This afternoon I want to raise with the hon. the Prime Minister certain matters on which I hope there will be very little disagreement because they concern affairs and states outside of South Africa, and as is well known we have always done our best to seek agreement, as far as we could, in respect of foreign affairs.

The first matter I wish to raise is in regard to the position which has developed in the Indian Ocean. It has been raised in this House before. We know that there is the development in that area of something in the nature of a power vacuum. We know that that is intensified by the fact that there is not complete agreement as to how the Simonstown Agreement should be interpreted. I think it has given members on both sides of the House great pleasure to hear the news of the visit of our naval vessels to Australia and the success of that visit. In the present position it is quite clear that the key position in the Indian Ocean is the island of Madagasar. It seems to me as though the attitude of the Government of that island as represented by its President has tended to become more conciliatory since his visit to Malawi and the other contacts he has made in Africa. I think what we would like to know is whether any progress is being made in respect of closer contact between that island and the Republic.

The second strategic point in the Indian Ocean at present is of course the island of Mauritius. There was a stage when our planes touched down there. I do not think there was much diplomatic contact, but it is also clear that there has been a very real attempt by the Communist powers to take over that island. It is equally clear that the French reacted and that there has been a change in attitude. We would like to know from the hon. the Prime Minister whether any steps are being taken, apart from the holiday service which serves the island, to make closer contact.

Then we come to the position in respect of the countries to the north of us and the first and most important of these is of course Rhodesia. I have no special information which is not known to the public generally, but it does seem to me as though any hope of a settlement is dwindling. I will not say it has dwindled entirely, but it seems to me that the hope of a settlement between Britain and Rhodesia is fading day after day. What is the effect of that going to be on the long-term strategic position in respect of the terrorist activities on the northern border of Rhodesia? The House will know that we on this side of the House have supported entirely the Government’s action in sending members of the Police Force into Rhodesia to assist in guarding that frontier. In fact, we are extremely proud of what our people have been able to achieve there. But I think one of the problems is for how long this is going to continue. If there is no hope of a settlement, one wonders how long this activity on our part will be necessary. I have seen reports in Rhodesian newspapers to the effect that the responsible Ministers and the Prime Minister have been saying that they will have to learn to live with activity of this kind. I think what we would like to know from the hon. the Prime Minister is how is this position developing. We are not informed, and I think it is something the public is entitled to have some enlightenment on.

Then comes the question of the Portuguese territories to the north of us. In a sense they are fighting our battle. Apart from that, we are concerned specifically with the security of our investments already undertaken or to be undertaken in respect of the Ruacana Falls Scheme and Cabora Bassa. We know there is a new President who has replaced President Salazar in Portugal, and we believe that there are indications that no change of policy is envisaged, but I think we should like to have the assurance of the Prime Minister that that is his feeling as well. I think we would like also to have from him an evaluation of the importance of the surrender of one of the leading, if not the foremost, guerrilla leaders in Moçambique. We would like to know, if possible, how that affects the strategic position generally, and especially in respect of the security of the Cabora Bassa Scheme.

Lastly, we know that if this Prime Minister, has introduced anything new in respect of policy, it has been what is called the outward-looking policy, and we have seen the developments in respect of Malawi, which have been most gratifying. What we would like to know is whether there is any progress elsewhere and whether there is any indication that that policy is succeeding in respect of other states in Africa. We know that once we have dealt with Rhodesia and the Portuguese territories, a number of the territories to the north of us are not exactly friendly, but by the same token, in other parts of Africa, there are territories who for historical reasons, because of their associations, view us in a rather different light. It may be that if the right steps were taken we could sandwich those hostile to us between groups that are friendly towards us and thus limit their activities.

I want to begin by replying immediately to the last question put by the hon. the Leader of the Oposition, viz. what progress we have made in Africa. The Leader of the Opposition added that this was the only new policy I had produced.

Not the only one, but the most important.

Very well, the most important new policy. Of course, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition is quite wrong if he terms it a new policy; it is not a new policy; it is a continuation of the policy of my predecessors. It is constructed on the foundations laid down by my predecessors. I do not want there to be any misunderstanding between the Leader of the Opposition and myself on this matter.

It is your belief.

To tell the truth, I expected, when the hon. the Leader of the Opposition spoke about this matter, that he would, as usual, say that it was their policy which I had taken over. He did not do so today on this occasion. I want to make it clear that this policy of co-operation on all levels, including the diplomatic level, is not a new policy. It is a policy which was foreshadowed by my predecessors. The hon. the Leader of the Opposition will recall that this matter was not of real importance during the time Dr. Malan was in power because there were no independent states in Africa, apart from Liberia and Ethiopia.

He does not know his history.

Egypt was still under British rule, and the rest of Africa was under either French, Belgian or British rule. During Dr. Malan’s régime, therefore, that matter could not have been of real importance. But the hon. the Leader of the Opposition will remember that the Nationalist Party has been giving attention to this matter ever since the mid-fifties. Mr. Eric Louw referred to it as long ago as 1955.

But he did nothing.

That is a matter on which we can differ. I do not know whether the hon. the Leader of the Opposition had already become Leader of the Opposition by 1957.

I had.

That being the position, the hon. the Leader will doubtless remember that on 2nd May, 1957, he conducted a debate with the then Leader of the National Party, the late Mr. Strydom, and that he put the following question to him: What about Africa and the relations between South Africa and African states? I am quoting from Hansard, columns 5219-20, the reply which the late Mr. Strydom gave the hon. the Leader of the Opposition on that occasion—

This is the date I gave the hon. the Leader of the Opposition—

This my predecessor said as long ago as 1957 in reply to the hon. the Leader of the Opposition. You must remember that when Mr. Strydom spoke these independent countries did not yet exist. Even Ghana was not yet a republic at the time. When he spoke, there was, in fact, no other country with whom we could establish diplomatic relations, even had we wanted to. But he saw that the day would come when that would happen. It is interesting to note that even at that early stage he did not shy away from the words “there will have to be even diplomatic relations”. Mr. Strydom went on to say—

Of course, history has now taken a different turn, because the one Rhodesia is black—

That is how Mr. Strydom concluded. From this it ought to be clear to the hon. the Leader that what he has just said—and for what purpose he said it, I do not know—namely that this standpoint is something new, is not true. Not only will he know that Mr. Strydom foreshadowed these events in this way, but he will also know that Dr. Verwoerd referred to them from time to time. Not only did he refer to them from time to time, but legislation for this purpose was piloted through this Parliament. The hon. the Leader will remember the provisions of the Separate Universities Act. It seems to me, from the hon. the Leader’s expression, as if what is coming now is new to him. But it is nothing new.

The argument is new.

It seems to me as if the fact which I am now going to put to the hon. the Leader will be new to him as well, because he voted against it without knowing about it. I shall demonstrate this to him in the Separate Universities Act of 1959. In that Act there is a provision to the effect that non-Whites shall not be admitted to white universities without a permit. But an exception was made. Now it is beginning to dawn on my hon. friend. That exception is in the case of children of diplomats.

A wonderful exception.

No, it is a sober, realistic exception. That is what it is. I say that an exception was specifically made for this purpose. There were, from time to time, the references of my immediate predecessor in this connection. There was the historic consultation with Chief Jonathan even before Basutoland, which is now Lesotho, became independent, the weekend before my predecessor died so tragically. In other words, not only did the National Party consistently face up to the problem, but the Nationalist Party also knew what to do in this connection. And it was done.

The hon. the Leader referred to the relations with Malawi. Surely such relations are not established overnight, but are established after a long process of negotiation and preparation. It is true that those relations were established in my time, but the negotiations did not commence in my time. If my predecessor had still been here, the establishment of those relations would have taken place in his time. This goes to show what a sober view the National Party took of these matters, and in this way the policy is consistently and all along being taken further. I am glad to be able to inform the hon. the Leader that things are going well with the diplomatic relations we established with Malawi. I think the entire House is just as aware as I am that it is not required of me to say much more than this at this stage. I can also inform the hon. the Leader that we have built up. and are building up. good contacts with other African states. But for obvious reasons it would be presumptuous of me at this stage to go into details of this now. The hon. the Leader will recall that I put it to the delegates at the National Party congress in the Transvaal last year that further diplomatic relations would be entered into.

That is precisely what I am asking.

Yes. I have already stated this to my congress. It was reported in this way in the newspapers. The hon. the Leader may be assured of that. I just want to repeat here what I said at the congress. I said that it was sound common sense to enter into such diplomatic relations, and that these would be entered whenever it would be in the interests of South Africa to do so. There need be no misunderstanding or illusions about that.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition asked me for my evaluation of the surrender of the terrorist leader in Mozambique. One fact which one absolutely must accept is that if one wants to combat terrorism successfully, one must have the co-operation of the local population. If one does not have the cooperation of the local population, one’s struggle is interminably difficult. Our struggle in Ovamboland was an easy one because we had the co-operation of the local population. That is why it will be easy in the rest of South Africa, because we have the cooperation of the local population. In Mozambique, up there in the north, the struggle the Portuguese had was a difficult one. As a result of the fact that the leader of the Makondo tribe concerned was one of the terrorist leaders, and the tribe straddled the frontier, living in Mozambique on the one side and Tanzania on the other, the problem was considerably aggravated. Now that this leader has surrendered, however, and is going about among his people to gain their goodwill and their co-operation with the Portuguese authorities, one must expect—in fact, one can already see it—an improvement in the situation and that matters will improve to an increasing extent because one is in this way obtaining the co-operation of the local population. One therefore finds it gratifying that this development has taken place. The death of Mondlane will cause conflicting evaluations. On the one hand he is said to have been a so-called moderate. However, how a terrorist can be moderate I do not know. Apparently this is determined by whether he cuts your throat with a blunt or with a sharp knife. I will not be able to visualize that position. The leadership has now passed into the hands of a Peking communist. I find it difficult to express any opinion on that, except that I think that the sum total is that the matter is turning in favour of the Portuguese.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition asked me whether I was satisfied that our investments in Portuguese territory were safe. I have no reason to assume that they are not. I was grateful, as you all were, for the particularly successful visit paid by the Prime Minister of Portugal, Dr. Caetano, to Moçambique and Angola. It was a historic visit in so far as it was the first time a Portuguese Prime Minister had ever paid a visit to these territories. He met with a particularly favourable reception. I think that it greatly strengthened the morale of everybody in Angola and Moçambique. Their morale was strengthened not only by his visit, but also by his firm standpoint and the assurance which he gave not only in public, but also to us, to the effect that he would continue with his predecessor’s policy in the two areas in question. I may just mention in passing that the co-operation between Portugal and South Africa is continuing on the most cordial basis. That will continue to be the position.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition also asked me about terrorist activities with reference to Rhodesia, if it should so happen that a settlement cannot be reached. Of course there will always be terrorist activities as long as there are terrorists who are prepared to risk their lives. But I think that the sting has been taken out of these activities, and that this will gradually be done to an increasing extent—I have no doubt about that, particularly not in the light of the major success which the Rhodesians and the S.A. Police acting in conjunction with them there, have thusfar had in the struggle against the terrorists. Months have elapsed now without there being any further infiltration of terrorists. In my view the position is such that any infiltration can be effectively dealt with. In fact, I cannot visualize any terrorist infiltration with which it will not be possible to deal. South Africa has played its role in this connection, and it will continue to play that role as long as it is necessary. The hon. the Leader of the Opposition is aware of the fact that I have been asked by Britain how long the S.A. Police will remain there. My reply was, for as long as it is necessary to safeguard South Africa’s interests there. The reason we originally went in there was to rake our own chestnuts out of the fire in that it was P.A.C. and A.N.C. terrorists who were trying to infiltrate there. That is why we thought that it was no more than fair that we should rake our own chestnuts out of the fire in this case.

I want to say nothing further at the moment about the Rhodesian matter, except to say that the propaganda which is being made in certain circles, implying that the Government, and I in particular, are exerting pressure on the Prime Minister of Rhodesia to negotiate a settlement with Britain at all costs, is an infamous lie; it is devoid of all truth. In this connection I have made my standpoint and that of the Government very clear. It is known to Britain what my attitude is. I do not want to go into details at this juncture, because the hon. the Leader of the Opposition is aware of this. South Africa has played its role here, and this role has been an honourable one. I made it very clear to Britain that I am neither prepared to twist Mr. Smith’s arm, nor prepared to dictate to him—for the simple reason that if I were to do so, I would be interfering in the domestic affairs of Rhodesia, and that while I do not tolerate anyone interfering in my own domestic affairs. This was consistently the standpoint which I adopted in regard to this matter. I am aware that there was a strong rumour doing the rounds last year that I wanted to sell out Rhodesia. This story reached my ears from various quarters. But, Sir, the irony of the matter is that at that moment, when the rumours were being spread, my own 18 year-old son, who was then in the S.A. Police, was standing on the banks of the Zambezi. I say that South Africa has played its role and that it will continue to play its role as long as this is necessary.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition also put questions to me in regard to the Malagasy Republic (Madagascar) and Mauritius. We have a good understanding with these two territories. From time to time there is informal contact between these two territories and us in matters affecting trade and co-operation in the technical sphere. The planning adviser to the prime Minister has just paid a very successful visit to both these territories. He was received most cordially there. I believe that benefits for both sides will result from this visit.

The hon the Leader of the Opposition referred with appreciation to the visit of units of the S.A. Navy to Australia, where they were very well received. Something which I am particularly grateful for, and which redounds to the great credit of our Navy and the Minister concerned, is, as was specially mentioned in personal communications to me, the exceptionally good conduct of our young men who visited Australia on that occasion. It was said that it was a pleasure to meet them. We have, of course, paid a similarly successful visit to the Argentine, and not only to Australia. One finds it gratifying that this could be the case.

The matter which the hon. the Leader of the Opposition touched on first, i.e. that of the Indian Ocean, is one which of course gives rise to concern. In fact, it should be a source of concern to all of us. However, it amazes me to see that it is not causing as much concern in the free world as one could have expected. I am glad the hon. the Leader raised this matter, because I should like to avail myself of this opportunity to make an appeal from this Parliament, not only on behalf of this side of the House, but on behalf of the entire House, with all the emphasis at my command, to the free world to become aware of this problem which is developing here in this part of the world. It is not only the interests of South Africa which are at stake. On the contrary. Europe and America have a far greater stake there than South Africa, for with the situation as it is, with the closure of the Suez Canal they are going to suffer far more damage than we are if this route around Africa becomes impossible for Europe and America. We shall suffer hardships, but thank God our economy has at least progressed to the point where we will be able to subsist for a very long time. Not only that, but we have also taken precautionary measures, as hon. members know, to ensure that we can subsist for a long time. But is the shipping of Europe which must pass here. It is their raw materials, and foodstuffs which must pass here. And what is more, if Southern Africa is lost to the free world, it is only a small number of people who succumb here, but it is the future of a mighty free world which is then threatened, because small as we are, we are fulfilling a very great need and are playing a tremendous role here at the southernmost tip of Africa in keeping it open to the free world. Perhaps there is still time.

Britain’s withdrawal will only take place in 1970. Perhaps people may still come to their senses. Perhaps there may be a change. One does not know. We are conducting negotiations in this regard on the highest level. These are not matters which I can take further across the floor of this House. For that reason I am concluding—and I am very pleased that I am able to do so on behalf of the entire House—by once again making an appeal to the world outside to take cognisance, not for the sake of South Africa, but for their own sakes, and for the sake of all anti-communist powers, of this position which is developing, and to act accordingly.

Revenue Vote 4 put and agreed to.

Revenue Vote 5.—Transport, R41,300,000, Loan Vote L.—Transport, R1,000,000, and S.W.A. Vote 1.—Transport, R662,000:

There is a whole number of matters we on this side of the House wouid like to discuss with the Deputy Minister as far as transport is concerned, but I want to say at once that we find ourselves in a very difficult position as the report of the Marais Commission on the co-ordination of the various forms of transport in South Africa is not available to the public as yet. This Commission was appointed on 12th March, 1965, more than four years ago. It presented its report to the Government quite some time ago, but as yet it has not been made public. I think, Sir, you will realize that it is somewhat unrealistic and extremely difficult to discuss transport matters, in which the co-ordination of transport is of the utmost importance, when one knows that the Government has at its disposal the recommendations of a very important and select commission which the public, and especially the Opposition, does not have at its disposal. In this connection I should like to refer to the problem we have as regards the congestion of our cities. Yesterday we started to raise the matter under the Prime Minister’s Vote as it goes so much further than the immediate responsibilities of the Department of Transport, but the Prime Minister showed that he was not desirous of discussing the matter under his Vote. He had the support of the Minister concerned, who criticized us severely, but our problem is that what we have to do with here is a matter affecting various aspects of the national life of South Africa, and in the absence of the report of the Marais Commission, we must try to obtain a judgment on the matters which go further than the mere Department of Transport. But I shall nevertheless raise the matter with the Deputy Minister. He was informed that we would raise the matter, and I am pleased he was informed, because I hope we shall be able to have a fruitful discussion as a result.

This problem of the congestion of the large cities of South Africa is not one which is restricted to South Africa only; this is a worldwide problem. All over the world, as soon as a city becomes a real metropolis, as soon as its population begins to exceed one million to a considerable extent, one has this problem of traffic congestion, of immovability, with serious social and economic consequences, not only for that community, but also for the country; and the smaller the country, the larger the problems, because in that case the urban population constitutes a larger proportion of the total population of the country. Because this matter is of so much importance, I should like to learn the following, in the first place, from the Deputy Minister, if he is prepared to give us this information: Has this matter been discussed by the Marais Commission? Has the Marais Commission, in considering the co-ordination of transport, taken this question of the congestion of a few of our large cities into account, and has it made any recommendations in this regard? I sincerely hope it has. It is possible, however, that it has not done so, because four years ago the problem was different to what it is to-day; and if there are no recommendations to the Government in connection with this matter, this goes to show that the report of this Marais Commission is obsolete already even before Parliament has been in a position to consider it.

I think the first matter I want to put to the Deputy Minister is that I hope his Department will accept this fundamental and simple fact, i.e. that freeways are roads. Freeways are not a new form of transport; this is not a revolution in the field of transport. It is a road which has to fulfil a special function when the transport and the mobility of people and goods become so congested that they require special attention. Consequently I want to emphasize the point that whereas we are advocating that the Government should reconsider its policy in regard to subsidizing freeways, it should also have regard to the fact that here we are dealing with an important economic requirement for the general welfare and prosperity of the whole of South Africa. If our cities become congested, if our cities cannot provide efficient services, the whole of South Africa suffers. The experts in this field who differ from the Government always insist that we should have regard to the ratio of costs to benefit. I do not want to detract in any way from the importance of inter-city national roads and other major roads. They also are of the utmost importance to the economy and to the communications of the South African community. But it remains a fact that is as clear as a pikestaff that every rand one invests in improving the traffic in the cities gives one a larger economic benefit, rand for rand, than that one invests in the sparsely populated parts where the traffic makes less use of the expensive roads. This is an economic fact and I cannot understand anybody questioning it. If the Department, the Minister and the Deputy Minister come to the conclusion that they cannot subsidize these freeways, these throughways, in our cities from the National Road Fund, although we amended the Act establishing that Fund specially in 1962 here in Parliament to make that form of subsidizing possible. if they have now changed their minds again, I just want to say that such subsidies need not necessarily come from the National Road Fund. The Government can make the funds available to our large cities in a different way, and this was another of the reasons why I felt the hon. the Prime Minister should give his attention to this matter. If he can be satisfied by the Department of Transport that the Road Fund is not the proper source from which to subsidize the freeways, then it is the task of the Government and the Cabinet to designate alternative sources of subsidization. Mr. Chairman, in this connection I think we have to ask ourselves whether the South African motorist, who is making such a tremendous contribution to the country’s revenue from taxes, is receiving a fail deal; whether he is receiving in return for those taxes the services one would think he is entitled to receive. Dr. Verburgh of Stellenbosch, who is a specialist on the question of transport, found in 1964 that approximately R120 million was collected from the motorist in South Africa by means of excise duty on cars and tyres, duty on petrol, licences, etc., and that R90 million of that was spent on the maintenance of rural and urban highways. This is not a bad ratio because the motorist must be prepared to make a contribution to the general national income as well, and in view of the fact that 75 per cent of his contribution is spent on roads, he really has no complaint. But then it is interesting to note that Dr. Verburgh found that with this 75 per cent, with this R90 million he spent, only 34 per cent of the expenditure on roads in all urban areas in South Africa, came from the road-user. For that reason I emphasize the point that while 66 per cent of the expenditure, in the cities as well, comes from other sources of taxation, it is unlikely that the motorist as such can have any real complaint, but I ask you, Mr. Chairman, to have special regard to what is happening with the urban motorist and with our cities. Dr. Verburgh found that in 1964 70 per cent of the registered motor vehicles in the country were registered in our cities and only 30 per cent outside the cities. But the urban authorities were allowed to retain and spend in their cities only 21.5 per cent of the taxes they collected, for other authorities, from the motorist. This is out of proportion; there clearly is an injustice and this injustice becomes all the greater when it is borne in mind that our cities, that carry the tremendous burden of making transport possible in their densely populated areas, are dependent for their revenue mainly on two sources; the one is from services such as the supply of electricity, where they can rely on the profits only, and these cannot be large as these are essential services, or otherwise on rates and taxes levied on the properties situated in the area of that local authority. [Time expired.]

The hon. member asked a question in connection with the report of the Marais Commission. I cannot say in advance what the Marais Commission is investigating and I leave the matter to the hon. the Deputy Minister. The other matter he raised was the question of the bottlenecks in our urban traffic. This is a matter which we discussed exhaustively on a previous occasion on the basis of a motion moved by the hon. member for Durban (Point) earlier on this Session, and at that time it was very clear in what direction the hon. member for Durban (Point) would have liked to move. On that occasion we gave him all the information he wanted and we also advanced all the arguments we could against his attempt to drag this matter into politics.

Nonsense.

Mr. Chairman, the whole question concerns the obligations of the National Transport Commission in respect of urban roads. The National Road Fund derives its funds from the levy on fuel, and the primary function of that Fund is the construction of national roads. The demand for national roads in this country is insatiable. Out country’s need for roads is so large that the Road Fund cannot come anywhere near meeting the demand. Before proceeding I should like, as a matter of interest, to refer to one paragraph in the report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Financial Relations between the Central Government and the Provincial and Local Authorities. In part I of the main report, paragraph 112 and paragraph 113, this committee, that was appointed to institute a very thorough investigation also as a result of this problem, expressed the following opinion (translation)—

Sir, this committee wants to go much further than the Minister has already gone. In spite of the fact that the National Road Fund was established mainly for the construction of national roads, the Commission may at its discretion utilize funds for urban roads as well, and the Commission certainly did so, and did so generously, in the past. When the funds were available we occasionally approached this House for authority to finance these urban throughways as a result of the need which existed at that time. The Commission entered into heavy commitments, commitments of no less than R50 million in respect of five urban areas. Hon. members of the Opposition should therefore not try to create the impression here that the National Transport Commission is indifferent to this matter and adopts the attitude that the cities should see how to best struggle along on their own. This is not so. From its side the Commission has already accepted a commitment of R50 million, and I want to give hon. members the particulars. I am going to mention the figures with a specific purpose and that is because reference is often made to Cape Town in the following terms, “Yes, Cape Town has fine roads, but who has paid for them, and what about the other cities?” Mr. Chairman, the Commission has accepted a commitment of R15 million in respect of Johannesburg, a commitment of R11 million in respect of Cape Town, a commitment of R10 million each in respect of Durban and Pretoria, and a commitment of R5 million in respect of Port Elizabeth. But what is more, as far as Cape Town is concerned, where most progress has been made with this scheme of throughways and where most success has been achieved with them because the situation of Cape Town is different to those of other cities, possibly with the exception of Port Elizabeth, the Cape Provincial Administration has subsidized roads here in the Peninsula to the tune of 80 per cent minus this contribution of approximately R11 million it received from the Fund. The Committee of Inquiry into the Financial Relations between the Central Government and the Provincial and Local Authorities found that urban throughways are the responsibility of the cities.

