as Chairman, presented the Second Report of the Standing Select Committee on Finance, dated 4 August 1987, as follows:

Bill to be read a second time.

moved: That in terms of section 70 (1) (a) of the Republic of South Africa Constitution Act the House of Assembly designate Mr C F Vosloo to be a member of the President’s Council with effect from 1 August 1987.

Agreed to.

Mr Chairman, before I make my final comments on the subject of the Rhenish school. I should just like to remind the hon the Minister—because he said he would come back and provide an answer in this regard today, having had a chance to read the documents himself—of the essence of the question that I am asking him. He has said that own affairs in education depend primarily on language, culture and value—that is the basis from which own affairs are derived.

Last week, however, the hon the Minister of Education and Development Aid said, and I quote again—

He referred to the fact of the Afrikaner’s own history.

I want the hon the Minister please to give me his view on the wishes expressed by English-speaking parents in some schools in the Cape Peninsula that these schools be allowed to admit children of all races. His preliminary response yesterday was totally inadequate. In fact, it was evasive and did not address the point. The only two points he made yesterday in his preliminary response were, first of all, that the English-speaking people need not worry, because English is an official language in terms of the Constitution and that, therefore, they need not worry. The hon the Minister will know, of course, that since 1910 Afrikaans—at one time, Dutch—has also been an official language in terms of the Constitution, but that did not mean that the Afrikaans-speaking community did not have educational complaints to make earlier this century.

The second point he made is really an answer to a point that nobody made. He said, in effect, that open schools would not solve all our educational problems. Well, I do not know anybody who suggested that that is so. Once again, therefore, the hon the Minister showed the weakness, in fact, the bankruptcy of his argument by arguing against points that nobody made, now or in the past.

Reverting now to the incident involving Rhenish Primary School to which the two Malawian girls could not be admitted, I should like to come back to the part played by the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning. As I said yesterday, the hon the Minister told us that the school had made representations for them to be admitted and that a former member of Parliament, Mr Myburgh, had asked for them to be admitted but that he would not say what the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning’s representations had been. My inference is that it is quite clear that the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning was in favour of admitting these children. Obviously, this hon Minister was against it, and if the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning was against it as well, the hon the Minister of Education and Culture would be only too pleased to tell us that the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning had concurred with him and that there was no problem.

The only circumstances in which this hon Minister would not tell me that would be if the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning had been in favour, or if he felt that the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning had been worried about the political implications, making him a political coward.

Clearly, that is not so and it is therefore clear to me that the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning, not being a political coward, must have been in favour of the admittance of these children. Given those circumstances where the constituency of a member of Parliament as well as a senior Cabinet Minister were in favour and the hon the Minister of Education and Culture was against admitting the children to that school, I do not believe that this hon Minister off his own bat would have overruled the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning. Particularly in view of the fact that the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning is the father of own affairs—he virtually invented the concept—and certainly enshrined it in the Constitution. Presumably the hon the Minister of Education and Culture would not tell that hon Minister that he does not know what own affairs is all about. He must have gone to the hon the State President and asked him which way to go. The hon the State President must clearly have ruled that they were not to admit those children despite the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning’s wishes. [Interjections.]

One wonders whom they were scared of. It is another clear indication that reform has ground to a halt because the hon the State President of this country has lost his political nerve.

Own affairs education has once again been shown not to be based on language or culture or values, but to be based on fear, greed, hypocrisy and racism.

Mr Chairman, I shall reply in due course to some of the hon members’ contributions in the Committee. Let me just express a few other thoughts here first.

Today I want to ask hon members to pay attention so that I can, in the first place, discuss the devolution of power to our partners. Several hon members referred to this and I think that if we can understand one another as regards this concept many of the decisions taken by this side will become clear.

In the White Paper on the Provision of Education in the RSA, 1983, it was stated that the devolution of power could eliminate impersonality, lack of involvement and inefficiency in the administration of education. We have also found that this is the case in practice. When the education partners are all involved, education comes alive. But where the approach is lukewarm, the children suffer.

Great progress has already been made in the devolution of power to the partners such as the organised profession and the parent community. We have been encouraged by the results. I am particularly glad that those parent associations which have not yet received recognition are at present seeing to it that they comply with the criteria for recognition of their associations. No one is as intensely involved in education as the parents. That is why it is the duty of the parents to take an active interest in the schooling of their children. Parents have a wide field in which they have a say which does not intrude on the professional field of the teacher. I also want to emphasise very clearly that it is not the idea for the parent to interfere in the field of the professional teacher with regard to the performing of his professional task. It is however of cardinal importance for the parents to be generally involved in school activities, particularly with regard to determining the spirit and character of that school.

For this reason the election of the management councils is therefore an extremely important matter for all the parents. It is the task of the parents to see to it that they elect representatives to the committees and councils that will put the education of their children first and will not turn the children into political footballs. I am therefore making another appeal to everyone involved in education to abandon personal political convictions and ensure that no institution is politicised in the party political sense.

†I find my contact with the organised teaching profession through the Teachers’ Federal Council extremely valuable. The Federal Council is not only the mouthpiece of the profession but is also an important liaison body which keeps its finger on the pulse of the profession. Today the organised profession has an extensive voice in education, inter alia, through a diversity of advisory bodies on which recognised teachers’ associations serve in every provincial education department.

The profession has representation in the second-tier provincial education councils, and Act No 39 of 1967 stipulates that the profession must be represented in every advisory body of the Committee of Heads of Education. The profession is therefore in a more favourable position than ever before to play a significant role in relation to a variety of educational matters. The unity and the dynamism of the department are also consolidated in legislation which I aim to introduce as soon as possible.

In the Bill which is under consideration at the moment the following are consolidated: Firstly, all the provincial ordinances which have controlled the activities of the education departments until now, excluding regulations pertaining to colleges of education. Regarding the colleges of education I plan to introduce a separate Bill as a next step; secondly, the Educational Services Act, 1967, also where it applies to special education, and finally, the Mentally Retarded Children’s Training Act, 1974.

In one of the finest chapters of our department’s short but dynamic history I can testify today that all the partners in education have been consulted in the drafting of this Bill and that fruitful co-operation was experienced in the process of reaching agreement.

*I should like to say a few words about school sport. Several speakers, particularly from the ranks of the Official Opposition, raised the matter of school sport. I also expect those persons who did so to take notice of the replies which to a great extent are contained in what I am going to say now. I shall discuss this matter in detail later on.

Our policy in connection with school sport also attests to our belief in the devolution of power. Hon members know that in terms of the Constitution what our policy amounts to is that we see school sport as being part of the educational programme of the school. There must be no doubt about that. We accept this. Hon members also know that we differentiate between official school sport and sport outside the official school context. Official school sport comprises sporting activities arranged and presented by the school and interested organisations, with the emphasis on the school, in which all the pupils and teachers participate, as part of the education and training programme of the school, with the approval of the headmaster and the management body of the school. That is why the department bears juridical responsibility for these official school sport activities.

Sport outside the school context comprises sporting activities not arranged and presented by the school, and where the parent alone takes the responsibility for the participation of his child in such sporting activities. We have delegated the decision for or against participation in sports meetings to the headmaster and the management body of the school, who can decide for themselves whether they want to accept specific invitations or who they want to invite. Both the headmaster and the management body must take this decision on the basis of the opinion, in the first place, of the parents of the school, but also of the community, so that every decision can be justified with reference to the accepted norms of the specific community, and in this way also ensure that the school, as a sensitive educational institution, is not destabilised. We trust our parent communities.

[Inaudible.]

The hon member on that side has made an interjection. I also want to ask him across the floor of this House whether he trusts our parent communities. [Interjections.]

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

Just let me finish my argument first. Then the hon member can by all means put his question to me.

We trust our parent communities. We are confident that through the bodies they themselves have elected, they will take responsibility for their own decisions. On the basis of this it is again apparent how important the say of the parents—I am now referring to all the parents—is in the day-to-day activities of the school. Every parent must accept the responsibility of exercising a joint say over the schooling of his child.

There is nothing to prevent a school community from competing against other groups or individuals. In the Republic of South Africa, where a diversity of people must live and work together, it is in fact necessary that the educational programme, in addition to cherishing what is unique to the group, should also give attention to inter-group liaison, as I indicated yesterday. On the other hand a school has the right to withdraw from a meeting if the parent community prefers. However, our multicultural society requires that society should not be unnecessarily segmented and unbridgeable gap created between groups.

Positive inter-group relations can contribute to the enriching of the mosaic of cultures in South Africa. In the course of this year I intend to amend the relevant regulations on management councils in such a way that a checkmate position cannot develop at a school again. The principle of the devolution of power will not be encroached upon, but the management council of a school should at all times represent the voice of the majority of the parents.

How?

A Press statement on this matter is going to be released today. [Interjections.]

†As far as private schools are concerned, this year my department was privileged to pay substantial subsidies to those private schools which applied for them.

We recognize the valuable work being done by these institutions. The fact that the private schools will be represented in the new provincial education councils is evidence of the esteem we have for these establishments. Some schools preferred not to apply for subsidies, probably because they thought that applying would affect their autonomy. This they are fully entitled to do.

We have kept our promise by maintaining and entrenching for the present the existing subsidies to schools which traditionally have come to rely on them.

The other private schools have received grants calculated according to a standard formula. I have gone into the allocation of grants personally and repeatedly and I am convinced that this sensitive matter has been handled with great care. The criteria which are listed in the regulations regarding the registration of and financial grants to private schools have been applied consistently and meticulously. The criteria according to which schools are evaluated embrace teaching standards, school attendance, teacher-pupil ratio, flow-through ratio, serviceability and physical amenities.

I am, however, not prepared to divulge to individual schools the finer details in this regard, as such a step would constitute an intrusion upon the privacy of the schools, and might even be construed as playing off one school against another.

Although the financing of schools is a very important matter, I appreciate the approach of most private schools, namely that they are educational institutions first and foremost and not business ventures. I urge the private schools movement to be realistic in its demands. As hon members are aware, funds are limited and the available money is allotted with the utmost care and responsibility. The vast majority of schools have benefited by the grants-in-aid, and no school has received less than in the past. Many schools have received more, and others have received grants for the first time.

I wish to assure you, Mr Chairman, that my department gives attention to all problems that may arise. Ongoing discussions are held with the leaders of the private school movement regarding the further refinement and improvement of the system of subsidisation.

*As regards provincial education councils, the education councils of the provincial education departments are going to start functioning this month. I have already appointed the council members. The chairmen have been designated. The reaction to this has been wonderful. The partners realise what an important forum has been created for educational discussion and participation in the provision of education.

The purpose of the education councils for provincial education departments is to ensure that the particular traditions and ethos of the provinces are not lost owing to an unavoidable degree of centralisation of policy-making. Those persons who are not participating and are not represented, do not have a mouthpiece or a say in the educational matters of their province. However, the fact of the matter is that all those who are interested in education in some or other way have been afforded an opportunity to have their say.

The task of the education councils is to advise my department and I. This is the channel through which the educational needs of a province will flow. If the water does not flow through the channel irrigation and growth cannot take place. It is as simple as that. An education council is not a political body, and must not be exploited for political purposes either. The education councils are concerned with educational matters, for the sake of the best provision of education for our children.

All the important partners will be represented in the provincial education councils, namely persons from the tertiary education sectors; from the organised profession; from the organised parent community; and from both statutory and non-statutory bodies, as well as persons and particularly teachers from the private schools and representatives of special education and technical colleges. Finally they will also include a number of people from the community who will be appointed by the Minister himself.

In the following weeks I am going to open the first meeting of every education council in person. This is an historic occasion for every provincial education department …

Because you are going to be there!

Well, definitely not because the hon member is going to be there! … and that is why a Press statement is being released on education councils today.

Don’t be so touchy!

The statement contains the names of the first councils as well as the dates of the inaugural meetings.

I should now like to reply to the contributions of a few hon members. In the first place I want to react to the hon member for Cape Town Gardens, who expressed his concern about the handling of the incident at Rhenish. Today I again want to tell the hon member that he argued for the most part by making assumptions about what a specific Minister would do. He then argued by making the assumption that this would probably be dealt with by the State President too. He made further assumptions and on that basis attacked me.

If I wanted to be nasty, I could have resumed my seat and told the hon member that I was not prepared to play along with him in regard to assumptions. But I am well aware that the Rhenish incident has aroused public interest. This is true. Without going into the details of the incident I want to emphasise that the policy of my department and the policy in terms of which the Rhenish incident was dealt with, has existed for years now. Hon members must not tell me that this has nothing to do with the matter, because it is important. The fact of the matter is that not particular, specific policy is being applied now, because it did not suit us in respect of the particular circumstances of the Rhenish affair.

I thought you were moving away from apartheid.

This decision in connection with the application for admission of the Kamuane children was dealt with on the basis of the existing policy, and the hon member knows, as do all the other hon members in this House, precisely what that policy is and what legislation it is based on. As a matter of fact I have just mentioned it again in reply to a question. [Interjections.] I therefore do not feel like wasting the Committee’s time by debating the Rhenish incident any further.

Nevertheless I want to point out that we did everything in our power to give the necessary attention to this matter and to see whether we could help in some way. It is true that these children can only speak English and their own language, but we did suggest that there were specific private schools they could have attended.

What about private school fees?

Of course there is a cost effect involved. [Interjections.] If the hon member would just listen, he might learn something. It will be difficult, but I shall try in any case. [Interjections.]

We therefore tried to fall in with their wishes as far as we could. The parents decided, for their own particular reasons—I accept that a shortage of money may have been one of them—that it did not serve their purpose to send the children there. From what I hear, the children eventually went to a specific school in Stellenbosch, and as far as I know, the children are happy there. I do not feel that I need take up any more of the Committee’s time with this entire matter, and I should like to leave it at that.

Mr Chairman, may I ask the hon the Minister whether he was aware at that stage, when he took the decision not to grant the request, that the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning would lose a great many votes to Dr Worrall as a result of that decision? [Interjections.]

I do not think that question deserves an answer. If a person is either on his way to Dakar or out of his party, how must I reply to his question? [Interjections.]

