised with them over the past year.

As far as the hon member for Turffontein is concerned, I really cannot quite understand the point of his argument. It would appear that Mr Klasie Viljoen, an organizer, gave incorrect information to the Press or that the Press received incorrect information, I am not sure which. However, I really cannot see that that point is important enough to be raised in Parliament unless, of course, the hon member feels that the NRP is not entitled to put up a candidate.

You are more than welcome; just stick to the truth.

The fact remains that I hardly think that it justified a snide attack in this way.

Before I go on to deal with what I actually want to say, I should like to refer to a point raised by the hon member for Green Point on the question of abstention from voting being a legitimate ploy in regard to voting. I am afraid, Sir, that I cannot altogether agree with his follow-up argument. I am perfectly well aware that where one has a situation in which there are political parties and registered voters, the system has in fact been used to ensure a stay-away vote. However, the hon member then went on to make the point that he believed that the UDF and various other bodies which are opposed to anything to do with the Constitution should be given every opportunity and assistance to espouse and project their point of view. I am sorry, Sir, but I cannot agree with that.

Even if they do not break the law?

In the democratic process there is nothing to stop them becoming a political party and opposing what is going on. That is what democracy is all about. Any person who believes in the concept of democracy, that it is necessary to know the voice of the people, will want to ask just how one can know what the voice of the people is unless they express it by becoming a political party and saying yea or nay.

I should like to mention here that during the course of the referendum in September of last year I made some comment about a certain newspaper editor. I suggested that, as a public opinion former, he was a disgrace in that he advocated a stay-away vote. He was most upset about that and I have letters on file indicating that unless I apologized and did all sorts of other things I was likely to be sued. I find this very interesting. Freedom of the Press is all very well as long as one does not take them to task for what they say. However, one must not interfere when they do the taking to task. I mention that just in passing.

May I please ask you a question?

I am sorry, but I do not have sufficient time to answer questions. I want to say, therefore, that I do not subscribe to the point of view adopted by the PFP because it smacks completely to me of boycott politics which I cannot accept.

What would you do with the UDF then?

Make your own speech in your own time. In regard to the question of elections I should again like to raise the point made by the hon member for Durban North in regard to the question of teachers. We have had representations made to us in regard to the teachers in the Coloured and Indian communities. We fully subscribe to the principle that educationists should resign if they wish to stand for a political office under all normal circumstances. However, I think everyone will concede the fact that these are not normal circumstances. The Electoral Act has already been amended to accommodate the peculiar and particular circumstances surrounding these elections. Another amendment to cover this particular point would not be impossible or unreasonable. I give as my reason for this that when it comes to White elections, elections which have been going on for many, many years, we have established political parties and established constituencies. If therefore an educationist should decide to stand as a candidate, he is in the position where he can make a calculated judgment as to whether he is likely to win or not. If he makes a clear calculated judgment that he is not going to win, then he will obviously be very silly to resign his post to stand as a candidate in that constituency. Here, however, we have two new elections altogether. The boundaries of the various constituencies are only being buttoned up now. When it comes to real politics the various political parties are for the most part brand new. They have neither the money nor the experience nor the expertise in any shape or form as compared with the established White political parties. Under the circumstances I suggest it is just not possible for anybody to make a calculated assessment whether or not it is going to be a practical proposition for him to stand for election. He cannot on behalf of his party say like the NP that in certain constituencies they can put a monkey up there and he will get in. [Interjections.] Or in a constituency such as Umbilo you can put Watterson up and he will come in. In the circumstances if an educationist is proposed as a candidate and he resigns his post for that purpose, he will be a fool, and deserves what he gets. My point is that in this case they have no precedent to go by. However, I fully subscribe to the general principle. It should be invoked after this election and when the next election is on the boards, by which time the political parties amongst these population groups will have gained some experience and will have settled down so that the respective candidates will be able to make a calculated assessment of their chances.

A further point I should like to make on this issue is that particularly in the Coloured community there is a very limited number of professional people, or farmers and of businessmen, of the type of person who normally makes himself available for election to Parliament. There are also very few people even of the legal profession, a profession which is very well represented in this House as it is constituted now. The only reservoir they have of well-educated and leadership-type material, a fairly substantial reservoir, is the teaching profession. In view of this I think there is considerable merit in having a rethink on this issue. We have had representations from a number of Coloured persons to put this issue to Parliament.

Finally, I would say that the question of some finance being made available to constituencies may be desirable in this instance for the very same sort of reason, namely that they have no back-up or the experience. They may not even have funds to put up the necessary posters to ensure that their party gets the necessary publicity and that they get the people to the polls.

Mr Chairman, in the ten minutes at my disposal I should like to confine myself to the subject of publications control and more specifically to films and video casettes, because this has become a burning issue.

Publications control and censorship have been topics of discussion in this House for many years now. Many people and bodies outside also air their views on this topic from time to time. For example a church recently had something to say about this matter. Eminent educationists have also expressed opinions on it, not to mention the innumerable letters which have been published in the opinion columns of newspapers. The main issue is the large quantity of undesirable video material at present in circulation in South Africa. It seems to me there are two main schools of thought in this connection. On the one hand one finds the people who want the net to be drawn tighter and the penalties to be increased. In other words, they are the people who are critical about the present control measures. There are even people who believe that there is something wrong with the system. On the other hand there are those people who think that we are too strict and who are convinced that publications control impinges on the basic freedoms and rights of the adult citizen of this country. One has to strike a balance between these two schools of thought.

Personally I can agree with a great deal of the criticism levelled. I also believe that the amount of violence and nudity in films and video recordings could be reduced. However, one thing I cannot agree with is that there is something wrong with the system. I feel the chairman of the Publications Control Board, Prof Braam Coetzee and all those who assists him, as well as the panels from which the various committees are constituted, should be thanked for the way in which they perform their task. I have every confidence in the ability of these people to lay down the correct norms in terms of which they have to pass judgment. We know that they would like to form their assessments, not according to the norms of oversensitive or hypercritical people, but according to the norms of reasonable, normal, well-balanced people. The people of the Publications Board themselves admit that mistakes may be made from time to time in the decisions which are taken. As they point out, the work is done by ordinary people and ordinary people are fallible. In this connection I should like to draw the attention of the Committee to a decision given by the Publications Appeal Board in January 1984 on a matter placed before them. A committee on publications approved a certain film subject to an age restriction of two to 16 years. The directorate itself appealed against this decision because it felt that the film contained too many violent and gruesome scenes. This appeal was upheld and the film was found to be undesirable. Mistakes can therefore be rectified. The point I want to make is that there is nothing wrong with the system. It simply has to be applied correctly.

It should also be mentioned that the Publications Board will not be aware of any infringement of the law unless it is notified about it. The public should therefore be encouraged to bring any irregularities it may be aware of to the attention of the Publications Board or to report them to the police. It goes without saying that if there are loopholes in the law, it is the duty of the Government to plug those loopholes. In this connection we are greatly indebted to the Ministry of Internal Affairs fty the interdepartmental committee of inquiry which was appointed and which has already submitted its report. In the annual report we read that at present the Government is giving attention to this committee’s recommendations and we hope that the hon the Minister will soon introduce legislation in this House that will plug the loopholes in the Act.

I should now like to dwell for a moment on one or two of the malpractices which occur and which I hope the new legislation will obviate. I have here in my hand a newspaper cutting from the Cape Herald of 28 April in which that newspaper reports on an investigation it made into video pornography. An advertisement was placed in the newspaper inviting members of the public who were aware of the existence of pornography to contact them. In that advertisement the assurance was given that confidentiality would be preserved. The reaction was astounding and overwhelming. From the large number of interviews conducted, it would seem that video pornography is in circulation in South Africa on a major scale, and more specifically in Cape Town. I should like to quote one or two paragraphs from this article, as follows:

Elsewhere in the article a woman boasted that she had recorded about eight video tapes, with a playing length of three hours, all filled with pornography. This is followed by a description of a number of cases where young children have watched the crudest pornography imaginable. According to the report this happens frequently.

This is only a single facet of the problem. Another facet is that undesirable Video films are still to be found on the shelves of video shops and being hired out to the public. People complain that they do not know what they are hiring. Frequently people hire a film and when it is shown in the presence of children or friends, they are placed in the most embarrassing position imaginable owing to the nudity, violence or gruesome scenes in it.

The question arises how this undesirable material enters the country and finds its way onto the shelves of the video shops. It is very simple. Unscrupulous and avaricious people purchase the cassettes abroad. The magnetic, tape is then removed from the casette so that it can easily be concealed under their clothes when they go through the customs control point. Once they are here, they replace the tape in the casette, make copies of it and are then ready to do business with it. When it is offered for sale to the video shops, it seems to meet all the requirements. It has a beautiful full colour cover and is also neatly packed in plastic, as it is supposed to be. The approval of the Publications Control Board is even affixed to it. But this is all deception. These tapes were never anywhere near the Publications Control Board and are films which were probably purchased in Soho in London and brought into the country illegally. Even the Publications Control Board number on it is fictitious.

I do not think that that one can prevent these tapes from entering the country. After all, passengers cannot all be searched at the customs control point and nor can all their luggage and goods. What we can do is to make it difficult for these unscrupulous people to sell their products. I feel that we should start with the video-shop owners. We simply have to think of a way of protecting them against these people and in their turn the shop owners have to be compelled in some or other way to put their own house in order. There are good shop owners and bad ones. In many of their shops there is not a single undesirable film to be found. On the other hand there are other shops that are full of these illegal films.

Another irregularity which has to be investigated is that many video shops—so I have been told—hire out feature films with an age restriction of two to 21 years, for example, to minors. They do not even ask the children’s age. As long as they receive their money they could not care less who watches those films.

There are other problems in this industry as well, but I do not have enough time to discuss them in depth. I just want to repeat my hope that future legislation will eliminate these irregularities.

The combating of immorality is not only the responsibility of the State. Hon members will agree with me that the churches, schools and other educational institutions also have a role to play in this connection. However, the greatest responsibility still lies with the parents. Their example and influence will carry the most weight and are of decisive importance in the education process and the lives of their children.

Mr Chairman, the hon member Mr Kritzinger will forgive me if I do not follow him on the subject of videos and the Publication Board. I have already discussed this situation at some length in the House during the debate on the Copyright Amendment Bill.

What I do intend to discuss is the position of the Chinese in South Africa. I do so as a South African who is concerned and ashamed at the way in which we treat these people. I do not intend to speak on behalf of the Chinese, nor have I sought their permission to do so. I speak out because I believe the way in which they are treated demeans all of us and I believe that South Africa as a whole can benefit by giving the Chinese a better deal. Some two years ago a State banquet was arranged in honour of a visit by the President of the Republic of China. It was held in Cape Town and the hon the Prime Minister on that occasion gave an address and promised a better deal for South African citizens of Chinese descent. That better deal has not materialized and I believe that this hon Minister should spell out in this debate what the intentions of the Government are towards these loyal, industrious and law-abiding citizens of our country. They are citizens but they do not have full citizens’ rights. The Chinese community numbers some 10 000 people and we are lucky in Port Elizabeth in that we have some 1 600 of them in that area. There are many laws which affect them adversely, but they pay taxes, Sir, just as you and I do. They contribute to the Exchequer on the same basis as Whites, but they have not been entitled to vote. They used to do so at local level, but this was legislated away by the NP Government. A Japanese can come into this country and become a first class honorary citizen; yet the Chinese who is born and bred here has considerably less than full citizenship rights. The Chinese are an old and a proud people. Their ancestors were civilized before ours were anything but barbarians.