But what is more, the Committee said that if the Commission entered into further commitments in respect of these schemes within cities, it should withdraw and transfer the commitments to the Provincial Administrations. The hon. the Minister said, “No, we want to accommodate the cities; an amount of R36 million of this R50 million is still outstanding and we shall meet our commitments in respect of throughways in cities.” The hon. the Minister said this at a function near Johannesburg. The contribution of this amount of R50 million by the National Transport Commission, was not the only thing it did. It went further than that. It said the cities were faced with a problem, i.e. taking the traffic through the cities. It said it had come to the conclusion that the throughways were not the solution, but that as far as by-passes and ring roads were concerned, it was prepared to accept full financial responsibility. The commitments entered into by the National Transport Commission in this connection, amount to no less than R122 million, of which amount R47 million is in respect of a ring road around Johannesburg and R25 million in respect of a ring road around Durban. Therefore it cannot be said that the National Transport Commission is doing nothing in connection with the problem urban authorities have in connection with their traffic. The commission is most certainly doing its work. A departmental commission of inquiry paid an overseas visit some time ago under the leadership of the chief road engineer of the Department and came to certain conclusions after an intensive investigation. One of these is that urban throughways do not solve the problem of traffic congestion within the street network of a city central area. This is the first conclusion they arrived at. The second is that these throughways require the expropriation of very valuable and large areas within urban areas. This corresponds to the opinion of Dr. P. J. Ridgen, director of the National Institute for Road Research of the C.S.I.R. In January, 1968, he addressed a conference and his speech was reproduced in The Open Road; he said the following—

They realized this was not the solution, and then decided rather to tax themselves with a view to constructing inter-urban railways. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Parow must not make a mistake now. We on this side of the House do not want to deny what is being done by the National Transport Commission as regards its assistance to our cities in respect of by-passes and ring roads. We simply want to have the problem of the congestion of our cities as a whole investigated, not necessarily by the National Road Fund but by the Government, as part of the transport problem of the whole of South Africa. If it is not the function of the National Road Board to subsidize approaches to the cities by means of freeways, the money has to be found in other ways. If freeways are not the solution, another solution to the problem must be offered. There is no point in saying that that in itself is not a solution. This is common cause. There are many other matters involved. There are the by-passes and the ring roads, there is the better utilization of public transport, the decentralization of urban streets; all these things form part of the problem. Our concern is this. There is not sufficient indication that the Government is aware of the problem and is sympathetic towards the problems of our cities, the cities that are the economic heart of South Africa, where traffic congestion is creating serious social and psychological problems, and this, on the long run, can only be to the detriment of South Africa.

I do not think that it is fair that this burden should be placed on people who own properties in our urban areas, with a subsidy from the provincial councils that are already complaining that they do not have sufficient sources of revenue to meet their existing obligations properly. We do not get any real indication that this question of the revenue of local authorities and of provincial councils is being taken into account properly by the Government. Commissions are appointed but it takes seven years before we learn what is to become of the commission. There is no sense of urgency. We get no sign from the Government to show that the Government realizes that this is an urgent problem, that every month that passes makes the solution more expensive. One of the problems of the Transport Commission with regard to the freeways it is subsidizing at present, is the fact that the municipalities inform them that the work is becoming more and more expensive as the years go by. They ask for more money because the work is going to cost more than originally estimated. This is not due to incorrect estimates but to the fact that the value of money is constantly decreasing. Time is of the essence in these matters, but we do not see that the Government feels that this is an urgent problem, something which has to be tackled with imagination and courage.

The problem has various aspects, and one of them is the question: Are freeways as such a solution? If not, what is the alternative?

Since the Department and one or two experts are opposed to freeways, the Government comes into conflict with other experts, the experts of the United Municipal Executive, the Association of Municipal Officials, the Road Federation itself. The latter stated that this condemnation of freeways was based merely on opinion. Then there is the opposition of the A.A. that also has experts who live with the problems of the majority of our motorists. Everyone is not in agreement on this matter. I am not going to say to-day who is right in this matter; I am not here to make political capital out of the matter. I am only asking that the Government should take it into consideration that these various opinions exist, and that the problem that exists in this regard is a growing and alarming one. The Government must take action and show us that it is interested in these matters; it must not come to light with negative measures only.

There are problems which may not be the direct responsibility of the hon. the Minister or the hon. the Deputy Minister, but they indicated yesterday that they did in fact accept them as their responsibility, and this is the allocation of capital to the development of our various means of transport in South Africa. To what extent should priority be given to railways, to road transport, and to other means of transport? Is it right that, because of the special circumstances of our transport system in South Africa, priority should always be given to certain forms of transport in respect of which the Government has the monopoly? These are all questions we cannot discuss properly while we are awaiting the report of the Marais Commission and while the hon. the Minister indicates that he is to be the sole judge of the entire transport problem of the whole of South Africa.

You will receive the Marais Report one of these days. It is at the printers at the moment. The work has been given out on contract.

I realize that there are difficulties, but the hon. the Minister should really not hold it against us if some degree of impatience does exist, not only amongst the Opposition but also amongst the nation, about the leisureliness with this report. In addition there is the leisureliness with the Borckenhagen Report as well as the Schumann Report on the financial relations between the various authorities. It seems the hon. the Minister feels that problems do not really exist in this regard.

We are asking for our transport problems in South Africa to be seen as a whole and that the congestion of our cities should be seen as part of that problem. We are asking for the national interest to be taken into account in the approach to this problem, and as part of the national interest the important geographical facts that there are concentrations of, people and of economic activity at certain places in the country which must receive special attention. This economic activity can be retarded and slowed down by this traffic congestion to such an extent that it may come to a standstill. These are the things we are asking for.

Mr. Chairman, we do not think that it is wrong when we say that we support the proposal of the Association of Municipal Engineers. We hope the Minister will once again give consideration to appointing a commission to conduct a special inquiry into this matter, a travelling commission with terms of reference not only to examine the position in South Africa and America, but elsewhere as well. In America the people were carried away and they wanted to build all the freeways on a standard based on peak hour traffic and not on average traffic for the whole day. They went too far. I have seen that for myself. Eventually the standard was too high and a reaction set in. The commission should examine the position in other parts of the world. This will be important. The United Municipal Executive indicated that if the Government did not want to appoint such a commission, it would do so. This proves how strongly they feel about the matter. But this will not be of much use, because it is necessary for the Government to be concerned in such an investigation. I hope the hon. the Minister and the hon. the Deputy Minister will give consideration to this and that they will appoint Mr. A. P. de Villiers of their Department to the commission and give him a large responsibility of leading them. Evidently this gentleman has a great deal of influence and, in my opinion, quite rightly so. His services can be very valuable. But I want to suggest that advice should also be received and considered from other sources. I sincerely hope that the Department of Transport and its Minister, as well as the Deputy Minister, will realize that here we are dealing with a problem which in point of fact is a world-wide one and which, in the light of the population explosion in South Africa, is going to become more urgent and more expensive to solve as time goes by. I hope this matter has received attention in the report of the Marais Commission. If it is not properly and exhaustively dealt with in that report, it is all the more urgent that action be taken as soon as possible by accepting a proposal such as that of the engineers, i.e. the appointment of a travelling commission to investigate the matter.

Mr. Chairman, I can understand the hon. member for Yeoville making such a heart-rending appeal in regard to this matter. He almost moved one to tears. The reason is that the only United Party City Council in the country, Johannesburg has found itself in a tight spot as a result of their injudicious planning in connection with the construction of freeways in the city. The hon. the Minister and the Transport Commission never stated that they were opposed to freeways. They were opposed to the building of freeways within urban areas, because that did not offer any solution. This has already been proved in Johannesburg. I want to inform the hon. member for Yeoville that in 1956 that city council brought out a group of consultants from America to tell them how to build freeways in Johannesburg. I think the amount spent on that was close on R14 million. What happened to the report of the American consultants? They shelved it. Then they began planning from scratch and subsequently brought out other consultants from abroad to help them. To-day people on the Johannesburg City Council admit that the freeways they are constructing are not going to offer a solution. When they are completed one day they will lie there as monuments to a lot of obsolete United Party city council members who did not know how to solve a problem.

R63 million was spent there.

Colossal amounts of money are being spent there, and they simply do not provide a solution. Why should the Transport Commission now accept liability for the costs incurred in an injudicious way by the City Council of Johannesburg, or any other local authority? We want to say to the hon. member for Yeoville that these heart-rending pleas he made will not find acceptance, and that we in Johannesburg as tax payers have now become sick and tired of planning being undertaken in such an injudicious way while we have to foot the bill.

But I should like to discuss another matter which also relates to freeways, etc. I do not want to go into the speech made by the hon. member for Yeoville any further. A matter which in fact affect my constituency to a large extent at the moment is the planning of the freeways around Johannesburg and to the South, and particularly the routing of these freeways. At present it sometimes happens that a road adjoins a persons property. It sometimes happens, particularly around Johannesburg where people own property which is not very large, that this routing virtually takes up the entire piece of land. We accept the fact development must take place and that somebody has to pay for that development; be we are not prepared to accept that only one individual, or only the small group over whose property the road is going to be built, should pay for that development.

I want to refer specifically to one farmer in my constituency, who is farming on a piece of land approximately 120 morgen in extent. This is irrigation land of which he has every square inch under intensive cultivation. But this piece of land lies from north to south. It is approximately three-quarter of a mile wide and five miles long. The routing of this freeway south of Johannesburg divides that piece of land neatly through the middle for a distance of more or less five miles. Now hon. members can understand that the land which that man will have to cede for this road is going to reduce his farming activities by probably at least 25 per cent. It is going to entail that he will have to move from the one end to the other with his milk cows because only one private bridge is being provided for him as a cross-over. It is going to take up a tremendous amount of his time. Briefly, it is simply going to create a tremendous number of problems for him if he wants to continue farming on that piece of land. I want to suggest now, without detracting in any way from the efficiency of that road, that it can be adjusted very effectively to the other farms through which the road will also have to go by routing the road along the boundary of that farm. That farmer was quite prepared to cede the piece of land requested from him, but through the middle of his farm. What is more, this man has recently made improvements to his entire farm. He built cow sheds as well as a house for himself. Now this freeway will run between his home and his cow sheds and other farm buildings. Notwithstanding all representations, the person entrusted with this routing refuse to lend an ear to his pleas, and will do nothing about it.

Another matter I want to touch upon is the compensation being received by these people. At present compensation is being paid on a basis of cultivated land and uncultivated land. The farmer on whose land mealies have been planted is compensated in the case of expropriation. This is regarded as cultivated land. But he does not receive a penny compensation for the grazing land on which his sheep and cattle are grazing. I maintain that that is unfair. I believe that the South African Agricultural Union has also made representations in this regard, and I want to advocate that the compensation for property, whether for the farm or other property, when it is expropriated for the purpose of road-building should be calculated at the same tariff irrespective of whether it is cultivated or uncultivated. I do not think it is fair that a farmer should cede his land, whether it is grazing land or any other kind, for nothing. I believe that all of us who are going to use that road one day are obliged to assist in bearing the costs of that road, and that it should not only be the small group of land owners who are being deprived of their land who should pay that price. I hope that this plea will fall on fertile ground and that, as far as the provinces are concerned, the Government will instruct them to carry out this principle.

In addition there is one other matter I wanted to touch upon quickly. It relates to motor car dealers who have new motors driven inland from the coast in order to sell them there. They then disconnect the mileometers of those new motor cars. I think that this is a very bad system which ought not to be allowed. I, as a private motor car owner am committing an offence when I drive with a defective mileometer in my motor car, or if I disconnect it. It is an offence for which I shall have to pay a fine. Whether by way of admission of guilt or after an appearance in court. However these motor car owners have been granted the right by the authorities to disconnect the mileometers of these motor cars, and to drive the motor cars from Port Elizabeth to Johannesburg, which is a distance of approximately 800 miles. I must then purchase that motor car as a new motor car. In many cases the drivers of these motor cars are very irresponsible, and it sometimes happens that motor cars are overturned. These motor cars, which have already been in an accident, are then sold. And what is more, and this is my greatest objection, the roadworthy certificate obtained by the factory in Port Elizabeth for the motor car, is used to sell the motor car in Johannesburg. The dealer is not obliged to have such a motor car tested again in order to determine whether it is still roadworthy. I think that this is a great anomaly, and I cannot advocate seriously enough that this matter be rectified and that these persons should not be allowed to take motor cars inland in this way. It is not fair towards the public that such motor cars should be offered for sale, that a motor car which has already done a lot of mileage should be sold as a new one, and particularly not with a roadworthy certificate which was issued in Port Elizabeth. It can happen that a person purchases such a motor car which is no longer roadworthy, and that such a motor car is then stopped by a traffic inspector and examined. Whose fault would it then be if the motor car was not roadworthy? The buyers or the sellers? I think that it is normally expected of the seller to see to it that the means of transport he is selling is road-worthy. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, when listening to the complaints of the hon. member for Langlaagte, I noticed that he could not, of course, avoid making political cracks at the Municipality of Johannesburg. I do not know the background of planning in connection with roads in Johannesburg, but from my own experience of provincial administrative control I believe that all these roads which are being built in and around Johannesburg were built only after deep and long consultation, not only with the local town council, but also with the provincial authorities and the National Transport Commission. It was with their compliance that these roads are being built. They are very much overdue and when they have been completed, they will certainly be an asset to Johannesburg. I do not believe, as the hon. member for Langlaagte does, that these roads will never be completed. He has no confidence in the local Town Council and I think he should not take up the time of this House to condemn those people who work so hard to solve their transport problems.

What about the Nationalist Town Council of Pretoria?

Yes, one could even refer to the Nationalist Town Council of Pretoria. They have their own troubles.

They have not started yet.

After condemning the Johannesburg Town Council the hon. member for Langlaagte went on to condemn the provincial authorities and the National Road Board about roads being built in his constituency and which go through a farm. Ele told us about the farm which was cut in half, and that the owner did not receive adequate compensation. If we had to avoid all farms when building national and link roads one can imagine what they will look like. It would look like a snakes-and-ladders board. It is unfortunate that roads sometimes have to go through very valuable farms. The national road to Paarl, for instance, goes through very valuable vineyards. The hon. member for Parow can verify that the owners of these farms received compensation amounting to the total value of the farm if the road running through it rendered the farm valueless. I do not know what the position in regard to this matter is in the Transvaal. If they wish to do so, the former owners may then lease back the divided farms from the provincial authorities. I think the same arrangement would also apply in the Transvaal. One has to face up to the fact that when national and link roads are built they can naturall/ not go around all farms and that certain people will suffer as a result. The same happens in respect of roads in cities.

The hon. member for Langlaagte referred to the car convoys. The hon. Minister for Transport knows the background as regards these car convoys, and why we have them. The Minister’s department is not in a position to convey all these motor cars by rail. A large number of these cars are conveyed by road trucks. Motor car dealers do disconnect the speedometers of these motor cars, but the convoys are controlled by tachographs. The speed of the vehicles is also controlled. When a motor car is bought the buyer may examine the tachograph. Furthermore, no reputable motor dealer will sell a motor car which has been involved in an accident. These vehicles are under guarantee, and the fact that it has been driven is disclosed to the owners. Buyers do not have to take cars that have been driven, because they will find that the same motor dealer will have quite a number of motor cars which have been delivered by truck. The decision is in the hands of the buyer and he does not have to buy such a motor car.

I now want to go on to the question of national roads and freeways. A lot has been said about it and the hon. member for Parow mentioned that the roads in the Cape are financed by the Provincial Administration. The 80 per cent subsidy they receive is from the licence fees paid by motor car owners.

They, the motorists, are entitled to it and one can only look at the beautiful roads we have in the Western Province to see the results. Before I go further I want to lodge a protest. We on this side of the House have tried very hard to obtain the latest report of the National Transport Commission, but we only received it when it was laid on the Table at the start of this debate. We have not been able to study it. It contains very useful information and I think it is wrong that we should be asked to enter into a debate when the report has only been submitted at such a late stage. One matter that I did notice in the report is that the National Road Fund is in the red this year. I do not know whether this is only a book entry or an overlapping of accounts. The hon. member for Yeoville has expressed himself in no uncertain terms at the fact that the Marais Commission’s report is not available. We have been waiting over the years for this report, because we regard it as the green light for the control, development and future of our transport facilities in this country. We have still not received it and we have to face up to the fact. We do not have the report but we still have the problems. When one deals with the financing of freeways and roads outside our cities, one accepts the fact that domestic roads are the responsibility of local authorities and that they derive the revenue to build those roads from rates. When dealing with the question of link roads and freeways through our cities one looks to the provincial authorities and the National Roads Commission for assistance as far as finance is concerned. They cannot be abandoned to the local authorities and told that they would have to find the money themselves in future. That is the easy way out. Motorists to-day pay, directly or indirectly, substantial amounts of money to the Receiver of Revenue in the way of taxation. This year motorists will contribute nearly R47 million towards the National Roads Fund. I agree that the costs involved when building roads and freeways are very high to-day. I think this amount is insufficient to meet the requirements of our road programmes. It costs a lot of money to build a first-class road, and they are very necessary. At the same time I would like to say that it is wrong to ask local authorities to levy a further tax on motorists to pay for these roads. That would be wrong. The burden cannot just be passed on to the local authorities without providing them with some sort of answer. If one examines the background of the original Act of 1935, one sees that it was after years of protest by the public that road conditions were improved as they are today. By world standards I think we can be very proud of our roads in this country to-day. They are wearing out, because the transport is becoming increasingly heavy. The country is progressing and better roads than we have at the present moment will have to be provided. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I should like to use the last few minutes at my disposal to bring the new coastal road, which is at present being planned along the South Coast, to the attention of the hon. the Minister. In view of the fact that this coastal road will run for approximately 100 miles through my constituency, you will probably agree that I have a considerable interest in it. This coastal road will undoubtedly be of great significance to this region. In the first instance it will open up a region, which was relatively isolated, to tourists, which will prove to be an economic shot in the arm for this region, so that this region will be able to offer new possibilities. For farmers over whose land this road will run, it will by no means be a blessing. The position in my constituency is that, as the road is routed at the moment, it will to a large extent have a prejudicial effect on the property of poorer farmers. While the farms of many of them lie from north to south, the road will travel from east to west, and all those farms will virtually be cut through the centre. In the area I am talking about the provision of water is a very important factor. It is for that reason that the farms now tend to lie south towards the sea, where there is more water available. Very recently boreholes have been sunk, but usable water is only found at a depth of 500 ft. When a farm is divided up into camps and provided with water, therefore, and a road is built right across the farm, I may probably say that it is not a blessing for such a farmer. I should also like to mention the work of divisional councils which construct access roads to the beach resorts. I am thinking in particular now of the beach resorts for Coloureds, which have to be provided with access roads. The farmers in this area, as well as the Divisional Council with the building of access roads to the beach resorts, will all be affected by the situation and character of this new coastal road. With a view to this, I now want to appeal to the Minister of Transport to make the routing of the road available to us as soon as possible. As soon as the routing is publicized, the great degree of uncertainty which still exists at present will disappear. If the farmers know how their farms are going to be affected by the routing of the road, they know what steps they must take in regard to their further planning. If the Divisional Council knows where the road is going to be constructed, it knows where and how to make provision for the crossings or the subways they have to build. Apart from the routing of the road, I also want to ask that a clear indication be given of the nature of the road. There must be an indication of where the junction is going to be. how many junctions there will be and how far apart the junctions will be. If that information is available, the further general planning can be proceeded with. In addition I want to request that the road, and this is actually the work of the engineer, should as far as possible be constructed as close as is practicable to the coastline. I am making this request because those parts close to the coast will of course not be so suitable for farming purposes. I have already mentioned that there will be problems in regard to water supply. If the road is built as close as possible to the sea, and this is after all a coastal road, then there is the advantage that the damage done by the construction of the road will be limited as far as possible. Where access roads to sections of the farms on the opposite side of the road can be made, I just want to request that provision be made for this as well, where it is in any way practicable. That region through which the road will run is a region where there is still a great deal of small game. This matter is one which is very close to my heart. This region is very well afforested, and one finds steenbokkies or duikers and bush buck there. This game has recently begun to increase in number because many farmers are beginning to apply game preservation on a large scale there. I can tell you briefly what the situation under normal circumstances will be when the road has been constructed. The road is fenced in on both sides, and in times of drought the buck crawl through the wire to graze on the green grass. Hon. members know that even a light shower causes the water to run off the road, and this in turn causes a lot of grass and shoots to spring up. You can imagine what will happen if they are grazing next to the road and are struck by the fast-moving motor cars. Not only will all this game be destroyed within three years’ time, but large bush buck, which weigh approximately 400 lbs., will cause serious accidents. At this early stage of the planning I must therefore make an appeal to the Minister to ensure that these roads in particular are fenced off in such a way, particularly in the dune regions, that the ordinary buck or bush buck will not have access to the road. This means therefore that the wire will have to be made at least 6 ft. high so that the buck will not be able to jump over. If this is not done, it will be of no use fencing off the road. These, then, are the few points which I wanted to bring to the attention of the hon. Minister.

Mr. Chairman, I wish to follow the hon. member for Salt River in lodging a strong protest because only after this debate had started this afternoon the annual report for 1967-’68 was made available for the first time. In other words, this report is not a recent report; it deals with the year ending 31st March, 1968 and it only reached us after the start of the debate this afternoon. The Department, however, may not have had time to issue annual reports or they may not have had time to let us have the Marais Commission’s report, but they are apparently planning to do a lot of talking this year. I say this, be-because I see that the telephone budget has gone up from R63,000 to R92,000. I also do not know to whom they are sending telegrams this year, but the amount involved in the sending of telegrams has been pushed up from R.5,000 last year to an estimated R160,000 this year. Are we to receive telegrams this year instead of reports? I want to raise three matters this afternoon. First of all, I should like to ask a question. Can the hon. the Minister, or the Deputy Minister, give me details of the item of R1 million in respect of the purchase of aircraft? For instance, what aircraft is this for and for what purpose are the aircraft to be used?

I now come to the question of airports, for which provision is made under Loan Vote L. This year less than R1 million have been allocated for airports, i.e. R980,000, for additions, buildings, etc. If one looks at the Railway Budget, one sees there an amount of R100 million lor aircraft. There are some 16 new aircraft on order, while the planning at our airports to accommodate these aircraft is falling miles and miles behind. There are plans for Jan Smuts, but for the others there is just talk. I glanced briefly through the latest annual report and there the only reference I could find is to the enlargement of Durban Airport “in order to create greater space”. But all that entailed, was to move a little “hokkie” from the centre of the building to the wall. The other day, in one day, Durban Airport had to handle 1,600 passengers. The number of passengers at the Durban Airport has almost doubled in the past five years. To-day it is almost impossible to move there particularly over long week-ends when extra flights are scheduled. The facilities there are utterly inadequate and the staff are working under impossible conditions. They have to cope with this tremendous pressure of traffic without having the necessary facilities to enable them to do their job properly. What facilities there are, are primitive, primitive in the extreme. Why cannot we in this age have some of the simple aids which are being used by any modern industrial firm? Take a simple aid like a conveyor belt for luggage.