I should like to reply to a matter which was raised by the hon member for Brits. He said there had been a considerable influx of Black students into the White universities and that a large part of the budget of the department was being channelled to people of colour because so many of them fell under the Department of Education and Culture of the House of Assembly. I want to tell him briefly that the reasons for the admission of people of colour to White universities have existed for decades now. Not only the reasons for this practice but also the practice itself existed when his leader, the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition, was vested with great responsibilities on this side of the House. This is well-known.

I want to mention a second matter. It is important that when we quote figures in respect of people of colour studying at White universities, we must differentiate between students at Unisa and other students.

That is precisely what I did.

Yes, of course, I am not saying that the hon member did not do so. As far as Unisa is concerned, 44% of the students are people of colour. This is obviously owing to the character of that university, which does not give lectures on its own campus, but operates throughout the country. It is not necessary to elaborate on this any further. It is important to note that the percentage of people of colour at other White universities is not as tremendously high as hon members of the CP were suggesting. We must at least compare the number of people of colour with the total number of Whites studying at those universities. The fact of the matter is that the universities themselves decide and lay down specific criteria in respect of the admission of students to the universities. What is important about the allegation of the hon member, however, is that in this case the people of colour are using the White taxpayers money. I see the hon member for Schweizer-Reineke is nodding his head in agreement—I can even hear it from here!

It is the Whites’ money.

That is not quite correct, because the number of full-time students—it does not matter whether they are White, Coloured, Indian or Black—is used as a basis when finances are involved. I am assuring the hon member across the floor of the House that no White student is therefore being prejudiced because of this. That is the other side of the picture and I am asking that hon members also mention this fact when they debate and discuss this topic outside.

I just want to say something about the speech made yesterday by the hon member for Losberg—I see he is not here; it would appear that he found it impossible to be here. He spoke about anomalies which ostensibly existed between the salaries of the respective educators’ corps. This matter is not my responsibility but that of my colleague, the hon the Minister of National Education. He has indicated that he has in fact instituted an investigation into this extremely important matter which the hon member raised. When weighing up posts a variety of aspects must be considered. There are aspects such as qualifications, the complexity of the post, the level of responsibility, the consequences of decisions and so on.

I also want to react to another matter which the hon member for Losberg raised. This is the extremely sensitive matter of parent contributions, compulsory parent contributions as some people call it. I am very sorry that the hon member for Losberg saw fit to deal with a very sensitive matter in the way he did, and particularly when he came up with the slogan: “This is White child tax. ” I find it detestable … [Interjections] … when a person wants to bandy a sensitive matter like this about by using this complete untruth.

Let me put forward a few considerations without our having an in-depth discussion here, because we do not have the time. It is universally accepted that the State cannot bear the costs of education on its own in any country in the world. I want to adopt a second standpoint, namely that education has never been completely free of charge in this country of ours. This has never been the case at any time in our history. As a matter of fact we amended the Act three or four years ago, and this was followed by amendments to regulations and ordinances of the provinces to provide that education may be free of charge—we inserted the word “may”.

I want to put forward another fact. No matter what happens, the State naturally has a responsibility with regard to maintain standards that have already been attained. The Government, the State, is not prepared to renounce its responsibility with regard to its financial contribution to the maintenance of those standards. It is equally true that the community also has the right, if it wishes, to contribute additional finance in order to raise the standard in its specific community even further. That community has the right to make additional contributions.

Now it is being stated across the floor of this House that the unfortunate Whites must pay White child tax, whereas the Coloureds, the Asians and the Blacks do not need to pay. This is not true! Surely the fact of the matter is that in the Schedule to the Constitution, it is specifically provided that every population group can consider introducing a levy if it wishes. If it does not wish to do so, it does not do so. The fact of the matter is that what is contributed additionally by a specific community will be used to the benefit of the children of that specific community only.

Something else I experienced during the election campaign was that everywhere people were being given the impression that White parents were now going to make a compulsory parent contribution so that they could help the Black, Coloured and Indian schools. [Interjections.] That statement is devoid of all truth.

It has the same effect.

The hon member says that it has the same effect, but I want to tell him that the Constitution very clearly makes provision for this.

I now want to ask the hon members on that side of the Committee, particularly the hon members of the Official Opposition, that we must not wreck this project which can be beneficial to our own White schools and to education. I want to repeat that we will obviously not tackle this matter before we have liaised widely. Of course we will handle this matter with the greatest sensitivity. We shall also take the financial means of parents into consideration and no matter what we decide, no child may be prejudiced or deprived of education because his parents are perhaps not in a position to make a contribution in that regard. I shall not pursue this matter.

The hon member for Roodepoort apologized for not being able to be here this afternoon. As regards school sport, I just want to mention that what I said in my speech at the beginning of this discussion still applies but I want to touch on three other matters in this regard by saying the following: Of course a community has the right to decide on participation in a sports meeting. It is equally true however that the community and that school’s management council must calculate what the consequences of their decision will be. They must ascertain whether the consequences of their decision will be in the interests of the children in that school, in the interests of the community and in the interests of our country as a whole. What is more, no matter what we or the management council may decide, pressure may not be exerted on any child regarding his participation or non-participation in the meeting. [Interjections.]

What is more, no outside organisations may exert pressure on the school concerning its decision. Unfortunately it happens in practice that pressure is sometimes exerted on schools as a result of the actions of specific outside organisations. I therefore also want to appeal to outside organisations to afford the school’s management committee, the headmaster, his staff and the parent community the opportunity to decide what is in the best interests of the school, as they see the matter. [Interjections.]

I now come to the speech of the hon member of Cape Town Gardens, as well as that of the hon member Prof Olivier who also referred to group specific education which cannot be determined by another people. In this connection they referred to a statement made by my colleague the hon the Minister of Education and Development Aid. [Interjections.]

Let me now state unequivocally: I have had the opportunity to look at the statement and I agree fully with what my colleague said about group specific education. If the hon member also reads his speech in its entirety, he will see that the argument actually concerned what had been said by a speaker of the Official Opposition. I agree fully with that hon Minister. I also want to say that this is a good principle and that is why I agree with it.

I would, however, like to point out—I am asking the hon member to listen to me and try to follow my argument, even if he does not agree with me—that one must also take historic group formation in this country into account. It is a reality. That hon member frequently tells us that it is a reality that we have been experiencing historic group formation in this country since 1652.

A group like the White ethnic group in the RSA, for example, although from the outset of course it consisted of a diversity of related subgroups, coalesced historically and developed affinities and common interests to such an extent that the group exercises joint control over its education. But on the basis of cultural differentiation provision is made within this group for Afrikaans and English schools.

What am I trying to say? I am trying to say that history has shown that we are jointly moving in a specific direction, and I am grateful that I am able to say today that the relation between the Afrikaans and English-speaking people, in particular, are very much better than they used to be. This is what happened to us in the course of history, and it is in that historic context that we must also see and examine these matters when we have to take decisions.

We have Afrikaans medium schools and English medium schools, and in the private schools we also make provision for further particularisation of a specific cultural or language group. We have the German schools that say they cannot fully experience their culture in their education in the State schools because they also rely on a close link between education and culture. That is why they say that on the basis of cultural, language, and religious differences they want to establish their own private schools. We allow this.

But do we allow Coloureds and other people of colour to attend those schools?

Of course; look at the Act. [Interjections.]

I am surprised that the hon member asked me that, but of course he is acting as the leader of his party. I want to tell the hon member that he must talk to his caucus, to the people who know what is going on in education. The legislation on private schools and the regulations make provision for this. There are many people of colour attending these private schools, because the private schools decide for themselves on the admission of those children.

Do they accept them in their own cultural context?

Of course. If they do it that way, it is all right.

What is the difference then?

No, there is no problem in that regard.

Subgroups therefore establish a link between their culture and education, and they establish control over it at local level. By what means? In the first place by means of mother-tongue education. Let there be no doubt about the fact that this also applies to the Black schools and every other school, because the mother-tongue conveys the spirit of the people in its particular idiom. That is why education takes place in this language.

In the second place it takes place by means of the training of teachers at Afrikaans and English medium training institutions. The training makes provision for weaving own culture, language, tradition, etc into education like a golden thread.

In conclusion, parents have an active say and share in creating and developing the spirit, character and tradition at the school, which breathes the parental education. This participation goes further. It extends to regional councils and provincial education councils. The provincial education councils which have now been constituted include the respective language groups. We work together on this one common ideal. I do not want to pursue this matter.

Mr Chairman, may I ask the hon the Minister whether he is not in fact saying that English-speaking South Africans must look upon themselves as being a distinct group, a small group like German-speaking South Africans, and that if they want to have their own culture and educational environment, they must not only pay their taxes but also private school fees to be able to achieve that? [Interjections.]

No, Sir, I do not think we should start a debate on this now. I do not think that is what I was trying to say. I tried to reply to the question regarding this real problem. It is a problem, and I understand this, particularly when looked at in the idiom in which the hon member sees it. I really do not want to debate that matter across the floor of this House any further because it simply takes the matter further away from us.

So you flick us off like a little minority group!

No, that is not true, and I do not want to pursue this matter further. [Interjections.]

I want to thank the hon member Prof Olivier—I mean this—for the well considered comments he made. Although we disagree with one another, I respect the reasoning of the hon member, and the way in which he expressed himself. I also want to tell the hon member that the department itself would very much like to see the bursaries at universities increased. I must however make it clear to the hon member across the floor of the House that this depends on what is financially feasible. We would all like more money, but because funds are limited it is simply not possible to do this.

I also want to tell the hon member that I could not agree with him more regarding the problems in respect of the library. If one removes the library from the university, one is removing the heart from the body as it were. There is surely no doubt about that. What is more, the books must be supplemented. Of course the hon member is right about the cost of books. As he knows of course, this is a component which is built into the formula. In this regard we are also dealing with a lack of adequate funds to meet the requirements of the universities to cover all the respective fields. May the day come when we will eventually be able to place the priority of education so high that it will be feasible, within the framework of State expenditure, that we shall get enough money to enable us to give more money to that extremely important component. The same also applies in respect of the extremely important visits of our scientists and academics to countries abroad. Unfortunately we also lack funds in this regard at the moment.

Before I resume my seat I want to touch on one further matter. This concerns career-orientated education. Several hon members on this side of the House—and I think a few hon member on the other side of the House too—spoke about this. I just want to say a few things. Career-orientated education comprises far more than technical professional education. I want us to bear this in mind, because I have an idea that we all talk about this and consider it to be important, but only have technical education in mind. This is not the case. Career-orientated education is aimed at maturing the individual and preparing him for his entire life as an adult.

As early as the junior primary phase the pupils are made aware of their own personalities and capabilities. Their creative and psychomotor skills are developed to ascertain the direction in which they must eventually move. In std 5, for example, basic drawing is offered to the pupils. In the junior secondary phase the pupils have a wide opportunity to take career-orientated subjects, while in the senior secondary phase there are no fewer than eight different career-orientated subjects from which they can choose. We are therefore doing a great deal in this regard. I can also inform hon members that training in pre-tertiary career education is being offered at more than 71 colleges.

In 1985 there were approximately 23 000 students enrolled in engineering fields, and approximately 10 600 in fields relating to commercial fields. A great deal is therefore being done, but having said this I also want to say that the technical colleges are at present the strongest growthpoint in White education, and for a very good and sound reason. We would like to help to make this possible.

Mr Chairman, to begin with I just want to set a few matters straight as regards certain allegations that were made here.

Firstly, I shall refer once again to the whole question of the salaries of academics at universities which are supposedly unsatisfactory. It was said that a junior lecturer—who occupies a post at a university equivalent to that of a teacher at a college of education— earns R21 000 per annum as against R36 000 in the case of a lecturer at a college of education. That comparison is entirely invalid. It is, in fact, very difficult to compare the lecturers at one institution with those at another, since there are different hierarchies at universities and colleges of education.

Let me put it this way. The junior lecturer’s salary is not even taken into account in determining the remuneration package of lecturers at universities. The remuneration package of the so-called average lecturer at a university, before the 12,5% increase, was a little over R51 000. That is considerably higher than the remuneration package of the average lecturer at a college of education.

Furthermore, we must take note of the fact that due to the autonomy of universities, and within the parameters laid down by the department in order to ensure that its money is not entirely wasted whenever this autonomy is abused …

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

Sir, I really do want to finish; I have run out of time on two previous occasions, and I do not want to be caught a third time.

The universities are entitled to single out good lecturers for higher remuneration than other lecturers, but that right is very seldom exercised. What is usually done is that the universities promote all the professors—by way of a subsidy 10% of the professors are regarded as being at level 7 and 10% at level 8—to level 8. The universities are therefore not prepared to make use of their autonomy insofar as the differentiation in the remuneration packages of their own lecturers is concerned, and the result is that lecturers, particularly the good lecturers, become bitterly dissatisfied with their salaries and eventually leave. What is more, one can quite understand it.

A second matter to which I want to refer is the entire issue of the 8% increase in respect of White education and the 40% increase in respect of Blacks. During the period 1972 to 1978, however, there was a decrease of 17,3% in the White birth rate. That decrease must naturally be reflected in our schools. One cannot, therefore, expect the increase in funds to be spent on fewer children to be equal to the increase applicable to a tremendous increase in the number of pupils. I wish we could put an end to that sort of comparison, because it is a totally invalid one.

I now turn to the last matter to which I want to refer. We have now heard quite a number of speeches on problems which universities— or rather, tertiary education—are experiencing, and on the potential for rationalisation. We should be very wary of one thing. The university is a tremendously important institution in any particular community, and the community which neglects its university is in a state of decline. We simply have to accept that. What is true is that too many of those attending university ought not to be there or ought rather not to have gone there. This is not because they are not talented, but quite simply because they would fare better in other institutions offering other types of training. Approximately 31% of our grade 1 children—this is last year’s figure—ultimately attend university, whilst only 18% of grade 1 children in developed countries attend university. If we wanted to remove that 13%, it would mean having to raise our admission requirements by 5%. However, at the same time we would reduce the pass rate by approximately 12%, from the present average of 24% to approximately to 11%—12%. This failure rate and the associated drop-out rate among students, who then leave university without any qualifications, is costing the State approximately R120 million per annum, based on last year’s figures, and that is a tidy sum of money to spend on people who do not give us anything in return, quite apart from the fact that a tremendous number of man-years are lost. These are productive years in the lives of people who could have done something else, thereby rendering a productive service which society could quite rightly have expected of them.

