as Chairman, presented the Fourth Report of the Standing Select Committee on Environment Affairs, dated 11 August 1987, as follows:

Bill to be read a second time.

Order! The hon member for Hillbrow has requested the opportunity to make a statement before I put the question, and I now give him an opportunity to do so.

Mr Chairman, my attention has been drawn to the fact that in an unrevised Hansard the following words appeared next to my name: “He was a Coloured.” On reading through the Hansard, the impression could be conveyed that I was referring to the celebrated and respected President Kruger, which was not the case at all.

What in fact happened was that a colleague of mine had referred to a certain Mr Abdul, and I reacted to that by saying: “He was a Coloured. ”

Mr Chairman, I want to convey my sincere thanks and appreciation to you for giving me the opportunity to rectify the matter.

Mr Chairman, this is the first opportunity the hon the Deputy Minister of Information has had to present himself to this Committee since being appointed to this position. I want to offer him my congratulations on his appointment. In passing, I just want to say that I do not know what he did wrong to be given this job. Nevertheless, I wish him well and I hope his stay in this bureau will be effective and fruitful.

And no more songs!

Anything I have to say is not in any way intended to be a reflection on the officials.

What I am going to say will obviously be of a political nature and should be seen in that light, particularly when one takes into account the fact that the amount being requested this year is in excess of R31 million. That is a great deal of money indeed, and we want to ensure that we are getting value for money, particularly after we heard the answer to my question today regarding the Special Communications Programme which provided for R8,8 million.

I want to begin, however, with what was known as the “Info Song” and the amount of more than R4 million that was spent on that project. This formed part of the overall communications programme which was approved by the Cabinet, and R8,8 million was provided for this project. We have no doubt that the song turned out to be an absolute disaster and a complete waste of money, and I want to ask the hon the Deputy Minister why, when this became apparent so many months ago, he persisted with the full programme until 31 March 1987 and why, as he told us today, the advertising programme is to continue until March 1988. Why is a great deal of taxpayers’ money being wasted in this way? Surely he should have brought the programme to an end in a timeous manner in order to ensure that good money was not thrown after bad.

He had instructions from the boss!

I hope that he will answer this question when he replies, because a new facet is now being added to the activities of the bureau. He mentioned this in his reply to my question today concerning the R4,3 million which is being spent on the Rates and Services Programme. This is a very important programme. We are aware of the problems in the townships regarding the non-payment of rent and electricity charges, and I am sure the Committee would be fascinated to hear what success this campaign has achieved, what it has consisted of, and how the bureau has gone about achieving success in this regard.

I also wish to raise with the hon the Deputy Minister the way in which the reporting by the bureau to Parliament is handled. I must say that I find it arrogant that the annual report for 1986 was presented to members only yesterday. This is eight months after the end of the calendar year on which the bureau was reporting, and we are given the report one day before we have to debate this Vote in Parliament.

I am not surprised, however, that they hid this from us because it is a document of ten pages, and it is more interesting for what it conceals than for what it reveals. I believe it actually to be a waste of money, and I think it should not have been printed at all. It is merely a jumble of words that amount to almost nothing. In fact it amounts to gobbledygook or to official-speak, because when one reads through this very carefully, as I did last night, one realises that it actually conveys nothing at all. The bureau gives no or very little information in this annual report. The report contains no meaningful information regarding the activities of the bureau and it leaves one with the suspicion that a great deal is being hidden rather than being reported on. I will return to this later, however, during the course of my address.

One point I do wish to make is that the graph on page 3 regarding the result of communicating the Government’s policies and views in newspapers is totally misleading. It indicates that 79% of the population agree that money spent by the Government on communicating is well spent. When one examines the graph carefully, however, one will see that the percentage is arrived at by adding the 31% who agree partially with this question to the 48% who agree that the programme has been effective. If, on the other hand, 31% agree partially, and that 31% is added to the 30% who believe that it was not effective, one would find that in effect 61% of the public disagree with the statement that the money was effectively spent. It is therefore quite misleading to present the graph in that manner, Sir.

Now, Sir, what about the activities of the bureau? I believe it is like an iceberg—that the 10% which one sees floating above the surface is what is visible to the public. It is the 90% that is below the surface, however, which is of concern to me in particular. It is well known that the bureau is part of the national management system, and I hope that the hon the Deputy Minister will explain to us the extent of its involvement in that system and the extent of its involvement in the committees that have been established throughout the country. Is it by chance that the 13 regional offices established by the bureau coincide with the joint management centres that exist throughout the country? I should like him to explain to what extent the bureau is involved in this activity. What percentage of the budget has been earmarked for liaising with the various management centres and how many of his staff members are involved in this activity?

When one mentions liaising I should like him to explain what liaising actually means to the bureau. I ask this because this has become a buzzword in the activities of the Bureau for Information. A great deal of time and money is spent on liaising among various committees and groups and some individuals in South Africa. I should like him to explain to us what he understands under the activities of the bureau when it liaises. What does it mean, for instance, when the bureau liaises with the organisation known as Women for South Africa? I also want the hon the Deputy Minister to tell us whether the bureau was involved in setting up or establishing this organisation, because there have been suggestions that it was established as a counter to Women for Peace or the Black Sash.

While we are discussing the question of liaising with organisations, will the hon the Deputy Minister also explain whether his bureau liaises with organisations outside of South Africa? There are a number of conservative right-wing organisations that take an interest in South Africa, and I wonder whether he would tell us whether he has any contact with those organisations.

The hon member for Sunnyside, when he spoke yesterday, made great play of the videos and the movies that were made by the bureau. I should like the hon the Deputy Minister to tell us, however, what sort of videos and movies they make. What scenes are explored and promoted in the videos and the movies which they make? These are shown at many meetings throughout the country. I hope he will devote some time to explaining what emphasis is placed on the making of those movies and videos.

I am advised that a movie or video was made earlier this year for distribution to visitors leaving South Africa or for South Africans about to embark on an overseas holiday—the intention apparently being that this would promote the social and political life of South Africa, as opposed to the video that is currently available at Jan Smuts Airport which shows our scenic beauty and the lions and cheetahs and so on that we have. I am told that there was a video that was made promoting the social and political life of South Africa, but that before the election an order was given, apparently by the State President, to shelve the project. I hope the hon the Deputy Minister will advise us in the course of his reply whether there was such a project. There is a rumour in the market that there was such a project. If there was—the hon the Deputy Minister is shaking his head to show that there was not, but I should like him to go on record in that respect—could he tell us what it entailed, who was involved, how much it cost and what the fate of the project was? Very well, he indicates that he does not know anything about it, but he might just apply his mind to that when he replies to the debate.

I have asked how many staff members of the bureau are involved in liaising with the joint management centres, and in this connection I hope that the hon the Deputy Minister will explain to us why it is that he has apparently exceeded his staff complement. Last year approval was given for 598 posts in the bureau, and this year in the estimates, approval is requested for the same number of posts, namely 598. In the annual report, however, it is recorded that as at 31 December last year there were 647 establishment posts and 156 vacancies—a total of 803, which in fact means 205 individuals in excess of those approved by Parliament. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Johannesburg North has reacted very negatively towards the Bureau for Information as a whole, and especially towards the so-called “Info Song”. I think the hon the Deputy Minister will reply to the hon member’s critical approach, but I would like to reflect on what he said about the Info Song.

We may have our differences of opinion as far as this is concerned, but I feel that the song was a great success as far as modern communication is concerned, if anybody knows something about modern communication. [Interjections.] If this song has prevented the burning down of one building in this country, it was more than worthwhile to produce the song …

What a statement!

… and to spend the money on it. [Interjections.] I have been approached by many young people, including young White people, who asked when this Info Song would be recorded on a seven single. So they really want it. I think the hon member should bear that in mind too, and not be so negative about everything this Government tries to do. [Interjections.]

The claim is often made that the Government is purposely keeping the public in the dark about the true aims and objectives of the ANC. This is also very often said by the PFP.

[Interjections.] For example, on 21 July 1987 the Cape Times proposed, and I quote—

On 14 July 1987 this same newspaper commented, and I quote:

Dr Slabbert, speaking about his trip to Dakar, said that he would return to South Africa with much more information about the situation, this being, and I quote—

This quotation is taken from the editorial opinion of the Daily Dispatch of 14 July 1987.

The Star, on the same day, commenting on the Dakar visit, wrote, and I quote:

And one has to listen to this, Mr Chairman—

These are the charges and accusations but what are the facts? The facts are that last year the Bureau for Information published a booklet Talking with the ANC based on direct quotes from the ANC and the South African Communist Party.

Selected quotes.

Although the booklet was very well received by the public the apologists for the ANC like the hon member for Greytown claimed that the quotes were taken out of context. The same charge was made concerning the SABC’s recent documentary on the ANC even though this programme was based on authentic documents and interviews.

The Government has moreover made authoritative and original ANC documentation available to the Press. On 12 December 1986 the following documents were given to the media: The Report, Main Decisions and Recommendations of the Second National Consultative Conference of June 1985, the Commission on Cadre Policy, Political and Ideological Work, the Internal Commission Report, Commission on Strategy and Tactics. I have these documents here this afternoon. These documents emanated from the ANC’s highest policy-making organ, the National Consultative Conference, which held its second and most recent meeting in Kabwe in Zambia in June 1985. The most cursory examination would have revealed, first of all, the authenticity of these documents; secondly, their completeness; and thirdly, their authoritative nature.

At the same time the Government gave another key ANC document to the media including a statement marking the 25th anniversary of Umkhonto We Sizwe and a speech by Oliver Tambo setting out the ANC planning for 1987.

Yet, in spite of the unimpeachable and incisive nature of this information, most of the newspapers which now complain that the Government is keeping South Africans in the dark about the ANC, either completely ignored this critically important data or gave it scant attention. The only explanation for their failure to convey this crucial information to their readers is either journalistic incompetence or that the picture of the ANC which emerges from this documentation does not accord with the picture of the ANC which they wish to put across to their readers.

This is understandable when one considers the following excerpts from key and authoritative policy documents. On the religious front the ANC makes the following recommendations, inter alia:

The movement should give attention to institutions like the Institute of Contextual Theology. We should aim at giving political content and direction to their work.

We should seek ways of intensifying church involvement in the End Conscription Campaign.

With regard to the mobilisation of the White community the ANC recommended that the so-called democratic Whites—

That is also the approach of the hon members of the PFP—

With regard to the working class and trade unions the ANC says, and I quote:

This was in 1985 before the formal establishment of Cosatu.

Why have sections of the South African media failed to convey this critically relevant and unquestionably authoritative information on the ANC to their readers? As The Star says: “South Africans remain in pitiful ignorance of the ANC”. It is not because of the Government’s failure, however, to provide relevant information; it is because of The Star's own policy of censoring what the South African public ought and ought not to know about the ANC and its elements. [Interjections.] As Dr Slabbert observed, it is essential to have more accurate information on the ANC in a country riddled with disinformation. Who is spreading the disinformation, however? Is it the Government which has made the ANC’s most authoritative policy documents available, or is it those who uncritically accept and discriminate everything which the ANC’s propaganda machine chooses to dish out to them?

Why cannot we make the choice?

Hon members will agree with me this afternoon that this reaction of certain newspapers is shocking and puzzling. The Bureau for Information and the media should actually be natural partners. They may differ with one another, of course—I believe that they should be granted that liberty—but then those differences should not disturb the basic partnership between the Bureau for Information and the media. We believe that it is the desire of both these organisations that we should ultimately live and work in a democratic South Africa.