Speak for yourself.

I am speaking for that hon member as well. Their history stretches back over the centuries and their achievements, scholastically and culturally, are legion. They are a law-abiding and orderly community in South Africa and they are an asset to South Africa.

There are three specific aspects I wish to mention. The first relates to the Group Areas Act. Port Elizabeth is the only city with a Chinese group area. It is proposed that this area of Kabega Park be deproclaimed. The Eastern Province Chinese Association has requested this. They say that they believe that a group area in Port Elizabeth is inconsistent with other cities. Furthermore, deproclamation would open up a much larger market for homes in the area and be to the advantage of the home-owner.

This brings to mind the next problem, and that is that to live or trade in any other area, they have to apply for a permit. I am aware that this is normally granted, but it should not have to happen. They should be allowed to live, trade and own property in whatever area they wish. Anything else is hurtful and demeaning. The permit system causes delays and sometimes results in a property lease or a sale or purchase of property being lost. Over the years the community has suffered at the hands of apartheid. Chinese traders were forced to move from business premises. The Chinese Association of South Africa gave evidence to the Strydom Committee on the group areas and requested that—and I quote:

The Committee’s reply to this was:

I believe that the Government must act on this and must do so now.

The second subject relates to the Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act. In this regard, the position is patently ridiculous. Let me tell you what happens, Sir. A Chinese woman who marries or cohabits with a Black is classified as a Black, with a Malay is classified as a Malay, with an Indian is classified as an Indian, and with a Coloured is classified as a Coloured. However, a Chinese man who marries or cohabits with a Black woman is classified as a Black, with a Malay woman as a Malay, with an Indian woman as an Indian, and with a Coloured woman as a Coloured. This is patently ridiculous and, as I have said, it is degrading. It degrades people and it degrades the whole community.

The third item I wish to discuss in connection with the Chinese is the new constitutional position. We have a new constitution for this country, but the Chinese are in limbo. They have, of course, always been in limbo, but in this era of a new constitutional dispensation for South Africa I believe there is no reason to leave them out of this new dispensation of the new constitution. Here we have 10 000 people who are being totally ignored while at the same time 3 500 people in Walvis Bay can elect a member to the White House. It makes you think, doesn’t it? While 3 500 people can elect a White member, 10 000 other people have no position whatsoever within the constitutional system: Not with the Whites, not with the Coloureds, and not with the Indians. I understand that the Select Committee of the House to do with the constitution in fact investigated and discussed this situation. I understand that they recommended that the Minister should investigate the situation with a view to making a recommendation. That was a year ago; yet we have had no change in the position. It is very simple. All the hon the Minister has to do is to say that for the purposes of voting the Chinese are classified as White, Coloured or Indian. Those are his three choices. Or, of course, he can just ignore them and leave them where they are, in limbo. I would recommend that they be classified White for this purpose and for all other purposes. A system of classification is of course repugnant. There should be no classification beyond that of being a South African citizen, but while we have it the greatest number should be in the most privileged position, and that is the position of White classification. These are good people. They are good citizens by and large. We trade with the locals and with the Taiwanese. The leaders of our countries exchange visits, we admire their industry and also their anti-Communist stance. Surely it is time that we gave them a place in the South African sun.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central, who has just resumed his seat, intimated at the commencement of his speech that he is not acting under orders from the Chinese population group in this country and that he had not consulted them either, but, in a manner which is typical of that party and its representatives, in that they are always concerning themselves with other people—with whom, by their own admission, they have no business and who did not give them orders to act on their behalf—he did so anyway.

They are fellow South Africans.

Those hon members interfere in the affairs of other people in a way which is incomprehensible. [Interjections.] If there were any question at all of the Government not treating the Chinese people in South Africa sympathetically, that would be another matter, but I think the hon member is probably aware that there is also a Chinese representative in the President’s Council.

Was he elected by the Chinese people?

Does the hon member object to the fact that there is a Chinese person in the President’s Council?

Is he an elected representative of the Chinese people? [Interjections.]

I believe that the 10 000 Chinese in South Africa are quite capable of speaking on their own behalf. The Government has full and regular contact with these people. I believe the hon the Minister will suitably deal with the hon member’s remarks when he has a turn to speak.

With reference to what my hon colleague, Mr Kritzinger, said earlier, I should also like to express a few thoughts on publications control in South Africa. I do not wish to repeat any remarks that were made earlier, or which I myself made in this debate last year, but I do feel compelled to reiterate certain thoughts. I wish to state that it is a growing trend for publications to use the name of the Almighty unthinkingly, in an unfeeling, repulsive and almost deliberate way. This occurs in both official languages and I do not think we can condone this in any way.

Although I do not go to the cinema regularly, I recently had the shocking experience of comparing what is being shown in our theatres at present with what was being shown three to five years ago. I am satisfied that there is sufficient legislation to deal with the problem and to protect our society sufficiently against these evils, but the question arises as to where the fault lies and who is responsible for the implementation of this legislation.

I just briefly want to refer to the fact that firstly, there are three autonomous statutory bodies that have to see to what should and what should not be permitted to go through. These are the Publications Committees, the Directorate of Publications and the Publications Appeal Board. The Publications Committees consist of a panel, and approximately 200 members who are distributed throughout the country serve on the panel. Approximately 20% of them are clergymen. Ad hoc committees are continually designated from the general panel to attend to what is presented to them. The Directorate of Publications consists of five members, a Director of Publications, a Deputy Director and three Assistant Directors who are appointed on a five-yearly basis and who are chosen according to educational qualifications and experience. They are responsible for the administration of the Act, and their main task is to set up the ad hoc committees to which I have just referred. The Publications Appeal Board is appointed by the hon the Minister on a five-yearly basis and it is the highest authority on publications control. If a person who submits an item is dissatisfied with a decision by a committee, he can go to the Appeal Board, and if the Directorate is of the opinion that the committee did not take all the relevant factors into account in making the decision, they can refer the matter to the Appeal Board by way of appeal.

The hon member also referred to the legislation that can be implemented in respect of video cassettes, and so on. I am convinced that this Government is in earnest about watching over what is essential for the composite population of this country. Where does the fault lie in view of the remarks I have made? In the first instance, we must admit that despite legislation and our attitudes as contained in the constitution and which have been placed on record by the Government, it is nevertheless necessary for our leaders to express themselves strongly against idleness and disregard for the Almighty. In my opinion, we cannot take strong enough action against this.

I also believe that we cannot express ourselves strongly enough against the general polution of our daily existence by actions and publications in the entertainment media. In my opinion, the public ought to be a great deal more willing to serve on our autonomous, statutory control bodies. The public of South Africa must show their responsibility in a clear and unequivocal way by continually complaining about the offences which take place from time to time. Are our people really in earnest about these matters? Are we really intent on bringing matters of this nature to the attention of the committees and the Publications Board? Do we really complain strongly enough about what is permitted to go through? It is our task as members of the public to state our views very clearly and to see to it that these autonomous boards function properly.

Recently one of our judges expressed some ideas on legal reform at a symposium in Port Elizabeth. In view of ideas expressed about the high divorce rate in South Africa, he said that despite steps being taken by the Government and the legislator, there is a contemporary trend prevalent among our people which simply means that we will not be able to control the divorce rate. Is such a trend prevalent among us today with regard to what we read or what we watch, or even what we want to watch, as well?

I have also consulted with various members of the English speaking community in South Africa; ordinary people, as well as people attached to the church. Due to the fact that it is generally thought that those people could possibly be more inclined to allow publications of this nature to appear, I went to the trouble of ascertaining their true standpoints. In reality, those people also strongly object to the possibility that they could be regarded as being liberal. I therefore want to appeal to the public of South Africa, as well as to the hon the Deputy Minister, who will probably deal with this matter at a later stage, to show increasing opposition to this kind of evil.

Mr Chairman, first of all I should like to comment on the speech earlier by the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central. I am very pleased to be able to support him totally in what he had to say in respect of the Chinese people. I believe they are somewhat abused in this country and they do deserve considerably better treatment than that which they are getting at the moment.

The Department of Internal Affairs is indeed a most unusual department in that it is one that seems to be fading away. A little while ago they handled matters relating to local government and the provinces. That, however, has since disappeared. Now, in the relatively near future—I assume, after this session—Indian and Coloured Affairs will be taken away from this department and will then he handled by the new Indian and Coloured Parliaments, as being for the most part Own Affairs. At the risk of sounding a little pontifical I should like to suggest to the hon the Minister that they do not make the mistake that we made in Natal when we created local authorities for Indians, with mayors and councillors. I believe this is indeed a very easy mistake to make. That is of course how it came about that we made that mistake in Natal. That was because these people were elected and put into office. They were made office-bearers, etc. They had officials, who were from the original local authorities but the elected personnel, who became councillors and office-bearers, had not any experience whatsoever of handling the authority which was then handed over to them. This brings me to the point of what I am trying to put across to the hon the Minister. I believe it is going to be vitally necessary to give those people, who will be coming in as new members of Parliament and as Cabinet Ministers, a proper opportunity of learning what the business of public representation is all about. In Natal we threw them in at the deep end, and it took us altogether 15 years before we resolved many of our troubles. Even as recently as a year or two ago we indeed had to remove one local authority because its members still did not understand the differences in functions between publicly elected representatives and the officials who were there to do their job. I believe therefore that it is going to be vitally important to take note of this.

It is of course going to be important not merely to ensure that they understand what is going on. I do not care how competent those people are going to be. Moreover, I believe there will be a number of extremely competent people who will be elected to the new Indian and Coloured Parliaments. I have already met many of them, and I know them to be efficient and competent people. Yet, they have not yet had the experience, and this is where the trouble may well start because generally the type of individual who will stand for office is going to be a businessman in the type of business in which he is the boss, and when he is the boss there is no arguing with him. He makes all the decisions and nobody else. This was one of our problems and, as I say, we found that some officials did not know their place in the spectrum and neither did the councillors.

The type of situation that can develop in consequence of what I have just said can be detrimental to these people themselves. They will be in a position to make decisions, particularly the Ministers, and those decisions will not be hidden away as in the case of a small local authority. The Press will be present and this information will be disseminated worldwide because the public are going to be extremely interested in what these people do once they are in office.

Another aspect which I think has to be borne in mind is the fact that in South Africa itself there are many people who are not going to look at the matter and simply say: “These people have made a mistake owing to lack of experience.” They are rather going to say: “You see, they have made a mistake. You cannot expect anything better from Indians or Coloureds.” This sort of thing is going to wreck their own credibility unless a situation has been created in accordance with which they can be properly trained. Very few of these people will have come in through the normal channels as we have done—from local government to provincial government to Parliament—and will have experienced the hurly-burly and the cut and thrust of political life. Many of them will be coming here absolutely green. Therefore, if the hon the Minister has no plan in mind in regard to some sort of schooling or training as far as these people are concerned to enable them to learn how to operate, then I would suggest that he put this matter in hand. If he does have a plan I would appreciate his giving us some indication of what his intentions are in this regard.