The hon. the Minister does not have to get into the rush, like into a rugby scrum, in order to get his luggage, because he receives special V.I.P. treatment—his suitcases are given immediate clearance. But the passengers have to queue up and scrum down to get their luggage while it would cost next to nothing to have a circulating conveyor belt on which the luggage can be put, as is the case in most of the modern American airports. Take mechanical aids. Why cannot we have these? They do not cost millions because for a matter of few thousand rand the immediate problem could be relieved. And what about the future? What provision is being made for the jumbo jet age in two years time?

Have a look also at Loan Vote B.

But this is for buildings, mostly. I see there is an item for Jan Smuts, but where is the item for Durban Airport?

Not for Durban.

But I am talking about the Durban Airport and the Cape Town Airport.

The jumbo jets will not go to Durban.

Why not? Durban is one of the greatest tourist centres. I have here a forecast of a year ago of “Durban’s Jumbo Hopes”. All facilities, except airport facilities, are there for tourist traffic to go straight there. Everything is being concentrated on the reception of jumbo jet parties, except the facilities at the airport.

Jumbo jets will not go to Durban.

The Minister says that jumbo jets will not go to Durban. That is so because he is not planning ahead. He is not planning even to meet the normal demand at the Durban Airport. Take only restaurants. Why cannot the Minister allow these restaurants, which have been let out to private enterprise, to use Indian waiters in Durban to overcome the tremendous staff problem, so to give a better service to the travelling public? Why are they not allowed the facilities which the Minister is entitled to give them, for instance to open their bars to passengers on closed days? These are simple little things that can improve the running of airports. Another thing—he could take tape recorders into use to obviate one having to listen to some of the voices you have to listen to to-day. Let him use tape recorders, although he shall have to have a lot of records made to express regret at delays in departures—360 in the last five or six weeks! But then at least one could listen to the announcements, in a voice which one can at least enjoy.

I now want to come to a very serious matter concerning the Department. I have in the course of this Session asked a number of questions about road transportation inspectorate. In the 1966-’67 report I find under the heading “Division of transport inspections” the following:

Further on it states that 14,000 warnings have been issued, 6,400 prosecutions undertaken, of which 4,000 were successful. This inspectorate is there to deal with law enforcement, but we still find in Natal that every single one of the staff employed on inspectorate work has been tried and found guilty of bribery or corruption.

On a point of Order, Mr. Chairman …

Order! The hon. member may not discuss this matter now as it is still sub judice. Certain court cases are still pending.

I have specifically checked with the Police and with the Department in Durban. I have been informed that as far as Natal is concerned there are no cases pending.

Mr. Chairman, I wish to raise the following point of order. I should like to point out that two former inspectors and six inspectors in Natal and one in Transvaal were charged and that the Transvaal charge is still sub judice. As the State used the same briber in all these cases and is still using him in order to prove the State’s case, I contend that this matter should not be discussed any further here as it may result in the legal proceedings being prejudiced.

I have given my ruling in this regard. It remains unchanged.

May I deal then with the reply to a question in which I asked the number of staff in the various areas? I found that in Durban in 1968 there was one inspector earning between R250 and R300 per month; one senior inspector earning between R200 and R250, and two inspectors earning between R70 and R200 a month. [Time expired.]

Like the hon. member for Durban (Point), I also want to deal with the position at our airports in general in South Africa, and particularly the international airport Jan Smuts, to which very elaborate extensions are being made at the moment. I want to refer to it especially in view of the boom in air travel which we are expecting in the near future. I know that the hon. the Minister of Transport has appointed a special committee to plan the future needs resulting from the jumbo jet passenger explosion which we expect. Passengers are to-day being whisked at jet speeds through the sky, but they are frustrated on the ground as the result of clogged terminals and snarled-up traffic between the city terminals and the airport terminals. It sometimes takes longer to travel from Jan Smuts into the city than it takes to travel to Bloemfontein by a fast jet. I wonder whether the Deputy Minister would not consider for the future, if it cannot be done now, using helicopters to expedite the travel of passengers from the airports to the city terminals, particularly the international airport. In other words, the task which has to be tackled in future is in regard to the congestion at the country’s airports, especially Jan Smuts. Aspects which are affected are the booking offices, the restaurants and dining facilities, the traffic halls and the parking lots at airports which are sometimes filled to overflowing, especially on Sundays. To-day’s big aviation problem, as I see it, is not so much in the air as far as South Africa is concerned, but or the ground, and consequently I was very glad to read that the hon. the Deputy Minister during his recent trip to New York encountered many new ideas which he has ordered his Department to investigate and to study. Perhaps when he replies to the debate he will tell us something more about this.

I want to ask him, firstly, whether a system like the American one where a prospective passenger writes his own ticket by telephoning an airline company and obtaining his seating and his flight number by telephone cannot be arranged in South Africa as well. His fare is then credited to his credit card, which as we all know is becoming so fashionable in South Africa. This means that for internal flights all the cumbersome details and waiting will be eliminated. At the entrance of the airport the porter simply attaches a baggage claim ticket to the passenger’s baggage, and hands the other half to the passenger. Then the baggage is put on a conveyor belt, as was recommended here by the hon. member for Durban (Point), which carries it to a central depot in the building, whence the baggage is despatched to the correct route. I also want to urge the Deputy Minister to see whether a conveyor belt cannot be instituted to carry the baggage straight from the incoming plane to a central baggage claim depot, where it is deposited on a round revolving platform in order to make it easier for each passenger to get hold of his baggage. I can assure you, Sir, that much valuable time is wasted to-day at Jan Smuts and other internal airports waiting for baggage to arrive as the result of the outdated means of getting the baggage there by hand-pushed or driven carts. I also want to ask the Minister whether the descending passenger platforms from planes cannot be drawn by motorized vehicles as at other international airports. Is it not possible, also, to supply pushcarts to passengers with which they can take their own baggage to the bus or to their private transport from the place where they reclaim their baggage. In this way I think the Bantu labour which we have at our airports can be reduced to a bare minimum.

The aim of the S.A. Airways should always be, as I see it, to speed people to and from airports as quickly as possible. While we are spending so many millions of rand to-day on the improvement and extension of our international airport, we may as well see to it that we make it a real show-window and Showpiece for South Africa which pro rata to our population will rank with the very best in the world. One must remember that the very first impression an overseas tourist gains of our country is at the Gate of Africa, which is Jan Smuts Airport. While I am talking about impressions, it is true that English is to-day the language of international aviation, but the indigenous language of any country should not be neglected and is not neglected in any other country, but I must say that I often get the impression that Afrikaans sometimes takes second place at our airports and also at Jan Smuts. I especially gained that impression in the Customs Department when I recently returned from overseas, but I hope that that day was the exception.

Since closed circuit television is being used generally these days for commercial purposes in South Africa, I also want to ask the Deputy Minister whether he will not have closed circuit television installed in different parts of the new international airport, as well as in the internal traffic halls of our airports, showing the exact times of departure and arrival and the flight numbers as well as the exit gate. Most overseas airports have this system, some even showing the young lady making the announcements. The announcements over the public address system at our airports are often not very audible, particularly if one is having refreshments somewhere else. Another innovation I want to recommend for the consideration of the Minister is whether it would not be possible to build the overseas type of canopy which enables passengers to walk under cover straight from the airport into the plane.

Then I want to refer briefly also to the traffic halls at Jan Smuts. One of the biggest irritations is the untidiness in which the traffic halls are sometimes left after big groups of different nationalities have passed through these halls. It often resembles the unseemly spectacle which confronts one after a rugby test match at Ellis Park or at Newlands. I want to make an appeal to the leaders or organizers of such large groups to impress upon their members to keep our international airport in such a condition as they would like to find it themselves when they arrive there. As far as separate halls are concerned, I hope the Minister will be able to tell us—that is the usual procedure at international airports overseas—that departing overseas passengers will immediately pass through the passport, immigration and health control departments and that a separate waiting hall will be provided for them, which is not the position at the moment. This will, I think, aid considerably matters like security measures, because according to the present system departing overseas passengers are allowed to mingle with private people and relatives for a considerable time.

Then there is the question of the catering services. I have had many complaints mentioned to me about the catering services both at Jan Smuts and at other internal airports. The consensus of opinion seems to be that they leave much to be desired. The poor quality of food and service and the high prices have been mentioned to me, as well as the lack of friendliness and bilingualism in the restaurants and coffee shops. I know the catering services are not run by the Department of Transport, but by private contractors, but I want to appeal to the Minister to impress upon these contactors that their services must be up to standard. [Time limit.]

I think I shall reply at this stage already. Hon. members will still have many opportunities to speak. It is no use that hon. member throwing up his hands. In the first place, I want to tell the hon. member for Yeoville that the hon. the Minister has already told him what the position is in regard to the report of the Marais Commission. This report is still in typewritten form, and it has only been handed over to the Minister himself. It was handed over to the Minister two months ago and subsequent to that it was handed over to the printers. Immediately after the Minister had received it, it was handed over to the printers. Even after it had been handed over to the printers, our Department attempted to expedite the printing of this report, but unfortunately it is still not ready to-day and I cannot blame anybody for the delay. But I want to apologize for our not having it available to the House.

Then the hon. member once again spoke about the national roads, but in particular about the freeways in the urban areas. I want to point out to the Committee that there has already been a special motion this year in regard to this matter, I think it was by the hon. member for Durban (Point), and that on that occasion I replied very fully and even furnished this House with the figures and the amounts in respect of what had already been spent. In spite of that the hon. member, and his whole party, raised this matter under the Prime Minister’s Vote yesterday, and the Minister of Transport replied to it. Rut now I want to call attention to a number of very important aspects. The hon. member wanted to know whether the report of the Marais Commission had anything to say in regard to this aspect. Hon. members have already had access to the Borckenhagen Report, and in that report it is stated very explicitly that we should steer clear of these urban freeways; this is not the task of the National Transport Commission, and it is not the task of the National Roads Board. It is a task for the local authority. That is what the Borckenhagen Commission says. The hon. member tried to point out that with these national roads which we were building, we were actually serving the sparsely-populated areas of South Africa, but the densely-populated areas had to pay for them and did not derive any benefit from them. But, surely, this is not the case. In the first place, national roads are roads for linking up, from point to point, the industrial areas, the developed areas and the urban areas, for the very purpose of affording the inhabitants of the densely-populated areas the necessary road facilities for driving to the other points where they have to be. In the sparsely-populated areas access to these national roads is not provided as a matter of course, for the latter are limited access roads. There is limited access to these roads. In this regard they do not derive any greater benefit than the urban areas do. The hon. member for Parow replied very thoroughly to this, and indicated what the position was in regard to Cape Town and other cities. Sir, the problem here is not the congestion in cities as a result of too few freeways. On the contrary, the problem is faulty town planning; the problem is that we did not look far ahead, and I am now going to mention a few examples. America is one of the examples I want to mention. In America one finds that the chain stores are moving out of the densely-populated areas to the peri-urban areas, for the very reason that they have congestion over there and are not trying to solve the problem by constructing freeways.

That is happening in Johannesburg, too.

Johannesburg is another example I want to mention. But I also want to put the other problem to hon. members. If we were simply to go on financing urban freeways, as the hon. member expects us to do, we would find—and Parkinson’s Law proves this—that city engineers would build grandiose schemes merely to enhance the status and prestige of their city. I am going to mention an example here without mentioning the city concerned. At one of our major cities we planned a by-pass which would cost just over R5 million. But the city council of that city wanted this very same road to pass through the city and to divide their city in two.

That is Pretoria.

No, it is not Pretoria. They wanted to take all the traffic from other places through the city. This would not have afforded them a solution to their problem; on the contrary, it would merely have aggravated the congestion in the city, and the cost of that road would have come to more than R48 million. They they approached us for assistance. The hon. member asked us to appoint a commission of inquiry, as the Association of Municipal Engineers is doing. Sir, they are free to proceed with their inquiry. We have already investigated the matter thoroughly, and Mr. P. A. de Villiers, whose name the hon. member happened to mention, was also a member of that commission. After our inquiry we arrived at the conclusion that this was not a solution. I shall presently mention a few figures merely to indicate what is being done and why we cannot go any further. The hon. member also made a statement here which I cannot allow to pass without comment. He wanted to know why the Government was financing transport in such a way that the State retained a monopoly in regard to transport, referring to the capital investment in railways and in national roads. Mr. Chairman, when I see what competition there is in America and in Australia between railway traffic and road traffic and when I have regard to the fact that, because of the uncontrolled, huge, heavy loads conveyed on American roads, their roads are being destroyed and worn out completely, and that their railways, which are fortunately in the hands of private companies, are only getting low-tariff traffic and are going downhill as a result, then I think that South Africa is in a privileged position to have a National Transport Commission to ensure a well-ordered system of traffic. The State has never had a transport monopoly. If hon. members want the information, I am prepared to indicate how many objections lodged by the Railways to transport permits being issued by the National Transport Commission, have been rejected. The National Transport Commission is a statutory commission and its function is to ensure well-ordered traffic in South Africa. The hon. member should therefore not create the impression that in this regard it is our aim to protect a monopoly. Therefore, merely for the information of hon. members, I want to mention the initial amounts which we made available for financing urban freeways partly: Durban, R10 million, Port Elizabeth, R5 million; Johannesburg R15 million; Cape Town, R11 million, and Pretoria, R10 million. However, it was made clear that we would not pay any further subsidies to them. I must also tell the Committee that the costs involved in these schemes have increased and are considerably in excess of the estimated costs. As regards Durban, the amount has increased from R25 million to R58 million; the cost involved in the Port Elizabeth scheme has increased from R14 million to R20 million, and that of the Johannesburg scheme from R42 million to R68 million. Hon. members can see how the costs are soaring, and one has to apply the brake somewhere. In a moment I shall tell hon. members what the position of the Fund is.

The value of money has decreased to that extent.

No. The estimated cost of the Pretoria through-road scheme comes to R115 million at the moment. These figures will give hon. members an indication of how costs have increased. Although it has been decided not to make any increased subsidies available in respect of the construction of these urban through-road schemes and to have no further part in such schemes, I can assure hon. members that the Commission does not adopt an indifferent attitude towards these cities, because apart from the R50 million which has already been made available in respect of urban through-road schemes, the Commission has accepted full financial responsibility for the construction and the maintenance of the following projects, to mention only a few of them: Durban’s outer ring road, R25 million; Pietermaritzburg’s bypass, R3,500,000; Kroonstad’s bypass, R2,300,000 …

Are these the final costs?

Yes. Pretoria’s eastern bypass, R10.300,000; the Silverton bypass, R3,200,000; Johannesburg’s ring road, R47,000,000; Bloemfontein, R5.700,000; East London, R11,300,000; Port Elizabeth’s bypass, R11,000,000; Cape Town’s Black River/Parkview road, R2,700,000; in other words, a total of R122 million. To what purpose? To try to relieve the congestion in the cities. We do not divert fast-passing traffic into cities. One does not stop in the city to have a cup of tea or coffee simply because one happens to be driving through the city; one plans ahead where one is going to fill up with petrol and where one is going to have coffee. We are keeping this traffic out of the cities, and we are doing this for the sake of road safety and so as to relieve the traffic problem. We do not adopt an indifferent attitude towards the problems of the cities. Sir, I do not want to take up the time of the Committee any longer by furnishing further statistics.

The Committee appreciates them.

In that case I shall gladly furnish them. I also want to point out that the Provincial Administrations are in fact engaged in subsidizing road schemes to the following amounts: Johannesburg, R6 million (and this represents 40 per cent of the contribution made by the National Transport Commission); Durban, R2,500,000 (25 per cent of N.T.C. contribution); Pretoria, R4,000,000 (40 per cent of N.T.C. constribution); Cape Town and Port Elizabeth, 80 per cent of the cost of the scheme, minus the National Transport Commission contribution. Hon. members will therefore see that assistance is also being granted by the provinces. Sir, hon. members must appreciate that the provinces are being subsidized by this Government on the rand for rand basis. In other words, via that subsidy and via the assistance granted by the provinces, we are helping the urban areas whereever we can and also helping to relieve the burden of the urban ratepayers. The hon. member referred to the estimate made by Professor Verburgh of the University of Stellenbosch. What his analysis amounts to, is that in respect of the next 20 years we shall need R2,000 million for the construction of roads in urban areas.

One hundred million per year. That is not much.

But let us now look at the position of the Fund. In respect of the three years as from 1968-’69 to 1970-’71, if we were to implement the proposals made to us by the provinces, the estimated deficit is as much as R52 million. In other words, there is quite a number of road construction programmes which were submitted to us by the provinces and which we simply could not accept; we had to tell the provinces that they would have to defer these schemes. These programmes were regarded as extremely important by the provinces; they approached us for assistance and said that they regarded the construction of these roads as being top priority. Sir, who is the father of our towns and cities? According to our system of government the father of our towns and cities is, in the first place, the provinces, and because they are the father of our towns and urban areas it is also, in the first instance, the provinces which should submit to us those road construction programmes which they regard as essential. As I have already said, they regard the construction of these roads as being extremely important, and if all the schemes submitted to us had to be implemented, we would be saddled with a deficit of R52 million.

That is the problem; what are you going to do about it?

This is not a matter which the hon. member merely has to submit to the National Transport Commission or to the Department of Transport; it is a matter which should be raised when a decision is taken on the financial relations between the Government, the provinces and the local authorities. When that matter comes up for discussion we can look into it, and I think that this has already been done in the debate on the motion introduced by the hon. member for Durban (Point). In that debate I furnished certain data in this regard and stated what I regarded as the essentials and how the problem could be solved. Mr. Chairman, for the time being this is all I want to say in reply to the hon. member for Yeoville. Now I want to come to the hon. member for Langlaagte. The hon. member has two problems. One of these is a fundamental problem.

He has a problem with himself.

No, he raised an extremely important matter here, not only on behalf of his voters, but also in the interests of the productive utilization of agricultural land. This is a problem which we must face squarely, but we are saddled with this problem: In the first instance, there is the question of location. A road has to be located somewhere; one cannot construct a road in the air. I want to make it very clear that the first step such a farmer or such a body should take, is to contact the National Transport Commission itself and to make representations to them. He should discuss the matter with the Commission, and if he has not yet done so, I want to request him to do so because, in considering such a matter, the National Transport Commission takes all factors into account, i.e. the best location, the most economic location, and in considering what would be the most economic location, they do not only have regard to the fact that in so many years’ time one would have saved so many miles and consequently be able to travel so much more cheaply; they also have regard to the fact that in so many years’ time one would no longer be able to produce so much on that land. In this regard I want to mention the following example: In the case of the road to Paarl which will now pass through Du Toit’s Kloof, or rather pass through under Du Toit’s Kloof—the case the hon. member for Salt River mentioned—we are even prepared, at the request of the hon. member for Worcester, to accompany the chief engineer to the proposed site in order to meet the farmers there and to look at possible alternative routes so that the absolute minimum of inconvenience may be caused. The hon. member also raised the question of compensation. I want to say at once that the information the hon. member has in regard to compensation is wrong, because we pay for every inch of land which is expropriated for national roads, be it cultivated land or pasture land. But we do have a problem in this regard, and I think that I should put it to the Committee. This is the problem: The hon. member for Salt River told us what was being done in the Cape for instance, and then he said he hoped that it was also being done this way in the Transvaal. The position at present is that the valuations are being done by the various provincial administrations, which have the physical control over these matters. They determine the valuations. They differ from one another. The method used by the Free State differs from the one used by the Transvaal. Natal appoints sworn appraisers. We try to do it by way of consultation. I have already asked for a meeting to be convened so that we may see whether it is possible to deal with this matter on a uniform basis throughout the country. We are working along those lines. The Act provides that compensation must be paid in respect of land used for national roads.

The other matter the hon. member raised here, is in connection with motor-car dealers who have cars driven with disconnected speedometers. This is, in the first place, a matter which belongs under the provincial administrations and under the Departments of Commerce and Industries. Like the hon. member I believe that once a car has covered the journey between Johannesburg and Port Elizabeth—700 miles—it is a second hand car, i.e. it is no longer a new car.

The court does not think so.

That may be the case, but this is what I personally believe. When I buy a car and the speedometer shows that it has done four or five miles, whereas it has in fact done, say, 700 miles, then I am not getting what I think I am buying. This is a matter which belongs under the provincial administrations with their road ordinances and also under the Department of Commerce and Industries, for to my mind such a car is a second hand car.

Yes.

I am glad that the hon. member for Yeoville agrees with me.

The annual report has only been tabled today, and both the hon. member for Durban (Point) and the hon. member for Salt River objected to that. Let me now give you some information. The Department handed over the draft report to the printers in January of this year already, and since then we have made every effort to expedite the printing of this report. The printing was given out on contract, and let me say that the Department received the full co-operation of the printers. Unfortunately there is nothing that can be done about the matter. I think the hon. member for Durban (Point) can be pleased that he did after all receive the report to-day! To my knowledge there are many other Departments whose reports are not available as yet.

Who are the printers?

The Cape Times. I am not withdrawing what I said; we received their full co-operation. It simply could not be helped.

I have a great deal of sympathy with the hon. member for Mossel Bay because to my mind he said a few very fine things. The hon. member spoke about game which might be killed on our roads, and it often makes me very sad to see how unnecessarily people kill animals on our roads. The route is being surveyed at present; the surveys have not yet been completed, and as soon as the plans are available, the location will be determined and all interested parties will be informed. All interested bodies will be informed. The road will be constructed as close to the coastline as possible. I also want to tell hon. members that it will be properly fenced off.

Is that the road between Hermanus and Mossel Bay?

It is the coastal route extending from Somerset West to Mossel Bay and beyond; that is the road I am referring to. If the hon. member wants more information on how much progress we have made, I shall furnish it, but in broad outline this is the position. As soon as the surveying of the road has been completed, we shall make the information available and then discuss the matter with all interested parties.

I am glad the hon. member for Mossel Bay mentioned this question of the proximity to the coastline. Here we are being requested to construct the road close to the coastline, whereas to other people we have to say, “No, stay away from the coastline.” We shall never be able to please everybody; that is something we must indeed take into account. The road will be constructed as close to the coastline as possible.

For what reasons?

In the first instance, this is a coastal road, and a coastal road is situated close to the coastline. In the second instance, this is the most economic road. In the third instance, we are a country which wants to improve our tourist industry.

Is it a picturesque road?

Yes, it is a picturesque road.

One of the questions put toy the hon. member for Durban (Point) was in regard to the cost of telephone calls and telegrams. He wanted to know whether we were going to make nothing but telephone calls, etc., this year. I want to tell the hon. member at once that as a result of the new Post Office Rearrangement Act, Government Departments will, as from 1st April, no longer be provided with these services free of charge.

Who paid for telegrams and telephone calls previously?

I shall give you the particulars. The postage on letters and parcels amounted to R55,000. Meteorological radio telegrams and telephones amounted to R171,700. This is what the hon. member is objecting to. In the past radio telegrams, mainly from ships, and telephone calls to the Weather Bureau for the purpose of furnishing meteorological data, constituted a free service provided by the Post Office. Therefore the hon. member’s information is wrong. The hon. member says that these services have always been paid for.