Mr Chairman, since the hon the Deputy Minister made a few rather derogatory references to Mr Louis Nel yesterday, I should like to be a little more positive in my references to him. I do not want to refer to his so-called, perhaps dubious, past—I do not know what words the hon the Deputy Minister used. I want to say that we want to thank Mr Louis Nel for his long period as a member of the House of Assembly and for the good work he did while he was here.

Since the previous speaker, the hon member for Soutpansberg, has already congratulated the hon the Deputy Minister on his appointment, I want to refer to the officials and associate myself with the hon the Deputy Minister by thanking them for the good work they have done and by wishing them everything of the best.

I am disturbed by an announcement made here yesterday by the hon member for Brentwood. He is not here at present, and I could not get hold of his Hansard, but if I understood him correctly, he said that we—referring to CP members of Parliament—had allegedly told a group of French guests who happened to hold discussions with us yesterday that Blacks did not pay tax. If that is what he said, he is talking nonsense. [Interjections.] What did he say?

The French say that that is what you people say.

The French say that we said it. I can speak French, and I was present on that occasion. I do not know whether the hon member can speak French. [Interjections.] Not one of us told those people that Blacks did not pay tax, and I think it is absolutely malicious of the hon member for Brentwood to have uttered such rubbish here. [Interjections.]

As far as the hon the Deputy Minister’s speech is concerned, let me say that I found it amazing. He sketched the Bureau’s task and explained it well. What I found amazing was how deeply he talked himself into trouble. He started off by saying that:

He says that is true, but he was a professor in political science and knows what the word “government” means. He knows, does he not, that the government is the government of the day. It is not the NP, but the State. So what he said there was a glaring admission that a specialised body was called into being for communication purposes on behalf of the Government, the NP. [Interjections.] I am not putting words into his mouth. Hon members need only read what is written in this document. It also just happens to appear in this booklet entitled Die Burn vir Inligting.

At a later stage in his speech he described the sphere of activities of his department, that of local information. He then said who, amongst others, was supplied with information about the local situation. He said travellers to overseas countries were supplied with information, that the South African population was supplied with information and that information was supplied to overseas visitors. One could hardly add anyone else, because local residents, foreigners, in fact everyone receives information. He also says how:

It therefore covers a wide field. Every conceivable modern aid is utilised—I am sure computers, etc, are used—to carry out the task.

But not Koos van der Merwe.

That is correct. They would not want to hear the truth, and would therefore not want me to write any of the articles. [Interjections.] By the way, unlike the NP, which published a certain information document about the CP, we have never yet been in the position of having an information document embarrass us to any great extent. I wonder whether that is not why the former member for Brits is no longer here.

The hon the Deputy Minister went on to say:

Now it is a question of Government initiatives, but it is party policy. It is nothing but party policy. He then goes on to point out that the Bureau for Information is even “a research body”. He says:

What is happening here is that the Bureau for Information undertakes these campaigns on behalf of the NP and even has a research body which takes the same initiatives as the Government. It does surveys and reports back to the Government about what action it should take and in what areas it should take care because it is losing support. [Interjections.]

He admits it. [Interjections.]

He says yes. He is a stupid professor. He admits he is in trouble …

Whose stupid student are you?

I want to point out to hon members that the Bureau for Information has become nothing more or less than the NP’s information service. It is simply not South Africa’s or the State’s information service; it is the NP’s information service.

With taxpayers’ money. [Interjections.]

Yes, with the taxpayers’ money; I am coming to that.

I want to put a question to the hon the Deputy Minister, and he may refute my standpoints if he wants to. In his document he refers to the fact that he has a goldmine of information about the overall internal situation. I now want to know from him what information he makes available about the PFP, which represents about 15% of the voters in this country and about the CP, which represents almost 30% of the voters. [Interjections.] He does not say a word. That is specifically the point. The information he does disseminate is the information in which he says what we believe in.

On two occasions, during question time on a Tuesday, I asked the hon the Deputy Minister whether, when he put the Government’s views, he was not also prepared to grant opposition parties an opportunity to put forward their own views. He does not want to do so. He wants to present people with the distorted PFP and CP policies as if they originate from us. It is very easy for them to prove me wrong if I say that the Bureau for Information is the NP’s propaganda arm. The hon the Deputy Minister is shaking his head. Surely they can prove me wrong by saying that when they write about political aspects, they will also give the parties represented in Parliament, the CP and the PFP, an opportunity to join the Government in stating their views. [Interjections.]

Is that not fair? The Bureau informs the public about the local situation which has a wealth of political ramifications. They one-sidedly inform the public, because they do not allow the opposition parties to put their views.

They also sidestep the key points, as the hon the State President again did so adroitly yesterday. They never get to the NP’s actual problem, the protection of minority rights. The hon the State President made a fine speech yesterday, simply stating the point again and sketching the policy and the problem, and about the protection of minority rights he then said that the matter was apparently not going to be referred to the President’s Council. No, they would not be able to solve this problem. The Government has already lost confidence in them. The SA Law Commission must now examine this confused issue. [Interjections.]

I have been here all the time; the hon member should just wake himself up properly.

I now want to ask the hon the Deputy Minister: When they inform people, would they please give a correct version of their side of the matter?

I want to conclude. [Interjections.] I can understand hon members being glad about that, because in some cases I have touched a raw nerve.

I said that the NP had begun to misuse the Bureau for Information, adopting it as its own information body, and doing so at enormous cost to the State. It has created its own propaganda body, and a party representing only 50% of the Whites does not want to give the CP, which represents 30% of the voters, an opportunity … [Interjections.] That is the truth! We have 27% support, and the 3% HNP support is added to that. That is 30%. [Interjections.] Apparently they do not know that; they are still fast asleep!

The Government does not want to give us an opportunity to put our standpoint. That is why the hon the Deputy Minister is developing into a South African Goebbels. Like Goebbels he, too, will fall.

Mr Chairman, I would like to revert for a moment to the hon member for Johannesburg North, because I have some difficulty with him. He started off promisingly enough by saying he did not want to attack the officials as such, but rather the political control. Then he went on immediately to attack the annual report of this department, and specifically the head of this department to his Minister in a very negative way. He spoke about “officials speak”, “gobbledygook” and the report being a “jumble of nonsense and not worth the paper it was written on”.

What did you understand of it?

He went on to attack the fact that the report was only tabled recently.

Yesterday.

Immediately thereafter he said that there should not have been a report at all. It seems to me that the schizophrenia in his party’s caucus has crept into his arguments in this House. [Interjections.] That is a great pity, because they are to keep their problems to themselves.

*Similarly, the hon member for Overvaal was his usual negative self, from the first word he uttered to the last. Nevertheless, I am quite sure that when the hon the Deputy Minister replies, he will have no difficulty in refuting the many superficial statements and criticism levelled at him by the hon member. I wish to tell him that, while listening to him and noting his use of repetition—let me call it that instead of saying the great lie, the great misrepresentation—I think he could probably teach some of the other great propagandists in history, such as Dr Goebbels and others, a lesson or two. I think he took a look at what was done by them in the past.

†I would prefer to be somewhat more positive. I believe that no reasonable person would dispute the need for any government to give an account of its management of national affairs, or the right of its people to be clearly informed of what that government’s plans are for the resolution of a country’s problems.

This is of course precisely what the Bureau for Information is all about. As a communication facility of the Government, it is also a fact that the bureau itself is largely dependent on the media as a major channel of communication in conveying its message. When I now refer to the media I am specifically speaking of what I would term the responsible media. The media not only report on the actions of the Government but also comment on aspects of the Government’s actions in a positive or negative way. That is something which any government must live with. I would also submit that perhaps we should recognise that the Government itself can create negative impressions in the media by its own actions per se when these are objectively assessed to be negative, or by defective or ineffective communication of that with which it is busy.

What do you mean by “responsible media”?

Responsible media is a concept which has often been dealt with extensively in this House. I would refer the hon member to a speech which the hon the Minister of Home Affairs made during a debate earlier this year—I can give him the exact reference—where he dealt very extensively with that subject. However, what are not responsible media are the alternative media or the revolutionary Press. That is the important distinction which must be made. [Interjections.]

Order!

The problem that I would like to address briefly in my limited time is the need for effective communication with the media as an essential and major function of Ministries of State and Government departments at central and provincial levels. In his bestselling book, Megatrends, John Naisbet analyses ten new directions which according to him are transforming our lives. It is stated in this book that none of the changes taking place is more subtle yet more explosive than what he calls “the megashift from an industrial to an information society”. Having dealt with the “information explosion”, as he calls it, he makes the point that the world is drowning in information but is starved for knowledge, and he makes the important observation that uncontrolled and unorganised information is no longer a resource in an information society. In fact, it has become the enemy of the information worker! I would like to apply this argument to the relationship between the Government and the media, and say that such a state of affairs, to the extent that it exists, is simply not good enough.

I took the trouble to ask a senior parliamentary media correspondent what he saw as shortcomings on the part of the Government in this regard. He made three major points. He said that, firstly, the Government’s Press and liaison officers should be prepared for their task by being briefed on how the Press operates. They should also be briefed on specific problems of the Press such as deadlines, editing etc and the way in which the Press is segmented according to the specific interests of its readers.

Secondly, he said that the media representatives themselves should be briefed and not simply fed with masses of raw material with little or no background or context being given. Thirdly, he said that media spokesmen should have proper access and should be able to speak to the media with confidence and authority or not at all.

I would like to say that I am satisfied in my mind that the Bureau for Information itself recognises these problems and is doing everything in its power to rectify the situation in respect of these and the other shortcomings that there are. The bureau’s aim is to ensure that formal and informal channels between Ministries and departments on the one hand and the media on the other remain open and active at all times.

*When the hon the State President was still the Prime Minister, he made the following statement on 20 April 1979 regarding the Government’s liaison function:

What happened then was that the Government, under the leadership of the Prime Minister at the time, established a liaison facility. A co-ordination project was launched immediately.

This brings me to an important instrument used by the Bureau of Information in its endeavour to create a communications culture in the Public Service, namely the Interdepartmental Liaison Forum, or the ILF.

†As the hon member for Johannesburg North would also know if he had read this what he calls “useless report”, reference is also made to this very important body.

*Apart from co-ordination, guidance, training and the promotion of professionalism the ILF also has other important objectives. I welcome the fact that this body now has regular meetings under the chairmanship of the hon the Deputy Minister himself. I also wish to express the hope that this forum will play an increasingly important role in the administration of our country and that all departments will participate with enthusiasm so that the Government’s liaison facility will develop to a further extent.

†If we expect the media to play their part in conveying our message to the public we must ensure that we keep our side of the bargain and ensure that our communication efforts are up to standard. If we do not we might have only ourselves to blame in instances where we are not always satisfied with the end product.

In closing I would like to make a plea for recognition for two categories of newspapers which are assuming great significance—almost unnoticed at the present time. Firstly, there are the regional newspapers of which there are 130 with a circulation of about 550 000 and an average readership of about 2,2 million. Secondly, there are what are known as local knock-and-drop free newspapers which have a similar circulation of 500 000 and also a readership of over 2 million. I pay tribute to these publications for the role which they play in our community life throughout the country.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Umhlanga obviously did not understand what I was about when I spoke earlier on concerning the report of the bureau. I made it quite clear that my remarks were not intended for the officials. I meant that and I am sorry that he did not understand it. What I believe is that the final responsibility rests with the hon the Deputy Minister and that he should not have allowed this annual report to be published.

