I have to announce that Mr. President and I have on behalf of Parliament accepted a bust of the late Senator C. J. Langenhoven, the author of Die Stem van Suid-Afrika. The bust, which was presented by Miss Sarah Goldblatt and the Cape Tercentenary Foundation, has been placed in the Parliamentary Library.

Mr. Speaker, with your leave I should like to make a personal statement. On Monday, 27th May, during the discussion of the Defence Vote, I referred to the speech made by the hon. member for Durban (Point), who spoke immediately prior to me, and compared it to the actions in the past of “a former hon. member for Simonstown”. It has come to my attention that a local evening newspaper yesterday interpreted my reference as being to the late Mr. L. C. Gay, late M.P. for Simonstown. The person whom I in fact had in mind was Captain W. R. Butters, a former M.P. for Wynberg. I am sorry if, on the spur of the moment, I expressed myself incorrectly and in so doing created a wrong impression. With your leave, Mr. Speaker, I want to state emphatically that any reference in the said speech to “a former hon. member for Simonstown” should read “a former hon. member for Wynberg”.

In the second reading yesterday, when no objection was raised to the principles of this Bill, but a few questions were put to me in regard to details, I undertook to reply to these to-day in the Committee Stage. As regards clause 1, the hon. member for Salt River asked for the assurance that the necessary care would be taken that ships which are attached and which are then moved by the harbour authorities will be firmly moored. I can give the hon. member the assurance that this is being done. It is also in the interests of the harbour authorities themselves that those boats are firmly moored.

Clause put and agreed to.

House Resumed:

Bill reported without amendment.

Third Reading

I move, as an unopposed motion—

That the Bill be now read a Third Time.

I should just like to furnish a reply to a question which the hon. member for East London (North) put to me. He is of the opinion that the compensation paid in terms of clause 2 for animals which are run over and killed by a train is, in certain cases, inadequate. I just want to point out that the amendment which is being proposed here is only being introduced in order to bring this provision of the Act into line with a provision which was accepted in 1966 in regard to animals killed or injured during the journey. It would therefore be unsatisfactory to effect a change in the prices of the value of animals, because they would then differ from the provisions which were adopted in 1966. The prices accepted then, which are also being proposed here, are prices which were agreed upon with the S.A. Agricultural Union and the Department of Agricultural Economics and Marketing. I readily concede that one can argue about the values attached to those animals, but almost every animal has its value. One finds a basis on which one can work, and determines the values according to that basis. When one conveys pedigree animals such as racehorses or stud animals by rail then it pays, as the hon. member quite rightly remarked, to have the animals insured, and if one then suffers losses one can institute a claim at the highest value which one placed on that animal.

The hon. member also put a question in regard to the fencing in of railway lines. This is not relevant either, but I can merely inform the hon. member that it is the policy, where possible, to fence in an entire section, but it depends upon the priorities, and it also depends upon whether the funds are available to undertake that work. I can give the hon. member the assurance that the Railways Administration are as anxious as he is to fence in the railways completely, if it is within its capacity to do so and that they also want to do so as quickly as possible, (because this would also indemnify us against payment of damages.

In addition the hon. member asked what the position was in regard to veld fires. It is true that veld fires not only cause the death of animals, but that it also causes damage to grazing and to trees and even, to buildings, and it is obvious that when animals, are also involved, the matter must be dealt with on its merits. This is in fact being done in practice.

Motion put and agreed to.

Bill read a Third Time.

I desire to complete what I was saying last night. I had got to the point of asking the Minister what preparations had been made in regard to what are called the jumbo jets. I had said that it was reliably stated in the travel world that if a party of 60 was to come to South Africa during a busy period, it would be very difficult to accommodate them as regards hotel accommodation, transport, and everything else that they need. In other words, you have to give a year’s or two years’ notice. The importance of this is that a prospective traveller going to an agent overseas makes inquiries about South Africa and he is told that arrangements cannot be made for him to visit this or that part but that they can be made if he wishes to go somewhere else. Then he says that this is the trip he wants to do, and if he cannot do the trip he has in mind then he is not going to South Africa; or it may not even get as far as making the inquiries to see whether accommodation is available. The agent may just say that it is very difficult at this time of the year, but seeing the traveller wants to go to the sunshine, what about going to the Caribbean, because the agent says he knows he can confirm the bookings, transport and everything else by the next day. The result is that South Africa loses a prospective tourist. I believe that is happening, to what extent one does not know. But it is happening to quite an extent overseas, and people who have the desire to come to this country are not coming because it is considered that the facilities are not readily available at the time they want to come. I gave that illustration to show that we are not really ready for this jumbo jet age when some 500 people at a time can come, and come very frequently. What preparations is the Minister making, and what action is he taking to prepare South Africa for that age? It is stated, for instance, this year that in the travel world there is an explosion in the East. Malaysia and those countries are experiencing a travel boom that they have never experienced before. It might quite easily happen to South Africa if we were ready for it, if we were prepared to accept the traveller. It is one of those conumdrums: Which comes first, the egg or the chicken? Do you wait until the people are on you to provide the facilities, or do you start Providing the facilities so that they may come and enjoy themselves? That is the difficulty. What I want to know from the Minister is what his thoughts are on this matter, and what action he is taking.

In regard to the hotels in particular, we have had emphasis up to now on the prestige hotel, which is acceptable; it should be done. I believe that they are now provided, and it may be that this has even been overdone, but they should be there. However, the real need in the hotel industry is to have hotels of the middle class, the cheaper hotels, because the bulk of the travelling public patronise those hotels. As far as one can see by observation —I have not the figures before me—those hotels are disappearing. We know of our own observation in Cape Town that they have disappeared and have become flats to a very large extent. We know that in Durban hotels are going out of business and are becoming holiday flats and no longer hotels, and that is happening in various parts of the country. The real need is to provide those hotels which attract the middle class person, people who constitute the greatest numbers as far as travel is concerned. There is a limited public as far as the prestige hotels are concerned, and they are provided for at the moment. I believe the Minister should take some action in that regard. There is a provision under the Hotels Act that certain moneys can be lent to provide amenities for hotels, but the difficulty is that the hotels must have a grade before the moneys can be advanced. What happens to the people who want to start hotels initially? One of the most difficult things is to raise money for the hotel industry. It is well-nigh impossible to raise the money through private enterprise. I ask the Minister to direct his attention to this matter.

Then there is another matter. There is the question of creating a greater interest in our country and concentrating less on the general attractions of the country, but having what I call “interest tours”. That is a movement that is taking place in the rest of the world. For instance, recently there was a trip to the Antarctic, under the leadership of Peter Scott, who took a number of people all the way to the Antarctic just to see the Antarctic. There was also a trip recently to Greenland to see the flora and fauna and the bird-life of Greenland. People are prepared to travel far afield in the interest of their own hobby, to see what is happening in other parts of the world. It is a development which is taking place and on which I think we should capitalize in this country. We have a great deal to offer. There is, for instance, our fishing. I am told that we have the finest game fishing in the world around the shores of South Africa, and people will travel halfway around the world to get one or two game fish and in doing so they spend tremendous sums of money. The amount of money spent by a man who wants to catch a game fish somewhere in the world is amazing. It is the same with hunting. There is no reason why in this country, through the co-operation of farmers and others, we could not have places where hunters would come to get a specimen of certain wild animals. It would not be to our detriment; it would not affect our wild life, but in the course of doing that tremendous sums of money would be spent in South Africa. It is a question of organizing trips also on which the emphasis is photographic. In East Africa to-day there are trips, at least arriving weekly and sometimes daily, purely organized on the basis of taking photographs, under the auspices of certain safari companies, and they are drawing large crowds of people to East Africa. East Africa has nothing better than we can offer in South Africa, and such trips could be organized. Take the archaeological position. We have some of the most famous people in this country in that sphere, but what do they do? They go as directors of trips to Israel and the Mediterranean to show people the archaeological sites and lecture to them. I do not know how much we have to offer in this regard, but I think we probably have a great deal to offer. There is no reason why one cannot get those persons interested and organize such trips in this country, bringing people from overseas. I give these examples simply to make the point that there is a wide field to be ploughed. What is being done about it?

Finally, there is one rather lesser point in regard to chartered aircraft. I understand the Minister has made representations in regard to this matter and the answer has been an emphatic no. I may be wrong; I am subject to correction and information from the Minister, but I believe that the answer has been an emphatic no to chartered aircraft in this country. The S.A.A. do not want to know about it. I read that somewhere. I want to know what the likelihood is of that aspect developing because it forms a very large part of the tourist industry in other countries. When the party is large enough an aircraft is chartered and there is no difficulty about it. I understand that in the past there has been difficulty about this, and I think it was also mentioned in one of the Satour reports. I believe that is a development which could take place and I should like to hear from the Minister what is being done about that.

What I said last night and what I have said here this afternoon are efforts to put forward constructive criticism to find out what the Minister is doing. If he will tell us what he is doing and, as I said last night, what his successes are, what obstacles he has, he could create a public opinion in favour of the things he wants to do. If I may say so, he is too silent on many of these things; we want to hear about them, we want to talk about them and create the right climate so the right things can be done in the interests of the tourist industry.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Von Brandis will probably not take it amiss of me if I do not follow up on what he has said, but unfortunately my time will not allow me to do so. Last night when the House adjourned I was discussing the tourist industry in South Africa. America, which does everything on a large scale, and even boasts on a large scale, is proud of the fact that the redwood trees in California are the biggest trees in the world. They also allege that the Grand Canyon is one of the greatest natural wonders of the world. But it is not only America which can boast about such things, because here in South Africa we have some of the tallest trees in the world. I am referring to the tremendous yellow wood trees in the Tsitsikama Forest, which are probably as much of a natural wonder. Between the small towns of Leydsdorp and Gravelotte we also find some of the largest baobab or cream of tartar trees in the world. Some of them are so large that in the old days the gold diggers of Leydsdorp hollowed out one of the trees and used it as a wine cellar to keep their liquor cool in that warm climate.

I also want to refer to the Blyde River canyon. This is probably one of the most impressive natural sights in South Africa. I have met tourists who had seen the Grand Canyon in America, and they assured me that the Blyde River canyon compared very favourably with, if it was not better than, the Grand Canyon in America. So I can continue. We should also include South West Africa here. We also have botanical and natural wonders in that area. Here I am referring to that living fossil, the welwitzia plant. I believe that those who are interested in botany would come from far and wide to see such a sight. It is something quite out of the ordinary and that is the only place in the world where those plants grow.

Our country has been richly endowed with natural wonders, but tourists do not only want to go to see natural wonders. Their only desire is not to look at wonderful trees. They also want to look at human achievements. In that field we also have something to offer the tourist. I am referring in this regard to the trek route followed years ago by Louis Trichardt when the Voortrekkers crossed the Drakensberg. If we can organize walking tours for our domestic tourists and students to enable them to follow that route, then we would have gone far in depicting our history to people graphically. This would undoubtedly be something impressive, historic, as well as educational.

I come now to another matter, and this is in fact the point I want to make. If we want to attract overseas visitors, we must of course build good luxury hotels for them, hotels of an international standard. However, we must also supply the necessary facilities for everyone according to his own pocket, and not only for the rich man. Not all tourists coming here are millionaires. We have visitors here who cannot afford to stay in the large, expensive hotels, and I am now advocating that cheaper accommodation be made available in our country for that group, the middle income group. We must remember that it is not only the rich tourists who are possible immigrants. I think it is precisely those tourists from the middle income and lower income groups visiting our country who are potential immigrants. After they have seen our beautiful country they may subsequently decide to settle here.

A party of tourists recently visited South Africa, and on the eve of their departure for Europe one of them was asked for his impressions of our country. His reply may be summarized as follows: “You have a wonderful country, but your hotels are too expensive; the ordinary man cannot afford to stay in them.” I think that there is a great deal of truth in that remark, and that we ought to give attention to this matter. Of course we also have many rich South Africans who tour the Republic, and consequently we must not concentrate solely on overseas tourists. They can stay in the luxury hotels. However, I want to repeat that middle and lower income group tourists cannot avail themselves of those expensive facilities. We must make it possible for the lesser privileged people, who are also entitled to a holiday, to enjoy their vacations. They would also like to see our country, but owing to their low incomes, it is simply impossible for them to afford accommodation for their families in an expensive hotel. Nor do they have the means of acquiring a motorcar and caravan, for that, too, costs a lot of money. They are therefore dependent upon public transport, and they must consequently make use of hotel or boarding house accommodation. But the rates are so high that those people simply cannot afford them, and as a result they have to remain at home all their lives, which is of course very frustrating for someone who has, throughout his life, had to render his services to his country. I think it is our duty to make it possible for these people to undertake tours as well. I am advocating that the Department and the Hotel Board should consider establishing cheaper hotels with liquor licences for our lower income groups.

I shall go further. At the moment the hotel industry is falling to an increasing extent into the. hands of the trust companies, and so on, which are well provided with capital, and the danger exists that the private hotel owners, who have for many years rendered such good service to us, will be completely eliminated. I feel that we should give those people all the necessary assistance so that they can continue to render their services to the travelling public.

It is a very risky undertaking to build an expensive hotel along a route which will only be visited during certain times of the year. They run the risk of suffering major losses. Consequently they simply cannot see their way clear to building those expensive hotels. We must remember that the person who does in fact have a decent little hotel there, has every right to retain his liquor licence without having to incur major expense on alterations, so that he can serve the travelling public. We must see to it that we make it possible for our workers and their families to undertake tours in their own country. Tourism has such an educational value for our own people that we should expand it to a far greater extent than we are doing today.

In conclusion just this. Apart from what the hon. member for Von Brandis said, I want to congratulate the hon. the Minister and the Secretary of the Department, with his handful of officials, on what they have already achieved up to the present. We want to wish them every success, and we hope that they will receive the necessary support in order to expand their Department into one which will prove to be one of the best sources of income in our country.

Mr. Chairman, I listened with interest to two speeches made by hon. members on that side of the House. In the main they both stressed the economic importance of the tourist industry to South Africa. They made the point that South Africa at this particular stage was not receiving its fair share of the tourist trade. Then they pleaded that the department should do everything in its power to encourage and promote the flow of tourists to South Africa. Quite obviously I must agree with all these sentiments.

While it is of course very encouraging to read in various reports that the tourist traffic in South Africa is expected to reach the record figure of 300,000 in 1968, we should not allow ourselves to fall into a mood of complacency because of this very welcome increase in our tourist figures. I say this because in the same year of 1968 more than 85 million individuals will visit and tour other countries and they will spend the colossal amount of more than R8 billion in the process. I draw attention to these figures merely to show that unfortunately South Africa still lags far behind in the very lucrative field of international tourism. I want to say in all fairness that the South African Tourist Corporation has done a truly magnificent job in stimulating the flow of tourists to South Africa. There is no doubt in my mind that the steady increase in the flow of tourists from 68,000 in 1947 to 275,000 in 1967 is due mainly to the efforts of this body. But we must remember too that the South African Tourist Corporation has to work within the confines of a very tight budget which is voted yearly by Parliament, so they can quite obviously only do what their budget will allow them to do under the circumstances. I believe that the Minister of Tourism and his department should appreciate the fact that international tourism has to-day become big business and a very competitive business. I believe that if South Africa is to fully exploit its vast tourist potential to the stage where we can count our tourists in millions instead of thousands, the Minister of Tourism and his department will have to approach their task of promoting tourism with a far greater degree of urgency than they have shown in the five years of their existence. Because tourism as such does not represent a clear-cut sector of our economy we are all inclined to underestimate its great economic value to South Africa. There can be no doubt that South Africa to-day has to a certain extent missed the boat when it comes to international tourism. Any expert in the field of tourism will tell you that for a country to sell itself as a major tourist attraction the bodies and organizations charged with the task of promoting tourism should apply their minds in the first instance to four main essentials. Firstly they should see to it that the natural resources of the country and the existing tourist attractions are developed to the fullest extent. Then they must see to it that these attractions are publicized continuously in the right quarters and through the right channels. Then they must make sure that enough capital is made available to make this possible. When I mention capital I do not mean that this capital should come only from the central Government. I think it is a known fact that the private sector stands to benefit most from any increased flow of tourism. We should look to the private sector to make a far greater contribution to the promotion of tourism than they are doing today. There should also be continuous efforts on the part of all these departments and bodies to encourage and promote greater community participation because you will find that this is really what brings tourists to a country. I want to mention one example. The island of Mallorca just off the coast of Spain is only 30 by 40 miles in extent. It has a population roughly the size of that of Cape Town, namely 500,000. This little island has increased its number of tourists from 800,000 in 1953 to 1,600,000 in 1964. The point is that, of this population of 500,000, we find that 200,000 are in fact subscribing members to the publicity associations on that island. This shows what can be done when the community in a particular area is called in to do a job of work. Fourthly these organizations should see to it that only people with the specialized knowledge of tourism and who also have the required managerial abilities should be employed in key posts in tourist organizations. There is no need for me to stress the fact that South Africa is very richly endowed with natural tourist attractions. Let us take as an example the Western Cane. I want to ask how many prospective tourists overseas realize for instance that we have here a truly Mediterranean climate. How many tourists realize that if they come to South Africa they can expect on an average 2,750 hours of sunshine each year? Do they realize that this amount of sunshine equals the amount they can expect on the famous Florida Keys and that it in fact surpasses what they can expect in famous tourist resorts such as the Riviera, Southern California and even the fabulous Hawaii?

I have mentioned the question of community participation. I should now like the hon. the Minister to tell me whether he is satisfied that the various regional and other committees that he has established are doing the job of encouraging the local people to participate more actively in the encouragement of tourism. Then I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether he has done anything at all to see to it that the private sector does in fact contribute more capital for the promotion of tourism for the reasons I have stated earlier.

Finally, I wonder whether the hon. the Minister will tell us whether he has investigated the possibility of creating special courses in this country, and this is being done in other countries overseas, where people who are interested in tourism and who want to make a career of tourism can study subjects such as tourist law, tourist geography, anthropology, languages and archaeology. These things are all very important because there can be no doubt that unless you have the proper personnel you will never really exploit your country’s tourist potential successfully. I think that this comment by an expert in this field bears reading. This particular expert says:

[Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, before I raise some specific points. I want to associate myself with the congratulations offered to the hon. the Minister and his officials this afternoon for the first-class way in which they have promoted tourism in this country in the past year, sometimes under difficult circumstances, and also with a limited budget. The work done by Satour and also the Hotel (Board deserves our highest commendation. The mere fact that our tourist industry is now worth some R160 million a year in foreign exchange and also the fact that the tourists coming from Europe only, increased from 18,000 in 1961 to some 60,000 in 1967, is ample proof of the good work that Satour has been doing overseas. Because I know that the hon. the Minister is as keen as anybody else to promote tourism and to get it into absolute top gear in this country, I know that he will not take amiss any criticisms and some suggestions which I want to raise here this afternoon.

The first aspect which I want to raise, is that I think that the elimination of the division in control of internal and external tourism between divergent bodies in this country will do much to streamline our efforts at tourist promotion. I think that too many people have their own ideas about how tourism should be promoted in South Africa, and I think it has become a definite necessity that there should be greater co-ordination between the different bodies. I feel a central co-ordinating body, perhaps a Tourist Promotion Organization should be established on which all the different provinces should be represented, as well as the municipalities, the National Parks Board, the hotel industry, the South African Airways, Satour, the Department of Information, Die Handelsinstituut, Assocom and all other bodies that may be interested in promoting tourism. Such a tourist promotion organization should, I feel, meet at least four times a year and iron out all promotion snags which may arise in the different bodies represented on this central organization. I know that I will be treading on dangerous ground, but I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether he could not consult with his colleague, the Minister of Justice, about our liquor laws, so that they could be made more flexible. Why cannot our liquor be served after 12 o’clock at night in some places as well? Why cannot tourists drink some of our fine wines in our cafés and restaurants, and why must liquor, according to law, only be consumed on hotel steps, and not also for example, at swimming pools?

Another matter to which I want to refer is the possible establishment of a large free international trading centre at a place like Jan Smuts Airport, an international airport, where tourists will be in a position to buy at the very last moment, if they so desire, all the wonderful souvenirs and gifts which our country can offer. I also want to ask the hon. the Minister to do everything possible to draw the best staff into his department, and also to ask Satour to do the same, especially staff who are absolutely proficient in as many languages as possible. I have heard complaints that there are some officials who have not been able to serve overseas tourists, for example Germans, Italians and French people, in their own language. I think the hon. the Minister will agree that these people come here to spend their money and that they are entitled to be served in the language which they speak. As a matter of fact I wonder whether we should not treat our tourist industry as seriously as Spain is doing at present. Spain has been mentioned here. I think Spain is an example to the whole world. It has legislation, for example, which compels firms to give their employees annually 25 days leave out of season. That is done in order to promote all-the-year-round tourism in Spain. Spain, as a matter of fact, has been so successful that she now draws annually some 19 million tourists. She earns as much from her tourist industry as the gold we produce from our mines.

Another aspect which I want to raise, and which the hon. member for Von Brandis also touched on briefly, is whether we could not perhaps pay more attention to accommodating visiting tourists in private homes, on the same lines that Switzerland and France are doing at the moment. I think the Minister will agree that one does not really get to know a country and its people well if one stays in the resplendent hotels of that country. But it is when one is living with private people that one really gets to know the people and gets an insight into the way of life of that country.

The hon. member for Von Brandis mentioned the extra attraction for tourists of perhaps participating in hunting trips. I think that that is an excellent idea, and I wonder whether that could not be followed up. We all know that thousands of Americans beat a dusty path on safari to East Africa to go on these hunting trips. I am sure that if a hunting trip is included in say a packaged tourist deal to South Africa and on a very cheap basis, we would be able to draw tremendous numbers of people from overseas to our country. I think nowhere in the world can one go on a hunting trip as cheaply as in South Africa; it is probably the cheapest hunting country in the world at the moment. Only a few days ago I read in the papers that the National Parks Board intend to do some large-scale culling of excessive impala, wildebeest, buffalo and elephant in the Kruger Park. I am fold that there are some 20,000 redundant impala in the park, and I wondered whether the hon. the Minister could not persuade the National Parks Board to allow tourists the opportunity of shooting one or two of these impala at say R50 a head. I think that would entice people from all over the world to come to our country.

Before I sit down, I want to raise a few other brief points with the hon. the Minister. There is the question of publicity by means of posters. My predecessor in this House once advocated that the Clifton bikini girls should be put on posters. Well, I want to say that I think that is an absurd idea.

Oh no!

The image that has been created of South Africa, as far as tourism is concerned, is that of a country where Bantu tribal life and animal wild life can still be seen abundantly. I think that our tourist organizations should put the emphasis on this.

A second point I want to raise is whether it is not possible in the future to compile a register of all the tourist attractions in this country. That will enable our travel agencies here and abroad to tell prospective tourists exactly what attractions this country can offer. I also want to ask the Minister whether the time has not arrived for the Central Government to develop more intensively the many inland holiday resorts which we have. There are many beautiful resorts which absolutely cry out for development, and it will help to take the pressure off the over-populated ones, like the Kruger National Park. Many overseas tourists I have found wanted to visit the Kruger National Park, but they cannot get accommodation there, because South Africans are looking at the Park as some sort of prolonged holiday resort instead of just going there for a few days to see game.

Finally, I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether it would not be a proposition to propagate our tourist attractions even more effectively overseas by scattering thousands of tourist pamphlets from the air onto cities in Europe and America, as many overseas countries have done with great effect in the past. [Time expired.]

The hon. member for Turffontein touched upon so many topics that it is impossible for me to comment on them all. However, without taking up a final stand on what he said about girls, I should like to remind him that girls constitute a very large tourist attraction in many countries! One thinks of France first of all in this connection. I do not suppose the hon. member has ever been to France without seeing some of the Parisienne girls. As a matter of fact, I think that can be said of many hon. members.

Do you speak from experience?

Oh yes! Is the hon. the Minister then in a position where he cannot speak from experience?

Oh no!

Is it because Joyce went with you?

However, to return to the Vote under discussion I should like to say that it is clear from the discussion so far that everybody is under the impression that South Africa is on the threshold of very big possibilities in the field of tourism. We have the attractions and we have so much else, to parody the song. But I fear our approach lacks the modernity required in a matter such as this; I fear that the Government does not display the required degree of modernity in respect of certain matters. Only think of television and of how we spurn this modern attribute. No one in his right senses would like to see our rugby techniques, for instance, become out of date; no South African would like to see our surgery falling (behind. But in other respects, such as television and to a certain extent in the field of tourism, we are prepared to take a back seat. But the time has come where we should not only think big, but also act big.