Linking up with that aspect, I want to speak about university autonomy. It is true that autonomy actually means that a university can make decisions regarding its own affairs. It also means that this autonomy has a tremendous responsibility attached to it. Such a university is autonomous, not as a little community on its own, but simply because it is a specific type of institution that is best able to make its own decisions. This autonomy is very often used to justify all sorts of actions. It is said that the State may not do this or that because then it would be infringing upon the autonomy of the universities. However, I think the universities and the State should come to an agreement regarding the extent to which a university is autonomous and when it forfeits that autonomy if it does certain things which actually negate its autonomy.

The concept of academic freedom is very closely linked to that of autonomy. There is probably no other excuse used more often to condone so many sins than that of academic freedom. When someone is an academic, he has academic freedom and he says whatever he wants to whenever he wants to and however he wants to. Academic freedom is also interpreted in the sense that a university may admit anyone who complies with its requirements to a course of study at that university. That is nonsense. That is not academic freedom at all. Academic freedom means one thing only, and that is that science must have a voice. One may not therefore inhibit science. This means that the academic, as an academic, may say what he ought to say on the basis of his scientific research.

I shall give hon members an example of this: It has come to my attention that a university has instituted a course for the training of teachers. This has once again been done under the guise of autonomy, and also because they are supposedly learned people. For all that, I just want to say that scholars ought not to be taken so seriously when it comes to matters other than academic matters. [Interjections.] A course has been introduced for teachers, entitled: “Anti-racist education”. This is something which has as little place in an academic institution as does “racist education”. Science does not impose values. It does not prescribe, and it does not tell one what one ought to do. Science is not politics. Just as it cannot tell one what one ought to do, it cannot tell one what one ought not to do either. Science therefore does not produce any categorical imperatives, but only hypothetical imperatives.

It would seem that my time has expired, but I just want to make one more point, and that is that we should really think hard about whether we are still being honest about these concepts when we sometimes use them to justify our own actions.

I want to repeat that the universities should not get the impression, in view of the criticism I am now levelling at them, that we underestimate their importance. The universities exist to accommodate the intellectual élite of society. They are the institutions which produce manpower of the highest order, namely those individuals who are not merely able to memorise a number of historical facts or scientific formulas, but who can identify a problem, form a theory about it and resolve it. That is actually what tertiary education is all about. It has to do with the creation of mental attitudes rather than ready knowledge.

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

Order! I am sorry, but the hon member has already resumed his seat. Moreover, his time has expired.

Mr Chairman, White educational standards remain a focal issue. They are standing in the way of the Government’s obsession with achieving parity in the field of education for every inhabitant of South Africa within the shortest possible time. According to certain statements made by the hon the Minister of National Education, he is even prepared to accept the disruption of White education as a consequence of the Government’s policy, as long as this is not too excessive.

We have already pointed out that Government policy is having a detrimental effect on the standard of White education. We have mentioned some concrete examples of this, but the hon the Minister of National Education has chosen merely to react with a personal attack. We did not really expect anything else, because the Government could not retract its prior statements which we quoted, and it could not dispute the concrete facts and examples we mentioned. I did expect, however, that the hon the Minister of Education and Culture would attempt to react to them and to give us the assurance that he was a staunch supporter of White education and White educational standards. During the many opportunities the hon the Minister has had to speak—three thus far, which is more than we were allotted—he has remained as silent as the grave on that issue. [Interjections.] The hon the Minister pretended not to be in the House. All these things passed him by without his taking any notice of them. [Interjections.] I refer the hon the Minister specifically to at least five concrete examples of the problem I have mentioned, and I ask the hon the Minister to react to them.

I want to refer specifically to the hon the Minister’s statements yesterday on White pre-primary education. I quote:

Where do you get that from?

I quoted what the hon the Minister said.

I want to ask the hon the Minister whether he realises how much consternation those statements of his caused in teaching circles yesterday. Looking at the hon the Minister, he does not appear to me to realise it. I once again ask the hon the Minister to take a look at this specific matter, which I dealt with at quite some length during the debate on national education as an example of the decline of White educational standards, and to react to it.

Where, when and by whom was it said that pre-primary schools were to be closed? I have no knowledge of that, and I wonder where the hon the Minister got it from. Furthermore, what is particularly striking is the fact that the hon the Minister wants to make empty classrooms in his department available to private pre-primary schools. Why is the hon the Minister withholding them from departmental schools? Or is it another way of confirming …

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

Mr Chairman, I will not take a question from that hon member, who does not even know that the UDF is an organisation acting as a front for the ANC.

Order!

Mr Chairman, the question is why … [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member is not prepared to answer a question. He may continue with his speech.

Mr Chairman, the question is why the hon the Minister is withholding these empty classrooms from departmental schools. Is this another way of confirming the validity of certain fears, namely that the Government has decided to make some severe cut-backs in respect of pre-primary education on the pretext that this is not compulsory education? The hon the Minister should tell us why no categorical provision has been made for this type of education in the formula. May I put a pertinent question to the hon the Minister? I shall ask it slowly, so that the hon the Minister will not be able to say at a later stage that I rattled it off and that it was impossible for him to answer it. [Interjections.]

Will your battery stand up to it? [Interjections.]

How is provision being made for White pre-primary education in the formula? A very simple little question.

Now the Minister is not listening to you at all!

However, Sir, there is a portion which I did not quote. It appears a little further on in the unedited transcript of the hon the Minister’s speech. In order to save time, I shall not quote it. I shall merely refer to the phrase:

Sir, I sincerely hope that I do not understand the hon the Minister correctly. I hope the hon the Minister does not mean by that that empty classrooms in his department are to be made available to other departments of the Ministers’ Council before they are made available for departmental use.

Mr Chairman, I also asked the hon the Minister of National Education whether he was prepared to eliminate the deficiency in the budgeting system. I referred to the fact that the profession was being confronted with a fait accompli because the Department of Finance was not making its contributions timeously. I want to ask whether this hon Minister is prepared to assist the teaching profession in rectifying this matter. I should like to hear from the hon the Minister by how much the White educational budgets of each province have been cut as compared to last year. I should also like to know how the Transvaal was dealt with in the process, because there is a suspicion that the Transvaal is still subsidizing the other provinces to a certain extent.

I want to touch on another matter, namely that according to a report in yesterday’s edition of Die Burger, the director of the TED, Mr Koos Steyn, said there was a great deal of concern about the increase in the number of resignations in the field of education. It is particularly those key staff members in the subjects for which there is a shortage who are leaving the profession. According to Dr Mans of the Transvaal Education Department 1 073 teachers have already resigned in the first six months of this year, 134 of them having done so due to financial pressure. During the corresponding period last year—the whole twelve months— the figure was 180.

[Inaudible.]

Why don’t you rather go and talk to the UDF! [Interjections.]

And a levelling off in student training is already discernible. Even those students who are already being trained want to change their courses. This matter is giving cause for concern and also relates to another question I put to the hon the Minister of National Education, that question being whether he was amenable to a comprehensive investigation. He was opposed to it. His reasons were unconvincing. We agree with Mr Douglas Schreuder, the chairman of the Federal Teachers’ Council, that a comprehensive investigation could prove that teachers’ salaries have been lagging behind since 1984.

Then there is the question of the status of the Superintendent General of White education. I asked the hon the Minister of National Education why, if he was serious about the so-called autonomy of White education, he did not elevate the status of the Superintendent General to that of a director general. He replied by way of interjection that he had already done so. I hope the hon the Minister of Education and Culture will agree with me that that is not a correct reflection of the situation, but I shall have more to say about that at a later stage.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Potgietersrus, in his characteristic fashion, again requested the attention of this Committee this afternoon.

He fired blank cartridges!

This time he went on about the harming of White education. He said that he was going to provide evidence, but all he did was to refer to pre-primary education. In the process he once again put a whole series of questions to the hon the Minister. It is quite clear that that hon member is still saddled with the problem of being unable to distinguish between what falls under National Education on the one hand, and Education and Culture on the other. [Interjections.] He will have to get his homework a little more up to date in this regard.

I do not wish to dwell further on what the hon member said. Nevertheless I just want to give him some friendly advice, which is that he will have to temper the tone of his speeches. Should he not do so he will harm the cause he seeks to promote. I shall leave the hon member at that because in the few minutes at my disposal I should like to draw the attention of this House to the importance of school guidance for career education.

This debate is about White education as an own affair, and if there is one matter about which we as Whites must have no illusions then it is that our survival in this country will depend on our quality and not on our numbers. The demands made in these times on the initiative, leadership, creative work and creative thinking of the Whites; and the demands made on the capacity of the Whites to form a partnership of coexistence with fellow South Africans in an uncertain and even unsafe world, require of them to be people of quality in all respects. I say that the Whites will have to be people of quality. What applies to the Whites in this regard also, of course, applies to all the other groups in our country. Therefore I want to say that a community without quality is a community without a future.

It is a simple truth that education, and schools in particular, play a decisive role in the moulding of people of quality. Here I am not simply referring to a single specific aspect of man, for example his intellect, but to all aspects and all components of a balanced maturity.

I am grateful to be able to say that our system of education, and specifically school guidance, is based on the following, and I quote from Act No 30 of 1967:

Act No 67 of 1984 links up with this. It reads inter alia—

Due specifically to the urgent need for people of quality, and against the background of the two extracts from the educations laws that I have just quoted here, the importance of school guidance for career education needs no further justification. This is in every respect of fateful importance to us and that is why it is a cause for gratitude that in the system for the provision of education for Whites there is already an extensive infrastructure for the provision of school guidance particularly in secondary schools.

However, the HSRC reports of 1984 and 1986, as well as the White Paper on the Provision of Education of 1983, indicate that there are serious deficiencies in the operationalisation of school guidance. Indeed, one of the findings of the HSRC inquiry and that of the National Institute for Personnel Research in 1986 was that the effect of vocational guidance within or outside the school context was regarded by the majority of pupils involved in this inquiry—and this is interesting—as being of little or no importance.

It was found that by and large, subject teachers as well as parents and other pupils, rather than counsellors and their guidance, were the only people who exerted a direct influence on pupils’ career choices. Without generalising, therefore, I contend that too many of our White schoolchildren are today still leaving school in a state of great uncertainty as to which career they wish to follow.

Die Unie, the mouthpiece of the Kaaplandse Onderwysersunie, referred in 1983 to a disturbing state of affairs. I wish to quote a brief extract from the relevant report.

The report goes on:

This is really cause for concern, and one cannot help asking where the fault lies. We do have the infrastructure for school guidance, but we have a problem here at grass-roots level, at the operational level. In this regard I wish to quote two recognised educationists. The first is Prof J S van der Walt, emeritus professor of the University of the Orange Free State, who had the following to say on this subject:

A second recognised educationist is Prof Neil van Loggerenberg, director of the Orange Free State Teachers’ Association. Earlier this year, in a discussion of school reform, he had the following to say in this regard:

Therefore, in making an appeal today for the importance of school guidance, I am not advocating a change in the structure of the system whereby it is provided. The system exists, and it is an excellent system. What I ask is that school guidance should, firstly, be accorded its rightful place and status in every school in our country. Secondly, I am calling for specialised counsellors at our schools who provide guidance in the group context and attend to the individual pupil as well. Thirdly, I call for effective guidance in our primary schools as well to enable pupils to make the correct choice of the type of secondary school they wish to attend. Fourthly, I ask that in addition to their general education, our children be individually guided and assisted to identify and develop their inclinations and talents.

I conclude by saying that effective school guidance will help our children to make occupational choices in accordance with their intellectual and physical abilities. This will means that their school careers will be more meaningful to them and more successful, as well as happier. In the process we shall be training young people of quality at our schools—young people of quality because they will be aware of and understand the creative task entrusted to them, namely to be of service to their Creator, their fellowman and the country we live in.

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

I have already expressed my apologies to the hon the Minister that I could not be here during the introduction of the debate yesterday, but I have read some of the more prominent speeches that were delivered yesterday, notably that of the hon the Minister himself. I must say that that, together with the remarks he made today, lead me to no further conclusion than that in the year since we last had this debate he has learnt nothing about the consequences of the very statements he himself makes. Let me give you an example, Mr Chairman. The hon the Minister says:

I agree with him wholeheartedly. The hon the Minister also says there must be a connection between the language and the culture of the communities and—I will use his own words— “its own system of values” and the school. Then he tells me—a person who belongs to a church which is non-racial and the leadership of which is made up of people who are from all races of South Africa; who invites people of colour to his home where his children play with people of colour; who has a system of values that says that “thou shalt not restrict on a racial basis” that he will determine for me what my school shall be like. He determines this; not me!

That is where the hon the Minister is not consistent. That is where he falls down.

It is fine when the Minister is talking from his point of view, but he does not allow the consequences to flow the other way.

The South African society is undergoing a process of turmoil, change, political conflict and pressure. However, a significant sector exists where the calm is almost embarrassingly evident and praiseworthy and that is in the classrooms under this department. Whatever pressures and problems exist—I will be talking of some of them in a moment—the staggering normalness of what is going on in our schools is a tremendous compliment to our teachers. They stretch across the wide spectrum of our politics. Some may be neo-Marxists, some are certainly AWB supporters, others are Nationalists, Progressives or Conservatives. Many are of no or no fixed political view. Yet, by and large, peace exists in our classrooms.

I want to congratulate and thank the teachers, the school establishment staff and the pupils themselves who have kept going and educating in the present South African environment which is more conducive to emotion than simple, logical reason. They in the schools represent among the very best elements of our South African society.

That is the good news. Now let us have a look at the rest. The Department of Education and Culture: House of Assembly under this hon Minister is incontrovertibly the most conservative and the most verkramp of all State structures or departments in South Africa. [Interjections.]