He should have ensured that a report of substance giving us details of what was going on in the bureau was made available to Parliament so that we could adequately assess the activities of the bureau and come to an intelligent conclusion in this regard. My remarks are not aimed at the officials but I want the hon the Deputy Minister to explain to us why he allowed this report to be published and at this late stage. As I say, I believe there is a degree of arrogance in the fact that it was only given to us yesterday.

The hon member Dr Golden is very enamoured of the song. If the song was so successful and effective, I just cannot understand why that programme has been brought to an end. All along we warned that it was ineffective and that it had been done in the wrong way and with the wrong people. They did not listen to us and it has really not been effective. As I have said, we believe it to have been a disaster and a total waste of money.

With regard to the ANC, the hon member Dr Golden just quoted selectively. If the ANC is unbanned and allowed to speak for themselves people can make up their own minds. I am not in favour of the ANC—I make that quite clear—because they have policies to which I am opposed. However, I would like to be able to make up my mind on my own and not to be fed information by the Government or by Government agencies. [Interjections.]

When the hon the Deputy Minister commenced the debate here yesterday he set out the roles of the various Departments of Information that have existed over a period of some time. At one stage he said that the main function of the bureau—I think it was during the war—had been propaganda. Well, not much has changed because, like the hon member for Overvaal, I am concerned at the propaganda aspects of the activities of the bureau.

Hear, hear!

This is not the first time that I have raised this issue with both this hon Deputy Minister and his predecessor. I do not have any of the copies of the booklets here with me, but I have on previous occasions held them up for the hon the Deputy Minister to view. We believe quite emphatically that any document printed at taxpayers’ expense is not to be used to propagate the views of one political party.

If that is done, I would say it is corrupt but, since I would not be able to say that what they are doing is corrupt, I say that it is a gross abuse of taxpayers’ money to use it to promote the policies and principles of one particular political party.

As the hon member for Overvaal pointed out, there is a difference between the bureau’s liaising on behalf of the State and liaising on behalf of the Government. When the bureau promote the policy of the NP, they are promoting the policies of the Government, which is the NP. In that respect I must say that I believe that the hon the State President’s little homily yesterday on minorities is guaranteed to become a booklet in the near future. It had all the trappings of a booklet, and I would not be surprised at all if it was rolling off the presses at the present time because this is obviously a programme which the NP is about to pursue. [Interjections.]

However, it is quite unacceptable if such booklets contain speeches which the hon the State President made at NP congresses—as happened last year—because in that way they are promoting the image of one particular political party. When the hon the Deputy Minister responds, I should like him to give a guarantee to the Committee that he will not pursue this policy in the future. It might be that his other duties regarding constitutional planning prevented him from giving all his time to the bureau in the past couple of months but, be that as it may, I have detected that the flow of booklets has decreased. I am pleased at this development; I hope it indicates a change of policy, and that we are not going to have such heavy NP propaganda as we have had in the past.

Then I must say too that I am pleased that the bureau has limited its role in filtering information to the media. I believe that this was an attempt by some individuals to manipulate the thought processes of South Africans. A much better situation obtains now as the media are able to approach the Ministers and the departments themselves. This is natural. This is the correct way to deal with the media. I am sorry that the hon member for Umhlanga is no longer here because he is apparently an expert on the media. However, I am sure that he would agree with me in this regard. [Interjections.] It is much better that the media can now approach the individuals themselves for comment rather than to have the bureau filtering that information. I am being positive now, Sir—and I hope the hon the Deputy Minister will accept it in that light—when I say I believe this to be good development and I am pleased that he has brought that practice to an end.

I want to make just one final point. I raised this matter last year during the debate but the hon the Deputy Minister’s predecessor did not respond to it. I believe that the hon the Deputy Minister could very well spend a great deal of his time in preparing South Africans for the post-apartheid era. In the R31 million he has a large amount of money at his disposal. Instead of promoting apartheid, as the Government does and as the hon the Deputy Minister will be obliged to do, I believe that some time should be spent on educating all South Africans to adapt themselves to the post-apartheid era. The Government claims that it is against apartheid; it claims that apartheid is an outmoded concept. I urge the hon the Deputy Minister to devote his time, energies and a great deal of his resources to working towards educating South Africans to prepare for the post-apartheid era that we are about to enter.

Mr Chairman, I shall come back presently to what the hon member for Johannesburg North said; I first want to react to the only real point that the hon member for Overvaal made.

*If I understood correctly, the hon member for Overvaal is a student of politics. [Interjections.] He tried to insinuate that the hon the Deputy Minister must have been a very stupid professor. However, I want to say that the hon member for Overvaal must be an extremely stupid student, because the CP alleges that we have a mixed government in South Africa. They accuse us of having incorporated people of colour in the Government—this is correct; we have done so—but at the same time he simply equates the Government with the NP. Since when have the hon the Chairman of the House of Representatives and the hon the Chairman of the House of Delegates, Messrs Hendrickse and Rajbansi, who are part of the Government, been members of the NP? Hon members apparently do not understand the difference.

I think the other naiveté he was guilty of here, was that he expected the government of the day to disseminate information and to promote the cause of an aspirant government, of someone who is not yet in the Government. I wonder whether the hon member for Overvaal can give us a single example of an existing administration which has promoted or explained the policy of a prospective administration—or someone it is in competition with—which is diametrically opposed to its own. It is unbelievable to think that, if one takes this through to its logical conclusion, the Reagan administration should use the information service of America to disseminate the standpoints of the Democratic Party. Surely this is ridiculous. It is not what is at issue. What is at issue, and where the task of the Bureau for Information lies …

You are not only stupid; you are idiotic!

If the improbable were to happen, and the CP were to come into power …

That is far closer than you think!

… they are going to adopt policies which are radically different to those the government of the day is adopting at the moment. Then it is not only going to be their right but their duty to inform the public on the policies of the day.

Order! The hon member for Overvaal referred to the hon member for Springs by saying that he was stupid. The hon member must withdraw that.

But he said I was stupid, Sir! [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member for Springs referred to a stupid student.

Then he is a stupid politician, Sir.

Order! When the hon member for Springs referred to a stupid student, was he referring to the hon member for Overvaal?

No, Mr Chairman. I did in fact say he must have been an incredibly stupid student. However, if there is a problem in this regard, I shall withdraw it and say that he must have been a student with an extremely poor grasp of matters.

Order! The hon member must withdraw the word unconditionally.

Sir, I withdraw it.

Order! The hon member for Overvaal must withdraw the word “stupid”.

I withdraw it and say that he is not at all clever. [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member for Overvaal must withdraw it unconditionally.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: If the hon member for Springs must withdraw the word “stupid”, the hon member for Overvaal must also withdraw the word “stupid”, because he said that the hon the Deputy Minister was “stupid”.

He has already done so.

Where were you, Sampie?

Mr Chairman, be that as it may, the fact of the matter is that from the reasoning of the hon member for Overvaal it was quite clear that he had no understanding of the difference between a party and the Government.

†I also want to react briefly to what the hon member for Johannesburg North said.

Are you now finished with me?

Yes, one does not need much time to deal with you! [Interjections.]

†The hon member for Johannesburg North did something here which I really think was a pity. He said “rumour has it” about a video that was made. The hon the Deputy Minister indicated that this was not true, but he continued to perpetuate that rumour. Why did the hon member for Johannesburg North not do the same as the study group of this party, namely to ask for an appointment with the bureau and ask the bureau to inform him on their work?

*We examined the relevant video and other videos they produce, and there is nothing sinister about them. They deal with matters such as the gas project at Mossel Bay, and these kind of things which enhance South Africa’s image. He is, however, trying to suggest that some or other sinister video is being or has been made, and that some or other project has been abandoned or something of this sort. He did not however make any enquiries beforehand to try and verify the facts. He was satisfied to spread rumours. Mr Chairman, one is inclined to pick up such habits from the friends with whom one consorts.

One of the functions of the Bureau for Information, as is indicated on page 4 of the Bureau’s annual report, is the on-going monitoring of the national state of emergency and, in addition to other functions of the directorate, for example research, the monitoring and analysing of media reporting. Obviously this monitoring function must be exercised within the context of the media regulations promulgated in terms of the Public Safety Act. Against this background I should like to try to deal with the effectiveness of these regulations as an instrument to counteract efforts to promote a general revolutionary climate in the country—something which the so-called alternative media in particular is endeavouring to do.

When one looks at the media regulations, it becomes apparent that the objective of the media regulations is not, in the first place, to limit the national debate, but to keep it within acceptable channels. The dividing line is a political constitutional strategy or strategy aimed at convincing people on the one hand, and a revolutionary, violence-orientated strategy on the other. In the second place the regulations rather serve as a guideline for reporting on revolutionary and related matters for example. As legal technical prescriptions such regulations can hardly ever be watertight. If a publication abides by the spirit of the regulations, conflict or clashes with the authorities will be fairly unlikely. It is however equally true that it is relatively easy to find loopholes in the existing regulations on technical grounds if one does not agree with the objective of the regulations, or even to circumvent them without much trouble.

I should like to examine a division or grouping of categories of the media, and yet again it is very difficult to divide the media into watertight groups. There is sometimes overlapping, and shifts also take place occasionally. For the purposes of the assessing of the efficiency of these media regulations I should like to differentiate between two categories of publications.

The first category is what one could call the institutional or commercial media, most of whom are members of the Newspaper Press Union. Then there is a second group, the so-called alternative media, which does not function on a commercial basis, but concentrates on a demonstrative approach in an effort to promote a specific cause. Whereas the institutional media concentrates primarily on news coverage, the alternative media concentrates primarily on promoting a specific climate, a specific cause or a specific ideology, and in no case I know of is the alternative media really members of the Newspaper Press Union. When the alternative media in particular, or certain elements in it, which concentrate on a revolutionary climate, look at the media regulations, they deliberately go out of their way when assessing them—I shall give examples in a moment—to circumvent these regulations and make them totally ineffective. It is to be expected that such elements will also try to discredit these regulations. There can be no doubt …

Order! I am sorry to interrupt the hon member, but his time has expired.

Mr Chairman, I am merely rising to afford the hon member for Springs the opportunity to complete his speech. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, I thank the hon Whip of the Official Opposition.

As I said, Sir, there can be no doubt that the revolutionaries use the alternative media for their own purposes.

†At the highest policy-making meeting of the ANC in 1985 it was decided that what they call the democratic Press should be developed inside South Africa and should receive more attention. They felt that the so-called democratic Press and the armed struggle should be complementary to one another.

The media should therefore not only be used as a persuasive force, but also as a means of mobilising people for the struggle or the revolution.

Francis Melli, editor of the ANC’s publication Sechaba, said on Radio Moscow in May this year:

During the debate on the Vote of the hon the State President yesterday, the hon member Prof Olivier said in connection with freedom of the Press that the fact that some members of the media abuse this freedom should not lead to curbs on the media or on that freedom. The abuse is the price we have to pay for that freedom. We just have to live with it.