In the discussion on this Vote last year, the hon. member for Durban (Point) touched upon the question of the divided control over hotels. I do not think the hon. the Minister replied to that particular aspect. So I should like to advance certain thoughts on this aspect and should like to hear what the Minister’s response is thereto. In the light of the need for action and a modern approach to this developing possibility, I should like to plead with the Government to place all hotels under the control of one authority, namely the Hotel Board, as soon as their initial classification has been completed. Let the National Liquor Board by all means complete its classification; but having done that, it would have discharged its main purpose. Let the off-sales liquor facilities of hotels by all means remain controlled by local liquor boards. But (beyond that, surely the time has come for us to have the control over hotels placed fairly and squarely under the Hotel Board itself. For that it may be necessary that it be given additional powers and that certain other aspects be brought under its wing. But it has been established, and it has been operating well, and has the goodwill of the industry. It should therefore (be entrusted with this task. Of course one realizes that the hon. the Minister cannot bring about this transformation single-handed. However, there is no reason to doubt his ability to persuade the Minister of Justice. The hon. the Minister of Justice can be very amenable, and I trust this hon. Minister may find him in such an amenable mood on this matter. I suggest that this matter has become urgent. It has been shown that there is an unprecedented need for hotels, both from the point of view of overseas visitors and from the point of view of our local people, who are travelling more and more. What causes concern is that there has been an unprecedented reduction in the number of hotels in (South Africa. I do not know whether this was the intention when legislation controlling the hotel industry was introduced. I cannot (believe that it was the intention.

At any rate, this is a most unfortunate feature of the effects of that legislation and of the introduction of a “new deal”, that we are losing hotels at an unprecedented rate. I am informed that by the end of the year about 500 hotels will not have been classified. This will mean that these hotels will lose their right to supply spirits, which in turn will mean that many of them will go out of business, thus bringing about a still further reduction of the number of hotels. Like any other business, hotels too are looking primarily for a return on their investments; and, if they do not get that return, they may sell out. They may occupy a valuable business site for which they may get a good price. As a matter of fact, this has already happened to a large extent. Then of course there are other difficulties—such as the availability of Bantu labour in the Western Province. Then there is the multiplicity of controlling bodies with which hotels have to cope. This is affecting hoteliers not only through the cost involved but also through the wear and tear on their nerves. From an industry that has been one of the least controlled, it has become one of the most controlled industries to-day. Let me mention some of these controlling bodies.

There is, first of all, the Hotel Board. This board has to carry out the original grading inspection and annual inspections thereafter. But this may still be perfectly acceptable. On top of that, however, we have the National Liquor Board which has to do the initial classification and a further classification every three years thereafter. Such classifications involve a considerable inquiry into the affairs of an hotel and can involve an hotel in considerable extra expense. Then there are the local liquor licensing boards who have to grant licences which have to be renewed every year. Such a renewal is of course not automatic, as certain requirements can be insisted upon before a licence will be renewed. There is also the likelihood of police inspection and continual police surveillance. Apart from all these factors, there is the multiple licence required by hotels— about 20 licences in all, whereas the Hotel Commission recommended that there should be only one licence covering all these.

Consequently there is a feeling amongst hoteliers that they are being policed rather than assisted and guided. This is not a happy frame of mind under which to continue in this very important industry. If overseas countries can do without such multiple controls, then surely it ought to be possible for us in this modern age to do so too. We have good hotels, like hotels overseas where there is not this multiple control. Surely the basic factor determining and guaranteeing the standard of our hotels is the patronage of the public. Members of the public are very conscious of what is a good hotel and what is not and they will withdraw their patronage if the standard drops.

I should like to know from the. hon. the Minister whether or not he is thinking in the direction of making the Hotel Board the only authority over the hotel industry. The hotel industry fully supports this board and favours such a change. I fear that if this wish is ignored any longer it may lead to more hotels closing in the time to come. This is a worrying possibility especially when we are on the threshold of attracting far more people to this country. I know there are reasons why this multiplicity of controls were maintained in the past, but I should like the hon. the Minister to think boldly, to act boldly and cut the knot in this situation.

Hon. members on both sides of the House commented in their speeches on the development of tourism, which is becoming an important industry. The general consensus of opinion is that it should be developed even more extensively in order to keep pace with the world-wide explosion which is occurring in the field of tourism today. But most of the speakers think in terms of external tourism, i.e. tourists from, overseas countries, and are somewhat remiss in giving some attention to internal tourism as well.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to refer to something which I read in the Press early in February in regard to a national congress of tourism which was to have taken place on 18th March this year at Oudtshoorn. According to the report a motion was to have been introduced there to the effect that a statutory national advisory board should be established to promote tourism and publicity. The idea was that such an advisory board would have a more co-ordinating effect on the liaison between tourism and publicity associations. It was felt that there are individual associations which are doing good work, but that there was unnecessary overlapping. We know that one of the most important tasks of the Department of Tourism is in fact to act in a co-ordinating capacity. I want to ask the hon. the Minister, in regard to this congress which was to have been held, whether the congress was in fact held and whether such a board, as was mentioned in the Press, has been established; whether the Department played any part in regard to the congress; and if such a board has been established, how it functions. I would be glad if the hon. the Minister could give us a little information in that regard, since the question of co-ordination has also been mentioned here to-day.

I would also like to touch upon another matter in regard to the hotel industry. Recently it has come to our notice that members of the public, tourists and travellers, are complaining about a new practice which is now coming into force in our hotels, i.e. to add a so-called service charge to the hotel account. We have also read in the Press that this practice has in general met with disfavour. The Hotel Board, under the chairmanship of Dr. Wiehan, has also given attention to this matter and has recently expressed itself strongly against this levying of a service charge at hotels. The hotel owners alleged that this service levy is in fact a service fee, or as they call it in English, a “service charge” which is levied and is then apparently distributed evenly amongst the staff of the hotel, from the room servant to the cook. What it amounts to is a method of charging a compulsory tip. The question is for what reason that so-called service charge is being levied, because after all the hotel account also includes the salaries of the staff. Surely it has nothing to do with a tip. After all, the tourist, visitor or guest at the hotel has the option of deciding whether he wants to give a tip or not. If he is served well and receives courteous treatment from the waiter and other servants, he will gladly give such a tip. It seems to me as though this system is simply being used to disguise an increase in hotel tariffs, and this can in due course lead to malpractices. It is difficult to believe that this service fee is in fact equally distributed amongst the staff, as is being professed. I also read somewhere that this malpractice has made its appearance in South West Africa and that it was prohibited there. The Legislative Assembly of South West Africa passed an Ordinance in this regard last year. In the Ordinance wide powers are conferred upon the Department of Nature Conservation and Tourism in regard to the grading, subsidizing and control of hotels. These powers are so wide that the Department in question can also take steps to encourage the tourist industry in South West Africa. In this regard I should like to put a few questions to the hon. the Minister. I want to ask him whether his Department, or whether he as Minister of Tourism, have any powers to prohibit this unwelcome practice, whether he or his Department can delegate powers to the Hotel Board to counter this practice, and whether the Provincial Councils have the right to promulgate ordinances in order to put a stop to this practice?

In addition I should like to ask the Minister what progress has been made in general with the classification and grading of hotels, and whether it will be possible for all hotels to have been classified or graded by the end of 1968?

Then, just one last remark: We know that internal tourism has increased tremendously during the last decade. Our people have become more tour conscious. I should like to raise a plea here for a matter which was also mentioned in passing by the hon. member for Lydenburg but which I should like to elaborate on. I should like to see an appeal being made to internal tourists to visit places of historical value when they are on holiday or go on tour. It so happens that many of the places which have an historical background and are of historical value, are in fact situated in the most attractive parts of our country— parts which in themselves offer tourist attractions. If one were to visit some of these places of historical value, where visitors’ books are made available for signature, then it is remarkable how many overseas tourists visit these historical places in our country while our internal tourists drive swiftly past and do not even know that such places exist. One wonders whether it cannot be explicitly stated in brochures which are distributed by the various regional committees that there are such places on certain routes which are in fact worth visiting.

I feel that I should cover some of the points raised in the debate so far, and that I should rather start at the end of the discussions than at the beginning, particularly as the hon. Chief Whip has indicated that he will be back shortly. I Shall therefore start with the hon. member for Pineland sand then come back to the hon. member for Koedoespoort.

The hon. member for Pinelands raised a matter which I consider one of important policy, and that is what he referred to as the divided control of hotels. He suggested that I should talk to the Minister of Justice and that some arrangement should be made between him and me. Of course that is exactly what has taken place already. I do not know whether the hon. member read it, but the hon. the Minister of Justice had a deputation from Fedhasa, who discussed with him this problem of divided control, and his attitude, in my opinion, was the correct one. We had discussed it before. He said that he was quite prepared eventually to hand over the hotels, as the hon. member suggested, to the Hotel Board and to the Department of Tourism, and from that point of view not necessarily bring them under the jurisdiction of the National Liquor Board—or shall I say that the methods which are applied at present through the Department of Justice might not necessarily be applied in future. But he rightly said that when he and I were satisfied that we were in a position to take over that function which is at present performed by Justice, he would then give the matter his further consideration. I mention this because it is a major policy issue, and I might say that the members of Fedhasa’s deputation were satisfied with that reply because they also realized, as the hon. member realizes, that just to move over machinery which has been in operation, to a Department which is not equipped to operate it, would not be justified. But his view was that he did not dogmatically oppose it, and they were satisfied and I was more than satisfied with this approach of his. I think the hon. member for Pinelands will therefore appreciate that this is something affecting future policy.

May I ask the Minister whether he is setting in train moves to put himself into the position to take over that work?

I would say to the hon. member for Pinelands that my attitude up to the present has been that I did not want to completely overwhelm my Department and the Hotel Board with functions which they were not in a position to perform, and that the essential function was to register and grade hotels and to endeavour to improve the standard of hotels. Therefore I wanted them to fulfil that particular task first of all, and as we go on our idea is, in consultation with the Minister of Justice, to see to what extent we can fit ourselves into a pattern which may be the pattern for the future of the hotel industry as such. So if the hon. member wants to know whether I have anybody trained in the Department to do that particular job, my answer is no, but eventually, if this job is handed over to the Department and by the Department to the Hotel Board, obviously one would have to have personnel to do this task. But the idea is to simplify the situation and not to complicate it. That is the attitude, I am sure, which the hotel industry itself wants. So we do not think in terms of having all the inspections and the complications that apply at present. We are trying to simplify the situation. The hon. member is quite right when he says that the Hotel Commission’s report referred to the multiplicity of licences and suggested that there should be one hotel licence to cover these. These are matters which will eventually be handled, but the immediate task was to ensure that there should be some basis of registering and grading and improving the standards of hotels in this country to meet the development of tourism here.

Then the hon. member was somewhat concerned about the hotels themselves. He indicated that the information he has was that the new rules and regulations applying to hotels resulted in 500 hotels going out of business and so being lost to the industry, because they failed to classify. I want to point out, as the hon. the Minister of Justice pointed out to the Committee at one stage, that an hotel need not do a thing and still could sell malt and wine, but if it wants to sell spirits it has to conform to certain standards. In addition to that, if it meets with those standards it can also practically automatically get an off-sales licence. The hon. member referred to 500 hotels that may be lost to the industry and to tourism. I have also seen these figures appearing in the Press, and I asked the Hotel Board to give me their assessment of the position and they said that they anticipated that it would be less than 150 hotels which would fail to classify. But those hotels can still operate with wine and malt licences. Let us be frank. If you want to improve the hotel industry in this country, you cannot immediately bring them all in. If you must have grading, you must accept that certain hotels will not be able to be graded. With classification under the conditions set by the Liquor Board there may be certain hotels that cannot classify, and they will lose their spirit licences, but they may still sell wine and malt.

Even if they have not operated in the past, they can still qualify for a wine and malt licence?

I am not sure of that. That is a matter which the Liquor Board will have to decide. That does not fall within my portfolio at all. I have just given the situation as it applies as far as I am concerned, in regard to the number of hotels in the country, because although I am concerned with the number of hotels, I am also concerned with the standard of accommodation, and that is what South Africa has lacked. The hon. member for Von Brandis knows what his inquiry led to and, he knows what was stated in the report of the last Hotel Commission. It said that certain hotels were not really hotels but just liquor outlets. Of course, if we want to meet the demands for accommodation by tourists, we will just have to accept the situation where some of them will have to go out. Some of them maintain bedrooms only to comply with the Liquor Act. They did not want anybody to stay in their hotels. In fact, they did not welcome people. If you came there, they said they had no accommodation, although the place was probably empty. That is my general answer to the hon. member for Pinelands.

I see the hon. member for Von Brandis is now back. Perhaps I can now handle the matters he raised in the beginning of this discussion. He spoke, first of all, of this “Cinderella Department”. I am not sure whether he used the word “neglected”, but he gave the impression that it was a Department which was handled very poorly, like Cinderella, and after all Cinderella was a very neglected little girl.

Until midnight.

Yes, but he did not say only until midnight.

The only trouble is that it is later than you think.

The hon. member said that talking about tourism was everybody’s business or concern, but that taking action about tourism was nobody’s concern.

I want to say to the hon. member and other hon. members on that side of the House: Let us be realistic when we approach this matter. The amount now devoted to Satour, for instance, which is an essential feature of tourism, is R1½ million. I want to point out to hon. members that in the year 1947-’48 less than R90,000 was devoted to Satour. To-day it is as much as R1½ million. She must have been a very lucky Cinderella; 12 o’clock must have struck between then and now for her to get an amount like this. I am quite prepared to listen to criticism, and I will deal with some of the criticism raised by the hon. member for Von Brandis. But I really think he is exaggerating when he refers to this Department as a Cinderella department.

As regards tourism, I do not want to pretend for a moment that this country can compete with France, Italy or Spain when it comes to drawing tourists. I extracted some figures in this regard and I want to show how many tourists came to this country from outside. In 1947-’48 we had something like 68,000 whereas to-day we have reached the 300,000 mark per year.

Is that as at the end of last year?

Last year we had 275.000 tourists. The estimated figure for 1966 is 300,000.

Those were largely Rhodesians.

There were also Rhodesians included in the 68,000. Are Rhodesian vititors to this country not considered to be tourists?

The Rhodesian population has doubled.

This is an important figure, and I should like to ask the Minister this question. I think the figure for 1966 is just over 250,000. What is the figure for the calendar year 1967? I have not seen the figure.

The figure was 275,000 for that year. What I am trying to show hon. members is that the growth of tourism in this country has been quite considerable. It has not been static; it has not been neglected. The hon. member for Durban (Point) in his usual jovial way said “We will have to get a new Minister” or something like that, when someone on that side spoke about disappointing tourist results. But of course it is not so. I do not want to say that because I have been in charge of this Department, the tourist figures have increased so much. There has been an effective growth from year to year and this Government has always accepted that tourism must be developed. After all, it was this Government which established a Department of Tourism. I know the hon. member for Durban (Point) feels that the portfolio was created so that I could have a job, that it was only a home-made job for me. That is not so. The Department was established because the Prime Minister was satisfied that tourism was becoming a very important factor in world economics. What is more, this Department created the Hotel Board. The hon. member for Von Brandis was anxious to have a hotel board years ago and sat on a commission in that regard when the United Party was in power, but his Government did not establish a Hotel Board. This Government did it. And so this Government will go on improving the position. Therefore I say I am anxious to have criticism which can help towards improving the tourist industry still further. The hon. member for Pinelands talked about the problems which face hotels, and I have great sympathy for them. I felt this was a basis on which one could approach the future. I felt it would improve the lot of the hotels, it would make them more attractive for tourists, and I think in that way more accommodation would be available to people in South Africa.

The hon. member for Von Brandis said he was a little disappointed with the approach of the Hotel Board to gradings because the emphasis was not placed on service. But in fact the emphasis is placed on service. Indeed, more than 50 per cent of the possible 1,000 points for grading are based directly or indirectly on the type of service supplied by the hotel concerned. Hoteliers have complained because they cannot get classified, but it is because they cannot meet the physical demands or else they do not meet the service demands. We are determined to place emphasis on service. If one goes overseas one realizes how important service in an hotel is. We must not forget that Europe does cater very well for tourists. One of the important features of those hotels in the type of service given. Our hoteliers must learn that good service must be given, and if they do not provide satisfactory service, then they will not be given grading. There are no arguments about it. Certain people have said we should be slack about our requirements. It has been said I must be concerned because a number of hotels cannot be registered. Well, I am not concerned, because I cannot register a liquor-serving hotel unless it has been classified. I say that is how it should be. Let the hotel know it is lacking in certain features and if it wants to become graded and registered, then it must conform to certain physical and certain service requirements. Let me repeat what the Minister of Justice said about being classified in category E, namely that it is not such a tremendous problem. It has really been completely exaggerated. It is laid down, inter alia, that 25 per cent of the hotel’s bedrooms must have a bathroom or a similar amenity. It is not necessary for a hotel to have say 50 bedrooms. If three of a 12-bedroomed hotel’s bedrooms comply with this requirement, then the hotel can meet classification on that aspect and could be registered as a one-star hotel if finally classified. But it must also provide other things, including service to attain this.

As regards loans to hotels, the Government has made the position quite clear. It will not through the Hotel Board lend money to hotels to assist them in becoming classified. That is the financial responsibility of the hotel concerned. I want to point out to hon. members that it is not such a great hardship. After all, various industries in this country are developed by private capital, and the hotel industry has also been developed by private capital up to now. The Government however went further. It established the Hotel Board and gave hotels certain guarantees so that this Board could raise money. This guarantee meant that the amount of R20 million could be raised. It was prepared to lend money to improve only registered hotels. If an hotel became classified and was automatically registered with a one-star grading then it could put its case to the Hotel Board and ask for money to use on improvements because it desired to earn a higher grading. It could obtain that money.

Hon. members spoke of luxury hotels, of international hotels. There are only two such international hotels in the country. The Government assisted them by guaranteeing certain loans in conjunction with the local council. Both hotels are in Johannesburg, namely the President Hotel which is in operation and which is a magnificent hotel of prestige value, and the Carlton Centre which is in the process of being built. The Carlton Centre is going to have the same luxury standards as the other hotel, and I understand it is going to have 600 bedrooms as against the President Hotel’s 300 bedrooms. Those are only two features. People say the Board is only concerned about luxury hotels. That is not so, because 82 per cent of the hotels already graded are only one-star or two-star hotels. Then there are the three-star hotels. I think there is one four-star hotel and four or five five-star establishments. To me most of the hotels are what could be called reasonable hotels of one-star grading standard. I think if we want to draw and cater for tourists, we must not offer hotels of less than one-star standard, if such an establishment is to be called an hotel. The tourist could also be offered private accommodation, and we have been working on this aspect for quite a long period now. Some of our officials have visited Namaqualand to see whether there were private accommodation facilities for people who wanted to tour that area in order to see the Namaqualand flowers. It would not pay to have a hotel up there which is only occupied for three or four weeks in the year. But private accommodation could cater for those visitors. The Department has been attending to that particular aspect of the matter.

Further with regard to the speech of the hon. member for Von Brandis, I should like to say that this Department has always realized the necessity for research. But with the first project of research we tackled the firm concerned wanted such a large fee to do the job and it wanted to spread it over such a multiplicity of issues that we turned it down. It came to a quarter of a million rand. I did not feel that I could come to this House and ask for a quarter of a million rand for research. What is happening is that we have given certain priorities to research. We are carrying out research in regard to the tourist attractions and amenities in our country. The next research will be carried out with regard to accommodation. We will tackle each priority in turn. We feel that we can do the job more efficiently if the priorities are dealt with in that order. We will then go on to other matters requiring research. Suddenly to be faced with a blueprint of a mass of information where you cannot see the wood for the trees, is I feel not necessary at this stage. I might say to the hon. member for Von Brandis that if it becomes necessary and if we can get a job done by some outside firm I would not hesitate to do so. I would discuss the matter with Treasury especially since we have a certain amount in the Vote provided for this and I would then allow this firm to do the job. But I was not prepared to approach the Treasury in regard to a quarter of a million rand.

At what rate of interest did you lend money for instance to the President Hotel?

No, we do not lend money. We provide a guarantee and then they get the money themselves. That is what we are doing in the case of the Carlton Centre as well. The Government does not lend money. The Hotel Board lends money. They are an autonomous body and control their funds themselves.

At what rate of interest does the Hotel Board then lend money?

I am not sure but I know that up to now the Government has actually granted the Hotel Board certain funds to operate because it said that if it went into the finance market to-day the rate of interest would be too high. If I am not mistaken the rate of interest at which they got the money from the Government was just under 7 per cent per annum. They then lend that money to the hotel people at a low rate of interest, at 7 per cent of 7¼ per cent. This is not a profiteering game. It is done purely on the basis of helping them to finance their project.

Have they lent any money up till now?

Yes, they have. I think that they have lent just over R400,000 up to now to hotels that wanted to improve themselves. In every case it had to be an hotel that was registered. We would not register a hotel unless it was classified, namely hotels with liquor licences.

With regard to the regional scheme, all I can tell the hon. member for Von Brandis is that the regional scheme was originally in operation under the Provincial concept. The only difference is that whereas the regional scheme was operating through the provinces and through a provincial tourist committee, because of certain problems that arose from a fiscal point of view this matter of general tourist promotion had to be taken away from the provinces. This was not originally the idea and now the Department itself has to deal directly with the various regional committees. But we do not interfere with them and their operations still go on. In fact the Department itself is going out of its way to assist them so that they will develop even greater enthusiasm for tourism in their own areas. I might also say in regard to hotels that of the 218 hotels already graded 59 are in the platteland. Over 25 per cent of them are. therefore, actually platteland hotels while the others are town hotels. Of course this development is accelerating all the time. The Hotel Board handles applications at every one of its meetings for the grading of new hotels.

As far as the question of visitors from America is concerned, which the hon. member for Von Brandis also mentioned, all I can tell him is that America has now introduced certain measures to stem the flow of tourists rather than to encourage tourism from America. They have done this for financial reasons and I therefore cannot expect any appreciable increase in tourism for South Africa from America in the near future. As far as the hon. member for Koedoespoort is concerned, I should like to advise him in regard to the conference at Oudtshoorn that I was fully aware of what was going on. They are sending a deputation to see me to submit certain resolutions that were decided upon at this conference. One of the resolutions is that there should be a statutory co-ordinating committee for tourism. But I have not come to any decision in regard to this matter as yet.

In regard to the question of service charges, I myself feel that it is not a very healthy thing that we have imported from overseas.

This Department took this matter up about two or three months ago. We also passed the matter on to the Hotel Board to get their views. Their views were very interesting, because serving on the Hotel Board there are three hoteliers. They said that a service charge applied to accommodation should not be allowed to continue. They felt that an hotel should not be allowed to charge a service charge on accommodation. A service oharge in a hotel restaurant should not exceed 10 per cent. If there was a service charge of 10 per cent it should be brought immediately to the notice of the customer who has to pay that service charge, instead of it being automatically included in the account. I think that that was more or less their views on the subject.

My own view was that unfortunately even though you pay the service charge, if you do not pay a tip you do not get the service. That is a feature of the Hotel Board’s decision which I still want to ask them to explain to me. A service charge is for service. They also said that one cannot stop tipping. That is all very well but then I am more inclined to agree with the hon. member for Koedoespoort. A service charge is for services rendered. You do not have to make a tip as well for services rendered if a service charge is levied. This is one of the matters being discussed by my Department and the Hotel Board at the present time. The hon. member for Koedoespoort asked me what powers I had to prevent the levying of a service charge.

As far as I can see I have no powers whatsoever to prevent this. This is not part and parcel of the powers of the Hotel Board, or the functions I have to perform. The hon. member referred to the fact that more South Africans should visit our historical tourist attractions. I quite agree with him. In fact, many of these spots which do not necessarily appeal to overseas tourists will appeal to our own people if there are plenty of signposts to show us where they are when we go motoring, in our country. In this regard I quite agree with the hon. member. The hon. member for Turffontein spoke about Satour and the Department and I appreciate his remarks. He said that many people wanted a co-ordinating body for tourism. Of course that is basically the function of this Department. The Department is there to co-ordinate the tourist effort in this country. I would say that the meeting of a high co-ordinating body once every three months is not my idea of proper co-ordination. I think that a Department such as this can do the job properly. Through Satour. The Hotel Board and the various regional committees, we are able almost by day to day contact, co-ordinate far better than a large coordinating body which meets from time to time. I think that the hon. member for Johannesburg (North) mentioned that such a body could meet four times a year. But that is not my idea of co-ordination. I think that it must be more intensive than that.

