Mr. Chairman, yesterday we had a speech from the hon. member for Zululand on this subject, a speech which was in line with the speech he makes on this subject every year. Let me say at once that as far as tourism in Natal is concerned, apart from the City of Durban with a magnificent organization in this connection and apart from other local authorities who are doing their best, the only worthwhile tourist activity going on in Natal emanates from the Natal Parks Board. The Natal Parks Board is a body primarily concerned with conservation; that is the reason for its formation. It is a statutory body created by law with the major object of going in for conservation. However, when in the course of its conservation work circumstances are produced which are of interest to overseas people or, for that matter, to people from within South Africa, they come along and take advantage of the circumstances so created. Now, we find that the major point of interest to people in other parts of South Africa and from overseas is wild life. The National Parks Board with the Kruger National Park and other parks, and we with our game reserves in Zululand realize that this is the prime factor in attracting tourists to South Africa. There are, of course, ancillary reasons. For instance, they come to see the Bantu in their tribal state …

Order! Hon. members are not allowed to converse on the floor of the House.

… and they come because they want to see our scenery and enjoy our climate, things which, in the main, are catered for by our local authorities although they, no doubt, also receive the attention of the Department of Tourism. The hon. member for Zululand is not satisfied with this, but comes here year after year and launches an attack on the Natal Parks Board. Now I think the time has come for us to tell the hon. member that the Natal Parks Board is not just another Naboth’s vineyard that he can covet. He has now been in this House for a couple of years. So, I want to ask him point blank, “What has he done in the interest of tourism in Natal?”. He has complained about the land under the control of the Natal Parks Board which he says stretches from the Tugela mouth up to Kosi Bay, i.e. to the Portuguese border at Oro Point—nearly 200 miles long on a rough calculation. Something considerably less than 20 miles, i.e. one tenth, comes under the Natal Parks Board while more than ninetenths of the area still fall under State departments. Now, what has the hon. member done to get any of that land available for public enjoyment, which he complained about yesterday? Various State departments control this area—the Department of Bantu Administration, the Department of Land Tenure, and others. Only one tenth of this area falls under the Natal Parks Board. The hon. member says that we have not allowed private capital to come in and that we are not allowing the public to enjoy it.

That is right.

You see, Mr. Chairman, there the hon. member repeats it. But what has the hon. member done to get one single acre out of the remaining 180 miles for the enjoyment of the public of Zululand, from the constituency he represents? Really, what I expected from the hon. member this year was a speech of thanks to the Natal Parks Board. Because his own university, the University of Ngoya, has asked us to make available to groups of students from that university the right to come in and notwithstanding the protection afforded to those reserves, to collect specimens and to carry out studies in the reserves because scientifically these reserves are well protected and cared for, so much so that his own university takes advantage of it.

The same applies to the Ngoya forest.

It does not matter whether it applies also to the Ngoya forest. The point is that it applies to the reserves which he has criticized. Let me come to one or two of them. He talked about the public not having enjoyment and mentioned Sordwana Bay. But at Sordwana Bay there are water supplies, lavatories and 80 camping sites. We have now reached a stage where all these sites are fully occupied. Over the Easter weekend alone 1,500 people came in there. Does that not mean that the public are enjoying the amenities which are there? Does he not realize what load was placed on the employees of the Parks Board to provide water and sewerage facilities and other amenities for 1,500 people, who literally came there overnight into an area planned only for 80? Is this not proof that there are amenities for the public to enjoy? Let us deal with Mapelane. The hon. member also referred to it and complained bitterly about it. However, he is not up to date with his facts. Mapelane, as the hon. member has said, has been difficult to get at for many many years past but gradually people are going there in greater numbers. There is a nice beach there; they can fish there, and so on. and the result is that peonie are going there. In the past a group of Zululanders organized a ski-boat club and asked to develop the area, not to the exclusion of others however. They were given the right there to establish temporary huts in which they could lock up their gear and find shelter in the night. But pressure has been building up from the public until the people up there, through the advisory committee in Zululand, indicated that they did not want anybody to have a sort of pre-emptive right. However much the public may seem to enjoy this, it looks as though there is some kind of a right conferred upon the ski-boat club. As a result the Parks Board some two months ago gave notice to the ski-boat club—which it was perfectly entitled to do—to the effect that the Parks Board was taking over the whole of the area in order to develop it for the public. Over a year ago the Parks Board built a house there for a white superintendent who has already moved in there. He is marking out areas, there is cleaning taking place of the undergrowth and the bush, grass is being planted to protect the sand dunes—all in preparation of the influx of the public. However, the hon. member is not satisfied with that. He thinks this is an opportunity to make a little political capital. He thinks he can now go back to Zululand and try to take advantage of what used to be public opinion in years gone by, i.e. opposition to the Parks Board. But the hon. member had better wake up. There is hardly a gathering. in Zululand today—publicity associations, the lot—from which there do not issue motions of approval of what the Parks Board is doing up there. [Interjections.]

Order! The hon. member at the back there must please keep quiet now.

I am going to take his Hansard along with me into Zululand. I am looking forward to his Hansard, because I am going to take it up to Zululand. I am fed up with this. The day he can show that he has managed to make available one acre of land to the public, to the people of Zululand, will be the day he can come and complain about what the Natal Parks Board is doing to cater for the public, not only of Zululand, but of the whole of South Africa. [Interjections.] The hon. Whip, the hon. member for Wolmaransstad, who is trying to interject over there should bear in mind that this is one of the assets of South Africa. South Africa benefits from tourism and, consequently, from having these areas. [Interjections.]

Order! The hon. member for Zululand has now made enough interjections.

We have been to the Government to ask for further areas to be made available so that the public of South Africa can enjoy the facilities up there and so that we can attract the tourist to enjoy them too. That has come from the Provincial Administration under an administrator who himself is a Nationalist.

Mr. Chairman, I do not want to join in this fight that is taking place between the hon. member for South Coast, who, of course, is a member of the Natal Parks Board, and the hon. member for Zululand. However, I want to say to the hon. member for South Coast that he exaggerated quite a bit when he said that the only body that has done anything for tourism in Natal or in Zululand, in particular, is the Natal Parks Board.

He did not say that.

What did the hon. member then say?

Why did you not listen?

I did listen. All right, I will give the hon. member the opportunity to repeat what he has said. I have listened to the hon. member and it is no good their Whip on that side of the House protesting. The hon. member gave the impression that it was the Natal Parks Board only who did something for tourism in Natal. I made a note of the very point that he mentioned.

You made wrong notes.

Oh no, I did not. It is the hon. the Leader of the Opposition who read his wrong notes. [Interjections.]

Order!

No, I am not going to let the hon. member repeat what he has said. I have given him the opportunity and he would not get up. The hon. member said the only thing worth-while for tourism was done by the Natal Parks Board. He cannot deny that he has said that. The hon. Whip on that side of the House cannot deny it either, because I have made a note of these words. The impression which the hon. member wants to give is that only the Natal Parks Board has done anything for tourism in Zululand. It is not true. The hon. member for South Coast condemns the hon. member for Zululand. He said that he would like to know whether the hon. member has done one thing for tourism on the State lands. I want to point out to the hon. member for South Coast, that it was the hon. member for Zululand who came to see me when I was Minister of Forestry with regard to extending the facilities for tourists in Cape Vidal.

What did you do?

We extended the facilities, Unfortunately the hon. Whip is again wrong. The whole area was extended and more facilities were given to ski-boat clubs, to campers and caravanners in that area. It was the hon. member for Zululand who came to see me about that. The hon. member for South Coast must not always get up in this House and exaggerate. He always tries to exaggerate the position. [Interjections.]

Mr. Chairman, may I ask the hon. the Minister a question? What is the total of the accommodation offered by his department or any State department to-day at Cape Vidal?

I can only answer that from what I have seen during my own personal visit to that area. I do not know if the hon. member has been there. I think the camping area was extended to cover 100 camping spots. The ski-boat clubs were given sites which they could develop. They were even given the right to build clubhouses. None of these facilities have been taken away. That is why I was disturbed to hear the hon. member for South Coast say that certain facilities that were given to a ski club would be taken away.

How many of them exist to-day?

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member can get up and make his speech. I am making mine now and he can listen to it. It is the same old story. The hon. members on that side of the House exaggerate in their criticism. They make claims for themselves and for their own particular interests. They criticize members on this side of the House who show an interest in their constituency. The hon. member for South Coast goes so far as to challenge the hon. member for Zululand that he had never done anything for tourism in his area. That is not the truth. I know it from my own experience.

How many ski clubs are there at Cape Vidal?

There must be about eight or ten. However, I am not sure of the exact number. These have been established during the last four or five years.

How long ago did the hon. member come to see you about it?

He came to see me when he wanted additional ski club facilities in that area. [Laughter.] Hon. members can laugh because they think they can score debating points at the expense of the hon. member for Zululand. We all know that it used to be a United Party seat but is no longer a United Party seat.

The hon. member for South Coast also mentioned Sordwana. If he had listened to the debate last night he would have heard me replying to the hon. member for Newton Park when he spoke about the prospects of big game fishing in the Eastern Province area. I said then that I had inspected Sordwana and I thought it had very big prospects for big game fishing if certain facilities were available. There was water; the hon. member is quite right, but he said there was accommodation for 80 and that 1,500 people came there over the week-end. I do not blame the Natal Parks Board. I do not know the history of it. All I know is that that area can obviously accommodate many more people than 80. Where the funds are to come from is another matter, but basically that area could be developed, in my opinion, as a centre for game fishing in the Mozambique Channel. The hon. member knows that just over the border, in Mozambique, they go in for these facilities of that nature to a large extent; and let me tell the hon. member that the facilities they have there are much larger than the 80 huts he mentioned are at Sordwana. I appreciate that these matters must be gone into. This matter of big fishing prospects in that area was also raised by various people. It was raised with me by the hon. member for Zululand and it was raised in correspondence, and the matter of the possibilities of Kosi Bay was also raised. All those things were raised by this member and for the hon. member for South Coast to say that he is not interested in tourism is a complete exaggeration and an attempt to make a little political capital out of the situation, and that is all. I am not letting the hon. member for South Coast get away with it. I am prepared to give him facts and to give this Committee facts of what has actually taken place in the Zululand area. I myself regard it as an area which undoubtedly can be developed on a large scale with tourist amenities for the people of South Africa.

What have you done there as Minister of Tourism?

The hon. member for South Coast is now leaving the hon. member for Zululand and he is trying to attack me. I at least have done something which many members on his side of the House have never done, and that is to visit that area intensively. [Laughter.] They may laugh, but it is so. I had discussions with the Mayor and the councillors of St. Lucia, in regard to the prospects and the development in that area. But of course that does not mean anything to the hon. member for South Coast, who thinks he is the whole of Natal and that he is the only man who can talk about these matters. But already he is not the great man in Natal any more and I think in the years to come he will not even be such a great man as he may think.

Vote put and agreed to.

Revenue Vote 23,—Sport and Recreation, R320,000:

There are two small matters I want to raise with the hon. the Minister before passing on to other matters. The first one is that we have received the first report of the Department of Sport and we welcome it. It is a clear and helpful document and it sets out the department’s functions very well; but I would ask the hon. the Minister whether he can tell us why we could not have a more recent report. This one is approximately 16 months old. It is not a long report and it would be very nice to have a more recent report when discussing the Vote.

The second matter concerns the question of various sporting gatherings which are referred to in the report. One is glad to see the useful gatherings which have occurred. I would like to ask the hon. the Minister to see whether it is not possible for certain limited numbers of the sports groups of each Party to be invited to the main national sports gatherings. I think it would be most useful to the members of both sports groups to make contact with such people on such occasions and indeed to be edified by the deliberations there. This is done, as the hon. the Minister will know, in the Department of Defence, the Department of Agriculture and many other Departments and I should have thought that this was a field in which the hon. the Minister could usefully follow their example. I refer only to the main national congresses and symposiums, some of which are referred to in the report.

The third matter I want to raise is a more important one. The whole task of the Department is to advance the health and fitness of the nation—indeed of the whole population—through sport and recreation. Obviously and quite rightly one of the main ways in which the Minister’s Department is seeking to achieve this is by encouraging coaching and training as a high priority and, furthermore, by bringing teams here from overseas and encouraging visits by our people overseas in order to ensure a high standard of performance by South Africans. When one reflects that this is the task of the Department, one realizes to what extent they are labouring under a handicap. I am, of course, referring to the absence of television here. The hon. the Minister has coaching symposiums and meetings. The average number attending these is approximately 30 because there have apparently been nearly 200 such coaching gatherings with an attendance of 6,000 in all. If these coaching sessions could be more widely seen it would greatly facilitate the work of the Department. Where the Minister is helping to bring teams to this country and is helping teams and individuals from this country to go abroad, one can again realize to what extent his department is knee-haltered, and to what extent the country is held back by the absence of television. One realizes that the Minister himself cannot introduce television, but what we do ask him is whether he is in fact exerting pressure in order to realize this great aim.

Order! Television has nothing whatsoever to do with this Vote.

With respect, it would greatly …

Order! Hon. members are continually going off the rails and trying to raise matters which fall under other Votes, and I am not going to allow it any longer. The hon. member must come back to the Vote.

Will the hon. the Minister just indicate what he is doing?

Television was discussed under the Post Office Appropriation Bill.

Sir, I am reminding the hon. the Minister that he is labouring under a handicap …

Order! I am not going to allow the hon. the Minister to reply to the hon. member’s question.

The hon. the Minister might in fact be able to give a reassuring answer on this point. At any rate, I think it cannot be doubted that from the educational point of view, from the point of view of watching sport, this is much needed.

Order! The hon. member must abide by my ruling or I shall ask him to resume his seat.

I beg your pardon, Mr. Chairman. I was not intending to evade your ruling, but I just wanted to bring that aspect to the hon. the Minister’s attention.

The next matter I want to raise with the hon. the Minister concerns the South African Games. Recently we held a South African Games and the main events took place at Bloemfontein. I am not completely certain who was responsible for the organization of the Games, but I think I will be correct if I say that it was organized by the South African Olympic Council with help from the Department of Sport. I think it will be valuable to have a report from the hon. the Minister on all the various relevant aspects of the Games. I would firstly like to ask the hon. the Minister what amounts have been granted in aid of the games by the State and secondly to have his report on the Games, including the achievements and failures. I ask this particularly in light of the fact that it has been made known that we can expect further games five years hence. Is it intended to have further games and what will the lines be along which these games will take place in future? There are two points to which I would like to draw the hon. the Minister’s attention. I was amazed to notice how little publicity was given to the past Games. I was even more amazed at how Very little interest was evinced for those Games, certainly in Cape Town. I hope that when we have further Games, they will be so arranged that there will be much greater enthusiasm for them. It is after all the task of the Department to encourage participation in the Games and the improvement of the standards. I do not exactly know why it was so, but it seems to me that something was seriously missing in that respect. The second aspect I would like to mention is the question of the withdrawal of teams from these Games. This was a matter of very great disappointment to us all and the exact reasons for this cannot be stated in one proposition, but it was clearly connected with the influence of politics in international sport. It is a fact that there is this influence in international sport. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member who has just resumed his seat put three questions to the hon. the Minister, and I take it that the hon. the Minister will reply to them in the course of the day. That aspect to which he referred, i.e. the withdrawal of participants from the South African Games, is a matter to which I shall refer during my speech.

