Mr. Speaker, I move—

Mr. Speaker, the hon. the Minister is aware of the fact that we on this side of the House do not like to discuss specific staff cases across the floor of the House. We prefer to discuss them with his office. Moreover, I can testify to the fact that we are always accommodated, where possible. But this morning I want to make an exception. I want to discuss a case of a particular small group of the Minister’s employees with him across the floor of the House. I do so for two reasons. The first is that the representations in connection with this matter have just reached me, and, in the second place, this is a matter in respect of which I feel the public conscience should be called in. I do not intend this as something to be held against the Minister, not at all, but I raise it because it may affect other employers as well. It is the case of male telephonists. They inform me that they can earn a maximum salary of R180 per month in the service of the Railways. I want to say at once that it is very difficult for one to imagine that a White family can exist today on a salary of R180 per month. I realize that in practice the post of telephonist often is a step to better employment opportunities. For many people it is temporary. There is one type of person, however, for whom it is not temporary, i.e. for the blind telephonist. Without being emotional or sentimental I want to ask the Minister whether he will not give attention to the case of blind telephonists for whom it is a life-long career to be a telephonist and for whom it is not possible to do more responsible work. Therefore I ask the Minister whether it is not possible for their scales to be revised to some extent so as to allow them to go beyond the salary of R180 per month. I shall be very grateful to have the hon. the Minister’s reaction to this. I believe his reaction may have a ripple effect which may affect also the position of blind telephonists outside the Railways and the Public Service.

†Mr. Speaker, I want to return this morning to the question of harbours. I made a plea earlier during the course of these debates that we should seriously consider appointing an authoritative commission representative of private enterprise, the Railways and Harbours and various organs of the State, especially the Industrial Development Corporation, to investigate the possible development of our harbours in the next decade or the next score of years, even to the end of the century. I pleaded for this because, as I pointed out, the need of the South African people for essential services like transport and harbours is going to increase phenomenally over the next few years. The General Manager in his most recent report pointed out that in the eighteen months before the end of 1970 the demands upon the harbours increased by 57 per cent. In the first paragraph of his report dealing with harbours he indicated that even in normal circumstances—without such abnormal matters as the closing of the Suez Canal—the demand on the harbours is expected to increase by at least 5 per cent per annum. This does mean that every fourteen years the requirements of our people for harbours will double. We have to consider what we are going to do for the future. If one looks at the Marais Commission’s report on the co-ordination of transport, we see that they emphasize the point that under the constitution the South African Railways is supposed to assist in the progress of less developed areas by providing transport in advance of the immediate needs of those areas. The Marais Commission made the further point that this consideration is still valid in the administration of the South African Railways.

I believe that there are a number of considerations why the development of harbours with ancillary transport against the background of their hinterlands, requires more specific examination than we have had up till now. The hon. the Minister referred to the fact that there have been, for example, investigations into Kosi Bay and Sordwana. But the one was in 1922 and since then there has been a revolution in the development of Natal and in the eastern part of the country, which has become potentially the greatest growth point in the life of South Africa. The other one was in 1956 in the days of Mr. Paul Sauer. Again, Sir, an obsolete inquiry; it is something which is no longer valid. I also want to refer to the West Coast. I want to say in passing that the hon. the Minister must not let the fact that we praise him and appreciate his qualities, go to his head. I look upon him as a modest man and that is why we feel we can take a chance and praise him whenever we can. We accept that his modesty will help him to retain his balance. But he must not stand up and say: “I know everything.” That was his reply to my plea for an investigation into the harbour potential of South Africa. “I know everything; this is a stupid request; I know everything.” I want to say to the hon. the Minister, if he then knows everything why did the South African Railways and Harbours not succeed in persuading the interdepartmental committee on the transport of steel and ore exports that Saldanha Bay was not the proper bay to use for this purpose? If they knew everything, then surely they should have had an answer in that case. I have said before that we feel that the House and the Railways should now accept that St. Croix should be developed quickly and essentially in order to save what we can of the plan for the exports of our iron ore in South Africa, and to do it quickly. I think that is beyond argument. That does not mean that especially on our west coast there should not be established growth points on the coast. I believe that one of the most essential needs of the South African community today is to raise the standards of the Coloured people in the Western Cape. I think the standards of the Coloured people in the Western Cape, especially in the north-western Cape, are one of the tragedies that we have …

Order! Is that under discussion?