The hon. member for Turffontein mentioned the matter of liquor laws being made more flexible, as regards cafés, restaurants and swimming baths. These are outside my particular field, and I would say that he must address these remarks to the Minister of Justice. The custom-free shop at the Jan Smuts Aerodrome is taking shape. There are some problems which are being ironed out. He talked about the staff speaking many languages. The problem of tourists with different languages. This requirement is something which we are endeavouring to meet. Up to now it has not been a problem in South Africa, because by and large the tourists who have come here had been mostly English-speaking people. But that pattern is changing. Nowadays there are Germans and French and more and more people from other parts of Europe who are coming here. I quite agree that it is essential to meet them and to discuss matters with them in their own language wherever possible. He talked about the publicity posters and the bikini girls, but I leave that to the hon. member for Pinelands, who has so much more experience than I have in that field.

It is never too late to start!

It is far too late, I am afraid. I think I have dealt with the points which the hon. member raised.

The hon. member for Lydenburg talked about the tourist attractions in South Africa, especially in the countryside. He talked particularly about the Blyde River Canyon. Of course, the province itself appreciated that. The Finance Relations Act was amended by this Government so that the provinces themselves could invest in tourist attractions and develop them, like Blyde River Canyon, for example. All I can say to him, is that it fits into the pattern which we feel is the right one, namely that the Central Government, which has its own tourist amenities, like the Kruger National Park, which comes under the Parks Board, the provincial authority, the local authority, the divisional council, and private enterprise, must also develop tourist attractions. Anybody who goes to Durban knows how much is done for the tourists by private enterprise. All these bodies we are anxious should be used as far as tourist attractions are concerned. I think the hon. member, although he accepted luxury hotels as part and parcel of the pattern in South Africa, has an exaggerated idea of their importance as far as this Department is concerned.

The fact of the matter is that there are only two international luxury type hotels which are being built at the present moment, and in respect of which the Government, together with the local authorities, have guaranteed loans which they could themselves make use of. The cheaper registered hotels, consisting of 82 per cent of one star and two star hotels. I think cover that aspect. I regard the person who runs his own country hotel, as the best host there could possibly be. I hope that he maintains his contact with our people by meeting the demands of classification. It is not expected that he should have a ten-storeyed or five-storeyed hotel; as long as he has a number of rooms, 25 per cent meet certain physical requirements regarding bathroom facilities and the service is good, can be classified; he can get his full liquor licence, and he can run his hotel. If he wants to improve his hotel, he can approach the Hotel Board for loan money, and they can decide whether they should give him the loan money to improve his hotel. But the responsibility in the first instance rests with him. I only hope that he does not just pull out, because I am certain that, with the tourists who are coming to this country, more and more opportunities will be available for that sort of hotel to do business with very satisfied customers. Therefore I hope that this type of hotel will not fall into the hands of big groups.

The non. member for Johannesburg (North) raised certain points. He talked about the tight budget for Satour. I think that if he followed the argument that Satour’s budget is now R1½ million, compared to some R90,000 in 1948-’49, he will realize that it is gradually developing to, I will not say a generous budget, but nevertheless not the tight budget that he thought it was when he spoke. I think, from that point of view, that is a reply to the point he raised. He said South Africa has missed the boat as far as tourism is concerned. He gave the example of Monaco. I would say that South Africa has not missed the boat as far as tourism is concerned. That is quite a wrong conception. I would say that South Africa is not convenient for the ordinary run of tourist. After all, Italy, France, Spain, Monaco and those countries are within a short distance and a cheap flight from Britain and the rest of the Continent. Germans go into Spain by their hundreds of thousands by car. The Americans, as the hon. member knows, come over to Europe and spend some time in Spain. But South Africa is not really geographically in that particular tourist country category. But the mere fact is that we are drawing more and more tourists every year; I think the increase is about 7 per cent per year. Every year it is increasing. I am quite happy if it goes on increasing. What I do not want, is a flood of tourists and no accommodation and no method of handling them properly, which will be a very bad advertisement for South Africa. As long as we can keep up and maintain progress, I am quite happy that that is the best business method of tackling tourism. So, although the hon. member gave me these fantastic figures with regard to Monaco, and tells me we are missing the boat. I do not think we are missing the boat at all in South Africa. I think we are going on reasonably well.

He talked about key men in the Department of Tourism. I suppose every Department would like to have key men. He talked about special courses. I want to refer him to the report of the Department of Tourism and I just want to read one section. It says on page 5:

That was the training of tour guides, the very point that the hon. member raised. I would say therefore that we have not neglected that aspect. We realize the importance of it, and we are anxious that South Africa, which did not have to worry about these matters in the past, should realize that with the growth of tourism trained guides are very essential.

He talked about South Africa and her sunshine. All our publications with regard to publicity have the theme: “Come to South Africa for sunshine.” I remember one film I saw, which is shown in Europe and Britain. It shows a man sitting on Durban beach in the sunshine. He was a man from Britain and was reading an overseas paper which said: “Britain closed in with blizzards.” That is what we are trying to sell, sunshine, space to move, lovely beaches, excellent roads …

Lovely girls.

I leave that again to the hon. member for Pinelands. These are the things which Satour stress in their publications. I have seen their last publication on sport in South Africa, showing how this country lends itself to outdoor life and to sportsmanship. These are the people whom we will draw to our country more and more. I have never maintained that we will draw the people who want to see stripteases like they have in Paris about which the hon. member for Pinelands is so enthusiastic.

I did not say anything about stripteases.

I presume there was no such thing in your day. These are the things that South Africa has got and I can assure hon. members that I have never thought in terms of South Africa other than as a most attractive country for a tourist to visit. South Africa is not the place for a tripper to come to, but for a man to come to, even with his wife and family. We have a healthy and beautiful country with plenty of sunshine even in winter. This is what we can offer the tourist. The hon. member for South Coast also put a number of points to me. He indicated through the Chief Whip that he will not be able to be here. I will see that the points he raised are attended to and he will be informed of the results later one.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. Minister has replied to a certain number of questions asked by hon. members on this side of the House. These replies were mainly in regard to the hotel industry. I do not want to take this point any further, because I know that one of my colleagues will do just that. This attempt on the part of the hon. the Minister was really one which did not make much impression. Here and there he dealt with the question, he touched upon this and that, kicked a loose pebble, but he failed completely to come to the heart of the matter, as well as to state his philosophy and further approach to this extremely important problem and the need for central management. The hon. the Minister becomes alarmed when hon. members on this side of the House refer to his Department as a “Cinderella” Department. The amount being appropriated only totals R1,700,000. The amount for Satour only totals R1,500,000. There is an English expression which goes, “You are trying to run a thing on a shoestring”. It seems to me as though the hon. the Minister is trying to build up an entire Department on a shoestring. The hon. the Minister maintains that this is good business and that he is satisfied with what is happening. However, I want to tell him that tourism is costing South Africa a great deal of money and that it is being run at a loss. What did South Africa lose last year through its overseas tourists? This figure amounted to R60 million, of which South Africa only recovered R50 million. In other words, there is a loss of approximately R10 million. The hon. the Minister maintains that this is good business. I have never in my life heard of a good business which is being run at a loss.

There are many other things which you have not yet heard of and will still get to hear.

The difference between us is that I am aware of what I know and that hon. member is not. I do not want to become involved in an argument with the hon. member. It has been said that one’s knowledge can be bounded by a circle. The more one knows, the greater is one’s contact with the outside edge of the circle, which stands for the unknown. I do not say that I know a great deal, nor do I say that my circle of knowledge is a great one, but I know how much I do not know. However, if that hon. member makes an interjection of that kind, then it seems to me that what he knows cannot be represented by a circle, nor by a line, but only by a dot.

It seems to me that quite a number of matters were touched upon here which the hon. the Minister has not reacted to. Possibly he is reserving them for the second part of his speech, and I want to afford him an opportunity of taking these matters further when he replies. We all speak of an explosion in this field of tourism. This is true, and I think there are two very clear reasons for this. There are more and more people in the world who have more and more time and more and more money to travel about more and more. The second important point is that tourism is a function of the transport system. In this field a tremendous revolution is taking place. After the war people in this country thought in terms of the Dakota, which represented only 30,000 passenger miles per day. To-day we already have the Boeing which represents a half million passenger-miles per day. Just round the corner is the Concorde which represents 2 million passenger-miles per day, as well as the American SST aircraft which represents 4.5 million passenger-miles per day. As a result of this there is a large-scale explosion in the field of tourism and more and more people are travelling. We want the planning to be done now so that South Africa can take proper advantage of what is hapening in this field.

I think we welcome tourism in South Africa for three main reasons. Firstly I can say that we welcome it because of humanistic reasons. We should very much like people to come here so that we can get to know them. We should like them to see our customs and culture. We will then be able to return the compliment. In this way an inter-action will be possible which I hope will enrich us as well as them. Secondly, there are also important political reasons as to why we should encourage tourism. At the moment we are paying an annual amount of R2.9 million for our information officers in overseas countries. The people overseas are not interested in this because they are of the opinion that it is Government propaganda. Of course the best kind of propaganda to have is to get those people to pay personal visits to South Africa in order to see what is going on here. We think that if they come to South Africa they will obtain a better insight into matters, and with a better insight there will probably be more sympathy for our standpoint. More sympathy may in fact lead to more goodwill. For purely political reasons it is essential to bring more and more tourists to South Africa. There is also a third, and probably the most important reason why we should promote tourism, i.e. the economic reason. I should like to elaborate a little on this matter. At this stage the goldmining industry is the backbone of our economy in this sense that it earns us an annual amount of foreign currency to the value of more than R700 million. However, everybody knows that inflation is stifling the gold-mining industry. Unless something radical happens, this mighty industry will, within 20 years, be a mere shadow of its former self. What is the easiest way of earning this foreign currency? What method requires the smallest capital investment? The reply to this is tourism. By means of tourism this gap which is going to be created can be filled. According to available figures an approximate number of 250,000 tourists come to South Africa annually. It is not clear how much they spend here, because the estimates vary from approximately R50 million to as much as R70 million.

I do not know what the precise figure is, but perhaps the hon. the Minister can furnish it for us. If we were to put the figure at R60 million, it would mean that to replace the gold-mining industry in South Africa as an industry which earns us foreign currency, this amount in respect of tourism must be multiplied tenfold over the next 20 years. I am of the opinion that it is a target which is not beyond our reach. We want the hon. the Minister to think in terms of this. We want to know what his plans are for dealing with this kind of situation. However, he talks about hotels, and what should be done here and there. Surely that is not going far enough. My colleague, the hon. member for Von Brandis, spoke about special interest groups. I want to ask the hon. the Minister a simple question. Suppose there were 150 people in Europe who said to the hon. the Minister— and this is a common occurrence overseas— that they want to come to South Africa and that they want to visit Cape Town, Durban, Johannesburg and the Kruger National Park, and that they want to journey together and share accommodation. Suppose they say that they want to come out here within a month. Will the hon. the Minister be able to deal with the situation? This is the simple question which we are asking him. This will show how prepared he is to cope with tourists.

Mr. Chairman, we are talking about special interest groups. It seems to me that the more man develops and the more progress is made in the field of technology, the more man’s thoughts turn to prehistoric times, and so we find that—to mention a special group —there are thousands of people to-day who are interested in old and anthropological discoveries, who are interested in rock art, in stone engravings, in the paleolithic era when stone implements were fashioned. I can take as an example a cave system such as Laseaux in France, which is visited daily by hundreds of people. Here in South Africa we probably have more than any other country can offer. There are the Magaliesberg and the Drakensberg mountains; there are hundreds of these places which can be visited, but nobody overseas knows about them. Sir, even if one visits a place like Sterkfontein, where one of the most important discoveries in South Africa was made, then the guide, the old Bantu guide, tells you, “This is the place where the oubaas found the oumissus.” [Time expired.]

I do not want to say too much in response to the speech made by the hon. member for Hillbrow, particularly not when he discusses business, because we are aware of the fact that he worked for a big boss who knows a great deal more about business than I do. But when he spoke about this deficit of R11 million which we have on our tourist account, he omitted to say that that figure has diminished to a tremendous extent during the past number of years; that the figure had been much higher, and that last year it was lower than ever before. The hon. member also omitted to point out the effect of a considerable credit balance on our tourist account in this time of inflation in which we have now found ourselves. We are aware of the fact that inflation is a temporary condition in the country, but I think the Government is quite mindful of the fact that as soon as circumstances warrant it, one can proceed to a large-scale attempt to develop this source of income, tourism, fully …

Yes, but there is a time lapse. One must begin now to establish those facilities.

The Government is aware of that time lapse, but it is no more than 18 months. In other words, if one makes a start with one’s promotion work, then one can expect results after 18 months, but the hon. member omitted to tell this to the House.

Mr. Chairman, I want to turn my attention more specifically to the hon. member for South Coast, and I regret his not being in the House to-day. I am sorry because I am certain that the fact that he is not present at the moment will result in his becoming annoyed at me when delayed reaction sets in. Yesterday the hon. member for South Coast took a great deal of trouble to prove to the Committee that the Natal Parks Board was not really geared to tourist promotion. That was really news to me. I gained the impression that he was doing so by way of offering an excuse; that there was something he felt badly about, and that he was only explaining in advance that they were really not geared to doing that type of work. But it is also true that we have very tangible proof that the Natal Parks Board is very proud of the tourist work which it has done during the past 20 years in Natal, and particularly in my constituency, Zululand. They are jealously proud of the work they have done there. But if we were to consider what they have achieved after 20 years, then we realize that the hon. member is apologizing for their achievements. The hon. member for South Coast was particularly afraid of the introduction of the so-called Jumbo jets. He has reason to be afraid of their introduction. I believe that if one Jumbo jet were to arrive in this country he would not be able to supply those people with accommodation in all his game reserves and parks in Natal. I want to go further; they will not even be able to transport those people in his game reserves because the policy of that hon. member, through his Natal Parks Board, is not even to allow a tourist bus into the game reserve.

It is only a sanctuary.

Yes, it must serve only as a sanctuary. The hon. member for South Coast went further and advocated a central authority in Natal to promote tourism. This is a very difficult matter. We have already tried, even on a regional committee level, to cooperate with the Parks Board, hut each time— and this is what the hon. member did yesterday—we discussed tourist promotion, they talk about conservation. We give the Natal Parks Board full points for conservation attempts, but we give them nought out of ten for their tourist promotion. This is a fact which we must begin to face up to. Mr. Chairman, ironically enough the hon. member for South Coast also spoke about the lack of accommodation. The only accommodation which is being made available in the Natal Game Reserves is provided exclusively by the Natal Parks Board; nobody else can get into the game reserves. I want to allege that this accommodation is totally inadequate and inefficient, quantitatively as well as qualitatively. I shall merely mention a few particulars in regard to the bigger camps. There are camps which are beautifully situated, but there is no accommodation for tourists. The Mkuzi camp has six rondavels and three huts. The Hluhluwe camp has four six-bed dwelling units and 25 two-bed dwelling units. This is the most famous camp in Natal. The Umfolozi game reserve has 12 two-bed rondavels. At Richard’s Bay there are only ablutional and toilet facilities, and at False Bay there are ablutlonal and toilet facilities and in none of the camps is there any food of any nature available for tourists.

What must one live on?

Probably on snakes and spiders. We are aware of the policy of the Natal Parks Board. We know how they feel. They are of the opinion that this accommodation should be provided outside the game reserve, on the periphery of the game reserves, and we are satisfied with that, but then we ask that private initiative be afforded an opportunity, and in particular the land, to make these facilities available to tourists. We must think of the requirements of the foreign tourist. He does not want to be put to any trouble; he wants to see and photograph things. When he returns home after what was a very tiring day for him, then he wants to relax in peace and comfort. If we bear the needs of tourists in mind, then the facilities which we are making available to them in Natal through the Parks Board are totally inadequate. I want to allege that it is time the Department of Tourism stepped in firmly so that Zululand with its sub-tropical climate, its unspoiled natural beauty, its wealth of wild animals, birds and plant life, will not merely be a kingdom of the Natal Parks Board, but in fact a world-famous tourist attraction where money can be earned for the Republic.

In conclusion just this remark about a different matter. It would perhaps have astonished the hon. member for South Coast if he had been present, but I do nevertheless want to bring the condition of the St. Lucia Lake to the attention of the hon. the Minister. The problem of salination has become a very serious one. When the salt content increases to more than 60 parts per thousand, then as the hon. member knows the biological life is destroyed. It is destroyed by way of a chain reaction, from the lowest to the highest form of animal life. If the plankton is destroyed, the fish are destroyed, and the birds disappear. Even hippopotami need fresh water. That lake is being threatened to-day. We have now received the St. Luoia report, with which I am not in full agreement; steps must in fact be taken there, but there are certain parts which deal with the question of desalination of the lake. Not only the Natal Parks Board, but all of us are concerned about the lake because we believe that it could possibly become one of our greatest tourist attractions in Natal.

The last point I want to mention deals with a purely organizational matter. It concerns these regional committees which have been appointed under the auspices of the Department of Tourism. I can understand very well that the hon. the Minister does not like to interfere in the establishment of these committees. The constitution of these committees is being left to them, and the fact of the matter is that those people sit too long on those oommittees; there is no fluctuation and no change. I should like to suggest that provision should be made for those committees to be reappointed or should hold elections at least every two or three years so that one does not find the same persons sitting on those committees for years on end.

I do not intend to spend much time on the hon. member for Zululand and his private vendetta against the Natal Parks Board. We have heard him before on the subject, and this sort of speech is not going to help him; he is not going to get himself put on the board. He knows perfectly well that the Natal Parks Board, as he himself admitted, is a nature conservation organization; it is not a tourist organization, and what it has done in the way of promoting tourism has been done over and above and outside the purpose for which it was established. Just as the National Kruger Park Board is now developing or allowing hotels to develop outside the park, so is the Natal Parks Board. It is not intended to be, never has been, and it will never be a tourist organization. It is there to conserve and protect the natural flora and fauna of the areas in which it has reserves. Sir, that hon. member attacks Natal; he does not attack the National Parks Board. Where are the hotels in the Kruger Park? Exactly the same policy is followed there, except on a larger scale. Sir, one of the matters raised by the hon. member for South Coast was the question of co-ordinating the conservation work that is being done through the Natal Parks Board with the tourist promotion aspect. I would be very sorry to see the true basic purpose of the Natal Parks Board undermined by turning it into a simple tourist organization instead of a nature conservation organization.

Now, I want ito come back to certain matters raised by the hon. the Minister. He said that this was not. a Cinderella department. What it certainly does not have is a Prince Charming as a Minister. He is quite right; the Government realized the need for a Department of Tourism; it realized the need for a Hotels Board—in fact the establishment of the Board was pressed for Iby the hotels themselves—and it therefore established the Department and the Hotels Board. Those are two good actions. What we have complained about is the Cinderella way in which the Department has been treated and the lack of a Prince Charming at its head. The hon. the Minister does not even know his own Department. He has said here this afternoon that the Hotels Board is an autonomous board which lends money—that is correct—and that he does not know what it lends.

Are you on the old tag again?

No, I am just showing up the Minister, because I happened to look at Section 29 of the Hotels Act. The Board can neither borrow nor lend money without the permission of the Minister and yet he says, “Don’t ask me; the Hotels Board is an autonomous Board; they lend and borrow the money”. That was his reply to the hon. member for Pinelands. Sir, I want to come back to this aspect on which the Minister is so stubborn—his refusal to make funds available to assist hotels to remain in existence. He says that only 150 hotels have failed to classify and it is not his job to help them. I want to ask the Minister to tell this House what hotels have been assisted by the Hotel Board, with his permission and authority, and what are the gradings of those hotels; because the point we have made, and the point which the Minister has missed completely, is not that we object to luxury hotels. You must have them; you need them for the tourist. We do not object to the standards laid down. Our concern is that the ordinary traveller in South Africa will have no hotel to stay in in two or three years’ time because he will not be able to afford the tariffs that are forced on hotels in order to achieve the minimum standards laid down. The average sum being spent by an hotelier to classify is something around R30,000.

That is not true.

The Minister can check it. That has been spent by many hotels, to my personal knowledge, and it has been stated by hoteliers and by hotel associations that that is the average sum which has to be spent. But assume that it is not the average, and assume that a lot of hotels—and this the Minister will have to accept—are spending R30.000, it will bring their tariffs up to such an extent that a family man, a husband and wife with three or four children, can no longer afford to stay at a normal hotel when they go on holiday. We have pleaded for consideration for the special needs of the type of hotel which, for instance, you get on the beaches, the holiday hotels, and the mountain resorts, instead of this nonsense, which is not the Minister’s fault but is part of the pattern, that rondavels must now be linked up by glass-covered passages to all the bathrooms in case people catch cold. The whole character of those mountain resorts is being destroyed. We feel that the Minister should have interceded and should still intercede to ensure that the hotel for the smaller man, the hotel for the not-so-rich man, will still remain available and be able to provide hotel facilities at tariffs which can be afforded. Otherwise you are going to destroy the hotel industry. Already in Durban I believe there are 10,000 beds available in holiday flats. All that is providing accommodation, but it will become more and more difficult for the small man to find an hotel to which he can take his family. Look around Durban now at the hotels that are closing. I can immediately think of four or five, and what is being built in their place is the luxury hotel. The luxury hotels are also needed, but we plead that we should not become so obsessed with tourism and luxury hotels that the needs of the ordinary person are forgotten.

Now I want to ask the Minister please to tell the House and through the House the country what benefits accrue to an hotelier who registers and is graded. I ask this because only 259 hotels have been graded and numerous hoteliers have said to me: “We have our classification, so why should we bother to become graded? We can automatically register; we do not want to be graded because then we have to pay a levy to the Hotel Board, and what do we get? Only a tax rebate and no other benefits at all.” I think it is necessary for the Minister to make it clear what the benefits are—I know they are there, but I want it from the Minister—to the hotelier, so that the hotelier who is hesitating now to apply for grading will in fact do so. What will the hotelier who is graded receive as compensation for the extra control and the levy he has to pay?

Then, could the hon. the Minister tell us what has happened in regard to the training schemes for hotel labour? The reports I have had are that the refusal to allow Bantu labour behind the Eiselen line is creating tremendous hardships and that of the Coloureds who have been trained only a very small proportion have proved to be satisfactory and are still working in hotels. The majority, who have been trained at some cost and trouble, have poved to be quite unsuitable when they had to work in hotels. [Time expired.]

When eloquence was distributed, the hon. member for Durban (Point) was at the head of the queue, but when realism was distributed, he was not there at all, because despite the explanation which the Minister gave about a variety of matters and which made it clear to us why certain things had not been done or could not be done at this stage, the hon. member kicks up a tremendous fuss about them. Not that we find this strange, because in this matter the hon. member has only tried to do once again what he always does, and that is to steal a political march, but he will not get away with it and I shall leave it to the hon. the Minister to deal with him.

I should also like to associate myself with the many speakers who have to-day expressed their appreciation to the hon. the Minister and his department for the very great work thus far done under difficult circumstances by this vigorous and able young department, especially in bringing tourists to South Africa from abroad. If one looks at the figure of 257,008 tourists who came here in the past year, one gets some sort of impression of the number of visitors to South Africa who came here largely as a result of the good work of this department. However, there are a few other matters which I should like to bring to the kind attention of the hon. the Minister.