With respect, that is an oversimplification and a very naive way of looking at reality. It is almost like saying: “If you want to rob me, I will rather leave the front door open than put you to the trouble of trying to break it down”. Total, uncontrolled freedom is sure to lead to the total loss of that freedom. History has many examples where the media, wittingly or unwittingly, aided and advanced the causes of radical revolutionaries. The role of the media in America’s withdrawal in disgrace from Vietnam is a very good example.

Despite the media regulations, a very obvious campaign to further the revolutionary climate by members of the alternative media has been stepped up, with inciting reports trying to discredit almost all instruments of the State and of society in general. I just want to give a few examples of this.

In the July 16 issue of South, there is a report entitled “Army Camp Row”:

*The report goes even further by trying to discredit this camp completely, whereas if one considers this matter carefully one sees that the camp lasted two days. They are supposed to have been brainwashed in two days! All that happened was that recreation was arranged, while they were also given a few lectures on matters such as personal hygiene. However, such civic programmes must be discredited.

The national state of emergency is referred to—and this while the national state of emergency is aimed at controlling such things as necklace murders—as “the politics of murder”. An effort is made to suggest that the joint management centres, to which the hon member for Johannesburg North also referred, are linked in a sinister way to the Bureau for Information, and they ask whether it is a coincidence that the offices of the Bureau for Information and these centres are in the same cities. They are trying to suggest that this is sinister!

It is not a coincidence.

Of course it is not a coincidence, because these just happen to be the largest centres in the country. [Interjections.] I therefore think that everyone will have their head offices there. Regional offices of various Government departments are in those centres. This system is nevertheless referred to as a Frankenstein, and it is suggested that it is clandestine and sinister. [Interjections.]

In this way they are also trying to create a basis for the so-called “people’s education”, and an analysis is given in the publication New Nation in April of this year of the “Black Consciousness” movement, and it is explained approvingly how they gradually changed from a Black consciousness movement into something closer to Marxism. One can give one example after the other. In New Nation for example an article was published on so-called protest songs and it was stated:

Another one reads:

There can be no doubt that an effort is being made with this kind of reporting to create a revolutionary climate.

It is, however, not only the State which is attacked. Other institutions in society are also attacked violently in these publications. In this way, yet again in New Nation, reference is made to the Kinross mining disaster as the consequence of “racism and profit rule supreme at Kinross”. In another very good example which I have here, along with a photograph of shacks, reference is made to Botshabelo as if things are going very badly there and this is called “orderly urbanisation”. I was privileged as a member of the Constitutional Committee of the President’s Council to visit Botshabelo. There are certainly new arrivals who are squatting in an orderly fashion, but there are also beautiful modern houses, tarred roads and streetlights. These things are not being publicised.

The point I should like to make is that it is quite clear that the existing media regulations are not contending successfully with the problem of the alternative media. This will have to receive serious attention.

Another aspect which will also have to receive serious attention is the financing of the alternative media. If one pages through these publications it strikes one that there are very few advertisements in them. They can hardly be economic undertakings on their own. The funds must be coming from somewhere. I think the public has the right to know where those funds are coming from.

Mr Chairman, it is a pleasure for me to take the floor after the hon member for Springs, who is also my benchmate. I should also like to congratulate him on his election as chairman of the NP’s study group on this matter, a task which he is performing very successfully at present.

At the same time permit me to convey my utmost sympathy to the hon member for Johannesburg North on the loss of the only other member in his study group. Hon members will have noticed today that he was the only PFP speaker. I do not expect any other member of the PFP to speak on the Bureau for Information, because their only other speaker on that topic has now left. As one knows, in the PFP people are constantly on tour. Some leave, never to return, whilst others do come back. We do not know where their chief propagandist has gone, but as they say “rumour has it” that he actually left because he had not been invited to Dakar. [Interjections.]

We are living in times in which the whole concept of communication is being subjected to very close scrutiny, also from a scientific point of view. The human process of communication consists of four elements: The communicator, the message, the medium and the receiver. The purpose of communication as I understand it, which would also be the aim of the bureau, is “to create understanding, to form attitudes, to strengthen attitudes, and to change attitudes”. There are, in fact, certain problems relating to the communication process, ie that in the process “one must overcome resistance”, as they say. I think that the Bureau for Information has a very important role to play in the communication process between the State and the population.

I believe that information is but one aspect of the communication process. The communication process involves much more than that. In the times ahead the bureau will be a communicator in this process of communication, and the most important characteristic of every communicator, if the communicator wants people to believe in his message, is that he should have credibility. He must build up that credibility so that the people with whom he is communicating can believe what he tells them.

The communicator, in this case the bureau, will have to decide what the message is, how it is to be conveyed and to whom it is to be conveyed. One very important fact, which all communicators are aware of, is that people deal with perceptions. Perceptions do not necessarily always reflect reality. That is why it has become of cardinal importance to the governments of the world to obtain the services of experts to deal with this whole question of perceptions. There are distorted perceptions of our country. Abroad there are distorted perceptions of our country that are giving rise to isolation and sanctions. Unfortunately that is what distorted perceptions lead to.

When we think of the distorted perceptions that various peoples in our own country have of one another, we realise that these are matters that must be put right. Distorted negative perceptions must be eliminated. I have said that the message conveyed by the bureau should be one of credibility. In order to convey a message which has credibility, one has to take into account the needs and aspirations of the people with whom one wants to communicate. That is very important.

That is why, in these times in which our statecraft involves communication between the State and the Black population of our country, in particular, it is not only the bureau’s task, but also our task, as parliamentarians, and that of the media, to tell these people, in our communication with them, that we understand their aspirations and needs. We must tell them that we understand that they also want proper education for their children; that we understand that they also want housing, that they want medical services, that they do not want to accept discrimination and that they also have political aspirations.

Having said that, we must also eliminate the perception that we are not prepared to give their children access to proper education. We must eliminate the perception that we do not want them to have good housing, that we do not want them to have medical services, that we do not care. We must convert these distorted perceptions into positive perceptions that this Government believes that it is in their interests and that they are entitled to have proper education and also housing and medical services; that we are moving away from discrimination and that we do want to grant these people political rights. It is important for us to instil these perceptions in the communities we communicate with. Having said that, it is very important that when we tell people that we are doing something, we should keep our word and do what we have said we are going to do.

Communication is nevertheless not unidirectional; it moves in two directions. In this communication process we must therefore also be receptive to people with whom we are communicating and to their answers and responses to what we are trying to do. The bureau has a difficult task ahead of it, and that is why the bureau needs our support and goodwill. The hon the Deputy Minister entrusted with this is well equipped for the task. I should like to take this opportunity to wish the bureau and the people involved, its officials, everything of the best for the future.

Mr Chairman, firstly I should like to come back to what the hon member for Springs said. Since the hon member chose journalism as a field of study, let me just tell him, firstly, that it is very clear that the prerequisites for statecraft are probably unattainable by him.

Political science was my other major, old chap.

It seems to me as if the hon member for Springs used the argument that because the Coloureds are not members of the NP, the hon member for Overvaal cannot use the argument in regard to the Bureau for Information which has become a propagandistic extension of the NP. Looking at what has happened during the past few months, let me say that according to NP policy the Coloureds have so little right to quite a number of things that they cannot even swim where they want to.

Oh please, Fanie!

Excellent point, Fanie! Take it from there!

Since the hon the Deputy Minister shook his head in denial at the hon member for Overvaal’s point about the propaganda resulting from the bureau’s functions, I should now just like to confront the hon the Deputy Minister with the official yearbook for 1986. On page 182 we find the following:

Apart from the fact that this entity can possibly refer only to the structure of the NP, of course, and not to its standpoints, let me ask the hon the Deputy Minister whether and where such words are ever used with reference to the other parties. Nowhere else in the yearbook, which is an official yearbook, is the CP or the PFP placed in this favourable light.

That really is mean, Stoffel.

If one thinks that it is an official yearbook, surely there is only one conclusion one can draw from this and that is that the NP is given preferential treatment in the yearbook. In fact, the hon the Deputy Minister can perhaps remember that a few years ago the CP had to make an official request for certain corrections to be made to what was said about the CP in this yearbook. That is true, is it not?

We accepted that.

They did accept it, and we are grateful to them for having done so, but surely they should have consulted the CP in advance about matters contained in the yearbook. They should have asked us whether the facts were correct. Surely something which is not factually correct is a piece of propaganda.

In point of fact, this goes even further. I want to ask the hon the Deputy Minister what he calls the ANC—a resistance movement or a terrorist organisation.

A terrorist organisation. It is a revolutionary organisation.

I understand. Does the hon the Deputy Minister draw any distinction between a resistance movement and a terrorist organisation?

A resistance movement is very widespread.

You see, Sir, in this very yearbook the euphemistic term “resistance movement” is used when the ANC is discussed, and not the term terrorist movement. Is there a specific reason for this other than the fact that “terrorist organisation” would be too strong a reference to such an organisation in an official yearbook? [Interjections.] On political platforms the term “resistance movement”, which is contained in the official yearbook, is simply waved aside and the term terrorist organisation is used when addressing voters.

A “weerstandsbewe-ging”!

Sakkie, what do you know about that kind of thing?

Next I should like to refer to what the hon the Deputy Minister said in the discussion of his Vote. He said:

With all due respect, what is apparent here is, of course, NP logic. According to this booklet, Die Buro vir Inligting, they want to be a department of information furnishing information to all population groups, but in such a way that the people do not know they are being furnished with information. [Interjections.] They want to furnish them with information, but at the same time they do not want to proclaim what they are saying from the rooftops. What sort of information service is this bureau for information, which does not want to proclaim its message from the rooftops?

With reference to that, I want to quote from the booklet, Die Buro vir Inligting:

Today I want to know from the hon the Deputy Minister whether, as yet, there has been an opinion poll to ascertain what political course the White Afrikaners in this country are in favour of adopting. Has there, as yet, been such an opinion poll?

Yes, on 6 May.

I am asking whether this has been done by the Bureau for Information. [Interjections.] So this statement is not factually correct, or is the hon the Deputy Minister saying that there has been such an opinion poll?

No, he denies it. [Interjections.]

Yes, he denies it.

Order! The hon member for Losberg may not put questions and then expect hon members to reply to them. The hon member may continue.

What I am asking the hon the Deputy Minister is: If there have been such opinion polls, amongst all the population groups, about their political attitudes and dispositions, would he please make the results available to the CP so that we can determine the dispositions of all population groups in this regard.

I should like to come back to the peace song about which so much has already been said. Today we have heard—I have made a rapid calculation here—that up to and including the 1988 financial year, R11,726 million is going to be spent on this song.

That is a lie.

According to my calculations, it is made up as follows, and the hon member can tell me if this is a lie—there is R8,718 million and …

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

Mr Chairman, may I briefly address the committee?

Order! I am asking the hon member for Langlaagte to withdraw the word “lie”. It is not permissible.

Mr Chairman, I withdraw it … [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member for Losberg may continue.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: The hon member for Langlaagte did not withdraw it without qualification, and he threatened the hon member for Losberg by saying he would get him, or words to that effect.

Order! The hon member for Losberg may continue.

Mr Chairman, the amount is made up as follows: The R8,718 million, and added to that a further R3 million, making a total of R11,726 million. If that is not so, the answer given here is again confusing, because it is not stated whether the R3 million is excluded or included, and we are waiting for the Bureau for Information to inform everyone in South Africa, once and for all, about what this song has actually cost.