Yes, Sir, growth points for the Coloured people. Of course, I must be guided by you, Sir. We have been allowed to discuss …

The hon. member may discuss the growth points from the Railways’ point of view, but not the state of the Coloured people as a whole.

I am quite happy to let it rest there, Sir. I have emphasized the point that growth points are necessary in this area especially for the Coloured people. I will not expand upon it. I have made my point. I think it is common cause. I want to know whether Saldanha Bay can still be developed as a growth point apart from ore exports. Can it be used for ship repairs or as another base for the fishing industry or for shipbuilding? The latter is very important indeed, and it has natural advantages. What is the position if one wants to develop Saldanha Bay to the extent that Iscor wants to develop it? What is the position with water? Saldanha Bay obviously will be dependent largely upon the waters of the Berg River. We read in the paper only last night that we have had a second crisis since 1961 as far as the waters of the Western Cape are concerned and that the position at the moment is critical and serious. Has that been considered? That is why I mention other possibilities on the West Coast. I mentioned Lamberts Bay in passing and I mentioned with more emphasis the possibilities of Boegoe Bay. There you have a natural hinterland. There are new copper mines on the Aggenhuys farm. There you have tremendous deposits of base minerals and of semi-precious stones and agricultural possibilities.

What about the water?

That is a most intelligent interjection. I am grateful for it. Boegoe Bay is ten miles from the mouth of the Orange River. With the tremendous development of the United Party’s Orange River scheme, which is at last now being adopted by the National Party and which extends much lower down than the Hendrik Verwoerd Dam—right down almost to Oranjemund—there should be water and plenty of water. One of the problems will therefore be met. It is true it is not a natural harbour in the sense that it has coves, protection and promontories, but at St. Croix a wharf of tremendous length will have to be built into the sea. At St. Croix the water is only 50 ft. deep whilst it is 70 ft. deep 400 metres from the shore at Boegoe Bay. These are all possibilities, and all we are asking is that the South African Railways and Harbours should take the initiative to investigate the future harbour potential in South Africa with a view to our development and with the view to creating growth points which are socially and economically needed in South Africa. We suggest that there should be a fully representative, authoritative commission and not an inter-departmental commission where some influences are too strong and the great intelligence of the Minister’s advisers are swamped by people whose motives are very difficult to understand. Let private enterprise, let independent bodies come in to assist the State authorities, including the Railways, in the planning of something for South Africa. I think the Minister has a very short time left in office, very short indeed. Perhaps a year or two …

Order! But that is not under discussion.

With respect, Mr. Speaker, I think that is a little bit unfair. I hope the hon. the Minister is going to grow a very old man and I wish him many happy years in the Opposition, but he does not have long to be a Minister. He may do something imaginative, something which may make it worth while for South Africa, for history to remember him as a great Minister of Transport, if he accepts this suggestion, which does not come to him from a politician, but from one South African to another. That is the one point. The other point that he and I should look into a little bit is the statement he made in this debate on labour. I was surprised that the Minister went to the extent which he did, namely to deal with job reservation and clause 77 of the Industrial Conciliation Act. For a page or two of Hansard he read out all the decrees which had been issued in regard to job reservation. I got the impression that he did it to show that this was not important, that in spite of job reservation, there was actually much fuller use of non-White labour than we appreciated and that this Government was much more liberal than we thought. Then the hon. the Minister issued a challenge to the Opposition. I want to read it as it was taken down at the time and as it was reported in the Minister’s Hansard. The Minister said :

That is true. There is no colour bar, not even the colour bar one gets under the Industrial Conciliation Act with regard to the definition of “employee”. It is free for an apprenticeship committee to take a Coloured, an Indian, a White or a Black man on as an apprentice. The Minister went on:

Since when has the hon. the Minister for Transport been indenturing Coloureds and Indians in the northern provinces as apprentices under the Apprenticeship Act? Since when has he been doing that on the South African Railways? If he is doing that at all, he has certainly not been doing it for more than a year. It must be a completely new development which we would welcome. Here I have the newspaper Rapport of the 15th August, 1971. I refer to the section known as Sake-Rapport where the following headlines appeared : “Bantoes sal nog vanjaar oorvat”. I think it was a slight exaggeration. The Railways cannot approve of that but of course it is the typical overstatement that one gets from the Nationalists. They are so enthusiastic about accepting United Party policy that they are now indulging in overstatements like this which is a bit preposterous. The report itself is more conservative. It says:

*The hon. the Minister must tell us more about this, because we welcome it. In particular I want to ask him where the people are going to be trained. He must tell us specifically where the Bantu are going to be trained as skilled carpenters, plasterers, and in other trades. It seems to me Government policy is becoming completely obscure. It is quite clear to me that the Minister of Transport and the Minister of Finance want a departure from the stated labour policy of the Government. I have here a statement made by the Minister of Finance in his Budget Speech of 1970-’71. It appears on page 4 of the White Paper which was published at the same time. It states—

†You will remember that this led to a bit of a controversy in the Cabinet. The Minister of Finance was repudiated by the Minister of Labour and I think by the Minister of Bantu Administration and Development. It was pointed out that the term “non-White” was limited there to Coloureds and Indians. What is the policy of the Government in relation to this? I had to look at the Senate Hansard of the most recent session to find that. I do not like quoting old statements. This question of labour is dynamic. It changes dramatically as the pressures grow on us and on the South African community. To take old statements is not always fair; therefore I looked for the most recent statements of policy and I found it in the Senate Hansard of 15th February, 1972, where the Minister of Labour made the following statement. Now hon. members and the Minister must listen. The hon. the Minister of Transport must help us and tell us what the policy of the Railways is when compared to the policy of the Government. Here I am going to quote the policy of the Government stated by the Minister of Labour:

This quote was from column 151 from the Senate Hansard. Now I quote from column 152:

It is a matter of high principle—

Then he made this point—and I would like the hon. Minister to explain to us how his policy fits in with Government policy. I want him to explain how he can issue a challenge to private enterprise when this is the policy of the Government? This is what the Minister of Labour said:

The Minister of Labour deals with the Minister of Railways in this phrase and I think the Minister must now reconcile his policy with the policy of the Government. He is the one that challenges; I did not start this argument. Let us now have clarity once and for all; let us have a definite and clear statement of policy by the Minister of Transport about what his policy is as far as this labour training is concerned and how it fits in with Government policy, because there seems to be a split in the Cabinet. Private enterprise is entitled to know what the policy of the Government is. Listen to the Minister of Labour. Talking about the White worker he says :

This is excellent. Then he goes on:

I want to say at once that this must be a misprint. Surely it is not the policy of this Government to offer these people minimum opportunities for training in their own areas. I accept that that is probably a misprint and should read “maximum”. Since the hon. the Minister challenges private enterprise to train non-White apprentices in the northern provinces, he must tell us how that dovetails with the policy statement by the hon. the Minister of Labour that it is politically impossible for the Government to allow this and that they are committed not to allow this. The hon. the Minister said in the Senate that they had a mandate from the people not to allow it. How then can he challenge these people to do this?

May I ask the hon. the Minister where he is going to train the Bantu in their own areas? Where do the Railways have the facilities to train Bantu plasterers and other building artisans in their own areas? Or are the South African Railways now going to train the Bantu in White areas? I hope so. If it is politically possible for the hon. the Minister to do this, it should be politically possible for the Government to extend this benefit to others in all areas of South Africa in consultation with and in agreement with the trade unions. I cannot tell you how grateful I am to the hon. the Minister for his challenge. I do hope that as a result of this challenge we shall now get clarity on Government policy. How many times have we on this side of the House not said to the hon. the Minister and to the members of the Cabinet that the major restrictive factor on the growth of South Africa and one of the major factors contributing to continued inflation in South Africa is the refusal of the Government, which we now know arises from a political impossibility for them, to make proper use of the manpower resources of our peoples. The hon. the Minister says he is changing this. He challenges private enterprise to do the same. In that case he must first take the hon. the Minister of Labour and the Cabinet by the ear, pull them into a corner and whisper into their ears: “You know, it is time we have a change in South Africa; it is time you realize that what you think is politically impossible, I am proving to be possible on the Railways.”