Firstly, there is the question of the part which can be played by local authorities, especially the local authorities of the larger centres, which in my opinion should have a larger share in making a pleasant visit to South Africa possible for our visitors from abroad. Every local authority worth mentioning usually has at its disposal the services of a publicity officer, who with the assistance of the Department of Tourism can be instrumental in acquainting visitors to South Africa from abroad with the attractions in the area concerned. But they can make a further contribution by acquainting the visitors with the way of life of the community concerned. I do not want to say that we should give less attention to publicity in respect of our natural attractions, but South Africa’s greatest asset, its greatest treasure, is not only its parks, but its proud possession is the people of South Africa, who they are, what they do and how they live. Visitors from abroad must definitely be afforded more opportunities of meeting the people of South Africa and of getting to know them better, and then I want to say that a great deal more must be done in future to make it possible for the visitor from abroad to get to know the Afrikaans-speaking section. Visitors from abroad must be afforded more and more opportunities of becoming acquainted with the cultural products of the Afrikaans-speaking section. If we are in earnest that the world should know the whole truth about the white man and his role in this country, we must in every possible way keep this basic concept in mind, i.e. that the truth is a property of knowledge, knowledge with particular reference to the origin of the Whites, their present and their future in South Africa. It is particularly in this respect that our cultural contributions can play a major part.

It is always easy to allocate tasks and I am convinced that the Department of Tourism can do a great deal, but what I am concerned about, on the other hand, is the fact that it is actually a two-headed department. On the one hand we have the Department of Tourism, and on the other hand the South African Tourist Corporation. I think that this is becoming an impossible situation and therefore I want to ask the Minister if he will consider, with a view to the further development of the Department of Tourism—and the emphasis must primarily fall on the Department of Tourism—whether the time has not arrived for a very thorough investigation to be instituted concerning the future role of the Tourist Corporation and in what way the Tourist Corporation can be made a more integral but subordinate part of the Department of Tourism. I believe that if there is to be only one department which will play a role as far as the outside world is concerned, it must be the Department of Tourism. For this reason I plead that anything, such as the Tourist Corporation, which can possibly influence the actions of the department, should be investigated thoroughly; I am convinced that if that is done, the Department of Tourism will be able to play an even more positive part.

I listened carefully to the speech of the hon. member for Springs and I would like to congratulate him on it. I thought it was a most constructive speech and that he made some very good points indeed. In particular he tried to relate the activities of the Department of Tourism to the role played by the local authorities, and that is a matter on which I should like to touch. But before doing so I should like to say that I believe he is quite right when he says that our local authorities, generally speaking, do not make visitors, either from overseas or inland visitors to the coastal areas, feel at home as they should. Generally speaking, they do not put themselves out.

I think Durban does.

I would say that Durban is a good example of what can be done for both inland visitors and visitors from overseas, but that is an exception. I also liked the hon. member’s remarks about informing overseas visitors of the aspirations, the culture and the history, as he put it, of the Afrikaansspeaking people of South Africa, but, as I would rather put it, of the South African people of both language groups. Thirdly, he emphasized that visitors from overseas in particular are not made aware of the great historical contributions that the Whites in South Africa have made to the well-being of our country. There, too, I agree with him, because I think too often visitors, from overseas particularly, are shown Native Reserves and, in the case of the urban areas like Johannesburg, tribal dancing. They go away with an idea of the Native Reserves and what the towns are doing for the Natives, but certainly not enough emphasis is placed on the history and the culture of the white people in South Africa.

I should like to deal with one aspect of the Department, and that is that it seems to me there are not any promotional funds available to the Department of Tourism at present. It seems also that under present circumstances loan funds are not available to the Department other than through the Hotel Board. If I am incorrect in this assumption then I would be glad if the hon. the Minister will correct me. Reading the Minister’s recent speech in the Other Place I see he enumerates certain functions to be performed by his Department. For example, it has to list and describe existing tourist facilities and to list potential tourist attractions. What does his Department do after having done that? Is everything then left to the provinces who likewise have no funds, no promotional funds for tourism? Or is everything left to the local authorities concerned, who likewise have no funds for promoting tourism? If I may give the Minister an example of the difficulties that the local authorities and the provinces experience I will give an example with which he is well acquainted, and that is the example of the False Bay coast. To list the existing and potential attractions, I would say that the two commercial fishing harbours which are run by the Department of Commerce and Industries at Gordon’s Bay and False Bay should play a major part in the future development of the Bay. In fact, the Department of Commerce and Industries has no plans to expand either of those harbours in any way. As regards future or potential attractions, there is not a single harbour for small-boat anglers anywhere in False Bay. There are likewise no launching sites for small-boat owners …

What about Buffel’s Bay?

… with the exception of Buffel’s Bay. There is no harbour for deep-sea anglers, there is no yachting basin— there are really no facilities for yachtsmen in False Bay at all except in the lee of the defence breakwater at Simonstown, which is not really a suitable mooring place. In the Bay, which has an entrance 25 miles wide, there are no fewer than eight local authorities: Eight local authorities border on the shores of False Bay. There is no regional or metropolitan authority whatsoever in the Peninsula which perhaps could be a body which on a regional basis could help to promote tourism, and in the result the eight local authorities are from the point of view of finance completely unable to undertake developments of the kind I have sketched. Yet, as the Minister knows, we have a large fishing potential in the Bay. I think of tunny fishing, marlin, yellowtail, Cape salmon, snoek when in season, and others. It has attractions which no other part of the world has to offer. I am not aware of any place in the world that can offer such a variety of fish as we have in False Bay. We have safe swimming and surfing such as can be enjoyed at only a few places in the world. Our beaches are unequalled and yet the amenities at those beaches which the local authorities concerned are able to provide are completely inadequate even for the local people, quite apart from tourists, whether from the interior or from overseas. I ask the Minister who has officiated at some of the provincial surfing tournaments at Muizenberg and Fish Hoek whether he feels the facilities which are available and provided by the local authorities are adequate for the staging even of provincial tournaments, to say nothing of national tournaments or international competitions. I ask him in what way can his Department help with this problem, the problem being that the local authorities are not in a position financially to provide amenities for the tourists of the kind I have described. It seems that the provinces are also not in a position to do so. What is the Minister able to do and what does he propose doing about this situation in the future?

Mr. Chairman, I want to express my appreciation of the report which we received this year. I think it is the first report of the Department of Tourism. I think that if one reads it very carefully, one comes to the conclusion that since the creation of the Department considerable spadework has been done in order to extend this major industry, tourism. I want to congratulate the Department and express the hope that next year, when the next report is available, we shall be able to make a much more realistic appraisal of what the results were of the spadework which was done in the past year. I must say that this has probably not been an easy Department to develop. Those of us who were from the outset familiar with its initiation realize that the hon. the Minister and the Department probably had many problems in getting under way. If one reads of the work which has been done, of the direct promotion work which is being undertaken at present, of what has been done to provide accommodation in the form of hotels and so forth, and of projects which are receiving attention, one comes to a full realization of the fact that this Department is busy laying very sound foundations for the development of this industry, We want to congratulate the Minister and the Department very sincerely on that. One gains the impression that they have now found their feet. I think that as far as this side of the House is concerned, and possibly that side as well, although we most certainly do not need it very much, we will do everything in our power to assist the Minister and the Department in our way.

As far as hotels in general are concerned, I want to put in a good word for them today. We know that the South African hotel industry is passing through difficult times, but I think that if one considers the circumstances, it appears that the hotel industry has in the past few years made accommodation available of which the country in particular, and I think the tourist in general, can be very proud. If one considers the Transvaal areas, one must concede that especially as far as the rural areas are concerned, the hotel accommodation is very good for the tariffs which are charged. In the Lowveld area, for example, the hotel accommodation is probably comparable to the best in the world in that category. We are very grateful for that.

I see that on the Loan Account an amount of R1 million is being made available to the Hotel Board this year. I do not know if difficulties developed which resulted in this smaller amount being made available, but we hope and trust that this fund will be greater in the future. We know that it is difficult always to make capital funds available for projects of this kind. Last year there was R 1,700,000 on the Estimates, and this year it has been decreased to R1 million. We hope that the Minister will make a larger capital amount available in the years to come. I cannot find out why this year’s provision is less than last year’s, and perhaps the hon. the Minister can enlighten us about this.

We must realize that our tourist industry can make great progress in the years to come and therefore we are glad to see that the Minister and the Department are alert in this matter and that they are not oblivious to the Jumbo jet era which is approaching. I cannot agree with hon. members who said that the Minister was not aware of it. We know that that era is coming, and we are most certainly preparing for it.

I now want to say a few words about research. If we look at the proposed programme, we see that only R100 is being made available for this purpose. I find this is a very small amount, and I should like to know how the project is going to be financed.

Then, as far as the training of tour guides is concerned, I just want to say the following. We who have done some travelling realize what value a tourist guide has in propagating his country. I see that negotiations are already under way with various organizations to offer this proposed course. This is the 1967 report. Perhaps the Minister can just tell us what has been done in the past year to introduce these courses.

Then there is a little matter which is very dear to my heart, and which was also mentioned here last year. I am glad and grateful to see that even the Secretary for Tourism referred to it in a recent speech. This is that in a country such as South Africa, where there are two strong language groups, Afrikaans and English speaking, we should do a great deal towards bringing these population groups together by means of the promotion of domestic tourism. What I envisage, and what I pleaded for last year as well, is that we should go out of our way to bring the city dweller to the country districts. To-day there is a one-way traffic. The country dwellers are very fond of going to the cities to-day. What happens in the cities? In the cities one also lands in a whirlpool of tourists. One is completely absorbed in that. But I also want traffic in the other direction. The Secretary said that it was difficult to implement, but I think that we should begin on a small scale. Through organized agriculture and local authorities we should see if we cannot find a point of contact and a point of departure somewhere, so that people can provide accommodation on farms. Let us begin on a small scale and make this accommodation available to tourists and to local people who want to spend vacations on farms. I personally know of many people who would be only too keen to spend a vacation on a farm. This would bring the city dweller and the country dweller into direct contact with each other again. In this way we can learn to understand each other, and cultivate mutual liking, respect and understanding for each other. Circumstances have caused the country districts to become depopulated. We must do something so that our White population, and in particular the city dwellers, would once again develop a love and respect for the country districts. I am thinking of many small towns which are struggling for an existence to-day. All of them want an industry or something similar. I know of small towns where numerous church houses stand empty and are probably only used during times of communion. By encouraging the local publicity association or town council to organize, can we not establish a local organization to make those houses available during holiday periods for families from the cities to stay there? This would also provide an extra source of income to those people. This is not something new, and it is done on a large scale in Europe. I myself went to see what was happening in the Ruhr area in Germany. In America it is done on a large scale. In America this tourist attraction on farms offers those people an additional source of income and the State finances that kind of accommodation. I am pleading for this to be done, and I really think that we should not simply say that it is an insurmountable difficulty. We should begin on a small scale and expand from there. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I think I should first deal with the hon. member for Durban (Point). I think hon. members on this side of the House are beginning to take him too seriously. They should know the hon. member for Durban (Point). I have known him for a long time. All this dour and harsh attack is just bluster. It is just a show. The trouble is, he has done it so often, that many of us are beginning to realize more and more that this is the speaking pattern of the hon. member for Durban (Point). The hon. member stood up, brought out the Act and said: “This Minister does not even know his Act. He says the Hotel Board is an autonomous body, whereas in section 29, it says this and that. Every loan has to be passed by the Minister.”. Of course the hon. member does not know what he is talking about. That section only deals with the method in which the Hotel Board raises money which it loans to these hotels.

That is right.

The hon. member said every loan to an hotel has to go through the Minister. The Government said the Hotel Board could raise R20 million under guarantee and therefore the Act says that the Minister of Tourism must see that he is satisfied with the terms in which they raise this money. But he did not say that the Minister, if they loaned R5,000 to a hotel, has to go through it and check it. That is the impression the hon. member tries to give this Committee. Of course it is not so. He does not know his Act.

Read again!

I am right. All I can say, is that they have granted loan money to the extent of R400.000 to hotels and they have not come to me about one of those loans at all. They only have to come to me when they loan money to a new hotel. If they want to loan money to a new hotel, they have to come to the Minister and get his approval as well. That only is in the Act, if the hon. member will read it. There has only been one case of a new hotel, to which the Hotel Board has loaned money. I am very sorry in a way to tell the hon. member that it is in his province. They came forward and recommended to me—they have to—that an amount of money should be made available to a new hotel to be built at Hluhluwe. There was no hotel there and they said that an amount should be made available. The hon. member for Zululand knows more about it than the hon. member for Durban (Point), much more. They said: “There is no hotel in the vicinity. A hotel will serve a purpose for the Hluhluwe game reserve”. My reply was: “Go ahead with that loan”.

That is right.

Now the hon. member says “that is right”. But the hon. member tried to indicate that this was not an autonomous body, that they could only loan money to hotels if I put my stamp on each one. You know, he and I know each other very well. If he only came and talked to me in the lobby, I could have told him where he was going to put his foot in.

Let me go back to the hon. member for South Coast. I see the hon. member for Zululand in the House. The hon. member for Durban (Point) said he was carrying on a vendetta with the Natal Parks Board. I did not refer to the speech of the hon. member for South Coast at all. He was not there. I prefer to tackle him when he is here, but I will say that the hon. member for Durban (Point) should speak to the hon. member for South Coast. He is getting some very amazing ideas about his position in Natal. Yesterday he said that he was talking on behalf of the wattle growers. I said he was not, because they have the Wattle Industry Board. Then last year he talked about “my Parks Board”. Then in his speech on this Vote he said “my province”. I think that he reckons that he owns the whole of Natal. I think that it is about time that that hon. member spoke to the hon. member for South Coast and made him realize that he may have been a Pooh-Bah as an Administrator in Natal in the old days but that he is not a Pooh-Bah when it comes to Natal any more. It will do him a lot of good. I might also add that the hon. member for South Coast said that there must be a central authority. He said that South Coast has a body and that there is one in Durban and others elsewhere in Natal. He said that there must be a central authority to co-ordinate the activities of these various bodies. But I remember that the hon. member for South Coast is the member who whenever you talk about a central authority for Natal nearly hits the roof. The last thing he wants is that anybody must interfere with Natal. Yet now he talks about a central authority to co-ordinate tourism in Natal. What is really the basis of the hon. member’s attitude? I can understand why the hon. member for Zululand gets so frustrated and annoyed with the hon. member for South Coast. These days the hon. member is really talking in such a way that one never knows whether he is making a serious speech or whether he is just talking from the cuff without even considering the matter. He must not talk to me on behalf of the wattle growers, the Wattle Board, Durban or the Parks Board. I regard him as the member for South Coast and no more.

I now want to come to the hon. member for Durban (Point). He said that hotels must spend R30.000 before they can be classified. Then I told him that that is not true. He then said that he knows of hotels that have spent R30.000. I listened to the Minister of Justice when something similar was said to him. He had all the facts before him. He said that those hotels which were rebuilt completely did not have to do so.

But they had to do it.

No, they did not have to rebuild these hotels. The hon. the Minister of Justice said that they did not have to do it. He said that they did it because they thought that this was the opportunity to rebuild an hotel. They then rebuilt these hotels and of course it cost them R30.000. But that was not the cost for classification. The oost for classification could have Ibeen from R3,000 to R5,000. But they decided, and I am very glad that they did, to rebuild their hotels. But then the hon. member must not say that that is due to classification. That is where the hon. member gets his facts all wrong. I should like to say that one does expect criticism from those hon. members but that criticism must be based on facts. They must not exaggerate the position. They may get the headlines in the English language Press hut it will not get them anywhere.

But it is the truth.

It is not the truth and the hon. member knows that it is not the truth.

Mr. Chairman, on a point of order …

Order! The hon. the Minister must withdraw that.

Mr. Chairman, I withdraw those words. The hon. member is prepared to say that it is the truth but I say that it is not tire truth. I merely think the other part and my thoughts cannot be ruled out of order surely for my thoughts. [Interjections.] I am quite happy to learn and to listen but then I want the facts and not an exaggerated story. The hon. member talked about the benefits a hotel gets if it is registered and graded. He wanted to know from me all the details of the benefits. I will read them to him. Firstly there are income tax benefits, as the hon. member mentioned himself. They are very important benefits. I might tell the hon. member that many hotels would not have gone as far as rebuilding hotels to be registered, classified and graded if it were not for the income tax benefits involved. If therefore an hotel which the hon. member says he knows spends R30,000 on rebuilding their hotel it is doing it also because of these benefits of being able to write off the capital for income tax purposes. Not every business can write off capital for income tax purposes. This is a special advantage given the hotel industry. They have made use of this and I am glad that they have made use of this. That is a big advantage, far bigger than the hon. member wanted to dismiss as being very small.

Is it not two per cent for a one-star hotel?

No 4 per cent. I know that the write off is for 25 years for a one star hotel. That is the period in which the capital can be written off. In the case of a five star hotel I think it is ten years. You cannot write off your capital in the case of a factory or a store. I cannot do it in my business but the hotel industry can. I am very happy that they can do so and I hope that it encourages them to build new hotels. The hon. member must not now try to say that because it is a 2 per cent concession it does not mean anything. The hotel industry maintain that it means a great deal to them and yet the hon. member maintains that he has the ear of the hotel industry. I come now to the other benefits. Only if hotels are registered can they apply for loans. If they are not registered they cannot apply for loans. Another factor which has a negative side, is that if they are not registered with the Hotel Board after a certain date they can no longer call themselves hotels. Many places of accommodation want to call themselves hotels. Only if they are capable of being registered and graded can they call themselves hotels. There is something else which the hon. member will probably also want to dismiss but the Hotel Board itself has been of great usefulness to the hotel industry as such. The inspectors have discussed their problems with them. They do not go to them negatively to push them out of business. They discuss things with them and tell them how they can improve their service, etc. There is a very good relationship between the Hotel Board and the hotel industry. These are the things we offer. That is why hon. members opposite must not belittle the efforts of the Hotel Board.

I am not belittling them; I am asking you to set them out.

The hon. member went out of his way to try to make an issue of this question: What does the Hotel Board really offer hotels? He asked what was the good of being registered. Now I am telling him why they should be registered.

Are the benefits in regard to loans and income tax then the only benefits?

I have just told the hon. member that the contact of the Hotel Board with hotels is another benefit. They make representations to the Hotel Board where they have problems. We have had many representations through the Hotel Board which have been conveyed to me. These are contacts of a very essential nature. The training of catering staff is another matter conducted by the Hotel Board. I was going to reply to the hon. member in regard to this issue. The hon. member talked about the failure of our staff training scheme. They ran a crash scheme for two sets of coloured hotel staff at the Queens Hotel. The director of the Hotel Board has just informed me that after eight months there are still 52 of these Coloureds working in the hotel industry. I would like to have seen a 100 per cent attendance but I cannot force people to work in the hotel industry. The hotel industry is a demanding industry. It keeps people busy over the weekends and people do not like to be busy over the weekends. After eight months 52 per cent of these people are still in the employ of hotels. I might also say that the Hotel Board is negotiating with the Sultan Technical College in Durban to extend and improve their training of Asiatics for the hotel industry. They already run courses and we have asked them to extend their courses. We have told them that we will assist them to expand their courses. As a result of the Board’s negotiations the Department of Coloured Affairs will soon establish a permanent school in Bellville for the training of Coloured hotel staff. These are things that have come about as a result of the activities of the Hotel Board. Negotiations are under way with the Department of Higher Education to commence the training of Whites for administration and managerial positions in the hotel industry. This has never happened before in South Africa. The Hotel Board is also preparing certain plans for the training of Bantu. Much of this progress is the result of discussions by a national committee on hotel training which was convened by the Hotel Board representing various departments and other bodies. That is my reply to the hon. member. This body operates and it is an autonomous body; it has three hoteliers on it, and is carrying out its functions very effectively.

I now come to the hon. member for Hillbrow. I know that he is capable of making a reasonable contribution to a debate. But I was disappointed with him this afternoon. Of course, I do not mean this in any unpleasant way. I want to say to him, and here again I do not want him to think I am doing so in an abusive manner, that he should remember that when he talks to this committee that he is not a philosopher talking from a “preekstoel”. Instead, he is talking to individuals.

But why don’t you answer me?

I shall do so. But first let me tell the hon. member that his predecessor was known as the “hon. member for Highbrow” and if he goes on like this much longer he too will be known as the “hon. member for Highbrow.”

That is what nobody can say of you.

I should not like to be known as the hon. member for Highbrow When talking about Cinderella, the hon. member said that what was missing was a Prince Charming as Minister. Well, all I can say is that as one of their main critics the Opposition has the ugly sister.

Who. me?

Oh no, I do not mean the hon. member for Houghton; I am talking about the hon. member for Point. The hon. member, more or less on the same lines as the hon. member for Johannesburg (North), tried to paint the picture that we were missing the bus as far as this tourist explosion was concerned. Here, he said, was a gold industry which may ultimately disappear and here, he continued, was a source of foreign exchange which could step into the breach. Of course, that is absolute nonsense. Not for a moment do I believe that tourism as a source of earning foreign exchange can ever equal the goldmining industry in this respect. Consequently, any suggestion of that nature is quite unrealistic. But the hon. member did that merely with the object of creating the impression that this Government was missing out. But yet from year to year the volume of tourists increases. We are increasing year by year the funds to attract tourists. That is what the hon. member is so upset about, because when his Party was in power they thought they were doing wonderfully well when they spent R90,000 on Satour and brought in 68,000 tourists, including tourists from Rhodesia. But now when the volume of tourists has come to 400,000 we are missing out, he said. Now that we are spending R1½ million on Satour, we are losing out, he says. Of course, that is nonsense. If the hon. member wanted to make a political speech and attack this side of the House, that would have been fair enough, but then he should not try to pretend that he is making one of his highfalutin objective speeches. Let him rather talk like the hon. member for Durhan (Point), whose language I can understand.

I am sorry I overlooked to reply to the hon. member for Vasco earlier on. But in the course of my speech I referred to the question of research, a question which he also raised during his speech. We appreciate that research is necessary. To the hon. member for Benoni I should like to say that the R100 on the Estimates is merely a token amount. Our arrangements with the Treasury is that the moment we can come to them with a sound and approved plan that amount will be increased. Therefore this R100 is purely a token amount, indicating that we intend conducting a research into the tourist industry. I want to thank the hon. member for Vasco for his remarks about the 21st anniversary of Satour. To the credit of my colleagues on the other side of the House I must say that Satour was incorporated during the period when they held office. However, fortunately for the country, this Government took over in 1948 and were far more generous with Satour than hon. members opposite were when they were in power. The hon. member also referred to the Kuneni and the Caborra Bassa schemes and the many immigrant Portuguese that would eventually live there. He said that we could attract these as tourists. I shall go into it but from what I know of the Portuguese in Mocambique the position is that when they get leave they go back home, to Portugal of course, this in understandable and therefore it might be a little bit difficult to get them to come to South Africa as tourists.

The hon. member for Zululand answered certain comments made by the hon. member for South Coast. Apart from that. I do not think he raised any question which requires a reply from me.

He did not say anything worth noting.

Oh no. He said quite a lot in reply to the hon. member for South Coast. As far as the hon. member for Springs is concerned, I quite agree with him that local authorities must make a greater effort to attract tourists to their respective areas. The hon. member for Simonstown said they were not doing enough, and I quite agree with him. In fact, some local authorities are doing nothing at all. However, it is quite another thing for the Central Government to force a policy on to local authorities.

I said the Central Government should assist them.

Can the hon. member tell me which local authorities I should assist? After all, there are so many of them in this country. He may think that his own constituency has a claim but there are a lot of other members in this House who feel the same way about theirs.

But is your Department able to give any assistance whatever?

No, not capital assistance in the form which the hon. member has in mind. What we did do however, was to arrange with Treasury that the legislation regarding financial relations be amended in order to enable provincial authorities to do something in this direction. Of course, provincial authorities themselves have certain amenities —like the Blyde River Oanyon, and so has the divisional council—like the caravan camp at Miller’s Point. These amenities must be decided by the local authority and their provincial authority. It is very easy to say that the central authority must do the promotion, but then I can say that the central authority will not want to do that without the right to see what is being done with the financial assistance given by it to local authorities. But the central authority itself has actually developed tourist amenities. The National Parks Board is run by the central authority: it is paid for by the central authority, and it is not only the Kruger Park. I think there are eight different parks and they will probably be expanded. But when it comes to the local authorities and the provincial authorities they themselves have the power to deal with this matter. It does not have to go to the central authority as the hon. member for Simonstown thinks.

Take the case in False Bay. If the idea is to have a deep-sea fishing harbour or a small-boat launching site, which local authorities there are financially able to provide those facilities?