I think one can sum this up by saying that the Bureau for Information has a twofold information task. It must furnish the various population groups with information—I have already referred to that—but there is another facet of information for which I crave the committee’s indulgent attention, and that is information to which political parties are entitled in this regard. We want to know from the hon the Deputy Minister whether it is his policy, and whether he understands his department’s functions to mean, that he should also furnish information to other departments and other political parties about the functions of his department and should take the Official Opposition into his confidence in regard to the feedback he obtains in connection with any opinion polls that are conducted. If that is not the case, the hon member for Overvaal’s view that this is a department which only benefits the Government is quite correct.

In this connection let me refer to the newspaper advertisements which were financed by the Bureau for Information and in which controversial party-political matters were dealt with. The question about what these newspaper advertisements cost the taxpayer should, after all, be answered. There is also quite a bit to say about the morality involved. The Government’s standpoints are therefore financed from taxpayers’ money. I want to suggest that it is highly debatable whether my money should be used for advertisements in which my standpoints are attacked. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Losberg embroidered on the theme of the Bureau for Information being an NP channel for propaganda. In support of this he quoted from the official yearbook, at the same time putting a series of questions to the hon the Deputy Minister which I think he will reply to. Seen as a whole, in my view the hon member’s speech was still aimed only at revealing the negative and critical attitude of hon members on that side of the Committee towards the Bureau. Since I have little time at my disposal, I am going to ask the hon member to excuse me for not reacting at greater length to his speech.

I should prefer to devote the little time at my disposal to focussing on a positive aspect of the Bureau’s functions. Here I am referring to the Bureau for Information’s research function. It is important for us to examine the research function, because what the Bureau produces has its origins, in many respects, at grassroots level—where the research is done. We should also do that against the background that it is the Bureau’s primary task to promote effect communication between the Government of the day and the inhabitants of South Africa.

To give meaningful substance to this task, the Directorate: Research came into being, within the context of the Bureau, in May of last year. This Directorate gathers and analyses factual data and information which is important to both the Government of the day and the inhabitants of the country, and therefore also to the functioning of the State.

For example, during the past year the Directorate has consistently monitored the state of emergency. Secondly it has launched a drive to gauge the attitudes and dispositions of all the population groups. Thirdly it has monitored and analysed reporting in the media. The hon member for Springs referred to that very effectively. Fourthly it has undertaken investigations into fundamental issues in Black residential areas.

What is interesting, moreover, is that in this process of investigation and research, the Bureau has made use of the most modern research methods and of modern-day technological aids which have been found to be very useful. The results of these research projects include, among other things, the following three aspects.

Firstly, very interesting and thought-provoking information and communication packages on a variety of subjects were published. I have a list of those information and communication packages in my possession. Unfortunately time does not permit me to mention to hon members the various subjects touched upon, but this information is available and specifically those hon members who are negatively or critically disposed towards the Bureau would find that if they approached the Bureau and made inquiries about this their efforts would be rewarded. They would see what a great help it is to politicians, but also to the man in the street, to consult these packages.

The further result of this research was that a great deal of the information thus obtained has been computerised; in other words, this information is ready for further use and for research.

Finally, as a result of this research and the gathering of information the Bureau could, on a regular basis, supply a large section of the population, and also overseas visitors, with information on matters of national importance.

In my view there cannot be effective communication, by means of which reliable information is conveyed, without exhaustive and scientific research; in fact, the degree of success of communication efforts made by the Government via the Bureau depends, to a large extent, on the quality of the research work which the Bureau’s researchers have done. Without fear of contradiction I want to say this afternoon that during the first year of its existence the Bureau’s Directorate: Research has established an information medium of great value to our country.

What is important, too, is that this information has not only been collected and preserved, but is also being analysed and is available for further research.

One of the sources of information which the Directorate: Research has, in my view, successfully exploited, something which I am delighted about—and the hon member for Umhlanga also referred to it—is the media. Although I have, in my participation in this debate, emphasised the research function of the Bureau, I should also like to endorse the important work done by the media in our country in the field of the provision and dissemination of information. In this connection I want to quote an historian, P S Malan:

It is a good thing that the Bureau is exhaustively exploiting this source of research, in the process separating the wheat from the chaff.

I want to conclude by saying that although the Directorate only came into existence a little more than a year ago, it has already succeeded in comprehensively collecting factual information and data on South Africa’s complex social structure, analysing it and making it available in a processed form. In my view, the Bureau is thus making an extraordinary contribution to the provision of information, which leads to efficient communication between the Government and South Africa’s respective communities. To my way of thinking the Bureau’s Research Directorate deserves our thanks. This side of the Committee wishes the Directorate everything of the best for the future.

Mr Chairman, after this stimulating debate one feels a great deal like Churchill. I want to quote him slightly out of context and say: “So much to say and so little time to say it. ” It will be impossible for me to react in detail to all hon members’ statements and questions. The hon member for Johannesburg North for instance asked more questions in 15 minutes than a clever man could answer in a day. Nevertheless I shall try to reply briefly to a few specific questions put by hon members, and then to elaborate a little more on the bureau and related matters. I hope this will cover most of the other arguments.

The hon member for Soutpansberg asked why the Yearbook was published on behalf of the Department of Foreign Affairs. The reply to this is simply that approximately 70% of the distribution takes place abroad. He also asked whether all foreign visitors requesting to speak to the CP were directed to that party by us. As far as I could establish, this happens wherever possible. What is more, some people who do not ask to talk to the CP are introduced to this party. [Interjections.]

The hon member for Sunnyside discussed the right and duty of the State to communicate and also raised the point that the bureau was not an NP instrument. I shall return to that. He explained the activities of the bureau as well and he has my thanks for that.

†Mr Chairman, at this stage I just want to point out a few things in connection with the points raised by the hon member for Johannesburg North. He asked why the report was so late. In fact, the report was already tabled and disseminated on Friday, and not only yesterday. This report was compiled with a view to busy politicians, so I believe it would not have taken a man of the intelligence of the hon member much time to read the ten pages.

I therefore do not really see how there can be much reason for complaint. The 13 offices of the bureau are situated in the 13 regions of South Africa—as is the case with most other Government departments. There is nothing sinister about that.

The bureau also liaises with the organisation Women for South Africa as it does with any other organisation that has any need or shows any inclination. Liaising just means keeping in contact and providing them with information if they want information. There is nothing strange about the term “liaising”. We had no involvement in the establishment of that organisation. We have some contact with organisations overseas but this is mainly in connection with our duties with regard to the foreign Press. We do not have any other relationships with organisations overseas.

The hon member referred to a video programme but I am not aware of any such project. There was definitely no project shelved on the instruction of the hon the State President.

The hon member also referred to the number of posts. Unfortunately, he read the report somewhat incorrectly. I am sorry if the language in this one respect is of an officialese nature, in the sense that one perhaps has to be an insider to know that labour provisioning is not normally part of the establishment. Where we speak of 600 posts this excludes labour provisioning which would refer to messengers etc; in other words, staff at the very lowest level. The vacancies should actually be subtracted from the 600 posts and not added. The real complement of people is therefore much closer to 400 than 600, and not 800 as the hon member feared. The monster is therefore not so big and not so dangerous either. [Interjections.] I will return to that.

Make it clear next time!

The hon member Dr Golden indicated very lucidly that the bureau, and actually the State, in fact relayed information, and that we tried to avoid propaganda. Whereas ANC propaganda is curbed by State action, the Government has no hesitation in furnishing the public with hard facts in the best possible way. I thank the hon member for his contribution.

The hon member for Overvaal said that I had made derogatory comments about my predecessor, but I think he misunderstood me. I said that my predecessor had had a controversial political career, but by this I did not mean that I had any quarrel with him. It simply meant that some people did not like what he did.

You could have omitted mentioning him!

I thanked him for the good work he put into the establishment of the bureau. If there is any misunderstanding in this connection, I wish to make it clear that I have no reason or desire to speak disparagingly of my predecessor; I have a great deal of respect for him.

I thank the hon member’s for his verbatim repetition of large portions of my speech. I did not regard it as a sufficiently good speech to necessitate repetition, but thank you very much for that. I shall revert later to other points raised by the hon member.

†The hon member for Umhlanga spoke of the necessity of the Government to communicate with the population. He made the point that it is part of good management that there should be proper communication. He referred to the interdepartmental liaison forum etc and I thank the hon member.

*The hon member for Springs emphasized the entire problem of the alternative media. The media represent a particularly important instrument in the entire political process. It is interesting that two processes are occurring in South Africa. One is a democratic process in which some parts of the population are already participating fully in the democratic process while others are expanding their participation. This is a broadening of democracy but it all forms part of a democratic process or a democratic game. Comprehensive information and as much freedom of the Press as possible is of cardinal importance in that democratic game.

In addition another process is taking place, a revolutionary one, which is played according to a totally different set of rules. The problem we experience is that the rules of democracy are being used in the other game to the detriment of democracy. One cannot play these two games according to the same rules. Because the rules are not the same, one cannot play them on the same field. It is therefore necessary for those parts of the Press to be examined which are in fact not promoting democracy but tending to bring about the downfall of the entire system. It is not the task of the bureau to examine this but a broader task of the Government and other Government departments. It will be investigated, however, and the hon the State President referred to this yesterday. I thank him for the clear exposition he gave of this matter.

The hon member for Parow gave a most thorough explanation of the entire process of communication, the perceptions involved, the necessity for credibility and so on. I regret being unable to say more about such excellent contributions as those of the hon member for Parow and other hon members.

The hon member for Losberg had a problem with the Yearbook, but I think it is of lesser importance. I want to reopen the discussion on the point he made, ie that I had said we did not proclaim our actions from the housetops. This does not mean we are engaged in actions we wish to suppress. All I said was that the bureau could point to splendid achievements in its short existence and had already made an enormous contribution. It is not the style of the bureau, however, to go about bragging and saying: “Look at what we did here and see what we did there”. That was all I meant in saying we did not blazon our achievements abroad. I also considered it important to say we were not doing anything that we felt could not bear mention. Our actions are not shrouded in mystery.

As regards the song, I should like to ask the hon member to read the reply I gave today, and which he has in front of him, very carefully. He will see there are two related projects; one of these was embodied in this song which was actually a project in which the idea of “together we shall build a better future” was conveyed. Nobody can have difficulties with that idea because it merely means “unity is strength”. The thoughts are identical. What happened was that in that process we made use inter alia of a song but that it was accompanied by an entire campaign on which we spent money in connection with the song on advertisements over the radio, on television, in newspapers, on billboards and so on. This cost approximately R4 million.

The other part of this campaign, which operated in conjunction with it, was that we said it represented a rent and services campaign. We told a person it cost money to build a house so one should pay for leasing it. The provision of water cost money and that was why one should pay for it. Hon members are aware of the problem in that regard. That is the other part of the project. The figures for the project “together we shall build a future” were furnished previously and remain unchanged. They formed part of a larger project, however, because we said if we could popularise the basic idea of building a better future together we could the more easily propagate these other ideas in the light of the first one. I shall revert to this a little later because it gives one food for thought.

†The hon member for Johannesburg North made the point that we should prepare South Africa for a post-apartheid society. Now, where can one find a better project than that for that particular purpose? In fact, just to add to that, in view of the fact that the hon the State President says that apartheid is an outdated concept, and considering the situation in South Africa, what better way is there than to prepare people for a post-apartheid society or to discredit the idea of apartheid, as it is known, than by propagating exactly what the hon the State President said?