On this occasion I should like to express my gratitude and appreciation to all who contributed towards making such a great and definite success of our own South African Games at Bloemfontein. In this connection I should also like to refer to the Provincial Administration of the Free State, the City Council of Bloemfontein, our own South African Olympic Council and then last, but not least, to our Department of Sport and Recreation which made such a large team of officials available to deal with the actual and substantial organization of our own South African Games. To make a fair assessment of our own South African Games we should perhaps see it against the background of national games, which we still find, and have found in the past, in other Western countries. In this connection I mention the Highland Games which are usually held during the month of August in the Highlands of Scotland at Braemar. Hundreds of Scots gather there to take part in that centuries-old institution, i.e. the Scottish Games. I could also refer to the Turnfeste which was held in Germany and which so many young Germans want to enjoy. I could also refer to the Swiss Games of Switzerland and to the Lingiades in Sweden, but perhaps the best example is the Sokol Games in Czechoslovakia, which, before Russian domination put an end to them, proved of so much benefit to the inhabitants of that country when they took place in Prague every six years. As you know, these Games were started in 1881 on a relatively modest scale. In time they developed until about 140,000 participants subsequently took part in them. A certain writer, M. O. Williams, wrote an article about it in the National Geographic Magazine. He said the following about these national games—

If one were to take the overall image of these people which radiates from these periodic festivals, one would find it to be an image of an individual nation which takes joy in living. It is the image of a nation which can enjoy and appreciate the pulsations of a new dawn with so much greater happiness because it takes place under such pleasant circumstances. National Games are thus as old as organized sport. They could have endured for so long and stood the test of time because they satisfied the actual needs of the people who had an interest in them. They could make those people happy and therefore I say that it would befit us to test the success of our own Games against the background of the well-known national Games with which we are familiar in the Western world. Secondly, we may test it against the actual magnitude of our Games. They did not constitute a small effort but a magnificent one. There were 6,000 participants who took part in 41 kinds of sport over a period of nearly five weeks, with more than 130,000 visitors attending. There were, inter alia, 120 participants from ten other countries. I think it was a magnificent effort. We may also test the success of the Games against the needs of our country and its people. I immediately want to say that these Games were actually a display of the sporting strength and the sporting traditions of our own people. This is a sporting tradition which has been built up over many years and which has given joy to our own people. The Games were a demonstration of the suppleness and the muscular strength of our youth, as well as a demonstration of the goodwill of our older people. If, then, we were to test our own Games against the background of these factors, we would all have to agree that our own South African Games were really a great success. Therefore, in congratulating the organizers of these Games I also want to plead on this occasion for these Games to become an actual part of our South African way of life and for them to become a regular institution with us. In saying this I know that it must be a mammoth task for the organizers to arrange such games. There is also a great deal of expense involved as well as stumbling blocks and problems to be surmounted, but I am sure that the resourcefulness for which South Africans are known, and the experience which they have gained in these Games, will facilitate the arrangement of future national games much more easily. I am pleading for the retention of our Games as a part of our national institutions and our national way of life because of various considerations. Firstly, I want to mention that I know of no better way in which two white language groups can be united on a national level of co-operation than specifically by joint participation in and joint support of our own National Games. My second consideration is that, as far as sport is concerned, we in South Africa have so much to be proud of and so many sporting traditions which can be transferred from generation to generation. There is so much of beauty which can be displayed to our own people and to those from abroad. Every nation that has the South African’s youthful vigour can be proud of it. We as South Africans are particularly proud of our young participants in sport and therefore we must create the opportunity for them to play together, to be happy together and to compete for their own benefit and for the benefit of the Mother Country.

I want to mention a further consideration, which is that we in South Africa, who have had to build up many sectors of our society very rapidly, have not had the opportunity, like many of our countries of origin, of giving a great deal of attention to displays and ceremonies. You may now say that these are external trappings and you may want to know what value they are to sport and recreation. My reply is that I know of few factors which can make a greater contribution to the cultivation, extension and establishment of national pride and national reverence. Whenever one has the privilege of hearing 90,000 Welshmen, people who do not often have many privileges, singing “Land of our Fathers”, one realizes how much prestige and essential creativity this performance lends to the national pride and honour of that fine nation.

Another reason why I want to plead on this occasion for our national games to become a regular institution in our national way of life is that there should always be a visible bond between culture and sport. Hon. members must understand that if a young nation, in developing, were to allow this visible bond between culture and sport to fade away, that nation would be so much the poorer. If that visible bond between sport and culture were to be lost, how much smaller would the scope of that nation not be!

In conclusion I want to plead for these national games to become a permanent institution in the lives of South Africans because we are faced here with the important consideration that we in South Africa are in the process of developing a young nation, which physically, spiritually and otherwise must be capable of standing the test of time and withstanding the onslaughts of the modern world. This can only be done if the youth of South Africa is taught to play together in great numbers and to find their happiness together. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, we on this side of the House feel that the holding of further South African Games should be pursued and encouraged. We agree with a good deal of what the hon. member for Port Elizabeth (Central) has said. It will be important to ensure that this South African Games, however, shall be developed as a true South African Games. In other words it would be wrong in my opinion if we should try to bring about a situation where the South African Games should be regarded as some form of mini-Olympics. Unfortunately, some of the enemies of South Africa endeavoured to wreck the successful holding of the South African Games due to this very reason. It is therefore important that we should keep the South African Games in their right perspective. I believe it can be classified as having been a successful South African Games, but unfortunately, due to interference from the outside, these South African games could even have been more successful if that interference had not been forthcoming. I think we can only condemn those enemies of South Africa who tried to imply that the South African games were a mini-Olympics. It is important too, that we should endeavour to see that our South African sportsmen do obtain international competition from time to time. I know the hon. the Minister will agree with me that it is important to increase and improve the standard of our sportsmen by means of international competition.

There are various difficulties that must have arisen, no doubt very real difficulties, as regards the initiation of the holding of such a large function. Evidently, there are certain points which created further difficulties, such as adequate facilities being provided for the various codes of sport at the Games. It would appear that the Bloemfontein City Council also experienced various other difficulties concerning venues, as well as other unfortunate matters that arose in regard to the accommodation of non-white spectators, and so forth.

However, it has been indicated that possibly the next Games will be held in Durban. It is hoped that the hon. the Minister could give some indication as to whether his Department would be able to assist these sporting bodies in the provision of adequate facilities for the holding of such an important event as the South African Games and as regards the cost of providing facilities that do not already exist, especially with regard to some of the smaller types of sport, which still do not have a great deal of finance behind them. It is interesting to note that in the Estimates there is, in fact, a decrease in the grants-in-aid. As indicated in this Vote, the grants-in-aid are reduced from R165,900 to R145,000, a drop of some R20,900. Possibly this is due to the fact that the higher grants-in-aid were brought about by the assistance that the Department rendered to various codes of sport in the holding of the South African Games. The assistance that is rendered to these organizations is absolutely vital to their continuing existence in South Africa and to bring about their encouragement.

Whilst dealing with the question of the grants-in-aid, it would appear that the two main functions of the hon. the Minister’s Department, as indicated in its first report, deal with the services in the technical field by liaison officers, and the allocation of the grants-in-aid. Consequently, it is important to try and obtain the information from the hon. the Minister to see what is being done in regard to the various types of sport in South Africa. A list is given in the annual report, showing the various organizations which have received grants-in-aid.

However, the point that I should like to raise here for the hon. the Minister’s consideration is the question of assistance to the non-white sporting bodies and organizations, so as also to encourage the holding of sports events, games and other international sports events, if necessary, amongst the non-white community. I believe it is vitally important, particularly from the sociological point of view, to encourage the vast number of Bantu in South Africa to be participants and to be interested in sport. We believe, particularly in the urban areas, where there is a continual growth in the number of Bantu living in that area or in close proximity to the area, that facilities, in many instances, are not adequate to cater for the enormous crowds that they have. It would be interesting to know whether the hon. the Minister has in any way assisted by way of grants-in-aid any of the non-white sporting bodies, so as to encourage them. Perhaps the hon. the Minister could also encourage them at a later stage, by seeing that international sides from countries which have non-white teams are invited to participate against our non-Whites, in other words, to help to develop their sport by international competition with other non-white countries. The information brochure which was made available to us yesterday indicates ou page 3 that the hon. the Minister’s Department must consult with the other Departments, as far as the non-Whites are concerned.

Now let us look at some figures. As far as sport is concerned and, let us say, the sociological problem of providing recreation and entertainment for the non-white community, if one looks at attendance figures, particularly of the Bantu attending soccer matches, for instance, one soon realizes that an enormous number is involved. The United Municipal Executive, which submitted a memorandum to the Select Committee that considered Sunday sport, indicated that some 50 million Bantu per annum attended football matches during weekends. As far as Durban is concerned, I know that figures indicate that on Sundays about ½ million Bantu attend football matches over a period of a year. With regard to Indians, the figure exceeds ¼ million attending soccer matches held at Curries Fountain, one centre which is in Durban. The question of encouraging the non-Whites to take an active part in sport, I believe is an important one in meeting a sociological problem which can exist where there is a large number of Bantu living in a restricted area and where, invariably, many of them are living in hostels and have to look for some means of entertainment.

Here I should also like the hon. the Minister to give an indication as to whether he, as a member of the Cabinet, has made any representations with regard to the consideration the Government at present is still giving to the question of the prohibition of sport on Sundays. I believe this is a very important factor and vitally affects sport, as well as the Minister of Sport. That is why it is important to know whether the hon. the Minister can give an indication whether he, as the responsible Minister, has a policy in regard to this important aspect. We know that in 1963 a Bill was introduced and referred to a Select Committee before Second Reading. In 1964 a Select Committee was once again appointed before the Second Reading of the Sunday Sport Bill. That Select Committee considered representations from some 68 organizations, heard oral evidence and found that there was a great divergence of opinion, particularly amongst the churches, as far as Sunday sport is concerned. Of the nine major churches, five were in favour of such a prohibition on Sunday sport, and four were against the legislation to prohibit sport on Sundays. The importance of this lies in the fact that the Minister of Sport is the one to bring about a healthier country. Where sport is concerned, we believe, that as far as legislation against sport on Sundays is concerned, it should be left as it is. As a matter of status quo, it should be left to the provincial councils and the local authorities concerned to deal with matters if they wish to do so. Therefore it is hoped that the hon. the Minister will indicate that he believes that it would certainly not be in the interest of sport and, also as far as the sociological problems are concerned, in the interest of South Africa if a prohibition law is enacted with regard to Sunday sport. In fact, in terms of the previous Bill that was brought before the House, it would make it a crime to participate in, organize or attend any sports function on a Sunday. I believe that as far as our European population is concerned, there are adequate facilities for sport on Saturdays. But as far as the non-Whites are concerned, it would be a great mistake if the Government should proceed with legislation to bring about the prohibition of all sport on a national basis on Sundays.

Mr. Chairman, it fills one with gratitude to observe that we have reached so much unanimity throughout the country about this aspect of sport that there was even a plea to-day from the Opposition for the continuance of the South African Games. We are also grateful for the fact that the Opposition apparently now realizes the necessity for the Department of Sport; not only in respect of its existence but also in respect of the extension of its functions and activities.

I want to associate myself with hon. members who referred with praise to the recent South African Games. I think that the Games were worth the effort, the expense and the time devoted to them because, although one identifies oneself with opinions expressed earlier this year in this House to the effect that sport should not be carried to excess, should not be idolized, should be kept in perspective, the fact still remains that for an energetic young nation such as the South African nation there is no better sphere of realization, of finding one another and of building up unity, as was also indicated by the hon. member on our side who spoke before me, than specifically in sport. If one observes that those abroad who have sought our downfall have specifically realized that sport is one of the spheres in which they can get at us, and that they have also taken trouble in recent times to isolate us from other sporting countries, one realizes that sport, even when exercised in its pure form without ulterior political motives, is a powerful weapon. I want to express the view to-day that since the enemies of South Africa had thought fit to use sport as a weapon against us, it is high time that we in South Africa made use of sport as a weapon, not to get at them, but to carry the image of South Africa to the outside world. Because it is a fact that South Africa is becoming known in circles where it was not previously known, specifically through the exemplary conduct and the achievements of our sportsmen. Therefore I also want to thank the Minister most warmly to-day. [Interjections.] Yes, an hon. member over there is groaning because I said that I wanted to thank the Minister, but last week I heard three Opposition members thanking him in one day. Things are about to improve on their side. I want to thank the Minister for his Department’s choice of the three persons who were nominated this year for the State President’s sports award, i.e. Paul Nash, who is to-day regarded as the fastest white sprinter in the world, Dawie de Villiers, our Springbok rugby captain and Bruce Dalling, who made that unforgetable solo voyage across the Atlantic Ocean, to the great credit of South Africa. I think that they are three men who deserve that distinction and whose efforts have brought great credit to South Africa. It will take a great deal of work for Sanroc and their friends to try and destroy such achievements by South African sportsmen. I therefore say that we must purposefully make use of sport to extend the good image of South Africa, and we want to pay tribute to those men, and also to others who did so on the occasion of our South African Games.

But, that being so, we cannot merely stop short at what has been achieved this year. One must think ahead and if one does so one sees another ideal opportunity for South African sportsmen to extend our image to the outside world, and that is on the occasion of the Republic’s sports festival in 1971, which has already been announced. The Department of Sport, as I see it, will be chiefly responsible for arrangements in connection with this festival, because these festival activities emanate from Government circles, and the Department will also have to obtain the assistance of a great variety of sports organizations in our country. If one looks at the present framework of the Department and thinks of this strenuous programme which lies ahead, it becomes clear that this Department will have to strengthen itself and will have to have more staff. Sir, you will perhaps stop me at this juncture and say that I cannot plead here for greater expenditure, but I am thinking ahead; I am not thinking in terms of this particular year for which the amount has already been voted.

However, the simple fact is that in future this Department will have to expand its activities because of this great task which rests on its shoulders. One thinks even further ahead, since there is already talk of the next South African Games and also of a junior South African Games in 1973. This Department will virtually have a full-time job in helping with the organization of prestige gatherings of this nature which could bring great honour and renown to South Africa. With a view to that, I want to go further to-day and plead that we should even think of the countries abroad, as we endeavoured to do this year, in order to obtain participants for great occasions. We must keep in constant touch with great sporting achievements abroad so as to know what persons are worth being invited here for international competition. I want to plead that persons at our Embassies abroad should give attention to the opportunities which exist for South Africa in the field of international competitive sport and to give attention to the achievements of sportsmen over there who would be prepared to come to South Africa.

But I want to go further and, with an eye on the Republic’s sports festival and the future prestige sports gatherings of this nature in South Africa, I want to plead that consideration should even be given to sending persons, who have international status, who carry weight in international sporting circles and who have the necessary knowledge and are accepted in those circles overseas, to make the necessary contacts so that we can obtain sportsmen and sports teams of a high standard for participation in South Africa. I want to content myself with these few words and I merely want to add my sincere congratulations to the hon. the Minister and his young Department for what they have achieved in this very short space of time.

The hon. member who has just sat down said that the enemies of South Africa unfortunately used sport as a weapon against us, and this is of course perfectly true. I would like to remind him, however, that sometimes it is the actions of the Government of South Africa which give our enemies all the weapons they need to attack us. [Interjections.] I want to cite an example. I believe that the hamhanded method by which the Games at Bloemfontein were handled was a sufficient weapon for all our enemies overseas to use as a stick against us. I couple with that our handling of the D’Oliveira affair which has been aired enough probably in this House during this Session already. But if anything made a mess of sports and if there was politics in snort, I believe it was this Government’s handling of the matter. They are the people who gave our enemies overseas all the weapons they needed. [Interjections.] For this reason I want to direct a few remarks to the hon. the Minister, but before doing so there are one or two points to which I would also like to draw his attention. One is the fact that the allocation for his Department this year is R320,000, but that well over half of this amount is taken up by administration. The minor amount, as was pointed out by the hon. member for Umbilo, goes for grants-in-aid. This is all very well if the Department performs its functions in an advisory capacity and instructs and trains various sporting authorities. One would then have no compaint about the fact that they use most of their allowance in expenses rather than in grants-in-aid.

In this respect I would like to draw particularly to the Minister’s attention the following fact and ask him whether his Department makes expert advice available to local authorities in Tegard to the construction of sportsfields, etc. I have in mind the fact that every local authority in South Africa to-day is faced with the problem that there is just insufficient ground available for sports fields. Schools particularly find that they cannot have enough rugby fields, cricket fields, and so on, and the tendency nowadays is to build a rather large sports complex in the larger areas. I would like to ask the hon. the Minister whether, if he has people who have expert knowledge, the advice of these people is made available to the local authorities or to the schools in the construction of their playing fields, because this is obviously a problem which is going to become more and more difficult to solve as time goes on. In this respect too I would like to join with the hon. member for Pinelands, who asked the Minister to give us a full report on the Bloemfontein Games. I think if we were all honest in this House—and I use the word “honest” in the literal sense—we would admit that from the spectator point of view the Games were a flop, and I think we must face this fact. From the sport point of view it was certainly a success, but if one takes the number of spectators who went to Bloemfontein to see the Games and if one bears in mind the length of the Games, one can only conclude, if one wants to be perfectly honest, that the Bloemfontein Games were a flop, and one would not like to see that happen again.