I am saying that previously you paid for telegrams and telephone calls.

I shall repeat it for the hon. member. In the past radio telegrams, mainly from ships, and telephone calls to the Weather Bureau in which meteorological data is furnished, constituted a free service provided toy the Post Office?

Is that the R160,000?

It is R171,700. The hon. member also asked questions in regard to this amount of R1 million for aircraft. The aeroplane we are using at the moment, is a Dakota.

Who is we?

The Department of Transport. In order to ensure that these aids function effectively at all times —i.e. the navigational aids which we need in civil aviation—they have to be tested all the time. For this purpose the Department has up to now been making use of the Dakota aircraft which we took over from the Department of Defence in 1957 and fitted out with the necessary equipment. As a result of the increase in the number of aids that have to be tested as well as the advent of the turbine type of aircraft which flies at very high speeds at heights of between 15,000 and 40,000 ft., the Department can no longer make use of the Dakota aircraft only in conducting these tests in regard to navigational aids. On the recommendation of IDACC and with the approval of the Treasury, provision is consequently being made for the purchase of a modern jet aircraft which will enable the Department to test these aids under the circumstances under which they are being used at present. I want to tell the hon. member that I specially asked to be allowed to see how this was done. That was before I held this Office—because I took an interest in this. I flew in the Dakota one night to see how it made contact with the D.F. Malan Airport and to see whether all the navigational aids of this airport were in working order. It is essential for the safety of our air traffic in South Africa that we do this. Now the hon. member is asking for improved facilities at airports. In the first instance, he mentioned Durban. I now want to tell the hon. member that I have good news for him. I quote—

They are already working at this—

Hear, hear!

So the hon. member can see that I have good news for him. It was not necessary for the hon. member for Durban (Point) to ask this across the floor of the House. We had already realized how important this was and seen that we had to grant assistance there.

The hon. member for Durban (Point), as did the hon. member for Turffontein, also spoke about the conveyor-belt system, etc. In the first instance, I want to tell the hon. member for Turffontein that this system is being considered in the new planning as regards the Jan Smuts Airport and as regards our buildings. Plans have already been made for the introduction of a conveyor-belt and a turn-table so that one may take one’s luggage when it comes past. We are thinking further ahead than hon. members realize.

Have you just discovered that that is what they do overseas?

No, I went overseas for another reason, which I have already mentioned.

The hon. member for Turffontein raised a second matter. He wanted to know whether we could not, as is the case overseas, make provision, inter alia, for tickets to be taken in advance. Of course, this is a matter which belongs under the South African Airways or the South African Railways, under which it falls. This is being done overseas because people with travel agency credit accounts or even with Diner’s Club card credit accounts have made arrangements with those airways beforehand. But this is a matter which belongs under the South African Airways and the South African Railways.

Then the hon. member also wanted to know whether we could not use helicopters between the airports and the cities. I want to tell him, firstly, that the distance is too short. It would not be economic. But, secondly, I want to tell him that this is not even being used in New York. The reason for this is a problem which we must take into account. At the moment there is already so much air traffic, in view of all the aircraft waiting at the New York airport and the air space which is so crowded with aircraft, that one cannot add to the congestion by landing there in helicopters. To take people to and from airports quickly, is an international problem, so much so that I heard the other day that they were considering ways and means in America of taking passengers away from the airports. They want to convey the passengers by means of trains travelling between 500 and 600 m.p.h. They have three models on which they are working at the moment so as to see whether this can be done. This is because of the fact that they have also found there that people have great difficulty in travelling from the airports to the cities, and vice versa, in spite of all their freeways, which cost such a great deal.

Can you imagine what the position would have been without these freeways?

These are not freeways passing through the city; they are merely freeways to the airports. If one thinks of the freeways which were built to the airports, one finds that at present it takes less than 12 minutes from Cape Town to the D F. Malan Airport.

With a Cadillac?

No. I do it in my little Volkswagen. If we look at the freeways which are being planned from Pretoria and Johannesburg to Jan Smuts and the one that has already been built to the airport at Durban, we are going to eliminate this problem by way of the freeway system.

The hon. member also said that our airports, where overseas visitors arrive, should be a show-window. I looked at the planning in respect of the Jan Smuts Airport. I want to assure him that this will be one of the finest show-windows, not only among South African airports, but also among airports throughout the world. When that airport has been completed, it will be a beautiful show-window. I think the Department of Transport as well as the Department of Public Works, which are engaged in this project, deserve every praise for it.

As far as neatness is concerned, I agree wholeheartedly with the hon. member that at times it is most saddening to arrive at Jan Smuts and to see all the peels and empty paper bags lying about there. But this is a problem which cannot be blamed on one race only. Unfortunately we are sometimes inclined to think that only this one race is to blame. Sometimes it looks like that. But just take a look, after a football match, at the places where people were sitting. Unfortunately we as a nation often display slovenly habits in this respect. I agree with the hon. member as regards the appeal he has made. However, hon. members will see that at Jan Smuts and at other airports there are always people who clean and sweep and clear away the rubbish at once. Papers and other refuse are never allowed to lie about longer than two or three minutes before being cleared away.

The hon. member also asked that our catering facilities be improved. I want to tell him at once that the catering service is being provided under contract. Unfortunately those premises at our airports where the preparation is being done, are sometimes rather cramped for space. The Department of Transport is continually watching the position closely so as to see how these tenderers carry out their functions and serve their customers. I have not travelled very extensively, but if I compare the catering service at South African airports with those of many other countries in the world—I am not even referring to the aircrafts themselves, because the service on them is phenomenal—I find that our catering service compares very favourably. These premises are neat and clean and one obtains the desired service, notwithstanding the circumstances.

The hon. member asked for a closed-circuit television system. I want to tell the hon. member at once that this is not practicable. After all, the person who sits in the toilet does not have a television set in front of him. [Laughter.] I also want to say this. The hon. member mentioned the example that, when one has one’s refreshments, the voice does not come through clearly. But if one has refreshments, one is perhaps not clear-headed oneself, and then there is no television either. This is a matter to which I do not wish to reply any further now.

The hon. member spoke about separate reception lounges. At Jan Smuts a separate departure lounge has already been provided. As soon as a person has been cleared by the customs, he goes into a separate departure lounge. Consequently such apartheid is already being implemented in respect of overseas flights. As soon as the new airport has been completed, there will of course be better separate lounges. I think that for the time being this is all I have to reply to.

Mr. Chairman, I was very glad to hear that the Deputy Minister is actually planning something. He is planning, for instance, the very modern idea of conveyor belts for luggage. What we should like to see, is some of the planning translated into action. I am not going to deal with the arguments and principles on the various matters raised. I only want to emphasize that while planning is essential, I do not believe the department has sufficient appreciation of the speed with which air transport is moving. I also want to emphasize the need to expedite and translate the planning into the finished product. From he planning board to the final product is a process which is not something on which we can afford to spend years and years. I am bitterly disappointed to find that Durban is not to be regarded as a jumbo jet or a major airline centre in the future, but extremely pleased to hear that there is to be a new terminal. However much it may hurt me, I want to thank the Minister for that good bit of news.

I want to come back to the issue with which I was dealing, namely that of the road transportation inspectorate and the Road Transportation Act. I dealt with the low salary scales at which inspectors start, namely from R70 per month. These are inspectors who, according to the figures I quoted, have to deal with up to 16,000 warnings and 6,000 prosecutions per annum.

Mr. Chairman, your ruling precludes me from dealing with certain aspects of this issue, but I do want to deal with the administrative aspect. I should like to point out that, in Natal, out of 45 posts in the division of road transportation, only 24 are permanently filled. In the Transvaal 53 out of 94 posts are filled. Something like half of the posts are filled with permanent staff. I want to ask the hon. the Deputy Minister whether the Marais Commission deals with the question of the Road Transportation Act as such, because if it does, I do not want to waste a great deal of time on it at this stage. I believe that we have to look at the whole Road Transportation Act right from the beginning. We must review the whole procedure and administration of this Act. The Act, and the way it is presently administered, leaves far too much scope for temptation, and for officials who are not trained, and who are not of the type used to handling authority, to use that authority in an officious and unpleasant way. I have heard of cases where officials have unloaded vehicles on the roadside, quite legally and quite within their rights, but simply because they have had a row with a particular transporter. I have heard of some incredible instances of the attitude of some inspectors to persons with whom they have had arguments. Every time a truck is impounded for a case, it costs the operator thousands of rand over a year. The result is that it becomes far cheaper to pay admission of guilt than to go through the whole rigmarole of court cases. What we are doing is to make of a legitimate transporter a criminal. I plead with the hon. the Deputy Minister to have a complete overhaul of this whole system. He does not have the staff to carry out this system, and where he does have the staff, the system is not being handled properly. It is a system I look forward to dealing with in greater detail when the case is no longer sub judice. However, what worries me is that this is the second year that I have been prohibited, because of the sub judice rule, from dealing with this issue. What will happen next year and the year after and the year after that?

If it is still sub judice you will not be able to deal with it.

In terms of your ruling, Sir, I cannot take this matter any further, but I want to deal with another aspect of the Minister’s department. I am sorry that the Minister himself is no longer here, because I wanted to point out what a popular Minister he is. He is a Minister who has two recreation clubs, one bridge, and one airport named after him. He must be very popular! The only thing I was interested in was whether the naming of the airports after him was not a bit premature, because all our airports are named after premiers—all except one, which is known as the Ben Schoeman Airport. Was this foresight, was it premature, or was it just wishful thinking? After yesterday, I am wondering exactly which of those three possibilities it was. I think that someone has been looking ahead into the crystal ball.

But whether or not the airport is correctly named after the hon. the Minister, amongst those which are named after the other illustrious Prime Ministers, I can think of something else which should be named after the hon. the Minister; I think there should be a Ben Schoeman Government Garage. When one looks at the mileages done—I do not have time to go into them in detail—I am sure that the hon. the Minister’s colleagues must be very grateful to him. Especially those who have to undergo the arduous duty of attending Nationalist Party congresses must be grateful, because I have found that when congress were held in Bloemfontein and in Durban in September, more Ministers were attending those congresses than there were Cadillacs. They were in a spot because the Ministers had to travel from their hotels to the Bloemfontein and the Durban City Halls. Of course, they could not be asked to drive in ordinary motor-cars. This was a difficult problem to solve, but the hon. the Minister settled it easily enough. He simply sent for cars from other centres. The result was that one Cadillac travelled 300 miles from Pretoria to Bloemfontein, 420 miles from Bloemfontein to Durban, and then 413 miles back to Pretoria, a total of 1,133 miles, so that a Minister could travel from his hotel to the congress in comfort, and in the style befitting a Cabinet Minister. In the meantime the hon. the Deputy Minister and another Minister did one Government trip in Natal. But the outcome of this was that motor-cars travelled …

You are incorrectly informed.

The Deputy Minster and another Minister travelled in two motor-cars on an official journey.

And another one.

Another Minister or another car? There must have been three cars then, Sir. Anyway, the fact of the matter is that a Cadillac and seven five-seaters travelled, empty, 5,763 miles so that they could convey Ministers to their congresses.

They must have been second-hand after that.

Yes, these were cheap cars, Sir, because the total cost of R761.88 means that, at 11.1 cents per mile, which is the figure given in the last annual report, R16 per driver per motor-car was left over for all these journeys from all these towns. We feel that, much as the Ministers might like their comfort, it would have been possible for the Nationalist Party to provide them with party transport to a party congress. We feel that the Nationalist Party should pay this amount. Therefore I move:

We feel that the taxpayers should not be asked to pay for conveying Ministers, and particularly not when a car has to be sent 400 miles because there is not a suitable car in the local Government Garage for a political congress. Why could the Ministers not have taken taxis, if they wanted to? ([Interjection.] No, they have people who drive Mercedes Benz cars now and not only Volkswagens. Amongst their members they could have found somebody to give them a lift. Surely, to send seven motor cars, including a Cadillac, 5,760 miles simply for the convenience of Ministers, is not the sort of expenditure which this Parliament should be asked tot vote out of the funds of the taxpayer. [Time expired.]

I do not really want to reply to the speech made by the hon. member who has just sat down. The arguments he used were rather pedestrian for a debate of this kind. For example, he deplored the fact that an airport had been named after the hon. the Minister. But I want to point out to the hon. member that Minister Schoeman has been Minister of Transport since 1954, which is longer than any other Minister. On account of that I think it is only right that an airport be named after him. But this is probably a sore point with the hon. member for Durban (Point), because nothing has been named after him yet. As regards the motor cars used in connection with the Nationalist Party congress, this is merely a useful piece of gossip the hon. member is using to catch a few measly votes. But I am sure he will get a full reply on that.

As regards airports, I want to ask the Minister whether he is in a position to furnish us with particulars in connection with the replanning and reconstruction of the D. F. Malan Airport.

There is another minor matter I want to raise, a matter which has been raised here year after year. Year after year we submitted a plea to the Minister about something of the utmost importance to us living in the Peninsula. This is the question of bus apartheid in the Peninsula. The lack of separate amenities on buses in the Peninsula has on occasion resulted in the Mother City being presented in a humiliating light. In the last instance it is due to the fact that the Cape Town City Council opposed bus apartheid for many years, while other bodies tried to find a solution. However, last year the hon. the Minister thought it fit to appoint the Secretary of Transport, Mr. Joubert, to act as mediator on behalf of all the interested bodies here in the Cape Peninsula with a view to finding a solution in order to introduce bus apartheid here in the Peninsula without placing too heavy a burden on the user of public transport. To that end Mr. Joubert convened public meetings here during the second half of last year in order to enable interested bodies to present their point of view. I attended some of those meetings. It strikes one that it was the Cape Town City Council in particular which waged a titanic struggle to prevent apartheid from being introduced on the buses. Some of the other municipalities in the Cape Peninsula stated that they were unable financially to make any contribution. I want to convey to the Minister a word of thanks as far as this entire investigation is concerned, and particularly to Mr. Joubert for the enormous task he fulfilled here. He was successful to such an extent that apartheid was introduced on certain routes with effect from 1st April. It is expected that we shall have apartheid on all the main routes within the near future thanks to the basis that was found for this problem through the mediation of Mr. Joubert. For this we as residents of the Peninsula want to express our gratitude towards the Minister and Mr. Joubert.

As I do not wish to interfere in the domestic affairs of Cape Town, I shall not follow the hon. member in his trend of thought. There are, in any event, other hon. members who are in a better position to deal with this question. I also do not wish to belabour unnecessarily points which have been made regarding the subsidization of through-ways for our cities. However, I should like to add my weight to one or two points in this connection. Ratepayers of our major cities cannot be expected to pay for these through-ways We have many owners of sub-economic houses in our cities. Many of these do not even possess a motor-car, so I cannot see what benefit they will derive from the extra burden that will be placed upon them in this connection. I know it has been said that we should encourage our commuters, especially commuters working in the centre of our city, to use trains. However, trains take them only to the outer perimeter of the city from where they must still get to their respective places of employment. Public transport is provided only on certain routes and is available only at certain times. The fact of the matter is that the commercial vehicle and the private motor-car are still the most popular form of transport, especially where on-site parking is available or where there are multi-storeyed parking garages in the vicinity. It is no good denying the fact—I say that these people have the liability to pay for these roads. The Act of 1962 provides for local authorities to be subsidized for these through roads.

If it was considered necessary.

Parliament decided that they should be subsidized. There is, therefore, no question of considering.

We have already paid R122 million to them.

The hon. the Deputy Minister wanted to pass the buck on to the provincial authorities. That is terribly wrong. I say the Act makes that provision and therefore it is the Commission’s duty to see that these roads are in fact subsidized. These roads are necessary in order that commerce is not stifled. After all is said and done, the centres of our cities are the centres of commerce. From these centres a great contribution is made to our economy and, consequently, we must see that transport facilities are available. Lack of urban through-ways can only mean delays and higher costs. It can never mean eliminating and the quicker we realize that, the better for the country. I say that even if the tax on motor fuel is increased the motorist should pay for the privilege of using these freeways.

I want to raise another matter with the hon. the Minister, and on this occasion I want to plead with him. I want to know whether it is not possible to consider a special road in Natal along the foothills of the Drakensberg. I would suggest that it should run from the new national road that links Natal with the Free State over Oliviershoek. I want to suggest that there should be a connection somewhere near the Royal National Park and that it should run along the foothills of the Drakensberg through Underberg, where it will join up with the Underberg-Pietermaritzburg road. I think it will be a good point if this road was extended via Port Shepstone to the lower new South Coast road. In the foothills of the Drakensberg—and it is a very popular place for tourists—we have several health resorts and hundreds of farmers. Every year during heavy rains these people are completely isolated. During winter they are again isolated as a result of heavy snowfalls.

That is a matter which concerns the provincial authorities.

I am asking for a special road. A road of this description will attract tourists by the thousands. At the present time there is a luxury bus running from Durban via the Royal National Park to Johannesburg and I believe it runs from there via the Garden Route to Cape Town. I want to say that one of the main attractions on this bus route is to stop over at the Royal National Park in the Drakensberg. It affords people the opportunity of seeing the splendour of the mountains. If this road is constructed a luxury bus could run regularly to and from Durban in one day comfortably. Agreements could be made with Safmarine and other passenger ship owners that, when their ships stay over in Durban for two or three days, their passengers do not only go to the Royal National Park, but also have a look at the Drakensberg. In times of emergency this road could be of great strategic importance from a defence point of view. It would be a short cut to the Transkei and even to the Eastern Cape. This road will also be welcomed by the Police to curb dagga smugglers and stock thieves. It must be remembered that all roads going into the Drakensberg are cul de sacs as such, because they can only go to the higher foothills of the mountain and no further. I will be very glad if the hon. the Minister will give this matter very serious thought.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg (City) advanced a plea here that the Government should contribute towards the construction of freeways in our cities. This matter has been stated quite clearly and I do not think it is necessary for me to add anything substantial to what has already been said. Nevertheless, I want to point out that the Administration does, in fact, receive a contribution on the R1-for-R1 basis, and that the contribution made by the Provincial Administration is subsidized in the same way. Therefore, the Government does, in fact, make a contribution.

I should like to say a few words about third party insurance. As we know, this is one of the things which is being discussed at great length and I should like to take the hon. House back to the position as it existed in 1965. In 1965 the Government was faced with the problem that companies undertaking third party insurance demanded a premium increase of 20 per cent. At that stage there was no alternative but for the Minister to intervene. He established a consortium consisting of 16 companies which were prepared to undertake third party insurance at the premium applicable at that time. This undertaking amounted to a saving of R25 million for the motorist up to the present time. Therefore, I am of the opinion that we cannot over-emphasize the significance of the fact that the Minister intervened in that regard. The motorist benefited a great deal through his intervention. In the first place, there is the saving on premiums. If the Minister had not intervened, the motorist would have had to pay an additional R25 million to date. But this is not all either. The premiums would probably have been increased in the meantime because we know that since that time salary increases, and so forth, were granted in virtually all spheres and that the motorist would consequently have been asked to pay more. Another advantage of this is that we can be sure now that there will not be another Parity case again. If a company undertaking third party insurance to-day were to go bankrupt, there would still be the pool and motorists would be protected. To my mind the hon. the Minister did the country a great service at that time by intervening in the matter and securing control over the funds so that there would be no doubt in future as to the security of these companies.

I should like to mention another aspect of third party, namely the classification of areas and the situation which arose as a result thereof. Initially there were three areas, namely the X, Y and Z areas representing the rural, semiurban and urban areas, respectively. After the claims submitted in respect of the Y areas were thoroughly investigated, it was decided to do away with the Y areas. These areas were thereupon transferred to the Z areas, which meant that an increased premium had to be paid in respect of vehicles generally. Of course, the same premium applied to all motor vehicles. In my own constituency and in many other areas which were semi-urban areas and which were then classified as urban areas, there was a great deal of dissatisfaction because of this step and people alleged that claims in their areas were not very high. I am mentioning this because the hon. the Deputy Minister went out of his way to make available to us detailed information in regard to these matters. These particulars give an indication of the premium income received as well as the claims large companies received. In the light of these particulars it is, after all, evident that there was no other alternative but to follow the course which was adopted and that those areas had to be included under the Z areas. There are, of course, the rural areas which are included in this but as long as they have the same number as the town has it will probably not be possible to make a distinction in their case. I want to convey my personal gratitude to the Deputy Minister and his Department for the analysis that was made and the trouble they went to in order to furnish us with these statistics. At the same time I feel there are a few matters I want to raise in connection with this whole question in order to see whether we cannot effect any improvements. One of them concerns the fact that there is no encouragement for the person who drives carefully. The person who has not submitted any claim yet, must continue to pay the same premium in future while the person who drives recklessly and makes an accident every day and submits a claim, is not penalized because of the high demands he makes on the pool. I do feel that there should be a bonus system in recognition of the person who has not submitted any claims yet.

The other question that worries me, is the period of time in which claims may be submitted. A period of two years was laid down, and usually people wait until the time has expired when all the evidence will have disappeared and it is very difficult to get witnesses and only then they submit a claim. This makes the matter extremely difficult and for this reason I want to suggest that this period be reduced and that notice that such a claim is going to be submitted, should be given immediately or within a short period so that the necessary evidence may be obtained in connection with the matter. I would not even be satisfied that notice must be given that a claim is going to be submitted, but I would suggest that the claim be submitted within six months. Extension may be granted in cases where people are in hospital, but the claim has to be submitted within six months and not within two years.

Another matter I should like to raise, is the following. As we know, in terms of this consortium these companies pay a commission of 5 per cent to the agent issuing the third party while 20 per cent goes into the pocket of the company concerned. The remaining 75 per cent goes to the pool. I feel that this 20 per cent is quite high. We know that insurance usually carries a risk and when there is a risk, there is always the possibility of the insurance company losing a portion of its money. But since the establishment of this pool all the claims are paid from the pool and the company only has to bear its administrative costs and expenses of that nature. While we are granting these 16 companies this privilege because they were prepared to render a service at this premium while the other companies were not prepared to do so, I do not want to say that we should get rid of them but I think the 20 per cent they receive should be reduced so that the premium may be reduced by at least 5 per cent. [Time expired.]

The hon. member who has just sat down has his facts wrong about how the consortium was formed. One of the companies which was prepared to continue with this insurance and in fact did the bulk of the insurance in the country and had not refused to do it was omitted from this consortium, although it very much wanted to be in the consortium, as all companies wanted to be because they realized that they could not lose any more. So it is quite wrong to say that the 16 companies were the only companies which were prepared to do he third party insurance and that the others refused to do it. I quite agree with him that their remuneration now is very handsome and that there is probably room for a decrease in the premium payable at present. I also agree that the motorist who is not involved in accidents should get some preference, as is done in the ordinary comprehensive insurance where he has the benefit of a no-claim bonus if he is not involved in accidents and makes no claims on the insurance company. However, there are others who I understand want to talk on this question of third party insurance, and I want to go on to something else.