I should also like to deal with an aspect of Indian education. The Indian community in Natal is unhappy in regard to the schools that came into being, many of them years ago, at a time when an insufficient amount of money was made available to establish enough schools for the Indian community. These people dipped their hands into their own pockets in order to build schools and run them themselves. Some of these private schools were established purely as a result of a lack of education facilities in those days while others were established on religious grounds in that certain communities wished the pupils to be trained along certain religious lines. Other pupils again were taught in their indigenous or original languages. There are about 100 of these schools at the present time in Natal and they are educating roughly 30 000 pupils. They receive a subsidy of R9 per pupil per year. It is quite obvious, Sir, that nowadays, particularly in regard to some of the smaller schools—they have to be smaller in certain areas because there are not that many people there—that subsidy is totally inadequate. If we do not assist to a greater extent than is being done at the present moment then I am afraid that there is every probability that some of these schools will have to close down. If they were to close down it would be rather distressing because, as I say, they came into being initially on the initiative and through the sacrifice of the Indian community itself. I may add that they not only made money available for ordinary schooling, primary and secondary, but also, in the initial circumstances, made money available for the establishment of the M L Sultan Technical College. This was in the days when there was less sympathy in respect of their educational aspirations than there is today.

From the Natal Provincial Administration?

Yes. Oh, you are a clever little fellow! [Interjections.] Oh, you are a hero! [Interjections.] The position is that these people did make those sacrifices and they wish to retain these institutions that educate them in their own language, in the vernacular, and have a certain religious background. I believe that it would be a shame if, because of a withholding of certain funds, they had to close. I want to make one further point. If the State has to provide the schools for those 30 000 pupils and man them and look after them at full cost, I rather suspect it will be an enormously large bill as compared to what they are paying now on this R9 subsidy. I appeal to the hon the Minister to make this subsidy a little more. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, in his speech the hon member for Umbilo, among other things, expressed his concern about the representatives of the Coloured and Indian population groups that would be sent to Parliament and suggested inter alia that they be given a certain amount of instruction. I do not believe that I have any fault to find with that suggestion by the hon member. It is true that when one comes to this place one is thrown in at the deep end, and it is during the first year or two in particular that everyone struggles to keep his head above water. Everyone will concede that as far as politics and representation are concerned, these two population groups have some leeway to make up. I believe that this will entail a considerable adjustment for them. However, we also wish to express the confidence that this will bring out the best in these two population groups.

I have been attached to this department for approximately three years and six months now. I at least have to my credit the achievement that I have survived two Directors-General; and what is more, they were both Van der Merwes.

Did they survive you?

At this point I should like to address in particular the last Van der Merwe, and also convey my sincere thanks to the outgoing Director-General of Internal Affairs; it was a great pleasure to work with him. My sincere thanks for his friendliness, and for the pleasant times we experienced together. I believe, of course, that if anyone wants to go away he should be assisted to do so and we shall be saying goodbye to him and conveying our good wishes at the Department of Justice.

While I was discussing Van der Merwes, the other Van der Merwe was unable to hold his tongue. I am referring to the hon member for Rissik, and now I must give attention to him as well; that will make him feel better. The hon member for Rissik keeps asking the question: Why a separate Chamber for Coloureds? He very much wants to know the answer. The hon member belonged to the NP for many years—not heart and soul, it is true, but he was at least here. [Interjections.] I want to say to him that the policy of the NP over the years, the standpoint that the NP has always adopted, is that the population of this country is composed of minority groups, various population groups. We recognize the existence of peoples with their own languages, cultures, traditions and customs, but we also said that there were population groups here, groups of people who identified themselves as a group. At one stage a leader of the NP and a Prime Minister said that the Coloureds were a nation in the making. I do not think that that was the official policy of the party; that was the standpoint of the former Prime Minister.

Did you differ with him?

I did differ, yes.

Did you ever say so to him?

No, because it was not policy; it was his personal standpoint, but we never discussed it. It was his standpoint that the Coloureds were a nation in the making. Every one of the speeches I have made in Parliament about the Coloureds over the past 12 years can be examined; it will be found that I have never spoken of them as a people. They identify themselves as a group. They speak our language, Afrikaans, and to a large extent they are of our culture. They are also to a large extent adherents of the religion of the Whites. However, they have their own institutions, too, which they have established over the years. They are a group that are identifiable as such.

With a view to discussions in the future I should like to ask the hon the Deputy Minister on the basis of which ethnic criteria he regards the Brown people as being separate from the Whites, particularly the Brown Afrikaans-speaking people, as he puts it, of the Afrikaner people.

I was in the process of explaining to the hon member how this population group which developed in this country—and the hon member cannot deny that the Whites, too, were instrumental in this happening—has over the years identified itself as a group with its own interests, its own group-interests and its own institutions.

When?

Over the years up to the present. Does the hon member not realize that? Does he not live in South Africa? Does he not take reality into account? But the hon member comes from Natal, of course, and therefore he actually lives abroad. Now I can understand why he asks that. Sir, I am spending too much of my time on the hon member for Rissik, but surely he knows that this is the road that this population group has followed. We can argue about the word “people” and the word “nation” …

May I ask you a question?

No, not now. In other words, the Coloureds are a group that have existed on their own in South Africa over the years.

The hon member Mr Kritzinger and the hon member for Roodepoort discussed publications control and I should like to express a few ideas about that. I wish to extend my cordial thanks to the Director of Publications and the Deputy Director of Publications, both of whom are present here, and to the other directors for the great and important work they have done over the past year.

Video cassettes have been discussed here. The phenomenal development of video technology and the tremendous growth of the video industry has made the task of controlling undesirable film material considerably more difficult. The dishonesty of certain distributors and in addition, the dishonesty of many individuals, and the deficiencies that still exist in the Act, have given rise to an inter-departmental investigation into improved methods of control and the adjustment of legislation. This inter-departmental committee, which consisted of members of seven departments, has already submitted its report and legislation is at present being prepared on the basis of that report. We believe that that legislation will be submitted in the course of the present session. The study group recommended inter alia that a prohibition be imposed on the possession of certain films, that certificates of approval and conditions of possession, hire, distribution and sale should be available at every distribution point and that age limitations should be shown on each cassette. It is also recommended that fines be increased considerably, while another recommendation is that video games, too, should be placed under control. Another recommendation is that a classification system for roll-films, of whatever nature, be considered.

The dishonesty of certain foreign distributors is making control of the video industry difficult. For example, a “soft” copy is sometimes submitted to the Publications Committee without its being mentioned that certain hard and undesirable scenes and dialogue have been removed from it. In this way a certificate of approval is obtained but the “hard” full copies of the film are distributed. Then, when they are clamped down on, it is contended that it was done by mistake. Thus the “soft” copy on which cuts have been made is submitted and “hard” pornography is distributed. The onus of ensuring that the approved copy is distributed is on the distributors in the Republic of South Africa and not the overseas distributors. In practice, the description of an approved film is in fact impractical.

This afternoon I wish to make a very earnest appeal with regard to this industry. Cassettes are going to become considerably smaller in future. Technology is constantly improving and in due course there will be a cassette which one will be able to carry in the top pocket of one’s jacket without anyone knowing that one has it one one’s person. I want to appeal to the public, and in particular to our parents, to act as watchdogs and help us to keep an eye on this situation. I want to give parents the assurance that the Government will do everything in its power to combat all the malpractices and any form of pornography. We shall do everything in our power to uphold moral norms and standards. Mere legislation without joint responsibility will not, however, be sufficiently effective. Accordingly I want to ask that parents co-operate with us in this regard. Parents must acquaint themselves with the video cassettes their children take out and watch.

Reference has also been made to the phenomenon that the name of the Deity is used in vain in films, and to the incidence of crude language. Complaints of this nature are received from the public fairly regularly. However, it must be pointed out at the same time that this is a field in regard to which cuts in films are consistently recommended. The Appeal Board sometimes, by way of exception, allows the name of the Deity to be used in dialogue. For example, this happens in a film of very high artistic merit if it is considered that the degree of undesirability or otherwise will be seen in perspective by the viewer. It is also permitted when it is not simply bandied about, but is fully integrated in the context of the story. It is also permitted where it is particularly significant in the development of a specific character and where it is clear that the use of such terminology is a trait inherent in the character in question, rather than the scriptwriter or producer. It is also permitted where it is not condoned.

I also wish to explain that the approach adopted is that any form of art, including films, seeks to interpret life, and that the life that we know on earth is part of a fragmented reality, fragmented by sin, and due to this condition or climate of sinfulness, further sin is committed, such as, inter alia, the use of the name of the Lord in vain. However, I wish to give hon members the assurance that very consistent action is taken in this regard and that using the name of the Deity in vain is not permitted without further ado.

It is interesting to note that it is in the very front line of publications control that we find the people whose names I have already mentioned. Those who serve on the Publications Committees are also in this position. The hon the Minister has just compiled a new list. We are very grateful that a very large number of people have offered to perform this very important task in return for very modest remuneration.

I have before me the statistics relating to what has been done over the past 10 months, from July 1983 to April 1984. During this period, 1 085 publications were submitted, 635 of which were approved and 450 rejected. One hundred and thirty-three periodicals, among other things, were submitted, of which 77 were approved and 56 rejected. During the same period 1 841 films were submitted. Hon members will all realize that the members of these committees had to perform a gigantic task over a period of 10 months. Of the 1 841 films, 1 007 were unconditionally approved, viz no cuts were recommended; 686 were conditionally approved and 148 were rejected. I believe that these Publications Committees have made a very important contribution towards combating undesirable matter in publications, objects, films, public entertainments and intended public entertainments. I think that the community of South Africa can deem itself fortunate that there are so many well-qualified men and women who are prepared, as I have already said, to do this work for minimal remuneration.

What are the norms applied in publications control? Let me say here and now that publications control and its implementation will probably always be something on which individual opinions will differ, sometimes very considerably. As hon members have already said, there are people who are opposed to any form of control whatsoever, because it supposedly infringes upon the freedom of the individual. Then, too, there are those who consistently demand that control be more stringent and that, through the implenentation of publications control, the State should play a stronger normative role in the community. This is a very sensitive area, in regard to which one can easily arouse emotions. This is a very fruitful field for pressure groups seeking to influence the public and setting demands which would amount to the furthering of their own particular standpoints. However, I can contend most emphatically this afternoon that no new norms have been laid down which would supposedly lead to greater permissiveness and consequent undermining of morals. I can emphasize this afternoon that undesirable matter will continue to be combated with zeal and dedication and that there is no chance whatsoever that pornography, hard or soft, will ever be permitted in the RSA. Efforts are constantly made to reach decisions in the most scientific and objective fashion based on the consideration of all relevant factors, while personal likes and dislikes are set aside.

Unfortunately it is a fact that over the past number of years there have been individuals, and also groups, that have taken a great deal of trouble to cast suspicion, in the eyes of the public, on publications control and the people responsible for it, and to accuse them of dropping moral standards. Let me say here and now that there has certainly been the occasional film which may have given this impression. I wish to emphasize this afternoon that many of these things are also rectified by way of discussions. To judge by the normal number of complaints that reach the Directorate from time to time, it seems to me as if there is widespread satisfaction with the way in which the Publications Act is applied. I use the words “normal number of complaints” because, as I have already said, publications control is a fruitful field of operation for pressure groups which, by means of one-sided arguments, seek to instil in the public the belief that there is something seriously wrong with the sytem of control. I agree with the hon member Mr Kritzinger that our system, that we all helped to create, is a very good system. It is probably the best system in the world. It is not perfect, because it has to be implemented by people, who are fallible. These complaints sometimes result in heaps of letters, obviously based on a single model reaching our office or that of the Director. In many instances the letters have been copied out word for word, including even the punctuation, and sometimes the spelling mistakes as well.

Apart from this category, however, there are also letters from the public—I am very grateful for this—who advance constructive criticism and positive comments, and such inputs are regarded as being of very great importance in determining the level of tolerance of the community.