What does the CP say about that? [Interjections]

I want to make it quite clear to the hon the Minister that I will not be dwelling on the total unacceptability to the PFP of the concept of racial own affairs education departments. I want to turn to some of the devious and dangerous behaviour patterns that this department is exhibiting— patterns which threaten not only good government but the very fabric of trust on which we base our society, and the hon member for Stellenbosch who is responsible for the schools in his constituency, must listen carefully today. [Interjections.]

It is extremely difficult to establish the absolute truth of some of the matters I will be talking about. Rather, because they may be his secrets, it is up to the hon the Minister to accept or deny publicly what I am going to say today.

To anyone knowledgeable the concept of a secret agenda or programme in this department is starkly evident. I shall give hon members some examples. Ask any teacher if he is aware of what his class size will be next year; ask any subject specialist as to what role his provincial education department is going to play in creating a syllabus for pupils in his province; ask any administrator—even the officials of the department sitting here today—whether they know what is happening about education legislation and one is likely to get an embarrassed shrug.

Let us turn to details like class size—I am listening to the laughter in the back bench over here. For a number of years principals and teachers have been aware of a whittling-away of the school teacher supply. Gradually principals have had to make adjustments for fewer teachers in their schools. The most obvious effect of this has been to make class sizes larger, and the hon the Minister must listen carefully to what I have to add. I believe that whether this might represent a fall-off in education standards still has to be resolved by educationists.

That is an assumption.

So, the hon member believes that it has been proved that bigger classes have no effect on standards?

Who says the classes are bigger? There are schools standing empty.

Yes, and what are you doing with them? [Interjections.]

For the information of the hon backbencher for Germiston I shall send him the answers of the hon the Minister over the past three years that demonstrate that class sizes have increased. He will agree. [Interjections.]

Now we come to the problem of the educational planner who is the one in the province who has to resolve this difficulty. He is told to base his supply on both finances and the figures channelled to him from above. Now what is the truth of the matter? Is it that it has already been agreed by someone, whether it is the hon the Minister or the hon Ministers of Education together or the Cabinet, that in equalising education over a 10-year period the average class size in White own affairs education must increase from an average in the region of 24 to 30.

This is what the evidence given by the hon the Minister of Education and Training before Scot implies. What that means is that the classes are going to continue to get bigger. There will continue to be fewer teachers supplied and paid for by the hon the Minister of Education and Culture. Please, we need the truth about this because otherwise we sail into the future with no knowledge and no map.

Let us turn to tuition fees which have already been mentioned, I understand, by hon members of the CP. At this point I do not want to go on and on about the formula; I have done so in three debates already. It is secret and yet it has been applied to the hon the Minister’s budget for two years. Strange but true! I want to ask him a question. How is he going to run his schools when his budget for this year—the segment relating to schools— has only been increased by 2,7%? Will it be by simply ensuring that from 1 January 1988 White parents will pay about R200 per child for the education of their children? Is that true?

Having last Wednesday summoned 33 representatives of parents from all over South Africa to attend a meeting to consider this matter, he has run into difficulties. He has run into a fairly unexpected and unified opposition to the scheme as he presents it. I want to make it clear that this is not opposition to tuition fees but to the scheme as presented. Schools do not want to collect the money and merely channel it through to his department for redistribution. Parents are unhappy about the vague and confused manner of explaining where and how the money is to be spent. So, quite clearly, 1 January 1988 as payday for fees appears to be slipping away fast. Has the hon the Minister thought of sharing this with all South Africans? No, Sir, not he!

It is interesting that the June issue of Mondstuk of the Transvaalse Onderwysers-vereniging had the following to say about the funding of education in general:

Will the hon the Minister therefore please tell South Africa about money? Tied in with the debacle about tuition fees incidentally, this goes back some four years when the TED first amended their ordinance to allow for tuition fees to be collected although since then they have not collected them because of political jiggery-pokery—is a further frightening financial dimension. This is best conveyed in these words that appeared in last Friday’s Finansies en Tegniek:

They are talking about education in general in South Africa—

That surmise appears to be close to the truth. Perhaps the hon the Minister can enlighten South Africa as to whether the House of Assembly’s departments, particularly his own, are in the process of investigating the creation of a House of Assembly’s services’ levy. This is apparently a levy to be placed on all users of own affairs departments, such as the municipalities, businesses and professions—he has simply to deny it if I am wrong—to help fund this apparently increasingly pauperised House. Is this true? Is it true that fees and levies to be collected by anybody except the Receiver of Revenue are nothing more than a manifest increase in taxation whilst avoiding the political consequences of calling it increased taxation? Secrets will out. The hon the Minister must rather tell South Africa what is going on.

As I look at this and listen and hear what’s happening, I wonder whether the hon the Minister has told his own caucus about these matters. Does each and every NP MP who has a co-responsibility for these fees and levies, know about this? If they know about it, then they must share, if you like, in the responsibility for it. I do not believe they know.

And we are not going to Dakar!

I doubt it very much …Neither did I!

Well done!

Could I suggest …

And you have told your caucus about it?

This is very interesting, Mr Chairman. If you will allow me. I would like to make a remark in passing. During the holidays I went to a country where the former State President is under house arrest and where the former head of the defence forces had been chased out of the country. I actually went to Transkei! [Interjections.]

Could I suggest … [Interjections.] … that we call on this hon Minister to tell us the truth. Let him explain carefully to us and the world what he is doing for example with education legislation. I wrote this before today’s speech by the hon the Minister. I must however tell you that nothing that the hon the Minister has put in his speech today answers the questions I am going to put to him.

In April 1986 he took over provincial education. More than six months previously his predecessor, the hon the Minister of Home Affairs had talked about the importance of provincial education councils and how they would help maintain the unique character and ethos of each province’s education. This hon Minister has repeated it. He repeated it in last year’s speech and he repeated it yesterday, namely that the character and ethos of a province’s education must be maintained. So when the provincial council ceased to control education, did we get the education councils? No, we did not. Seventeen months later we heard the fanfare viz, that on 20 August the education councils would arrive. Are they going to discuss tuition fees?

Of course, yes.

Thank you.

Are you happy now?

I am pleased that I got an answer! What I do know is that well over a year ago when I asked the hon the Minister a question about the provincial ordinances and their status that the hon the Minister talked about in his speech today, I was told that they would be co-ordinated in a single Act of Parliament. I am glad that he confirms it. These ordinances actually make interesting reading, 286 pages of them. Every province and every educationist and every MP has a vested interest in ensuring that his particular ordinance view predominates.

What I want to ask is whether the provincial education councils will have the power and the right and the ability to discuss the draft Bill that this hon Minister is in the process of putting together before it is presented to this Parliament or to the law advisers or tabled for first reading. Do I get a yes? No, I get silence.

The advisory council is for that reason …

I get silence. I will give you the reason, because this hon Minister infact does not want the differences and distinctions between the ordinances and the draft Bill to be fully and convincingly debated.

That is not true.

Okay, fine, I have heard the hon the Minister’s reply and it is now in Hansard. Let me, however, ask him whether he is prepared to consider referring such a Bill which may well be complex and certainly will be long—it will have to be to summarize all this—to a standing select committee of this House for discussion, debate or comment. Or is it the intention to use the unquestioning and largely unaware NP caucus to ram it through quickly with the maximum possible speed and the minimum possible debate?

I must warn the hon the Minister that in regard to this forthcoming Bill he must tread carefully and sensibly and with the widest possible consultation. It is simply not good enough to stick to the secret agenda.

Briefly, as far as preprimary education is concerned—the CP has already talked about this—the hon the Minister must please tell us when the funding of the non-preschool year in preprimary education is going to end. The hon the Minister must tell us whether the provincial directors already have a clear knowledge of where the pre-primary education phase is going to be cut. He must tell us, tell South Africa, tell the teachers or—let us make it even more personal—tell me whether the three-year-old child whom I have in the past sent to a pre-primary school will be taught by a teacher whose salary will be paid by this hon Minister’s department from next year onwards.

Mr Chairman, I welcome the opportunity to participate in this debate on a subject with which I have for some time had a close affinity and involvement. I will not comment on the points raised by the hon member for Pinetown who is a man who obviously knows his subject but is just as obviously on a most provocative crusade for instant utopia. The hon member expects equalisation of education at no cost.

I never said so!

Before I proceed any further, I believe that through my inexperience in this House it appeared that in my maiden speech I went, politically speaking, close to the bone at times, and I trust that if anyone took umbrage he will accept my explanation.

I should like to address myself to several educational matters. The first concerns the future of the Natal College of Education, formerly the Natal Training College, in Pietermaritzburg. Regrettably the training of teachers for Natal pre-primary schools in the English medium, which has been the function of this college in recent years, is to be phased out totally next year and its functions are to be transferred to the Edgewood College of Education in Pinetown.

I fully understand the financial implications and that the drop in pupil numbers has led to a rationalisation in teacher training. However, that a college with many years of tradition and an outstanding reputation, and one which was originally responsible for the training of all primary school teachers in Natal, should suffer in favour of a college that is still wet behind the ears, is very sad indeed.

To lay the blame at anyone’s door at this stage would, I think, be futile. I do, however, make a plea to the hon the Minister that we look at the circumstances of this college to see whether the correspondence section of the college which operates most successfully at present could be expanded to make it financially and educationally viable, and to accommodate firstly the educators of all sections of our population, many of whom are without proper or any training facilities at all in their area and who have expressed a keen interest in using the facilities already established and available. Perhaps this will be possible if one applies the devolution of power to college councils in terms of the proposed Colleges of Education Bill although the draft legislation makes no provision for this at present.

Secondly, this section could be expanded to accommodate a loyal and highly competent staff who at present face a most undeserved and uncertain future. By so doing we may keep alive the remnants of a college dear to the hearts of the people of Pietermaritzburg.

Furthermore, in future planning sight should not be lost of the needs of the people in the Natal Midlands, and serious consideration should be given to the reintroduction of resident teacher-training courses. In this way we can resurrect an institution whose demise is, I believe, the result of a most unfortunate sequence of events.

The next matter I would like to deal with is one which I raised briefly in my maiden speech and concerns the University of Natal in Pietermaritzburg. I refer to the granting of subsidies in respect of capital and recurrent expenditure in accordance with the approved subsidy formula.

I note with interest in the estimates for 1987-88 that the subsidy for the University of Natal—that is Pietermaritzburg and Durban—for recurrent expenditure and interest is R84,8 million, as against R69,7 million in 1986-87, which represents an increase of R15,1 million or 21,7%. This appears to be most satisfactory, but the only university which received capital grants was the University of Pretoria, which received R7 million in 1986-87, and R7,8 million in 1987-88.

I appeal to the hon the Minister to call for a full report on the facilities at the University of Natal/Pietermaritzburg and to take note of how far these have lagged behind other universities in the Republic of South Africa.

I would like to bring to the attention of the hon the Minister that it is through the shortage of funds that there is a lack of maintenance of the buildings which has even made some of the physical facilities uninhabitable.

I ask further that consideration be given to the separation of the Pietermaritzburg and Durban campuses for the making of grants in terms of the formula.

My third subject is the influence of parents’ and teachers’ associations on the education system, with particular reference to Natal. We all welcome the powers devolved to parents, school committees, and regional committees. I believe this will do much to improve the community involvement—financially and, I think, organizationally—for the improvement of education. We welcome the news announced by the hon the Minister today of the imminent introduction of the Natal Education Council which will be advisory to the hon the Minister. I believe it will fill a void which appears to exist at present.

Contrary to what the hon members for Durban North and Pinetown had to say about the so-called lack of powers of the education council, I believe its representation will much improve the total community involvement in education in comparison with what existed under the old provincial council system and, at times, super powers of the executive committee.

I am confident that the education council, drawing members from many disciplines, together with the capable assistance of the ministerial representative for Natal, Dr Hosking, will ensure the success of the education system in Natal.

The role of teachers’ associations is a very important one. They fight for the rights and standards of their profession, and they contribute much to improve their professional status and the standard of education. On a discordant note, however, the Natal Teachers’ Society—the NTS—has become highly politicized in recent years, together with its mouthpiece titled Mentor being a most controversial publication. I belong to several professional associations, and I receive publications which are totally professional and a credit to the bodies they represent. Regrettably, I cannot say the same for the NTS publication Mentor. We have a past president of the NTS in this House, namely the hon member for Durban North, and a past professional secretary, namely the hon member for Pinetown …

No wonder!

… who it would appear have made blatant use of the publication for political purposes.

Did you ask which association the hon the Minister belonged to?

I refer to comments on subjects in volumes of Mentor handed to me by a member of the teaching profession. It is questionable whether some of the comments represent the general view of the profession, and some, I think, are certainly objectionable. Subjects like teachers’ organizations as forces for liberation, the author being Franklin Sonn, are discussed: “The inevitable is a post-apartheid society. More academics join the revolt”.

Do you approve of apartheid?

There is also the following comment by the editor: “Teachers can rest assured that in our cuckoo Parliament Mike Ellis and Roger Burrows will be telling the time loudly and clearly for all to hear: I should say tolling the time”. [Interjections.]

Probably the worst examples of political bias in Mentor are caricatures of the State President with his cranium being lifted and his brain being removed, with the caption: “The brains of apartheid fly the coop”. There are many more examples which most hon members would find objectionable.

Small wonder that letters are written to the editor of Mentor by members of the NTS and parents objecting to the line taken. One goes like this: “I resign. I was perturbed to see the Natal Teachers’ Society involved in front-line politics. Educationists are here to educate along non-political lines”. Another letter, to the then president, Mr Mike Ellis, reads as follows: “As a parent I am concerned to learn that you and squeaking liberals like you run your lives by kind permission of the White taxpayer, hold radical integrationist views and wish to impose them upon White children”. These are not my words.

To improve relationships between parents, pupils, and educators I appeal to the hon members mentioned if they have any influence over the NTS publication—and I am sure they do—to do their utmost to lift the standard of this journal to make it a truly professional publication, worthy of a very fine profession.