The matter I want to raise is one which is becoming a scandal, and the subject of much adverse criticism and comment. I refer to the national road in the Transkei. This road has become a real hazard because of straying stock and the accidents in the Transkei are numerous, especially at night or when there is a mist. You only have to travel through the Transkei to realize the danger of animals on the roads. You come on them suddenly, and I understand that horses are the main hazard. I have raised this question in the House before with the previous Deputy Minister, who gave me a reply in 1966 that the Transport Commission and the Transkei Government had come to an agreement that this Department would supply the fencing material and the Transkei Government would erect the fences and maintain them; because the problem there is that the roads through the Transkei are unfenced except for very small portions. I should like to know from the Minister what is happening in this regard. It is three years since this agreement was entered into, and yet I see no signs of the fences being erected as we were given to understand would happen shortly after the agreement was entered into. Perhaps the Minister can tell us whether he is having trouble with the Transkei Government, or what the reason for the delay is. I want to stress that it is most important that immediate attention be given to this matter.

While dealing with the national road in the Transkei, I also want to know from the Minister what the position is with the road which has now been proclaimed a national road with the establishment of self-government in the Transkei; the road from Queenstown to Umtata and then to Port St. Johns, and from there to the Natal border at the Umtamvuna River near Port Edward. I see there is a substantial amount on the Estimates of R1,695,000, and I would like the Minister to tell me what progress he expects to be made during the next financial year. The road has been tarred from Engcobo west to near Cofimvaba which is about 40-odd miles and also east towards Umtata to a place called Baziya. Last year I was given to understand that the road would be tarred up to that point, and it was, but now the road gang has been removed from the Transkei and I want to know what is happening. Once a road gang is removed, it is very difficult to get it back. Why did the Department not continue with the tarring past Cofimvaba along the way to Queenstown? The most unsatisfactory aspect of this national road, is the road from Umtata on to Port St. Johns and to the Natal border. I have asked questions in the past about the progress, as to when we could expect something to be done. The problem of course is that from Port St. Johns on to Port Edward the road has not been located and the previous Deputy Minister told me that there was difficulty in getting staff. I then suggested that it be done by employing private firms, and the Government did in fact employ a private firm to do a survey from Baziya to Umtata and on to a place called Libode, but they stopped at Libode, something I could never understand. One would have thought that if they were going to build a road down to Port St. Johns, they would have got the surveyors to have a look at the general picture to see where the destination was and get the shortest route to that destination, and not just go to a little village along the road and then have to do another survey from Libode on to Port St. Johns. The obvious thing would have been to survey from Umtata to Port St. Johns. Nothing further has been done. In 1966 the Deputy Minister told us that they expected the work south of Umtata, for which money had been set aside, to be commenced during that year. A contract had been placed with a private contractor, but as far as I know nothing has been done there either. I want the Minister now to give me a definite assurance that something is definitely going to be done this year. I want to stress the difficulty of a place like Port St. Johns. This road was made a national road to serve Port St. Johns. Previously it was a provincial road. Now Port St. Johns is a white spot, isolated from the rest of the Republic. According to Government policy it will never become part of the Transkei. It has no other access to the Republic except through these roads. There is no harbour. They cannot get out by sea. There is no airfield for transporting passengers, and so they have to rely on the roads for their access to and their contact with the rest of the Republic. The Government appointed a commission to go into the question of the development of Port St. Johns two years ago, and the report was a negative one; it said that nothing could be done. This port is a tourist attraction. It is very popular with holiday-makers and it can become a much more popular resort if there is easy access to it. That is why it is so essential that they have good roads. At times Port St. Johns is completely cut off by road because the bridges are under water during floods. That is an intolerable situation for any town and especially for a place like Port St. Johns which has to rely mainly on tourism and on the farmers around the town, who have to get their produce out to the markets at Umtata and elsewhere. I know that the terrain is difficult, but the Government has undertaken to build this national road and is committed to doing so. From Umtata to Port St. Johns it is not so difficult, but even there nothing has been done. From Port St. Johns on to Port Edward it is admittedly difficult, but a bridge has already been built over the Umtamvuna River connecting Natal with the Cape, and there is a national road on the Natal side right down to the bridge. In reply to a question the other day, put by the hon. member for Simonstown, as to what progress had been made, the Minister replied:

Actually there is a national tarred road in existence. I think it is being rebuilt and widened and made into a four-lane road, but there is in fact a road down to the bridge at present. Sir, this question of the road from Umtata down to Port St. John’s and further on has cropped up year after year. The Transkei was given self-government in 1963, six years ago, and we were then promised that this road would become a national road and that it would be built. Shortage of staff for planning the road, for locating the road, is no excuse. There are private firms which are prepared to do it and in fact the Government has already employed a private firm, as I pointed out just now, to plan the Port St. John’s road. [Time expired.]

The hon. member for Transkei raised matters here which particularly concerned a national road in the Transkei area, and the hon. the Deputy Minister will probably reply to this matter in due course.

I should like to speak about the activities of the S.A. Road Safety Council, about road safety and, if there is still time, about the 70- mile speed limit about which such a great deal has been said. Sir, the South African Road Safety Council is an organization which definitely does not get from the public the recognition it should get, and it is an organization which sometimes has to function under difficult circumstances because of the criticism it sometimes has to endure from the general public and other bodies which are concerned with transport generally. We should appreciate that the S.A. Road Safety Council is rendering an extremely valuable service in the interests of the State, in the interests of the public and in the interests of the country. We have become so accustomed to hearing over the radio and to reading in the newspapers about accidents and wrecked motor-cars which subsequently land up in the scrapyard, of people losing their lives, people being injured, people being maimed for life, that the public have developed a kind of neutral attitude towards reports of this nature. I remember reading once on the front page of a newspaper a report of a person whose leg was severed by a shark and on that same front page there appeared a report of two motor-cars which were involved in a head-on collision on one of our roads. Six or seven people were killed in that accident, but the report about the person whose leg was severed by a shark had greater news value and was published under greater headlines than the road accident in which seven people were killed. We listen to these things with a shrug of the shoulders and it is only when one of our own relatives is involved in an accident that we start reflecting seriously on the matter.

Recently we received the report of the Road Safety Council; it is a fine report and when one pages through the report and reads it, one sees what a great task the Road Safety Council is really fulfilling. In a chapter, “Revised Action Programme”, which is quite interesting to read, it is stated clearly what is being done to promote road safety. In this chapter mention is made of the research work which is carried out and of road safety education, which is the most important part of the work done by this council as far as I am concerned. Road safety education is given to primary school pupils, high school pupils and to students entering the teaching profession, but it is also necessary that education should be undertaken among the adults as well. Mention is also made in the report of legislation and the role the council plays as regards recommendations in respect of legislation and the implementation of the law. Mention is also made of other projects which are being undertaken. On page 5 of the report the position is set out as follows—

On behalf of this House I want to express my gratitude towards this Council for the valuable work it is doing.

There is also another group of people who work in close co-operation with the Road Safety Council and who fulfil a major task; these are people who very often fulfil a thankless task, namely the traffic inspectors. I want to refer specifically to the provincial traffic inspectors. It is often said that these people suffer from a prosecution complex. We know that these people really try to be friendly and helpful. They try to make the road safe for all motorists. All of us who are road-users know that some people drive recklessly; we know there are people who are road-hogs; we also know that there are people who think they have the sole right to the road and we know there are people who think, as we often put it, that they have bought the road. Sir, these are the people who endanger the lives of the road-users and, of course, it is necessary for steps to be taken against such people. It is necessary for the inspectors to see whether vehicles are not overloaded; they have to see whether vehicles are roadworthy; they have to see to it that travellers or motorists obey the traffic laws and they also have to see to it that there are no animals running loose on or next to the road. Sir, these people fulfil an enormous task from early in the morning until late at night, particularly during peak hours. During the holidays they work long shifts and the travelling public is grateful for this, but we know ana we get complaints from the travelling public that some of these inspectors do not see the task they fulfil as one of improving traffic conditions, but their task as they see it is to prosecute motorists. On the whole we must admit that the majority of the inspectors so out of their way to make the road as safe as possible for motorists.

There is a growling feeling and a desire among the general public that prospective drivers of motor vehicles, particularly drivers of heavy vehicles, should be subjected to more stringent tests. As a matter of fact, some parties are of the opinion that the evil of unsafe roads can be tackled at its source by being more strict as regards the issuing of driver’s licences. Some countries even lay down a maximum speed for a certain period when driver’s licences are issued to people for the first time; this applies to the ordinary motorcar as well. In France, who, like South Africa, has a very high death rate as a result of road accidents, the road code was revised and various changes were effected. I just want to mention two of them which struck me in the article I read about these changes. One of the provisions is that when a driver’s licence is issued to a beginner, it is laid down that he may not exceed a speed of 56 m.p.h. (90 kilometres) during the first year. Beginners are compelled to obey this instruction and they are also compelled to confirm this fact by fitting a disc at the rear of the motor-car. The result of this is that everyone knows that the driver is subject to that specific speed limit during the first year. Drivers of heavy vehicles are also made subject to a speed limit. To my mind this is an important provision, because a person who drives a motor-car for the first time, is not yet capable of handling his vehicle with skill, although he has obtained a licence. [Time expired.]

Sir, I would like to deal with the quest-’on of weather bureaux, if I may move away for a moment or two from the very important question of national roads. The position here is that historically the weather bureaux and the broadcasts that we get on the weather have been organized and prepared by the Department of Transport. I understand from past debates in this House that, primarily, this was for the purpose of getting information for our aircraft. That was basically the idea that they were aiming at, the idea being that with our variable weather conditions and the wide areas that we have to cover here, geographically, in South Africa, a good weather forecast was of the very greatest importance to the safety of our flying. From that it went on until to-day we give broadcasts for shipping in our coastal waters and we give forecasts of gales and so forth. But, Sir, I would like to ask the hon. the Minister whether, since that is our only means of getting weather forecasts, he could give us the latest up-to-date information arising from our financial contribution to some American source. I believe that I am correct in saying that we have to make a financial contribution to some American source so that we can get information from some of the American satellites which are being used, one or two of the latest, with very great success.

We have published those photographs already.

That is what I am referring to.

We do not contribute.

Are we getting this information free?

Yes.

So much the better. The point I want to come to is this: How far have we got with the developments so that we can now look further ahead with some certainty to a reliable broadcast for more than merely perhaps 48 hours? Sir, on one night of the week. I think Friday night at five minutes to seven, the S.A.B.C., for reasons best known to itself, does not give the ordinary forecast that it does at other times during the week, but someone in the S.A.B.C. office, someone called Fred or Bert, holds a conversation with the head of the Weather Bureau in Pretoria; he calls him Dick and then he says, “Now, Dick, will you tell me what weather are we going to have on the Witwatersrand over the weekend; will we be able to play our golf and our sports?” They then have a sort of chit-chat. As a result of that I have gained certain information from the head of the Weather Bureau in Pretoria which indicates that there is a great deal of progress being made and, of course, the information that we want, we want as farmers and not because we have our own private aircraft, and it would be a great pity if we ever had to think of duplicating the machinery that has been established to give us weather forecasts. Sir, I understand that the Deputy Minister was once very familiar with a certain Deputy Minister of Agriculture, and from the days of his friendship with the Deputy Minister of Agriculture he will know how important it is that we as farmers should get all the forecasts that we can in this regard. This falls under the Department of Transport; they are paying for it all, but perhaps the Deputy Minister of Transport could have a talk with the new Deputy Minister of Agriculture, and see whether a programme cannot be worked out, based on the Department of Transport, to give us that rather wider forecast, with its doubts and question marks, so that we can see how we stand in this regard. Exactly what we are getting from the satellites at the moment, I do not know. I have seen what has been published in this regard. Perhaps the Deputy Minister can give us the latest information and say whether he feels that it is possible for an extension of this service to give the agricultural community of South Africa the benefit of a rather longer forecast than we are getting at the moment, even if it has some doubts and question marks about it.

Mr. Chairman, I shall not reply to what was said by the hon. member for South Coast, but I shall leave it to the hon. the Deputy Minister to deal with it as adequately as he has dealt with, for example, the complaint raised by various members on that side of the House as regards the contributions made by the National Road Fund to cities for their freeway systems.

However, I find it very strange that the United Party found it necessary to-day to raise that aspect again. I find it strange because, as long ago as 1967, the then Deputy Minister replied just as adequately to this matter and formulated this policy. Even at that stage those hon. members knew what the position was. However, two years later the hon. Opposition thinks it fit to raise the same matter once again. Why? It is because we find that the Opposition has been scratching around for votes lately. This is their past-time at the moment. We find this quite strange, but we also understand it. because it is clear to us that they do not like homework. This brings me to the question of congestion of our urban traffic. However, I want to place the social consequences of the congestion of our urban traffic squarely on the shoulders of the United Part/ to-night. They are already being blamed for this, and they will to an increasing extent be blamed in future for the social consequence of such congestion. This results from the fact that they do not support the policy of separate development, especially as far as the decentralization of industries is concerned. It is obvious that, as these large metropolitan areas expand, the traffic will increase as well. They are in favour of this. This side of the House wants to decentralize; we want to develop the homelands. We want to develop the border industries; we want to channelize the traffic to those homelands. We are not the only people who say this. Cape Town was mentioned as an example here to-night. What does Dr. Morris say, the man who gave final shape to this road system in and around Cape Town?

He says—

He states further—

This is what Dr. Morris says. That is why I say that the blame for the social consequences of this congestion will be laid upon the United Party. Why do I say this? I say this because altogether 1,212.938 vehicles were registered at 31st March, 1966. Of that number 91,184 motor cars were estimated to have been registered in the name of Bantu persons. This position does not appear to be so serious. However, we know that our Bantu population, as far as that race is concerned, own the largest number of vehicles in Africa. What is the result of this? According to the latest statistics available the number of accidents caused by Bantu persons is out of proportion with the number of vehicles they possess. We only have to look at the figures. Of a total number of 162,787 drivers who were involved in accidents, 30,156 were Bantu persons. The remainder was Whites. In 1964 altogether 191,949 drivers were involved in accidents. Of this total 37,637 were Bantu drivers. This is out of proportion with the number of vehicles they possess. The surveys I mentioned were carried out in urban areas. As regards the rural areas, the picture appears to be equally serious. That is why I say that this policy of separate development should also have as a consequence a better distribution of the population. It will lead to a better organized community and to less serious social consequences.

This brings me to the possible prevention of accidents in these urban and other complexes. Many of these accidents are known to be caused by vehicles which are not roadworthy. However, the hon. the Deputy Minister, in terms of the latest amendment to the Third Party Act, has made it quite impossible, if these powers are applied, for a person to drive a vehicle which is not roadworthy. The insurance companies can now demand that a certificate of roadworthiness be obtained in respect of vehicles for which a temporary permit was issued. We are all aware of the great number of vehicles which only had temporary permits. I am sorry to say that such vehicles have been driven by Bantu persons in particular. We also know that Bantu persons mainly buy the older vehicles and drive them with temporary permits month in and month out. Providing this section is applied, this will no longer be possible. If I may suggest something to the hon. the Deputy Minister, I think he should issue an instruction to these insurance companies to apply those powers they have. This will at least ensure that we shall have vehicles on our roads which are roadworthy.

In terms of these amendments it is also anticipated to protect and compensate drivers in the case of hit-and-run accidents. Both the previous and existing agreement provide for this. This provision was made possible because the necessary machinery was established for it in terms of section 2quat of the Act. In that article it is provided that the necessary compensation will be obtained from the Fund in a case where a person is injured as a result of a motor accident caused through the negligence of a person whose identity is not known. That is the position. The agreement which eminates from that section, only provides for physical contact. It means that a person cannot claim compensation from the Fund in a case where a vehicle is forced from the road by a reckless driver and the driver of the vehicle sustains physical injury. That is the present situation.

The person who causes such accidents usually disappears. One simply does not get hold of them.

That is correct; one does not get hold of them. However, I want to ask that, whereas the possibility exists that a new agreement will be entered into or that the old agreement will be amended, the hon. the Deputy Minister should give instructions or should include a provision to the effect that an ex gratia payment will be made to a person notwithstanding the fact that there was no physical contact and providing the evidence for such ex gratia payment is favourable. Such cases are known to exist.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Bloemfontein (West) has certainly come to light with one of the most original arguments in favour of separate development I have yet heard. That is that if separate development is carried out as it should be, there will be a reduction in the number of Natives using cars in the city areas. I should like to leave that without further comment. It speaks for itself.

He did however say that the United Party has opposed decentralization in all spheres. This of course is wrong, because we support decentralization where it is undertaken for sound economic reasons and not necessarily for ideological reasons. The hon. member also referred to the large number of accidents on our roads. I must confess I am in agreement with the hon. member, because I believe there should be a far stricter supervision over the issue of licences to all drivers on our roads. I believe that the high rate of accidents is due to the many people who are not suitably qualified to drive a vehicle and who are being given licences by our local authorities.

Now I should like to return to the question of national roads and should like to draw the hon. the Deputy Minister’s attention to page 20 of the National Transport Commission’s report, which has just been issued. On page 20 reference is made to national route 2, the road between Cape Town and Durban. In the fourth paragraph I should like to quote the following:

I want to say a few words in connection with this road. In the first place I asked him, when he was speaking, what is the purpose of this road. He answered that it will be a coastal road and therefore it will be built near the coast. Now, there has been some doubt about this road as is evidenced by the controversy in both the English and the Afrikaans-language newspapers in the Cape Province. As I have said before, I should like to direct my remarks particularly to that portion of the road which is to be built between Hermanus and Mossel Bay. I ask myself whether this road is to be an alternative road to the present national road, or whether it is to be perhaps a strategic road, or whether it is to be, as the Minister indicated, a coastal road. In reply to further questioning he said that it was to be a “skilderagtige pad”, in other words a scenic drive. If it is to be an alternative road to the present, and in my opinion inadequate national road, surely its purpose is that it should be the most direct route between two points. Surely, it is then to be one of the high speed freeway roads. If on the other hand, it is to be a strategic road, surely it must be a road which is not accessible to the enemy; obviously the enemy in this case will be the enemy who land on our sea coasts. Therefore, it must not be too near to the coast. In addition if it is to be a strategic road, it must be a road which is most accessible to our own troops. If on the other hand, it is just to be a coastal road, then it must follow the line of the coast. I would like to advance some arguments why it should not follow the coastline too closely. The first argument is that it will not be the most direct route between Mossel Bay and Hermanus, it will be a more circuitous route. The second reason is one I have already mentioned, and that is that it will strategically harm our defence position in those coastal areas. There is another reason and that is that it will be a most expensive road.

This road will be R17 million cheaper than the other one.

If the Minister is familiar with that portion of the coast he will see that there are deep indentations in parts of the coast. He will then know that there are dongas and sand dunes along the coast. I should have imagined that if that road were to be made close to the coast it would involve considerable expenditure. The fourth reason why this road should not be too close to the coast is because that portion of the coast between Hermanus and Mossel Bay is in effect one of the most closely and jealously guarded nature reserves we have in the Cape Province. The Department of Nature Conservation in the Cape Province has made enormous strides in recent years to protect our flora and fauna. It so happens that in those areas there are farmers with large tracts of land, and there are other owners on the coast who have rigidly enforced nature conservation on their own properties. There must surely be some portions of our coastline to which the public should not be given direct access. If they are to be given direct access, it means that there will soon be no portions of our coastline where either the flora or fauna will be allowed to develop in their natural surroundings, nor will the marine flora and fauna in any way be entitled either to protection or able to reproduce without disturbance. If this road is built too close to the coast the area will be thrown open completely.

I should like to suggest to the hon. the Deputy Minister that he should instead pay attention to the improving of the present national road between Hermanus and Mossel Bay. The dangerous bends which exist can be straightened out and it will then become the most direct route between those points. Alternatively, I suggest he should consider the construction of a direct route, other than the present national road, from Mossel Bay to Hermanus.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Simonstown raised a very important matter here as regards position of this road. All of us have to agree immediately that this road will be one of the most beautiful roads in the Republic because it will be passing through some of our most beautiful landscapes. For example, I am thinking of the possibility that in one part of my constituency there will be no less than 14 tunnels if this road is going to be built along the coast. I imagine that this will probably be one of the most beautiful routes in the country. I want to say immediately that if we think of the strategic value of the road, we should also think of the very great tourist value this road is going to have. This road will attract the public to travel along our Garden Route. It is impossible to build a strategic road which will be free from all attacks which may be carried out from the sea, the air and the land.

For this reason I feel that other aspects should be borne in mind as well. We should particularly bear in mind the beautiful scenery, as well as the costs.

However, I want to raise another matter here, a matter which does not affect many people directly, but nevertheless is a great nuisance. I am referring to the question of direction signs along national roads. We know that sign boards may not be erected at certain places, because the Advertising on Roads and Ribbon Development Act of 1940 defines an advertisement as follows—

The Act further lays down that nobody may display an advertisement which is visible from a public road outside the urban area. The result of this is that people who have business undertakings in rural areas are excluded from this, whether it is an hotel or a motel or a caravan park or anything of that nature. I am not dealing with business undertakings situated at seaside resorts or in towns, because in those cases these business undertakings are usually situated away from the national road, but I am dealing with places situated next to the national road. I am aware that if we consider the limited access roads, the new roads we are building now, it is impossible and probably very dangerous to erect such direction signs. The erection of these sign boards will not promote road safety. But in the case of our existing national roads one finds that some of these places have been in existence for years along the Garden Route and the public finds it very inconvenient to find such places.

Where such a private undertaking adjoins the national road, the Act allows for a notice board to be erected but as soon as one has to travel over land which belongs to somebody else in order to reach such a place, a notice board may not be erected. A person may come from Rhodesia or from any other place and may look for a specific holiday resort and people simply may not indicate to him where it is situated. Surely, this is not to the advantage of tourism. The Act lays down that in cases where a sign board may be put up, it should be a small, neat notice board with six-inch letters painted in white on a black background. Such a notice board is useful and shows people the way. Why are rural business undertakings excluded?

In our cities people may advertise as they like. The name of an hotel or a caravan park or whatever it may be may be indicated in letters of any size. The name may also be put up by means of attractive lights which draw people’s attention away from the road. But as soon as one comes to the rural areas, one may not even put up a notice board to show where your business undertaking is situated. For this reason I want to ask the hon. the Minister to consider making a few exceptions. I want to mention a few specific cases.

In the first place, I am thinking of the case where a road turns off to a specific caravan park or motel or whatever the case may be. In that case it should be allowed for a notice board to be put up. Where a road turns off to four or five different places, it will be unpractical as well as dangerous to put up such notice boards because motorists will want to look at them. But where the road leads to one specific place—even if it traverses somebody else’s private land—I can see no reason why a small, neat-looking notice board should not be put up to show where the road is leading to.

There is also another matter which is prohibited in the Act. It is prohibited to put up notice boards on private land in rural areas to show what place it is. This makes it almost impossible for the public to distinguish these places. For this reason I want to ask whether people may not be allowed to put up notice boards on their own land to show what place it is.

I believe that if these small concessions are made, it will assist to promote the tourist trade, and it will also help the public to find their way easier when travelling in the rural areas.

Mr. Chairman, I found the last point mentioned by the hon. member for Humansdorp very interesting, because it is something which I myself have been supporting for years. I think the hon. member will recall when he and I were in the Cape Provincial Council we both pleaded for this same thing. I fully agree with him and I endorse what he said when he asked the hon. the Deputy Minister to reconsider the matter of advertisements and notice boards on private property in rural areas, next to our national roads. I cannot see any reason why people should not be allowed to display their names, addresses, and occupat ons. In the case of agriculturists, they should be permitted to do some advertising as well, provided the notices are on their own property. This is an important and serious matter, and I do appeal to the Deputy Minister to give this question his consideration. It will not only assist those who display their names and addresses but it will help the travelling public as well. It is essential that the traveller should know his whereabouts when travelling on our main and national roads.