I wish to conclude—in fact, my time has already expired—by giving hon members and South Africa—I refer specifically to those people who are really concerned about our moral norms and standards, who are concerned about our young people and our children—the assurance that we, and everyone involved, will do everything in our power to keep South Africa on the road of strong, sound moral norms and standards.

Mr Chairman, can the hon the Deputy Minister tell us whether the committees has received many complaints about the use of foul language in films?

Yes. As I have already said, we do receive complaints from time to time about the use of crude language in films. In that instance, too, we have certain guidelines in accordance with which we combat this. I might just add that one should really be worried about films, because there are indeed few films today that do not contain crude language or undesirable scenes.

Mr Chairman, the hon the Deputy Minister is now the third speaker from that side of the House to dwell almost entirely on matters of censorship. One wonders whether the Government is preparing South Africa for a new morality campaign or some major new tightening up of the censorship laws. Perhaps subsequent speakers will guide us on that.

The hon the Deputy Minister also touched on the question of the Coloureds. He made the astonishing statement that the Coloureds have always been a separate group in this country and that the Government deals with them accordingly. The hon the Deputy Minister has a very poor knowledge of history. The Coloureds are only a separate group because the NP has designated them a separate group in this country. [Interjections.] For hundreds of years the Coloured people, particularly in the Cape, have been an intégral part of the social fabric of the society. We have lived together, worked together and there have also been intermarriages. They have been on the common voters’ roll, they were represented in city councils and there was even representation in the provincial council. Quite honestly, to suggest that the Coloured people are a separate group is purely a figment of the NP’s ideological imagination. [Interjections.] It is a political manipulation based on the ideology of the NP, and they should be honest about it.

The issue that I want to raise, however, relates to a review of Government Policy in respect of the showing of films to the public on a Sunday. The position at present is that cinemas, and for that matter live theatre as well, may not open on a commercial basis on Sundays. For reasons that I will presently motivate I believe this policy has now become a farce. This ministry which is in charge of regulating the norms of the society internally should, I believe, put its mind to reviewing this policy.

It is my belief—and I make this appeal to the Government through the hon the Minister—that there should be a relaxation of the present restrictions and that the policy should be amended to allow cinemas and theatres to operate from noon on a Sunday, with immediate effect. I say from noon because one does not want to suggest a competition with Sunday morning church service which is the time when most major churches seem to hold their main weekly services.

The reason for my saying that the present policy of prohibiting cinemas and theatres to operate commercially on Sundays has become a farce, is that this policy has already been undermined, not least by a major Government institution to which I will refer shortly. I must preface my remarks by saying that it is my information that South Africa is now the only country in the world in which cinemas and theatres are not permitted to operate commercially on a Sunday. I have been informed that every other country in the world, including such very religious countries as Spain, Italy and Ireland, all allow cinemas and theatres to operate on Sundays. This is an extraordinary situation, to say the least. While it may well be possible that somewhere in the world there is a country that has not been identified which also exercises a similar ban, I am not aware of it, my informants are not aware of it, and I would challenge the hon the Minister to identify such a country if one should exist.

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

Mr Chairman, I am sorry but I do not have the time to reply to questions.

I have not been able to identify such a country. However, what is clear is that our major trading partners and allies in the world do not follow this practice, and these are the countries upon which we generally model ourselves.

It is therefore my first contention that if the Government wishes to persist in this policy, since we are so out of step with the world, it should at the very least be able to offer a cogent reason and motivation for our continuing with this policy. Why should we be out of step with the vast bulk of the rest of the world? If the hon the Minister wishes to justify this then, to be consistent, he must also condemn SATV for showing films on a Sunday. Since the beginning of this year Afrikaans TV has been showing full-length films on alternative Sunday afternoons, and since 8 April English TV has been doing this from mid-Sunday afternoon by showing such interesting and entertaining films scheduled as The Merry Widow, Camelot, Casablanca and The Railway Children. To say the least, it strikes one as an anomaly that the Government can prohibit cinemas and theatres from offering the same kind of entertainment that is now being offered to all and sundry over public TV at the mere turn of a dial.

However, that is not all, Sir. It is well known that video shops are not similarly restricted as to when they can operate. In many cases video shops create seven days a week, late at night and at all hours. I even know of a video shop that was operating commercially on Good Fridy. As far as I am aware, there is no serious objection to video shops operating, and I believe that if the hon the Minister again wishes to justify a prohibition on the showing of films in cinemas and theatres on Sundays, he should take steps against video shops. I am, however, sure that he has no intention of doing that because if he did there would be a public outcry. The point is that it is important to realize that in the case of video shops they are offering their services commercially on a Sunday so how can one deny similar rights to the cinema and theatre owners on the basis of a fair, consistent policy?

Another factor which is turning the Sunday prohibition into a farce is the fact that near many of our major urban centres is the so-called constellation of casinos at which hotel firms go out of their way to attract the South African public. It is a very popular thing and the public go there in droves. One does not need a passport to go to Sun City or to the Wild Coast Inn. One can drive there and be entertained in all manner of ways, often in ways which would not be permitted in this country. It is becoming completely farcical for the Government to permit Mr Sol Kerzner to operate fully commercial entertainment services from his homeland bases while not permitting our own South African cinema chains and theatres to offer controlled and scheduled entertainment on a similar basis.

It is my view, and I am sure the hon the Minister must agree, that the time has come to review this anachronistic and out of date policy. I believe it is better to review and change the existing policy than to permit a situation in which the law is seen to be inconsistent and in some respect an ass. Let us take for example the situation which has arisen recently in Johannesburg, where an enterprising pair of cinema owners have opened their cinema on a Sunday and have allowed the public to attend film shows. They do not charge them, however—I am referring, by the way, to the Mini Cine in Hillbrow—because they have found a way to get round the law by simply asking people to make a donation in the foyer. They claim that the profits they make in this way—also, of course, through selling refreshments during interval—are more than sufficient to make the whole undertaking viable. They are indeed very happy to do this.

I believe that in order to prevent the present policy from becoming farcical, and also in order to get us back into line with the rest of the world—on the basis of commercial equity as well—that the case is overwhelming for this outdated restriction to be changed.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Constantia will forgive me if I do not address myself to the same theme to which he did, namely film shows on Sundays. I remember once watching a film with the title “Never on Sunday”, and I have just been wondering whether in Israel one is allowed to watch film shows on the Sabbath. The hon member for Constantia, however, believes that everywhere else in the world one can watch film shows on a Sunday.

*In the second part of my speech I should like to deal with an aspect relating to the future of the Coloureds, the Whites and the Indians. In order to do so I should like, by way of preamble, to make certain basic statements. Based on the old dispensation, prior to the rationalization of the respective Government departments, one could contend that at present the hon the Minister is, in truth, still Minister of Coloured Affairs and of Indian Affairs. So the matter affecting the relationship between the Coloureds, the Indians and the Whites could best be discussed in the Vote under discussion.

In this respect I briefly want to refer to the annual report of the Department of Internal Affairs for 1982-83. It is really a carefully and well-prepared publication. Chapter 1, on page 1, bears the heading “Administration”. The first subheading is “Top Structure”. Under this subheading the chief components comprising the top structure of the department are set out. The three foremost subdivisions that we find here are internal affairs, development and administration. “Development” also includes Indian and Coloured Affairs. There is also a short description of what each subdivision comprises. We notice, however, that Indian and Coloured Affairs constitute one of the chief components of this department’s activities. For the sake of interest I just want to point out that the previous annual report contained 182 pages. Chapter 2 and chapter 3 of that annual report directly involved matters concerning the Coloureds and the Indians. The other chapters were, of course, indirectly related to this. The aforementioned two chapters comprised 136 pages. This consequently means that 75% of that annual report was devoted to this aspect. The rest was devoted to “Administration”, whilst eight pages dealt with “Civic Services”. I have gone through this annual report thoroughly.

The present annual report is pretty much the same as the previous one. Of the 175 pages, 125 are devoted to the development of the Coloured and the Indian communities. This amounts to 79% of the annual report. I do know, of course, that no direct parallel can be drawn between the number of pages devoted to a subject and the amount of work involved. I do believe, however, that between 75% and 80% of the annual report specifically deals with Indian and Coloured Affairs. That does indicate, in any case, that this constitutes a very important aspect of the department’s activities.

According to the report, on 30 June 1983 the department’s establishment made provision for 1 955 posts for Whites, 8 806 posts for Coloureds and 1 461 posts for Indians. Hereby the importance of this subdivision of the Department of Internal Affairs is again emphasized, a subdivision that will mainly fall under own affairs with the advent of the new dispensation.

The report offers us an interesting summary of the very important work done in the sphere of education, particularly in regard to primary schools, secondary schools, technikons, etc. On page 61 of the report the University of the Western Cape is dealt with. This is a university that has developed its own individual sense of pride. Eight years ago I visited the university, and I have done so again this year. That university is growing beautifully. A breakdown of the numbers of students is as follows: 1960, 164; 1970, 936; 1980, 4 153; 1983, 4 776, and we know that this year there are approximately 5 700. One can really be proud of the growth of this university. It is inevitably, of course, also a community-orientated university.

I also want to emphasize this very important aspect as far as Coloured and Indian Affairs are concerned. In Africa there has, from Dr Nkrumah’s time, at times been the idea—and the idea persists even today among certain hon members in this Parliament— that one simply has to change a political system and then everything else falls into place of its own accord. That is, of course, not correct. Africa has proven this fact. Political systems have indeed been changed, but Africa has not benefited because this has not been enough. Political systems do have to be changed at times, of course, and that is the reason why we are in the process of changing ours. The political system, however, is a mere subdivision. What they are discussing here, ie education and training, is what is most important.

As far as the second half of my speech is concerned, I should like to make a few basic statements about the road ahead. My first basic statement is that the so-called White/ Coloured/Indian problem is not a problem. It is a situation, and in that situation we do indeed have certain problems. In this situation, however, there are many positive, constructive and supportive aspects on which we can build.

I also want to make the statement that the White/Coloured/Indian situation is merely in its infancy. It is merely in its infancy in relation to the Black problem. If we cannot solve this White/Coloured/Indian question— I am now specifically referring to human relations and the way in which we are going to handle this aspect—in the days ahead we shall not be able to handle the Black question either.

Another basic statement I want to make is that we should investigate the reality of this situation. What is the true present day situation? Some of its aspects have previously been mentioned. In present-day realities— now I am also, to some extent, talking to the hon member for Rissik—there are strong similarities in the overall situation. There are, of course, also certain inherent differences. I also want to make the statement that we should use the matters on which we strongly agree as a basis for building future structures. Language, culture and religious ties, and a common love of the fatherland, have previously been mentioned. What I want to say is that throughout the years, in all possible circumstances, including wars, the Coloureds have shown themselves to be people who love their fatherland. There is also the question of our integrated economy. We must use all these aspects to promote the case.

So why are you placing the Coloureds in a separate House?

The hon member is asking me why there should be separate Houses if there are so many similarities between us? Let met tell the hon member that I once saw an advertisement in which mention was made of “similar but not indentical”. That is the position. There are indeed boundaries, just as a farm has boundaries. There are possibly various camps on the farm, but there are also enough gates. There must be gates. This is similar to a body cell that has its own membrane. Each cell is a distinct unit. It has a clearly defined membrane, but it is a permeable membrane. Such a group of cells go to make up an organ, the organs go to make up a system and this goes to make up the whole. So there is nothing wrong in having separate Houses. That is the reality of this situation.