Mr Chairman, the will of every people to survive requires them to do everything in their power to ensure that everything that is necessary for the future is made available to the young people so that they may be spiritually and physically strong and prepared for the difficult times that lie ahead, because the youth of today will be the leaders of tomorrow. The youth of today themselves are also concerned about their own survival, and the process of impoverishment is one of the reasons for this concern because they, too, do not want to be forced or pressured into Third World conditions. Equal pay for equal work should be based on a high level of productivity so that the young person will have the assurance that the skills for which he or she is being trained, will still be necessary in this country in the future. They must also be assured that there will be work for them in future.

Sir, why is the White growth rate declining? It is being said that by the end of this century there will be large-scale unemployment. The end of this century is round the corner. Not all the peoples living in this country care about maintaining a disciplined population growth. We cannot be apathetic about the survival of the Afrikaner people. We should therefore give attention to the fundamental causes of the declining number of Whites, because this problem is quite possibly the worst the Whites have to deal with in order to survive. [Interjections.]

We on this side of the House become most concerned when we look at the questions that have been asked regarding unused accommodation at White schools and colleges, and we are taking cognisance of the evasive reply the hon the Minister of Education and Culture provided to these questions on 28 July, as well as of the reply by the hon the Minister of Education and Development Aid. He said the reaction was positive in respect of the talks that were held between the hon Ministers and the national states on the admission of Black students or pupils to unutilised institutions. How far can this be allowed to go, and what will happen if those that are admitted form more than half of the students or scholars at such an institution? What kind of school would it be then, and under which Ministers’ Council or department would a school like that fall?

The Du Preez-Van Wyk Primary School, which took its name from a previous director of education for the Transvaal, is situated in Bronkhorstspruit, which is in my constituency. The school building is very dilapidated and it is only through an act of grace that it is still standing. The question of facilities that are lacking such as classrooms, a laboratory, adequate toilets, a school hall, central heating, and an administration block with facilities has already been taken up repeatedly with the authorities.

I went to visit the school, and became profoundly aware that something would really have to be done. As long ago as 7 August 1979, the Transvaal Executive Committee decided that a replacement building for 750 pupils for the Du Preez-Van Wyk Primary School would have to be built. An investigation should have been instituted into whether the replacement school should be built on the same land, or whether another suitable piece of land should be acquired.

The so-called school hall consists of the old home economics and handwork rooms which have been converted. There is no proper entrance hall nor any proper public cloakrooms. The hall is situated on the southwestern side of the building complex, whereas the school’s cloakroom facilities are situated on the north-eastern side. The walls of the hall are covered with unsightly cracks, and where the department has tried to carry out repairs, these repairs have been a failure. At the moment the worst cracks are being concealed by chipboard panelling. The school’s wooden floor is disintegrating and children who go barefoot during physical education classes have already been injured.

The same goes for the administration complex. This does not come close to providing for the needs of the school. The walls of the principal’s office look terrible, and there are cracks to be seen everywhere. The administration office is also full of cracks, which have to be hidden behind hardboard. The door of the safe has to be adjusted again and again when it no longer opens, as a result of the fact that the ground is subsiding. There is no office for the deputy principal. There are no separate cloakroom facilities for the staff. Boys as well as girls have to make use of a cold, dark room as a sickbay. The schools medical service has been insisting for several years that conditions be improved, and that a proper sickbay should be organised.

Because heating is a necessity for the welfare of the pupils in the Highveld winter, it must be mentioned that at the moment the heating consists of electric fan heaters in some classes, slow combustion stoves in other classrooms, and electric heaters bought for the purpose in others.

The condition of the school building is alarming. The walls are cracked and the floors are disintegrating. I want to ask the hon the Minister please to give effect to the 1979 decision by the Transvaal Executive Committee.

The Donkerhoek Primary School is also situated in my constituency. This primary school is situated close to the Mamelodi township for Blacks. I am worried because the school still does not have a security fence around it, but I am more concerned about the approximately 200 metres of dirt road, from the tarred road to the school, which the children, parents and teachers have to use every school day. I regard these as very dangerous problems, and I can therefore, with full responsibility, ask the hon the Minister to give attention to this problem as promptly as possible. Our children deserve the highest degree of safety.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Delmas devoted much of his speech to the problems in his constituency, and he will forgive me if I do not follow him in that. I have come to know the hon member here as a member who is not always right but who is always sincere and honest.

The question of contact with other cultural groups, across the colour bar as well, has frequently been broached in this own affairs debate since yesterday. I should like to go into this aspect in a little more detail.

The hon the Minister, too, referred to this aspect in his introductory speech and, just to refresh our memories, I want to quote two short extracts—naturally perhaps a little selectively—from that speech.

†I quote from page 4, paragraph 2 of the hon the Minister’s written speech, in which he said, inter alia:

*The hon the Minister also says elsewhere that we attach great importance to contact in the academic, cultural and sporting spheres.

I want to argue that although cultural contact should not of course be enforced or counteracted, as the hon the Minister said, we should certainly encourage it very enthusiastically.

Hear, hear!

Paul Kruger said we should learn from the past. I was born in Okahandja, in Lewies van Wyk’s backyard, with the help of my mother. I grew up on a cattle farm and until Std 6 attended a small farm school.

During those years we practically hated the English. My grandfather fought till the end against the English in the Anglo-Boer War, and my grandmother survived her suffering in the concentration camp, but 26 000 women and children did not. One of my grandfather’s uncles—that is, my great-grandfather’s brother—literally jumped off the ship that was making for Ceylon, swam back and went to fight again. Unfortunately, that same man’s brother became a “hensopper” and a traitor. That was my great-grandfather’s family.

I want to say that Lord Milner’s anglicisation policy and the forced wearing of the “Dutch donkey” fanned the flames of anti-English feeling. In any event, there were very few English people near us in that area. We seldom saw them. The treachery of this brother of my great-grandfather meant that anything that appeared the least bit English, smacked of treachery to us.

On the other hand, I can say that on the farm we grew up together with the Blacks, mainly Hereros. We played together and laughed together, swam together, experimented with smoking together, rode donkeys together, rode calves, made clay oxen together, and attended funerals on the farm together because, the one’s loss was the other’s loss, too.

Perhaps I could just tell the hon member for Schweizer-Reneke that although we did all these things together, it did not lead to a single mixed marriage, despite the fact that there was no law against mixed marriages.

What is the position today? As a result of good, close cultural contact my family and I have long since ceased to have an aversion to the English. Even Lady Di and Aunty Maggie are okay. The antipathy between English-speaking and Afrikaans-speaking people has virtually disappeared nowadays as a result of close cultural contact.

In sharp contrast to this are the relations nowadays between young Whites and Blacks. How do the White boy and girl from the city get on with the Black boy and girl today, and vice versa? Do they still know each other or do they know dangerously little about each other and about each other’s language and culture? We could speak the Blacks’ language and they could speak ours. What is the situation today? Has the stage not perhaps already been reached in the cities that some of the young people hate one another more than we hated the English?

Part of the solution to the problem lies very definitely in natural cultural contact, as happened spontaneously in the rural areas in earlier years. [Interjections.] My statement is simple but definite: We must learn to know one another better.

The bright future—I say “bright future”—and salvation of all the children in South Africa, from whatever culture, colour or racial group, lies in our getting to know one another from the outset, from grass-roots level. We must come to know, understand and respect one another’s culture, and this can be achieved only through contact.

What better method is there to make contact in order to build good relations, to build up knowledge, understanding and respect for one another than by means of cultural contact? What better “dagha”, or as we said on the farms “ómonokkó”, that is to say building clay, can there be than cultural contact with which to build bridges? [Interjections.] This statement is true and it applies from the cradle to the grave, everywhere.

How can we work together if we cannot relax together; win together if we cannot run together; and fight together if we cannot play together? How can we fight together for what is right, or know how to sweat together, feel together for the same ideal, strive together to live in peace, and decide together on what is right, if we do not even know, or want to know, one another culturally? [Interjections.] We cannot win together if we do not know one another. To share power, we must be able to tolerate one another. To govern together successfully, we have to seek peace together and sincerely desire one another’s friendship. We must work together to strengthen one another, and share in order to heal the wounds.

I repeat, Sir: We have to come to know one another much better; otherwise what is described in the Bible will happen to us—in our hour of crisis we shall say of one another, “no, we do not know them”. [Interjections.]

We, the ordinary people from farms, the city, the kraal and on the street, specifically the young people, must make contact with one another through culture, playing rugby, holding debating evenings and field schools, touring and holidaying together, and create opportunities for conversation and getting to know one another.

But not in the schools?

Yes, in the schools, too. I am proud of Gymnasium, the high school in Paarl that I attended, which played rugby against the Coloureds last year. I am proud of that first Afrikaans school in this country.

Hear, hear!

We shall have to move away from the idea that it is wrong or bad to make contact with people of another race, skin colour or cultural group. Some people even still attach a stigma to such contact. People shout “traitor” if as part of her duty an air hostess carries a child, simply because she happens to be White and the child Black. After all, the fact is that through the centuries Black women, as part of their duty, have carried, handled and helped bring up thousands of Afrikaans children. [Interjections.] As the relationship was then between those Whites and Blacks …

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

No, Sir. I do not have time for that hon member’s nonsense. [Interjections.]

As the relationship was then between those Whites and Blacks, that help, care and bringing up of the White child in his own parents’ home, in his familiar environment with his own mother readily and often at hand, was a better arrangement than placing a child, as is done nowadays, in a crèche or nursery school amongst strangers and away from his parents’ home. I want to ask whether we should not learn once again to sing Amakeia with feeling and with humility.

Let us totally reject, rightly and out of hand, the contact and discussions with the communist-inspired ANC, which commits acts of violence. Let us reject this but let us not in Heaven’s name reject the cultural contact and the discussions with our own people, our kindred spirits, the millions of Black people and the other cultural groups who stand together with us and fight against communism and anarchy. We are prepared to share power with these people from the lowest to the highest level. These people are at present fighting together with us and desire a future together with us. Now is not the time to look for differences between our people with a magnifying glass, but it is time to look at the similarities with our eyes wide open. We must then, with a song in our hearts and a prayer in our minds, revitalised and inspired, give effect to and fulfil positively our cause and duty of building bridges and joining hands by means of our cultural contact. We can win only when we know one another. Let us therefore once again encourage contact at a cultural level—as happened naturally on the farm. [Interjections.] [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Langlaagte has now brought us, in a skilful and convincing manner, from the sphere of education to the sphere of culture, and I now intend to remain there. I shall return once again more specifically, in the last section of my speech, to the area he dealt with.

It is one of the function of the National Monuments Council to identify, proclaim and restore cultural historical buildings. When it comes to the maintenance and care of such monuments, however, the responsibility rests with the community that uses or has used it. It is therefore an own affair for the community concerned and so the Department of Education and Culture has a task in this regard. The following item appears under Programme 7 of the Estimate of Expenditure: Assistance to organisations for preservation of national memorials. An amount of R1 428 000 has been appropriated for this purpose. This is 0,027% of the total budget for the Administration: House of Assembly. It is a modest amount.

Since I entered public life, I have found—in local government, in the provincial council and now here, too—that similar items always appear in budgets, with modest amounts allocated to them. In a country such as ours, it is of course understandable that this should be the case. After all, tremendous demands are being made on the Treasury in order to narrow the gaps in education and in the social sphere. The fact that our country is threatened also necessitates great financial sacrifices to ensure our safety. I could continue in this vein.

In a certain sense the way these matters are dealt with in budgets should be seen as emphasising the Government’s earnestness and idealism regarding the matter of preservation. These are, however, accomplished by a measure of impotence arising from the difficult demands of our dualistic society with its large backward communities, which still have to be raised to a First World level. The authorities simply do not possess the financial means to accept sole responsibility for the preservation of our cultural historical heritage.

In this regard a great responsibility rests with the private sector; a responsibility they fortunately do not evade. It is proper for us in this House today, during the discussion of the Education and Culture Vote—with the emphasis now more specifically on the cultural aspect—to take cognisance once again of the contributions business firms, businessmen, farmers, local authorities and others have made over the past few years to perpetuate the visible evidence of our heritage in this country.

I am thinking of the Boland wine farmers as an example. Cape Dutch architecture is South Africa’s special contribution to world culture. We farmers preserve those treasures in the interests of all. They are part of our heritage. They attest, as it were, to the right all of us have to be here.

I also want to pay tribute to Dr Anton Rupert who showed us that, sociologically as well as economically, it is cheaper to restore than to demolish. The fact that a town such as Stellenbosch is more beautiful today that it was 50 years ago is largely thanks to him. The same goes for Graaff-Reinet.

There is, however, an important contribution the State can make without it costing any money. The State can ensure that when it erects buildings in towns and cities, the style of these buildings will not detract from the character of the environment in which they are placed. A structure planned and built without imagination or a feeling for the environment can cause just as much damage to that environment as demolishing a valuable cultural historical asset. Many of our towns, including my own, are burdened with buildings today that have been built to last forever, but which, as long as they do stand, will disfigure the nature and the character of the environment. The hon the Minister and his department, who are capable and sensitive people, can use their influence to prevent such disfigurements from ever taking place again in at least all the cases where State buildings are involved.

Returning to the R1,428 million that was voted in the Budget for the Preservation of National Memorials, I want to point out that most of this money, namely R703 000, was voted for the Voortrekker Monument. Together with last year’s appropriation this amounts to just over R1 million. This is money well spent, as was the R677 000 that was appropriated for the 1820 Settlers’ National Monument Foundation. The expenditure on these two monuments, the Voortrekker Monument and the Settlers’ Monument, emphasises once again the composition of the largest section of the White population in our country, and its wealth. I shall never be able to be anything but proud that I am an Afrikaner. The fact that I have also been exposed to English influence not only makes me a better South African, but also a better person and, paradoxical as it may sound, a better Afrikaner, too. We would have been much poorer had we been exposed to the Dutch cultural influence only. I as an Afrikaner am certainly grateful that this was not the case.