I was interested too in what the hon. member for Bloemfontein (West) had to say. He in fact accused the United Party of being responsible for the heavy Bantu road traffic on some of our roads, particularly in the urban areas. I have heard Nationalists accuse the United Party of many things, but this accusation takes the bun. Imagine the Opposition being accused of being responsible for this Bantu traffic, especially as he says the driving of heavy, slow-moving vehicles, simply because we do not support the policy of separate development and because we do not accept it in its logical conclusions or when and where it will take us to the end of the road. Certainly we do not accept this policy. At the same time the hon. member says we do not support the Government in its policy of decentralizing our industries and because of this we are also responsible for the heavy Bantu traffic on our national roads.

They have been governing for 21 years, and now they claim it is the Opposition’s fault that they have not been able to decentralize and it is our fault that they have not been able to repatriate the Bantu to their homelands. I do not want to get away from the Vote, Mr. Chairman, but it does surprise me that after 21 years of Nationalist rule, the Opposition should be held responsible for the Government’s failure to carry out its Bantu policy.

I wish to deal with a problem which I do not consider to be insurmountable. It was raised earlier by my colleague the hon. member for Transkei when he spoke of road traffic, particularly in the Native territories. I want to deal with traffic in the Transkei using the national roads. I realize the hon. member for Transkei spoke on behalf of his constituency and his voters. I want to speak on behalf of the travelling public, particularly the people who use the Transkei roads between East London. Pietermaritzburg and Durban. This road is the only link between the Cape Province and Natal. Last year the Government spent well over R1 million on road construction work on national roads in the Transkei and it proposes to spend well over that amount for road construction this year as well. It also spent R200,000 on the maintenance of the Transkeian national roads, and this amount will again be spent this year. However, there is much room for improvement. I am not talking about the surface of the roads as such, but I am talking about the same problem mentioned by the hon. member for the Transkei, namely the fences along large sections of this national road.

I frequently use this road, travelling between the Eastern Cape and Natal. Long stretches of road are not fenced in, but other sections are fenced in. While the fences are good—and in perfect order, the tubular steel gates that once upon a time hung on hinges are today broken and all lying open. In fact, one does not find a single gate which is cared for and hanging on its hinges along this road, resulting in a dangerous hazard to the travelling public, i.e. Bantu stock.

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

Mr. Chairman. I should like to bring a few matters to the Minister’s attention to-night, matters which still have a bearing on the Parity case. On 17th December, 1964, the Minister of Transport declared the Parity Association unfit to handle third-party insurance. We were aware of the fact, at the time, that the Minister had announced from time to time that anyone who was insured with Parity, should take out new third-party insurance. In Government Notice No. 1775, which appeared in the Government Gazette of 6th November, 1964, the Government also exempted the M.I.A. (Motor Insurers’ Association) from the responsibility of assisting persons whose vehicles were not properly insured. The Minister went further. He met us half-way by saying that he would make arrangements to the effect that any persons who had been insured with Parity, and who had not yet taken out third-party insurance by 3rd February, 1965, would receive further assistance. I admit that according to law I have no right to make out the case which I want to make out to-night, but I am making out this case on a moral basis tonight. The date on which third-party insurance normally lapses, is 30th April. From 3rd February to 30th April, 1965, there were many people in South Africa, particularly Bantu, who did not heed the Minister’s appeal to them to renew their third-party insurance issued by Parity. Many accidents took place in South Africa in that period from 3rd February to 30th April. Many of the motor-cars which were involved in those accidents had been insured by Parity and were owned by Bantu. Many of those Bantu had not renewed their third-party insurance, because they had apparently not read in the newspapers or heard on the radio what had happened. Many persons who were involved in accidents during that period are living in the most parlous state to-day as a result of the actions of a company such as Parity. While this matter has almost been concluded now, and while these people had hoped that something would be paid out to them at the last minute, I can give the Minister the assurance to-night that a very large number of people in South Africa are suffering as a result of the mismanagement of this company. Some of these people had made a good living before, but after the accidents in which they were involved and the expenses they had, such as doctors’ fees and hospital fees, they are wrecks to-day who have to live from the ordinary pension they receive from the Department of Social Welfare in the form of disability allowances. I want to plead on a moral basis with the Minister to-night. I think the Minister of Transport has a duty towards these people. They are suffering hardship to-day. I want to plead with the Minister to institute an inquiry in order to determine how many of these cases there are in the Republic of South Africa and whether it would be possible to help these people. I can tell the Minister that if he asked the attorneys in our country to-day, he would find out that a large number of people find themselves in such parlous circumstances. It is the moral duty of this House to take note of what those people have had to suffer. I think it is the Minister of Transport’s duty to help them in some way or other, for if proper provision had been made to cover these persons until the 30th April, they would not have had to undergo that suffering. Therefore I am now asking for an investigation into these cases, since I think that this House owes it to these people, who were involved in accidents and to whom nothing has been paid out.

Mr. Chairman, I was very interested to hear the comments of the hon. member for Brakpan who has just sat down. I must say that I cannot disagree with him when he asks for an investigation into this particular problem, because it is a very real one. In fact, we have raised this matter in the past. It is very pleasing for us to know that a member on the Government side has joined with us in our plea in this respect. I think that the time has come for us to try to place the whole question of the Motor Vehicle Insurance Act in its proper perspective. We had a debate earlier this Session on motor vehicle insurance. I think that we must ensure that certain aspects of the M.V.A. Act are put in their proper and true light. I think that we must first of all draw a distinction between the insurers of the consortium and those insurers who were in business in the days before the consortium came into existence. To-day we have the position where every member of the consortium acts merely as an agent for the consortium. He runs no risks whatsoever, whereas in the past the insurance companies who undertook this form of insurance carried their own risks. I think that is the first thing one must remember, namely that the consortium companies are merely agents for the consortium and carry no risks whatsoever.

I should also like to remind hon. members on that side of the House that, prior to the consortium, all the insurance companies, almost without exception, made representation to the Minister at the time, pleading for such a formula as was adopted by the consortium. It is interesting to know that despite the fact that a memorandum was submitted to the Minister, many of the companies who joined in submitting that memorandum were not included amongst the consortium companies. This we find particularly strange. We fimd it particularly distasteful that these companies, who in fact advised the Minister of the formula for such a consortium, were discriminated against when the consortium was formed. The Minister invited selected companies to join the consortium. As I have said, he did not admit members of the insurance industry who had advised him in this respect. The consortium, as we have it to-day, came about, as everyone knows, as a result of the insolvencies of certain companies. There is, for instance, the company which was mentioned by the hon. member who has just resumed his seat. I should, however, like to remind that hon. member that the tragedies and the hardships brought about by the insolvency of the Parity Insurance Company could well have been minimized had the Government acted on the advice of this side of the House, and if the Government had conducted an investigation into the Parity Insurance Company, as we asked for months before the crash took place.

The Department of Transport was aware of the complaints from agents and from the public regarding obtaining insurance, and this was another reason why the consortium was formed. But it is particularly interesting to know that the following was said in an annual report of a company at that time—

I would like to remind the other side of the House that the company from whose financial report this extract was taken was in fact one of the first companies appointed to the consortium. Changes have taken place in regard to the consortium and some of these changes have of course been very beneficial to the consortium. The consortium is now backed by legislation and it is able to reduce the procedure for the investigation of claims. There has been a change there, which has been of benefit to the consortium companies. The consortium companies, too, now pay on an average a commission of 3.4 per cent, whereas prior to the consortium the average commission was 5 per cent. Now we have a saving on commission of R25 million since the consortium started. This is also applied to the benefit of the consortium, which did not previously exist. The consortium has no expenses in regard to the investigation of claims. This never happened before. When I say the consortium, I mean the consortium companies have no expenses in regard to the investigation of claims. The consortium companies have increased the premiums by uplifting the country areas and bringing them into line with the town areas, and we have heard speeches in this debate on this very subject. I would remind the Committee that this increase in premiums has resulted in an increase to the consortium companies, to the consortium itself, of something between R5 and R7 million per annum, the above changes being 25 per cent commission, 5 per cent expenses and 20 per cent commission, and that is no longer justified. As I said before in this House, I believe that an investigation into this whole aspect of the amount received by the consortium companies should be made. It would also be very interesting if one were to quote one or two statements from some of the consortium companies as to the effect this Act has had on their business. I have made claims in this House in the past that the consortium companies were using their 20 per cent or 25 per cent gross to offset debits against other branches of their business to the detriment of the consortium, and I would like to substantiate this by one or two statements taken from financial reports in this respect. I would like to quote the financial report of a leading member of the consortium, which reads as follows—

Another report of another member of the consortium says this—

I cite these cases. I have others here with me. They are taken from various financial reports of consortium companies to bear out what I told the hon. the Minister before, that the third party insurance companies, the consortium companies, are making excessive profits out of third party insurance and that they are applying these profits to the running of other sections of their business to the detriment of the motorist in South Africa.

What is your proof?

I have just read some of the proof from their financial reports and if the Minister would like me to quote some others, I will do so. The report tabled to-day shows that the consortium earned R4 million in interest on its investments. We wonder whether this constitutes a threat to the other insurance companies who are precluded from being members of the consortium. It is also a very interesting fact that six short-term insurers are quoted on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange, and that three of these are members of the consortium and three are companies which are excluded from the consortium. In the consortium to-day there are still two wholly-owned subsidiary companies from overseas. As South Africa is assuming a more important role in the world market for reinsurance, the overseas connections have in fact looked askance at our discrimination against certain companies in the formation of the M.V.A. consortium. [Time expired.]

I should first like to refer to certain matters raised by the hon. member for Durban (Point). The hon. member said he regretted it very much that the jumbo jets would not fly to Durban. This, of course, is a matter which falls under the S.A. Airways, in the first place, but the only reason for this decision is based on economic factors. It would not be economic to let them fly to Durban.

Why not?

Because one would not have sufficient passengers on this short route. The jumbo jets will fly from overseas countries to South Africa, and Ian Smuts is the international airport. Then he said that he would like to see planning being accelerated and that it pained him to thank me. This is the first time I have heard that it pairs one when one has to thank someone. The fact of the matter is that planning in Durban is in the process of being carried out, and we hope to complete it as soon as possible.

It is a little late.

Then the hon. member again mentioned the position of the inspectors. I agree that the salaries of inspectors are inadequate and I have asked the Secretary for Transport to make representations to the Public Service Commission for improved salaries. We are investigating it. The hon. member also asked me whether the Marais Commission mentioned anything in connection with the road transport. Yes, there is quite a lot in the report about that.

Are you going to amend the Act?

The report of the Marais Commission still has to be tabled and then the Cabinet will decide which of the recommendations they will accept. We are aware of the fact that there have been arguments in connection with the inspectors. These matters do receive our attention if brought to our notice.

May I ask a question? Does the hon. the Minister expect people who are subject to the control of the inspectors to report them to higher authority, thereby creating antagonism against themselves?

They should report everything and the matter will be investigated on its merits.

The hon. member took it amiss that the name of the hon. the Minister of Transport was given to the airport at East London and also to certain recreation halls.

Oh no, I did not.

Oh yes, the hon. member did. He then said that he would also like to see the name of the Minister of Transport given to a Government garage. I want to ask him where he suggests the Ben Schoeman Garage should be situated so that there will always be sufficient cars at all centres where they may be required.

I would say in the desert of South-West Africa.

If you named it Vause it would sound rather Raw.

The hon. member linked this objection in respect of the Minister to the fact that ministerial cars had travelled to Bloemfontein and to Durban, and he mentioned one Cadillac. Sir, I just want to refer back to the days when the United Party was in power.

One Cadillac and seven other cars.

I am coming to that. In the days when that Party was in power, the Prime Minister never made use of any other car but a Cadillac, no matter what city he visited. It is expected that a Prime Minister should be treated like that.

Nonsense.

I shall furnish the proof. [Interjections.]

Mr. Hofmeyr travelled in a small Ford.

The hon. member also mentioned other cars. With the visit to Durban there were three Ministers and Deputy Ministers who had to carry out inspections on the South Coast route in respect of road alignment, town planning, roads over agricultural land, etc.

And fishing.

Some of the Ministers who went to Durban arranged their affairs in such a way that they could also visit other places in connection with official duties at the same time. Cars are, of course, made available for that purpose.

Are there no cars stationed at Durban?

Is there no Government Garage in Durban?

In Durban’s Government Garage there are a few small cars.

And Ministers do not want to travel in small cars.

I repeat that the Ministers did not use the cars for Party matters and Party congresses only; they arranged their programmes in such a way that they had to visit other places in connection with official duties. They do not do their work together at one place, because every Minister has different activities and responsibilities and for that reason different cars were used. Sir, I am going to take myself as an example.

A bad example.

It may be a bad example, but on my visit there I had to inspect the entire planning of the national road from Durban down along the South Coast, and I did so together with the Leader of the United Party in Natal, as far as certain aspects were concerned. I took him along in my car to see to what extent this road was affecting the fauna and flora, the natural conditions, and to what extent it was affecting town planning and urban development, and subsequently, together with him, to receive a deputation at the southern point of this road where the various municipalities and local development committees had to come to put forward their cases.

Did you need eight cars for that?

But I proceed: Because the Minister of Planning had to undertake part of that investigation, he went in his own car, not in mine.

And the other six cars?

This is the position as regards two of these cars. Let me say at once that the other Deputy Minister travelled with me in my car. Whenever we can travel together, we do so. Mr. Chairman, the municipalities and local development committees of the South Coast are not the only interested bodies in Natal. On that same occasion investigations were carried out in the northern area with regard to water problems, water problems at Mtubatuba and at Richard’s Bay, etc., just to mention a few examples.

What about the other six cars?

This amendment of the hon. member for Durban (City) to reduce this amount is a piece of cheap politicking. Sir, I want to conclude …

Before the Deputy Minister concludes, may I ask a question? Would he tell us what official duties the Ministers carried out in Bloemfontein in the Cadillac and the other seven five-seater cars?

The hon. member thinks that Durban and Natal are the only important areas in which Ministers have to carry out official duties. He does not realize that when a Minister of Agriculture visits Bloemfontein, it may be necessary for him to pay a visit to Glen where the agricultural school is situated to carry out investigations there. He does not realize that in the Free State, because it is situated on the doorstep of the Hendrik Verwoerd Dam, there is as much important business to perform as in Natal. It goes without saying that it is not only necessary for the Minister of Water Affairs to go there, but that it is also necessary for other Ministers to visit the development projects there.

A joy ride.

If the hon. member is not satisfied about the way in which individual Ministers have made use of Government transport and Government vehicles it is his duty to raise the matter with the individual Minister concerned and to charge such a Minister with having misused Government transport on such and such a occasion.

May I ask another question?

No, the hon. member has had his turn to speak and I have already replied to many of his questions.

Reply to his question then.

The hon. member for Tygervallei referred to the D. F. Malan Airport. I just want to tell him that the reconstruction of the D. F. Malan Airport will commence in June, 1969, and will be completed within 20 months. So we are busy with this. The hon. member also mentioned the question of separate buses. I want to thank him for having thanked the chairman of the National Transport Commission, Mr. Joubert, whom he mentioned by name, for the work which has been done up to the present. As he himself knows, separate buses were introduced on the Milnerton-Cape Town route on 1st April, 1969. This is the first of the seven main routes on which a separate bus service will be introduced. Separate services will gradually be introduced on the other routes.

May I ask the hon. the Deputy Minister with regard to the question of separate buses, whether the Department is going to subsidize the local company?

This is the second time that this question has been asked in the House, and I refer the hon. member to my previous reply in which I said “no”.

*The hon. member for Pietermaritzburg (City) once more raised the question here of urban freeways. I am not going to elaborate much more on that. I think I have explained the Government’s policy in respect of the subsidizing of freeways very thoroughly.

Thoroughly, but unconvincingly.

That is for the House to decide; not merely for the hon. member for Yeoville.

The member is obtuse.

Then the hon. member referred to the Oliviershoek Road. I want to tell him that the National throughway from Johannesburg via Heidelberg, Villiers, Harrismith, Bergville and Escourt, links up with the throughway which has been completed up to Miooi River. The connecting roads to the national parks and other tourist attractions is a matter for the provincial councils. It is not a matter for the National Transport Commission or for this Government to build those connecting roads. The hon. member said that all these roads were dead-end roads. This is so. But it remains the responsibility of the provincial councils to build connecting roads and supply roads to the national roads. It is not our task to do so.

Then the hon. member for Bloemfontein (District) spoke about third party insurance. I am glad that he himself came to the conclusion, after he had made an analysis, that the delimitation of the Y and X areas was correct and that the premiums were correct. He did ask, however, for recognition for safe drivers. This Committee will probably be glad to learn that there will once again be no increase in premiums for the next ensuing year. I may mention that this is as a result of the sound way in which we constituted this consortium and the way in which the Department is acting as the managing body in order to ensure that the best service is given.

In addition the hon. member spoke about the permissible period during which claims may be lodged. I want to agree with him that the period during which claims have to be lodged, ought to be reduced. This matter will receive attention as soon as the Act has to be amended again. We shall therefore give attention to the matter.

But then the hon. member raised another matter. He said that safe drivers, people who have not had accidents over a certain period, should pay a cheaper premium.

Hear, hear!

That hon. member says, “Hear, hear!”, but he does not know what the position is. I want to tell him that 90 per cent of motor vehicle owners have not been involved in accidents. As a result all of them would have to receive a reduction, which would result in a shortage of premium funds from which claims must be met. Again I do not want to take up the time of this Committee, but if it is necessary for me to do so, I may point out to the Committee that our revenue from premiums amounts to approximately R24 million per year. But the amounts paid out in claims amount to approximately R27 million per year. There still are 65,000 outstanding claims. In other words, one cannot say just like that that this fund is so solvent that one may reduce premiums for 90 per cent of the motor vehicle drivers. Where will the funds come from, especially if one links this matter to the plea made here a short while ago by the hon. member for Brakpan?

Now I want to deal with the hon. member for Transkei. First of all, the National Transport Commission has undertaken to supply all necessary materials, provided the Transkeian Government undertakes to erect the fences. It is now up to the Transkei Government to take the initiative as regards the fencing of those roads.

Why must they take the initiative?

We cannot force them to do it. The National Transport Commission decided and has already notified them that we will supply all the necessary materials. The matter will be taken up again.

Why do you not undertake it?

We will take it up again with them, but the agreement was that the National Transport Commission will supply the material and they erect the fence. That was the agreement. We will take it up with them again.

May I ask the hon. the Deputy Minister a question? When last did his Department take up this question with the Transkeian Government?

A little while ago.

I am sorry, I am not asking that hon. member; I am asking somebody who knows something about the matter.

Order! Now hon. members can see for themselves what happens when I allow questions !

The hon. member asked me two questions. Firstly, he asked why they should erect the fences. Coming from the Transkei, he should know. If they do the work, we at least know that they will see to it that the fences remain there.

That is a lovely story.

The hon. member says it is a lovely story, but he does not know the mentality of certain people. I want to tell the hon. member that we discussed this matter with them again some time ago and brought it to their notice.

The hon. member asked me a question in connection with the Umtata-Port St. Johns Road. The new road will be a national freeway with a different alignment. I want to mention that to the hon. member.

*I want to give the hon. member all the other particulars now. The hon. member has frequently put questions in connection with this matter, to the previous Deputy Minister as well. All the roads concerned were declared national roads on 21st November, 1963. The road from Cofimvaba via Engcobo and Baziya was constructed by the provincial construction unit before the unit was transferred. In terms of the decision of that time that all the roads concerned should be constructed according to national road standards, the National Transport Commission approved of the appointment of consulting engineers to undertake the planning of the road from Baziya via Umtata to Libode, including the Umtata by-pass, according to limited access standards. But the Minister recently approved of the construction of the roads concerned according to the standards of modern provincial main roads in the Cape, and of the suspension of the planning of the Baziya-Umtata-Libode portion of the road according to limited access standards, and of the Umtata by-pass being dropped. In view of the aforegoing, the Cape Provincial Administration was requested on 31st March, 1969, to furnish the alignment proposals in respect of the portion of road concerned as soon as possible; and secondly, to furnish proposals as soon as possible, for submission to the N.T.C., for the appointment of consulting engineers to undertake the planning, if necessary. No planning in connection with the route, i.e. surveying alignment, etc., as regards the portion of road from Libode to Port St. Johns and from there to Port Edward has been undertaken as yet. As a result of the shortage of professional, skilled and technical staff, no indication can be given at this stage either of when the possible undertaking will take place. As a result of representations by the Cape Provincial Administration, supported by the Department, for additional funds to be made available so that the road-building programme within the Transkei could be accelerated, the Treasury replied on 6th December, 1966, that the Cabinet was not in favour of the proposals. The result of this decision was that no funds were made available for the construction of any roads within the Transkei, that all construction work has come to a standstill since, and that it has only been possible to keep up the maintenance of the proclaimed routes. In conclusion I want to say that an amount of R1 million has been included in the draft Estimates for 1969-’70 at the request of the Cape Provincial Administration, for the construction of the portion of the road between Baziya and Umtata.

The hon. member for Koedoesnoort spoke about road safety. In the very first place I want to thank him for his presentation of the matter and for the positive contribution he made in this regard. As far as road safety, road consciousness and proper driving ability are concerned, we in South Africa cannot do enough to bring this matter to the attention of our people. I want to address a special word of gratitude to the hon. member for referring to the inspectors, who help with this work. He also spoke about the highway code. I think that the most important code is consideration, and this is something that so many of us still have to learn, as this, too, will ensure greater safety.

It is high time that the Cabinet also learns this.

It is only a man who has been hurt that speaks like this. The hon. member also asked for more stringent tests prior to the issuing of drivers’ licences. A draft handbook for the testers of applicants for drivers’ licences has already been compiled by a committee of experts of the Road Safety Council. The aim is a uniformly high standard of tests. The handbook has already been accepted in principle by the interprovincial Road Safety Advisory Council and is at present being adopted to the latest road traffic ordinances and legislation as well as to the contemplated new road traffic signs. In the meantime the Road Safety Council is compiling a syllabus for learner drivers. I think that it will be of great assistance in this connection.

†The hon. member for South Coast asked me about an extension of the Weather Bureau services. I think the present investigation that is being held will enable the period to be increased to four days in future. The forecast will cover four days.

*I want to give the hon. member more particulars because I think it is important. The development of aviation and the increased number of flights resulting from this, have doubled the number of weather prediction stations and have lately increased the number of stations where information is gathered about conditions in the upper atmosphere from one to ten within a very short time. At present a network of 3,412 climate and rainfall stations is maintained for the collection of rainfall and other data. Many people ask why we go to Antartica and why we are doing this other research. All this has a bearing on this matter. In order to supply more reliable weather forecasts to the public, aviation and shipping, the Government provided funds for the purchase and installation of five sets of weather radar equipment. This made an important contribution to the safety of aircraft passengers, etc. I also want to inform the hon. member that we receive thousands of telephone calls from people who enquire about weather conditions. I now want to mention a few figures. During the period 1968-’69 the following places received the given number of telephone calls in this connection: Pretoria—7,270 (the year before it had 6,090 calls); Cape Town—10,200; Port Elizabeth—6,068; Bloemfontein—4,280; Durban—17,000; Jan Smuts—40,316; this comes to a total of 86,000 telephone calls about this matter alone. The hon. the Minister of Posts and Telegraphs ensures that the calls can be made, so it is possible for us to give a good service.