*I now wish to reply to more general questions. I want to spend a few moments in discussing the reason why there should be communication, how it takes place, who carries it out, what is involved and the results we have achieved by this means.

And on whose behalf.

The CP is merely singing a swan song!

It is the duty of a government to communicate, to inform the population of what it is doing, because it is important that the population be aware of government action. The population should be informed. It is their right to know; it is part of the democratic process. They must be informed to enable them to assess government actions. It is therefore important for them to have that information. We would rather solve the country’s problems through communication than through conflict. The communication should be of such a nature that people understand it.

But you suppress the views of opposition parties! [Interjections.]

A need has been expressed for better communication—frequently by members of the Press as well. The question is now, if we want to communicate and convey the message, why it is not sufficient merely to make the information available to the media.

The media play a most important part in this process of communication and we are grateful for it. We actually have an entire division which concentrates on liaison with the Press, by means of which we attempt to build good relations with its members and to provide them with information in as continuous and effective a manner as possible. We acknowledge the role of the Press but it has its limitations too. The media actually have an inherent propensity for the dramatic, the unusual and the somewhat sensational.

Like the SABC.

That is why one cannot expect them to convey all the facets of the Government’s message. One finds telling proof of this in that even other institutions do not find Press coverage adequate in that a company still takes a full-page advertisement to emphasise the best aspects of its annual report when this appears, although the newspapers carry reports on it. [Interjections.] The company does this because it cannot expect newspapers to stress everything, from a news point of view, the company would like to see this done.

Yes, with its own money!

The company therefore buys space and composes its own headlines. This is a method the Government has also adopted in this respect.

With the taxpayers’ money! [Interjections.]

I should like to cite another example. When certain products are offered at a special price at particular shops for instance, even this could be news but not of the type to make newspaper headlines. Consequently those companies find it necessary to place double-page advertisements in newspapers week after week to invite readers to buy from them and to inform them of what products are obtainable at what prices. Those are all news items. They are true but not the type of news that gets into the newspapers.

As far as government action is concerned, there is news of many kinds that does not get into the papers and is therefore not given the necessary prominence. This is what obliges us to make use of other methods too. I shall return a little later to results achieved by these methods. [Interjections.]

Let us deal with the question: Who communicates? The Government has to communicate, but I shall revert to that in a moment.

In this regard the bureau communicates only within the country and only on the South African situation. There are a few aspects which are halfway to being exceptions in that sphere, but they are very logical. In other words, it is not the primary task of the Bureau for Information to disseminate the image abroad. When one has foreign visitors here, however, what does one find them asking about? They do not want information on the foreign relations of South Africa; they want to be informed about internal conditions in the country. [Interjections.] This also holds good for foreign journalists stationed here. They also want information on internal conditions in South Africa and this is where the bureau’s expertise lies. Consequently it is logical for the bureau to deal with these foreign visitors and foreign media stationed here as well.

On various occasions—we do this regularly—we have sent visitors to the CP when they requested this and also when they did not. At the request of the media we have arranged appointments with Opposition representatives on various occasions. From that point of view this means it is our objective to put these people into contact with a balanced spectrum of South African society, including White Opposition parties and groups among the Blacks which are not necessarily sympathetic toward the Government.

I now want to deal with the point that the bureau is supposedly an NP information organ. I may say in passing that I used to be a member of the NP information service. As officials of the NP information service we always felt we were called upon to defend all types of actions taken by the Government which had nothing to do with the party and that this was actually the bureau’s task. In other words, while we were standing there we felt this bureau was not doing its work properly because the NP had to do so much for it. [Interjections.]

Let us reflect on this a little. What is this all about? Government action influences the lives of the population, so the population must be informed. The policy of Opposition parties does not actually influence the daily lives of the parties because it does not change anything. [Interjections.] They are not able to launch actions. There are certainly a few points in this respect. On the one hand the Government does not consist only of the NP. This is also the case because the Government is involved in the direct implementation of policy and in dealing with many affairs which have nothing to do with general NP policy. That is why many actions launched by the Government actually have nothing to do with NP policy. [Interjections.]

Order! There are too many interjections coming from my left. The hon the Deputy Minister may proceed.

It does not form any part of general NP policy that regional services councils have to be established. Nevertheless such councils have to be established to satisfy the requirements of South Africa and all its people; that is why they have to be established. [Interjections.]

Order! Is the hon the Deputy Minister prepared to reply to a question now?

Sir, I have very little time. [Interjections.]

Order! The hon the Deputy Minister may proceed.

That is why Government policy frequently differs from that of the NP. What is more important, however, is that the policy adopted by the Government—regardless from what party it emanates—is adopted by the Government which has been placed in the seat of power according to the constitutional processes of the country, with a mandate to carry out that policy. That policy therefore has the sanction of the majority of voters and that calls for an explanation of actions launched in terms of it.

Are regional services councils not part of NP policy?

Nothing in the general NP policy necessitates the establishment of regional services councils. Circumstances give rise to them.

The RAU should be glad you left.

A further point is that 90% of the work of the Bureau for Information comprises ordinary, cold and objective information which has nothing to do with the party. What is more, we definitely give other parties publicity too. In this way a balanced image is given in the South African Digest of what appears in South African newspapers. I have an example here in which PFP policy is explained. This was taken from an article in a South African daily paper. Consequently publicity is given to a variety of standpoints in that regard too; not only standpoints favourable to Government.

I wish to emphasise that the bureau is involved in aboveboard information and actions. We have no secret funds nor do we want them.

You have no secret activities?

Every cent spent goes on some project or other for which we can account openly in this Parliament.

No secret activities?

We have no secret projects.

Unfortunately furnishing information is not merely the furnishing of facts.

Yes, that is true!

This is true in many respects. The relationship of those facts to one another is sometimes more important. It is the perspective which is important because without perspective those same facts can be interpreted in one way or another; they can be interpreted negatively. Take for instance Government action in abolishing influx control. On the one hand the same facts may be interpreted as the Government’s throwing in the towel; on the other hand they may be interpreted as having no significance. In the third place it may be interpreted as a step forward in the direction of a new future. Because this is actually the current Government objective in launching those actions, it is legitimate for the bureau to place them in perspective to prevent our lapsing into perpetual pessimism.

Order! When I was in the Chair earlier today, and hon members on this side were participating in the debate, the hon the Deputy Minister listened to them attentively without any comment. I now expect the same courtesy to be shown him. The hon the Deputy Minister may proceed.

Thank you, Sir.

In conclusion I should like to add that we are living in modern times. Modern communication media and means of communication have changed and differ from those of the past. One reason for this is that we live in a very much more intense society than was the case in earlier years. All other sectors of society make use of modern means of communication, so it is our task to use them too. That is why we make use of modern means and techniques of communication. We carry out market research and analyse signals. We examine our timing and liaise with the necessary people and then come up with specific projects.

I should like to express a few thoughts on the successes already achieved. It is true that one cannot say with complete conviction in respect of something like rentals and service charges, regarding which we are launching a specific project, that the resultant change in attitudes can simply be ascribed to steps taken by the bureau; it would be presumptuous to do this. Nevertheless the fact remains that negative attitudes existed among the Black population on the payment of rentals and service charges to such a degree that we found through research we carried out that more than 61% of Black respondents indicated in October 1986 that they were negative toward the payment of rentals and service charges.

The bureau subsequently came up with this campaign. It covered a broad spectrum which included inter alia the matter of these rentals and service charges. Approximately a year later research was again carried out and we found the picture had been reversed. Whereas 61% of people had previously been negative toward this, 62% of them were now positive about this matter.

If one converts the effect of that action in terms of rentals and service charges paid, and which would possibly not have been paid, I think the bureau achieved its aim and there is adequate proof that these actions are as successful as can be.

Unfortunately my time has expired. I should have liked to present hon members with further examples of researched statistics on the successes achieved by the bureau with specific campaigns embarked upon but unfortunately I lack the time. I have great confidence in the bureau as such. I firmly believe in the great task which the bureau has to fulfil and I firmly believe in a great future for South Africa providing the bureau, all the other Government departments and all the citizens of this country do their share.

Vote agreed to.

Chairman directed to report progress and ask leave to sit again.

House Resumed:

Progress reported and leave granted to sit again.

Mr Chairman, I move—

The proposed amendment of the definition of “ledger fees” will enable credit card managers to levy an annual fee for the issue and use of a credit card and not only for the initial issue. During the debate on 11 April 1986—see Hansard column 3165 to 3167—Mr D W Waterson suggested that an initial charge for issuing a credit card should be made compulsory and that a form should be completed by applicants indicating whether an applicant has creditworthiness.

Up to now the Act has only provided that card issuers may charge an initial levy although this was not mandatory. Due to costs and competition in the market other card issuers charged annual levies for the use of a card. These levies were classified as ledger fees which formed part of the finance charges with the result that the profit margin of the credit card issuers decreased. This amendment now provides for credit card issuers to levy both an initial fee and a periodical fee for the use of a card. The view is held that no mandatory charge should be prescribed because market forces will determine these amounts.

Credit card issuers require applicants to complete a detailed form which will provide sufficient information to enable them to determine an applicant’s creditworthiness properly and satisfactorily. This amendment was inserted at the urgent request of the Association of Bank Credit Card Issuers.

In consequence of the request by the hon the Minister of Finance, and a subsequent investigation in November 1983 by a subcommittee of the Technical Committee on Bank and Building Society Legislation into the question of prescribing finance charge rates, the said committee recommended to the hon the Minister that finance charge rates should be brought into line with the movement of the prime overdraft rate of the five major banks in the Republic. A formula for this purpose and the method of disclosure were proposed. In terms of the proposed amendment to section 2(1), (2) and (3) of the Usury Act, 1968 (Act No 73 of 1968), the hon the Minister may subsequently in his directions to the Registrar of Financial Institutions prescribe a formula in terms of which the Registrar shall determine the maximum finance charge rates from time to time.

The formula proposed by the Technical Committee on Bank and Building Society Legislation contains a fixed rate to cater for the administration and other costs of the lender. It also contains a variable element through the inclusion of the prime bank rate which causes fluctuations in market related interest rates to apply in the determining of the maximum rate. The effect of the proposed amendments will be that, in terms of the hon the Minister’s directions, the Registrar may, from time to time, publish the prime rate fluctuations in the Gazette, as and when they occur.

†Section 3 is a rectification of the Act to provide that the finance charges which are disclosed are calculated at the finance charge rate which was agreed upon. As the Act at present reads agreement is reached on an amount of finance charges which then has to be expressed as a finance charge rate per annum. In practice agreement is reached on a finance charge rate per annum rather than on an amount of finance charges.

The provisions of section 6K of the Usury Act, 1968, seem to be too strict in respect of a leasing transaction which expires and where the book value of the movable property leased in terms of that transaction is nil. The Bill, therefore, provides for the exclusion of the application of certain provisions of section 6K in such circumstances and also exempts a further leasing transaction between the same parties in respect of the relevant movable property from the provisions of the Usury Act, 1968.

Second Reading resumed

Mr Speaker, the Usury Act has a very interesting history, but I do not want to dwell on it this afternoon. However, it originated at a time when advancing loans, lending money and providing credit was done at a very unsophisticated level, and over the years the Act has had to be adjusted to make provision for the sophisticated practices of today. This amending Bill effects further essential adjustments.