I would like to know to what extent the hon. the Minister was consulted in regard to the Bloemfontein Games. I am not attaching any blame to him at this stage in this respect, but I would very much like to know how much he was brought into the picture. There is one matter, however, which is clearly the Minister’s responsibility and where I am going to attach some blame to him. I refer to the fact that he left this question as to whether non-white spectators would be allowed to attend the Bloemfontein Games in abeyance until just two weeks before the Games. I think we are perfectly justified in asking the hon. the Minister whether he has any influence with his colleagues in the Cabinet or with the local authorities or with the Bloemfontein City Council because this matter was left to run until just two weeks before the Games started before it was resolved, with the result that only a handful of non-white spectators went to see the Games. Taking this a little further, one can also ask the hon. the Minister what he is going to do about the touring team that is going to visit our country in the very near future. Is the same thing going to apply at Bloemfontein then? Are non-white spectators going to be allowed to watch the games in Bloemfontein? Sir, hon. members opposite smile, but I bet that none of them has yet worked out the answer. I want to know whether non-white spectators are going to be allowed to see the games at Bloemfontein when this touring team comes to our shores, because at the present moment not only Bloemfontein has this regulation but Pretoria as well. I would like to know whether Pretoria is going to allow non-white spectators to watch the touring team in action.

Is that our only concern?

Sir, the main difference between that hon. member and my self is that I am concerned with what happens to South Africa’s image. He has damaged South Africa’s image so much already that it is no longer a matter of concern to him. It is a petty matter like this which the Minister could resolve quite easily if he had the courage to go to his colleagues in the Cabinet and put the matter to them. Sir, if we showed a little bit of courage and faced the facts of life in South Africa, we would win far more friends overseas than the Government has been able to obtain for us up to the present time. Sir, I would also like to know from the hon. the Minister to what extent he was consulted in regard to the use of the Olympic rings in the Bloemfontein Games. There again I am not saying that it was his fault, but if he is the Minister of Sport, are people not consulting him? Are they frightened to consult him, or have they no confidence in his ability to find the answers?

They are scared of him.

I believe that perhaps one might say that they have no confidence in the ability of this Minister to find the answers for them because he has not got the power in the Cabinet to alter Cabinet decisions.

In conclusion, I would like to support the hon. member for Umbilo who dealt very briefly with this question of Sunday sport. The Government has been very silent on this matter for some time, and it would be vary interesting to hear from the Minister what his own views are in this regard.

After the fine, positive contributions of the first two speakers on Opposition side, the hon. member for Port Natal, of course, has just left one once again with a bitter taste in one’s mouth. He honestly said nothing worthwhile, but kept on nagging. I hope he is satisfied now, because he believes in many things; he said every now and then: “'I believe, Sir.” I hope he believes all the things which he advocated here. If it does, let him keep it up, if he derives any benefit from it.

Mr. Chairman, in respect of sport and participation in sport, there are a few things weighing rather heavily on my mind, and in mentioning these things here, I have regard to the aims and aspirations of this Department; I also take into account the powers which the Minister and his Department have as well as the limitations. Nevertheless I should like to make the statement here that I am convinced that we in South Africa participate too little in sport. What I have in mind here. is not so much competitive sport but the fact that far too few people actively participate in sport. In saying this, I find strong support for my statement especially in the circumstances which I noticed in the rural areas, where, as we all know, there are far fewer sporting facilities than in the cities. We find that especially in smaller schools, where sport has its roots, the necessary facilities and opportunities for children to participate in many different kinds of sport do not exist. In most cases we find in the schools in the rural areas to-day, that the boys play rugby and the girls netball or basketball; a few play tennis and a few take part in athletics. I do not have much to criticize in this regard. but because there is limited participation in sport, it has the effect that when these children are adults, they are completely excluded from participation in sport because they did not have the opportunity as children to participate in different kinds of sport. It simply is a human Characteristic to become less outgoing as one becomes older, and the result is that these people are not very keen to participate in sport and to take up a new kind of sport.

In this connection I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether it is completely outside the scope of his Department to give attention to this matter; I do not think it is. I should like to see this Department taking the lead and advocating this idea of participation in more kinds of sport. In suggesting this, we will most definitely not be offending against the rules as this does not entail increased expenditure, but I nevertheless believe that this could be done to great advantage.

This brings me to another aspect, also in respect of the rural areas in particular. In our larger centres there is, as a rule, many participants in each kind of sport. Because this is so, the standard of the sport normally is higher. The spectators, too, are usually more in number. As a rule one does not find the financial problems in the urban areas which one may find in the rural areas. I said at the outset that in making my pleas I have regard to the aims and aspirations of this Department. I shall not go any deeper into the merits of participation in sport now. I just want to point out to you, Sir, what the position in the rural areas is.

There we have the rapidly depopulating at largely depopulated smaller towns in which the people are faced with problems which do not exist in other areas, problems such as distances and the attendent transport difficulties. We find that various kinds of sport, even a popular sport such as rugby, have died out completely in such towns, because the facilities simply do not exist. The possibility of something being done under present circumstances, is slight. Local authorities in the Cape —I do not know whether the same position obtains in other provinces—can get assistance from the Provincial Administration in certain cases, but that in turn burdens local authorities to a large extent and they in turn have to recover this from the sports bodies. Has the Minister perhaps given any thought to the possibility of extending his Department so that it may undertake services in this field as well? I should like to hear what the Minister has to say in this regard. Without associating my-self with the hon. member for Port Natal, I want to point out that it is nevertheless, a fact that a large portion of the amount allocated to this Department is used for administrative purposes. We do not have any fault to find with that as such. The question merely is whether we should not extend the Department and those administrative advantages, so that we shall be able to give attention to these things as well? I think the Minister as a sportsman will agree with me that it is a pity that this state of affairs should have arisen.

To the hon. member for De Aar I should like to say that I have always admired the sporting spirit of the platteland. I know what distances they are prepared to travel to attend a rugby match for instance, even disregarding the expense involved. They usually do this with an enthusiasm which has amazed me. We cannot get away from the fact that the enthusiasm of our people, whether they are on the platteland or in the cities, for sport is spontaneous. I have assisted the platteland as far as the terms of reference of my department allow me to. When this department was established, it was suggested that we might be able to supply capital equipment to build swimming baths, tennis courts, and that type of thing all over the country. However, that was not one of the functions of my department. But we have arranged coaching courses. If there are teachers on the platteland who want to become experts, in swimming for instance, the department is prepared to arrange for them to attend courses to enable them to instruct their own communities according to the latest methods. As far as the terms of reference of my department allow me to I am only too anxious to assist the people in the platteland, because I appreciate their difficulties. I should also like to tell the hon. member that this department is supposed to concern itself with the post-school period. It is not intended to intervene in school arrangements or in school sporting activities. The concern of this department is the fact that people after they leave school are inclined to drop out of physical exercise and sport in general. The basic object of this department is to extend the basis of sport in this country, and not necessarily only the top pinnacle. The foundation of the pyramid should be broadened. We go out from the standpoint that through sport we can build up a healthy people, physically and mentally.

But I want to come back to the speech made by the hon. member for Pinelands. Like the hon. member for Port Elizabeth (Central) I should like to convey to the hon. member my appreciation of the tone he set for this debate. I know there are many things where one can try to score political capital—like the hon. member for Port Natal for instance. He is interested only in one thing. He is definitely not interested in sport. As a matter of fact, I do not think he even belongs to the sport group of the United Party. He is concerned only with one thing—how he can score a political debating point, regardless of the interests of sport. The hon. member for Pinelands is the chairman of the U.P. sports group and anybody outside would have appreciated the difference between his approach and the approach of the hon. member for Port Natal.

He is probably a better sportsman than all of us.

He may be, although he did not sound so to-day. He did not talk like a sportsman. I am convinced that his object was not to help sport in South Africa but only to see how much harm he could do. I have always regarded the hon. member for Pinelands as the man who represents sport in his party …

But I hope you will reply to everybody’s questions.

Yes, I shall—even those of the hon. member for Port Natal, and the hon. member for Pinelands can then tell me whether the answer I have given to the hon. member for Port Natal is not the correct one.

The hon. member for Pinelands wanted to know about the report of the department. Last year it was possible to give this report to the sporting groups of both parties before the Vote came on. We tried to do it again this year. However, this Vote came on about three weeks earlier than last year. What is more, this report has to go through all the departmental procedures. Not only that, but many members of our staff had to attend to matters in connection with the South African Games at Bloemfontein. I hope, nevertheless, that the report will be available within the next three weeks, when it will be given to the hon. member and to his party. He also referred to the national gatherings, or congresses. There was only one congress, I think, and it was held in 1968, early on in the year when Parliament was already in session. I can assure the hon. member that in future the sporting groups of both parties will be invited to these congresses. I may say to the hon. member that he will know that for the ceremony of the State President’s award in the Castle, invitations were given to every member of the sport groups of each party. To the credit of the hon. member for Pinelands, he was the only member who attended the first ceremony. Why I remember it, is because I spoke to the hon. member and thanked him for coming. I felt that the occasion was something recognizing an achievement of sportsmen for South Africa as a whole and not just limited to groups or parties in this House. On the other hand, this side of the House was well represented by the members of the sports group. I hope in the future more hon. members will attend the ceremony. At the last one which we had in the Castle, the hon. member for Umbilo was in attendance too. I hope that in future more people will attend what I regard as a very dignified ceremony and one which gives credit to sport all over the country. I want to mention the names of the sportsmen who have received the sports award since the beginning of the granting of this award. I think it will give members an idea of the calibre and the quality of the people that received this. In 1966 it was awarded to Gary Player, Karen Muir, Graeme Pollock and Anne Fairlie. In 1967 it was awarded to Angela Harrison, Frew MacMillan, Bob Hewitt and Denis Lindsay. In 1968 Dawie de Villiers, Paul Nash and Bruce Dalling received the awards. If one thinks in terms of South Africa’s achievements in sport, I think one will agree that these men are a credit to South Africa. We are very proud that they were recipients of this award.

I want to advise the hon. member also that the department has run 200 courses during the first 18 months of its coming into being. Admittedly, that is 30 per course. I will not go into that matter any further. However, I myself appreciate the fact that there are aspects of sport which are very important and where aids can possibly be given to sport. The hon. member asked me what the amount granted in aid of the South African Games by the Government was. I think I have answered that question previously in this House when I stated that R50,000 had been granted to the Trust Fund for the purpose of the South African Games at Bloemfontein. There has been reference to the non-Whites. All I can say in regard to that is that an amount will be granted by the various departments under whom non-white affairs come, namely the Department of Bantu Affairs, the Department of Indian Affairs and the Department of Coloured Affairs. An amount will be granted by each of these departments for the South African non-white games that will take place in October this year. The hon. member also referred to a report on the Games. I think the Games only ended a fortnight ago. I have asked for a report and it will be available soon. I attended the closing of the Games. I have had discussions with my departmental officials who assisted with the organizing of these Games. Contrary to the sentiments expressed by the hon. member for Port Natal, the Games were a success. I need not even add any adjective to the word “success”. Over 130,000 people attended the Games in Bloemfontein during the period. Undoubtedly, I think the extended period which, I think, was 35 days, was a long one. However, I expect that the report will have suggestions to make in that respect.

Can the hon. the Minister give us a short verbal report of the Games?

I would say that basically the Games were not intended solely as a spectacle for the spectators, if one can put it that way. It was intended to be a gathering of the various sportsmen from all over South Africa. I think there were almost 50 different forms of sport taking place during that period in Bloemfontein. This will show the hon. member that there was a considerable interest by various people. I arrived at the Games one Friday evening and went straight to the weightlifting event. I have never seen weightlifting in my life before. I was amazed to see the number of people who were enthusiastic spectators of the weightlifting competition that took place in Bloemfontein. The hon. member for Port Natal wanted to know how many people attended the Games per day. Of course, his only object is to decry anything that is South African.

That is tripe.

He wanted to divide the whole period to see how few people attended the Games so that he could say, as he has said here that the Games were a flop. The hon. member can make inquiries from all the sporting bodies and ask them if the Games were a flop. I saw the cricket games being played, I saw so many athletic events. It is only the hon. member for Port Natal, who has such a jaundiced outlook, and says it was a flop. [Interjections.]

There were more players than there were spectators.

There were 130,000 spectators not players. There have been games previously. I think there were national games in 1960, 1964 and these Games in 1969. In 1964 there were only two overseas contestants. This year there were 106. That is my answer. I agree with the hon. member for Umbilo that these national games should be continued in South Africa, and that there should be more and more competition from overseas to show the international standards which our people can produce. As far as I am concerned, these Games have not been a flop. In fact, I think they were a success. I am not prepared to exaggerate the success, but I say that the spirit of the contestants coming to these Games, showed me that the sporting people of South Africa appreciated what was intended to take place at Bloemfontein. The hon. member also referred to the little publicity which was given to the Games in Bloemfontein. There was a South African Games Committee which had a subcommittee handling publicity. I must say that although there may not have been headlines on the front page, I always heard and saw a great deal of reference to the Games at Bloemfontein in the sporting sections. I did not expect more than that. The Games were well covered in the Sunday papers, both English and Afrikaans. The member also referred to the withdrawal of teams. Obviously, the withdrawal of teams, as he stated, was due to political influences. They were not teams as much as individuals. The individuals were threatened that if they took part in the South African Games at Bloemfontein, they would be suspended from their particular athletic bodies in their own home countries. The hon. member wanted to know what the arrangements will be for future Games that have been announced. Naturally, this is a matter that will be considered in due course. As he said, these Games would only take place in 1972 or 1973. The Games that we are going to tackle next, are these Games for the non-Whites. We intend to tackle that with the same enthusiasm as was done with regard to the Games for Whites at Bloemfontein. I hope that will satisfy the hon. member. Funds are definitely available which should allow them to organize proper games. The hon. member for Umbilo also approved of the principle of national games. I would say that we are all agreed on that. We want to see this developed and would also like to see more international competition at these Games. He referred to the next Games in Durban. I saw that announcement. I presume that that will take place. I do not decide the venue. The venue is decided by the sporting people who are in charge of starting bodies. That, I think, falls in line with the views of members of both sides of the House. The hon. member also talked about the decrease in grants-in-aid. That is true. The hon. member for Port Natal, in this reference to it, talked about the large amount that was made available and said that over half of the amount was for administration and a minor amount for grants-in-aid.

I said “the minor”.

The impression the hon. member wants to give is that this is an establishment of people who are just looking after their jobs and are not interested in the sport itself. However, in actual fact the activities of the members of this department are indirectly concerned with all the sporting bodies who may in fact get grants-in-aid.

What is the reason for the decrease?

The reason for the decrease was that the arrangements which were being made for this year’s national games did not necessitate this large amount. I do not want funds which I cannot use. In regard to the people who attended the national games at Bloemfontein from overseas, I might tell the hon. member that the Department agreed to pay their travelling costs to take part in any of the provincial or other tournaments which took place at other centres, for example, Port Elizabeth, Cape Town and East London. The Department had undertaken to pay the air fares of the visiting athletes to these places.

Will there be grants-in-aids for the non-white games as well?

Yes, through the various Departments. I can only give the hon. member an assessment but each Department concerned, the Department of Bantu Administration and Development, the Department of Indian Affairs and the Department of Coloured Affairs, will make a separate grant for the non-white South African Games, because that is the basis on which we run our non-white sport. This department is very anxious to assist, but it takes its instructions from the other departments concerned with the particular group in question.

The hon. member for Umbilo also referred to the non-white Games and he referred in particular to the facilities for spectators. The Department does not provide what can be regarded as capital facilities. These facilities must be provided, but the Department is prepared to arrange courses, training courses and coaching courses and to assist in these indirect ways towards the development of sport. The Department does not spend money on stands and on fields, because that is left to the sporting bodies of each group and region.

The hon. member also talked about Sunday sport, and all I can say to the hon. member is that no legislation in this regard has been brought before this House during this Session. Therefore I think he will appreciate that no legislation is contemplated in this regard.

Are you prepared to give your own view on that matter?