There is already a Kalk Bay harbour, and there is the Simonstown harbour. I do not think that in that respect False Bay is so badly off. The hon. member said that there was not anything else there; but at Buffels Bay they have a cement ramp; they have something, and that sort of thing can be developed more and more. Does the hon. member consider that the central authority should build a harbour at Miller’s Point for example to cater for boats belonging to private people?

And for overseas tourists, of course.

Does the hon. member think that it is the responsibility of the central authority?

No local authority can afford it.

Sir, False Bay has been going for a long time and I have never heard that policy advocated by hon. members on that side of the House. The construction of a harbour, where it is an economic asset from the point of view of harbour dues, is a different matter, and the construction of a fishing harbour in False Bay, a fishing harbour which is viable, is another matter, and the central authority goes into that. But I cannot justify expenditure such as that envisaged by the hon. member merely to accommodate holiday boats and that sori of thing. The suggestion has been made to me not only by people in False Bay but by people along the whole of the coast line, and perhaps the hon. member can tell me where I should start and where I should finish.

That is the trouble; you do not know.

As far as that is concerned, I certainly would not know. The hon. member has been a member of this House for a long time; he sat on the Government benches for years, and I have never heard him sponsor that sort of expenditure by the Central Government.

I just want to say to the hon. member for Benoni that I have noted the points raised by him. I think that basically, from the South African point of view, there is tremendous room for our people in the country and in the cities to get together—but they should go from the cities to the country rather than from the country to the cities. The cities have not got the amenities that the country can offer. If there is some way in which this Department can assist in creating that flow of holidaymakers. I will most certainly investigate it. I thank the hon. member also for his remarks about the Department and the report and for his statement that we have now established the basis for tourism.

Vote put and agreed to.

Revenue Vote 39,—Sport and Recreation, R335,000:

At the outset I would like to say that we appreciate the fact that the Department supplied us with a preview of the annual report for last year. This Department has been in existence for approximately 18 months. The report is most informative on the principles on which the Department is working. It also gives certain information about grants and the intentions of the Department. As I have said, we appreciate the fact that this information was made available to us although the report as such has not been tabled because it has not been printed. It was useful to have it before the Vote came up for discussion.

Mr. Chairman, I think we must congratulate our sportsmen and sportswomen in South Africa on the results they achieved during this last year. I think the past year has been an exceptional one from that point of view. These achievements will culminate shortly in the presentation at a suitable function of the State Persident’s Sport Awards, which are being awarded on this occasion to Mrs. Angela Harrison (hockey), Bob Hewitt and Frew McMillan (tennis) and Denis Lindsay (cricket).

Since this is the first occasion on which Parliament as such can express an opinion about this matter, I think that I voice the view of all members when I say that we in Parliament congratulate our sportsmen and sportswomen on their achievements. They are among the best ambassadors that this country can have overseas. I think that our sportsmen and sportswomen generally who go abroad, either as individuals or as members of teams, not only win renown for themselves but they also bring great credit to this country.

The position at the moment appears to be that the Department, in the short time that it has been in existence, has been making money available for coaching and training projects, for financing administrative bodies, for tours to this country and tours overseas, for bringing experts and sending out experts, for certain apparatus and publications and for a little research. I think this year the Government is setting aside in the Estimates R165,000 for that sort of item whereas last year it was R136,000. The amount to be voted for the Department is R335,000 as compared to R250,000 for the previous year. Sir, one might say that the Department is being run on a shoestring budget because R335,000 is not a great sum of money and in the circumstances it is understandable, but I do not think that this allows the Department to do what should be done in the field of sport and recreation because it has a long way to go. The first point that I want to mention in regard to sport is that I think the sooner a sport centre can be created the better. This matter was mentioned last year by the hon. member for Johannesburg (North) and others. I believe that that would give a tremendous fillip to sport and that it would facilitate training and make it easier to organize sport in this country. We know that in Britain there is the Crystal Palace centre, where expert training is available in the various fields of sport; in Scandinavia there is a centre which does the same, and I think in America there are similar facilities, although I do not know much about the American situation. I believe that if an appeal was made to all sporting bodies in this country to raise funds on a R-for-R basis, the Government contributing R1 for every R1 contributed by the sporting bodies, you would raise sufficient money to meet the capital costs of such a scheme. I think it is high time that this is done in the sporting field, and I can see nothing but good resulting from it. Such a centre would be a growth point for sport in this country. The establishment of such a centre would save sport liaison officers a tremendous amount of trouble. At the present time I think liaison officers, speaking from memory, had to attend about 282 meetings during the year. If we had such a centre, many of these people could be brought together there and things explained to them. Many of our young people could be trained there and I think that nothing but good could result from it.

Then I want to deal with the question of recreation. It seems to me that this is the sphere in which the least has been done by the Department, perhaps because it has not been in existence long and secondly because of the lack of funds. It would appear that as far as sport is concerned the Department is well buttressed by many organizations outside. As far as recreation is concerned we have the National Advisory Committee for Recreation which has had a checkered career. It has been passed from Education to Planning and from Planning back to Sport, with the result that it has not really got off the ground. Sir, my time is limited and I can only make one or two suggestions. I believe that there should be a survey of space available in this country. We believe that we have any amount of space to do anything but in fact I am informed that as far as Natal is concerned, there are only 16 miles available on the coast for further development. That is the only ground which has not yet been taken up. It is high time therefore that some sort of planning took place with a view to providing recreation for the present population and for our future population in this country. For instance, there is a national playground at the foot of Table Mountain; at any rate, it has been proclaimed as such. I do not know what has been done in that connection and I do not know what influence the Minister has in that respect. This situation applies throughout the Republic. It is also the older people, the people who have reached the age where they no longer actively participate in sport, that we should take an interest in, particularly in this day and age where the emphasis is more on leisure than ever before. I believe that the Minister would be doing great work if his Department would give some attention to this question of providing more recreational facilities for the people of this Republic.

Mr. Chairman, I do not want to follow up on what the hon. Chief Whip of the Opposition said in his speech. He put forward certain suggestions and I think that the hon. the Minister will reply to them himself. Sir, outdoor life is deeply rooted in the traditions of the South African. Whenever the South African seeks what is significant and glorious in his heritage, then he seeks it not in old ruins but in nature; he seeks it in our mountains; he seeks it along our rivers; he seeks it in our plains and he seeks it along our coast. He does so because our history is one of discovery, of clashes and of dearly-bought occupation; but this heritage is more than simply the land itself. The love for and contact with the land has always played an important and essential role in the formation and the development of the South African’s character and philosophy. It has also ensured the fitness of our people. But we are losing the essential resources. As a result of the industrial explosion in South Africa, the greatest percentage of the population is at present concentrated in a few large centres; there they are being crowded together in flats, in dwellings and in areas where there is little space for relaxation. If one drives out to the recreational resorts near Cape Town over the week-ends, and one sees how congested these are then one realizes for the first time how serious the situation has already become and one shudders to think what the situation will be in the year 2000 if active steps are not taken now to combat this danger. That is why it is the duty and the task of the State to rectify this unfortunate state of affairs and to bring home the seriousness of the matter to local authorities and to the population itself. There are many bodies and many people who do not realize how late in the day it has become for South Africa in this regard. Let me mention one example. I have here a report which appeared a few weeks ago in the Cape Times—

If that should happen, the community would be committing an offence against the children of Claremont. We so easily forget to-day. in our pursuit of economic gain, the finer and the more important things of life. Are we not doing to-day precisely what Thoreau once warned against when he said—

During the past year two American experts in the field of recreation visited this country of ours, and I want to read to you what they had to say about the situation here—

Professor Wayne van Huss, a physical fitness expert, said that South Africa must not make the same mistake as the Americans by using its large open spaces injudiciously. New expansions must not be planned without sport and recreational facilities. During the past week Professor Wayne van Huss said in Pretoria that it is absolutely essential that sport facilities should not be neglected in the laying out of new expansions. He said that it has now been proved that young children should be subjected as far as possible to strenuous exercise. Their capacities must be utilized to the full in order to ensure their own protection in future.

In America the position to-day is so deplorable that in 1958 Congress appointed a committee under the chairmanship of Laurence Rockefeller to advise on this matter. This committee tabled its report in 1962. This report. under the title “Outdoor Recreation in America” can be studied profitably by those who are interested in this matter, as well as by those whose approach to this tremendous problem is an unsympathetic one. In the short time at my disposal, I cannot quote extensively from this report, but I am going to quote a few paragraphs. On page 7 it reads—

It goes further and states—

This committee recommended that the Government should assist bodies to establish these recreational areas. They state—

Now I am pleased to be able to say that our young Department of Sport and Recreation is tackling this matter on the basis as set out in this report, and as recommended by this committee in America, and I want to pay tribute to the hon. the Minister and his handful of able and enthusiastic officials who have already achieved so much in the short while they have been in existence. I am only sorry that the funds of this Department and the manpower at its disposal are so limited. They can only penetrate the top layer, but they definitely cannot delve deeply into this problem. That is why I would welcome it if this Department could, during the course of the year, grow into a fully fledged Department, so that this problem, which constitutes a real danger to south Africa and the people who will come after us, can be solved by means of more funds and resources. [Time expired.]

I will not comment on the matter raised by the hon. member for Graaff-Reinet. because in the time at my disposal I should like to raise two entirely different matters with the hon. the Minister of Sport.

We on this side of the House have always maintained that the administration of sport and the staging of sporting events should be left entirely to the bodies conducting those particular sports. I think hon. members here will remember that last year in this House in a debate we pleaded with the Government to allow the sporting bodies to conduct their sports in their own particular way. It is, therefore, rather disturbing to find that as the result of a statement made by the hon. the Minister of Sport, a certain amount of confusion and consternation has arisen in the minds of certain sporting bodies: and when I say this, I mean of course in relation to the proposed South African Games. You see, Sir, on the one hand we find that the Olympic Committee, after very careful consideration, took a firm decision that the South African Games should be staged in Bloemfontein in 1970. and then we find the Minister of Sport coming out with a statement in which he says that the Games will be held in 1969. I want to say immediately that I think the South African Games is a very laudable project, and I hope that it will be a great success, but I believe the time is opportune for the hon. the Minister to give us a clear statement and tell us how his Department is involved in the staging of these particular games? Because there is no doubt that this statement of his has caused a certain amount of confusion. We find various headlines in the Press. We find, for instance, that Mr. Braun, the Chairman of the Olympic Committee, says that sporting bodies need have no fear that there will be a sport takeover by the State. I want to say that I do not believe for one minute that the Government intends taking over sport. I merely raise this matter to show that we have to be very careful when making statements in regard to sport.

Then, too, we find that it was originally decided to have South African sporting games for both sections of the community, for the Whites and the non-white section, and we find, too, that the South African Games for the non-Whites have now been transferred to Umlazi in Natal. Now, I have no particular objection to these Games being held in Umlazi, but I would like to know whether the Department of Sport had a hand in this particular matter, because obviously this might be misinterpreted in certain quarters. I believe the Minister can give us an explanation and I would be very pleased indeed to hear what he has to say in regard to this matter.

Then I should like to raise the matter of the National Sports Fund. As you know, Sir, this fund was made possible by a very magnificent grant by Messrs. Shell of South Africa. They made a grant of R150,000, and I think they should be complimented on the spirit they have shown in making this grant. I want to say, too, that I welcome the creation of a fund of this sort, but I believe that it should be taken very much further. There is no doubt that there are many other commercial and industrial concerns who would like to contribute to a fund like this, and I believe that the Government itself should set an example here and offer to donate rand for rand to build this fund up to at least R½ million. I have a very good reason for saying this, because you know. Sir, that through no fault of their own various sports in South Africa find themselves completely isolated in the international sphere, and whereas one would expect any sport to look after itself in normal times and to find its own money when either inviting teams to come here or sending teams overseas, the position to-day is not normal. I think the Minister will agree with me when I say that any sport in South Africa needs a certain amount of international competition if it is to progress. We find that many sports are affected in this way, through no fault of their own. We find, for instance, that we are out of the Olympic Games to-day, and here I want to say that it is a great pity that the International Olympic Committee bowed to certain threats and called for a new vote, the result of which was that South Africa is now excluded from participation in the Olympic Games. We also know that football in South Africa to-day is completely cut off from international competition. We know that repeated attempts have (been made to have other sports like tennis, weightlifting, wrestling and athletics barred from international competitions. I mention this because obviously these particular sports will have to find funds somewhere either to send members overseas or to invite other teams or individuals to compete against them. I believe that the Government should give a lead in this matter. It has been shown already that there is an opportunity of getting money from commercial and industrial concerns, and I want to plead with the hon. the Minister to give this matter of donating money on a rand-for-rand basis his very serious attention.

Mr. Chairman, we are grateful for the new attitude adopted by the hon. Opposition as regards the Department of Sport. Two years ago they objected to the small amount which was then placed on the Estimates for the first time.

No.

I see the hon. member has a guilty conscience. He did not object at that time, but I notice that he is still feeling ashamed of the way in which his colleagues behaved themselves. I say we are grateful for the change that has come over that side of the House; apparently the winds of change have affected them as well. I find it interesting that the hon. member should actually plead for a contribution to be made by the Government on the rand-for-rand basis during the ensuing year in respect of contributions such as, for example, this one of R150,000 and contributions made by other business undertakings.

Are you opposed to that suggestion?

No, I support this suggestion and I am very grateful for it, but I want to ask the hon. member, who is so arrogant, whether he conferred with the hon. members on that side of the House who spoke about financial matters earlier this year. They said the Government was spending too much and the hon. member now pleads that the Government should spend more. I say it is gratifying that we have had this change of attitude. It reminds you of the old saying, “Experience makes fools wise”. I am glad the Opposition has now reached the stage where it is beginning to appreciate good sense.

The hon. member for Johannesburg (North) also raised a few other matters. The tenor of his remarks was more or less the same as that of certain English newspapers when commenting on the fact that the date for the South African Games was changed from 1970 to 1969. He reproached the Government and the hon. the Minister as if the latter had virtually taken matters in their own hands and had decided to change the date. All of us regret the fact that South Africa may not participate in the Olympic Games in Mexico City this year owing to the pressure exerted by certain people. It is also a fact that our sportsmen, while they were hoping that it would, in fact, be possible for us to participate in the Olympic Games, achieved better results during the past year than they have ever achieved before. We have in mind, for example, the achievements of Paul Nash, Karen Muir and several other athletes, not to mention the sportsmen who will be honoured early next month in Cape Town when the State President’s awards will be awarded to them. These athletes achieved (better results than ever before and we are proud of them. Should we have waited until 1970 for these athletes to have the opportunity of showing the world and South Africa on a national level what they and their country are capable of?

Who should decide?

That is precisely the point. The hon. member mentioned the South African Olympics and National Games Association and said they had decided that the Games would take place in 1970 and that the Games would be for Whites and non-Whites. However, that decision had been taken before it was decided that South Africa may not participate in the Olympic Games. Should that decision have remained in force regardless? Should the Government not have taken the lead? After all, is it not one of the functions of this Minister and the department to establish liaison with sports organizations and to guide them? I think the hon. the Minister has provided sensible guidance in this regard. Should we have sat back with folded arms until 1970 before we held our national games?

But the Minister should not have arranged it.

The question of arrangement is quite a different matter. To my mind the hon. member does not quite appeciate this matter. The difficulty with this hon. member is that he always wants to drag politics into these matters and this is why he objects to the fact that the Minister announced that the games which will take place in Bloemfontein next year will be for Whites only. He complained about the fact that the games would not (be for both Whites and non-Whites. Anybody who is interested in sports, knows that good facilities are provided at Umlazi for nonWhites and that this is not the case in Bloemfontein. Does he want an inferior sports meeting to be held for our non-Whites simply because it was decided at that time that the games for non-Whites would take place there as well?

We have read in the newspapers about the frustration among our non-white sportsmen as a result of the decision that we may not participate in Mexico City. Such an athlete as Humphrey Khosi said that he simply could not understand the decision taken by the Olympics Committee; that he could not understand how they could shunt South Africa aibout in such a manner. He said that it actually hurt him to think that it was black people who were responsible for the fact that South Africa and people such as he could not participate in the Games. For that reason the best opportunity should be created for them as well, and the best opportunity according to the South African pattern and an opportunity which the non-Whites will appreciate, will not be an obscure sports meeting held at the same time as the South African Games in Bloemfontein, but their own sports meeting held in Umlazi, where the necessary facilities for the nonWhites exist.

I do not want to say anything more about this matter. I want to associate myself with hon. members, inter alia, also with the hon. member for Von Brandis, who congratulated the Minister and his department on this report which they have been able to furnish in the short period of two years, and on the enormous field which this young department has to cover. It is evident from the report how active the department is and over what wide field it is making its influence felt. I want to associate myself with the hon. member for Graaff-Reinet, who said it was time to think of expanding this department so that it will no longer be a department which is subordinate and neglected. In view of the position which is developing in the Republic where we have greater concentrations of people and also young people in our cities, this serves as the very reason why the activities of this Department should expand. Personally, it would give me much pleasure if the staff can also be expanded and if the department can be given a higher status. In the times in which we are living we need the large variety of activities which the department is at present undertaking and which the hon. member for Graaff-Reinet described. I make bold to say that if we succeed in activating our young people both in the field of sport and in a wider field of recreation and if we could help them to get away from the force of our expanding urban populations which is hemming them in on all sides, we would not have the conditions which are developing in our countries of origin in Europe at present.

I also want to say something about the necessity of sports centres. We have advanced a plea for such centres before now and the hon. member for Von Brandis also mentioned this matter this afternoon. If the idea to establish one or more sports centres in our country can be put into practice, I think the Department will be in a much better position to fulfil its function as regards the training of coaches and sports administrators. Our sports activities will then be placed on a firm and sound basis, and the result will be that sports organizations will be less inclined to come to the Department for financial assistance, but that their own activities will seize the imagination of the people and that they will become financially strong as a result of that.

Allow me to say a few words about the State President’s sports award. This was also referred to by the hon. member for Von Brandis. These awards for 1967 will be presented in about four days’ time in the Castle here in Cape Town. Last year these awards were presented at the State President’s residence, on which occasion the acting State President was present. Having particular regard to the circumstances which developed in respect of the Olympic Games and since we want to honour our sportsmen who have achieved great things and since we want to encourage them to continue to do so, we should see to it that when these particularly fine awards are presented, the representation thereof should also be something special. When the presentation takes place early in June at the Castle, the services of even only a small group of members of our Defence Force may also be used at the ceremony. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I do not wish to follow the line which the debate is taking at the moment, except to say I think the hon. the Minister is making a mistake to have the Sout’i African Games at Bloemfontein and at Umlazi.

I believe that the correct procedure is that the Department of Sport should leave the organizers to run the show and to do what they want to do with it. I believe it is a mistake for the Government in the long run to interfere in any way because, after all, the organizers do know the requirements of the sport which is affected. They also know the laws of the country and the problems under which we suffer. I would therefore lend my support to the plea that the hon. the Minister should leave the sporting bodies to run the show and, in plain English, to mind his own business.

The other point which I want to discuss with the hon. the Minister is one of long standing between him and me. It is the attitude of the Department of Sport towards the other races in this country, namely the Coloureds, Indians and Bantu. During the previous session I raised this question with the hon. the Minister under this Vote and he gave me a very unsatisfactory reply. He said it depended on the Ministers of the Departments concerned to make application to him for any financial support which may be required for non-Whites from the Department of Sport. I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether that approach is also not an incorrect one. As the Minister for Sport he should initiate action and take the lead in dealing with the other departments, because I am convinced after the past 12 months, that there is a crying need and a necessity for races, other than white, to enjoy the financial support of the Government in sporting activities in this country. There are many non-white sportsmen of very high calibre and competence. In nearly every case they have to leave the country, before their merits are really acknowledged, and before they get any reward at all for their skill and diligence. I believe that if the hon. the Minister would be the patron—if I may make that suggestion—of the movement in connection with non-white sport, he would take a tremendous step forward in this country, and at the same time rid ourselves of half of the sociological problems, with which we are faced because of the inability of Coloured persons, Bantu and Indians to enjoy organized sport and other individual sports. One has only to look at the schools, and Coloured schools in particular, to see the woeful lack of sporting facilities. As the hon. the Minister knows, I have had a lot of experience in one particular city where this problem was tackled. I believe that if we were to tackle the problem of the occupation of our youth, to let them work off some of their surplus energy chasing tennis, cricket and footballs and to let them take part in athletics and swimming, we would begin to see some daylight in this big problem, with which we are faced in regard to the non-white people. It is a matter of deep concern to those of us who work and move among these people. We see the way they struggle to form sports clubs and to get money together to finance their activities. It is quite rewarding to see that when they do get assistance, they do not only play very well, but that they also become better citizens. I think that this is the line which the hon. the Minister of Sport should follow. During the time that this portfolio has been in existence the hon. the Minister has confined himself exclusively—and I hope that he will say that this is not so to-day —to white sport. With that I have no complaint. South African sportsmen excel in all fields and I think it is problematical, as to whether or not they do need the financial assistance which they get. All sports among Whites in this country, which are conducted properly and organized on a satisfactory basis are money spinners, with one or two minor exceptions. The same does not apply in regard to the Coloured community. In terms of Government policy, townships with areas set aside for the benefit of their youth are established. The sporting facilities for youths which existed in the old areas, which they occupied, do not get transferred with them during their removal to new townships. I do not suggest that this is a function of this Minister. But what I do say is that it is his function to intercede and plead with his colleagues who, when approving the transfer of communities, should ensure that adequate facilities exist before these people are moved and that they do not have to travel miles, most of them on foot, to attend a football or cricket practice, or play a game of tennis far from where they are housed and settled. I believe that the hon. the Minister could do the country a service and himself a lot of good, if he would act as the intermediary between these other departments and the communities concerned. I am inundated with requests from Coloured persons all over the province, and not only in the province, for financial assistance. Hon. members know the old gag: “Make him the vicePresident”. Well, I am now the patron of most of these sporting bodies, and so I am in fairly close contact with them and the difficulties under which they suffer. I want to repeat the story I told the other day, when the Minister of Community Development evaded me. Basil D’Oliveira, the cricketer, came to play cricket in this country before and with his own people and, thinking to make a few rand, they asked for a ground in an area which happened to be a private ground in a white area, in order to play a cricket match. There were many white sportsmen, as the hon. the Minister well knows, who admire and appreciate a good batsman or a bowler. They wanted to see this gentleman playing. To their confusion the permit arrived the day before the match. We shall not go into the details; that is a sad enough story on its own, but it stated that the match was for Coloureds only. So there we found ourselves with the Coloured community in this quandary. A side, which would include this gentleman, had been selected to give everybody an opportunity of seeing him play and perhaps seeing what an example he is of how to play cricket. But they were denied the opportunity. I do not want to make a political speech on that sort of thing, because this is not the occasion. I have dealt with that aspect before. But I do appeal to the hon. the Minister to realize that the whole country expects him to be a Minister of Sport, and not a Minister of Sport for one section only. That is how it appears at the present moment. I hope to-day that he will rise and tell me that I am wrong, that he does take care of all the other groups of people, that he does have plans, that he is giving consideration to certain aspects of matters which affect them, and that there will be an improvement within the next 12 months. If he can do that, I would be a very happy man. What is more important is that the Coloured community will be happy too. That does not only apply to them; it applies to the Indians and to a greater extent to the Bantu. I suggested to the hon. the Minister a year or two ago, that he should visit the city with which I am very familiar, and see what that local authority actually has done for the provision of sporting facilities for non-Whites. I have listened to the debate here this afternoon, only to find that there is mention only of Whites. I believe that these other people are entitled to a share of the cake, even though it be a small topiece to begin with. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, it was indeed a pleasant experience for me this afternoon when the hon. member for Von Brandis brought a refreshing atmosphere into this House during the debate on South African sporting affairs. It was, of course, a great pity that the hon. members for Johannesburg (North) and Karoo made a few inept remarks which detracted from this refreshing spirit. If the hon. the Minister of Sport had failed to realize the necessity for games to be held as soon as possible after we had been denied participation in the Olympic Games, and had not set up our own Games in Bloemfontein for our people, it would have been a great pity. On the other hand, the hon. member for Karoo maintains that very little or nothing is being done for our non-Whites by this Department. It is a great pity that the hon. member should have made such irresponsible remarks here, because just a few moments ago mention was made here of the large-scale Games which are going to be organized for our non-Whites in Umlazi. He also knows about the large-scale Games which are going to be organized for the Republic Festival in which non-Whites will also have an opportunity of participating.