The Minister of Finance, speaking a few days ago on the 24th February, said in the Senate (col. 668)—

Good United Party policy—

That is superb; excellent United Party policy! The best policy for South Africa! I give the Railways full marks for leading the nation in this matter. But when the hon. the Minister of Finance commends the actions of the hon. the Minister of Railways in this matter, they must make up their minds whether it is politically possible to extend the same benefits to private enterprise. I think that the hon. the Minister has started something that he should see through to the end, to the conclusion. He thought he was clever; he thought he would prove that our praises of him are correct; he thought he would be clever and issue this challenge to the Opposition. We have accepted the challenge. Before we can take the challenge through to its logical conclusion, the Government must take its policy through to its logical conclusion. That is our request. I say that I look forward with very keen interest to the hon. the Minister’s reply to this debate. I know him as a fearless man. I know that, if he is in a corner, he will get up and say all sorts of terrible things about individuals in the Opposition. We will accept that gladly. We will listen to him and suffer that. But after he has done that, will he please tell the nation how his challenge to private enterprise and the statement in Sake-Rapport, can be related to the political impossibility which other members of the Cabinet see in carrying out that policy and in making that challenge to private enterprise real.

You are anticipating my reply.

The stereotype in life becomes part of one’s understanding.

I see I have five minutes left. I want to say, and I have said it before, that I find it a pity that the hon. the Minister of Transport is now trying to emulate the hon. the Prime Minister in that he is trying to become a joker. We have become used to a Prime Minister who has earned the nickname of “Jolly John”, but we do not want a Minister of Transport who deserves the nickname of “Boisterous Ben”. He indulged himself in a fantasy of what would happen, as he said, in 10 years’ time when the United Party takes over.

You should blame the Argus, not me. I merely quoted the Argus.

I am not blaming the hon. the Minister. I am just surprised that this Minister, who in some respects shows glimmerings of intelligence, can talk about a United Party take-over as long hence as 10 years.

I think it is longer.

What has happened to the intelligence we have noticed from time to time? Suppose we of the United Party have to imagine that in the short time, the very short time left to this Government, they have to make Cabinet changes. Do you think it would be a joke? Let me, for example, imagine that the Minister of Transport departs from this House and is succeeded by his Deputy … [Interjections.] When I first thought of it, I started to laugh, but my laughter caught in my throat because I realized what a tragedy for South Africa that would be. That is the difference. Look at the hon. the Minister of Finance. I do not know how old he is, but judging by results he should never have been Minister of Finance, and he should not be Minister of Finance for much longer. Who is he going to be succeeded by? The hon. member for Paarl? One cannot even begin to laugh. But think of the Prime Minister. Suppose the hon. the Prime Minister had to go. The history of a chauvinistic body such as the National Party shows that a successor to its leader is always more extreme than the departing leader. That is why Dr. Malan could not be succeeded by Mr. Havenga; that is why Mr. Strydom could not be succeeded by Dr. Dönges; that is why …

Order! Is that under discussion?

I am replying to the hon. the Minister. [Interjections.]

No.

I will abide by your ruling, Sir. But I want to say, with the greatest respect, that when you rule me out of order, you should not have allowed the hon. the Minister of Transport to spend 10 minutes of his speech on a similar subject. I will now accept your ruling and I sit down.

Mr. Speaker, I have not been in this Parliament very long, but I have learned this …

You won’t be staying here very long either.

Oh, you whipper-snapper, keep quiet! You know nothing about Parliament. In this short time I have learned that the hon. member for Yeoville suffers from two frustrations. The first is an obsession he has about a “split in the Cabinet”. I think he has been speaking about this “split in the Cabinet” since I arrived here. I do not know how many years ago, and that “split” has not happened yet. I think he merely hopes that if a “split in the Cabinet” occurs, he would come into power. His second source of frustration is the fact that his advice is never accepted. Every time the hon. member stands up and gives the hon. the Minister advice about how he should administer the Railways. He was so devoid of arguments that he specifically had to attack the hon. the Minister for having become a joker in this Parliament. I think this was a very poor effort on his part, but I want to tell him that with the jokes he made here the hon. the Minister of Transport has gained himself one supporter who will never desert him for as long as he lives, i.e. the hon. member for Wynberg. She enjoyed it so much and she is so content with the fine words the hon. the Minister used in reference to her, that she cannot stop laughing.