No, I have only told the hon. member what I am prepared to say in this regard. I say that no legislation has been offered to this House and therefore I think the position will be understood. I should like to say to the hon. members why I was pleased with the tone of this debate, is that sometimes much harm can be done to sport by too much discussion. I think the hon. members will appreciate it.

Only if you have something to hide.

I know the hon. member for Port Natal’s intention and I know his object.

I should like to make an appeal to hon. members on all sides of this House. I think that the hon. member for Port Elizabeth (Central) has mentioned, and I agree, that sporting activities between our people can do so much good. I trust that nothing will be done or said which will impair the sporting development of our country.

Yes. but then you must tell your Ministers not to make speeches.

I think the hon. member for Houghton should also be very careful how she treats the sporting people.

People must not cheer when D’Oliveira is left out of the team.

That may be so, but that hon. member must remember that she is isolated in her point of view in respect of integrated sport in this country. I do not think that she stands with the hon. members on that side of the House.

I stand with the rest of the civilized world.

I do not think that the hon. member is the only one who is in step in South Africa; I know she likes to think that she is!

You yould be surprised! Lots of people in South Africa think the way I do.

My impression is that very few people in South Africa think like the hon. member. She may hope that they do, but she will find out in due course just how few people support her views, not only her views of sport, but her views in general.

You should come to some of the meetings.

The hon. member for Port Natal wanted to know whether expert advice was given to local authorities by the Department of Sport. We do offer them advice with regard to the planning of sporting facilities, but we do not interfere with the sporting plans for schools. That is left entirely to the schools and to the Department of Education.

Do you give them advice?

Not for any schools that I know of. We have always maintained that the schools are quite capable of looking after that matter themselves. However, where we do give advice is when it comes to a local authority which wants to plan a sporting area. We suggest how it should be laid out, but we are not in the position to offer them any financial assistance.

The hon. member referred to the Olympic rings. I should like to point out to the hon. member that in 1964, when we had the South African National Games in Johannesburg, the very same flag which was flown at Bloemfontein was flown there. This flag showed the very same five Olympic rings including the emblems of the South African Olympic Association. In 1964 there was no objection and it was accepted without protest. As far as the stamp is concerned, I, as Minister, was consulted when the issuing of the stamp came under discussion. I immediately got in touch with the South African Olympic body and I asked them whether they were satisfied that they had the authority to have this emblem for the Games and they replied that they always had it and that it was registered as a South African sporting emblem. This emblem not only has the Olympic rings, but also has a torch and the springbok on it. This emblem has always been used in the past, but only because of the political influences a big fuss was made over the Olympic rings. That is the position.

That is fair enough.

I want to appeal to the hon. member for Port Natal; I have probably said a few harsh things about him, and I do not want to say …

Could the hon. the Minister reply specifically to the questions about the stadiums at Bloemfontein and Pretoria which are closed for non-White spectators, in view of the forthcoming visit of an international team.

I was not going to make an appeal to the hon. member. I was going to say to him that there are many problems with which we have to deal in South Africa …

They are largely of our own making!

No, these problems will be worse if we follow the pattern which is advocated by the hon. member for Houghton. The pattern she advocates will have much worse effects on South Africa.

You have not applied it yet!

We know where it has been tried and we have seen what has happened. We are not going to fall for that. That is why I will say to the hon. member for Port Natal that I know what the situation was at Bloemfontein as regards the non-Whites. The Government has no authority to override a decision by a local authority. The Government has no right to override a provincial authority. The hon. member for South Coast will appreciate this. Arrangements were made at Bloemfontein and seating was made available for non-Whites. In fact, there was no problem.

How many attended?

Very few. I want to tell the hon. member for Houghton, however, that she should come down in October to see how many non-Whites attend the non-White games, because that is the proof of the (pudding. The proof is that the non-Whites will attend their own games and this is a step in the right direction.

May I ask the hon. the Minister a question? Will the hon. the Minister allow white spectators to attend the non-white games?

It is not a question of whether I want to allow them. The arrangements for the Games are made by the authorities where the Games are held. I do not know what the position is going to be at this stage. My own view is that I would discourage white spectators. I would like the non-Whites to attend their own Games and see their own people’s achievements in the sporting field. I do not want it to be a mixed or integrated meeting. I want the non-Whites to have a pride in the achievements of their own people in the same way as our white people are proud of the achievements of our white athletes.

May I ask the hon. the Minister a question? Does he know how many non-white spectators attend white sport every week-end in South Africa to-day?

Of course I realize that non-Whites attend white sports, but I do not think it is a pattern one should encourage. What I think one should encourage is more participation by non-Whites in sports to attract their own people. That is what I think is the best solution. I think this will come about. May I ask the hon. member for Port Natal if he knows how many non-Whites attend non-white games on the Reef? Thousands also.

Does he know that at Orlando there are non-white rugby and soccer matches which are attended by thousands of non-Whites?

Millions.

This is the basis which I feel is the best solution. As I have said before, what is the point of trying to raise differences between us when there are so many points of agreement? That is why I feel to a large extent it is better not to debate these sporting issues across the floor of the House. I want again to say to the hon. member for Pinelands that I think he set a very fine example not only for to-day, but for the future. There may be some issues in the future about which hon members will criticize this department and myself, but these issues can be debated objectively and without the atmosphere deteriorating as a result of issues being raised that will only do South African sport and sportsmen harm in the end.

Vote put and agreed to.

Revenue Vote 24. —Indian Affairs, R22,300,000:

Mr. Chairman, in the short time at my disposal I would like to deal with a proposal which appeared in the Press a few months ago and which was apparently advocated by a Natal newspaper and then taken on to a national organization dealing with social and cultural affairs for non-Europeans. The proposal was that as far as the Indians in Natal were concerned an area of land should be set aside which was recommended should be from the Umgeni River to the Tugela and inland for approximately 10 miles. This land should be set aside for a Hindustan for the Indian people. Two means were suggested namely the acquisition of all the properties in that area finally resulting in all the land being acquired as well as all the buildings, townships, etc. A lot of publicity was given to this idea in Natal and curiously enough, and now I am speaking under correction, I nowhere saw any official denial or an authoritative statement to the effect that this idea was completely impracticable, except a statement by the Administrator of Natal. He issued a statement which said that this was virtually a lot of nonsense and that there was no substance in the idea. It was not really his pigeon, because this matter has nothing to do with the Provincial Administration of Natal. This proposal appeared in a Natal newspaper, and I understand the hon. member for Umhlatuzana is associated with the editorial work in that paper.

I told you before that is a lot of nonsense. I am not associated with that newspaper.

Naturally I accept the hon. member’s denial at once. I am merely stating that he frequently writes for that paper and I think he will not deny this fact.

Only on occasions when I am invited.

The hon. member says that he only writes occasionally when he is invited to. The point I want to make is that he occasionally writes for that newspaper.

I also write in the Natal Mercury.

Surely not!

The hon.

member may proceed.

I am concerned that the hon. member should say that he writes for that particular paper, and he says that he does. That is all I am concerned with. It so happens that this concept is something which the hon. member has advocated in public and also in this House, namely that there should be an area set aside for the Indian people as a Hindustan. That is the hon. member’s concept. Seeing that this matter has not received an official denial. I would like to ask the hon. the Minister whether his attention was brought to this proposal and how he views it, speaking now in the name of the Government. With that I would like to couple a proclamation which appeared in Gazette No. 2636 of the 25th April, 1969. Proclamation 103/1969 deals with the proclamation of an area for the Indian group near Kranskop. When the hon. the Minister replies he could perhaps tell us what the area is of this particular piece of land. This leads me straight to the next point I want to make, namely that we now have outside Durban what is becoming a very large Indian town, namely Chatsworth. It is destined to become very much greater and I understand that it was designed to eventually cater for something like 200,000 or a quarter of a million Asiatics, men, women and children. What is the hon. the Minister’s policy in regard to the Indian population, and I am particularly concerned with Natal for the moment? Down here in the Cape for certain laws the Indians are classified with the Coloureds, for example, for purposes of the franchise. In Natal this is not so and it is therefore in respect of Natal that I particularly want to deal with this matter. How does the hon. the Minister see the future as far as the Indian community is concerned? From the hon. the Minister’s predecessor we heard in the plainest language that the Indians will be represented by a Parliament of their own and that they would have a chief minister, cabinet ministers and a set-up that would create for them, almost like an independent Bantustan, a Hindustan with the same kind of development. I am not advocating anything at the moment; I am just trying to get information. I ask the Minister whether he sees the Indian population of Natal in the future as a purely urban community? As they go on increasing in numbers, will they live only in towns? They are gradually being withdrawn now from the rural areas. There are certain rural areas where they exist; I do not want to say that they have all been withdrawn because that is not so, but by and large it seems to me that through the pressure of their rapidly growing population they are becoming an urban community. Where do they go from there? What view does the Minister take of their development? What part will they play in the population complex of Natal? Are they to have a homeland, and if so, where; or are they to be only an urban community? If they are to be a rural community, where is the land to be acquired and who acquires it, and under what conditions must it be acquired? Or are they to become an industrial community? We see the Bantu areas with the border areas developing as industrial areas. Is there to be something commensurate for the Indians? Let us say frankly that we are talking about a community which does not have many friends in the broad generality of the population of South Africa, but still they are part of the population. They came here originally to minister to our wants and they are here legally to-day, except of course those who have slipped in from time to time, and I believe there is quite a group of those. But apart from that, in general, here they are and here they stay. What is their destiny? Is the Minister able to say to us in this Parliament: I want to tell you Indians that you will forever reside in towns; you will not have industrial areas; or you will not have to reside in towns, but you will be given an opportunity to acquire rural areas and you will be able to get employment in your own industries in your own areas. Or what is the plan? When I look at Umzinto, an area which I am not sure has been demarcated—I do not think so—there are areas there where apparently, as the discussions go to-day, it appears the Indians may get agricultural land, land outside the urban area. I believe there is a factory already established there. How does this develop? Does it just grow like Topsy, just sort of growing from day to day without anybody noticing it, or is there planned development as a matter of set policy? It is the Minister’s policy we ask for. How does be see these folk staying on here, not for this generation, because just looking at this generation is short term and that will lead us into very great trouble, but I refer to the foreseeable future when the population explosion which is taking place is building up at an increasing tempo. Their numbers are in creasing. I doubt whether anyone to-day has any real idea of the numbers of Asiatics in Natal and the other provinces. The system of taking a census is so fraught with difficulty and so full of administrative difficulties that the figures we get are worthless, just as worthless as the figures for the Bantu population. And they can do no better in India. When we were there only a few years ago and we had a talk with Mr. Nehru, the then Prime Minister, and asked him how reliable his population figures were, he said they were completely unreliable; they might be 50 per cent out, because it is just impossible under their social conditions and way of life to find a means accurately to reflect what the figures are. Here is, then, a group of people in our mid-st. What is the policy of the Government, and how does the Minister see the future of these people, and in what direction will they expand?

I am surprised that a senior member such as the hon. member for South Coast should come along this afternoon and said the things he did in regard to the Indians of Natal and put several questions to the hon. the Minister, while he knew or should have known that the whole matter about which he inquired concerned the Minister of Planning.

You are passing the buck again.

I am not shirking my responsibilities in any way and I am not passing the buck at all. We are not afraid of that. I can say this to you now. The hon. member wanted to know about the articles which had appeared in the newspapers and in which it was insinuated that the area from the Umgeni River to the Tugela River should become an Indian area. He said those articles stated that the area should become a Hindustan and that, except the Administrator of Natal, nobody denied what was said in those articles. But by whom should the articles have been denied? The articles emanated from a study group of Sabra, and Sabra is not the mouthpiece of the National Party Government.

But they support you.

I say Sabra is not the mouthpiece of the Government and we do not have to repudiate them. In the same way any study group can make a suggestion, and do hon. members then want this side of the House to repudiate it? No, this has nothing to do with the Government. But I want to say the following. It is quite unrealistic to suggest such a thing, because it is obvious for any person with a little common sense that there are large complexes from the Umgeni River to the Tugela River which have been developed by the Whites, complexes such as Durban North, Umhlanga Rocks, Umhloti, which are regarded as white.

What has happened to your agency basis plan?

We are not dealing with the Bantu here. The hon. member for Pietermaritzburg (District) speaks about the agency basis now. There is no such thing in the case of the Indians. The hon. member is so confused, and he can therefore appreciate why he is a member of that side of the House. He does not even know that, but he nevertheless tries to argue about things he knows nothing about. I say these things fall under the Minister of Planning and not under this hon. Minister.

Then the hon. member for South Coast comes along and asks whether all the Indians are now going to stay in cities; are all of them going to stay in urban areas? This Government has already given large regional areas to the Indians of the Republic, areas such as Verulam, which is approximately 4,00 acres in extent. There are also other areas which are large regional areas. There are large group areas which have been given them. The hon. member for South Coast mentioned the population explosion which was going to take place, and let us accept that there might be 5 million Indians in the Republic in 100 years’ time. But then I say that the rate at which they will become urbanized will depend on how much land will be made available; we must keep in mind that it is going to be the Whites who will give them that land. I now want to ask the hon. member for South Coast: “Is he and the United Party prepared to make land available to all the various non-white groups in South Africa, including the Indians?” Now they cannot give me a reply.

Why are you running away from it?

I am not running away. I say this Government is, in fact, making land available, but I ask whether the hon. member for South Coast, the Leader of the United Party in Natal, and his party are prepared to make that land available? Is he and his people prepared to make land available for that? [Interjections.] I gave the reply and I repeat it, namely that this Government is constantly giving land to the various non-white groups where they can have a place in the sun of South Africa.

Where are you giving it to them?

In every group area which is given to the Indians, in the large complex of Durban which I mentioned already, Chatsworth and other parts, as well as large areas in the Cape and in the Transvaal. [Interjection.] Now the hon. member for South Coast is running away again. My time is limited and I should like to ask the Minister to perform a function as Minister of Indian Affairs in the implementation of the group areas, something which in fact does not fall under him, by stimulating and encouraging the Indians through his Department so that they will practice diversification in their economy to a greater extent. We have the position to-day that while the Indians object against their having to move into their own group areas, they do not object because they do not want to accept those areas as residential areas, but the real problem is that these people are in commerce and they are afraid to move into these group areas because their business may be adversely affected. There are cases where this fear does exist. Now I want to say that this is a function which is solely the Indians’, i.e. that they will diversify themselves in the economy in such a way that they are able not only to take their place in their own group area, but also to provide for their own people in that area. The position is that there is a disproportionate number of Indians in commerce to-day. Only a few years ago about 130 out of every 1,000 Indians were in commerce, while the figure was 30 or 40 in the case of Whites. Something that makes the position even worse, is that this figure remains at 130 in the Transvaal and the Cape Province, but in Natal the figure is more or less the same as that for the Whites, in relation to their total population. That is why I want to make this plea that the Minister, through his department, should try to encourage the Indians to diversify their economy. I want to say that there are many Indian traders who should not be in commerce, and those smaller traders can join forces and, by making use of the Industrial Development Corporation, can diversify by going into industry. Then the Indians themselves will be able to provide work for their own people in South Africa. The Indians should not think for one moment that the Whites should provide for all those things. The Whites are prepared to help them to a certain extent, but they should also be prepared to make their contribution to provide employment for their own people. [Interjection.] The hon. member for Houghton said they were doing just that, but I know one of the richest Indian traders in Durban who drives a big black car and who has a chauffeur, but the person he employs is not an Indian, but a Bantu. I say that person should employ an Indian so that he can provide work for his own people. [Time expired.]

To follow the hon. member for Klip River who has just sat down, I would first of all like to take him up on the point that the Indians must diversify their occupations. In this respect I would like to tell him, and I hope it sinks in very deeply with the member for Klipriver, that at present in Durban among the registered licence-holders in business there is one Indian licence-holder to every 29 of the population. Compared to that, there is one white licence-holder to every 16 of the population. When the hon. member stands up and repeats what the hon. the Minister of Community Development said, so unwisely, I believe it is time that we started to produce some of the facts and figures relating to the situation. It is easy to get up and say that the Indians should take up different jobs; that they should diversify and, as the Minister of Community Development put it, that they should come out from behind their shop counters. Sir, I would like to ask the hon. member who has just sat down, he who has been elevated to the very high position of leader of his party in Natal, just what he expects the Indians in Natal to do after he has taken them from behind their shop counters. Many occupations are already closed to the Indians of Natal, and I hope in all sincerity that the Minister of Indian Affairs will play his role this afternoon in a proper manner and defend the Indians who the hon. member for Klip River attacked so violently a few minutes ago.