What about the funds which will be made available to them to attend the sports meetings in Umlazi?

Yes, it will cost them practically nothing. And yet he comes here now to try to antagonize our non-Whites once more. I wonder what people he is serving now? But I shall leave the matter at that. We hear that story quite often from the hon. member for Karoo. I think he is doing the people whom he is supposed to serve a very great disservice.

Sport is accepted in the civilized world as a very extensive phenomenon. This is the position to-day throughout the civilized world. I think we can mention no better example of this than Germany, where sport enjoys tremendous interest among the German nation, so much so that they say that in 1963 there were as many as 28,000 well-organized sports clubs with a membership of 4f million. Over and above this number 5 million pupils participated in the annual federal games. I am just mentioning this phenomenon as an example of the tremendous importance which sport is occupying in the civilized world. In my own modest opinion this wide interest in sport in modern times can be attributed to the fact that the nations of the world have to a large extent actually become urban nations, to such an extent that where the urban population of the world came to approximately 21 million 100 years ago, an estimated number of more than 500 million people inhabited the cities of the world in 1950. It is a fact that this pattern was also followed in South Africa. Where ours used to be a rural population who enjoyed the revelry and advantages of rural games and rural relaxation, these things have practically died out altogether or have changed altogether. That is why I think that our people in South Africa see in the activities which sport and recreation in modern times offer them, the satisfaction of their emotional and social needs. That is why sport and recreation have become so deep-rooted in our South African way of life. I do not think I can put it better than one of the well-known sports writers did the other day under the title “The Romance of Sport”, when he said: “Loyalty, courtesy, courage and humour are all part of sport and in its finest exponents I find the qualities which can make my world a saner one.” I think that with these words he clearly expresses the importance of sport and the immense benefit and influence which it has on the lives of all people. Therefore I want to say that we can accept the fact that as far as modern man in modern cities is concerned, sport can satisfy the needs of our people. But we cannot leave it at that, because sport must be channelled in the right direction and only then can it be of lasting value to our people.

It is a fact that all South Africans were very pleased when the establishment of this Department was announced on 1st July, 1966. They were not only pleased about the establishment of the Department, but also about the elevated objectives embodied in that establishment, because it was said at that time that it would be the task of this Department to promote sport and recreation in South Africa, in order that the South African nation could always remain a strong one. The modus operandi which was suggested was the modern one which is followed by most of the civilized countries of the world. It covered various facets, but the most important facets were on the one hand the promotion of training and coaching projects and on the other hand the promotion of the sound administration of sport. Since the Department has now been in existence for approximately two years, it is interesting to note that this Department has also operated along these recognized lines and that the Department places the emphasis in the first place on coaching projects on the one hand and on the promotion of the sound administration of sport on the other hand. It is true that these two facets go hand in hand. If one neglects one of them the other suffers. A sports club may have a very good coach but if its administration leaves something to be desired, it will not accomplish much and it will not achieve much in the way of results. Therefore these two facets must go hand in hand: The one in the first place to make provision for and to render assistance in regard to the establishment of good coaching and training projects, and on the other hand the promotion of sound administration. Along these lines our Department has, as I have said, followed the fine example which is followed in well-known Western countries which have already gone far along this road. It is also interesting, when one considers how young this Department is, just to mention a few examples of how far they have already progressed along this fine road. In this connection I want to refer to the best-known instances of assistance rendered by this Department. I am referring to our gymnastics, netball, the South African Paraplegic Association, and so on. If we want to go into details it is perhaps desirable to refer to one good example only. As far as gymnastics is concerned, no less than 17 coaching courses were arranged. Through the agency of the Department a Swedish gymnast could come to South Africa to provide the necessary guidance. This is the course which the Department has followed in respect of virtually all our well-known sports, but they did not leave the matter at that. They have also been giving the necessary attention to the other important aspects, namely the training of sports leaders for our sport. It is a fact, and everyone knows this, that a good sports leader and a good sports administrator are in point of fact synonymous. The one cannot be separated from the other. It was essential that the Department never left these two aspects in abeyance. In this connection I want to associate myself with what the previous speaker said, and that is that as a result of the great achievements of the Department and the correct directing principles which the Department has been following, I believe that the necessary status will be given to this Department and its officials within the foreseeable future. If our Department trains sports leaders, then surely it goes without saying that these people will carry their skills and knowledge not only into their sports associations, but also into their sphere of work or the community of which they are members. In this way we shall systematically build a well-ordered sports organization and a well-ordered recreation organization. [Time expired.]

Business suspended at 6.30 p.m. and resumed at 8.05 p.m.

Evening Sitting

Sir, the hon. the Minister has had three votes running consecutively—Forestry. Tourism and Sport—and I was wondering whether next year he could not reverse the order so that we may have sport for tourists in the forest. The hon. member for Port Elizabeth (Central) was the last speaker on that side of the House and I do want to say again that I do not think hon. members on this side introduced anything of a political nature in their speeches. They were speaking as sportsmen. I am glad he mentioned how many million sportsmen there were overseas, especially in West-Germany, to show the importance of sport in the world. Sir, I should like to ask the hon. the Minister whether the games that will be played at Umlazi will be open to all non-white races? Did I also understand the Minister correctly that his Department put up the cash for the Umlazi stadium? I ask this because we have no annual departmental report from his Department and we are therefore in the dark. Sir, I would like to put forward a plea this evening on behalf of a group of sportsmen and sportswomen who seem to be forgotten officially. I am referring to the members of rifle clubs, pistol clubs, clay-pigeon shooting and air rifle clubs. These people do not only practise for self-defence purposes, but more and more of them turn to this type of sport for recreational purposes, and they should be given some encouragement by giving grants to properly vetted clubs. To quote an example. A large town like Pietermaritzburg does not even have a rifle range at the present time for practice purposes. Not only do the members of these clubs become expert marksmen but they serve a dual purpose. By learning how to handle firearms expertly they could be very useful to the country in the event of any hostilities. Rifle clubs throughout South Africa usually arrange South African championship meetings annually, and clay-pigeon shooting clubs do the same. They occasionally send teams overseas to compete in international events. They have done exceedingly well at these competitions, quite apart from the fact that they have acted as South African ambassadors. Sir, it is an expensive pastime to compete in these events, and these people should be assisted financially.

Then, Sir, I would like to support one aspect of sport which the hon. member for Von Brandis mentioned and that is big game hunting.

That was on the Tourism Vote.

It can also be sport. In view of the fact that the animal population of our game reserves is rapidly increasing, to such an extent that it is becoming a problem, thanks to our conservation officers—the Natal Parks Board, for example, has managed to preserve the famous white Rhino—is it not possible to set aside game areas adjoining the game reserves where oversea hunters can shoot trophies under expert supervision? The meat of these animals could be made available to the Bantu in the nearby reserves.

That would not be sport; that would be slaughter.

Botswana has proclaimed a very large game reserve around the Okavango swamps, and adjoining that they have these shooting blocks which are used by professional oversea hunters to shoot trophies. This has proved a great financial success to that country. Sir, this would attract wealthy tourists and sportsmen from overseas. The countries to the north of South Africa are no longer protecting their game herds for this purpose: on the contrary, they are allowing the unnecessary destruction of their game herds through lack of proper control. On account of this South Africa should grasp the opportunity of attracting hunters from overseas who would otherwise have gone to the Central African hunting grounds.

In conclusion, is the hon. the Minister satisfied with his oversea advertising campaign? I am given to understand that everything is controlled from Pretoria and that the adverrising campaign is very often unsuitable for the oversea country concerned. How often has one or other of the Department’s chief liaison officers visited the oversea offices?

Order! Which Vote is the bon. member discussing?

Sport.

That matter falls under Tourism.

Sir, from this side of the House I also wish to congratulate all our sportsmen and sportswomen in South Africa and those who have competed overseas on the wonderful job they have done in their respective fields of sport.

The hon. member who has just resumed his seat, has played his own game and I leave him in the competent hands of the hon. the Minister. In the few minutes at my disposal I should like to request the hon. the Minister’s attention for a specific kind of sport, a sport which has developed dramatically in South Africa in the past four or five years. I am referring here to the colourful sport of boating in all its various facets, a sport which is increasingly succeeding in drawing hardened old landlubbers to our lagoons and larger dams over the weekends. Our ordinary people, especially in the family context, are to-day discovering in increasing numbers the pleasure and the challenge which a small boat on a large dam of water or a lagoon can offer one. In addition it is a fact that all the new synthetic materials which have come on the market recently and which have brought the construction of these smaller boats and also of sails within reach of the ordinary man, are causing this sport to be practised on an ever-increasing scale. At most of the large dams and lakes in our country, active sailing clubs are to be found in ever-increasing numbers to-day. As against fewer than 30 clubs ten years ago, there are 55 recognized sailing clubs in the Republic today, with an estimated membership of more than 10,000. The total value of pleasure craft in South Africa to-day amounts to more than R15 million, and about R8 million is spent on this sport every year. In South Africa to-day there are an estimated 10.000 ordinary small motor-boats. There are 4,500 sailing boats and more than 500 yachts in our country. There are altogether about 130 boating clubs in South Africa alone. Mr. Chairman, at the recent national yachting regatta held at the Langebaan Lagoon it was noticeable what large numbers of people turned up for this sport. At this national regatta about 300 different yachts competed, and the yachts which were used there differed in value from about R300 per boat to R6.000 per boat. Apart from this, it is also true that in the past few years South Africa has made its name internationally in the sport of sailing. I think that at the past six Olympic Games South Africa was strongly represented and made a name for itself.

I want to plead here for one matter in respect of this rapidly expanding sport. The Department of Planning established a standing committee at the end of last year in respect of the planning of lakes in South Africa, a permanent so-called lakes committee, which at this stage is charged with the planning of our lakes at places such as Knysna, Langebaan, the Verloren Valley and others. I am aware of the fact that this committee of the Department of Planning is at the moment giving its attention to these lakes. I think that we should see to it that in respect of this particular sport we have representation on this lakes committee of the Department from the very beginning. At the recent national regatta which took place in March, it struck me that at least four international yachtsmen took part, one from West Germany, two from the United States and one from Denmark. I had the privilege of talking to all these persons at this particular occasion and they all focused attention on the tremendous potential of especially certain lakes in South Africa for this particular kind of sport. Therefore I want to plead with the hon. the Minister that he should see to it that the Department of Sport will have permanent representation on this lakes committee of the Department of Planning with a view to planning this type of sport correctly from the beginning. There is, for example, the question of quay facilities and slipways for the drawing out of the larger boats and numerous other aspects affecting this particular kind of sport. I think that, as far as this developing sport is concerned, it would be a good thing if we planned correctly from the beginning and if the Department took another look at all our lakes in South Africa. Here is a colourful sport which, in our beautiful country with its abundance of sunshine and space, can be planned at an early stage and can become one of our greatest assets. I think that we must attend to the matter at an early stage, because it would be a tragedy if we again had to come along with planning after the event as regards this rapidly developing sport. Therefore I want to make a kind appeal to the hon. the Minister to see to it that the Department of Sport will be very well represented on this standing committee of the Department of Planning.

At the outset I should like to add my appreciation to that which has already been expressed to the hon. the Minister and his Department for the very fine work which has been done in the course of a short period. I also want to congratulate them on the good annual report which will shortly be available in its official form and which will give us a very good indication of what has lately been done by this Department. To-night I want to predict that this Department of Sport will still be called on in the future to make a very important contribution to making especially the youth of South Africa able-bodied. We must never underestimate or disregard this important task of theirs. We want to express our appreciation to the Department for the very sympathetic reception one gets from them when representations for aid and assistance are made. From the nature of the case it is not always possible for them to comply with all the requests which they receive, but in spite of that I do not know of a single organization which has not at least been satisfied, even if only by a long-term promise.

Promises are cheap.

As far as the annual report is concerned, I should like to point out one matter which is of great importance to all of us and which is near to the heart of all of us, and that is the question of adventure projects. The position at present is that children in our cities are at present denied the privilege of giving expression to their thirst for adventure along properly controlled lines. When one consults the annual report, the fact that a very small contribution, as against what it should have been, was made in this regard in the past, is a source of some concern to one, and I trust that for the next ensuing year and for the years to come, the Department will find it possible to an increasing extent to devote more money, attention and time to this aspect.

In the few minutes which I still have at my disposal I should like to refer to another matter and I should like to pose a question which is relevant to this matter, and that is whether the time has not arrived for the Department of Sport to broaden its outlook as regards a particular matter. I am referring to the question of foreign universities coaxing fine sportsmen and sportswomen away from South Africa by offering them attractive bursaries. I want to ask whether the Department cannot do something in order to combat this state of affairs. I say combat, because this type of thing can, on the one hand, have many advantages, and I should like to view it in that light, but on the other hand it surely has many disadvantages which we must never overlook. I should like to draw attention to two possible evils in particular.

In the first place it robs South Africa of its young sportsmen and women at a time of life when they would actually have been able to make their greatest contribution to the enrichment of the South African sporting scene. They are taken from us at the prime of their sporting careers. I do not want to say anything more in this regard, although one can say a great deal more about this matter.

But a second evil may attach to this, and that is that when these people arrive at those foreign universities, it may happen willy-nilly that they are estranged from those things in which we as Whites in South Africa believe. Although this is a Department which is not dogmatic in its attitude, I think we must not lose sight of the dangers of indoctrination overseas. But now I should like to ask, in the light of what I have just said, whether the time has not arrived for this Department to give consideration to the question of bursaries for prospective students so as to enable them in the first place to study preferably at South African universities. I am convinced that at present the South African universities can offer young students every opportunity, also as regards their sporting activities, to realize themselves to the full, and consequently there is no real compelling reason for these people to go overseas. But if they have to go, let this Department, on a very selective basis, give consideration to the question of bursaries for these people to study at overseas universities, but on the very clear understanding that upon their return to South Africa their services, and especially their services in the field of sport, will be available to this Department.

I want to say that the atmosphere this evening and earlier this afternoon has been amazing to me. In fact, I almost expected the Opposition at some stage or other to get up and congratulate the Minister! That is how friendly they were.

Are you fishing for compliments?

No, but why I say that is because no longer is this called an unnecessary Department, and no longer is it a Department which was just established to give this inefficient and inept Minister a job.

How do you know?

The hon. member was not here. He should have listened to a few of the speeches. Then he would have known why I say that. But now the atmosphere has changed. I almost feared that the Opposition members were going to congratulate themselves on establishing the Department of Sport. I presume they have forgotten long ago how they objected to this Department.

The Department is all right; it is the Minister who is so useless.

Why prove it then?

I know the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is trying to change the image of the United Party, but some of us have a very good memory of his particular image, and we are not at all impressed by all the stuff put over by the hon. member for Yeoville. But from my point of view it was very pleasant to listen to the golden words that flowed from the lips of hon. members opposite and to experience the new atmosphere. Even in regard to this matter of me being such an inept Minister, as the hon. member for Yeoville was so anxious to assure the House was the case, hon. members on that side of the House have stated that the State President’s award has been a great success, but it was the Department and myself who initiated the idea of this award. So I would like to thank them very much for the compliment. I am sure we will get on very well. I only hope that in their efforts to assure the House that they have changed their image, they will not claim that it is their Republic.

Have you tried to change your image from the time you spoke with the communists on the steps of the City Hall?

Poor old Vause Raw! He must try to save the bacon. But I want to come to a serious part of the debate which was introduced by the hon. member for Johannesburg (North). He raised a matter, supported by the hon. member for Karoo, this hon. member who two years ago said that Fascist Italy established a ministry of sport and Nazi Germany established a ministry of sport. That was the language that hon. member used. Both those two hon. members raised the matter of my behaviour in regard to the sporting bodies, and I want to reply to it. The hon. member for Karoo said I must mind my own business. He says that to a Minister of Sport! Obviously sport has nothing to do with me. The hon. member for Johannesburg (North) took me to task because he said I had issued an unfortunate statement. I have that unfortunate statement here, and I will read it. The hon. member should not just go by Press cuttings because they are very misleading. I know that the hon. member is out to cause a little mischief. That is all he is out to do. I want to read the statement that the hon. member thinks was so bad. It was given to the Press and it was a statement issued by myself. It reads as follows—

But I pleaded for that.

But the hon. member was taking exception to my statement—

And then I give the names of the members. They are Professor Avril Malan, former Member of Parliament and director of companies, chairman; Mr. Danie Joubert, President of the S.A. Federation for Youth and Sport. They are all associated with sport.

I said they were good men.

You keep quiet.

A sore boil has to break out.

Then there are Mr. Reg Honey, Life President of the S.A. Olympic and National Games Association; Mr. J. L. Miller, Managing Director of Shell (S.A.); Mr. J. F. Botha, Secretary for Sport and Recreation.

All very good people. I agree with you.

But the hon. member tried to indicate that I was dictating to the sports people. The statement continues—

Interjection.! I know the hon. member does not want to know; he was never here, but now he tries to be smart. This was the statement which the hon. member now says was an unfortunate one.

No, all he said was you must not confuse the issue.

No, I do not want to hear anything from the hon. member who does not know anything about it. The hon. member is not even a sportsman.

Will the hon. the Minister tell us what Mr. Frank Braun said?

I want to read exactly what took place and I want to show this House in what way the hon. member maintains that I was using the big stick. Listen to this. I want to show hon. members, including the hon. member for Johannesburg (North), what took place, immediately the situation arose that this money was made available. Before that, the South African Olympic Committee announced they were going to hold the South African Games in Bloemfontein in 1970. When this sum of money became available I approached the Government and the sporting bodies to try and sort out the position. Many sporting people and sports administrators in South Africa contacted me and my Department and said, “You know, 1970 is too late.” I just do not understand the hon. member. He said I must do everything possible for the young sportspeople of South Africa who could not compete in the Olympic Games. My attitude and that of the people who approached me was, as I said, that 1970 would be too late and that we should hold the South African Games as soon as possible.

The Olympic body said they wanted it …

Just let me finish and then the hon. member can ask me as many questions as he likes. What did I do? I spoke to them and I arranged for my Department to speak to Mr. Frank Braun and tell him about the representations we had received and that we were in the position to assist him. I also interviewed the Shell people, and although they had stipulated the money should be for a sport festival, I asked them whether they would consent to some of the money being used for the South African Games? I eventually persuaded them to allow R50.000 of the money to be spent on the Games. I approached the Government and it also consented to contribute R50.000 towards the Games. I then went to Mr. Braun and asked him whether the Games could not be held in 1969 because 1970 was too long ahead, we could not expect our young people to wait so long because they wanted something immediately. That is what I said here. I have a Press cutting which says the South African Olympic Committee decided unanimously to have the Games in 1969 and not 1970. Do hon. members know why? Because they are interested in our sportsmen and sportswomen. When they got assistance of this nature they were able to carry on and prepare for 1969.

I have two reports here which refer to 1970.

Of course, and I told the Committee. The hon. member is trying to make out he is a great sporting man here interested in South African sporting affairs.

And he is.

Then the hon. member should not come here and try to make mischief out of sport; he should not try to create ill-will where no ill-will exists.

He did not say that.

Yes, he does; he said here that I had made a most unfortunate statement.

[Inaudible.]

That hon. member was not even in the House at the time.

Yes, I was here when this hon. member spoke.

You were not.

Yes, I was.

You were not. [Interjections.] The hon. member for Karoo who is also a member of the United Party said I must mind my own business. That is the atmosphere that was being created. As I said to hon. members opposite before, they must not try to create ill-will in the sporting field. That is what they are doing now. They are always trying to see if they cannot throw a spanner in the works. In this way now they tried to throw a spanner in the works. I have given the hon. member a great deal of credit. Last year I said to myself the hon. member is also a sportsman and I accepted his criticisms. But in the way he initiated this discussion and in the way he carried on, I say he did not act in the best interests of sport.

You have not given an explanation yet.

The hon. member says I have not given an explanation. An explanation of what? … I am waiting. I will sit down and the hon. member can tell me what explanation he wants.

Tell me why is the Department interfering with sport?

He wants to know why is the Department interfering with sport. First of all, he says to me it is the Department’s responsibility to see that these young people get sporting facilities and that sports meetings are arranged for them immediately, and now he wants to know why is the Department interfering in sport. I think the hon. member must be very careful because I wrote down the exact words he used. He said the responsibility rests on the Department to see that the young people of South Africa who had been deprived of the opportunity to participate in the Olympic Games had a substitution in some sort of way. And now he says the Department must not interfere. What does he want?

I said you should only help them financially.

Oh, I must only finance. Let me tell the hon. member something he should in any case know. In the past, before this Department was established, when the South African Games were held here in 1960, they called on the Department of Education, Arts and Science for someone to assist them in organizing those games. They again called on the Department in 1964, and they will call on the Department again now. I say, regardless of the sneers of hon. members opposite, we know how to run these matters and we will give them every assistance they need. But the hon. member tries to create an atmosphere of suspicion here; he tried to make out that this terrible Department was following the lines which they thought it would, namely to control sport in South Africa. Mr. Braun is the chairman of the committee which is organizing the 1969 Games. The executive committee members who are appointed to this committee will act on it. Mr. Braun said he had given the assurance that the Bloemfontein Town Council would be represented on the committee. Also on the committee will be representatives of the South African Swimming Federation as well as the Athletics president. The Secretary of Sport will also be on the committee. Is there anything wrong with this state of affairs? Should the Secretary not be on it?

I merely said you should not arrange a date; you should leave that to the sporting bodies to decide.

But the sporting bodies told me 1970 was too late and they asked me whether I would discuss the matter with these people.

Then these Press cuttings I have here must all be wrong.

I say to the hon. member he must be careful when he comes to this House and tries to create the impression that I am trying to control the sporting bodies in this country, because that is not the case. [Interjections.] Hon. members opposite can carry on like this, with these stories, if they wish. Last time they found out to. their cost that the attitude they adopted against this Department WAS doing them a lot of harm. Now they are trying to change their image but by doing this sort of thing they again destroy it. Let them go on.

[Inaudible.]

Oh, yes, there is the great Mike Mitchell again. These are the facts and hon. members know it. I know there are hon. members here to whom I can speak at any time about sporting matters, but the hon. member for Umlazi is not one of them. I would not discuss sporting matters with him. I would, however, discuss them with the hon. member for Port Elizabeth (Central). I might say I am very disappointed with the hon. member for Johannesburg (North).

I want to come back to the hon. member for Von Brandis. First of all I wish to thank him for the way in which he discussed the affairs of this Department. He talked about the report of the Department. He said he felt a good job was being done and he also applauded the idea of a State President’s award and he agreed with the choice of sportsmen and women who would be honoured in this way. The hon. member also raised the question of sport centres and he suggested that sport centres should be established, like the Crystal Palace, on a R for R basis. [Interjections.]

Order! I want to point cut to hon. members that it is not the function of this Department to provide fun and games in Parliament.

As far as these sport centres are concerned I want to say that I and the Department are very anxious to see them established, but I do not have funds to establish them. It is not one of the functions of the Department, as outlined, to establish these sport centres. I heard that the Federation of Sports is thinking of establishing a sport centre in Pretoria. I was very happy to hear of this, but this will not be done with Government funds, because there are no Government funds available for sporting centres. I would like to hear from the hon. member where such a sporting centre should be situated. Should it be in Johannesburg, Pretoria, Cape Town or Durban? Who is going to make the choice? This is not for the Government to decide and that is why I say that the problem is not as simple as the hon. member thinks. Hon. members also said that more attention should be paid to recreation. I quite agree with this. I am trying to develop the forest reserves into recreation centres, because I believe that they offer natural scope for recreational centres. On the other hand, one of the main features of this Department is that the Department should assist in developing sport in this country for the physical benefit of our people. The hon. member said that sport is buttressed by sporting associations. That may be. Sport is buttressed by some very fine sporting associations, but nevertheless the whole idea was to give them the opportunity of increasing the numbers that are participating in the various sports. I think that the Department has succeeded in this respect. More and more people are taking an interest and are participating in sport and I think it will be an asset to the country. There will be far less money spent on medical expenses and I have no hesitation in putting the case forward that this is a very good investment.