I also want to put the following on record, because many people are not aware of this. As far as development in the field of meteorological research is concerned, the Weather Bureau took part in one of the most comprehensive meteorological projects ever undertaken. This was the drawing up of international weather charts based on information gathered during the 18 months of the International Geophysical Year. Our Weather Bureau was responsible for the weather charts of the entire Southern Hemisphere while West Germany drew up the charts for the equitorial area and the U.S.A. those for the Northern Hemisphere. Some of the Weather Bureau’s charts are being used extensively at present by all researchers in this field.

In conclusion I want to refer to the important question put to me by the hon. member for South Coast. It concerns agriculture. The Weather Bureau is establishing agricultural meteorological stations with a view to doing research in connection with the influence of the weather on agricultural production and keeping in close contact with the farming community in an advisory capacity. This subdivision is at present co-operating with the Departments of Agricultural Technical Services and Forestry on a number of projects of an agricultural—sylvicultural—meteorological nature. The Weather Bureau supplies apposite information to the agricultural industry for practical use and for research purposes. In this connection we have, inter alia, established a fully equipped agricultural weather station at Roodeplaat in Pretoria. In other words, we are at present doing what the hon. member requested.

The hon. member for Bloemfontein (West) also referred to a few points. In the first instance he spoke of proposals to ensure more road-worthy vehicles. We are busy with that. The hon. member also referred to the hit-andrun accidents and said that if a person had not had physical contact he should receive an ex gratia payment in terms of the Act. I should like to tell him that when we receive such requests we shall consider them on merit.

In addition I want to tell him that as far as hit-and-run accidents are concerned, anybody may make application to sue the Fund for damages. The matter is submitted to the hon. the Minister whose approval is required for any such claim against the Fund. In this connection the same steps may be taken.

†The hon. member for Simonstown referred to the Cape Town-Durban route mentioned on page 20 of the report. I wish to tell him this will be a supplementary road built to freeway standards. He also said this road will be the longer one. It will be four miles longer but very much faster, and it will cost R17 million less. In some places it will be close to the coast but in other parts it will not be so close.

He also mentioned flora and fauna. I want to tell the hon. House that the question of flora and fauna has been taken into consideration in the planning of this road and it will be unpractical to consider the existing road, as the hon. member requested us to do.

What is the name of the road going to be?

It will definitely not be called Bronkie Road.

Then the hon. member for Humansdorp put questions to me in connection with road signs and sign posts, etc. I want to tell the hon. member that road signs and sign posts are put up at all junction roads by the road authorities. Advertisements, however, cannot be allowed indiscriminately on national roads. A national road cannot be used as an advertising medium. The policy of the National Transport Commission in this connection is well-known to all bodies and persons. If lots of signs were to be allowed, the cars would necessarily have to reduce speed and the drivers would have to drive slowly or even stop in order to read them, and this would affect road safety. I shall refer this matter to the National Transport Commission, however, and I shall also discuss it with them.

The hon. member for East London (North) also referred to the question of advertising along roads and my reply to the hon. member for Humansdorp serves as a reply to him as well. The hon. member also discussed the question of Bantu on national roads, etc. His speech reminded me strongly of the man who arrived here in Cape Town with a broken down car, and who, when he was asked whether he had not travelled on the beautiful national road, replied, “Man, I am a United Party supporter, I cannot travel on that road”. However, I am not going to start an argument now about the decentralization of industries, the border industries, etc., and the bearing these things have on road safety. I leave it at that. The hon. member also spoke of the Transkei road from East London to Durban, and I think that what I said to the hon. member for Transkei is also applicable in this case.

The hon. member discussed Parity, its bankruptcy, etc. The hon. member for Port Natal associated himself with that by making the accusation that the Government had been warned in good time. This of course is not so. Firstly, I want to tell the hon. member for Brakpan this. The M.I.A. was a private organization that had entered into an agreement with the Minister to pay compensation in respect of injuries caused by unidentified and uninsured vehicles. The agreement provided specifically that the M.I.A. could not be liable if vehicles became uninsured as a result of the bankruptcy of a registered company, and there was nothing the Minister could do about the matter at that stage. I think the hon. member put it correctly when he said legally there was nothing the Minister could do. Since 1st May, 1966, there has been an agreement between the Minister the Fund from which these provisions have been omitted and compensation is paid in all cases where negligence can be proved. In other words, we have rectified what was wrong as far as possible. [Interjections.]

Order! I am warning the hon. member for East London (City) now. If he does not heed my appeals for order, I shall take other steps.

The hon. member must realize that one cannot simply continue with payments in respect of earlier actions that have not been rectified. Where is one going to draw the line? I have every sympathy with those cases. Let me say at once that were it not for the steps taken by the Government in that it appointed a commission of inquiry and introduced this system of compulsory motor vehicle insurance and a consortium, we would still have been having more and more of these cases. The hon. member for Port Natal said that they had warned us in good time. Well let him go and read the minutes of the commission of inquiry and of the Select Committee. We tried to accelerate things so that many people would not suffer as a result of Parity’s failure, but what spanners did they not throw into our works in order to delay the matter!

†I also want to mention to the hon. member for Port Natal that the membership of the consortium has been discussed annually in this House and the hon. the Minister as well as my predecessors have furnished the reasons for the constitution of the consortium in its present form. The department is already investigating the question of the 25 per cent allowed to members of the consortium. This present contract is valid until 1976. This does not apply in the case of the 25 per cent. This percentage of 25 per cent can be changed annually.

*As hon. members know the Act made provision for a premium committee and an advisory committee that has to advise the Minister on the basis of statistical data of which it has to keep a proper record. This question can therefore be dealt with in terms of that. With these words I think I have now replied fully to the queries of all hon. members.

Could the hon. the Deputy Minister tell us when he last received a report from the premium committee?

I have just mentioned to this Committee that there will be no increase in premiums. You should therefore know that that is a report received from the premium committee. That is why I could tell this Committee that there will be no increase in premiums.

When did you receive the last report?

To-day.

Amendment put and negatived (Official Opposition dissenting).

Revenue Vote 5, as printed, Loan Vote L and S.W.A. Vote 1, put and agreed to.

Revenue Vote 6—Cultural Affairs, R5,143,000, and S.W.A. Vote 2—Cultural Affairs, R85,000:

Mr. Chairman, I should like to refer to the first item under this Vote, namely “Minister”. I see that the salary and allowances of the Minister have been increased by R1,500. I do not want to discuss this, however. During the discussion of this Vote it has usually been my pleasure in previous years to congratulate the hon. the Minister on the early appearance of his Annual Report. I am, however, sorry that I cannot congratulate him this year. We have not yet received the annual Report on Cultural Affairs. The Department of Cultural Affairs is in an especially privileged position, because it has control over the Language Bureau. The customary difficulty of providing a translation of the report is therefore not experienced by this department. This is my first point and I want to express my disappointment about it. Not that there has been a scarcity of reports from the hon. the Minister’s other portfolio. We have received a bundle of them …

To-day.

Yes, to-day. We received three reports to-day. It is quite impossible for us to make a study of these reports and to discuss and debate them this evening. It is essential to have these reports if we are to do justice to this debate. These are not the only reports we have had to study. We have another one, namely that on teachers and which falls under one of the hon. the Minister’s other departments. I am not discussing the content of the report, but the Minister’s salary and the fact that we have not received reports in time in order to bring points before this Committee.

I want to raise this aspect with the hon. the Minister. He has now had some experience of the bifurcation of his old department, namely that of Education, Arts and Science. He now has two departments and I should like him to tell us what his experience has been in running the two departments. I think he should be asked whether the creation of these two departments was really necessary. Was it necessary to create the department we are now discussing? Was there any need for it? When we compare the old Department of Education, Arts and Science with, for example, the Department of Coloured Affairs which deals not only with education and culture, but also with such subjects as pensions and all aspects of cultural life, we cannot understand it. In addition the Minister of Coloured Affairs is also the Minister of Labour. There is no desire to have two departments dealing with Coloured Affairs. The same is true for the Department of Indian Affairs and the Department of Bantu Affairs. I wonder why it was necessary for us to have a special department dealing with cultural affairs. I know it means more public servants and this is one of the reasons I raise this question. The hon. the Minister of Finance, as well as the hon. the Leader of the Opposition and the hon. the Prime Minister, have discussed the problem of the shortage of manpower and how it affects our Public Service. When new departments are created it means additional costs and staff. Parkinson’s Law states that work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion. The more you expand the more people are necessary to fill the vacant posts. We, like the rest of the public, sometimes have the impression that if the Public Service has expanded as it has in recent years, it means that the amount of work has expanded. It does not always mean that.

Having said this I should like to refer to some of the details of the report. Hon. members on this side will deal with other matters, but I have one or two points I would like to raise. If one examines the Department of Cultural Affairs, one finds that there are two sections. One is the administrative section, for which staff is required, and this increases the overhead costs. As I have said there are two departments now and therefore there are special overhead costs concerning this department. This Administration is the one section and it is of course one which must appear in any portfolio. There is a second section in the Department of Cultural Affairs and this is one which we usually discuss. It is what I call the “gifts” section, where the hon. the Minister appears as Father Christmas distributing largesse to the whole country. Why, is it necessary to have a department of State in order to do that? Should it not be easy to distribute these amounts of money which the hon. the Minister has to distribute? There is very little other work in this portfolio according to what I see here. However, if one looks at the list one can say that A, B, C, D, and E are administration. Following that are F, G, H, I and K, which constitute the largess department where the Minister has to give money away. Having given the money away one year, it is quite easy to give it away the second year, to increase it or decrease it, or to add a new item here and there. That seems to be the work of the Department of Cultural Affairs. The work is being done voluntarily. Very little is done by the department itself. However, I should like to refer to one item which belongs to the department itself. I refer to page 29 of the report where the integration of immigrants is being dealt with. How does one integrate an immigrant? In debates we have had here recently, we have heard a great deal about “integrasie”. How does one carry out the policy of “integrasie” when one is dealing with immigrants? It seems to me that it is the education of immigrants. I think that must be correct. Whatever form of integration there is, I assume it is in education. When immigrants are integrated in the United States of America, they are sent to school. That is of course what we have to do. I wish to discuss this particular point with the hon. the Minister. I have seen a reference to it by one of his advisory bodies. They have been discussing the subject of medium of instruction for immigrants. I should like to know that when immigrants come to this country, if they do come to this country, will they have applied to them the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? I know that in South Africa we say that the Whites of South Africa could of course have human rights and that the declaration might apply to them. However, as a matter of fact, it does not. I think it should apply to immigrants. I should like to mention one or two of the points in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. I will start with the last of these points under Education. It is article 26 of Unesco’s declaration. The last point reads as follows:

Order! I wish to point out that we are only dealing with Cultural Affairs at the moment and not with Education.

That is right. I am referring to the report which deals with the integration of immigrants. I assume by that is meant the education of immigrants. How does one integrate them if one does not educate them? Perhaps I should explain that whether we educate them at a camp or whether we educate them in a building or take them for a picnic to the seaside, it is still education. That is what I wish to raise.

Surely “inburgering” is not “education”. It is merely to make them feel at home here.

The hon. member seems to suggest that this is not a very good translation. However, this is the department that has the translation bureau. They ought to have the translation right. The hon. member says “inburgering” is integration. That is something quite different. It is making an immigrant a citizen. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Kensington is known to be one of the great gentlemen in this House, but this evening we saw him in a different role. He will pardon me if I say we saw him in the role of a vitriolic person (bitterbek) in the House this evening. We heard him making a fuss about three things. In the first place he raised a great deal of dust over the delay in making available certain reports to hon. members of this House. It is not for me to give the reasons for those delays, if one can speak of delays. I think if the hon. member wants to be reasonable he will realize and accept that the preparation of these reports, reports testifying throughout to very thorough work, cannot be disposed of overnight. He will then accept that they cannot always be available on time.

In the second place the hon. member asked in a fairly negative, I almost want to say in a sneering, way, whether it was necessary for a separate Department of Cultural Affairs to have been established. This matter need not be gone into again to-night. However, I want to say that when the hon. member spoke about it, he was in fact speaking in the idiom of the United Party, in the sense that they, as traditional liberalists, always try to make everything equal. When it comes to the culture of one’s people, it is never good enough to deal with it as a separate entity; apparently it is sufficient if it is only discussed now and then. We on this side of the House want to tell the hon. member that we are grateful that a separate Department of Cultural Affairs has been established. Its object is to undertake the preservation, development and extension of the cultural heritage of the white population of South Africa. I now ask the hon. member whether he accepts or rejects the principle on which this separate Department has been established. As far as this side of the House is concerned, this is the basis on which we shall go to meet the future.

In the third place he had a great deal to say about the assimilation of immigrants. I just want to say that there is a difference between the “assimilation” and the “integration” of immigrants. Assimilation is the gradual drawing of the immigrant into our national way of life; the gradual assimilation of the immigrant so that in fact he becomes part of a process by which he will accept and understand the weal and woe of our fatherland. In order to do this, the hon. member must realize that the State cannot perform that entire function. The hon. member must realize that the State has to fall back on the services of many voluntary assistants from outside. I should therefore like to say that the amount voted for that purpose in this year’s Budget is in aotual fact still insufficient. Many other sound arguments can be advanced as to why this amount should be increased; it ought to be increased so that this process of assimilation of the immigrants into our national way of life can be expedited, in the sense that more can be done about it. I trust that the actions of the hon. member for Kensington this evening only happened to be sharp and negative by chance. I want to repeat that we do not know him like that. But now, Sir, you must allow me to bring a few matters to the attention of the hon. the Minister in a more positive way.

In the first place I want to extend a word of particular thanks to the Minister and his Department this evening, not only on behalf of our group which has pleaded for it on this side of the House, but also especially on behalf of the people outside who are involved in this matter, for the concession that has been made in respect of our artists. I trust, if one looks at subhead J under this Vote, that the full amount which is now being made available for aid to our artists will be much larger than it appears on the face of it. But I want to tell the Minister that whatever the amount may eventually be, it is appreciated very much. I believe that as far as the future is concerned we can expect much more from the Minister in this connection.

Then I also want to plead with the Minister and ask him whether the time has not come for more attention to be given to our cultural attachés overseas. According to the Estimates we have three cultural attachés at the moment, who have a particular task, who have a particular part to play in the sense that it still remains true that one understands somebody else better if you have got to know him by proper acquaintance, and I see the task of our cultural attachés in this light, that they have an important part to play overseas by the very fact of bringing the message of South Africa there to our many good friends, and also to others, by making information about us available abroad not only as far as our political convictions are concerned, but also, and especially, as regards those achievements we can take pride in and which I believe can make a very important contribution towards the creation of another kind of climate in respect of South Africa there. For that reason I want to ask whether the hon. the Minister will not give attention to this during the recess and see whether something cannot be done about it. If I may be permitted to indulge in what may be flights of fancy, I visualize that these cultural attachés can be instrumental in finding markets overseas for South Africa’s cultural products in respect of our literature and other products in that field. I think they can perform a very important function in that regard. [Time expired.]

I think the hon. member for Springs really did not use nice language towards my friend the hon. member for Kensington by referring to him as someone using sneering language, as someone, to use an unpleasant word, who is a “bitterbek” (vitriolic person). This is not the kind of language one would expect to be used by a young backbencher such as he is in referring to a highly respected frontbencher. I think the hon. member for Springs ought to be cooled off as happened at a Nasionale Jeugbond Conference, when his fellow delegates threw him into the swimming bath clothes and all because of things he had said.

I think it is a great pity that we do not have a report here, an annual report, of the Department of Cultural Affairs this evening. I do not want to mention this by way of criticism; I merely mention it as a fact that it is a pity that we do not have it, so that we may discuss it here to-night. This is an important new Department and I know there are difficulties in preparing the report and I hear that the Department of Cultural Affairs really wants to give us a very attractive report, possibly before the end of this Session. I hope that when that report arrives it will, unlike some other reports, be complete and will give us a comprehensive survey of the many activities of this Department.

There are a few interesting items appearing on the Estimates. Some of them, as far as I can judge, are new items, and unless we have the report before us, it is difficult to judge what these new items are about. I hope the hon. the Minister will be able to tell us more in this connection. Under subhead F there is an amount of R7,000 for cultural history films. Now, this sounds fine, but I am just a little suspicious when this Government uses a term such as “cultural history”, because this may mean “Calvinistic-Nationalist”, and I hope that in this case it will not mean that. We also see another item which, I think, appears as a new item on the Estimates, namely R2,400 for the patronage of artists, to which the hon. member for Springs referred. On the face of it there should be no objection to artists being patronized, but then, when such an item appears on the Estimates with no explanation, then I, as someone with a rather suspicious mind as far as the Government is concerned, expect at least that we ought to receive a better explanation in connection with it.

I am glad to see that there is another new item dealing with the Malay Quarter and amounting to R60,000. I would have thought that this could perhaps have fallen under the amount granted to the Historical Monuments Commission, but if the hon. the Minister can tell us more in this connection, I am sure it will be interesting. I think there is no one on either side of the House who would not like to see the Malay Quarter preserved and that money is provided in that connection.

But, in actual fact, I want to come to something else, and that is the contributions made for camps, for youth camps, for camps for adult education, and for camps in general which are organized by the Department of Cultural Affairs and by organizations receiving subsidies from that Department.

Is it camps or “verkramptes”?

It may be that the camps are for verkramptes. The details do not appear under subhead J on page 29, but last year the hon. the Minister tabled a document dealing with certain allowances granted by the National Advisory Council for Adult Education, and one of those was an allowance of R1,200 for what is called in Afrikaans, all in one word, the “Hartebeespoortdamkampkomitee”. This seems to be an interesting amount. It is a beautiful spot for camping and it is also a beautiful spot for having a camp committee, but then we find certain reports that recently appeared in the newspapers in connection with what happened at a camp held at the Hartebeespoort Dam during the past fortnight. About that camp some of the most shocking revelations were made that I have ever seen, which make that camp virtually the equivalent of one or other—one may almost say—Fascist camp with commandants and commandantcies of 20 or 30 years ago. There was a report in connection with the camp held in April in which allegations were made about which we hope to hear from the hon. the Minister to-night. In the first place we want to hear, above all, whether it is true that this was organized by the Department of Cultural Affairs, and if it was not organized by this Department, whether it was organized by this National Advisory Council for Adult Education, which formerly received an allowance of R1,200 for this purpose. Because you know, Sir, there were the most interesting and sometimes the most shocking reports about that camp at the Hartebeespoort Dam this month. For example, it was said that the young girls and boys who went there were prohibited to speak one single word of English.

You know that is a lie.

Order! The hon. member for Springs is not allowed to say that, and he must withdraw it.

I withdraw it.

What is the hon. member’s source of information?

I mentioned one source, and that is the report the hon. the Minister tabled in connection with an amount of R1,200 that was granted by way of subsidy to the Hartebeespoort Dam Camp Committee. Now I ask the hon. the Minister whether that camp committee or the National Council for Adult Education or his own Department of Cultural Affairs was responsible for this camp on which a report recently appeared in a Sunday newspaper to the effect that the most shocking things imaginable had taken place there, particularly since the camp concerned was one that was subsidized or received an allowance from the Government. The hon. the Minister should tell us whether this is the camp that was referred to in this report in the Sunday newspaper, where young boys and girls were forbidden to speak one single word of English or to sing English songs, where they were brought to exhaustion by hours and hours of military drilling, where they were woken up at 6 o’clock in the morning and only allowed to go to sleep at 11 o’clock at night, where they had to listen to lectures at 11.30 p.m. while sitting on a cold concrete floor, and where—this is the allegation that has been made and we want to hear from the hon. the Minister whether it is true or not—’they received food, bad food, in which some of these children even found maggots, where they were forbidden to telephone their own parents, where for 200 young girls there were only two baths, eight showers, and unhygienic toilets.

It sounds like a ghetto to me.

The hon. member at the back there made a remark. He said that to him it almost sounded like a ghetto. I do not want to put it that strongly. [Interjections.] But this is something that worries one, and the report on this camp does not come from those two young girls only; there was also a teacher who came from Carletonville and who took 15 of those young people away there who did not want to be there because they said they found the discipline there far too strict. It does not matter to me if my Nationalist friends want to have their own private camps. We remember that 25 years ago they had their own camps under Ossewabrandwag generals, etc., here at Bloubergstrand among the dunes. [Interjections.] [Time expired.]

Order! I will not have any more of this shouting to-night.

The hon. member for Orange Grove, whom I may in fact call a detribalized, denationalized person …

What do the verkramptes say about that?

I do not know what they say, but the hon. member should rather listen to me. The hon. member for Orange Grove has the record in this House of being so far removed from reality as the United Party is removed from the prospect of ever governing this country.

As Hertzog from Vorster.

The hon. member for Kensington had an opportunity at the beginning of last year of putting the fundamental attitude of the United Party in respect of the establishment of this Department of Cultural Affairs, but he never did so. The hon. member for Orange Grove also spoke here last year, and it was one of those speeches which are typical of him. He had no inkling or idea of what this Department was about and to-day, a year later, he is in fact more ignorant than he was last year. He referred to the hon. member for Springs, and I want to tell him that you measure another man’s scorn by your own bushel. To this evening the United Party has not stated its attitude in regard to the establishment of this Department. They come here with criticism and say that no reports have been issued. Sir, one can put the hon. member for Orange Grove in a whole library full of books and he will still understand nothing. I want to say that this Department has done a great deal of good, solid work and has laid good foundations since its establishment a year ago, and I want to congratulate the hon. the Minister on his contribution to the establishment of this Department. If ever in the future I have to create an image of a Minister of Cultural Affairs, then I will always think of the hon. the Minister. He has done a great deal of good work for our country.

Mr. Chairman, I only want to raise a few points this evening in connection with a certain matter, but by way of leading up to it, I first want to say something about the art galleries and cultural history museums. Our art galleries and cultural history museums in South Africa have already developed a character of their own. A primary function of the art galleries and cultural history museums is the collection of both art and cultural-historical objects. The second important function of these galleries and museums is the preservation and maintenance of a collection of works of art or objects of cultural-historical significance. Further general functions of these institutions are the display of collections, educational services and enlightenment of the public, the publication of the results of investigations and research, and the promotion of an awareness of art and a knowledge of the cultural history of the people. You have several of these institutions: The National Cultural Historical and Open Air Museum, the War Museum at Bloemfontein, the S.A. Cultural Historical Museum in Cape Town, the S.A. National War Museum in Johannesburg, the Voortrekker Museum in Pietermaritzburg. Then you have various collections: The Michaelis Collection in Cape Town, the Engelenberg House Collection in Pretoria, the S.A. National Art Gallery in Cape Town, the William Fehr Collection in Cape Town and the William Humphreys in Kimberley. Sir, I want to draw the attention of the hon. the Minister to the following matter, a matter which he in his wisdom, together with his Department, will know how to handle. There are many people in South Africa, more than the general public is aware of, who are interested in family histories, in the genealogy of the white families here in South Africa. There is also the Genealogical Society of South Africa, which specializes in making a study of and undertaking research into family histories. We have for example a quarterly publication, Famil a, of which Dr. C. Pama is the editor and in which many interesting articles appear. For example, in the edition I have here, The Genealogy of the 1820 Settlers, the table of descent of the first State President, Mr. Swart, is featured, along with many other interesting articles. Various works have also appeared on the research which is being done here. I am thinking in particular of the work of the previous century by C. C. de Villiers, who did phenomenal work. I should like to quote from the foreword to Geslagsregisters van ou Kaapse Families by De Villiers and Pama (translation)—

There are individual studies in respect of various families. There is the work of Theo Bosman on the Bosnian family. I also have in mind, for example, the work of Dr. Petronella van Heerden on the Van Heerden family, etc. I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether one cannot at some stage or another draw the attention of the public to the fact that many genealogical tables are still lying about. Many of the younger people marry and inherit the old family Bibles in which their parents or grandparents made very complete entries of the family history. There may also be little bits of particular personal history of a particular family recorded in this way There are many old family photographs which a younger generation very often just tends to discard as having no value. One finds many families of individuals who are not really sufficiently interested in preserving old family photographs and Bibles, and I wonder whether an effort should not be made to store these old family photographs, family albums and family Bibles with genealogical tables at a central place, where people with scientific knowledge can systematize and collate them and by so doing can preserve this part of the history of our nation and our country for the future. Sir, I think it is very important for one to be familiar with one’s forebears, because it binds one not only to them, but also to the members of one’s family, and I think it promotes greater love and piety in the future. I think this is something to which we should pay attention.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to add my disappointment to that of the hon. member for Kensington about the fact that we have to deal with the Vote before the annual report has become available. We hope that it will be possible to avoid this in future. There are a few questions I want to ask the hon. the Minister. Perhaps some of the questions would have been unnecessary if we had had the annual report before us.