You will still find out what it means when I really attack.

Sir, we in Natal have long ago ceased to pay any attention to the hon. member for Klip River. I believe that when he was made leader of that party in Natal, the Nationalist Party surrendered any hope that they ever had of making any progress in that province.

Mr. Chairman, I did not intend to start in this vein, because in the debate on the previous Vote the Minister felt that I was highly critical of him and I was going to try to be at my most appealing best on this particular Vote. If it is going to help in any way, I shall try to use these tactics because my previous tactics did not help. If I make an appeal to him, then perhaps we shall make some progress in Indian affairs in South Africa. There has been no progress in this respect over the last 21 years. Sir, in the short time available to me I would like to ask the hon. the Minister what progress has been made in regard to Indian Council elections. We on this side of the House will attach very little importance to the Indian Council until it becomes an elected body. Will the hon. the Minister please inform us when the Indian Council is going to become an elected body?

He will not know.

I think this Committee is also entitled to know from the Minister when and how often he has had meetings with the Indian Council as it is presently constituted. We would also like to know what the Indian Council, as presently constituted, thinks on various matters. We have never had a report from the Minister in this respect and I think we are entitled to have one. We would also like to know what role the Indian Council is playing in group areas at the present time. I know that this has nothing to do with the hon. the Minister, but the hon. member for Klip River also raised this matter, and, as usual, tried to pass the buck from the Minister of Indian Affairs to the Minister of Planning and then back to the Minister of Community Development. But I am asking the hon. the Minister of Indian Affairs what role the Indian Council is playing in the declaration of group areas. Sir, the Grey Street complex in Durban is shortly going to come under discussion in Durban. I believe that any discussion on the Grey Street complex as an Indian area is completely immoral unless two or three members of the Indian Council also have representation on the Group Areas Board.

Once again a mixed board.

Sir, remarks of that kind from hon. members opposite mean absolutely nothing at all, because they are not in line with the facts as they are in South Africa. If they were in line with the facts of South Africa, then every South African would be inhuman in his treatment of other people. Sir, I would like to repeat my request that when the Group Areas Board deals with the matter affecting the Indians, members of that community, or at least members of the Indian Council, should have representation. Grey Street is an area which has been occupied by Indians for 100 years; it is 95 per cent owned by Indians, and justice will not be done except in the way in which I have suggested. Sir, the hon. member for Klip River has had so much to say in this respect that I would like to quote here what a member of the Indian Council himself said—

Sir, this has happened too often in South African politics when we deal with the rights of minority race groups.

Are the Whites not a minority group?

I feel that the time has come when, in dealing with these people, we should, in all honesty and Christianity, allow them representation on the board because they are the people who are best acquainted with the difficulties involved. Sir, let me show the hon. member for Klip River one of those difficulties. Just recently in Durban an area was proclaimed for Indians and they asked if they could have ground set aside for a cemetery, because the members of this particular sect never use mobile transport in their funerals; they carry the coffin on their shoulders. An area was set aside for them and they duly moved in and then they found that the nearest cemetery was 15 miles away. They are expected to carry the coffins on their shoulders for 15 miles. I believe that this stupid mistake would not have been made if Indians had been on the board and had been consulted. Sir, this Minister may well say that this has nothing to do with him. I say, however, that it has everything to do with the Minister of Indian Affairs if he has the interests of the Indians at heart.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to raise one last issue in this respect. I also raised it last year and I will continue to raise it as long as it is necessary. The Indians in South Africa, even under the present Government, are now to be regarded as South Africans. I hone the hon. member for Umhlatuzana is listening very carefully this afternoon because he did not listen carefully last year. I asked the Minister why it was that South African Indians still required permits to travel between the provinces of South Africa, if they were considered to be South Africans.

You know what the reason is.

Last year the hon. member said something different. I am asking why, when they travel from Natal to Cape Town on holiday or on business, they still require permits if they are considered as South Africans. I direct this question once again to the hon. the Minister of Indian Affairs who has yet to prove to me that he has the interests of the Indians at heart.

The hon. member for Port Natal made a remark at the beginning of his speech in connection with an argument which the hon. member for Klip River had used here. I have here in my hand details which are based on data compiled by the Bureau of Statistics from the 1960 census, and I want that hon. member to pay close attention now. These statistics are captioned: “Economically Active Male Population according to Occupational Groups, 1960”. These are the latest authoritative statistics we have. In Natal alone the percentages of Indians in commerce were as follows—

This means that a total of 22.6 per cent were engaged in commerce in Natal. The figures with regard to Indians for the entire Republic were as follows at that time—

In other words, a total of 37.4 per cent was dependent on commerce, as proprietors of shops, employees, etc., while the comparative statistics for the Whites were as follows—

Therefore a total of 14.4 per cent. These official statistics disprove the statement which the hon. member made here in his speech.

Mr. Chairman, I notice in the Estimates under item Q, that provision is made for R1,000 as regards assisted emigration. This represents a decrease of R1,000 as compared to the amount of R2,000 which appeared in the Estimates the year before. I want to ask the hon. the Minister to tell us why this amount has been decreased.

Then I should like to say a few words about two other aspects in the few minutes I have at my disposal. A very interesting monthly journal is published on behalf of the Department of Indian Affairs, i.e. the journal Fiat Lux. This journal usually contains a wealth of interesting and instructive information which is of educational value to the Indian community and such; it supplies not only information but also guidance to them. It often contains valuable, factual information with regard to general Indian activities, especially in the field of education and as regards participation by Indians in various governing bodies, inter alia, the Indian Council, the consultative committees, the local affairs committees and advisory councils. It also supplies interesting information, which is of importance to the Indians on the wide socioeconomic level. In addition it supplies information in connection with agriculture and horticulture, fields of activity in which a large group of Indians find a livelihood at present, especially in Natal. It is stated on the page that the views expressed in this journal do not necessarily reflect the policy of the Department. As, I have said, these articles are instructive and interesting. I have only one objection to this journal, and that is that no articles appear in Afrikaans. We know that the argument will be advanced that the Indians in. Natal use mainly the official language English, but if a start is not made at some time to publish some article or other in Afrikaans as well, the Indians will never learn the Afrikaans equivalents of the English expressions. Consequently I want to ask the hon. the Minister to investigate the possibility of having some of the articles appear in Afrikaans. I have in mind, for example, speeches by the Minister, speeches by the Secretary for Indian Affairs and speeches of the Director of Education, or even valuable articles written by Indians themselves. The April edition of Fiat Lux contains a very interesting article under the title, “The Social Value of Schools” by Dr. S. R. Maharaj, Senior Lecturer in Education at the Indian University College. If articles such as these cannot be published in Afrikaans only, I want to suggest that it should be published in both languages, in two columns parallel to each other so as to enable the Indians to learn the Afrikaans equivalents. These journals are also distributed to the Indian schools and are available in the reading rooms of these schools. If my suggestion were to he accepted, it would afford the Indian children an opportunity of learning Afrikaans in this way while reading Fiat Lux. I want to ask the hon. the Minister to investigate the matter and to establish whether there is some possibility of giving effect to my suggestion.

Mr. Chairman, a few weeks ago we conducted a full debate here on the University College of Natal, and I do not want to discuss tertiary education now. We also discussed the question of university training on that occasion. I just want to mention a few matters in connection with secondary Indian Education. I would like to congratulate the Department of Education, under the control of the new Director of Education, Mr. P. W. Prinsloo, on the fine work which is being done as regards Indian education in Natal, especially in secondary schools. Mr. Prinsloo recently commented on the work being done in the senior classes of secondary schools. He said at present more subjects were being taught at Indian secondary schools, in other words, that the courses were being extended so as to afford the Indian children a wider choice both in the practical and the academic direction. The Indian child will therefore have the opportunity of pursuing a direction in which he is interested, or one for which he has an aptitude. Then the Department also arranged special orientation courses and special refresher courses for teachers employed in Indian schools, especially in subjects in which they do not have a good grounding as yet. So, for example, courses in the two official languages were arranged. In my opinion Afrikaans is still being neglected a great deal, and such courses can promote instruction in Afrikaans. Courses were also arranged in mathematics, arithmetic, science and other subjects. This, of course, enables teachers to apply the latest teaching methods. The Department also made arrangements for teachers who are capable and have an exceptional knowledge of certain subjects, to be exchanged between schools so that the best use may be made of the knowledge these teachers have of their subjects. In this way the standard of the work in high schools is being improved. In addition to these things the Director of Education and those assisting him have arranged regular conferences of inspectors. At such conferences education is planned and investigations are conducted into methods which may be applied to improve education. Another interesting practice is that inspectors visit schools much more regularly, not so much to carry out inspections or to criticize, as to give guidance to the principals and the teachers. This benefits the teaching of subjects. In addition the Department arranged, and is still arranging, correspondence and holiday courses. Teachers who are not well-equipped professionally can also benefit from those courses. [Time expired.]

Having listened to what hon. members on the other side had to say about the Minister and his Department one is left sometimes wondering just exactly what the functions of the Department are. We have raised matters here which are of vital concern to the Indian community in South Africa, and we have a Minister charged with the administration of Indian affairs. But I should like to know what part the hon. the Minister plays in any discussions that take place regarding matters such as group area determination, and that kind of thing, where the interest of the Indian community is vitally affected. From what the hon. member for Klip River had to say it appears to me that the Department of Indian Affairs as such plays no part whatever in such a determination. The hon. member for Port Natal stated very clearly that where people are vitally affected they should and must be afforded some kind of representation on councils of this nature. I want to bring the hon. member for Klip River back to the idea which was mooted by Sabra. Sabra stated that there should be an Indian homeland to the north of Durban. [Interjections.] The hon. member for Umhlatuzana also favours the idea of an Indian homeland. [Interjections.] Also the hon. member for Kempton Park said that it was a policy of the Government to have homelands for Indians and Coloureds. This is not a matter which is simply one of political theory …

This is a distortion.

Order! The hon. member may not say that. He must withdraw it.

I withdraw, Mr. Chairman, but … [Interjections.]

Order! The Chair is here to maintain order and hon. members may leave it to the Chair to do so.

The point I wish to make is that in 1950 the idea of independent homelands for the Bantu was an idea mooted by Sabra. It was then mooted and thrown into general discussion and repudiated by Nationalist after Nationalist. The whole thing was never accepted until suddenly one day somebody thought this was an idea which might be a solution to our problem. I want to know what the hon. the Minister’s attitude towards this is, whether he believes in this homeland for the Indians. If he does not, will he then tell us how he sees the Indian community fitting into a relationship with the other races here in South Africa? The Nataller editorial, which mentioned this matter, said on 2nd February, 1968 (translated)—

Then it goes on to say—

“May”!

Mr. Chairman, I want to know what the Minister’s approach to this matter is, because he is the Minister who is in charge of the affairs of the Indian community. He must be in touch with the Indian Council. He must have some kind of knowledge of the thought and the feeling of the Indian community.

I want to know further what the relationship is which the Indian community through their council is going to have with the Department of Planning. We have said already that there must be some relationship with the Indian Council, which has been created by the Government deliberately to cope with the affairs of the Indian community and which must play a part in all matters affecting the Indian community.

I want to return to the hon. member for Umhlatuzana and to the hon. the Minister, because during the University Bill debate, on three occasions I asked the hon. the Minister whether he agreed with the statement made by the hon. member for Umhlatuzana about the autonomy of the Indian university. The hon. member said that the Indian university would get autonomy when the Indian community was able to foot the bill. That is what it amounted to. On three occasions I asked the Minister what his policy was in this regard, how he expected the Indian community to foot the bill, and whether he envisaged a time when the Indian council would be a tax-levying authority which will enable it to foot the bill and to take over autonomy of the university. On three occasions I had no answer. I ask the Minister again now, a fourth time, whether he will give me an answer.

It is the wrong Bill.

Sir, it is not the wrong Bill. This is the policy of the hon. the Minister in relation to the Indian community. If ever there was an occasion to ask it, it is now; because that hon. Minister has in his hands, as a member of the Cabinet, the development of the Indian Council towards what kind of greater autonomy, what future and what control of the affairs of the Indian community? I think we can quite well ask that the hon. the Minister should give us some answer to this problem. What is the future of the Indian community to be? The hon. member for Klip River said that great areas are being set aside for the Indians in Natal. When we asked him which areas, he said “Oh, Chatsworth”. But the practice has been with the farming community in Natal, when we have negotiations on agricultural land to be handed over to the Bantu community, that the Natal Agricultural Union negotiates with the Department of Bantu Administration. I think it is fair to say that on no occasion has the agricultural community in Natal through their mouthpiece, the N.A.U., been unreasonable with the Government. I want to know whether the hon. the Minister, his Department, the member for Umhlatuzana or anybody else has ever approached the Natal Agricultural Union for agricultural land for the Indian community. That is the way it has to be done. I tell the Minister now if that is what he wants to do, and if he has any idea of agricultural development for the Indian community, he has to go through the Natal Agricultural Union. I believe the hon. the Minister owes it to us to tell us whether he has made or contemplates any steps of this nature. I think the Indian community are people who, of all the people in South Africa, can beneficially use land to the greatest advantage. If they are simply now to be written off as far as farming is concerned and simply to be told that their future must lie in the direction of urbanization, I believe that there is going to be a great loss of agricultural production to us in South Africa, which the Indian community can very easily provide, and to which they can contribute a great deal.

The hon. member for Klip River raised the matter of diversification. There was, I believe, a shocking insult to the Indian community by the hon. the Minister of Community Development, who said they must now “get off their counters and get out into the main stream of our economic life and work”. But, Sir, there are all kinds of avenues of employment which are closed to them by Government policy. The hon. member says that the opportunity is available now to the Indian community through the Industrial Development Corporation, to create employment for their own community. But I want to ask him or any hon. member in this House, how many people are there who are capable of borrowing the sort of money that is necessary to create employment on a significant scale for their own people, and then establishing themselves in business as a manufacturing enterprise, thus creating this kind of employment for their own people? I ask the hon. the Minister whether he seriously believes that this is the kind of answer we are going to have to provide for the Indian community. We have ½ million people to-day with the most rapid rise in birth rate of all the population groups in the whole of South Africa. They are people who are capable of being skilled.

Do you suggest integration with the Whites?

I wish the hon. member would …

Shut up!

Where the Indian community is increasing at such a tremendous rate, how can this hon. member seriously advance as an answer to the lack of employment which we have to provide, that that employment should be provided by Indians borrowing money from the Industrial Corporation to create employment for those people in their group areas? Surely, Sir, we know that that is a nonsensical suggestion and that it will come to nothing. We want the hon. the Minister to set out further how he sees the Indian Council developing. A previous hon. Minister told us about the independent parliament for the Indians and about the greater powers that are going to be given to them. We now want to ask this hon. Minister, as Minister of Indian Affairs, how he sees the future.

I should like to ask him one further question, which I have raised before in this House, namely the question of military service for Indians. Would he like to comment on the question of military training and the arming of Indians in South Africa, and how they will fit into the general defence pattern of our people in South Africa?

Mr. Chairman, there are many things one can say of the hon. the Opposition but there is one thing one cannot say of them, and that is that their arguments are scientifically correct. It cannot be said of them either that they really have any desire to govern the country.

How many Indians are there in your constituency?

I have not counted them, but I may tell the hon. member that my knowledge of them is considerable. The hon. member for Mooi River reminds me of the elder in my home town who said many years ago after he had delivered a sermon, “Brothers and sisters, all these things put together amount to nothing”. If I were to summarize the speech of the hon. member to-day, I, too, would have to say to-day that all those things put together amount to nothing. He touched on everything and said nothing.

But I just want to mention that he said, inter alia, “Sabra stated”. By that he meant that Sabra had laid down a fixed policy regarding an Indian homeland for themselves in their journal of racial affairs. The hon. member for Umhlatuzana then asked the hon. member for Mooi River by way of interjection whether he had read the article. That was the question the hon. member wanted to ask. But the hon. member for Mooi River did not want to reply to him, because if he were to give an honest reply, he would have to say, “I have never read the article”. That is why he did not want to reply. For that reason I am saying that hon. members opposite are unscientific. They impress simply nobody in this House.