An amount of R17 000 is also being voted for the maintenance of the Louis Trichardt Garden of Remembrance in Maputo. It is interesting, indeed moving, that in the capital of Mozambique, from which we are nowadays ideologically speaking poles apart, such a monument for a hero of the Afrikaner people is being maintained. There, where everything reminiscent of the previous colonial overlord was knocked down and destroyed long ago, in that tragic hunger-ravaged land where people are fighting for their physical survival, our monument is still visited by some 120 people per year, of whom many are from Eastern bloc countries. The Trichardt Monument in Maputo stands there as proof to the world and as acknowledgement by the world that the Afrikaner has never been a colonialist. The Portuguese monuments have been destroyed, and even the name of the city has been changed, but the Afrikaner shrine remains as visible proof of our permanence in this part of the world. The Afrikaner people is here forever as part of the greater South African nation.

In addition, an amount of R31 000 has been voted for the Huguenot Monument in Franschhoek. On the last day of this year, 1987, it will be exactly 300 years since my French Huguenot ancestor, Charles Marais, left the Netherlands with his family to go to meet the unknown. Next year we commemorate the arrival 300 years ago of the French Huguenots in South Africa. Their influence on what later became known as the Afrikaner people is unmistakable. No historian will dispute that. There is, however, one particular lesson we can learn from their arrival and permanent settlement here. This is a lesson that deserves to be emphasised today. They tried to remain completely separate from the rest of the community with whom their destiny was linked. This appeared to be impossible. The fact that this was not possible proved in the long term to be to the advantage of the Afrikaner people and the South African nation.

The keynote of the Huguenot celebrations next year should be reconciliation; reconciliation out of gratitude, too, for the example and the opportunities they bequeathed to us. It is a great pity that this is apparently not going to be the case; that the celebrations will be taking place in an atmosphere of disunity—the kind of disunity exemplified by the venomous speech made here in this House yesterday by the hon member for Schweizer-Reneke on the 150th celebration of the Great Trek. [Interjections.]

It was you that drove us out of the FAK! [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, I conclude by asking whether we could not, when honouring our ancestors for their contribution to our heritage, just try to be bigger than our current differences. Could we not be dignified when we honour our forefathers?

Mr Chairman, I have become accustomed to the style of the speeches of the hon member for Stellenbosch. His speech today was once again a fine one. He is a refined person, and I agree with the sentiments and quite a number of the things he said. But I must say that the hon member for Langlaagte, who spoke before him, outshone him. I really mean it when I say that he made one of the sincerest and finest speeches I have ever heard in this House. That speech breathed a spirit which, I feel, is going to bode well for South Africa in the future.

Yes, it is based on Prog policy! [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, I am sorry that the fact that I am saying this is making it difficult for that hon member and his party to associate themselves with it. [Interjections.]

In spite of all the reform rhetoric we have heard for such a long time now from the Government I believe that the system of own affairs education represents the perfecting of apartheid and of the apartheid ideology. [Interjections.] I will explain what I mean by that. I believe the NP Government is sincere in its intentions and also in the sentiments expressed here, but whether those sentiments are really embodied in their policy, whether all their intentions are sincere, will in fact have to be tested in practice first. It must be tested in practice by referring to the way in which apartheid or racial discrimination is being dispensed with in education.

In this connection I want to illustrate what I have by means of two examples. It is generally known that there are serious shortcomings in the Black and Coloured educational institutions. This is a fact I need not try to convince anyone of. It is, however, also well known that in White educational institutions falling under this department there is total and large-scale underutilisation of educational facilities.

It must be clear to even the most shortsighted person that such discrimination and the maintenance of such inequalities will give rise to serious tensions and feelings of envy among the Black and Coloured sectors of the population. I want to illustrate this statement with reference to the situation prevailing at the Cape Town Teachers’ College in Mowbray, on whose council I serve. The fact is that this college is almost half empty.

That is because you serve on the council, Jan.

It is not because I serve on the council, it is because that hon Minister is the responsible Minister. The fact is that this college is virtually half empty, whereas Coloured and Black colleges in our vicinity are bursting at the seams and are turning away potential teachers because there is no place for them in their so-called own colleges. I believe this is a disgraceful situation when one takes into consideration how important the role is which education can and must play, and when we take into consideration that many thousands of Black teachers will be needed by the year 2000 and that thousands are needed in South Africa at present.

In Cape Town alone approximately 200 potential Black teachers were turned away this year at the new training college in Khayelitsha because that college was full, whereas the Teachers’ Training College in Mowbray could have accommodated those 200 people with the greatest of ease and in two or three years’ time we could have sent 200 qualified teachers into the Black teaching profession. That is a fact.

The hon the Minister will remember that when an official deputation from the college council came to consult him on that matter, we requested him to thrown that college open. This was a unanimous request by the college council. After a long discussion the hon the Minister refused point-blank to grant our request. I do not want to mention all the reasons he gave for this at this stage.

I believe that the decision by that hon Minister was nothing but White greed, a greed which to a great extent has contributed and still is contributing towards profoundly and seriously bedevilling racial feelings in our country. How would that hon Minister have felt if he was Black, wanted to become a teacher and could not get a place in his own training college, while he was well aware that there was place in the White college in his own area and he was not admitted to that college because he was not White. I want to repeat: How would that hon Minister have felt if he wanted to become a teacher and he was turned away from a college because he complied with all the other standards, but did not belong to the right race group. This is a disgrace in the year 1987.

There are other examples of this so-called reform strategy of the Government. My colleague, the hon member for Cape Town Gardens, mentioned the situation in regard to Rhenish, and I therefore do not want to refer to this matter further except to say that it was really a spectacle to watch a senior Cabinet Minister on that side of the House performing an egg-dance over the admission of two children who are not White to a school in his constituency; his fear that he might lose votes was more important than the welfare of the education of two children.

†I want to refer to a second example and that is in George. We had a situation developing in George around the admission of two Coloured pupils to the English-medium York High School. Those two children are the children of an English-speaking family, the Hamman family, who were transferred from Cape Town to George.

They tried to have their children admitted to the English-medium school, York High in George. The York High School Committee approved of their request and made such a recommendation to the hon the Minister. However, the hon the Minister refused the school committee permission to admit these children to this English-medium school which happened to be White whereas they happened to be Coloured.

The result of the hon the Minister’s decision was that the son had to be sent to a local Afrikaans school, where he struggled so much with his school work that they had to take him out of that school and send him back to Cape Town as a boarder. That son is now boarding in Cape Town as a result of that hon Minister’s policy. That hon Minister’s policy is responsible for the fact that a family now has to incur excessive additional expense because their son has to go to school in Cape Town while the family is living in George.

If that hon Minister can tell me what defence he has from a moral point of view, I would like to hear it, because I would like him to tell the mother that he thinks it is morally right that her son should be taken away from her because apartheid will not allow her son to go to York High School. The daughter is now at a private junior school, but next year she will not be able to go with her classmates to York High. Where will she go? Also to Cape Town?

I believe that that sort of action is a total and utter disgrace in the South Africa of 1987. This Government, through its deeds, is clearly demonstrating that it has no intention of getting rid of racial discrimination. This has two effects: Firstly, I believe it will reinforce the impression among Black people that this Government, and Whites, are unwilling to share South Africa and all its riches with all its peoples. One can only imagine how this will fan the feelings of discontent and anger in our schools. Secondly, this apartheid education policy is also preventing the building of a broad and truly South African nationalism. By keeping our young people apart, the system of own affairs education is actively promoting a lack of understanding for each other’s fears and aspirations, while at the same time reinforcing prejudices. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I do not want to react directly to the argument of the hon member for Claremont. This kind of argument is familiar to us, and I shall leave it to the hon the Minister to deal with him. I want to raise another subject here this afternoon.

Education and culture is under discussion, and we have the opportunity to escape from the mundane matters some hon members keep us occupied with in this House. Let us therefore allow ourselves the sublimity of art and culture, like the following:

This is poetic art, but it is also protest art, and the danger of this kind of art form is that it freely lays claim to the inspiration drawn from the best in us, like the following:

An extreme, vociferous rage, hatred and desire for retribution is also expressed in song:

This means:

And further:

Closer to my own culture, Breyten Dakar Breytenbach contends:

Of course his friend André Dakar Brink regularly writes an open letter to our Head of State, as he did recently:

He writes this when there are Black leaders who openly welcome the state of emergency, because it protects their people. Dakar Dries goes further, however:

Is this true? Are Buthelezi, Phatudi and Mangope not true leaders, according to this writer? The illustrious writer nevertheless flagrantly lays claim to morality:

[Interjections.] He also gains comfort from his own suggestion that we should be done away with, and hopes the following:

This trend in our literature is very arrogant. They are wilful and flourish on misrepresentations, and when one brings them to book, you are the spoilsport and they are the angels. We find this in the following poem as well:

Whose lies are these? These so-called poets are sitting amongst us and they encourage insurrection and revolution:

How alluringly suggestive! These expressions of emotion I have quoted do not simply take place spontaneously, and are not just inspired by the spiritual and the soulful in a human being. They are also planned and co-ordinated. The role of art and culture to encourage resistance in South Africa was the theme during the Botswana arts festival, “Culture and Resistance”, in 1982 in Gaberone. It was decided there to use the specific talents of artists in the struggle to support the cultural boycott against South Africa and to involve sympathetic Whites.

One such sympathetic Gaberone Afrikaner then wrote in Stet, a journal in which one can publish anything no one else wants to print:

Hon members must listen to this:

It would appear that it was a purifying experience for this participant, and it seems to me that we Afrikaners have lost our identity now, too! I have news for the writer. Our long history attests to much worse cultural shocks, and we have survived them all. In comparison with what lies behind us, the Botswana escapade is mere jazz. The same writer also praises the contribution of the jazz musician, Dollar Brand, or Abdullah Abrahim, to the proceedings. It is a small world, however, because about 15 years ago I was a carefree student in Heidelberg—in other words, that was long before the responsibility for the weal and woe of my people and fatherland descended on my narrow shoulders—and during a confrontation with a German broadcasting station concerning the absolute lies about South Africa they broadcast during a jazz programme, it became apparent that Dollar Brand was one of their informants. This same Dollar Brand has already been considered three times for chancellor at a certain South African university, having been proposed each time by an artist and self-acknowledged Marxist. The pieces of the puzzle start to fit!

The SABC does the same.

I would prefer to deal with higher things now. [Interjections.]

As partially illustrated by the preceding, the pre-revolutionary phase of the formal-radical art of protest in South Africa is firstly aimed mainly at leaders and opinion formers in the various fields of art; secondly, at people in key positions at, for example, universities, newspapers, and also in theatre management; and finally of course at the broad masses who are usually ignorant concerning refined artistic taste. The art of protest is therefore a cunning propaganda strategy, and we shall have to be intrepid in taking suitable steps, throughout our community, in our schools and universities as well, to neutralise these trends which could so easily be regarded as the “in thing”.

The entire South African community must therefore be attuned to distinguish between what is dished up by leftist radicals and what really has artistic worth. We must therefore be able to distinguish between the culture and the fire.

†It is so easy to be led astray—so alluring—so effortless, like this:

How beautiful! But, Sir, nowadays love is lost there; even the PFP—the Progressively Failing Party—who themselves became poetic about Zimbabwe a few years ago, will admit this. They were fooled by the poets. This one is rather more truthful:

Sir, let us cease our slumber. Let us beware of such artists. Let us neutralise them! But, let us also, therefore, persist in our endeavours to secure a place in the political sun for all in South Africa. We shall do it, however, in such a fashion that this country does not become the political dying ground of the White man.

Neither is South Africa to be the dying ground of the Black man’s liberty—as happened elsewhere in Africa, abetted by resistance culture as practised by naïve or plotting artists. I put it to you, Sir, that they can never control what they help create.

Finally, let all take note: uBotha and his people do not run away… neither from their enemies, nor from their responsibilities. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, I want to discuss cultural development in the rural areas, particularly from the field of experience of a rural Afrikaner, an Afrikaansspeaking Freestater who comes to the House and has an Englishman as a benchmate on his left. By the way, the hon member for Germiston was the only hon member to complete the Comrades Marathon this year. I am very proud of him. [Interjections.]

My great friend the hon member for Ladybrand says that sometimes he also feels like taking up jogging, but then he lies down on his bench for about ten minutes, and the feeling goes away. This brings me to the question that has occurred to me often since I have been part of this House: If this emotion wells up to such an extent in certain hon members of the Official Opposition, as it does particularly in the case of the hon member for Schweizer-Reneke, would it not be a good idea for him, too, to go and lie down for a while on his bench and to call up a visual image of the Afrikaner, his numerical strength and the disastrous consequences that disunity and denigration in various fields, including the cultural sphere, could hold for us as Afrikaners? Is this then quite the right way to preserve for the future what we all share in and hold so dear?

[Inaudible.]

I gather the hon member for Schweizer-Reneke is leaving on a trek; to move away from the pernicious influence of the NP. I wonder whether he is going to make use of the national roads.

I return once again to culture. I am not bragging but for the past 30 years I have been continuously involved in cultural activities or development in the rural areas, particularly also as far as celebrations of the Day of the Covenant are concerned. I do not know about the Transvaal, but in the Free State many of these people, the conservative spirits who brag about maintaining Afrikaans and the Afrikaans culture, are conspicuous by their absence.

That is a lie. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: Is it permissible for an hon member of the CP to say to the hon member who is speaking “that is a lie”?

I did not say that.

Order! The hon member must withdraw the word “lie”.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: There is nothing wrong with saying a statement is untrue. That is the case only if one says “you know it is an untruth.”

Order! Will the hon member just tell me what he said?

Mr Chairman, I meant that it was not true. [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member may proceed.

Mr Chairman, this is not an easy task, and a great deal of negative comment has already been made about the question of whether it is still worthwhile to promote culture in the rural areas, since less than 20% of our Whites still live there.

Fortunately, however, this is not the language of the Directorate of Cultural Affairs: Provision was made for the preservation, development, fostering and extension of culture in the rural areas in the Culture Promotion Act, No 35, 1983. In a praiseworthy manner they are trying, by means of that Act, to raise the general quality of life of our people in the rural areas, and contribute in a positive way to the morale of communities that have been dealt severe blows by natural disasters. No one who has not been in the rural areas, and particularly in certain farming communities, in the past five years can realise what these people have endured.