I also want to point to a further portion of this reality. Here I have a book: Mnr John Vorster—OB-generaal en Afrikaner-vegter, written by E O Terblanche. This book records events during those days in Port Elizabeth when the Afrikaner was not yet permitted to make full use of his language in public. I have experience of that. When I spoke Afrikaans for the first time in the South African Boxing Association, the deputy chairman had to act as interpreter for the other members. The writer of this book says there were not many Afrikaans-speaking people in those days. He says there were a few ministers of religion and two Afrikaansspeaking medical doctors, Dr Greeff and Dr Rabie. He quotes Mr Vorster on the question of the feeling against Afrikaans and says it was so pronounced:

So there were not two Afrikaans-speaking doctors; there were at least three.

Let me conclude with the following thought; The spirit in which we are going to meet the future will be of decisive importance. Our approach is, as the NP’s constitution states: “Equal treatment for all”. What I want to say is that we are ploughing virgin land, and the labourer is worthy of his hire— we shall harvest our crop. The basis on which we shall be working, and on which we shall succeed, is that of positive goodwill and co-operation, and the keyword is “patience”. We shall have to have a great deal of patience with the Coloureds and the Indians, but they will also have to have a great deal of patience with us. We shall have to have a great deal of patience with one another. What I want to propose is that we all read our Bible. Let us read Job in the Bible and practise patience. With a man such as F W de Klerk at the helm, we shall succeed. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, for various reasons this is quite an historic week for me. In the first place, it is historic because, as hon members opposite have said, this is the last time this department will be discussed in Parliament in this way.

Just don’t start crying.

It is something to cry about.

An hon member pointed out that Indian and Coloured Affairs would be taken from the department, so that in future it will only be Internal Affairs. I wish to ask the hon the Minister, merely in order to confirm the position, whether I am right in saying that in future, a person of colour could also become Minister of this department. That is so, is it not?

That has been the case since 1977.

Yes, it is so.

It is so, and I accept that it is so. These are facts that we must have with a view to the political struggle at hand. [Interjections.] The hon members of the NP are laughing, but we are not afraid of politics. We are not afraid to tell the truth. I am not afraid to go to Potgietersrus next week and in the subsequent weeks and to tell the voters …

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

No, I do not wish to reply to a question now.

I shall put it to the voters that when I put it to them that in terms of the new dispensation a Coloured may become Minister of Internal Affairs, the hon the Minister confirmed it. The voters will then have to judge “yes” or “no”.

But you yourself voted in favour of that.

The NP is having a very difficult time nowadays, because it is equivocating. I spoke recently to a very old former senior member of the United Party, and he said to me: “Willie, die NP bevind hom vandag in presies dieselfde situasie waarin die ou Verenigde Party hom be-vind het.”

Is it Daan who told you that?

In passing, I just want to say that I think that I am one of the few members who never makes any interjection or shouts at an hon member while he is making a speech. I simply do not do so. I do not take it amiss of hon members who do so. In fact, I sometimes reproach myself for not doing so, but I simply do not. Am I not, for that reason entitled to the same treatment? I am merely asking.

The man told me that the NP was on the same path as the old United Party because it was equivocating. He related a fragment of history.

I now come back to my own part of the world. I want to relate a fragment of history which reminds me of the NP and which occurred in my part of the world, in my area. During the Boer War there was a family in my area, about five farms away up the Klip River, a fine Afrikaner family—a man and wife with three sons and four daughters. These sons did not join the Boer commandos, but remained on the farm and enriched themselves. While their neighbours were on commando, they enriched themselves by looting those people’s possessions. The Boer commandos discovered this and tried to deal with those men, but were unable to succeed. Below the house was a dam and when the three brothers discovered that the farmers were on their track, they slipped out of the house and went to sit in the dam among the reeds, with only their noses and faces protruding so that they could at least breathe.

That was old André Fourie.

One fine morning the farmers came somewhat unexpectedly …

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: The hon member is now referring to people who were “joiners” during the Anglo-Boer War, or who did not participate in it, and the hon member for Rissik mentioned my name.

I withdraw it, Mr Chairman.

One fine morning the farmers were a little too quick for these three fellows. One brother was unable to get to the dam in time and had to seek a hiding place in the house. The only place he could find was in the kitchen. As we know, the old people used to build a wall around their stoves, with the wall extending from the corner to just above the stove. The only hiding place the brother could find was behind the wall, above the stove. However, he did not take into account the fact that the stove was still quite hot from the previous evening. When the farmers entered, they say two feet being lifted in turn. When it became too hot for the left foot, the brother lifted that foot and put the right foot down on the stove, and vice versa. [Interjections.] Sir, at the moment the position is this: When the PFP attacks the Government from the left, it lifts its left foot, and when we attack it from the right, it lifts its right foot.

There is another reason why this is, for me, an historic day and an historic week. I know that I am now going to hear a chorus, but I am going to say it because I know that it is the truth. An election pact was entered into yesterday which, on that broad basis, is going to bring this Government to a fall. [Interjections.] Three weeks ago I heard something confidential from NP ranks … [Interjections.]

Order! Hon members must now afford the hon member the opportunity to make his speech.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: I cannot understand what this argument that the hon member is now advancing, has to do with the discussion of the Vote we are dealing with now.

Other hon members have also digressed somewhat. The hon member for Meyerton may proceed.

I now turn to elections, which fall under the hon the Minister. I spoke about an election pact that was entered into yesterday and I have before me a report entitled “Syferman oor KP se kanse”. A certain Prof Laurie predicts the following about the CP:

He then mentions them. They include Ermelo, Randfontein, Waterberg, Soutpansberg and Barberton. [Interjections.]

Order! I have already requested hon members to afford the hon member the opportunity to make his speech. If hon members do not wish to listen to me, action may be taken against them.

Mr Chairman, I appreciate the order you are maintaining, but I have learned that when one hits a dog hardest, he yelps …

Order! The hon member must not react in that way, because then I shall not be able to get hon members to listen quietly.

I just want to say that the harder one hits someone, the louder he cries.

The interesting thing about this prediction is that these seats include five Ministers’ seats and two Deputy Ministers’ seats. It is not I who says this, but a professor who supports the NP.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: Is the hon member implying thereby that we on this side are dogs?

Order! The hon member for Meyerton may proceed.

I wish to conclude. I do not wish to persist in hurting hon members opposite, and will be merciful to them. Tomorrow night and on Saturday, the greatest cultural organization ever will be established in Pretoria, viz the Afrika-nervolkswag.

I wish to congratulate the Department of Internal Affairs on their comprehensive report. Reading this report, it made me think of a tree whose branches and roots are distributed throughout the length and breadth of South Africa. I wish to convey our congratulations to Mr Van der Merwe and his department.

Reference is made in this report inter alia to the Council for Culture and Recreation. This council met during October 1982 and March 1983, and its committees made grants amounting to R434 000 to various cultural organizations. I want to ask the hon the Minister in a good spirit—since the leader of the organization which is to be founded this weekend is a recognized cultural leader who has served for many years and if after a time the organization has shown that it is a purely cultural organization—whether he will consider making financial grants to this organization as well. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, I wish to deal more directly with the Vote under discussion. Firstly, I want to add my gratitude to that of other hon members who thanked Mr S S van der Merwe and bid him a timely welcome on behalf of the Justice study group.

I wish to refer to the immigration campaign. When one reads the report on this, one is struck by the contribution this campaign has already made in supplementing our shortage of skilled manpower and the tremendous potential this campaign still has of supplementing further shortages.

Over the past 21 years more than 750 000 immigrants have come to South Africa. There were 240 000 emigrants, which means a gain of 540 000 for South Africa. During the year ended June 1983—which was not a good period for immigration, since it levelled off in 1983—16 500 economically active people came to South Africa. Of these, 4 800 were professionally qualified, and 5 800 were factory and construction workers. I wish to state with a great deal of gratitude that as far as we know, 1982 was the year in which we gained the greatest number of immigrants. There were 45 000 immigrants and 6 000 emigrants, which means a net gain of 39 000. It is true that there was a greater number of immigrants in 1966, viz 48 000, but in that year there was also a much greater number of emigrants, to the extent that there was a net gain of only 38 000. There are certain interesting facts which appear from the report. Firstly, 3,9%, or 1 400 of the people who immigrated to South Africa, were South African citizens. This means that a very large percentage of the South African citizens who leave South Africa return to this country. Another interesting phenomenon is that only 24% of the emigrants from the Republic were South Africans.

What is very alarming, is the very few Netherlanders and Belgians who have immigrated to South Africa in the recent past. In 1982, which was a good year for immigration, only 671 Netherlanders and 536 Belgians came to South Africa. If this is compared with the mid-’sixties, when the average figure for Netherlands was in the region of 1 500, we see that there were twice as many immigrants from the Netherlands than there are at present. We could also compare this with Britain. As far as Britain is concerned, the figure in 1982 was 20 000, whilst in the ’sixties it varied between 12 000, 13 000 and 16 000. There was therefore a considerable increase with regard to Britain, whilst as far as the Netherlands are concerned, there was a considerable decrease. These countries are among our most important countries of origin, and I regret that there is such a poor contribution on their part as regards immigration.

Something which is of further importance and which should be pointed out, is the percentage of Zimbabweans who immigrate to South Africa.

Why?

If this is such a bad country, why do they come here when they have had such a bad experience there? Surely they would not come here. Consequently, this is proof that this country has a future and that there is stability in this country. [Interjections.]

I want to refer to the contribution of the Zimbabweans to our immigration campaign. There is a rising trend as far as that is concerned. In 1975 there were approximately 5 000 immigrants from Zimbabwe. This rose to 9 000 in 979. In 980 there were 12 000, in 1981 there were 15 600, there were 15 000 in 1982, and in 1983, which was a bad year for immigration, the number was nevertheless extremely high, viz 11 200. For the year ended on 30 June 1983, the figure was 13 700, which constituted 35,8% of our total immigration figure. I would suggest that in assessing the success of our immigration campaign, one should take the number of Zimbabweans into account. Those people do not come to South Africa because we lure them here. To a large extent, they come here because they are running away from the political situation in Zimbabwe. If one really wants to determine how successful our immigration campaign is, one should subtract these numbers from the total immigration figure. Percentagewise, one could just state that during the ’sixties the Zimbabweans constituted approximately 10% of the total immigration figure, as opposed to 36% at present. If one takes the total figures and subtracts the number of Zimbabweans, it appears that in 1966, 43 000 immigrants entered the country, and in 1982 there were only 30 000 who entered the country. This is therefore an indication that there is a great deal of room for expanding our immigration campaign, particularly because our economic base is much broader at present than it was in 1966.

If one looks at the contribution immigration could make in supplementing our skilled manpower, one is really amazed. I wish to refer specifically to engineers. There were 632 engineers who entered the country in 1980; 966 in 1981; and 1 178 in 1982. The State made no contribution whatsoever to the training of these engineers. They simply came to South Africa. I do not know how many engineers are being trained each year in South Africa at present, but I do not think it could be much more than the 1 100 who entered the country in 1982. This simply emphasizes the fact that immigration could make just as major a contribution in solving our manpower problem in the short term as training could. It is also much cheaper.