We know that in certain circles there are objections to the credit card system. I myself had no objection to credit cards until the day the bank issued one to my wife. She seems to regard it as an inexhaustible source of credit.

I should like to be brief; we have no objections to the Bill and we support it.

Mr Speaker, this amending Bill contains three alterations. For the sake of argument allow me to deal with the second alteration first.

There is no argument.

The Bill alters the way finance charge rates are dealt with. Initially finance charge rates were mentioned specifically in the Act. In terms of this amendment they are being removed from the Act and will from time to time be announced by means of regulations. As it stood the old Act could have caused confusion when from time to time people consulted and saw that a finance charge rate was specifically mentioned there. It is also interesting and worthy of mention that the Standing Committee on Finance was informed that in future this rate would also be determined according to a specific formula. This formula will cause the rate to be market-related in that it will be linked by a fixed factor to the prime rate; this will ensure that the finance charge rate will also be market-related throughout.

The second amendment that will be effected by this proposed Bill is that ledger fees will be applicable in respect of credit cards, too. In terms of the original formulation in the Act, banks could levy ledger fees only at the initial issue of credit cards. This created an exception in that this situation was different from, say, that regarding cheque accounts. It will now be possible to levy ledger fees not only when credit cards are initially issued, but also in the years thereafter.

One could ask whether the levying of ledger fees would not lead to the exploitation of consumers. It is my opinion that with a finance charge rate that will in the future be more market-related, it will not be necessary for the banks to compensate by levying excessively high ledger fees on credit cards. Furthermore, it is true that notwithstanding certain co-operative agreements between the banks in respect of credit cards, there is still a great deal of competition between banks with regard to the credit card users’ market. To us—we who profess to believe in a free market system—this competition will mean that these ledger fees cannot be out of proportion and will also always remain within limits.

A third amendment effected by the Bill deals specifically with leasing transactions, in particular with the procedures once certain leasing transactions have expired. Leasing transactions in which the value of the article on expiry is nil, will now no longer be subject to certain procedural requirements, which are self-evident in light of the fact that this article no longer has any book value. Further leasing transactions between the same parties involved in the initial transaction are now also exempt from the provisions of the Bill.

I believe the amendments being effected here are logical and well thought out. Nevertheless, since this is already the sixth time the original Act—which was previously known in the trade as Ladofca and to which certain ad hoc amendments have been effected—has been amended, one could ask whether the time has not come to give thorough consideration to this Act as a whole and really determine whether it is in accord with the Government’s present philosophy regarding the free market system, and intervention in that system. However, I believe the amendments effected by this Bill are improvements, that this is self-evident, and that they will make the system more fluid and logical. I am therefore happy to support this amending Bill.

Mr Speaker, I think the hon member for Rissik has covered most of the points relating to the amendments in this Bill in detail. We accept the principle whereby the credit card issuers can recover an annual cost as a reasonable one. Similarly, we accept that that cost does not form part of or is generally to be regarded as finance charges, therefore forming part of the overall costs which are limited in terms of this Bill. We agree that such a charge should not form part of those finance charges. We believe that the principle is correct and fair. We believe further that such a charge should be of a minimal nature, and should be fully disclosed, and that it be optional to the purchaser or the client in the sense that he may choose to take up the card or not.

If this procedure is followed, the issue of such a card will be in terms of the normal free-enterprise system.

As far as maximum finance charges are concerned there is obviously a relationship between the maximum rate that may be charged and the average overdraft rate charged by the five major commercial banks in South Africa. There can be no doubt about there being a relationship, admitting nevertheless that such a relationship may change and that the formula may therefore change. However, we accept the principle that such a relationship does exist, and therefore a formula may be devised which would simplify the administration of the Usury Act as such. We therefore support that change.

Finally, we also accept the change relating to hire-purchase contracts. So, we on this side of the House support the amending Bill as tabled, Mr Speaker.

Mr Speaker, I want to thank the hon members that participated. This measure was dealt with and approved by the standing committee.

I should like to come to the hon member for Rissik, and to mention to him that we realise this legislation is very complicated. In practice, too, there are often problems concerning its implementation. The question has even been raised as to whether we are still affording the client sufficient protection. Our department is in fact giving serious thought to investigating and examining this legislation properly once again from the beginning. We shall then come back to the standing committee.

I should also like to refer to the one amendment regarding which hon members are uncertain, namely that of section 6K. The provisions of section 6K are applicable even once a leasing transaction has expired, and the book value of the movable property leased in terms of that transaction is nil. This has caused a number of administrative problems because in terms of section 6K (1) and (3) certain requirements, particularly those set by the Receiver of Revenue, had to be met. These were intended for cases in which the value of such a product was not yet nil. This section is now being amended in respect of cases in which the product has already been completely written off, because in most cases the lessee no longer has any interest in the product.

I was asked a very interesting question regarding clause 5 (b), which also deals with this aspect. When a leasing agreement on the same product that has already been paid off is concluded—so that the lessor has already made his interest, capital and profit—in terms of the Bill before us the Usury Act does not apply again. Therefore, in the second contract the lessee is not protected.

It has taken a long time to determine exactly what the situation is regarding this matter, but it is very interesting. When the second contract is concluded, the capital has already been paid off and there are therefore no further finance charges. The Usury Act is concerned only with finance charges and this clause therefore had to be inserted to point out that the Usury Act does not apply in the case of a second contract. This falls under other legislation.

I thank hon members for their participation in the debate and their support of the Bill.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

Mr Chairman, I move: That the Bill be now read a second time.

This Bill is necessitated by certain practical problems which were experienced with the implementation of a measure which was placed on the Statute Book during 1985. Hon members are aware of the fact that in order to make hotels more accommodation-orientated and less liquor dominant, provision was made for the conversion of off-sales of hotels into liquor stores. In order to implement the conversion of hotel off-sales into liquor stores with the least possible difficulty and as expeditiously as possible, the relevant measure required of a hotelier only to lodge a written request with the Liquor Board.

†It appears that the wording of the relevant provision according to a judge of the Transvaal Provincial Division of the Supreme Court does not comply with the required objects. It is therefore necessary that the provision be amended in order to give effect to the intention of the legislature. The new provision makes it clear that the holder of a hotel liquor licence may apply at any time for cancellation of the off-consumption authority and the issue in its place of a liquor store licence. In addition it is now made clear that such an application shall not be considered unless proof to the satisfaction of the competent authority has been submitted that reasonable notice has been given to the owner of the premises upon which the outlet is situated, as well as to any person having a financial interest therein. It is in the interest of legal certainty further necessary that liquor store licences which have already been granted in terms of the existing provision, be validated.

Second Reading resumed

Mr Speaker, the central idea behind this short piece of legislation is in fact to facilitate matters for people so that the public can ultimately be better served. I think this is a very important component of the whole school of thought on deregulation.

We are all acquainted with the hotel industry. We know about their on-consumption section and their off-consumption section—the old off-sales. It has happened in the course of time some of these licences have been transferred to more densely populated areas in the vicinity where the public can be better served. The question then arises as to what exactly the licences comprise.

This amending Bill in fact cancels several restrictive conditions that were imposed on such licences. It cancels special provisions and greatly facilitates the whole process. The whole system is being simplified and this will contribute to a freer distribution in the sense that it is being made easier for the public to purchase what they need. Therefore the liquor store is in fact being brought to the people instead of the people having to go to the liquor store, which in many cases was situated in an inconvenient area.

If this amending Bill is passed it will be possible for liquor store licences to be amended with the approval of the National Liquor Board, and of course that of the Minister concerned. This makes everything much easier and more sensible, and at the same time those that have already moved are authorised by this legislation to come under the new liquor store licensing system, instead of the old hotel liquor store licences.

A point on which one should perhaps remark is that this whole affair has nothing to do with the completely unrestricted distribution of liquor. It has nothing to do with increasing the number of licences either, but is concerned rather with the consumer’s convenience and the economic position of the hotel manager or the owner of the liquor store licence.

Because of this simplification of the system and the removal of all the restrictive measures, which did not actually benefit anyone and only represented a problem and an irritation to those concerned, this really is an item of legislation that we should all welcome. In any event, ultimate control still rests with the Minister and the National Liquor Board and with this legislation we shall only benefit the public.

I am therefore very happy to support this legislation.

Mr Speaker, we on this side of the House have no trouble in supporting this Bill; in fact, we consider it essential for the correct regulation of the liquor trade.

I would like to take advantage of this opportunity, however, to request the hon the Minister to consider the appointment of a commission of enquiry to investigate and dissect the ills of the retail liquor industry and, in so doing, to prepare a set of guidelines which will correct the many imbalances and imperfections where they exist, as they do in terms of this Act, and also to accommodate the urgent need of small liquor businesses. If the hon the Minister should consider this worthwhile, such a commission could in turn consider applying the same principles to the retailing of liquor as those applied to the petrol industry, the similarity being that the retailing of liquor is a one-commodity business in which all retailers purchase the bulk of their requirements from sole suppliers.

Secondly, they could consider introducing a Robinson-Patman type of Act to prevent wholesalers from interfering with or manipulating the marketing process, a practice which is quite common these days. Such an Act will ensure that fair and equitable trading practices are applied and will minimise the chances of misusing monopolistic powers. I believe consideration should also be given to devising a licensing system which can be applied in a consistent manner. In the process a formal method of licensing shebeens will have to be spelled out. Black entrepreneurs in particular should not be discouraged from establishing their own liquor businesses and accommodating the urgent need of township communities.

Should this be acceptable to the hon the Minister I am quite sure that leaders in the retail liquor industry would be quite happy to be co-opted onto any commission of enquiry and, under testimony, would co-operate in exposing many of the prevailing malpractices. I do not intend to elaborate on this; I will write to the hon the Minister and provide him with the information which I have received from representatives of the liquor industry for his further investigation and competent action.

I would like to congratulate the hon the Minister on this occasion on the success achieved by the new tax on exported liquor. I think it was a very good move, and I think the hon the Minister and his officials deserve great credit for that. We on this side of the House support the Bill.

Mr Speaker, we too on this side of the House support the amendments as contained in this Bill. We see them largely as being of a technical nature correcting what is already an existing situation in many instances. This Bill is also neutral in the sense that it does not have any impact on the wider availability of liquor. It is also supported by other bodies, including the Association of Law Societies. It in no way affects existing contractual rights. For these reasons we support the Bill as tabled.

Mr Speaker, I want to convey my sincere thanks to the hon members who participated in the debate and support this Bill. The points that were raised by the hon member for Wellington I shall take up with him, because I do not think they affect the conversion of liquor licences. The legislation is actually a rectification of procedures that were followed when a hotel liquor licence was converted into a liquor store licence.

†I want to thank the hon member Comdt Derby-Lewis for his support. I have listened to the points he made and I will attend to them. I think he is aware of the fact that the whole Liquor Act is being redrafted at the moment, and I think if I could get those suggestions in writing we will give the necessary attention to them. I also want to thank the hon member for Pinelands for his support.

*With reference to the Liquor Act—this is very technical legislation—which is before us today so that we can make certain rectifications, I want to make use of this opportunity to mention a few aspects of the liquor trade that really disturb me. I also want to make certain statements in this connection. Hon members will permit me to repeat them word for word, because I do not want to be misunderstood in the process.