But it appeared like that in the journal.

But now I want to tell the hon. member that on page 3 of this journal (October, 1968) there is an introductory paragraph by the editor at the top of the page—now the hon. member for Mooi River must pay close attention—in which, inter alia, the following is stated (translation)—

I must say that it stimulated the hon. member for Mooi River to say nothing. Now the hon. member should pay close attention. It continues as follows—

These are the words of the editor. In other words, now the hon. member for Mooi River has to admit that what he said here a short while ago was not true. Does the hon. member admit that? He said that at present the policy of Sabra was to establish a homeland for the Indians.

[Inaudible.]

The hon. member must give the hon. member for Mooi River a chance now. The hon. member for Mooi River did not read this article. I may just tell him that the article is very interesting and stimulating. Nationalists read all articles and find all of them interesting. We know how to sift the good from the bad. At the end of this article, under the heading “Summary and Picture of the Future”, a number of statements are made. The first is (translation)—

The article continues—

The article concludes—

This is as far as Sabra is concerned. The article then continues—

The problem of the Opposition is that they have no basic, principal method of approach to our population problems as a whole. For that reason the people cannot make sufficient use of scientific articles, whether such articles are out and out in favour of integration or whether they are in favour of separation, by incorporating them into their view of a solution to our problems. I want to tell the hon. member for Mooi River that he may safely go back to a bibliography compiled by a certain G. R. Morris in 1946, when the United Party still was in power. Therefore it dates back a very long way. I do not know whether the hon. member had been born at that time. This bibliography dealt with “The Indian Question in South Africa”. The hon. member should consult this article which was published so as to see to what extent the United Party had been able throughout all the years it was in power to make even a slight attempt to establish a decent way of life for the Indians here in South Africa.

But, Mr. Chairman, I really want to come to my short speech. I want to begin by congratulating the hon. the Minister of Indian Affairs on the work he has done during the short time he has been in charge of this portfolio. In my opinion he is doing a fine job. While he has been Minister, the activities of his Department have been looked after very well. In my opinion he is a very fine Minister who has been doing very good work for us. The Indian population may rest assured that under this hon. Minister their affairs will still be looked after as well as it has always been looked after.

Now I should like to say a few words about tertiary education. Last year the hon. member for Berea—this year he seems to me to be completely out of this debate—asked, inter alia, the following questions—

1. (a) How many students enrolled in 1968 for (i) degree and (ii) diploma courses at the University College for Indians; and
2. (b) how many enrolled in the faculty of education for (i) degree and (ii) diploma courses?

I told him last year that that question was completely up in the air. He simply could not make any use of it. A year has gone by since and it seems to me as though the hon. member has not been able to make use of that even up to now. Yet, I want to draw his attention—as well as that of the hon. member for Mooi River—to the fact that the amount allocated to the University College for Indians this year exceeds the amount allocated last year by R156,000. This is proof of the steady growth we have at this university college. In 1961 it had 114 students whereas last year it had 967 intra-mural and 496 extra-mural students. Therefore the total number of students came to 1.463 in 1968. This year it has 1,154 intra-mural students and 560 extra-mural students. This gives us a total of 1,714 students for this year. It is with a feeling of gratitude that we take cognizance of the fact that the extra-mural department is also showing a steady growth. We are grateful for an opportunity like this being created for the Indians, for Indians who cannot be full-time students for various reasons. Now they are able to study extra-murally after hours. One must have appreciation for people such as these who sacrifice their time at night, after having done a hard day’s work, first to attend the lectures and then to study. I think the employers of these people should also adopt a sympathetic attitude towards the Indian students who are studying extra-murally and should help them to complete their training courses. A new teaching clinic was also added to this University College for Indians last year. This development at the Indian College corresponds exactly to and is keeping pace with the latest developments in the field of education overseas. This teaching clinic is geared for serving the Indian community in a variety of ways. This teaching clinic has, inter alia, the following specific aims: In the first place, there is child guidance in which particular attention is given to diagnosis; in the second place there is therapy and in the third place the question of vocational guidance. In addition attention will also be given to students. It has become essential at all universities that there should be psychological guidance. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, before the hon. the Minister replies I should like to put three questions to him. I am not going to use up ten minutes and the hon. Whip can relax. The first is whether he would take this Committee into his confidence and tell us what happened at the top level discussion that he had with the deputation of members of the Indian Council on the 10th February, 1969. Will the hon. the Minister give us some idea of the subjects discussed and any decisions reached? In the second place, I should like to ask the hon. the Minister whether any progress has been made with the establishment of an Indian Economic Advisory Council, suggested by the Indian Advisory Council in order to assist in the provision of diversification of opportunities for Indians. Thirdly, I should like to know whether the hon. the Minister would give us his considered opinion on the recent prohibition which had been issued as far as the employment of African domestic live-in servants by Indians is concerned, which has gravely affected the position of Indian mothers who have jobs. I should like to have the hon. the Minister’s views on these three subjects.

Mr. Chairman, to start not quite at the beginning, I may say that I listened to the speech of the hon. member for Mooi River, in which he referred to the Indian University Bill, and also to what he called the Minister of Community Development’s “insult” to the Indian community. I must say that I was a bit amused at the hon. member for Mooi River. I think he was trying to redeem himself in the eyes of the Indians, after his unfortunate lapse during the debate on the University of Durban-Westville Bill. He was the one who used the words “ja, baas”. Hon. members know all about that. I want to read to him the reaction of a senior member of the Indian Council. He made these remarks in general, but his statement came as a result of what took place in that debate. He said Members of Parliament are privileged to speak out their minds on controversial issues affecting the non-white people, but in doing so they must not underrate the integrity of men whose welfare they assume to espouse. The inferred supineness of the Indian members of the Advisory Council is just as reprehensible as the hypocrisy that underlies much of the Opposition’s thinking in Parliament.

I did not say that.

Mr. Chairman, this is the reaction …

The hon. member said that he did not say that.

Yes, I know. Since the day the hon. member used the words “ja, baas” in connection with the Advisory Council, he has been endeavouring to backslide from what he said. This is the reaction of the Press in Durban. I have read from a report which appeared in the Natal Mercury. The hon. member used the unfortunate phrase “ja, baas”. As a result of that phrase, this was the reaction of a member of the Indian Council. Now that same hon. member talks about the insulting language of the Minister of Community Development.

Mr. Chairman, on a point of information, I should like to say that my reference, with the words “ja, baas” …

Order! That is not at issue now. The hon. member can make a speech afterwards.

Sir, I feel sorry for the hon. member, because I know him. I said that it was an unfortunate lapse on his part. The hon. member should never have used those words and he knows it.

But I corrected that during the same speech.

Why do you not read from Hansard instead of from a newspaper?

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Durban (North) is not in this argument. Unfortunately for the hon. member for Mooi River, he referred to the Advisory Council in terms of “ja baas”. The result of that was that the Indian community is incensed about the insinuation.

No, it is not.

The hon. member must argue with the Indian Council. Perhaps he will have that opportunity, but he will have to do a lot of explaining before he can get out of that one.

With the words “ja, baas” I was referring to the white Council.

No, you were not. The hon. member had better correct his words. He was referring to the advisory council, not the white Council.

May I ask a question?

No, you may not. [Laughter.] Mr. Chairman, I am so used to the hollow laughter of the Opposition. Whenever they are in any difficulty they try to get out of it with hollow laughter. It leaves me cold.

I want to refer to the speech of the hon. member for South Coast in which he asked about our policy in regard to an Indostan. I think he made mention of an area between Umgeni and the Tugela River. The hon. member seems to indicate that this Government has never made its position clear. I want to read to the hon. member what the then Prime Minister said in this regard on the 7th of April, 1965 (Hansard, Vol. 14, col. 4180). This is what Dr. Verwoerd said in the course of a long debate I remember the debate. Just listen to what the Prime Minister said in his statement.

What did Trollip say after that?

Mr. Chairman, what amazes me is that they ask for information, and when the information is offered to them, they run away from it. The hon. member for South Coast must first listen, and then he can ask me any questions he wants to. This is what the Prime Minister, Dr. Verwoerd, said on the 7th April, 1965:

Now the hon. member says that he wants to know the position. The Government has no plans and no intentions of creating an Indostan on the lines the hon. member mentioned. The hon. member for Klip River stated the position quite clearly.

What about the hon. member for Umhlatuzana?

I am telling the hon. member the Government’s policy. I want to know who the Government of the country is. Sir, the hon. member for South Coast wanted to know what the Government’s position was. I am telling the hon. member what it is. The hon. member for Klip River also told him, but he is not satisfied. Now when I tell him, he wants to ask the hon. member for Umhlatuzana. Well, he can ask him, but I am telling him what the Government’s attitude is. If he does not want to know that what does he want to know? The hon. member does not want the information. He is only trying to see if he can score a point. We know the hon. member. He does not want to hear what Dr. Verwoerd said about this policy. He does not want to hear what the policy of the Government is to-day, in 1969. He wants to see if he cannot rake out something which will help him in Natal.

That is what I asked you. I asked you what the policy of the Government was to-day.

The policy of the Government is that there is no intention whatsoever to develop an Indostan. Is the hon. member satisfied now?

That is what Dr. Verwoerd said five years ago. What is your policy to-day?

I have already told you that the Government has no intention of developing an Indostan.

And the factories?

No, the hon. member asked me about the Indostan. What I have said now, is in reply to the hon. member’s question. The hon. member must not now try to draw a new red-herring across the path. He can talk to me about the factories, and diversification, etc., later. [Interjections.]

Order!

Col. 5422:

Lines 14—15: For “They have no vocation at training schools”, read “They have no vocation training schools”.

May I ask the hon. the Minister a question?

We are in Committee now. The hon. member may make a speech after the Minister. I am therefore not going to allow any questions.

But the Minister has sat down.

I have given my ruling. I gave a similar ruling last year.

Are you going to leave it to our children to decide?

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for South Coast also wanted to know whether I could advise him about the area involved in the proclamation of the group area at Kranskop. The hon. member knows, of course, that the proclamation of a group area does not even fall under this department. He knows it, and he has known it for years. He can place a question on the Order Paper, or he can ask the Minister concerned when his Vote is discussed. As far as I am concerned, the hon. member wanted to know about Morgenzan Farm and the size of that area. I do not even know that. The hon. member cannot even ask my department for that information.

That is the point. You do not know.

That has nothing to do with my department. The hon. member tries to make out as though this Minister of Indian Affairs knows nothing.

Hear, hear!

The hon. member for South Coast has been in this House for many years and he still knows nothing. He does not know which Minister handles a particular issue. With all this great experience the hon. member for South Coast has had, he does not know which questions to put to which Minister.

Sir, I should like to refer to the question of diversification.

That is under Commerce and Industry.

This is quite a different matter. Indian diversification in industry is a very pertinent matter for the Department of Indian Affairs. 142 Indian owned factories existed in 1962. By 1967 they had increased to 350. One of the leading Indian industrialists in Natal stated that the number would be trebled in 10 years’ time. Of course, that diversification is essential. The hon. member must appreciate that one of the discussions that I had with the Indian Council, discussions that took place with one of the Ministers was on the basis and direction they can diversify. Undoubtedly these were fruitful discussions. A deputation from the Indian Council came down for the purpose of discussing the manner in which the Indians could diversify. I will tell the hon. member for Houghton later just what took place. There is no doubt that the feeling on that side of the House is also that their concentrated activities, particularly in the Transvaal, as regards trading stores is not a healthy one.

They have no vocation at training schools.

These were matters that were under discussion. I quite appreciate it. I think they resulted in quite a different atmosphere to a discussion across the floor of the House. The Indians submitted their problems and their difficulties. The Minister concerned was able to hear from the Indians themselves just where their problems lie. I myself think the discussions were very fruitful. The hon. member for Port Natal wanted to know how many meetings of the South African Indian Council I have attended. I might just say that I opened the meeting of the newly appointed South African Indian Council. The secretary of the department has attended every meeting since then. I have not, but he has attended every meeting since as an observer. He has referred the matters which were discussed and the minutes of the meetings to me. I cannot find a better method of hearing the views of the Indian people than that. The Secretary said that one of the matters that they wish to discuss was, inter alia, that of group areas. I myself, the department and the Minister of Community Development met this delegation from the Indian Council. I may mention to the hon. member for Port Natal that the Indian Council submitted a memo to the Department of Planning on the Grey Street complex. The deputation also interviewed the Deputy Minister of Planning, because the Minister of Planning was not available due to illness. Very fruitful discussions were undertaken.

We will see from the results how fruitful these discussions were.

I know that the only hope of the member on that side of the House is to try to create suspicion. The Indians have found that out. I think the statement by the Indians that I read out, could definitely apply to the hon. member for Port Natal. I do not think they referred so much to the member for Mooi River. In fact, I think he was just foolish. The statement was that the Opposition in actual fact only create suspicion. It is not to help the Indian people, but only to help the political cause of the United Party, That is all. The hon. member also condemned permits for Indians to move from one province to the other. I should like to ask the hon. member whether the U.P. would do away with that permit?

Yes.

Oh, they would? Are you talking on behalf of the United Party?

I am talking on behalf of myself.

That provincial permit arrangement was made by General Smuts in 1913. I think the hon. member for Port Natal should speak to the hon. member for South Coast before he commits the United Party to do away with this provincial permit.

They are travel permits.

They call them visiting permits. Since 1913 this has been the law in South Africa. I should like to know whether the hon. member for South Coast who is so anxious to put us right, agrees with the hon. member for Port Natal that we should do away with this visiting permit for Indians who want to move from one province to another? [Interjections.] Whenever that hon. member is in a hole, he either says to me that I must grow up or that I am a rotten Minister or something like that. He never answers a question that I put to him.

What do you know about discussing your Vote in Parliament, anyway? [Interjections.]

The hon. member for Koedoespoort raised two matters. He referred to the matter of Afrikaans in Fiat Lux. This is something which the department will investigate. I might say that there have appeared articles in Afrikaans, articles which were submitted in Afrikaans. I will find out whether there is the opportunity for more articles in Afrikaans to be submitted and printed in Fiat Lux. The hon. member also referred to the reduction in the amount for repatriation. All I can tell him is that there has been so little demand for repatriation from Indians, although this arrangement was made many years ago, that the figure was made more realistic to the amount spent. However, the arrangement is that if a bigger amount is required, that amount will undoubtedly be available from Treasury to this department. It is only a matter of the indication of a figure that is nearer to the actual figure that has been arrived at from experience. Last year, I think, two Indians were repatriated. Although there is a bonus scheme and a fare, etc., he can understand that the amount expended was in fact infinitesimal. [Interjections.]

Hon. members must please stop trying to be funny.

I now come to the hon. member for Houghton. Regarding the discussions that took place in Cape Town in February of this year, they are on issues of importance to the South African Indian Council. They had asked for a deputation to meet certain Ministers in conjunction with the Department of Indian Affairs. They reported back to their council that they were fully satisfied with their discussions. They have made considerable headway with their representations and the subjects which were discussed included diversification, industrial land and apprenticeships for the Indian community. With regard to the question about the Advisory Economic Council, the matter is being considered by the authorities concerned at the present moment. With regard to the matter of Bantu servants employed in Indian group areas, the South African Indian Council initiated representations which are being considered by the Department of Bantu Administration. These matters are being handled by the Department of Indian Affairs. We have access to the other departments and, therefore, can make the representations on their behalf. I have tried to answer most of the questions raised by hon. members.

Except about military service.

As the hon. member admitted the military service for Indians is a matter concerning the Department of Defence. [Interjections.] The hon. member for Mooi River has already said this, but what I can tell him is that representations were made to the department and that it was referred to the Department of Defence by the Department of Indian Affairs. At the present moment the matter is still under consideration. I do not now why it was necessary for that hollow laugh to come from the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg (District). The fact that the Department of Indian Affairs has been of great value to the Indian community. As could have been expected there were avenues of suspicion created at the beginning against this department, but to-day there is full co-operation and I am sure that the hon. member for Mooi River can go through any publication or any interview given by Indians who are genuinely and responsibly concerned about their future and said that this innovation is a very satisfactory one and in the interests of the Indian people themselves.