Thirdly, they make these communities feel they are not neglected. Add to that the fact that there are vigorous cultural centres such as the Sand du Plessis Theatre in Bloemfontein and the Nico Malan Theatre here in the Cape, which create the space and the opportunities for our people from the rural areas, who travel great distances to experience the best forms of culture.

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

Unfortunately I do not have time for that now.

This directorate carries out its praiseworthy task through eight regional offices which not only monitor the cultural life but also, where necessary, co-operate with the communities. The activities for promoting culture include readings, symposiums, demonstrations, performances, youth camps and discussions.

I shall give hon members an example. Over the past year 101 educational projects were presented in the rural areas of the Free State, and 10 000 people were involved. In the Northern Transvaal border area, which has been identified as a priority area, R323 000 has been spent on the promotion of culture since 1985.

We on this side of the House were also delighted to hear that in this year the directorate spent R6 million more on the promotion of culture. I am not saying this is enough but can there ever be enough in this country with its manifold problems? I want to add something here: If we as Whites—and from the rural areas in particular—want to salvage the values that are important to us, we shall immediately have to consider establishing sound partnerships. In the first place, we shall have to consider partnership between the authorities and the private sector. As far as the authorities are concerned, the White schools in the rural areas are performing an enormous task in regard to their cultural function, and we praise the department for what it is doing in that way. We also give the cultural organisations credit for the great deal they are doing for the promotion of culture in the private sphere.

In the second place, we must also create partnerships between the city and the rural areas. I am also arguing today for understanding for what is being done by the Government to enable the farmer and his family do remain in the rural areas. Our rural tradition—I want to stress this—is the most precious tradition we have, but it cannot be salvaged if those who uphold this tradition—the farmer, his wife and his family—cannot be kept in the rural areas. I therefore argue that closer co-operation should exist between these partners. The rural areas must come to the city: There should be a “Kleinplasie”, like the one in Worcester, in every city. The city, too, should move out to the rural areas.

In the third place, I argue that cultural partnerships should also be formed between those people belonging to a different language or race groups, who are culturally aware in their own right. This could create new opportunities and possibilities not only for cultural life in general, but also in particular for new relationships in our country. Not only must we introduce others to our cultural creations, fine traditions and cultural heritage; we must also create in others a positive attitude and a sense of appreciation for them.

Before hon members of the Official Opposition raise their eyebrows, I remind them of the fine words spoken by Dr Anton Rupert:

I believe that in this way, and in this way alone, can our valuable cultural treasures—as well as our fine rural culture—be preserved, and in this way, too, we can lay down a firm foundation for our future constitutional development.

Mr Chairman, a while ago I was making the point—with reference to the status of the Superintendent General—that salary-wise, his post level is the same of that of a Director General, but the status is not equivalent. With reference to the abolition of the two posts of Deputy Director in Transvaal and the Free State, the hon the Minister created the impression yesterday, if he did not state it expressly, that this had been settled with the Federal Council of Teachers’ Associations. I should like to ask the hon the Minister whether or not this impression he created was coupled with the impression that he had gained the consent of the Federal Council of Teachers’ Associations in this regard.

In the past election the NP made a point of saying that White schools would be retained. Yesterday the hon the Minister of Education and Culture again created the impression that he stood by White schools and White education. However, I contend that just as many other things have been abandoned recently, the abandonment of exclusive White education is also being prepared for, as is the abandonment of exclusive White education with reference to standards, syllabus, financing, salaries and conditions of service. I should like to refer to a statement made yesterday by the hon the Minister, and I quote:

My response to that, is—in all humility—to comment that the hon the Minister by that statement creates the impression that he wishes to relieve himself of his political responsibilities. He is flinching from his responsibility as political office-bearer, not only to take educational decisions, but to act in accordance with his political responsibilities. The hon the Minister of Education and Culture also said the following yesterday:

He also spoke about being “open-handed” and “receptive”. He went on to say:

Sir, we are acquainted with the use of terms such as these in the constitutional sphere. The movement is away from the exclusive—the sole right and full self-determination—to the inclusive, that is to say, towards co-existence, communality and, indeed, forced sharing. [Interjections.]

May I refer the hon the Minister to so-called spontaneous contact which must not be counteracted, by referring to statements by other hon Ministers on that side of the House? On one occasion the hon the Minister of Education and Development Aid said at RAU

Yes, yes, that is right!

The hon the Deputy Minister of Finance said with reference to the Menlo Park incident:

Sir, that is far from spontaneous contact.

If one reads this in conjunction with the facts given to this House yesterday by the hon member for Britz, namely the presence of people of colour and people of other races at previously White universities and other educational institutions, then we know where this so-called spontaneous contact is leading. [Interjections.]

The third example I want to mention is that the educational advisory structure is already mixed. We already have a large number of educational institutions that used to be reserved for Whites and which are open or mixed. It becomes clear that the pressure on White schools to remain White schools can only increase. The Government does not appear too unhappy with this state of affairs.

I want to make special reference to the way in which the Government is making use of private schools as a method of helping along this mixing process. [Interjections.] I quote the following from principle No 8 in the White Paper:

The hon the Minister knows that the NP initially refused to subsidise non-White education at White private schools. Then the requirements were relaxed, and now we have the situation as stated last year by the hon the Minister of National Education, and I refer to column 3491.

In the first instance the hon the Minister of National Education said that the old system of subsidisation whereby only pupils belonging to the population group for which the school was registered could obtain subsidies, had fallen away. In the second instance, the hon the Minister of National Education mentioned that the new system of subsidies represented a major improvement on the old one: More money for integration education!

In the third instance the hon the Minister of National Education said—

In the next instance I want to say that the liberal monied interests are in fact making full use of this opportunity afforded by the Government. [Interjections.] Mr Speaker, in the words of the Director of New Era Schools Trust, Mr Dean Yates:

[Interjections.] The Government is not merely subsidise this process of integration. Apart from making the PFP so happy that they are unable to contain themselves, it gives this publicity to make it acceptable and make the voters ripe for non-exclusive—that is the new terminology used by the hon the Minister—or inclusive White schools. He even takes the opportunity to present these mixed private schools on television as model schools, in order to make the voters ripe for this concept.

The Coloured and Indian partners of the Government state openly that they are in favour of open schools. [Interjections.] They go on to argue that we cannot discuss equal norms and standards before all citizens of the country have equal access to the schools of the country. Moreover there can be no truly open schools before the residential areas are also open. In other words, they say that we must first abolish the Group Areas Act before we can speak about equal norms and standards.

It is not only the partners of the Government that link residential areas and schools. The hon the Minister of Education and Training also said yesterday: “Schools are community-oriented”. The election manifesto of the National Party also has that connotation: “The assurance of an own community life for all communities through, amongst others, the maintenance of own schools and residential areas as far as possible.” The question is when this will no longer be practicable, since that gap is already been left wide open. In the first instance the question is: If schools are community-oriented”, what does the community look like? The school derives its substance from the community. For a long time now it has been no secret that there are literally dozens of White residential areas in South Africa where Whites have already been crowded out of their residential areas.

Now we have the question: When is it no longer practicable, in accordance with the criteria of the National Party’s manifesto, to maintain own schools and own residential areas? We do not have many guidelines as far as open schools are concerned. However, we do have some guidelines in regard to residential areas. The hon the State President stated that he no longer regarded it as feasible to keep a specific White residential area White when he was prepared to relax the legislation in certain well-off residential areas. The hon the Minister of Finance gave us another indication. When asked whether he was prepared to counteract the crowding-out of Whites from White residential areas, he said that this was not a priority in the Budget and that in any event, people co-existed in peace and harmony and that it would in any event be too expensive to change the situation.

The hon the Minister of Law and Order even went so far as to say, and I quote from the Sunday Star of 3 May:

[Interjections.] However, what is priceless is what the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs gave as the most important guideline. On 9 March he said:

In the speech made by the hon the Minister yesterday, we read how that same process is being put into effect.

Mr Chairman, I should like to return the focus of the debate to the subject of culture, but just react in passing to vexatious questions of the hon member for Potgietersrus about the meaning of “as far as is practicable.” I want to point out to him that as far as my knowledge goes these words were contained in the NP’s election manifesto as far back as 1981; and then I just want to ask him how he and other members of his party voted at the time. [Interjections.]

Next year it will be 500 years since Diaz opened the way for Southern Africa to be exposed to the influences of Western civilisation. It will also be 300 years since the Huguenots bolstered the spirit of religious freedom in South Africa—in 1907 a young Huguenot, Hendrik Bibault, said at Stellenbosch: “Ik ben een Africaander.” It will also be 150 years, however, since South Africa found itself in the throes of the Great Trek, when the Voortrekkers as pioneers, opened up the interior to civilisation. In time the proud Boer Republics could come into being.

The need which numerous organisations and people have felt to commemorate these events by way of festivals met with a response in Government circles as far back as 1983 when negotiations were started for financial assistance for these projects. It is true that the hon member for Jeppe revealed particulars of the Diaz Festival on a previous occasion. The Huguenot Festival, which is under the auspices of the hon the Administrator of the Cape, will be held at Saldanha from 8 to 12 April 1988. The event will also be commemorated in Cape Town on 13 April. Subsequently, in accordance with a route programme, Bellville, Wellington and Paarl will be included on 14 April. This is to be followed by the main festival at Franschhoek on 15 to 17 April. As far as the commemoration of the Great Trek is concerned, there is a festival committee under the chairmanship of Prof Marius Swart. Regional festivals and local festivals will take place from 10 October, with the main festival at the Voortrekker Monument from 14 to 16 December.

I would very much like to elaborate on the wonderful events that lie ahead and the delightful significance they will have for Afrikaner culture. Unfortunately I should rather spend my time replying to a speech of the hon member for Schweizer-Reneke. I regard this as one of the most unfortunate speeches on Afrikaner culture I have had to listen to. As someone who has not been found wanting when work has had to be done in the sphere of Afrikaner culture, the time has come for us to say a few things to each other without mincing words. The hon member took it upon himself to reproach the Government for being indifferent to the Afrikaner and his culture …

But surely that is the case!

… and for having had a divisive effect on the Afrikaner’s cultural and religious life.

That is even more true.

It might sound like the truth to hon members on that side of the House, but they are engaged in a very old and well-known intellectual manoeuvre. What they are doing is saying: We do not agree, so now we are getting out, and because you do not agree with us, the minority group, and we have to get out, you are splitting. [Interjections.]

Order!

Hon members must ask themselves who it is who is splitting.

The hon member for Schweizer-Reneke also said that the Government was placing greater emphasis on the Diaz Festival than on that of the Great Trek. He referred to the amounts voted for them. That is a very interesting argument. Does the hon member not take into account that certain capital expenditure is being incurred in regard to the Diaz Festival? Does the hon member not take into account, for example, that the Government has made a substantial contribution in regard to the Taal monument? Here again we are dealing with a distorted image which is being created for the sake of political gain, just as a distorted image was created in regard to the restoration work on Tuynhuys and the repair work to the Union Buildings. Those hon members still owe the voters of South Africa an explanation to indicate whether they are opposed to the restoration work to Tuynhuys. Is that the attitude of those hon members towards their cultural heritage? [Interjections.]

Order!

The hon member also took it upon himself to ask very reproachfully why the Afrikanervolkswag did not receive a contribution too. Either the hon member is being wilful or ignorant. These negotiations and preparations began as far back as 1983. With what organisation could the Government have linked up other than with the FAK, with its 4 000 affiliated organisations and bodies, or with the Afrikaanse Nasionale Kultuurraad, with its 27 national and provincial cultural organisations, or with the steering committee established by the Afrikaanse Nasionale Kultuurraad on which 20 national and provincial organisations are represented and on which, among other things, all the Afrikaans churches are represented, under the chairmanship of Prof Marius Swart? Or is Prof Swart so unacceptable to CP members that they do not want to accept the leading role he and his committee have played by in this regard? With what other organisations could the Government have liaised? I want to ask a further question: Must the Government now ask the Afrikanervolkswag whether, by chance, it wants to hold a festival? Must it also ask the AWB, and what about the Blanke Bevrydingsbeweging and perhaps the new splinter-church? Sir, the organisations are increasing so rapidly that one would not be able to keep up if one had to ask all of them what contributions they might possibly want to furnish. [Interjections.]

From the back benches of this party I now want to make a serious appeal to the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition to ensure that the divisive factor that has entered the Afrikaner's cultural life be given serious attention. [Interjections.] He and his party arrogate to themselves the right to determine who is an Afrikaner. They arrogate to themselves the right to be the sole standard-bearers of Afrikaner culture. They arrogate to themselves the sole right to the Afrikaner way of thinking. They think of themselves as the only interpreters of history. They generate further divisiveness, however, by virtue of the venomousness with which they have attacked fellow-Afrikaners in all walks of life and cast aspersions on their Afrikanerhood and their cultural ties. And they thrive on the tension they can create, because they can again benefit from that politically. [Interjections.] They carry politics into the educational arena, and yesterday the hon member acknowledged it. [Interjections.]

Into the church too.

They misuse Afrikaner sentiment and Afrikaner culture for political gain. [Interjections.]

I understand that the Afrikanervolkswag’s festival theme is “’n trek na ons eie”.

Order! I can understand hon members wanting to comment on that, but they cannot do it so loudly. The hon member may proceed.

I want to tell those people to be careful they do not start a trek away from the Afrikaner, a trek to a caricature of the Afrikaner that exists only in their own imaginations.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: May the hon member for Brakpan tell an hon member on this side that he is a miserable wretch (mislike vent)?

Order! Did the hon member use the words “miserable wretch”?

Mr Chairman, I said the hon the Deputy Minister of Defence was still a miserable wretch. I am prepared to withdraw that. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, it is a pleasure for me to follow up on what was said by the hon member for Sundays River who made a very good and sturdy contribution in this Committee. [Interjections.] He also dealt very effectively with certain of the opposition parties’ statements and I endorse his arguments.