The first matter is discos and so-called discos. More and more complaints are received concerning abuse that takes place at these places, and this does not concern only liquor abuse. There is also drug abuse, loose morals and complaints that such places are objectionable and can be a nuisance to the community. One is usually told that there is a need for entertainment and I want to make it very clear that there is no objection to healthy, clean entertainment, but then it must not rely on the sale of liquor. Consequently, except in exceptional cases, liquor licences will not be granted in future to people who want to run discos or similar undertakings.

As a result of the fact that licences are more freely available than in the past, and competition is becoming keener as a result, some licence holders are apparently turning to practices which are not in the public interest. The Liquor Board and I are getting more and more complaints about objectionable behaviour on or in the region of liquor-licensed premises. I want to issue a warning in this connection that I shall not hesitate to take definite action. Licence holders should not be the cause of abuses, and public disturbances cannot be permitted under any circumstances. When we consider the new liquor legislation, I may even consider placing the onus that a disturbance has taken place on or in the immediate vicinity of licenced premises cannot be attributed to any action on his part, on the licence holder. The legislation will have to be directed at the protection of the public interest to an ever increasing degree.

In addition I intend to ask my colleague, the hon the Minister of Law and Order, to institute an investigation or investigations into the occurrence of abuses against the public interests at predetermined licensed premises. The findings of such investigations will be submitted to the Liquor Board to decide within the framework of their own procedures about taking action against the licence holders involved and to make recommendations in this connection.

Once again I want to thank hon members sincerely.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

Mr Speaker, I move:

Last year the Rand Afrikaans University celebrated its twentieth year of existence. In this year altogether 1 466 degrees and diplomas were conferred by this university. This is the highest number ever conferred during the main graduation ceremony. The steady growth of RAU over the past 20 years has led to valuable contributions by this institution in the social, cultural, economic, spiritual, intellectual and professional spheres. This success has been achieved, according to the principal who has recently retired, because the scope of one’s life is wider, deeper and higher than just one’s professional life. This, then, is the aim of one’s intellectual formation—to deal with one’s world with vision and faith.

This Bill, which amends the Rand University Act of 1966, is being moved for the following reasons: Firstly, to give effect to the change in the constitutional system and to the subsequent change in the Minister entrusted with university tuition; secondly, to reflect in the Act the de facto position that has developed over the years; and thirdly, to make provision for better and more effective management and administration of the university.

Section 1 of the principal Act amends the description of “Minister” and deletes the description of “professor”. The present description of “professor” includes lecturers that are heads of department, in order to ensure that such department heads may also sit in the senate.

The amendment of section 10 of the principal Act by clause 5 of this Bill makes provision for the addition of departmental chairmen as independent members of the senate. Consequently, it is no longer necessary to define “professor” any further with reference to departmental chairmen.

Section 5 of the principal Act is being amended in order to make provision for the university to have at least two vice-principals, and to include technical staff in the constituent parts of the university.

The amendment of section 8 of the principal Act serves only to recognise the fact that the university has more than one vice-principal.

It is also necessary to amend the principal Act so that a vice-principal may become a member of the council. Section 9 of the principal Act is then also amended to make formal provision for the vice-principals to be fully fledged members of the council. In this way vice-principals will be able to serve officially on the management committee of the council. This will lead to more effective administration and management of the university. The amendment of subsection (4) make it clear that the vice-principals, in the same way as the principal, will be official members of the council and that the period of office of other council members will be prescribed by statute and not linked to a fixed period laid down by the Act itself.

In clause 5 various subsections of section 10 of the principal Act are amended. Firstly, section 10 (1) (e) is amended in order to confirm that the director or head of each institute, bureau or section of the university who has been named as such by the council, will be an official member of the senate.

Secondly, the amendment of section 10 (1) of the principal Act by the insertion of paragraph (eA) has already been dealt with and is a consequence of the deletion of the main definition of “professor”.

In the third place, the amendment of section 10 (3) of the principal Act serves to confirm that, with the exception of the members mentioned in subsection (1) (b) or in (1) (f), all the members of the senate hold their posts ex officio. In terms of the proposed amendment, members of the senate will hold their posts for the period the council may determine, and no longer for a period prescribed in the Act.

In the fourth place, the amendment of section 10 (5) of the principal Act serves to confirm that the senate also has jurisdiction over the organisation and control of syllabi at the university.

In clause 6, section 14 of the principal Act is amended by the statutory provision that the university is to have a faculty of law and a faculty of engineering. Provision is made in the principal Act for the faculties of arts, science, education and economics and management.

Clause 7 amends section 19 of the principal Act by extending the grounds on which a degree may be conferred honoris causa. The university is thus now enabled to confer this degree upon a person who has rendered exceptional services in the advancement of science; it no longer has to be linked to a particular faculty. Honorary doctorates are awarded on the one hand on the grounds of outstanding contributions in various subjects, and on the other on the grounds of contributions to the community that is being, or has been, served. The hon the Minister of Education and Development Aid, Dr Gerrit Viljoen, the first principal and now chancellor of the Rand Afrikaans University, is one of the people to have been honoured by this university in this way.

The amendment of section 20 of the principal Act by clause 8 serves simply to give effect to the provision that technical staff may now also be admitted to the constituent parts of the university. The assurance is also given that the proposed amendment will not adversely affect the rights or interests of any person or body.

I believe the proposed amendments represent an improvement to the Rand Afrikaans University Act, 1966, and that they will lead to the more effective functioning of the university. They will further enable the university to continue with its important task in the educational field on the Witwatersrand and in South Africa. The Bill has the support of the hon the Minister of Education and Culture in the House of Assembly and, on behalf of the Rand Afrikaans University, I want to thank him for his support.

Second Reading resumed

Mr Speaker, it is my pleasure and privilege to express my support for this Bill on behalf of this side of the House. It is a particular privilege for me as I have through a post-graduate study had particularly close ties with this university since 1976.

It is also a privilege to support the Bill because I see in paragraph (f) of the preamble to this Bill that the department of law, which has been a section of another faculty up to now, is being accorded the status of a full-fledged faculty of law in terms of this Bill. Then I also want to take this opportunity to congratulate the staff of what has thus far been a department, but will in the future be the Faculty of Law at the Rand Afrikaans University.

Naturally, when a Bill, which is mainly aimed at improving the administration and operation of the university, is before the House, this party is pleased to support it.

Nevertheless, there are two technical aspects I want to single out. The first is that the Bill makes provision for the appointment of two or more vice-principals. This is clear from clause 2 of the Bill. If one then looks at clause 4 of the Bill, it is clear that these vice-principals will also be members of the council of the university. We therefore feel that a possible recommendation is that only two vice-principals should be members of the council and consequently that only two vice-principals should be appointed; otherwise more vice-principals could be appointed and also become members of the council of the university, which is in reality the executive and decision-making body of the university.

A further technical aspect of the Bill is evident in clause 4 in which mention is made of appointments of representatives of certain churches. One of the churches is designated as the “Nederduits Gereformeerde Kerk”. To the best of my knowledge there is no such denomination. I think this church also has the designation in the principal Act, but it is actually the “Nederduitse Gereformeerde Kerk”. In order to ensure that the legislation can be legally implemented, it is our recommendation that that error be rectified.

In our view the inclusion of technical staff and the way in which the legislation has been drafted, are an improvement, and will also lead to the better functioning of the university.

It is apparent from clause 6 of the Bill, that the only remaining department at the university which is not a full-fledged faculty, as at other universities, is the Department of Social Science. We should like to express the hope that this department will, in the near future develop to the status of a full-fledged faculty.

With these words I should like to promise the support of my party for this Bill.

Mr Speaker, I take very great pleasure in supporting the Bill today. At the same time I should like to take the liberty—on behalf of the oldest Afrikaans-medium university, that of Stellenbosch, which is my alma mater, and of which I am in effect a representative—of extending good wishes to its youngest counterpart, the Rand Afrikaans University.

The establishment of the university in the sixties was an act of faith. There were those who were of the opinion that it was unnecessary to create another tertiary institution and who were convinced that it would struggle to exist. However, it was soon proved that a positive approach in all circumstances is a winning formula. The pessimists of that time have long been forgotten. On the contrary, RAU stands as a beacon of success, a monument to all who devoted their energies to its establishment, and to those who developed it to the proud institution it is today.

In fact, one of those responsible for this development is the person who introduced this Bill, the hon member for Primrose. It is appropriate that he is dealing with the measure here today. It is a measure aimed at the promotion of better administration and management, a set of amendments and extensions to the principal Act, which have become necessary as a result of the growth and the continuing development of the university.

By the formal creation of a full-fledged faculty of law and a faculty of engineering not only have new milestones been reached, but new points of departure for continued growth have been created. I wish these faculties and the university as a whole everything of the best on the road ahead. All South Africans are grateful for what has already been achieved, are proud of what exists, and have high expectations for the future of this fine institution.

Mr Speaker, we Transvalers are pleased that the “Kapenaar” from Stellenbosch has given his good wishes to RAU on this occasion and we accept them with great pleasure.

I also want to say that we will be supporting this Bill. The RAU was brought into being 20 years ago and is a relatively young university. It is, however, developing into an institution which is playing a major role in the academic, sporting and indeed the social life of Johannesburg. It has an energetic body of students and it has a committed academic staff who have made great strides under the inspiring leadership of Prof De Lange, to whom I wish to pay tribute for all his many endeavours.

Although the RAU is known as an Afrikaans university, I am aware that many English-speaking people—including many people from my own constituency of Johannesburg North—avail themselves of the facilities offered at RAU. This is a development which I welcome.

I must also admit that I have a personal association with RAU, even though I did not study there myself. In 1979 I was a candidate in the by-election in the Johannesburg West constituency, which includes the RAU campus, and even though I was not successful on that occasion I have happy memories of the courteous and polite way in which I was received in the hostels and on the campus. I have appreciation for the way in which I was listened to.

RAU has a major role to play in the life of Johannesburg. I support this Bill on behalf of the PFP and wish the university well.

Mr Speaker, I should like to avail myself of this opportunity to convey my sincere thanks to the two hon members who supported the Bill, viz the hon member for Roodepoort and the hon member for Johannesburg North, as well as the hon member for Stellenbosch, for their support.

This university is celebrating its twenty-first anniversary this year and has already reached a milestone in South Africa, as the hon member for Stellenbosch said. This was endorsed by a former student of the RAU, the hon member for Roodepoort. I am also a former student of this university. That is why it is a pleasure to thank all three these hon members once again.

I merely want to react to the meaningful proposal made by the hon member for Roodepoort. It does not form part of the amendments at this stage, but I shall convey the proposed amendment to the university so that they can consider the matter. I shall point out that when the original Act was passed by this Parliament in 1966, reference was incorrectly made to the “Nederduits-Gereformeerde Kerk”. We have changed this to “Nederduits-Gereformeerde Kerke”. Reference was made in the Act of 1966 to the “Gereformeerde Kerk”, and this has been changed to “Gereformeerde Kerke”. I want to convey my sincere thanks to the hon member for Roodepoort for pointing this out and shall convey this to the council and the rector of that university so that this can be rectified on a subsequent occasion when there are amendments.

Mr Speaker, in conclusion I want to say …

Hear! Hear! We want to adjourn!

… that at this stage I am full of confidence that since this university is celebrating its twenty-first year of existence this year, and has made its mark since its conception in a beerhall in 1966, it will continue to promote its motto, “diens deur kennis” for the sake of the students and the community it serves.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

Bill not committed.

Bill read a third time.

Mr Speaker, I move:

Agreed to.