The report also points to problems that are being experienced at present in finding employment for prospective immigrants. This is a tremendous problem. It is a problem which could adversely affect the effectiveness of our immigration campaign. I shall mention a few examples in this regard at a later stage. Before doing so, I should also like to say something about the shortage that exists in this country at present as regards civil engineers. I wish to refer to what Prof Deon von Wielligh, the president of the Institution of Civil Engineers, SA, had to say very recently. He said that there was a tremendous shortage of civil engineers, to the extent that over the next three years only 21% of the vacancies that will arise for civil engineers in South Africa will be able to be filled by South African graduates. In this regard I should like to mention two examples which are known to me personally and which are important with regard to this matter. The first case is that of Mr S A J Demeyer, a Fleming. He is a trained civil engineer and, amongst other things, he also swam for Belgium. He is therefore a well-rounded person. In September 1982 he applied to immigrate to South Africa. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, immigration is a very important subject, and the hon member Mr Schutte made an interesting contribution to the debate. However, I want to talk about other matters, and I hope he will forgive me if I do not comment on his contribution.

I want to add my good wishes to Mr Van der Merwe in his move to the Department of Justice. My infrequent contracts with him were pleasant and fruitful, and I hope his stay in that department will be a long and happy one. The only good thing about his going is possibly that there will no longer be any confusion in the Department of Internal Affairs in that both the Director-General and the chief spokesman of the PFP have the same initials. However, that is a minor problem.

During the debate on the Referendums Bill in September last year the hon the Minister gave assurance, and I quote from his Hansard, “that provision will be made for measures to prevent and to keep a check on double voting”. In reply to the hon member for Green Point the hon the Minister responded to Question No 149 earlier this year by saying that special attention was given to the monitoring of the measures and the prevention of double voting. He said that these measures had proved effective. I hope the hon the Minister is going to explain to the Committee what measures were taken and used in the event of a suspicion that someone had voted more than once in the referendum. Our concern is with the effectiveness of the measures as this was debated at great length in September last year when we expressed our concern at the change in voting procedures and also made it clear that our worry was that things were being changed in a hasty way. We just wanted to be reassured that loopholes had not been left open.

Have you had any complaints?

No.

Neither have I.

But I want to know what measures the hon the Minister took. In this answer he said that steps had been taken, and I simply want to know what these measures were. That is all. In the light of the hon the Minister’s assurances which he gave us last year I would be grateful if he would explain the procedure to the Committee.

Secondly, I wish to raise the question of voters’ rolls. I did this during the debate on the Second Reading of the Electoral Act Amendment Bill earlier this year, and the hon the Minister asked me to raise these matters again during the course of his Vote. Briefly, without going into all the details that I did at that time, the voters’ rolls are certainly in a mess. With the combining of the voters’ rolls with the records of the population register the current voters’ rolls have been thrown into a state of chaos. All party offices were inundated with lists of additions and deletions, which some of our offices have still not been able to sort out. An enormous amount of work is involved in checking out all the pluses and minuses to ensure that our records are correct. A good example of the mess the voters’ rolls are in is the constituency of Pinetown where we had a by-election recently. In an intensive door-to-door campaign we found that there were no less than 3 000 people from that voters’ roll whom we could not contact. We were able to contact 1 000 people and register postal votes, but 3 000 were simply not contactable. They were people we had no chance of getting hold of. Again, in the recent by-election in Ward 16 in Johannesburg, there was a voters’ list of 6 000. There was also an intensive door-to-door campaign there, and on the eve of that election we ended up with 2 000 voters who could not be traced. The hon member for Turffontein and the hon the Minister were aware of that campaign and I have no doubt that they are familiar with the untraced voters in that area.

During the course of the debate on the Electoral Act Amendment Bill, I mentioned a constituency in Cape Town which is particularly well organized. There are apparently 14 people on the roll listed at addresses which they left years ago. Their names were deleted and now because of the population register they have been reinstated at those addresses. There were also six cases of girls who have married and who have moved away from the addresses at which they were registered. In fact, their parents have even moved away from those addresses but the girls have been reinstated at those particular addresses under their married names. Since having raised the matter in that debate, I have received a number of other communications from various people listing similar sorts of complaints. I do not want to go through all the examples again but there are a large number of anomalies on the voters’ roll.

A group of our people visited the offices of the Department of Internal Affairs and they maintain that the computer programming needs to be re-examined. I wonder therefore whether the hon the Minister will give his attention to that. They maintain that there appears to be a great deal of duplication. Computer technology does improve day by day and it may very well be that the programmes that are in operation at the department are in need of review. I would ask the hon the Minister whether he would apply his mind to that. With all the demands that are made on the department, it is abundantly clear that they simply cannot keep pace with the political decisions that are being taken by the hon the Minister and by the Cabinet. I hope that in future, after we have got through the next round of elections in August, the hon the Minister will resist pressure from his colleagues in the Cabinet to implement decisions which his overworked officials find very difficult to undertake.

Finally, Sir, I want to raise the matter that I initially raised in a question yesterday concerning two children that were referred to in the Hoexter Report as having been detained in a place of safety for three years while waiting for their race classification to be determined. I have read the statement of the hon the Minister’s predecessor to which he referred me. It is a fairly lengthy statement made in 1981 and it is reasonably informative. Having answered this question recently the details will be fresh in the hon the Minister’s mind, I should like to ask him to reassure us—I am sure that he cannot go into the details of that particular case—that this type of incident will not or cannot happen again. This is the type of incident that gives South Africa a bad name, and I hope that the hon the Minister will state quite clearly that instructions have been given to his department to ensure that this type of incident cannot be repeated.

Mr Chairman, a second matter I should like to raise under the hon the Minister’s Vote, is perhaps a somewhat sensitive subject. However, I do not think that my contribution would increase that sensitivity. I should like to exchange a few ideas on the Press. This year marks the 300th anniversary of the printing industry, as well as the Press in South Africa. I do not wish to claim that we approve of every report in every newspaper every day, but I think it is fitting that we place on record under this Vote that we in South Africa generally have reason to be proud of the Press in South Africa.

The South African Media Council came into being as a result of the Registration of Newspapers Act, No 98 of 1982. Since then, the Media Council was established and I have a copy of their constitution here with me, but unfortunately it is not possible to read out the aims contained in it. Like all the other facets of the economy and industry, the Press is also experiencing tremendous problems at present due to high costs and new technological developments. When one takes note of the technological developments in the world, it is clear that the Press in South Africa also has reason to be concerned about what the future holds for them in that regard. It is even claimed that with the aid of Beitel—and that is in the not too distant future—one will be able to read every facet of every newspaper on one’s television screen. It is things like this that make one realize how rapidly technology in this field is progressing.

Last year South Africa again had to endure sharp criticism from the International Press Union, and we as members of this House think it a pity that, whilst in the spirit in which we deal with the Press in South Africa, we do not wish to tamper with the principle of the freedom of the Press, we were nevertheless treated the same as certain other countries on that occasion, and a great deal of negative criticism was levelled at us. In view of the provisions in our constitution it is very clear that we on this side of the House should like to see those broad aims given substance in our new constitution in South Africa, and that the Press is one of the most important instruments whereby those aims can be realized in South Africa. When we speak of a free market system in South Africa, we are supported wholeheartedly by the Press. In any case, the Press itself propagates the free market system. In fact, the Press in our country is a product of that system. An interesting fact in this regard is that the 36 major advertisers in South Africa spent the phenomenal sum of R242 million on advertising last year. Of course, a very large portion of that money was spent on advertisements in the Press. In view of these facts, one realizes that our entire commercial and industrial sector leans very heavily on the Press because for them, everything depends on how they are treated by the Press and to what extent they reach the public through the Press. From the point of view of the economy, the Press therefore plays a tremendously important role. Each of us who wishes to purchase a home or a motorcar, or who wishes to do business, makes use of the Press as a means of getting those things done.

It is of the utmost importance for democracy in South Africa, too, that the Press should continue, as it is doing today, to play a positive role in extending and maintaining the democratic system. Consequently, I believe that we on this side of the House are not upset when, at times, we are subjected to criticism by the Press concerning the things we do. I believe that our country would be very backward and that things would indeed have gone wrong for us if the Press in South Africa—the English-language Press, as well as the Afrikaans Press—did not feel free to point to what they regard as being wrong.

Of course, it is also true that the Press and certain Pressmen, as well as certain specific newspapers are only human in their actions. Surely we are all human. We are all people with our own opinions and our own interpretation of things. To certain Press organs, their most important task is seeking sensation. That is why it often happens that certain events in the news are sometimes headlines for days. Most of those reports fall flat afterwards, however, because they really do not have much substance.

It is particularly pleasing to note that the Media Council has already dealt with 44 complaints to date. We therefore believe that the public of South Africa will make proper use of the opportunity they are being afforded to raise complaints through the Media Council with regard to matters which they feel are unfair or improper. Of course, we as politicians will always have the worst of it. After all, a politician is not someone who likes to go and complain. We shall therefore simply have to take our punishment. However, there will be times when we will be able to fight back. When we take note of the way in which all the political parties in South Africa conduct politics and at how the Press affords us as politicians and as political parties the opportunity of stating our case, it is clear that the role of the Press in extending the democratic system in South Africa should indeed fill us with gratitude. I myself often read the Black newspapers. I therefore notice to what extent those newspapers are increasingly trying to convey a positive message. They also receive many letters from readers concerning matters which all of us in South Africa would like to see confirmed. They often concern the desire of people to protect and maintain high values and norms. I also always find it interesting to note that a tremendously strong standpoint is adopted in the field of social matters by a newspaper such as the Sowetan, particularly against crime, the abuse of liquor, etc. The Press in South Africa also plays a crucial role in the economic sphere; a role for which we in South Africa are all very grateful.

In the field of democracy, the newspapers in South Africa also play a vital role; vital with regard to the ideas which all of us in South Africa believe should be conveyed to everyone. We could point out how the newspapers play a particularly positive role in respect of educational matters. In this regard, for example, I could refer to the “Teach compaign” of The Star, the purpose of which is to assist Black people with literacy. I could also refer to the programme of education of the Transvaler in Pretoria. There is also the positive publicity which education and everything that happens in education enjoys in our Afrikaans daily newspapers. We could continue in this vein.

Having said all this, I as a politician, together with all my colleagues on this side of the House, I must say today that as far as the negative things that appear in the newspapers are concerned, those things which give us a hard time and which take us to task along the way, ultimately do not weigh more heavily for our country and our future, our continued existence and our progress than those negative things that do in fact appear. I think the Press in South Africa are generally beginning to see that in a complex society such as South Africa the restrictive measures we introduce with regard to the security matters and supplies and other matters, and which we do not wish to make known, are ultimately in the interests of South Africa, and that it is not the intention of any piece of legislation on our Statute Book to limit the freedom of the Press as such.

Since we have established the Media Council so that the public can lay complaints about the Press to the council, I just want to break a lance for the Press in general. I should like to appeal to the hon the Minister that we as a Government should do everything in our power through the education authorities and at every opportunity we as politicians have to encourage our voters, our children, our educationalists and our schools to read newspapers. Each of us who is in politics went into politics because reading newspapers was a way of life. We grew up reading newspapers, as it were. When one looks at the circulation figures of some of our newspapers, one is concerned that so few people in South Africa, indeed, too few people in South Africa, read newspapers today. On occasion last year I read an article written by Adv De Villiers, the retired chairman of Nasionale Pers, in which he said that most of the 21 daily newspapers in South Africa were experiencing financial difficulties. He pointed out that of the six Afrikaans daily newspapers, there was probably only one that would make a profit in that particular year. That is true throughout the world there has been a decrease in sales of daily newspapers in all the large cities. Consequently, I think that we should firstly express a word of thanks to our newspapers on behalf of our South African society, and secondly, that the entire South African society has a responsibility to make more people conscious of reading and to convince them to read our newspapers. Newspapers are in many respects the arteries, the life-blood, the mirror of the society in which we live.