The first matter relates to the “integration” of immigrants, for which an amount of R75,000 is being asked. Sir, while the hon. member for Kensington was speaking I had to leave the Chamber for a moment, so that I do not know what questions he asked the hon. the Minister in this regard, but I wonder whether the hon. the Minister can explain to us how this amount is to be spent, what integration comprises, who is in charge of it and what success he is achieving with this work. Then, as a Johannesburg member, I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether he is paying attention to the big influx particularly of Portuguese immigrants into Johannesburg. It is calculated that in Johannesburg there are now between 70,000 and 75,000 Portuguese immigrants. This makes Johannesburg the biggest Portuguese city outside Portugal and Brazil to-day. A further increase should be expected, and we shall find in the very near future that we have a bigger Portuguese population there than in Angola or Mozambique; and here I am referring to the white Portuguese. Sir, I am able to speak from experience, as someone who represents a constituency where entire streets are now inhabited by Portuguese immigrants. It goes without saying that where one has such a large concentration, other than in the oase of scattered minority groups, cultural problems must necessarily arise, especially in respect of education, and I shall be very pleased to hear from the hon. the Minister whether he is giving this specific matter his special attention, because here we are dealing with a group which adapts itself less easily than for example German, Dutch or English immigrants.

The hon. member should really raise this on the next Vote.

I do not want to go into too much detail now. The hon. the Minister may reply to me on this matter as far as he can, and, if necessary, we can ask further questions on the next Vote, because unfortunately we have very little time on this Vote. I just want to tell the Minister that I am sympathetically disposed towards immigrants; I am not raising this matter by way of criticism. We need immigrants. The matter which interests me specifically is that where one has such large minor groups, attention will have to be given to matters such as mother-tongue education, etc. We are anxious to hear whether the Minister is giving special attention to this matter, and what his views on the matter are as regards the future. Then I should like to hear what is meant by the item “patronage of artists”. The hon. member here behind me also raised this matter.

Mr. Chairman, the amount of R98,000 being asked here “towards completion of the Afrikaans Dictionary”, is something which we naturally support wholeheartedly, but I wonder whether the hon. the Minister can give us a brief report in connection with the progress being made on the Dictionary. We have now come to Part V, as far as letter K, and one wonders whether we can expect the work to reach completion within a reasonable number of years. It seems to me that we are dealing with an item here which will probably have to be placed on a permanent basis, because even if we eventually reach the completion stage, then the task of supplementing this major work will remain. The volumes are expensive; the leather-bound edition costs R19 and the ordinary edition costs R11.40 in the trade. Actually, this is not so terribly expensive if one takes into account what the product entails and what books cost to-day, but it is expensive for schools, etc., and I wonder whether it has been considered to give special assistance to institutions that need the “Groot Woordeboek”. I shall be very glad to hear from the hon. the Minister how many of these dictionaries are printed per edition.

Then provision is made for an amount of R102,000 for the Africa Institute. This is a very large increase on last year’s amount of R87,000. We are not objecting to this. I just want to ask the hon. the Minister whether he is keeping his eye on the Institute; whether he has any say as regards the staff; whether he is satisfied with the staff being appointed; and whether he has given consideration to the possibility of granting assistance to a very important organization which is doing similar work and which is older than the Africa Institute, i.e. the South African Institute for International Affairs, which has its headquarters in Johannesburg, and has branches in Cape Town, Pretoria and various other centres as well.

I shall be glad if the hon. the Minister can inform us on the item “Purchase of works of art”. Last year provision was made for R1,000 and now there is a revote of only R100. It will be interesting to hear what the intention is with the purchase of the works of art, how the matter is being handled, what course of action is followed in selecting them and who are in fact the people who do the selection. I accept that the objec t here is a good one and we are asking these questions only because we are interested.

Then I wonder. Sir, whether the hon. the Minister could inform us in regard to the extent of the work of the Language Service Bureau. If details are going to appear in the annual report, I do not mind waiting for that information. But provision is being made here for a large amount, and one would like to know a little more about the extent of the work.

Then just a few words about the cultural attaches. We have three at present: in Holland. Belgium and West Germany. I think this is of particular interest to South Africa, and I should like to hear from the hon. the Minister whether he has any plans to consider any extension of the existing cultural agreements with other countries and, if so, with what countries he is negotiating, if it is possible for him to mention this.

I should also like to hear details in connection with the study bursaries to students, travelling grants to outstanding personalities, and the travelling grants to South Africans for travel overseas; but I take it that we shall find details of these matters in the annual report. If not, we hope that the Minister will furnish us with details of these matters in the future.

Then I just want to ask a last question in connection with the grant-in-aid to the South African Institute in Amsterdam. I shall be glad to hear what the functions of the South African Institute are as regards the interests of South Africa, in order to be able to judge whether the expenditure is justified.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to say a few words about the Natural and Historical Monuments Commission. It is a commission which does very important work. We have great appreciation for it and also for the work which the commission has done in the past by preserving historical places for posterity. Unfortunately I have to add that this has not always been done. Cases have come to my attention of historical places which were not taken under the protection of the Commission.

I now cast my mind back many years, when I was particularly interested in the vicinity of the Bosberg, where Somerset East lies. It is a very historical environment. In actual fact it formed part of the old Republic of Graaff-Reinet, which extended up to the Fish River. At the foot of the Bosberg, where Somerset East is situated to-day, there was, among others, the farm of Louis Trichardt. There, at the foot of the Bosberg, lay the cradle of the republican ideal. I did a good deal of research there and in a mealie field I came upon an old ruin which was only a few feet high and was apparently the ruin of the house of the man who can be regarded as the protector of the republican ideal when it had just originated. It was the house of Marthinus Prinsloo, who in 1795, when the Republic of Graaff-Reinet was established, was proclaimed the “protector of the voice of the people”, as it was called. At that time I tried to secure the preservation of certain buildings for posterity in connection with that history and what followed on it, namely the Slagtersnek episode. The building which I have in mind particularly, is the old gaol building in Uitenhage in which the prisoners of the Slagtersnek Rebellion were detained and from which they were taken to the magistrate’s office for their trial, where they were then convioted. I think the magistrate’s office is still standing there to-day. I made representations at the time to the City Council of Uitenhage to preserve for posterity all or part of this building, even if it was only the two cells in which the people had been imprisoned, but they refused to do so. I gained the impression at the time that the Historical Monuments Commission was not inclined either to preserve what they regarded as unpleasant. This particular episode had been an unpleasant one for certain people. But, Sir, there are unpleasant things to be found everywhere in history, and we have to approach history as a diamond-digger approaches the gravel that he works on. Once it has been washed, he carefully scrutinizes it to see whether there is not perhaps a diamond among the gravel. In the gravel of our history of that time there is a splendid diamond. It is the diamond of the ideal of freedom. Although there was some gravel it was worth the trouble to retain the diamond. That building, or at least those cells, should have been preserved.

Now I want to express the hope that if that ruin in the mealie land still stands it will be preserved by the Historical Monuments Commission, because it really was an outpost of our civilization. The man who stayed in it took the lead in the so-called Van Jaarsveld Rebellion in 1799. This person, Marthinus Prinsloo, was sentenced to death. He was kept here at the Castle. However, General Dundas, the then Governor, stayed the sentence because he realized that England had the Cape in its possession only temporarily. In 1803 the life of Marthinus Prinsloo was saved by Napoleon, because in terms of the Peace of Amiens the Cape was to be handed back to the Batavian Republic, that is to say, Holland. Marthinus Prinsloo then came out of the Castle with the nickname “Marthinus Kasteel” because he had spent so many years there. During that time Adriaan van Jaarsveld died in the Castle. The son of this same Marthinus Kasteel, Hendrik Kasteel—he was also given the nickname—was the leader of the Slagtersnek Rebellion. That is why I say this old ruin in the mealie land about three miles from Somerset East really is an historical place which ought to be preserved for posterity. I hope it will be done by this Commission.

Mr. Chairman, I have no desire to delay proceedings unduly. There are just one or two points I should like to refer to briefly. Firstly, I should like to explain to the hon. member for Rissik that there was no objection on my part against encouraging and financing cultural activities. That was not the point I raised at all. The question was whether cultural activities should be divorced from education. That was the point I tried to raise. I think they should go together. I think cultural activities and education are part of the same thing. They both help to build up the perfect person.

I should like the Minister, in his reply to tell us whether there has been an improvement in obtaining recruits for the Language Service Bureau. Some years ago I discussed the problem with him and the difficulty then was to obtain suitable men who could translate from Afrikaans to English. We are a bilingual country, but people are not perfectly bilingual. People are usually stronger in one language than the other. The hon. the Minister explained at that time that he was experiencing some difficulty in obtaining sufficient recruits who were experts to translate from Afrikaans into English. It was easier to obtain those who could translate from English into Afrikaans. When I raised this matter some years ago there were 35 members of the Bureau. Now I see that he has 42 members, so the position looks more promising.

Finally, under Item J, Performing Arts, the quite considerable sum of R650,000 has to be voted. I should like the hon. the Minister to give us details about how he proposes to allocate that amount.

Mr. Chairman, in reply to the hon. member for Kensington, he will remember and knows it very well that all these annual reports are compiled by the Department and submitted to the Minister. Therefore, I have to wait for the publication of these reports. My Secretary for Cultural Affairs gave me the following explanation. I think it is only fair that I should read his explanation to this Committee. It reads as follows—

I still remember very well that the hon. member for Kensington was in a position to congratulate the old Department. The Secretary further says—

When we come to the Vote of the Department of Higher Education, I will also explain what the reasons were for the report arriving late and why it only arrived yesterday. The Secretary went on to say—

I should like personally to assure the hon member that in the future the Department of Cultural Affair will table its report in time for the debate on the Estimates.

*I hope this will also satisfy the other hon. members who expressed their disappointment in this connection. We have already had a very detailed discussion on the question as to whether this department was justified. If hon. members will just have a look at the Estimates and the increased amounts, they will see that there is not one single item in respect of which the amount has been reduced. There are, however, a few items in respect of which the amounts have remained the same. There is a large increase in the case of most item by far. I may safely say that there has been an increase in 90 per cent of the items. If we just look at the increased amounts, it should make us all glad to see to what extent new life has been infused into this section of the old Department. My main complaint was that as regards the old Department of Education, Arts and Science, education was looked after first and cultural activities had to be satisfied with the crumbs that fell from the table. It was considered to be less essential when limited amounts were available. This year I am really very pleased. I thought that I would receive compliments from all and sundry. I have in fact brought along some powder to be able to hide all my blushes when I am praised for these large increases. Surely this is what we are all striving after; this is the more conservative part.

A few members spoke about the Language Services Bureau. Conditions have been slightly improved. Further improvements will follow, because the Treasury has granted us special concessions in view of the increase in the salaries of teachers. We have now obtained a special salary scale for these officials. It is actually from the ranks of the teachers that we obtain the staff, Afrikaans-, English- and German-speaking, and also people who know other languages, for the Language Services Bureau. The position has already improved, and in the near future the position will probably be quite satisfactory as far as rendering these services are concerned. As hon. members know, the Language Services Bureau has to undertake all the translation work for all the departments. This is their main function. Only when such translations have gone through that expert division of my Department, those translations can be said to be correct in so far as one can have certainty about translations.

Is the translation work of the Department of Information also done by your Department?

No, the Department of Information does its own translation work.

Is the translation work of the Department of Bantu Affairs also done by the Language Services Bureau?

No, my Department does not do it. We do in fact undertake the translation work of most of the other departments. However, we cannot translate the correspondence of all these departments. But when it comes to books and reports which have to be prepared, we do it. I cannot give a complete list now of all the translation work that we do. However, a great deal of the translation work we have not been able to do, because we simply did not have the staff.

The English that is used in many of these reports is shocking.

Yes, I want to agree with the hon. member. Sometimes the Afrikaans is also shocking. However, we cannot work with uninformed people. The position there was critical, so much so that I warned that if the conditions of service of these people were not improved, I would be obliged to ask the Cabinet to relieve my Department of the responsibility to provide that service, so that each department would have to do its own translation work. After that an improvement came about.

The question of the integration of immigrants was mentioned by various members. This item was on the Estimates last year as well. There is no increase this year. The amount is still R75,000. Integration does not mean that citizenship is granted, or that the immigrants are naturalized, but it means that these people are integrated into the South African way of life. We are doing this by bringing these people into contact with Afrikaans- and English-speaking people. We have done this in the case of adolescent children who have reached the secondary school stage. We brought them to seaside camps and to camps in the interior, and gave them instruction in English and Afrikaans in turn. We tried to bring the typical South African way of life home to these people, so that they can in turn carry the message to their fellow immigrants and so that they can adapt themselves better to our way of life instead of continuing on their own. We could spend much more than R75,000 per annum on this, and render a bigger service. However, this is the amount that is made available to us for this purpose.

Various speakers referred to the question of assistance to artists and the R2,400. that has been made available for that. Misgivings have been expressed. Pleas have also been made for increases, for example by the hon. member for Springs. However, this is only the beginning. When we last had a motion on this matter, I gave the undertaking that we would encourage our artists in some way or other. Now we want to make a small beginning. We want to buy 200 copies of the two best Afrikaans books and the one best English book respectively, that are published in the year concerned. These books we then want to distribute free of charge to libraries and elsewhere. The reason why there are two Afrikaans books and only one English book is that English literature is so rich and receives so many contributions that are not written in South Africa that we thought this would be a fair division to start with. This was done by way of experiment. It will also serve as an encouragement to the author, because he will also receive his share from the books that are sold. We hope to be able to develop this further. An expert selection committee will be appointed to select these books. We do not stipulate that certain subjects should be written about. The judges will decide what are the best subjects. The hon. member for Springs and the hon. member for Bezuidenhout asked for more cultural attachés. However, we send cultural attachés only to countries with which we have cultural agreements. At present South Africa has cultural agreements only with the Netherlands, Belgium and West Germany. The three cultural attachés are therefore stationed in those countries. The cultural work in all the other countries with which we have diplomatic relations and also other ties, is being performed by the Department of Information. All the cultural work is being performed by them and we do not want to duplicate this service. When and where necessary, however, we will see to it that this is done.

Are any new agreements envisaged?

At the moment no new agreements are envisaged. At one stage in the past we wanted to send someone to South America, but then we learned that the Department of Information itself was sending someone there.

The hon. member for Orange Grove asked a question about the cultural history films This amount of R7,000 is to be used for a film on the inauguration of the Trichard Garden in Lourenço Marques. This film is being made by the National Film Board. This amount of R7,000 is therefore being used for this specific purpose. This year the Government has voted an amount of R60,000 for the restoration of the Malay Quarter. The Government is subsidizing the City Council of Cape Town to restore a certain part of the Malay Quarter. The Government has voted a total sum of R298,000 for this purpose. An annual amount will now be allocated until the grant of R298,000 is used up. The hon. member welcomed this. I now want to refer to the report in the Sunday Times about the camp at the Hartebeespoort Dam. Immediately after this report had appeared, the Secretary for Cultural Affairs sent a telex to Pretoria in order to find out what had happened. He received the following reply (translation)—

In addition it is said that Mr. S. F. van der Merwe will arrive in Cape Town to-morrow morning at 7.15 by train. He will hand the report over to us. At this stage I cannot say much more, except that I shall give the Press the correct statement of the position as soon as the report becomes available.

Who is Mr. Van der Merwe?

He is the chief organizer of youth work. I may also just mention that there is something here that leaves the impression with me that there is something fishy about that Sunday Times report. I get this impression when I read this further telex report. It reads as follows (translation)—

It seems to me, therefore, as though the Sunday Times has again added a little poison of its own. I do not want to anticipate the report, but it seems to me as if it was again a case of there being a few runaways and a few malcontents. Perhaps they made these stories up, but I do not know. I will give the Press an accurate and complete report, as this Vote will have been disposed of by that time and it will not be possible to raise this matter here.

The hon. member for Rissik asked that research in connection with genealogy be undertaken. I just want to say that there are also risks involved in this. If all the information is collected, some families may perhaps be embarrassed. However, I want to assure the hon. member that we shall go into this idea of his further. I know the hon. member is personally very interested in this; he even wants to do research in regard to the De Klerk family to see whether everything is in order. In any event, we shall give attention to this.

As I told the hon. member for Bezuidenhout a moment ago, the question of the Portuguese immigrants should rather be raised with my colleague, the Minister of Immigration. As regards the children at school, I can only say that the matter falls under the Education Vote. As regards immigrants, we are trying to integrate them by means of our Adult Education Organization. This also is the only aspect of the question of immigrants this Department is dealing with.

The hon. member asked a few questions about the Afrikaans Dictionary. I may just tell the hon. member that the Dictionary staff have repeatedly been complimented by many bodies and persons on the work they are doing. Recently, with the acceptance of Volume V by the State President, I attended an exhibition. More than two million Afrikaans words have been collected to be sorted into alphabetical order. These words include words covering all the letters of the alphabet. I may just tell hon. members that this is an immense task. I think we must accept that, just as in the case of the Oxford Dictionary and just as in the case of the dictionary of the Dutch language, this will also be a permanent institution. We will have to accept that this Groot Woordeboek is a permanent institution. We will have to accept that the compiling of this dictionary will take a long time. The fifth volume appeared very recently, and it is expected that the sixth volume will only appear in five years’ time. We will have to accept this, because we have a young and growing language and every now and then new words will be added.

And every few years they have to look for a new definition of apartheid.

Order!

If the hon. member remains here long enough, perhaps the word “Vause Raw” will also appear in this dictionary. The impression of each volume, in other words, the number of books printed, is 10,000.

The hon. member also asked me about the Institute in Amsterdam. The Institute in Amsterdam is a library of Afrikaans books and serves a very good purnose. Through our Dutch-South African Association we are introducing Afrikaans books there, and I therefore think this is money well spent.

The hon. member also asked me about the purchase of works of art. Approximately seven years ago the late Dr. Dünges, when he was Minister of Finance, set aside R250,000 for us for the purchase of works of art. Let me tell you what has been purchased with that amount so far. There is the Wagner collection of Africana, consisting largely of books, for R52,000; the E. G. Jansen collection, also a library, for R25,000: and then there is the Mullne Cape Silver Collection for R38,000. This is R115,000 of the R250,000 that has already been spent. As soon as a worthwhile opportunity arises, such as the three I mentioned here, the rest of the money will be used. We are very grateful for this, because it is difficult to ask for these things. Hon. members who were here seven years ago will remember that that was provided for.

Then the hon. member for Bezuidenhout asked whether we were satisfied with the activities of the Africa Institute. I can assure the hon. member that the Africa Institute, with its publications and with its bulletin, with its activities, with the assistance it renders to universities, research workers, etc., is invaluable. The expansion of the staff is being watched carefully, so that Parkinson’s Law will not come into operation there. I am very satisfied with the activities there. I have full rights of inspection, especially as regards their publications.

Do you have any say in the appointment of staff? Are you consulted in this regard?

As regards the creation of posts I am, but not as regards the appointment of staff.

The hon. member for Kempton Park made a fine plea. We know his splendid reputation in connection with the preservation of antiques. The matter of the mealie lands he mentioned, even if there are only ruins left, we shall bring to the notice of the Monuments Committee and ask them to expedite the matter. I am in great earnest about this, because overseas many old ruins have a very long and interesting history.

I hope with this I have replied to all the questions. I do not think I have left anyone out. I want to express my sincere regret that the annual report has not yet been tabled. If one has had a good record for so many years and one transgresses once, I think one should be forgiven seven times !

Votes put and agreed to.

Revenue Vote 7,—Higher Education, R50.918,000, and Loan Vote M,—Higher Education, R3,120,000:

Mr. Chairman, in the less than five minutes at my disposal I should like to raise one point with the hon. the Minister, the other extreme of the education of immigrants. The Minister has not answered my question about the education of immigrants. I asked him what had been decided about the medium of instruction for an immigrant. I thought the Minister was going to talk time out, but he has not done so, so I will do it for him. I hope the Minister when he comes to deal with this subject under the Education Vote will be able to tell us about that.

I want to go to the other extreme, to universities. The Education Department is a gift department as Cultural Affairs is and the Minister has to play Father Christmas there as well, because in the old tradition of the Department of Education, Arts and Science there were many schools and institutions that the Minister supported. There were voluntary institutions that he supported. Some of the horn members on this side will refer to them appreciatively in some cases. I should like to refer to university gifts this year. I think the Minister has taken a step forward. The financing of universities is improving.

In deciding on gifts to universities, to support the universities, the Minister should follow the example they have in Britain. He should have a grants committee. It would be difficult to appoint a grants committee that would be satisfactory to all sections and to all universities. My feeling is that a grants committee would relieve the Minister of much responsibility. He could find a committee in South Africa of outstanding men, not only educationalists but also men from commerce and industry, as well as from agriculture, people representative of the whole community who would take that load off the shoulders of the Minister. They would advise him and the Minister’s function then would be to say how much money could be made available. The grants committee could then make appropriate recommendations.

Having said that, I should like the Minister to tell us what has happened to the Cilliers report. Mr. A. C. Cilliers has given a universities report and the Minister has received that report. I do not know how long it has been in his possession. Why has it not been laid on the Table of the House? Why have we not been given copies of that report? It is a very important report on university finance. We have not received a copy. I should like to make this suggestion to the Minister. If he finds he has not sufficient copies of the report then perhaps he could make, say, six available to this side of the House and perhaps a dozen available to the other side of the House. Members of the education groups on both sides would then be able to make a study of this report. That is my feeling about this.

The universities have been discussing the Cilliers report. The Minister has not given us the report but he has appointed a commission, a very important commission, to report on the universities. I think the first stage is that the report should be made available to the members of this House. I hope the Minister will tell us what he expects this new commission to do and how long they are to sit before they are to report. A commission appointed last year was given a time limit in which to report. I do not know whether a time has been fixed for this commission. Has the Minister fixed a time for this report to be made, or is it left to their discretion?

Only an interim report on the financial matters must be submitted by the middle of this year; that is near the end of the Session.

Business interrupted in accordance with Standing Order No. 23.

House Resumed:

Progress reported.