Vote put and agreed to.

Revenue Vote 25,—Foreign Affairs, R6,967,000:

Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask for the privilege of the half hour. There is a fairly long list of matters on which we would like to get clarity from the hon. the Minister of Foreign Affairs. I also want to make some remarks in regard to our international position and the progress made in respect of our relationship with countries in Africa, which I hope we will come to mainly to-morrow; but in between I would like to make one or two suggestions, and I hope that these suggestions will be helpful, in respect of the handling of our foreign problems.

I think I should start with some of the matters on which we seek further information from the hon. the Minister. Before I do so I want to express the hope that the debate will be conducted in a constructive and tolerant spirit. I say this because last year, and the year before, we detected some irritation and annoyance on the part of the Government because we had raised a number of issues which seemed to disturb the political comfort of members on the other side. We are aware of the fact that there is some excitement in the hon. the Minister’s party over matters like the contact policy, or their outward movement, and black diplomats. But members opposite should remember that it is not part of our responsibility to take note and consider the domestic problems of the Government party. We on this side are concerned with the problems which face South Africa and about what should be done by the Government to overcome them.

I now want to come to the matters on which we seek information. The first matter is in connection with South Africa’s contribution to the budget of the United Nations Organization, which amounts to R394,100. During the last session of the United Nations South Africas’ representative in the Budget Committee, Mr. David Tothill, objected against an allocation of some R56,000 for the purposes of a campaign against apartheid. So it was reported in the Press. According to these Press reports, Mr. Tothill then announced that the South African Government would hold back a pro rata portion of its annual contribution towards the United Nations. What happened after that, I do not know, but the Estimates before us do not reflect a reduction in our contribution to the Budget of the United Nations. I would like the hon. the Minister to clarify this matter for us. We contributed R394,100 last year and the figure is the same this year.

Then, arising out of this question, I should also like to know what steps the Government has been taking to ensure that no part of its own contribution is used for purposes hostile to the Government’s interests. In so far as the U.N. publicity programme against apartheid is concerned, we should particularly like to know what active steps the Government is taking to counteract this programme abroad. While I am dealing with U.N., I want to ask the Minister to give us a straight reply to the question why he and the Government regard it as being in the best interests of South Africa to retain our membership of this world organization. The reason why I ask the question is that leading members of the Government have been making speeches in which they described U.N. as “useless” and “futile”. I am thinking particularly of a statement made by the hon. the Minister of Transport, and in one case one of the leaders described it as a “farce”. According to the Estimates, our membership of U.N. costs us more than R½ million a year, and then I am not counting the R35,900 we contribute voluntarily to the Children’s Fund. That is a lot of money to spend on something which the leaders of the Government regard as useless and futile. Certainly all of us are very much aware of the shortcomings of U.N. We know that they are not always effectual. They sometimes contravene their own rules and often fail to live up to their stated ideals and principles. That is all true, but that is not the full story in regard to U.N. The United Nations has no real power. It has no army; it has no police force at its disposal. It has no teeth. And let me say, Heaven forbid that it should ever become an organization with teeth, willing and able to settle international disputes by force. I say quite frankly that that is not what we would like to see. But we on this side of the House appreciate the need for a meeting-place of the nations where inter-nation problems can at least be discussed so that efforts may be initiated to try to settle international difficulties and disputes by negotiation. We realize that were this organization to disintegrate, we would certainly see the emergence of competing organizations, with much worse effect, especially for the smaller nations of the world. So with all its shortcomings, we on this side see a certain usefulness in an international organization like the United Nations. But if it is the considered opinion of the Government that this is a useless and futile organization, then of course we fail to see how the Minister could come to Parliament and require it to vote more than R½ million for the upkeep of the organization. I think an explanation of Government policy is required from the Minister and I hope he will give it to us in a straightforward manner.

From time to time reports appear in the Press about contributions made by members of U.N. to a fund for the benefit of what they call the “victims of apartheid”. It is called the Anti-Apartheid Fund. I have in front of me some Press reports referring to these contributions. and in those that I have, the names of the countries mentioned are all of countries which maintain diplomatic relations with South Africa. I do not want to name any of the countries mentioned, because I do not have a complete list and I think it would be unfair to mention only one or two. But I should like the Minister to give us some kind of report on the present nature of this Anti-Apartheid Fund, what it now amounts to, how the fund is administered, how the money is distributed and how many South Africans are involved, if he has this information. We should especially like to know what countries have been contributing, and what steps the Government has been taking, if any, to try to dissuade countries who maintain friendly relations with us from acting in this manner.

This brings me to another important point. Up to a few years ago it was customary for the Department of Foreign Affairs to present Parliament with reports about the activities of our representation at U.N. In a moment of pique the previous Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr. Louw, stopped this practice and referred hon. members to the Parliamentary Library. The present Minister showed that he was far more aware of the practical problems facing members of Parliament, and in 1966 he presented us with a White Paper covering questions at U.N. affecting South Africa since 1965. This was followed by some very excellent White Papers on the South-West Africa question, the question of terrorism, the treatment of prisoners and the South-West Africa Survey. I think Parliament welcomed that because it cannot do its work properly and come to sound decisions unless members are properly informed about what is going on and how the Department is doing its work.

But what I want to come to is this. What I believe is absolutely essential for us is to create a Parliamentary Committee on Foreign Affairs as a permanent committee. In most democratic countries this is regarded as absolutely essential. I came across it recently when I visited Parliaments in Germany, Belgium, Holland and France, and in every case found that the Committee on Foreign Affairs was regarded as the most important of all. Among other considerations, this kind of committee springs from the need to deal with certain questions which cannot easily be discussed in plenary session. For instance, the appointment of top-level foreign representatives should most certainly be allowed to be scrutinized by a committee of this kind. After all, when foreign representatives go abroad they go there not to represent the Government but to represent South Africa, and there should be some control by Parliament to ensure that positions abroad do not go to politicians who were disappointing at home. I shall later mention a few other matters which I think should be considered by a committee of this sort, but I do believe it is something the Minister should seriously consider initiating in our parliamentary system. I want to call upon the Minister to modernize our parliamentary system of government and institute such a permanent committee on foreign affairs, to which the parties may appoint suitable members in proportion to their strength in Parliament. I would say that if there is one country where there is a need for a committee of this sort, it is South Africa.

From 1910 until fairly recently our foreign relations were so closely tied to London that the Prime Minister of the day dealt with foreign affairs almost as a sort of sideline. Now this is no longer the case, but as far as our parliamentary system is concerned, on this point we are still very much where we started in the era of colonialism in 1910. Despite the coming of the Republic, we have made no progress and no adaptation in this respect at all. It is in the power of the Minister to initiate changes in this direction and I hope that we shall have a favourable reaction from him. Apart from that, it seems to me quite obvious that Parliament should be presented annually with a departmental report by the Department of Foreign Affairs, incorporating a report on questions affecting South Africa at U.N., and that this should be tabled at the beginning of each session.

To come back to some of our more immediate problems, I want to say that it gives one cause for concern to see how often South Africans are barred from privileges in other countries. This is the kind of thing I have in mind. I have here two cuttings. There are far more. One reads: “Turkey bans South African professor from post”, and the other says: “India bars South African geographers”. Non-political people are barred from taking up positions or from attending conferences in other countries. There were several cases of this sort. They crop up in Press reports from time to time. What worries us is this, and I wish to ask the Minister whether the Government takes this kind of thing for granted, or do they try to do something about it? We are aware of the fact that we have no diplomatic relations with countries like Turkey or India and some other countries. But what concerns me, and I put this question pertinently to the Minister, is, do we not have contact at a place like U.N. with such countries? Are we not even on speaking terms with such countries? And does the Government follow these incidents up directly with the countries concerned, or is there no effort to back up our citizens at all? Must we simply accept that the Government is taking all this for granted and that our citizens must fend for themselves overseas? It would indeed be sad if this were so. I hope the Minister will give us the necessary assurance.

Unfortunately in the past year we saw a variety of demonstrations against South African persons and property abroad. In London South Africa House suffered a battering, and I should like to know from the Minister what the damage amounted to, whether it has been repaired and whether any representations about it have been made to the British Government.

An exchange took place recently in the British House of Commons in which the Prime Minister was involved. It concerned the presence of South African police in Rhodesia. In reply to a question by Mr. Michael Foot —and I have checked up on the correctness of this report—Mr. Wilson said—

That was the infiltration by S.A. police—

As I say, I checked on this and it was officially confirmed that Mr. Wilson had made this statement. It is quite possible that the Prime Minister, Mr. Wilson, meant to refer to the Rhodesian Constitution instead of that of South Africa, but I wonder whether the Minister’s attention has been drawn to this statement and, if so, if Mr. Wilson was under the wrong impression, whether the Minister does not think it should be corrected.

Last year I raised the matter of the diplomatic suburb in Pretoria, I do not want to repeat what I said then, but I want to add that in so far as the Government is encouraging or assisting friendly countries, especially the newer countries, to acquire property below the exorbitant level applying in the older parts of the cities, there can be no question about it; but there is a danger that the motives behind the effort will be misunderstood abroad, and that I made clear last year. Of course here is another matter which should normally have been considered by a foreign affairs committee of Parliament if we had had one. I should like to know from him what this effort is going to cost the country and whether the effort is going to be repeated in Cape Town. I sincerely hope that it will not be necessary. If so, is it the intention then to start consular suburbs in cities like Johannesburg, Cape Town, Durban and even Port Elizabeth? In the third place, Sir. my eyebrows were raised by a report which appeared in Die Burger of 21st September last year; it was a Sapa report from Pretoria and I take it that it must be regarded as reliable. This is what the report says—

The report then ends on this rather significant note—

Sir, we would like to know whether this report is correct. We would like to know how it is that the Press gets information of this sort while Parliament is not informed about the plans of the Government. I do hope that the Minister will give us some explanation and complete the picture for us.

Then there are two other matters of an allied nature. The one is a report which recently appeared in the Press about what is called “diplomatic quarters” to be built in the Kruger National Park at a cost of R150,000. I would like to know whether that has the approval of the hon. the Minister. Sir, we really hope that he will be able to avoid that kind of thing. There is no harm in the idea of V.I.P. rooms in hotels and at places like Skukuza but, Sir, a diplomat’s job, as the Minister knows better than anybody else, is to make contact and to learn to know the country as it is, not to be set apart in diplomatic enclaves all over the country. We do hope that that kind of thing will not be repeated and that “diplomatic quarters”, so called, will not be established in places like the Kruger National Park.

Then I want to refer also to reports which have appeared about a fancy hotel at Jan Smuts Airport. Let me say that the country would welcome a good hotel there, but what I do not like so much is that according to the report, this hotel will be used as a venue for international conferences. I am asking the Minister for information. I cannot say that the reports were correct, but I would like to hear from the Minister whether the Government has a hand in efforts of this kind, and to what extent the sponsors have the moral or financial support of the Government. Sir, as far as we are concerned, we can think of nothing as unwise as to let people come a long way to South Africa to a conference and then to park them at an airport. Airports, in any case, are noisy places and completely unfit for peaceful conferences. If it is necessary to provide conference facilities, I do hope that the Government will look for a better venue than the Jan Smuts Airport. I would say that the obvious place is Johannesburg. There are most attractive areas in the city which could be utilized for this purpose, and I am asking the Minister to clarify the position for us.

I come now to the question of our immediate neighbours. Let me say that I hope that somebody, sooner or later, will coin a suitable collective word for what we referred to in the past as the “three protectorates”, which have now become independent States and which have a special relationship with South Africa. Sir, it is very gratifying to note that the relations between us and the three independent neighbouring countries are as good as they are. Much credit in this respect must go to the hon. the Minister, the Secretary for Foreign Affairs and the officials in the Africa section, who, I feel, are cut out for the job. Of course, we will have to start thinking of the future and the difficult human problems which are almost certain to arise. Because there is no doubt that inter-territorial traffic is going to increase, and we shall have to consider ways and means, in the first place, of avoiding the possibility of visitors finding themselves in embarrassing and undignified situations. I hope to have an opportunity later in the course of this Session to open a discussion on this matter here in Parliament, but for the time being we shall have to turn our minds to problems like the following: I have here, for instance, a cutting from an article which appeared in the Financial Mail which, as the Minister knows, is an important paper with a wide circulation also beyond our borders. It is stated in this article, which appeared in the issue of 24th January, 1969 that—

Sir, I do not know whether this is correct or not, but I think this is the sort of thing that we will have to clear up in the very near future. My hon. friend the member for Constantia will also raise with the Minister, on our behalf, the whole question of the customs Union. Sir, that is also dealt with in this article in the Financial Mail, as what they call the “darker side of good neighbourliness”. As I have said, this is an important journal, and whether or not one shares its opinions, it is clear to all of us that this is the kind of problem that we in South Africa will have to overcome. Good neighbourliness will not be very lasting if the nationals of a neighbouring, independent State are placed or seem to be placed in any kind of inferior position in comparison with the nationals of other independent States. I would like to know what the hon. the Minister has to say about this state of affairs as interpreted by the Financial Mail. Sir, friendly relations with new African States, especially with our immediate neighbours, are of vital importance to us in respect of our security and our efforts to return to normality in our relations with the rest of humanity. But it is no use hiding the fact that it is going to place a tremendous strain on some of the Government’s domestic colour policies—I do not think there is any question about it—and significant changes will have to come about sooner or later. Sir, in this matter the Government can count on the co-operation of the Opposition; I wish to underline that, but my friendly advice to the hon. the Minister again is to get a permanent Parliamentary committee on foreign affairs going as soon as he can, so that thorny questions of the type which I have just touched upon need not be thrashed out in detail on the floor of the House.

As far as relations with Africa are concerned, it seems to me that the Government’s outward movement, its contact policy, is at last getting into its stride. The diplomatic reporter of The Sun in London recently wrote in flowing terms of the “diplomatic flirtation” between Malawi and us now having developed into an “open romance”. Well, this is all very encouraging, and we are prepared on this side to give the Minister and his Department as much credit as they deserve, and they certainly deserve credit; but I am sure that what the Minister would best like to hear is that we on this side offer him our full co-operation in improving our relations with other African States. Of course, let me say that a very interesting new strategy on the part of some African States is developing in Africa, with Dr. Banda as the pioneer. I do not want to discuss this matter at this moment except to say that the Government should not be too sensitive about statements made by African leaders in respect of this strategy. I believe that it is vitally important to our future that we take our rightful place in Africa. It seems to me that the key to future success is to establish friendly relations at some time or other with Zambia and Madagascar. Zambia will not be so easy. Much will depend on whether the Rhodesian problem is resolved or not. But in the case of Madagascar, or the Malagasy Republic, there is fresh hope after President Tsirinan’s recent visit to Dr. Banda. I should very much like the hon. the Minister to tell us whether we can hopefully look forward to the development of new links with African States in the near future. [Time expired.]

The hon. member advocated the establishment of a parliamentary committee in order to select overseas representatives. In other words, a parliamentary select committee consisting of representatives of the various parties must now decide who should represent the Government in overseas countries. Sir, I know that the motion as such will be rejected, but what I want to reject with contempt in advance is the insinuation the hon. member made, which is very undeserving, namely that the men who now represent us abroad are politicians who were a failure here in South Africa. I do not think any graver disservice has ever been done in the past to any of our men who are representing us in such a worthy manner abroad. I am very sorry that that insinuation was made by the hon. member. He did not allege it directly, but he did insinuate it.

He did say it.

I think it is an insinuation to which every right-thinking member, on whatever side of the House he may be sitting, takes strong exception. I have also had considerable experience of the men who represent us there, specifically the politicians. It has always been my standpoint—and I am in quite good company because this has always been the Government’s attitude—that nobody can represent South Africa more successfully abroad than a person who is acquainted with all the various questions with which this country is faced, in its relations with its neighbouring states and in an international sphere, and who is grounded in the policy of the Government of the day. In that I am supported by a man who made a great name for himself, namely the late Mr. Churchill. The late Mr. Churchill said that nobody could represent his country better than someone who was in politics. But now the hon. member is insinuating that those men are not worthy representatives of South Africa because they have been failures here.

You did not listen carefully.