In conclusion, I should like to ask the hon the Minister whether the State could not lend a little assistance in this regard, particularly in the field of education.

Mr Chairman, I should very much like to associate myself with the hon member for Innesdal, since he expressed his concern about our people not being readers of newspapers. We are greatly concerned about this, since it is true that the Press is the mirror of society. It is really a pity that such a large section of our society is not really aware of what is taking place around them in our country and in the world because they do not read newspapers.

I also wish to associate myself with the speech of the hon member for Johannesburg North, who expressed his concern about the condition of the voters’ lists. I cannot disagree with him, since it is true. Our experience in 1981 was also that our voters’ lists leave much to be desired.

This brings me to the referendum in November 1983. When the Government decided that a referendum was to be held, the department was instructed to investigate ways and means of holding such a referendum with the following two premises in mind: To ensure that the maximum number of people could participate in the voting and that it should be made as easy as possible for the voter to be able to cast his vote.

As a result, we voted as we did with our identity documents. It was decided that the voter would go and vote with his identity document, but at that stage a large section of the population did not yet have identity documents. I think we should congratulate the department most sincerely on its exceptional effort, on the major effort that was made in providing our people with these books.

In the normal course of events, an average of 35 000 identity books are issued per month. At that rate it would mean that many thousands of people would not have been able to vote on 2 November. Special arrangements and special efforts were then made by working overtime, by hiring additional staff and by even working on Sundays towards the end. Whilst at that stage 35 000 books were issued on average per month, 47 000 books were issued in June; 55 000 in July; and 44 600 in August. When the announcement came on 27 August that voting would take place by means of identity books, the applications streamed in, to the extent that the department received 18 000 applications in three days. Consequently, 67 600 new books were issued in September, and 90 000 in October—a total of 305 000 new books were issued in those five months.

I think that, to put it mildly, this was a tremendous achievement for the Civic Services section of the department. In this enormous effort, the Post Office, which at one stage fetched books twice a day, and the SA Transport Services, which made special aircraft available, contributed to making this effort such a success.

Hear, hear!

In between all the work surrounding the identity books, the department and that section still had to continue with their work and they had to make the arrangements for referendum day themselves. Officials had to be appointed, forms had to be printed and distributed, ballot papers had to be printed, polling stations had to be determined and publicized, polling booths and ballot boxes had to be arranged, ballot papers had to be transported and votes had to be counted. I think that each one of the 76% of the voters who voted will agree that the Department of Internal Affairs acquitted itself excellently of a very difficult task regarding the referendum, both before and on 2 November. I think they deserve the gratitude and congratulations of all of us.

Once again, I associate myself with the hon member for Johannesburg North concerning the question of voters’ lists. It was the first time that we held an election and voted in this way. I think this proved that the proper method is to compile voters’ lists according to identity documents in future, but then care must be taken that the voter reports his change of address so that the voters’ lists will be in order. Not only will this mean that voters’ lists will be in order and that high polling percentages will be able to be achieved, but that we will also be able to eliminate this expensive system of postal votes and special votes to a large extent. I do not know what the correct ways and means are of getting people so far as to notify the department of changes of address as soon as they move. The matter will have to be investigated, but it is obvious that a solution will have to be found. We shall have to find ways and means of getting people so far as to report changes of address so that voters’ lists can be drawn up on the basis of identity documents and so that they can be up to date as far as possible. Then we will be able to hold elections in the same way we held the referendum on 2 November 1983.

With these few words, I want to congratulate the department on, and thank it for, the arrangements with regard to the referendum on 2 November 1983.

Mr Chairman, I should like to thank all hon members who participated in the debate. I think we conducted the debate at a high level. There is a reasonably good spirit, and I shall attempt to give every hon member a comprehensive answer, as comprehensive an answer as the time available to me permits.

I want to start off by referring to speakers who dealt with electoral matters. The hon member for Hercules appositely dealt with the problems involved and successes achieved in regard to identity documents, and I can only join him in saying that we must definitely continue trying to find new ways and means of ensuring that people promptly notify the department of changes of address. The department does not, however, rest on its laurels in this connection. The network, of which hon members have heard a great deal, and which we are in the process of extending, is in the process of achieving increasingly better results and is doing so with increasing frequency. As we obtain the cooperation of municipalities and other bodies, we detect in practice a fundamental improvement in those areas where we specifically concentrate on this aspect. We as members of the House of Assembly represent the entire geography expanse of the Republic, and I think that every Parliamentarian should make contact with his city council, or city councils if his constituency has more than one town, and use his influence to help motivate the people to co-operate in this connection. When water and electicity are connected, for example, officials can obtain peoples changes of address, not only that of the husband or wife who comes to pay the deposit, but also that of the other marriage partner. If each of us, within his own constituency, could help the department to set the ball rolling and to motivate people, we could contribute to this important information input point being fully mobilized, which ought to make a great contribution. I also want to give the assurance, however, that we never cease looking for alternate ways and means. If there are hon members who have constructive proposals to make in this connection, they are very welcome to do so. Nor do we stop at city councils alone, for we also have an eye on other organizations. As far as farmers are concerned, contact with co-operatives must definitely be extended, because that is an important point at which to link up with farmers, because the majority of them have accounts with co-operatives. We are really doing everything possible. In the final analysis, however, it is the voter’s duty, that of the individual, to ensure that he furnishes any new information at those points where it should be furnished. We as members of Parliament should, in our constituencies, act in such a way as to motivate people to meet their basic obligation towards the country, ie that of making their contribution towards keeping the population register up to date. If we could do that, could inculcate a feeling of patriotism in our people as far as that is concerned, and also engender some realisation of the value of the right to vote, so that the first thing any voter would do when he moved house would be to assure himself of the fact that if he sent his change of address to the department he would have his name recorded on the voters’ roll of the new area in which he was going to settle, elections would run much more smoothy and political parties would be saved a great deal of effort and expense. In political campaign, one can then concentrate on what ought really to be discussed, ie the politics of the day, the problems South Africa is wrestling with and the best alternatives that ought to be selected.

The hon members for Turffontein and Hercules both referred to the possibility of conducting elections on a totally different basis, in the light of the success we achieved with the reasonably revolutionary method adopted in the referendum. It is true that there are many other bottlenecks. We have a constituency system, and if one did not fundamentally amend the constitution, one would have to—whatever one did—bring one aspect into line, and that is that if one is voting in a constituency, one can only vote for a candidate in that constituency. For voters who move, it will have to be made possible, by electronic means, to vote elsewhere in the country for their specific candidate. The department does not rule this out as a possibility, and there is a feeling of enthusiasm for an investigation into this possibility. It would have to be an in-depth investigation, but I shall not be putting any obstacles in the department’s way. I even think it is worth investigating this aspect and I want to assure hon members that a work-team is giving the matter its attention, and that we shall not allow it to go cold on us. As far as I know, there are differing views about this practical aspect in each of the political parties in this House, and within the ranks of the various parties clarity will have to be reached about whether this should be taken any further, as modern aids permit. There is, however, a positive attitude, and we also feel that we must build further on the sound foundations laid during the referendum.

The hon member for Turffontein highlighted very important aspects involving the ordinary RV1 application card and the new method involved in beconing a voter or remaining one, simply by submitting a change of address form to the population register. There are important shortcomings to which he referred. Change of address is not subject to the sufficient legal control measures. At the moment I am dealing with departmental documents that indicates that we are moving towards subjecting changes of address for the population register to more or less the same formal requirements as those to which the RV1 forms are subject. The documents before me are not yet quite satisfactory. Before we proceed to setting up voters’ rolls solely on the basis of the White, Brown and Indian population registers throughout the country—and that is no longer a very distant prospect—we shall very fundamentally have to look at the change of address form and procedure. It would have to be properly revised, because that would be the only alternative. We would have to make certain that there were no short cuts or angles that could be used by certain people who have a very reckless attitude towards the truth as such.

The hon member pointed to a specific example. It would be extremely reprehensible for anyone, merely for the sake of casting a vote in a by-election, to have himself or anyone else placed on the voters’ roll when, by law, he is not entitled to be on that voters’ roll. The electoral laws makes provision for the fact that one may only be registered at one’s place of residence or where, under specific circumstances, one has a fixed address in a specific constituency, and to the best of my knowledge any contravention of this provision is a crime. Any member is free to lay a charge against anyone who has his name placed on the voters’ roll under false pretences.

†The hon member for Johannesburg North raised various matters—he asked to be excused because he also has to attend the Standing Committee. In the first instance he asked what measures were taken to prevent double voting. The most obvious measures were, firstly, to check each ID book used to vote with the referendum to determine whether the person concerned had already voted; and, secondly, after the person had been issued with a ballot-paper, to stamp his book to indicate that he had voted. Thus he was successfully prevented from voting twice. The department has not received any complaint from any source at all with regard to possible double voting. When this matter was first put to me, I could as a result reply that it was not regarded as necessary to use certain further powers the regulations afford me. I want to point out, however, that these were obviously not the only measures taken. In a sense, the very strict conditions inserted in the regulations and in the legislation themselves served to prevent double voting.

*The high fines for double voting, and the measures relating to this in the referendum legislation were, I believe, an effective and successful deterrent. The mere fact that there are neither complaints nor problems, despite the fact that politicians as a whole are always sharply on the look out for malpractices or for the abuse of privileges, is an indication of the electorate’s honesty and of the fact that basically the system stood the test of possible abuse.

†The hon member for Johannesburg North also referred to the state of our voters’ rolls. I have already dealt with the difficulty of voters not advising us of their change of address. I may say, however, that this is nothing new. Under the old system of registration there was really not much difference and we have always had more or less the same percentage of the total number of voters missing from the addresses at which they were registered. What has happened, however, is that we now have more voters on our rolls and therefore larger numbers of people we cannot trace. In terms of the percentages, however, my experience is that there is really no great difference between the present position as it was before. As a matter of fact, I think that the new method of compiling voters’ rolls assures that each and every individual in South Africa—at this point in time that, unfortunately, applies only to the White voters—can vote.

The hon member also asked whether our computer programme may not need revision. In this regard I can assure him that we are keeping our equipment up to date and that I am not aware of any insurmountable problems. However, if the hon member has details with regard to any particular problem, he is welcome to submit them to me so that I can have it properly investigated.

In the last instance the hon member referred to children detained for nearly three years. Once again, he did not ask me to refer to a particular case because the Hoexter report does not specify which children were involved. However, the hon member asked for an assurance that this will not happen again. I can give him the assurance that in each and every case we do our utmost to ensure that any such situation does not arise. I am fairly confident, and I can say that I have reason to believe, that delays of this nature can and will be prevented in future.

*That it is completely impossible for it to happen again, however, I cannot say. Something like this could possibly happen again. I just want to say, however, that there are also children in regard to whom race classification is no problem and yet who have sometimes, as a result of a specific combination of circumstances, had to spend long terms in places of safety before being dealt with in some other way. Race classification is made to appear a tremendous burden on the shoulders of hundreds of thousands of children. That is simply not the case. We should rather concentrate on methods of placing children who are in need of care as sympathetically and effectively as possible in the proper care than to try to make political capital out of the fate of some unfortunate children, or out of the distress in which they find themselves. Can we not at least trust one another, whatever our political opinions may be, with every member of the House going out of his way to prevent children who are in need of care, who have no one to look after them, being wrongly handled? I can assure hon members that this is our attitude on this side of the House when dealing with this problem.