The hon. member for Graaff-Reinet talked about our natural South African love of the soil and nature and the need for people in the crowded cities to go into the countryside. I fully agree with him and I would like to see the extension of our forestry reserves to be such that it can accommodate more people. The department is also trying to make an assessment of what one would call the major recreational parts of the country. We realize that, although we live in a vast country, there may eventually be a shortage of such areas. He talked about a playground which was being closed at Claremont to make way for a parking area and I also agree with him in principle that we have far too little open spaces. That is not one of the open spaces which should be used for parking facilities. The hon. member for Karoo talked about me minding my own business. As one can expect, he also spoke about non-white sport and it seemed that he thought they were neglected. I can assure him that the department has actively assisted in creating various opportunities for non-white sport. The Department of Sport has been in close contact with, the departments concerned with the well-being of the non-Whites and plans are being made. It is not my function to announce all these plans, but I can only reiterate that every possible aid in the technical sense is given by us as a department and will be given in the future. I might also mention that a course was run for Indian sports administrators. There were plans for a sports festival for Coloureds. We also assisted the Bantu groups through the Department of Bantu Affairs in certain aspects. We are going to have the non-white South African Games in 1969. I think that shows us the attitude of the Government. The Government is quite prepared that the non-Whites should have their games at a centre such as Umlazi, or a place where the facilities are very good. The finance required to assist those gamts will come from the Board of Trustees. We laid it down that the funds collected were not to be used only for white sport, but that they should also be used to finance, not only the South African non-white games, but also, when we have the Republican Festival, the sporting festivals which the non-Whites will have at the same time. He said that I should initiate the situation. I say that the initiation as regards financing lies with the departments concerned, as I explained to the hon. member, and the Government has no intention of changing that policy. He said that all we did was confined exclusively to white sport. That is not true, and the facts are not as he stated. He may say that it is not sufficient, but it is not true that they are exclusively directed to white sport.

Then I go on to the hon. member for Port Elizabeth (Central). As I have said before when he speaks about sport it is a language that I understand. I am always very happy to listen to him, because he, as I see it, has the same outlook that I have. He appreciates the physical fitness of people which can be attained through sport. I myself think that the basis on which he laid out his philosophy is one which I understand.

I was not too sure whether the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg (City) was talking about tourism or sport, because he drifted on to what I should do overseas with regard to publicity. I do no publicity about sport overseas. I only do what I can in South Africa for South Africans. He also talked about rifle clubs, pistol clubs, and clay pigeon shoots, and said that these were neglected as far as the department was concerned. I think the hon. member should know that the department gave a grant of R2,000 to the South African Rifle Association. It is not a big grant. I do not want to pretend that it is such a large amount. But the spirit and the idea of assisting a body like that was a principle the department accepted. He talked about big game hunting as a sport. I do not want to fall foul of the Leader of the House, but as far as I am concerned, it is still a low priority. There are many other matters we have handled up to now in which I am more interested.

He will probably shoot you down.

Maybe. The hon. member for Moorreesburg talked about the boating sport on the inland dams. I might tell him that the South African Yacht Racing Association received R1,800 from us, the department accepting the principle that we should encourage it. The Rowing Association received from us some R350. In that respect, we appreciate the value of that as a sporting activity.

The hon. member for Springs spoke about adventure projects. He knows that we have a number of adventure projects, which have been a great success. They have not been projects that could be handled easily by people. They were for youngsters, who had to suffer trial and tribulation. They walked through the Fish River Canyon for three days. But, nevertheless, it was an adventure project which was a great success. We have had others along the coastline and in the Tsitsikamma Forest, and they also have been successful. He talked about the department being able to offer bursaries to our sportsmen. I would say that there are bursaries available from an educational point of view, but they are not specifically directed at people who have attained great achievement in sport and not the great achievement as far as knowledge is concerned. But those bursaries are definitely available through the Education Department. My department does not issue bursaries from a sporting angle.

I think that I have now replied to all the hon. members who spoke on this Vote. I personally feel that progress is being made. I am sure that the latest awards, as mentioned by the hon. member for Von Brandis, have been popularly received. There is a cricketer, a women’s hockey captain and two tennis players, Bob Hewitt and Frew MacMillan who won the Wimbledon doubles championship, which was an international match. As these awards are intended for people who achieve international status in sport, in this case for 1967, I think that they were well earned. I am sure that the congratulations of our people are extended to these sportsmen and women on both sides of the House.

Vote put and agreed to.

Revenue Vote 40—Foreign Affairs, R6,985,000:

Mr. Chairman, may I ask for the privilege of the half hour?

Mr. Chairman, we believe that it is vitally important to South Africa that we revert to a position of normality again soon in our relations with the rest of the world. We believe that our well-being and our security make this a priority matter. By “normal” I do not mean that we should suddenly become the blue-eyed boy of every country in the world. No government in the world has been as lucky as that. By “normal” we mean that we move out of the category of international problem countries and. that the countries that matter to us stop considering us as a case for special attention. Quite honestly, we on this side of the House do not believe that it is within the resource of the present Government to accomplish this for South Africa. As far as they are concerned it is a case of too late: as the proverb has it, a wounded reputation is seldom cured. In any case we shall get nowhere while our system is such that we have cases, as for instance last week, where the Security Police swooped on a few boys playing a ball game, the news reverberating around the world and washing away all the neat philosophical treatises about separate development. I say categorically that unless we eliminate factors which constantly weaken our country’s position, we will never progress internationally. That is why we on this side believe that South Africa’s interests demand a change of Government and nothing less than that. We shall continue to work ceaselessly for that change.

At the same time we are always prepared to give credit where credit is due. I have said before in this House and I wish to say it again, that we have a distinct regard for the present Minister of Foreign Affairs and the hard-working body of men here and abroad who labour day and night to overcome the handicaps under which South Africa suffers and which their own Government is constantly creating for them. We are always anxious for South Africa’s sake that the Government of the day should have success in the field of foreign relations. Therefore we were greatly heartened when about five months ago, just before we gathered here for the present Session, the Prime Minister stated confidently that 1968 might see, as he put it, “an end to unreasonable international pressure on South Africa”. Therefore it came as a very unpleasant shock to our people when, in the first place, the British and American attitudes hardened in respect of the delivery to South Africa of arms for external defence and when the spirit of Simonstown appeared to collapse. This was quite a massive setback for our diplomacy. We have since been looking to France, and as things have been developing there one wonders whether we have not landed on extremely risky ground. We watched with great concern the open sympathy which terrorist attacks on South Africa aroused in high quarters abroad and the extreme demands made on us by the United Nations, the membership of which costs our country R678,600 for the coming year. In the past year there was again the same show of solid determination on the part of the major powers to terminate our administration of South West Africa. It was a very welcome sign that the U.S.A, again expressed itself against the use of force as a method. But the enforcement arm of the United Nations, namely the Security Council, has been called upon to take, what they call, appropriate measures in regard to the South West Africa question, and the United Nations continue to treat South West Africa as a question of the highest priority. Finally there was the staggering ease with which international pressure groups succeeded in reversing our initially successful effort to enter the Olympic Games. While this certainly cast a very bad light on some of the people with whom we have to deal, at the same time there was no joy in it for us, because it tended to show that the climate abroad is still so politically unfavourable to us that it remains relatively easy for the “hate South Africa” group to muster general support for action of some sort against us. All this is very disconcerting, the more so when at the end of March this year the Prime Minister announced at Calvinia that:

One Government newspaper saw the Prime Minister’s speech as a warning that “our darkest hour had come”. A day or two later the Prime Minister went further and said in Pretoria:

This was indeed a very sombre view of South Africa’s international position. It is certainly a very far cry from the more confident tone we heard from the Prime Minister only five months ago. I think that the time has come that the hon. the Minister should put our position in perspective and that he should tell the country exactly where we stand as regards our international position and what we are to expect, as the Prime Minister put it, “op alle terreine in die maande wat voorle”. I know that there are people who believe that the Government is overdramatising the position and that it is doing so for party-political purposes. Let me say that if that were true it would certainly be a very serious position. We are looking to the hon. the Minister to put the matter into proper perspective for us.

For the department the past year seems to have been an exceptionally busy one in the field of publications. I have here several publications distributed by the Department of Foreign Affairs this year. Naturally it is the right thing to do. Accusations should not be left unanswered. I wish that I had the time to comment on each of these publications, because there is room for improvement and certainly room for criticism. The criticism we have and which applies to all the publications is that the idiom employed in the political section is the idiom of the “ism”-state and not that of the democratic state. I am not suggesting that this is deliberate and that it is a calculated move on the part of the department, but I believe that it remains our most serious mistake in the representation of South African affairs abroad. Let me explain what I mean. In a democratic parliamentary system like ours the state, the country, South Africa, is permanent. Policies, parties and governments are impermanent and subject to change. In authoritarian countries state and political doctrine go together. In these publications the emphasis is constantly on what is termed “South Africa’s policy of separate development”, as though state and doctrine were one. In other publications the following term is repeatedly used: “South Africa believes that …” This is done, as though party and country were one. I say that there, is. an authoritarian flavour about the publications which should be avoided in dealing with matters which go abroad. The emphasis should be on the friction of ideas in South Africa, which forms the essence of our parliamentary system. Government point of view should be pronounced as Government policy, as is done in all democratic countries, and not as South Africa’s policy, for the simple reason that the opposing policies and points of view, the minority points of view, are as much South Africa’s as those of the Government. I have here a booklet entitled “South Africa and the Rule of Law”. There is a whole chapter which is entitled “South Africa’s Policy of Separate Development”. Tucked away, right at the end, there is a very short chapter, which starts as follows—

Quite right, but a few paragraphs later this curious statement follows—

Again the words “South Africa’s policies” are used, although it had just been said that the Opposition, which forms a big part of South Africa, is opposed to it. I quote further—

This second paragraph completely contradicts the first paragraph, and underlines the very thing I am complaining about. I would advise the department to make a comparative study of publications issued by democratic countries like Britain, America, Holland, Belgium and others, and those issued by authoritarian countries. They can go into our reading room and they will see several such publications, such as the publications of Bulgaria. They will find that there is a marked difference between the one and the other. We should take note of this. When South Africa is portrayed the picture of South Africa must be given truthfully, as it is. One side alone does not represent South Africa. [Interjections.] Time and again foreign visitors who have been to South Africa have told me that before they came to South Africa they only knew South Africa in terms of one policy, namely apartheid. What impressed them most after they had been here, was the friction of ideas and the fact that South Africa was not in fact the monolithic race doctrine state which they quite wrongly believed it to be, but that here they found a healthy divergence of view, widespread opposition to the Government and a changing pattern even on the Government side itself. One foreign visitor after another will tell you that this is the most commendable part of what they find in South Africa. It was because of this situation that they left South Africa with more sympathy and understanding for our country than before. [Interjections.] The picture of South Africa must be presented as it is, as all democratic countries do.

Mr. Chairman, I was interested in the official use of the terms “Whites” and “Africans”. The term “Bantu” is also used, but I think that the Minister of Bantu Administration should take note of this matter. Here we have the official use of the terms “Whites” and “Africans” and “White nations” and “African nations” in South Africa. I want to ask the hon. the Miinister: Are the Whites not also Africans? Are we not all South Africans? .1 appreciate the fact that the term “Bantu” is not always understood abroad, but we should avoid the impression that we, the Whites, are “indringers” or non-Africans. Admittedly this is not an easy problem, but the department should set language experts to work to find or create or adopt terms which will avoid colour appellations like black and white, and yet make it clear that we are all Africans.

Coming to Africa, the past year saw some very interesting developments in Southern Africa. There was the arrival of the first black diplomat and some very realistic and cooperative statements from neighbouring African leaders. At the beginning of this Session, in February, I asked the Minister of Information a question in regard to the so-called diplomatic suburb in Pretoria. We wanted to know the price paid over and above the initial price of R395,000. I hope that the hon. the Minister can now give us the full details. I should also like to ask the hon. the Minister whether similar purchases for the same purpose in other cities are contemplated, and if so in what cities, and what steps have been taken in this direction. I must say again to the Minister that we do not like this idea of a diplomatic suburb, because it is bound to be viewed with misunderstanding. We have something like this in Brazilia. [Interjections.] I am coming to that. But Brazilia was built from scratch as a new capital rising out of the veld. As such it was planned from the start in every detail.

You are a traitor. [Interjections.]

On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, may the hon. member refer to the hon. member for Bezuidenhout as a “traitor”?

I withdraw.

Mr. Chairman, on a point of order, if such an outrageous thing is said, ought the hon. member not to apologize?

Would the hon. member please continue?

Sir, I look upon him as such an utter clown that I am certainly not interested. He can say it again if he likes.

Order! I warn hon. members. This has gone too far now. If there are any further interruptions, I shall take steps, and those steps will be that the hon. members concerned will have to leave this Chamber. This applies to both sides of the House. The hon. member may proceed.

Sir, the only other places where you have diplomatic suburbs are the Communist capitals and this, as we all know, is for purposes of restriction. Our advice to the Minister is to drop the idea. Against our political background of separation the idea would be viewed with suspicion. We believe that it would be far better for the Government to deal with each case individually and to help newcomers to acquire land and accommodation in the place and area of their own choice, and according to merit. After all, Sir, we have had consular representatives here from non-white countries for a long time, and I am not aware that accommodation for them caused any particular problems. Sir, there is one matter in which we must ask for the intervention of the hon. the Minister. We do not believe that it is healthy for South Africa that the position of non-white diplomats should be in any doubt at all or become the subject of party political wrangling. For instance, at a meeting at Montagu, as reported in Die Burger of 26th March this year, the Deputy Minister of Bantu Development (Mr. Vosloo) said this—

One would like to know whether this is indeed Government policy, coming from a Deputy Minister of the Cabinet. But to go further, at the end of last year there was a meeting at Waterkloof where Mr. Tom Langley was present. I quote from Dagbreek (3.12.67)—

Listen to that! Already the impression is that this is a suburb for non-white diplomats—

Sir, I do not think that this kind of thing is a good thing for South Africa, and I think that a stop should be put to it. The only way in which we can put a stop to it is by getting a categorical statement from the hon. the Minister and from the Prime Minister that all foreign representatives—White, Black and Brown—will be treated on exactly the same footing and that no one will have better or fewer privileges, because of his colour, than the other, and that the non-white diplomats will have absolutely the same freedom of South Africa as the white diplomats. I sincerely hope that this matter will be cleared up once and for all by the hon. the Minister and by the Prime Minister when he speaks again and that politicians will learn to place the interests of South Africa above the interests of their party in vital matters of this kind.

Fortunately our commercial links with African states seem to be growing in a healthy manner. Already we have an air link with Malawi, Madagascar, Botswana, Swaziland and others. Ibis is ah excellent development. But again the question will arise of offices, residential accommodation and general facilities for staffs as these links grow, and already at this stage the air hostesses are black hostesses. Sir, we would like to know what the policy of the Government is in respect of the developments which must inevitably follow upon friendly political relations, because if we do not handle matters of this kind carefully we will endanger continued friendly political relations. We believe that the time has come for us to leapfrog our immediate neighbours and try to make friends with African states further afield. As we have pointed out before, we believe that if there is one country with which we should try to forge closer political links it is Madagascar. The Republic of Malagasy is so strategically placed in the Indian Ocean that close relations with that country is a natural for South Africa. We were therefore pleased to see that what looked like an important delegation from Madagascar recently visited South Africa, and we would like to know if the time is opportune for the hon. the Minister to make a statement and whether he can hold out any hopes for us in respect of diplomatic ties with Madagascar.

Sir, before my time expires I want to put a few further questions. The first concerns the treaty sponsored by America, Britain and Russia to halt the spread of nuclear weapons. While in principle we should be amongst the first to support a non-proliferation treaty, we believe it is quite right that we should press for adequate safeguards for ourselves and others and that we should reserve our position until the matter is fully cleared up. We are aware of the fact that important discussions have been taking place in South Africa in the last few days and we should like to know if the Minister is in a position to make a full statement to-day.

Then, Sir, South West Africa is still a major target for attacks upon us. I have here the text of the letter which the Minister sent to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, U Thant, on 27th March of this year. In this letter the Minister stresses the fact that in the early stages of the dispute between South Africa and the United Nations, “the Government was voluntarily prepared to seek the solution for the problem of South West Africa by negotiation with the United Nations.” I should like to know whether it is still the opinion of the Government that the matter of South West Africa should be settled on the basis of negotiation with the United Nations and the finding of a basis of agreement mutually acceptable to the United Nations and South Africa. If that is so, we would like to know whether the Government’s opinion is that there would have to be a give-and-take approach on both sides. If this is not the opinion of the Government, then may we ask what is the Government’s long-term approach to the question of a solution of the South West Africa issue. I think it is important that we should know what the long-term approach of the Government is and that we should understand it. We therefore look forward to the Minister’s reply in this connection.

We would also like to know how many envoys of Governments accredited to South Africa made use of the Minister’s invitation early in 1967 to visit South West Africa and to see conditions for themselves. Then finally it is interesting to note that countries like Canada and Malawi have been calling on the United Nations to reopen dialogue with South Africa. We would like to ask whether there has been any new development in respect of a personal representative of the Secretary-General visiting South Africa for talks with the Government.

Then there are a few items on the Estimates on which we should like to have a little more light. Firstly, there is the contribution to the Foreign Affairs Special Account of R500,000, which I know is in the nature of a secret account; we accept it as such. Secondly, a short while ago we passed the Economic Co-operation Promotion Loan Fund Act under which R5 million was set aside for direct aid to developing countries, particularly in Africa. But then I come to the item in which we are interested and that is “Assistance to and cooperation with foreign countries, R350,000,” which represents an increase of R100,000 over last year’s figure. I would be pleased if the hon. the Minister would explain that particular item to us. Then, Sir, the case at The Hague is mentioned again in the Estimates, and I wonder whether the final figure of the cost of the case to South Africa is now available.

Then a few final questions: I recently read that we had now reached the stage where women are also to be trained as diplomats in South Africa, and I wonder whether the Minister can tell us what we can expect in that direction. Sir, at the end of last year two members of the Cabinet posed the question whether South Africa should not rather become an “uncommitted” country and form its own little world next to the “third world”. Mr. Schoeman, the Leader of the House, very seriously posed that question and the hon. the Minister himself later posed the question whether it would not be wiser for South Africa to become an uncommitted country and not stand so clearly on the side of the West. I got the impression that a sort of pattern was developing here, and I would like to know whether the Minister has had further thoughts on this idea and what he and the Government think of the idea at this stage.

Then, Sir, I have previously pleaded here for what I called a more relaxed attitude in respect of our foreign affairs. I refer here to the continuation of the practice of not attending some of the national festivals of important countries in South Africa. I would like to know from the Minister whether the time has not come for us to drop our objections and attend these national festivals. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, at this stage I do not want to enter fully into all the matters raised by the hon. member for Bezuidenhout. I just want to remark in passing that he started off on a particularly low level to-night, much lower than usual, and that he maintained that low level throughout. I want to inform the Committee very Firefly to-night about one matter touched upon by the hon. member, and that is the question of non-proliferation and the talks held in connection with it this week. I want to begin by pointing out that South Africa is in favour of the principle of non-proliferation of nuclear weapons. This explains why South Africa, as one of the major uranium-producing countries of the world, decided long ago to do nothing in respect of uranium sales to the outside world which might lead to proliferation. At the general conference of the International Atomic Energy Commission held in 1966, the South African representative, the leader of our delegation, gave the following assurance—

Mr. Chairman, South Africa still subscribes to this principle. You must bear in mind, however, that we occupy a special position in this regard as one of the major uranium producers of the world, and on account of the fact that the production of uranium is linked to our gold-mining industry. We have quite a number of problems as regards the draft treaty in connection with non-proliferation of atomic weapons, which is before U.N. at the moment. It is very clear to us that one cannot realize its full implications at this stage, and that one will not be able to do so until the safeguards have been finalized and announced by the International Atomic Energy Commission. Incidentally, I may point out that South Africa is not the only country which has problems and misgivings in this connection. As regards these safeguards, which, inter alia, entail inspection, it is not quite clear to South Africa how they may affect our gold-mining industry and how they will affect the processing of ore. Nor is it clear how they will affect our programme for the development of nuclear power for domestic use for peaceful purposes. You will agree with me. Sir, that these are important matters to South Africa. South Africa’s representatives at U.N., in taking part in the general debate last week, said that South Africa strongly supported the objects of non-proliferation and would continue to do so whether a treaty was concluded or not.

South Africa’s attitude in regard to this draft treaty will be decided after a thorough study of the final terms of the treaty has been made and in the light of the safeguards decided upon in due course. We sincerely hope that these will enable us to sign the treaty eventually. But before Ambassador Botha spoke at U.N., we had already been studying the draft treaty in connection with non-proliferation for quite some time, and there are many things in this treaty which are not clear to us. We also held talks on it, both in South Africa and elsewhere. Talks were held with, amongst others, the U.S.A., which is one of the states which took the initiative in this matter. We held these talks in an attempt to obtain their interpretation of the treaty in its draft form. Now, I must say that this is of course a highly technical matter, and accordingly South Africa suggested, shortly before Ambassador Botha spoke in New York, that the U.S.A, sent experts to South Africa to hold talks in the Republic with our experts. The reply we received to this from the U.S.A, was a favourable one. They responded by sending out a team of scientists shortly afterwards, and this team has held talks with our own experts this week. I may say that the talks that have been held were very useful and will help us a great deal in arriving at our evaluation of the draft treaty. I may point out in passing that the contract is not something about which the Government need decide at this stage. These talks, as I have explained, were held at South Africa’s initiative and must be seen as an attempt to obtain a better interpretation of the draft treaty. They must not be regarded as an attempt to exert pressure on South Africa. In fact, the question of the resolution before U.N. was not discussed with these experts at all, and as far as the resolution is concerned, the Government will take a decision on it within the next few days.

I hope that from what I have said it will be clear that non-proliferation of nuclear weapons is a matter of serious import to South Africa and to the Government, and that we are not standing aloof and adopting an indifferent attitude in the matter, but are studying and investigating it very thoroughly.

To my mind the hon. Minister who has just spoken, has been more than extremely courteous as regards the speech made by the hon. member for Bezuidenhout. I want to describe his speech as being very unnational, so much so that the hon. member, when he was abroad, where he was supposed to uphold the image of his fatherland, did not advocate the policy of this country.

How do you know? Were you there?

I shall return to anybody who makes an interjection. [Laughter.] When the hon. member for Bezuidenhout was interviewed abroad and asked about apartheid, he said that it would not be long, and if that Government came to a fall, we would have something different in our country. Does a South African speak that way?

May I put a question?

You sit down. I am talking. You can talk again. The ambassadors of this country, irrespective of what their nationality or their political convictions may be, can only be South Africans and can only represent this country, but cannot betray this country. I want to go further as far as the hon. member for Bezuidenhout is concerned.

On a point of order, Sir, is so miserable a member allowed to cast such a reflection? [Interjections.]

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

I withdraw it, but I ask whether the hon. member is allowed to say that.

Order! What did the hon. member say?

He said that I had betrayed the country. He definitely referred to me. You may ask him, Sir, and if he says he did not refer to me, I shall resume my seat.

What were the hon. member’s words?

I referred to “a person” and not to a specific person, but I shall come back to that specific person.

I am satisfied that the hon. member has got cold feet.

Order! The hon. member may not accuse another member of having cold feet.

I withdraw it.

On a point of order, Sir, the hon. member referred to the “miserable” hon. member.

The hon. member withdrew that statement.

May I ask whether the hon. member for Bezuidenhout has withdrawn twice?

Yes, he has.

I want to go further than that. I still want to speak to the hon. member for Bezuidenhout. When the Prime Minister’s Vote was discussed, the hon. member for Bezuidenhout revealed something which was not in keeping with propriety and good breeding.

Order! The hon. member must moderate his language.

I shall try to do so, Sir. The hon. the Leader of the Opposition is being respected by this side because of the office he holds as Leader of the Opposition, but I also want to ask hon. members opposite to respect the offices held by the hon. the Prime Minister and members of the Cabinet. That was not done by the hon. member for Bezuidenhout. Only people who have been brought up well, can display good manners, and as far as this matter is concerned, I want to ask the hon. member for Bezuidenhout to take a leaf from the book of the Leader of his party. It shows good breeding; it shows where one oomes from. [Interjections.] Do you have an interjection to make? [Laughter.] Referring to me, the hon. member for Bezuidenhout said a few days ago that I was a “mummy”.

Order! The hon. member must discuss the Vote.