I think it is an insinuation which we must reject with contempt. As far as I know them, they were all very successful men, and it is precisely because they proved in this House that they had in fact made a study of national affairs and that they were men whom the Government could trust when they represented South Africa in the outposts of the world that they were appointed to those positions. So much for that hon. member. The series of questions he put to the hon. the Minister will of course be replied to by the Minister himself. Mr. Chairman, I think I am expressing the opinion of all of us in this House when I say that this country, as well as this House, is very taken up with the progress which the hon. the Minister of Foreign Affairs has recently made since he took over this important post. I think that the image of South Africa abroad has changed a good deal, and to the good of our country. I think that this is to a large degree attributable to the tactful way in which the has acted when stating South Africa’s problems and when dealing with people he knew were not favourably disposed towards South Africa. I think that the image as such has undergone tremendous change, to the good of South Africa. We and the country are very grateful to him for that. I hope that the will continue in this way. We are already plucking the fruits. That is why I do not even want to confine myself to the U.N., because, as hon. members know, stating our case has very little effect there. But where the Minister has been particularly successful has been the Continent of Africa. That is why I want to refer now to a report which appeared recently in one of the newspapers. This report quoted from a manifesto which was issued after the recent meeting of the African States. When I saw the contents of the manifesto, as published in the Cape Argus of 20th April, I was struck by it. I was quite struck by it, in the first instance, because I could see it glimmering through that those African states realized that the position in South Africa, as they regarded it to be in the past, no longer obtained. It glimmered through that the rancour which existed in the past had changed, but that there were a few matters with which we could in fact deal which are still obstacles to good relations between South Africa and the various states on the Continent of Africa.

I want to refer to three aspects which struck me, which were mentioned in that manifesto to which I have just referred. For the most part, there are still three matters which vex them, and to which I think we should react timeously. These days we make a great fuss of the statement that there is a time for everything. I think that we have here the opportune time for reacting favourable to that manifesto. With a serious effort on our part at this stage, since they have approached a good deal closer, we can approach closer to them by once again emphasizing our case correctly, as a means of counteracting those different fallacies and misconceptions which prevailed in the past among those countries.

The first aspect is the question of “minority rule”. This is something which has always caused a great to do among all the African States as well as the U.N. But I want to confine myself to the African States only. I think that we can repeat the statement here, without unnecessary speculation, which has already been made in this House by the hon. the Minister of Bantu Administration and Development. I think it is a statement which should be made more often. It is a statement which should be expanded, and should now, because this is the right time for it, serve as an accommodating reaction towards the African States in expect of the alleged minority rule. When those countries can be properly informed on a high level, for example by our competent Minister and his equally competent Department, that there is no such thing in South Africa as “minority rule” any more, I think we would to a large extent have drawn the sting. But then it should be stated in such a way that there can be no doubt about it. It must be based on the actual situation in South Africa. Because it is such an important fact and such an important aspect in the relations between South Africa and those countries, it is not something which we should communicate to them casually, timorously, circumspectly or apologetically. It must be “adumbrated”, if I may borrow a word from the hon. the Leader of the Opposition, in the clearest possible way.

Oh my!

The outside world and all the African States must be able to realize that there is no such thing as minority rule in South Africa anymore. That is my first plea.

The other aspect which is still vexing, is the question of, as they call it, discrimination on racial grounds. I think that this is something which can be rectified to very good effect, in this respect that the discrimination can become applicable to a greater or lesser extent. Discrimination is dependent on the question of how much separation one has in the social, political or industrial spheres. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, my colleague the hon. member for Bezuidenhout who resumed his seat a little while ago was discussing the United Nations and what we in South Africa contribute towards the expenses of the United Nations, in other words in the form of a levy. This is something which causes me concern. We know that an amount of R394,100 was paid as our contribution to the United Nations last year. I should like to know from the hon. the Minister if he could tell us whether all the States attending the United Nations have paid all their levies in full? It is natural that we should want to know this. After all is said and done, most of the States who attend the United Nations have much to say in criticizing other States. I believe that this is something which should be brought to light and that much more should be said about it and more frequently. I do not think the world appreciates the fact that South Africa is one of the few States which contribute their levy in full. I know too that there are people, particularly some politicians, who are prone to run around the countryside casting reflections on the United Nations. In other words, very few, if any are complimentary towards the United Nations. It is not a body with which I personally am found of either. Nevertheless, I look upon the United Nations essentially as a body which we must regard as a “talking shop”. This is the way I view it. If we did not have that body which we could use as a talking shop, where every State, large or small, can go and blow off steam, and air their views and grievances, there would be an explosion in the world some time or other. It therefore does serve a very useful purpose in this regard. I do believe that we in South Africa, and particularly the Government, are not exerting ourselves to the full in regard to our foreign affairs policy. Events take place and this Government, often ignores events and lets them slip; often very little is said. We find that other States who do not treat us very kindly, seem to get away with it too often, and I appeal to the hon. the Minister to view this in the light in which I have brought it to his attention.

You will remember that only last year the American aircraft carrier, the Franklin D. Roosevelt, called at the Cape Town harbour. This naval ship called here, and we as South Africans in our customary generous way of extending hospitality to visitors, had everything laid on for no less than 2,000 American sailors. For no rhyme or reason at all, an order was directed from the White House cancelling all shore leave for the 2,000 American sailors on board that ship. This was a slur and an insult not only on the South African Navy, but on the South African nation as well, I believe it would have been a wonderful opportunity for fostering better relations between the South African Navy and the American Navy. Our naval officials went out of their way to meet these sailors, in order to foster better relations between the two navies and their countries. As I have said, this order came from the White House and nowhere else, and these sailors were never allowed shore leave. The ship left us quietly, unlike its arrival, and very little was ever said about it.

The American ship left in this clouded atmosphere because it suited the Americans at that time. It suited them politically too, to disallow their sailors from touching South African soil, and they are allowed to get away with it.

Now, hardly a year later, we find that another ship, the S.S. Ryndom, which was converted into a floating university, arrived last week at this same harbour in Cape Town, with no less than 500 American students. These students were on a study cruise. They arrived here and they all disembarked. They were treated royally by the South Africans, as we are accustomed to treating visitors. This time it suited the Americans, they landed their students here to further their studies and they accepted our hospitality. Again these students left with no comment from this Government.

There are States in the Western world, States such as America and others, who like to have their cake and eat it. When it suits them, then South Africa is not good enough, then a year later, when it suits them, they allow 500 students to disembark on our shores. I believe that the hon. the Minister should not allow States such as America to get away with it as easily as this. It is having a damaging effect on the dignity of our South African nation. I appeal to the Minister, as Minister of Foreign Affairs to talk to the Americans when the opportunity arises; particularly when he goes overseas, he must ask them to explain to us what changed their minds, and how they can allow the students to land here when they will not allow their sailors to land here. He must ask them to explain their change of policy?

Do you want us to stop them from landing?

No, they are all very welcome as far as South Africa is concerned, but why do they stop some of their people from landing here and not others? They cannot be so inconsistant surely? I want the Minister to follow what I am saying, let there not be any misunderstandings. I believe this Government should not let these States get away with it, as often as they do.

In what way?

I have just explained it to you. The hon. member wants to know in what way. How can the Americans in one year not allow their people to land on our shores and in the next year allow them to enter? I do not expect the hon. member to explain this to me, because I know he has no idea, but I expect an answer from the Minister.

Another “matter” worries me since the Budget was announced, it relates to the political and economic side-effects of the new sales tax on our immediate neighbours. When I speak of “immediate neighbours”, I mean neighbouring States such as Lesotho, Swaziland and Botswana. Now, I know that these States were shocked when they heard of the wide range of articles which the sales tax is covering. They are extremely worried and shocked about the position. The Government should at least have had close consultation with them, in lieu of customs and excise duties. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member who has just spoken, will forgive me if I do not follow him up in his representations and arguments in connection with ships. I should like to confine myself to what was said by the hon. the Minister of Finance when he participated in the debate on the Vote. In connection with grants to our neighbouring States he said that we should cast our bread on the waters, as the Preacher had said. It is not necessary for me to say that if we were to do so, we would reap the fruits after many days. In the short time I have at my disposal, I want to take you back just a short way in our history, Sir, to the reason why it is important for us to play our part in Africa. The appeal of the hon. the Prime Minister was: “We are of Africa. We, who have received so much from Africa, it is also our duty to plough back into Africa part of the good things we have received”. This idea of ploughing back has been known to us for many years. Our forefathers also rendered a service. I want to make special mention of the task undertaken by our missionaries 80 or 90 years ago. They set out not only to preach the gospel, but also to render a service. They rendered a service to underdeveloped states, service to the sick and service to a community. They never asked to reap the fruits. We are reaping these fruits to-day. As far back as 1961 the late Dr. Verwoerd said at the opening of the J. G. Strydom Building that our task in Africa was a task in a different sense. This was that a nation that was strong, one that was great and one that was developed, could be a friend to others that had not as yet progressed so far and were in need of assistance. Such a nation could offer service, not leadership, but service, co-operation and assistance. The assistance we especially were able to give was knowledge; knowledge of how to deal with various practical problems of life. This kind of knowledge was acquired best in a country in which conditions more or less corresponded to those in one’s own country. He also asked what we expected in return and said that what we expected in return was not much, but that it could be a tremendous asset to us. Goodwill and friendship were the only things we expected. The words that were spoken on that occasion, just as the words spoken by our forefathers, are the words of our present Government as well.

I had the privilege during the past year to have spent a month in a neighbouring State, and to do so with a sense of rendering service without asking anything in return. That forms the basis of our whole policy as regards other States of Africa. In Malawi we can already see clear signs of the service and assistance we are rendering to them bearing fruits, i.e. friendship and good neighbourliness. I can read to you, Sir, from the Hansard of Malawi dated 29th January, 1968, the reaction of their hon. President to certain missions sent to that country. He said, inter alia—

We are of Africa, we have knowledge of the conditions and diseases which are to be found from here to Central Africa. We have knowledge of the geography, we have knowledge of the conditions of drought and we have knowledge of the Bantu people because we have been living with the Bantu in South Africa for 300 years, and the Bantu we have in South Africa, we also find in countries to the north of us. Dr. Banda went on to confirm why the service and reports he received from us, were better than those received from others, in the following words—

However, these are not the only reasons. Another reason is that we, though a relatively small State, are better equipped than even the larger States for rendering direct assistance in the development of Southern Africa and for stimulating economical growth. As far as development is concerned, when we have regard to South Africa’s participation in the Cabora-Bassa scheme, the Oxbow scheme and the Kunene scheme and other schemes which may still arise, we have no option but to continue, and I want to put it to the hon. the Minister, to render service. In the last few minutes at my disposal, I should pay special attention to the services we can render there in the form of personal services. We can help them economically and we can help them in other aspects, but I can assure you, Sir, that these countries to our north, also need our personal assistance. As a medical practitioner, I want to give one example of how urgently they need our help. In South Africa we have one doctor for every 15-16,000 people. In Botswana, the figure is one doctor for every 17,000 inhabitants; in Malawi, one for every 34,000 and in Ethiopia one for every 180,000. Therefore I say that what we have received we should also give to those countries to our north. If we give them that, we will not only receive friendship or goodwill in return, but we all know that a country which is weak economically, is more susceptible to Communism. We also know that a country which is weak spiritually and physically, is so much the more susceptible to international Communism. I was alarmed when I read a report which revealed that among the large number of Chinese communists in Zambia there were a large number of doctors who were quietly helping people although they were unqualified. These communists are helping the people in this way whereas in point of fact they have been sent there to assist with the construction of a railway line. However, I am also glad to be able to say that certain medical bodies are also giving help to those countries. We are grateful for that help, but I should like to ask the hon. Minister whether we cannot bring about a larger degree of co-ordination as regards all this help given by certain bodies and philanthropists. We have had the very interesting experience of a certain philanthropist from a certain country who made Malawi a gift of toothpaste to the value of R5,000. A senior official of the department in Malawi who took delivery of that gift, came to me and asked me what he was to do with it because most of his people did not even know what toothpaste was and what it was to clean one’s teeth. I told him to give it to the people because they could use it to dress their hair. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, part of my remarks will follow the line which was taken by the hon. member who has just resumed his seat, but before getting to that particular point, I would like to ask the hon. the Minister, whether he could give some indication as to his thinking, in connection with the activities, which have been taking place recently in regard to the South Atlantic Pact, to use one expression, and the power vacuum in the Indian Ocean, to use another. Many people in this country have the mistaken idea, that we can live alone and ignore the outside world, and, more or less, just paddle our own canoe. But I think thinking people appreciate and realize, that that is an impossibility, and that the time has come to look at the situations, which are facing us, particularly the two items which I have just mentioned. We saw in the Press that apparently approaches to the Argentine and Brazil have met with no response. Furthermore, we saw that the Australians and the New Zealanders were more concerned with being associated with America. The final point that came to light was, that a spokesman of the Nixon Government in America has said that the Cape route was not really so important, because access to the East and to the Indian Ocean could still be gained by way of the Panama Canal. Our naval units have visited Australia, and we are all very pleased to see, and to hear, what a magnificent reception they have had. However, I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether he had any discussions in the diplomatic field prior to these attempts at defence pacts. I ask this, because I firmly believe that there is a great deal of merit in Britain’s attitude of being disinterested in the defence of the areas east of Suez. I also can see that America feels that they can handle the other parts of the world without very much consideration of the importance of the Cape route, which we think is of such supreme importance. I say that because I think that, to-day, with modern weapons, modern equipment and fast flying aircraft which have speeds of more than twice that of sound, armed forces can move around the globe at such speed, that perhaps these ideas of defence pacts are out of date. I would appreciate it if the hon. the Minister will give us the opportunity of hearing his thoughts on these particular matters, as to how he has tackled or, is considering attempting to tackle, these problems of the so-called vacuum in the Indian Ocean and in the South Atlantic.

I am fully aware of the strength of this country which, for its size, is quite considerable, but which is not formidable in world terms. This brings me to my second point, which is, that our friends in the future are not going to be freinds on the shores of the South Atlantic or the Indian Ocean, but on the African continent. I want to put it to the hon. the Minister that in the new thinking which is taking place in the Nationalist Party, and I do not wish to digress into their local quarrels and arguments, I think the time has arrived, when we should look at the African continent with slightly different eyes. If we are to succeed, I believe we shall not only have to give help of the kind which has been given, and which is suggested by the hon. member who spoke before me, but I believe that our technical know-how, and our skills should be made available to the emergent nations on the African continent. I think they should look to us for training in the many skills and sciences in which we are the equal of anyone in the world. I now refer particularly to agricultural-technical services, and to mining skills. I think we have the places of learning and universities, where these skills can be taught. Although it is true, as the hon. member said, that the people going from this country to Malawi have made magnificent progress because of their training and skill, I believe that our best friends on the African continent would be those people who came to this country and were trained and educated in the higher educational fields, and who returned to their countries convinced that there is a future on this continent for all colours.

Order! Hon. members on my left must not converse aloud.

I am convinced that the modern age demands that a man like the hon. the Minister of Foreign Affairs, must look at the African continent as our future, because if we are to survive at this end of the African continent, it can only be with the goodwill, support and assistance of those beyond our borders. Much as we may arm ourselves, and much as we may sit behind the balustrade and inside the bastille of privilege, we must accept the fact, that the African continent is emerging and emerging fast. It would be folly not to admit that there are certain States, who are not making the progress that they should or which was expected of them. Among the vast number of States on this continent, there are many who are progressing and I believe it is in our own material interest and in the interest of our welfare and our safety, to do what we can to assist them. This can be done by training their own people to work among their people. I do hope that the hon. the Minister will get the support of his party and his Cabinet, and that they will produce such a plan. I do not wish to introduce any sort of political note at this stage, because the hon. the Prime Minister a short while ago, when he enunciated his views and his policies, made the illuminating statement that as far back as 1951 our white universities, when they were closed to the non-Whites in this country, could accept students if they were the sons of ambassadors. I think of ambassadors in quite a different way from the type of ambassador with whom this hon. Minister deals. I believe that the ambassadors, whom we should seek, are not the ambassadors who come with diplomatic privilege, but the ambassadors who go back to their countries after learning and being trained here, and who become ambassadors for South Africa on the African continent as a whole.

Business interrupted in accordance with Standing Order No. 23.