Even before the debate had been in progress for any length of time, politics was dragged right into the every midst of so elevated a discussion as that on education. Understandably the NP was attacked from two different sides. On the one hand it was said that the policy of this side of the House promoted integration, and on the other that this side of the House was blatantly adopting a policy of discrimination. The hon the Minister dealt with this matter very adroitly when he explained the NP’s education policy, which is also clearly and systematically justifiable on the grounds of principle. Without going into the matter, I just want to say that in my view the NP can be very proud of its record in regard to education in this country. Over the years the NP has fostered White education, and it continues to do so by regarding White education, amongst other things, as an own affair. At the same time this side of the House has also, in spite of the very difficult and complex composition of the population and an inherent Third World component, ensured the achievement of fantastically good results in education and the field of pedagogics for people of colour, so much so that we compare very favourably with other countries in Africa. I leave it at that.

The hon the Minister, the Superintendent General and the officials of the department have already been thanked and congratulated, and I endorse those sentiments. As an ex-educationist from the Free State, Sir, permit me the opportunity of very sincerely thanking and congratulating Mr Willem Odendaal, the Director of the Free State Education Department and his officials on the outstanding work they are doing in the field of education in the Free State. The report of the department attests to the enthusiasm and responsibility with which they deal with educational matters in the province.

Yesterday and today the organised profession in the Free State has also been represented here by its chairman and executive director; they are people with a very keen sense of this fine task being performed, people who, to the benefit of children and teachers, elevate the image of education in the Free State to the exalted position it should occupy. Over the years each province has also built up its own unique character as far as education is concerned. I want to appeal to the hon the Minister to continue to see to it that the provinces, without necessarily sacrificing rationalisation, retain their own character because this is essential and constitutes the advantage that very close ties can in that way be forged between education and the child and parent communities. That is why I am also very grateful to the hon the Minister for having mentioned today that in the process of devolution this matter is receiving very serious attention and this also applies to the establishment, operational field and functions of the provincial education councils.

A moment ago the hon member for Smith-field referred to the sports and recreational habits of the hon members for Germiston and Ladybrand. Today I want to link up with that and exchange a few ideas about the creation and maintenance of sports and recreational facilities.

To start with it can be mentioned that sound sports and recreational practices are essential in the times in which we are living. In recent decades the working week and working hours of most people have decreased. This has resulted in the steady increase in the free time people have available. It is important for people to spend their free time usefully and constructively. Tension and easy living, characteristic of our time, lead to physically detrimental habits, reduce one’s physical resistance and can diminish one’s general level of health. This in turn has a negative effect on one’s capacity for work, one’s endurance, the quality of one’s life and one’s productivity. The promotion of sport and recreation can make a major contribution towards improving the health of the people in the widest sense of the word.

Sport is also one of man’s important cultural assets because it relates to values which are unique to a community and are also expressive of that community. It is interwoven in the fabric of societies and is one of the most important cohesive factors contributing to the entrenchment of specific patterns of conduct, conventions, codes, values and ideals. It helps to establish stable and sound communities and societies.

Sport and recreation bind people together at all levels, promote spontaneous communication, create strong social relationships and ties and promote sound human relations. It is important that in our schools, in fact everywhere in South Africa, there should be fair and adequate opportunities for everyone—participants and spectators—to participate in sport and recreation.

In recent years the Government has also launched programmes to make the general public aware of the necessity for participation in physical activities. This process of awareness and education, as hon members know, began in the early seventies with small fun-runs, spring-runs, recreational gymnastics and other activities in which approximately a quarter of a million people participated. At present approximately one million people participate on a regular basis in activities such as fun-runs, recreational gymnastics, biotrim classes, family fitness programmes, sports days for the aged, hiking and trim-weeks.

The construction and maintenance of sports and recreational facilities are on-going and relatively expensive functions which are the joint responsibility of the community, the authorities, the private sector, sports bodies and individuals. This responsibility will vary, depending on what has to be provided and the level at which it is provided. There is a great need for financial assistance in our country when it comes to the provision of sports and recreational facilities. In the past local authorities have played an important role—they still do—in the construction and maintenance of sports and recreational facilities. In planning the establishment of these facilities thorough calculations will have to be made of demographic trends such as the composition of the population and population growth.

The establishment of these facilities is expensive, and in future there should also be better co-ordination between sports clubs and schools so that maximum use can be made of such facilities. Even sports clubs, particularly multi-faceted ones, should investigate the extent to which one club’s facilities can be made available to other clubs.

It is interesting to note how sports facilities at schools are left unutilised for large parts of the year, particularly during holiday periods. By means of co-operation and co-ordination schools, particularly neighbouring schools and schools in the community, can make joint efforts towards the better utilisation of the facilities existing at the schools, thereby also drastically reducing the burden of maintenance. Economic realities make the shared use of sports facilities between schools and the sharing of school and community or sports club facilities even more important.

What is more, today there is also a wide variety of sports, and no longer do pupils in our schools only have rugby, tennis, athletics, swimming, cricket, netball and hockey to participate in. It is virtually impossible for one school to provide for the needs of all its pupils in the field of sport.

It is gratifying to know that there are local authorities which are strongly in favour of such an interaction and which are even prepared to make additional land available for sports and recreational facilities. For the most part, too, local authorities have the necessary infrastructure to do the maintenance, or at least offer a great deal of assistance. It will merely be necessary to ensure that sports programmes are well-coordinated. In many areas school facilities are increasingly being utilised by the communities concerned. Such arrangements can profitably be made elsewhere too.

Some primary schools also serve as traditional sources from which specific high schools draw their pupils. Facilities such as swimming baths and pavilions could very easily be shared in such instances too. One school, for example, could erect and maintain an excellent athletics track, whilst another could provide a cricket field.

Mr Chairman, we really have come to the end of a long day. At this stage 27 hon members have made contributions. Here in the dying moments of the debate—I shall continue with my reply tomorrow—let me say at once that certain of the speeches made here were undoubtedly speeches of quality. I have no doubt that there are several MPs here who not only have a knowledge of what they want to convey to the House, but who have also made an in-depth study of the matters involved. I sincerely want to thank all the hon members who have participated, particularly those who devoted a great deal of time to the issues involved.

Whether we want to know it or not, what we say in this House is also a reflection of our opinions about the importance of education and culture in this country. The profoundness of our contributions here is solely dependent on the level at which we discuss these matters. We can very easily, of course, in a debate such as this, sink to the level of political one-upmanship. I therefore want to thank the majority of hon members, who attempted to keep actual politics out of the debate. All hon members, however, did have lapses now and then. If necessary I shall also refer to that.

Generally I think our endeavour was to make this an educationally and pedagogically responsible debate. I think we have largely succeeded in doing so, also involving as we did the aspect of culture, particularly that cultural aspect on which particular attention was focused this afternoon. I want to extend my sincere thanks, in particular, to the hon members who made contributions on the topic of culture. I have been a member of Parliament for 13 years, and I am afraid that year after year I feel that there is so little time for this aspect because we also have to discuss so many other matters that we do not have enough time really to focus on the aspect of culture. This year there were approximately nine individuals who did devote their speeches to this extremely important component, the cultural component, and I want to thank them, in particular, for the fine contributions they made in this regard.

I should like to reply to several of the hon members who made contributions. I want to turn my attention to the hon member for Port Elizabeth North who, if I remember correctly, apologised for the fact that he would not be present here today. Oh, there he is. Pardon me.

The hon member spoke about parent-teacher associations, emphasising the extremely important link between the contributions of the school principal on the one hand and those of the parents and the community on the other. It can so easily happen in this field that each person gives his full attention to his task, deeming himself to have the best interests of education at heart, but in the absence of close co-ordination between the efforts of these three elements, the result would be chaotic. The hon member presented this matter very clearly and I thank him for that.

Nor may one allow fields of activity to overlap. Nor must parents be allowed to prescribe to teachers, as professional people, what precisely they must do in the classroom and how they should teach. On the other hand it is equally important for people to realise that the time has passed when teachers could regard parents merely as people helping to transport children to sports meetings or helping to collect money at the school fêtes. That is not true either. Parents have a much greater and more important involvement in education, that of helping to shape the spirit and character of the activities at a particular school. Ultimately it is the parents who, by way of their representatives in the management councils, actually have the decisive say about who teaches their children. Hence the singular involvement.

And the hon member—this ends my discussion of what he had to say—also made an excellent contribution about whether parents with statutory representation could not also focus on their non-statutory representation, the reference being to the provincial education councils, because the relevant legislation provides for statutory representatives of the organised representative body of parents but then on a non-statutory basis too. By statutory representation we mean those parents who are already representatives on the various management councils and who are thereby channelled, through the various school boards, to ultimate representation on the provincial education councils. However, because we felt at the time, when we passed the legislation on provincial education councils, that this was insufficient involvement on the part of the parents, we also argued that a wide spectrum of parents should be given an opportunity to be represented by way of some or other structure. That is why we came to light with the so-called non-statutory parental representation. These parents will ultimately be given representation within the provincial education councils by way of the various parent-teacher associations, whether English-speaking or Afrikaans-speaking, several of which are already recognised bodies. There are definite criteria according to which ministerial recognition is given to the parentteacher associations.

It could of course happen, in practice, that somebody is also elected on a statutory basis to serve on the provincial education council and that such a person is also designated to serve on non-statutory parent-teacher associations. I would, of course, suggest that one and the same person should not be so chosen, so that one can have as broad a spectrum of parental representation as possible. I thank the hon member for Port Elizabeth North.

The hon member for Winburg focused on a very important matter which he finally made applicable to his own constituency and the area he comes from, i.e. Bloemfontein. He spoke about the problems involved in the rationalisation process. I have already spoken about rationalisation in the two contributions I made, and I think it is important for us to accept, in the first instance, that with the development we are experiencing in this country at present, rationalisation has become a reality.

I nevertheless want to issue the warning that we should not view this rationalisation process merely in terms of the problems involved. We should not see rationalisation as merely depriving us of assets, without our getting something in return. We must not think that the Whites are the only ones to lose out as a result of rationalisation and that only people of colour, with their educational backlog, will benefit. We must not see this, as the PFP does, as the baleful influence of the Government’s policy of apartheid. The CP, on the other hand, sees this rationalisation as a brain-child of this so-called leftist-liberal Black Government because it simply wants to give everything to Black, Coloured and Indian education. That is not true.

I could go on to mention several other problems we are experiencing in education today, problems to which hon members referred. There are fewer teaching posts, low subsidy amounts, the fact of educational institutions closing down, the restrictions on the growth of universities, limited subsidisation, inadequate salaries for teachers, etc. I could mention many more problems. If hon members want to ascribe that directly to Government policy, let me tell them that that is not quite correct. Let me say, in fact, that in part that is naive, because they lose sight of the fact that the world in which we find ourselves today, has shrunk to a very small size. No country in the world has escaped the impact of development on a world-wide scale.

It is clear, for example, that at present White education has moved into a development phase, a phase which Western countries encountered for the first time as far back as 1970. In all these countries education was nudged into a new orbit chiefly because of two aspects still exerting a negative influence on us today. The first is the decrease in the birth-rate—in our case, of course, particularly in regard to the White population group. But let us not lose sight of the fact that the growth-rate in the other groups in this country is also on the decrease, not to the same extent as amongst the Whites, it is true, but there is a decrease, in line with the trend world-wide. The second is the decrease in the value of our monetary unit.

We are therefore dealing with two components: A decrease in the growth-rate and therefore in the school population and, on the other hand, a decrease in the value of the monetary unit. These are two problems one should attempt to bring into line. Whereas education, in its previous phase, aimed at expansion, at “more of the same”—that was the experience of the Whites—there has now been a reversal in White education which is now placing the emphasis, not on expansion, but on rationalisation owing to a smaller number of pupils. This means that financial allocations will not be increasing again, because they are based on the number of pupils. One must therefore maintain the position one has. This can only be achieved by rationalisation, greater cost-effectiveness and increased productivity.

That is precisely what we are now trying to do in this department. That is what we are trying to market, and it is precisely the same problem with which countries throughout the world are struggling. Let me quote what Philips Coombs of the International Council for Education and Development said. After an exhaustive investigation into education in many countries he made this extremely important statement:

That, Sir, is precisely what is happening to us today. We shall now have to focus more on quality and less on quantity. We must focus less on the creation of increasingly more facilities and make greater efforts to improve the quality of what we have. We must furnish a better service and aim at greater costeffectiveness and productivity. That is why the fear—I am saying this to the Official Opposition—that standards will be lowered is unjustified. I have referred to this in previous speeches and I want to reiterate it.

To achieve what we are aiming at, however, we must rationalise in order to adapt to the numbers of pupils for which the State provides money. When we rationalise, when we allow schools to amalgamate and bring pupils together in a single building in which they can comfortably be accommodated, we are consolidating and improving standards, because our action leads to the better utilisation of our money. We then have more money that we can make available and we can therefore provide better education. In case I am asked whether the facilities would be made available to other groups, let me say that I have already given an indication of that and, to save time, do not want to elaborate on it again. I therefore thank the hon member for having highlighted this extremely important matter.

The hon member also referred to Bloemfontein and said there was a possibility that Bloemfontein, with its university, the Bloemfontein College of Education and also the technikon, already gave proof of rationalisation. In the Bloemfontein College of Education there is a decrease in the number of students. Projections indicate that there will be a decrease at all the universities. In contrast there is a great need for students at technikons and a growth in the number of students attending them. Let me tell the hon member that this whole matter is being dealt with with the utmost sensitivity. For several months now these three institutions have been dealing with that aspect, and the hon member, as a member of the university council, is probably aware of the fact. The truth of the matter is that the sentiments which have prevailed at the Bloemfontein College of Education for many years now have not passed us by unheeded. On the other hand, the question of rationalisation should be examined, without relinquishing the ethos, the traditions and the sentiments involved, if possible. Already this has reached an advanced stage, and I do not want to debate the matter any further in the House. The hon member may rest assured, however, that we are giving it our attention. I think Bloemfontein has an opportunity to make an exceptional contribution, and here I am thinking of this new concept of rationalisation too.

The hon member for Cradock also made a very good speech. He also expressed his thanks for the role played by the rural areas. The hon member also made a positive contribution by referring to the outstanding assistance which schools, particularly agricultural schools, could also furnish in the rural areas. I agree with him wholeheartedly.

Business interrupted in accordance with Standing Order No 19.

House Resumed:

Progress reported and leave granted to sit again.