I was discussing it. Now I want to discuss mini-apartheid in regard to our foreign policy and the mini-apartheid of which the hon. member for Bezuidenhout accused us. I should like to know what he means by “mini-apartheid”. I only know about mini-skirts. But what the hon. member for Bezuidenhout meant, was the separate entrances and exits for the various races, and the hon. member for Prinshof gave us a very good explanation here of what mini-apartheid means, the point of which the hon. member for Bezuidenhout failed to see, nor is he capable of doing so. But the hon. member for Bezuidenhout—and this is foreign policy, because when he was abroad, and he said so here under the Prime Minister’s Vote, he felt that he could not defend the mini-apartheid of our country.

Sir, if a person from this country goes abroad and does not advocate the policy of this country, is he or is he not a traitor? I merely ask this; I do not say it. [Interjection.] Now I want to leave the hon. member for Bezuidenhout for a moment and I want to address the hon. member for Yeoville. I think he is making too many interjections. Our foreign policy is in the very good hands of a Minister who knows what he wants to do and where he wants to go and all this yapping on the part of the Opposition will never put him off his stroke, but all these speeches made by hon. members opposite in regard to foreign affairs are, as the Prime Minister said, simply and solely designed “to shine in the papers”. And not only that, but they also damage our country. I want to warn them to-night that one can only be a patriot of this country if one endorses the policy of the people of this country; otherwise one cannot he a patriot. Otherwise one is—and I am going to use that word again, Sir—a traitor. Does the hon. member for Durban (North) also endorse that?

May I put a question?

All the questions in the world. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I am not going to endeavour to reply to what was said by the hon. member for Jeppes who has just sat down. Apart from making a poisonous attack on the hon. member for Bezuidenhout, whom I think is quite capable of looking after himself, he did not say one word about foreign affairs. I will, therefore, ignore him. I am only thinking that it was a tragic day when that hon. member was elected to represent the Jeppes constituency.

We want to thank the hon. the Minister for the statement he made and for the wording in which he put it in regard to nuclear proliferation. I am quite sure that the hon. the Minister will make his speech available to us. If not in pamphlet form it will certainly be in the Press. We will then be able to deal with it in the morning when we proceed with this Vote. The hon. the Minister has made it clear that South Africa has time to decide on the issue and that it will depend on the wording and the terms of the agreement itself. Under those circumstances I am not in a position to deal with it any further at this stage.

In dealing with the Vote, there are a couple of questions I want to put to the hon. the Minister. I am referring to the contradictions, irregularities or it may even be misprints which appear in the Vote. I would like to begin with the heading “Greece; Athens” and point out that there is an increase of R 17,000 on the Budget for this year with the same personnel in exactly the same categories as there were last year. I want to follow on and say that in Italy, also with the same personnel and the same categories, there is a reduction of R2.000. In the case of Italy; Milan, there is an increase of R 10,000. Again the same personnel was used and the currency and rate of exchange was identical. I will be glad if the hon. the Minister will reply to these aspects. Last but not least, we find that in the United Kingdom under the heading “Other Staff” the figure for 1967-’68 is 252 and for 1968-’69 179. Presumably this is a misprint, because last year these figures were 11 and 11 under the same heading.

As far as our trade and allocation in regard to our representation in the United Kingdom are concerned I want to say that the last census of statistics of foreign trade figures that I can get shows that a third of our export and import trade is still done with Great Britain. Thinking in terms of the disturbed world that we are living in at the moment with near social revolution, if not approaching industrial revolution in certain of our European countries, I want to suggest for the consideration of the Department of External Affairs that it is a golden rule and proverb to preserve your good friends of many years standing and also the trade and good association with them, regardless of what the government of the day might be able to do or indicate that they might like to do. The fact remains that as far as Great Britain is concerned if one translates the figures …

Order! Foreign trade falls under the Department of Commerce and not under the Department of Foreign Affairs.

I am indicating this by virtue of the fact that I am talking about the personnel in the offices …

That is provided for under Vote 42, Commerce.

I will then leave commerce and say that as far as our personnel for foreign offices is concerned, it is important that we should strengthen our representation in the United Kingdom. For years I have been pressing for the opening of more offices in more countries, particularly in those countries where representation could serve the purpose of South Africa well. Over the last year we have extended our representation to Finland, Hong Kong, Uruguay and Malawi. Having set our hand to the plough as far as dealing with Malawi is concerned, Mr. Chairman, may I put a question to the Minister, if he is in a position to reply to them at this stage?

If it has anything to do with commerce, it is under the wrong Vote.

I am not dealing with commerce, Mr. Chairman. I am dealing with the representation under Foreign Affairs.

The hon. member may put questions on diplomatic representation.

I am dealing with diplomatic representation. I mentioned Malawi and the diplomatic representation which we now have established with Malawi. Then I would like to put this question pointedly to the Minister. As I said, having set our hands to the plough, has the time arrived, and is he in a position to reply to the question, that we should further our cause in international good relationships by now also establishing diplomatic representation with Lesotho, Botswana, Swaziland and maybe even Zambia? Having dealt with those four countries, that have now received their independence, it is very important that we should endeavour to establish representation with these countries by virtue of the fact that we have undoubtedly gained a lot of international goodwill by establishing diplomatic representations with Malawi. I think it is very important that we should carry on at this stage, if the Department sees its way clear and is able to do so. Even if we do it gradually and one at a time, it will indicate that the direction in which we have set out is now progressing to the extent that our near neighbours, who have obtained their independence, would be brought into line with Malawi.

Then I would like to follow on what the hon. member for Bezuidenhout was referring to, namely the Republic of Malagasy and its importance in the Indian Ocean. I would like to go beyond that point by putting the following to the Minister. I noticed that in this morning’s editorial in Die Burger the same question was put, or the editor stated the same view. I think, with the enormous representation of Jewry in this country and the essentiality of endeavouring to establish good relations and diplomatic representation with the State of Israel, the time has arrived when we should endeavour to establish relations with them also, taking into consideration their important position in the Middle East and our important position as guardians of the shipping lanes of the world around the southern tip of Africa. If the Minister is in a position to reply to this particular suggestion, we would very much appreciate it. I might mention the fact that to an outsider it would appear as queer that we have an office in Lebanon. I pleaded for this office over a period of two or three years. We now have diplomatic representation in Lebanon, but we have not been able to establish diplomatic representation with the State of Israel. I consider it as extremely important, by virtue of the fact that Jewry is represented in such large numbers in this country, and the fact that Israel at this stage is so important as a guardian of Western civilization in the Middle East, that every endeavour should be made to establish diplomatic representations with Israel as well. I would be pleased if the Minister could see his way clear to reply to these points.

Mr. Chairman, I do not want to follow up what the hon. member for East London (City) said, but I should like to refer to what the hon. member for Bezuidenhout said, and the statements he made. He said: “It is important to know what the long-term approach with regard to South West Africa is.” I think the hon. member is well aware of what the long-term policy of the Government in regard to South West Africa is. The policy was laid down as far back as 1948 by Dr. Malan, and it was clearly stated to the hon. member in person. In 1948 the hon. member was secretary to the United Party during the negotiations which were held with the then Prime Minister in connection with constitutional changes. In those negotiations they agreed on certain conditions. The National Party subsequently complied with those conditions. The hon. member afterwards joined the National Party. According to the record it is clear that he attacked the United Party in this House because they had not complied with those conditions. One of the conditions laid down by the then Prime Minister Dr. Malan, was that he was not going to throw South West Africa to the wolves. It is a policy which has been clearly stated by successive Prime Ministers. I do not think any change has been made in that regard. That hon. member left South West Africa owing to circumstances which he was unable to endure there, and then sought refuge here in the Republic. I am certain that if the hon. member was still in South West Africa to-day, he would have joined with us in saying that the Whites should remain there. But to-day he is the champion of a policy which will place U.N. in command of South West Africa, an event which will of course sound the death knell for the Whites of South West Africa. It is his party who, together with Mr. Carpio, said “You exert pressure from the outside and we shall exert pressure from the inside”. That is the tragedy of the United Party of South West Africa to-day.

But I want to leave it at that. I want to express my appreciation for the standpoint which the hon. the Minister adopted towards the nuclear power experts who visited our country, and towards the discussions which are being held there. I want to express my appreciation for the standpoint which the Government has adopted for the protection of the interests of our gold mining industry. This proves once again the prestige and status which our mineral wealth affords South Africa and of the significant role which uranium affords South Africa in the international sphere.

Actually I want to talk about the importance of communication routes linking our neighbouring states, particularly with South West Africa, as an integral part of the Republic. I call South West Africa “an integral part of the Republic”, because this is in accordance with the conditions of the mandate. I want to point out the importance of communication routes between ourselves and Botswana, ourselves and Angola, Mozambique and Zambia, as a means of promoting our foreign policy. I am thinking in particular here of routes of communication between Gobabis and the Gaberones, where it is possible for these to link up with the traffic routes through Rhodesia to South Africa. It is not necessarry for me to elaborate on the advantages which such a route would entail for South West Africa and Gobabis, but it can result in tremendous benefit to our cattle farming industry there because it would consequently represent a shorter route to the meat market in the heart of South Africa, i.e. the Johannesburg-Pretoria complex. In addition there are the advantages of development which such a route would entail for Botswana itself. But apart from that, this will offer a shorter route to a harbour on the West Coast for the Republic. Common benefits for all countries are therefore involved in this matter. Of course it requires close co-operation between all concerned.

Another route I want to mention is a route linking Grootfontein with Livingstone in Zambia where this will link up with the route to Rhodesia. There are overwhelming reasons in favour of such a project. I am aware of the fact that the Minister of Transport may react by saying: “Guarantee the capital and the operational costs, and the railway lines and roads will be constructed”. But must we always think in materialistic terms? Is it not time we realized that a bridge over the Okavango, or a bridge over the Quando, or over the Zambesi is in reality a bridge to better relations with our neighbouring states, whether they are White or non-White? In the Seventies of the previous century a Dorstlandtrekker paved his own way across the Okavongo into the unknown, across the Zambesi, via the Congo to Angola. We in South Africa are accustomed to undertaking pioneering work, on the Continent of Africa as well as on behalf of the entire world. Should we not in this case as well make the present boundaries of separation from our northern states, the boundaries which which divide us from our northern neighbouring states, points of contact in a pioneering spirit, in a spirit of renewal? Should we not regard a road or a railway line as an act of goodwill to strengthen in that way the spiritual viability of the Republic in regard to the world? By way of motivation for this I want to point out that in spite of all the propaganda against South Africa, hostile countries, amongst which I include communistic countries, are still purchasing a great deal from South Africa. This gives the lie to the propaganda against South Africa. But one of South Africa’s most effective weapons against the campaign against it is that it is the economic power source for the needs of Africa, and beneath the surface of world politics this weapon is a very valuable one. It is for that reason that we should give added impetus to the development of this power source by combating Communism to the north of our boundaries on a peaceful and economic basis, and to circumvent it by means of this economic power source via the proposed routes of communication. As an example of what economic strength can achieve on a peaceful basis, I have only to refer to the large amounts which are still ploughed into South West Africa in accordance with the recommendations of the Odendaal Commission. On the surface we do not always realize what benefits that will entail for us. However, I want to state that the implementaion of the recommendations of the Odendaal Commission is the most important bulwark against communistic influences. It serves to prevent bloody conflicts … (Time expired.)

When we come to foreign affairs, we embark upon a field where it is possible for all Afrikaners to join in the discussion, even though all of them do not agree on the details. However, our object is the same, i.e. to restore South Africa’s reputation abroad and in general to do what is best for our country.

Tell that to the other Basson.

Sir. if I wanted to cast stones, I could cast many. However, it is not my intention to do so to-night. But if I want to, I can also cast stones, but I am not going to do so unless, of course, the hon. member prefers it. It is for him to choose. I say that whatever the causes may be for the existing confusion in the world to-day, and whatever the causes may be for our running into difficulties at present, these things do not have any bearing on the fact that it is essential that we as South Africans should view this matter soberly, and that as genuine South Africans all of us should forge ahead in the same harness. I think we have a very good answer to the outside world as a whole. Ever since I was a child I have always been hearing that the diplomacy of the British is amongst the best in in the world, because their experience of diplomacy extends over many centuries.

Renegade (hanskakie).

That word renegade (hanskakie), has caused this counrty a great deal of damage. When we were in the army the words “renegade” and “red louse” caused South Africa much more damage than the colour question is causing to-day. I hope hon. members opposite will realize that they are Afrikaners and not party-political agents. Just as England has perhaps gained experience in the world diplomacy, we in South Africa have over the past 300 years been living with the problems of the world virtually in micro-cosmic form. Providence has placed us here, exactly half-way between East and West. After previous attempts at civilizing Africa had failed. Providence afforded us the opportunity to make a second attempt at civilizing Africa in the way in which we believe. By trial and error we have made more progress than those who tried before us. We were thrown together here Whites and non-Whites—the Whites composed of two different language groups—the Coloureds, the Asiatics and the Bantu. As I said, for 300 years we have been living with the world’s problems in micro-cosmic form. I believe that we have learnt something during that period of time. In the past other states used black men as a commodity and they were exported to other parts of the world, even to America. Some people believed in the total annihilation of the black man. Other people again adopted the opposite course, people such as Van der Kemp and Philips, persons who believed in fraternization and total integration. To-day we can afford to laugh at those experiments. Over the years we as a nation have come to realize that the best policy for all our races is one of separate development.

Hear, hear!

Yes, I shall say “Hear, hear!” along with you. I am referring to a certain separate development which is the traditional apartheid of South Africa. Let me make this very clear. [Interjection.] Would the hon. member kindly realize that I am making a serious speech; this is a serious topic, and, surely, this is no time for flippancy and caterwauling. We may differ as regards separate freedoms, but we most certainly do not differ on separate development. That is why I say that when the hon. the Minister addresses the outside world, he is entitled to saying that all responsible political parties in South Africa are grateful for and appreciative of his attempts and those of the hon. the Prime Minister at giving South Africa an outward-going policy which, it is hoped, will bear good fruit in the future. Over the past 300 years we have been gaining experience, such as no other country has done, of the world problem which is so acute to-day, namely the problem of various races having to live together in one country. We have been living with this problem for hundreds of years. We may have made mistakes, and we probably did make mistakes, and we shall probably make more mistakes in the future. But nobody can have any doubt about the sincerity of the attemps made by all South Africans at solving those problems. We are running into major difficulties to-day. Sometimes this is the case because our position is not being understood, but all too often it is the case because wilful people are trying to extract poison from the same flower from which the bee extracts its honey. Perhaps our major problem as regards the near future is that of South West Africa. A moment ago the hon. member opposite said that we in the United Party wanted to surrender South West Africa. He says we in the United Party told Carpio, “Exert pressure from outside and we shall exert pressure from within.” That is not true.

No, it is the South West Africa United Party that said so.

The United Party of South Africa did not say that. The United Party of South Africa were the people who took South West Africa when a rebellion broke out there. We took it for South Africa by force of arms. Whenever we felt that South Africa’s interests had to be served, we never hesitated to take action. Let it not be said by anybody that as far as South West Africa is concerned, the past of the old S.A. Party and the United Party was one of betrayal, because that is not true.

You should rather speak to the U.P. supporters in South West Africa.

I am speaking about this Parliament, about the South Africans that are being represented in this House. They will in any case be the people who would have to bear the brunt more than anybody else if things go wrong there. When we read the newspapers, we see what is happening at the U.N. Irresponsible people make all sorts of demands on us in regard to South West Africa. Now I wonder whether the time has not come for us to let those people have their way. They find it so easy to talk about a right of self-determination. Has the time not arrived for us to ask this world body whether they really want the right of self-determination for South West Africa? Has the time not arrived for us to hold a referendum to ascertain whether the inhabitants of South West Africa want to be incorporated with the Republic or whether they want to stay as they are? I do not think the world is serious when it comes to this matter. I do not think that certain black states would like to see such a referendum. We who are familiar with the facts of South West Africa know that the lot of the black man in that territory is much better than that of the black man in many of the so-called independent Black African states. One only wonders what would happen if the citizens of South West Africa— White, Black, and Brown, should prefer to be incorporated with us. Would the U.N. then want us to give effect to the wishes of the inhabitants of that territory?

Is the hon. member aware that there was in fact such a referrendum in General Smuts’s time, that 33,520 people vated against it, and that the U.N. did not want to accept that result.

Yes, I am aware of that referendum. I also know that to a large extent its result was in favour of incorporation with South Africa. I also know that the objection was that the referendum had been held in such a way that it did not really represent the will of the population. I think those objections can be overcome. I think if all the races in South West Africa were to participate in an honest and genuine referendum, if they were asked, “Do you want to remain as you are, do you want to go to the U.N., or would you rather be incorporated with the Republic of South Africa?”, their reaction would be, “Rather the devil we know than the devil we do not know.” I think the same U.N. which has such a great deal to say to-day about the right of self-determination for those people, would be first to say, as they also did at that time, that it should not be permitted. I really wonder what the world actually wants. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Sea Point and the hon. member for Bezuidenhout have common surnames, but the two Bassons do not speak with one tongue. In the old days I was told that two heads are better than one, even if the one is that of a sheep, but to-day I am confused because these two Bassons had a lot of strange things to say. The one became absolutely aggressive on a very low level to-night against our foreign affairs which ought to be discussed on a high level, and the one who did so was none other than the front bencher Basson. The back bencher acted differently.

He is a middle bencher.

I beg your pardon, the middle bencher Basson—I am a back bencher—tried to give out that his party supported our policy of separate development. But that is untrue. Nothing like that exists. If we were to look at old Hansard reports we would see how the same hon. member for Sea Point has opposed and agitated against separate development in a way which has never been equalled. The United Party has been one of the biggest saboteurs of the policy of separate development there has ever been.

Order! Separate development is not under discussion now; we are dealing with foreign affairs at the moment.

I want to state very explicitly that our foreign policy is based on this national economy which is being safeguarded by the policy of separate development. Let us understand very clearly to-night that this nation and this country has, during the past twenty years, taken its place on the international financial level alongside the biggest nations in the world. By this means it was possible for us to enjoy international recognition. Let us have no illusions about this; let us accept it as a recognized fact that a country cannot influence other states if its national affairs are not in order. In South Africa we are dealing with a national economy and a currency which can be compared to that of any country in the world.

I believe that our trade with the African States will lead to the development of greater ties of friendship between the Republic and the African States. Many foreign powers built up empires here in Africa in order to exploit Africa. However, that has never been the aim or the ideal of this Government. If it were our policy to derive financial and materialistic benefits from other parts of Africa, we would fail. We are striving to realize an ideal, and that is to grant all peoples a place in the sun.

If one looks at Africa to-day then one is amazed that the hon. member for Bezuidenhout could have acted in the way he did tonight. With the abolition of the various empires in Africa, we are now dealing with independent countries which were not ripe for independence. We are dealing with a growing communistic danger, as well as with the danger of terrorism. These dangers are very close to the threshhold of the Republic of South Africa. It is without doubt the duty of every citizen of this country to make the defensibility of this country felt abroad. Where it affects us directly, I want to make use of the opportunity to congratulate the hon. the Minister and his Department on the large-scale breakthrough which has already been made to the African States. The trend is one where communism is no longer as popular amongst the leaders of African States as it was several years ago. In other words, there has been a change in direction on the part of the African states.

Throughout the world to-day we are faced with the germ of anarchy which is directly influencing the students. We find that the students in Europe and on the Continent are taking anarchic and liberalistic steps. Let me state at once that I have every confidence in the students of South Africa. I now want to ask courteously whether it is not possible for our students, under strict control of the Government, to move outwards in a co-ordinated way in order to fulfil a task in the interests of the Republic of South Africa. I am convinced that the spiritual viability of South Africa is strong enough. I believe that with the correct guidance from the Government our students, because of their background and because we have been through the process of evolution and the suppression of a revolution, will be able to make a major contribution to African states. The basic difference between us and many other countries is the following: We have never tried to sell our policy or to have our policy accepted by any other African states. All that we are asking is that we in South Africa should be able to move in an outward direction, with this condition that there will be no interference in the policy of separate development.

I want to conclude by expressing my disappointment at the attitude expressed by the hon. member for Bezuidenhout in his speech here to-night. Last year, during the discussion of this Vote, his attitude was on a much higher level than it was to-night. I cannot understand how he can advocate a “change of Government” as the only solution to foreign problems as far as the Republic is concerned.

What is democracy if it is not the possibility of a change of Government?

Democracy exists in the right to survive. If that Party had been in power for the past twenty years we would have had no foreign affairs. If we scrutinize their policy we see that South Africa would have had no say in the international sphere. South Africa would have been sold down the river, there would have been a conglomerate mixture of colours here. The hon. member for Houghton need not sit here so piously to-night. If that had happened she would have left a long time ago. They are inciters; we know them, and that is our problem. The future and salvation of South Africa lie in an honest and upright policy, the policy which we have always propagated, namely to be able to move in an outward direction.

Mr. Chairman, I am astonished when we discuss foreign affairs to hear Government members say that any criticism which strikes at the heart of the problem in connection with foreign affairs is directed against the welfare of South Africa. I should like to remind Government members that this country had a long and honourable record when General Smuts and men like him were in command. Now hon. members opposite say that, while we are in our present sony state to-day, we must all defend what is going on, that we must not utter a word of criticism, and they say we are not patriots if we do not keep quiet. I think the time has come for us to have some plain speaking. I say quite frankly that we are in this position and the hon. the Minister is facing a most difficult task because of the policies of the Government. The policies of the Government have brought us to this sorry state. That is why we are being asked to defend the policy of the Government and to accept it as the policy of the country and as an ideal. There are many of us who disagree with it, and we disagree violently. There is only one way to change it, and that is to change the Government. Then we will have a new era, a new spirit. There is quite a backlog to be made up because we are in an unholy mess. Indeed, we have not got a friend in the world. We are struggling right, left and centre to get people who are well-disposed towards us to side with us. We are pleading that we have a case. When anybody gets up and says his piece he is accused of not being a patriot and of being un-South African. I think it is time that all came to an end. When one hears the hon. member who just resumed his seat say that if the United Party was in power we would have been a “bonte nasie”, he is speaking absolute nonsense. I sympathize with the hon. the Minister of Foreign Affairs, because I think that he has a difficult task to defend. He must lay awake at night and worry himself sick about some of the statements made by hon. members on the Government side when they get onto the platteland. It is all very well to plead that everybody must try to understand, but we are dealing with people. I want to tell him of the sort of thing which gives us the bad name we have. We see in this morning’s paper that the emigration of Coloureds to Canada has come to an end. Some of us have known for some time that the Canadian Government was attempting to introduce a team of two officials, coming from Beirut in the Lebanon, to screen prospective immigrants to see whether they qualify. The backlog of persons wanting to go from this country to Canada were in the main Coloured people. When we consider the attitude in this country towards the Coloured people one wonders why they do not let them go. They all get good jobs, hold up their heads and are regarded as people. It is now 1968 …

What are you getting at?

What I am getting at is that the day of the fool’s paradise is over.

And you are the fool.

These are the things that bring us into disrepute.

Order! Which hon. member said that hon. member was a “fool”?

I did, Mr. Chairman.

The hon. member must withdraw that.

I withdraw it.

I want to suggest to the hon. the Minister that the questions put by the hon. member for Bezuidenhout should get a plain straightforward reply, particularly in regard to the black diplomats and other black personnel who will be coming to South Africa from time to time. People, and especially coloured people, want to know what the situation is going to be. I think that the hon. the Minister owes it to this country and everybody in it to enunciate clearly and definitely exactly what the policy of the Government is and is going to be. At the present moment we only have a few, but this number is going to multiply. The hon. member for Bezuidenhout also suggested that we should skip some of our immediate neighbours and go further afield. I would like to ask the hon. the Minister what steps, if any, are being taken to sell the idea which he feels is the idea he wants to sell in these black countries. I have raised this matter before. I see some additional amounts being voted in the Estimates this year for far off places. What is being done in regard to the black states to the north of us? How do we go about attempting to make friends? When we ask that they should come here and see for themselves, we want to know what the conditions and circumstances are under which they will come and be treated when they get here. These are the points which are exercising the minds of people outside and this is the place to ventilate them. I would like to say that everybody in this country is just as concerned as the Government about the bad reputation that we enjoy in the outside world. I was very disappointed this evening when I heard the hon. the Minister say in his opening remarks that the debate was on a very low level. This is not so.

Business interrupted in accordance with Standing Order 23.