If we had not had race classification, and the necessary measures for the creation of individual community life, I think there would have been far more children in need of care. I think that this system, which gives each group a sense of security, making it possible for them to develop as communities, prevents shocking conditions from developing. In that regard this basic pattern in South African society is therefore not the cause of unhappiness, but actually prevents a great deal of unhappiness.

Some hon members had a great deal to say this afternoon about the days when both Coloureds and Whites shared the same voters’ roll. But what was their position then? How many of them were at university at that time? How many of them had decent housing then? What was the position of Coloured education at the time? [Interjections.] The argument that the policy of this side of the House leaves people of colour with a handicap does not hold water any longer, because the truly spectacular progress which these groups have made, was made after 1948 and not prior to that date. [Interjections.]

The hon member for Green Point raised a few very important points. In the first place he referred to delimitation and registration, pointing out that in the month remaining, even if a tremendous number of people registered, there would not be such a high percentage of potentially registerable Coloureds registered. I immediately concede as much. The fact remains, however, that each of those individuals can still register if he wants to. There are still 26 days remaining in which to do so. I cannot force anyone to register.

But we do it with Whites.

Even amongst the Whites, until we had virtually all the Whites on the population register, there was always a large gap between those who could register and the number who did register. Only then could we place on the voters’ roll actually against their will, the names of those Whites who did not attach any importance to their right to vote. Now those hon members complain because those voters do not want to come and vote and because they cannot be traced. They are now on the voters’ roll, but are still not interested in voting. It has not made them any more patriotic, nor did it make them attach any more value to their right to vote. At the time when, owing to circumstances, we should have had the same system, there was also a vast difference between the total number of possible White voters and the actual number of registered voters. So this discrepancy cannot merely be attributed to this side of the House. It is a natural phenomenon, built into the system, that one must voluntarily be able to register. Before the end of the year we also hope to be in a position to have every Coloured and Indian on the population register, with possibly a small handful of individual exceptions, so that we can implement exactly the same system now applying to Whites. We are working towards a target date, ie 1 September, and if we can manage this, after that date the first by-election for Coloureds or Indians will already be taking place on a different basis. We cannot, however, achieve this goal before the general elections.

The hon member made a great fuss about the question of the boundaries of constituencies, saying that there would be far too many Coloured voters in Cape constituencies, in contrast to ridiculously few voters in Free State constituencies. In our White system there are, after all, similar examples too. The hon member for Bethal, for example, has almost 30 000 voters, whilst many other hon members have only 8 000 or 9 000. [Interjections.]

Parliament determined that Walvis Bay could be an individual constituency by virtue of its unique circumstances, amongst other things its regional interests and remote position. There are far fewer voters in Walvis Bay, after all, than in an average Transvaal constituency. The Free State is also a region, and although there are insufficient Coloured voters to justify constituencies of the same size, on the strength of the basis on which an MP ought to serve his voters, they should also have the same benefits as those that White voters have in Walvis Bay and elsewhere. So there is nothing we have to apologize for in this connection.

I am not saying, however, that the delimitation will be an ideal one. The data base on which delimitation is done will, however, be improved in future. We hope that this can be done speedily, depending on the rate at which the population register for the Coloureds and the Indians is brought up to date. In the meantime our present system, as defective as it is, is the best we have to offer. I therefore want to reiterate the appeal I made in previous debates. There are still 26 days remaining for people to register as voters. Every Coloured and Indian who is entitled to vote can still register. “Make use of the opportunity and obtain the right to share in determining your own future. Register. At the moment there are more than enough registration cards available at all distribution points.” That is my appeal to them. The hon member also said that we should ensure that between now and election day—and I hope he joins me in saying “and after that”—we should strive to create a better atmosphere for democratic decision-making and participation in democratic processes.

Then he raised a few points that he believed we should give attention to.

†In the first place he said that we must ensure that the maximum degree of freedom will exist; freedom for all parties, also for those who want to abstain. The police must not interfere in legitimate activity, he said. Mr Chairman, I agree with the hon member, but I want to clear up a few matters with him. I agree with him that a party should be free to advise votes to abstain. As a matter of fact, we have a clear track record in our dealings with such parties. We did not harass The Star when it advised voters to obstain nor did we harass the PFP when it abstained from participation in the President’s Council. [Interjections.] If they wished to be a boycott party, they were free to become one. However, there is a distinction between abstention and preventing other people who do not want to abstain from exercising their right. I hope that I also speak for the hon member when I say that in such instances we must act strongly against the perpetrators of that sort of activity, people interfering with the right of other people to meet, to hold orderly meetings, to go to a poll and to make their cross. Do I have the support of the PFP for stronger action in cases of intimidation against those who want to participate in the new system? [Interjections.] Thank you very much.

The hon member also referred to the Prohibition of Political Interference Act.

*In this connection I want to repeat something I said previously, and that is that there are definitely certain facets in this legislation that could give rise to uncertainty. Those facets can be investigated. In fact, I have already asked the Department of Internal Affairs to carry out such investigations, and at present the department is engaged in doing so. The matter has been discussed with me, and I think that reasonable adjustments for the elimination of uncertainties and anomalies should be considered, but then without relinquishing the basic principles incorporated in the legislation. It is not impossible for legislation in this connection to be ready even during the present session of Parliament. The basic principles to be retained could be identified on the grounds of the basis on which provision is made, in the 1983 constitution, for handling both general and own affairs. All hon members know the constitution, after all, and each and every one of us who is not intent on stealing a political march on each other surely knows that for as long as the constitution remains in existence in its present form, it will embody certain manifestations of order. Therefore a completely integrated party-political system transcending colour boundaries, for example, would make no sense if seen against the background of the fact that there have to be individual voters’ rolls and that each population group must hold its own elections, put up its own candidates and be elected for separate Houses. Surely that is the logic involved. The hon member for Green Point knows this too, and must therefore not try to make petty politics of that now. [Interjections.]

The constitution has specifically been structured the way it has with a view to achieving two goals. Firstly it has been done with a view to making possible the establishment of joint responsibility for matters of common concern, without encroaching, in the process, on the right to full-fledged self-determination in regard to own affairs. So political parties which find themselves in sympathy with this political dispensation— except if they want to be boycott parties; then they should rather stay out of it—will of necessity have to be constituted on the same basis as that adopted for the new Parliament; if not, the right to self-determination in regard to own affairs would be suppressed in the party structure, where one or other group could, after all, be in the majority.

I want to know from hon members of the PFP whether, if they had the right to do so tomorrow, they would allow Black, Indian and Coloured people to become full-fledged members of the PFP. [Interjections.] Mr Chairman, I am noting the reactions of all those hon members opposite. The hon member for Green Point says “no”. Hon members in front of him and behind him are saying “yes”. [Interjections.]

We are all saying “yes”.

So they would allow all—Blacks, Whites, and Coloureds and Indians—to become full-fledged members of the PFP, regardless of the fact that those people would not be able to vote for this House of Assembly.

Yes.

Regardless of that fact, they would therefore still open the party to all.

Yes.

Very well. That is now on record, Mr Chairman. I think this is just one further reason why the PFP is the small political party that it is. Mr Chairman, I know how they will allow those people to become full-fledged members of the PFP. They will allow them in the way they the liberal universities did so in those years when there were no restrictions applicable to them. They will simply ensure that there are enough of those people to solve their own consciences, but never enough to oust them from their own party. [Interjections.] That is exactly the way their minds work, Mr Chairman. [Interjections.]

Order!

Questions have been put to me in connection with the minimum requirements, and I now want to reply to them. I want to mention those requirements, as I see them. I think they will at least have to include the following: Firstly political parties will each have to be constituted solely of members from one population group. Secondly electoral agents will have to be members of the same population group as the candidates they are assisting.

You only use Blacks to put up your posters.

Yes, that is job reservation for you! [Interjections.]

Order! Hon members must please give the hon the Minister an opportunity to continue with his speech now.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Green Point is, of course, now actually referring to the CP. We use young NP boys to do that work. [Interjections.]

Order!

Furthermore, no public meetings may be addressed by members of other population groups during the course of election campaigns. Unconnected with the Constitution Act, section 3 of the Act, which tries to restrict external influences on the domestic policies of South Africa, must of course be retained. Those are the minimum requirements, as I see them. If hon members were to study the Act, they would observe that within the framework of these minimum requirements it is possible to effect material changes to the Act. In fact, I give the assurance that it will be subjected to continuous scrutiny.

I think that the third matter the hon member for Green Point raised I could rather reply to when we are more specifically discussing the Indians and the Coloureds in the Orange Free State, otherwise I am not going to get a chance to reply fully to other hon members who participated in this part of the discussion of the Vote.

The hon member for Innesdal made a relatively fundamental contribution on the Press, on Press freedom and on Press control. I want to put it to him that I really can, to a large extent, associate myself with the standpoints he put forward. I think he did this House and the country a favour by subjecting this important matter to some close scrutiny. He made an appeal to me to encourage people to read newspapers. In general I agree with him because I want people to be informed and to be well-read. I think it is a good thing to stimulate children’s interest in public matters, and for that reason it is already the practice in schools to make sure that the general knowledge of our children is broadened and that they are sometimes asked to submit projects which force them to read newspapers. Perhaps more could be done in this connection, and we can give attention to the matter. In the final instance, however, as far as the quality of some of our newspapers is concerned, I am not prepared to accept the obligation to promote the reading of such newspapers. I think you will agree with me, Sir, that in a country where we do, after all, strive to maintain the free market mechanism, we should rather leave it primarily to the newspapers themselves to see to it that the quality and standard of what they offer is such that it makes people want to read those newspapers.

I want to convey my cordial thanks to the hon member for Innesdal and the hon member Dr Vilonel who both addressed a few friendly and personal words to me, and I also want to thank the hon member Dr Vilonel for his very interesting contribution.

I come now to the question of publications control. In amplification of the excellent and effective contribution made by the hon the Deputy Minister, I just want to make three points. In the first place, not everything that one finds on the bookshop shelves has been passed by the publications control system. Only films are assessed. If a film or a book is passed, with or without a few cuts in the case of a film, then the system does not stipulate that it is a good film. It does not stipulate that it is a good or constructive or uplifting film. All that is stipulated, is that the film is not so repugnant that we wish to take the extreme step of banning it completely. The primary responsiblity of distinguishing between good and bad remains with the individual.

In the second place I want to say that we should be careful when we express criticism that we do not jeopardize the system per se. We have had many systems, but I do not think we can find a better system than the present one. If the present system does not appear to be adequate, however, we shall not flinch from effecting moderate adjustments to it. Fortunately the people who help us to apply this system still find it possible to come forward, in an imaginative way, with new procedures aimed at continuously enhancing their effectiveness within the framework of the present legislation.

Finally, on this aspect, I want to say that we welcome the fact that hon members of the House have clearly spelt out their resistance to and their disapproval of the modem trend, not in South Africa, but in the world at large, which has blown over to South Africa. It is time we realized that not everything that comes to us from abroad is a good thing. I am referring now to the hon member for Constantia. One of the arguments he put forward for wanting theatres to be open on Sundays was that they were open in the rest of the world. I am certain he did not mean it, but if one begins to argue like that, one would probably allow the same things in those theatres that are allowed in the rest of the world.

No, that is not the case.

Not everything we import is a good thing. We must do our own thing in our own way here in South Africa.

Business interrupted in accordance with Standing Order No 22.