We are now in the death throes of this Railway Budget and I do not believe that the hon. the Minister has ever in his career received so many words of praise and so many accolades from the Opposition. I accept the fact, and I hope it was meant sincerely, because I also want to congratulate him on the particularly capable way he has recently been administering the Railways. Throughout this Budget the Opposition did not discuss the Budget itself; they skirted around it. As far as I am concerned they never once came forward with any fundamental, original criticism of the policy and the structure of the Railways. The whole time they skirted round the Budget.

I now come to the hon. member for Yeoville. He made extensive reference to the so-called labour policy of the National Party.

“So-called” is right.

I just want to tell the hon. member that I do not want to go into the whole matter, but he makes the point that the hon. the Minister of Transport is adopting a separate policy in respect of the employment of Bantu. I want to tell him what he actually means by that. He is trying to make this a point of division between the Minister of Transport and the Minister of Finance. Now I hear that he has again coupled the Minister of Finance with the Minister of Transport and ranged them against the Minister of Labour. Thereby the hon. member subtlety wants to launch an attack on the Government; he wants to undermine the Government in the eyes of the country’s industrialists. He thereby wants to imply that the Railways is being accorded certain benefits that are not being accorded to the industrialists. That is completely false propaganda. I want to reject this in its totality. It is completely unjust and incorrect. It is true that the Government has provided that for certain categories of industries labour shall be utilized in certain ways. As far as that point is concerned there is disagreement between this side of the House and that side of the House, because they reject decentralization in toto.

That is not true.

But what I want to emphasize is that there is absolutely no difference between the hon. the Minister of Transport’s policy and the official Government policy and its implementation. The hon. the Minister confirmed this here in his own words, but then those hon. members began laughing like a lot of excited schoolgirls who saw something they should not have seen, laughing as if they did not want to believe him. The fact is that the Railways is an industry in this country, and it is a very big industry. At certain places the Railways qualifies as a border industry, but at other places it can definitely not qualify as a border industry. What is clear, however, is that the Railways is a locality-bound industry that can qualify for that in terms of the Government’s policy of labour utilization and labour concessions. I should like to quote what the hon. the Minister of Finance said in his policy speech on 21st February, 1972, in this House. He dealt with the question of labour utilization and said (col. 1489):

I want the hon. member for Yeoville to listen to this. That committee exists and it deals with labour matters. The Minister continued :

Now comes the important point.

What committee is that?

It is the Geyser Committee of the Department of Labour.

[Inaudible].

Sir, the hon. member must just listen. Here the hon. the Minister of Finance makes the important point:

Sir, those are the facts, and the Opposition must now accept them for what they are.

Another aspect concerning the Railways is that it is a key industry. It is a key industry on which the success and the survival of other industries is dependent. It is therefore clear, with a view to the key role the Railways plays as the fountain of life of the South African economy, that a strong case can be made in support of the fact that the Railways can qualify, as an exception to the rule, for exceptional treatment as far as labour utilization is concerned. This allegation by the United Party, to the effect that the hon. the Minister is claiming certain privileges for himself which the industrialist cannot obtain, is unfair and unjust and does not accord with the facts. I think the Opposition must stop that. I want to tell the hon. member for Yeoville that it is not worthy of him to continue with that.

Then the Minister must not challenge me.

Sir, that is not the truth.

Now I come to the point the hon. member for Yeoville made about devaluation. The hon. the Minister attacked the hon. member for Yeoville because he used the words “deed of insolvency”, and pointed out to him that it was incorrect and unfair to the country. I want to associate myself with the hon. the Minister, because if one speaks in popular terms of a deed of insolvency, it sounds as if the whole country is bankrupt. This is not fair or just as far as the country is concerned. But then the hon. member went further. He then appealed to section 8 (3) of the Insolvency Act and quoted :

I want to tell the hon. member for Yeoville that he is altogether wrong on this point. Devaluation is surely not the same thing; he said devaluation was the same thing. But, if I owe someone in London £100, then surely I still owe him £100 after devaluation. I still pay him £100 in his own currency. What happens is that it costs me more rands to pay that person £100. That is what happens, and this standpoint of the hon. member is therefore completely wrong. But then he went further. By way of interjection the hon. the Minister said that it now costs us more abroad. That is so. Then the hon. member for Yeoville said: “That does not matter. The deed is committed not against foreign countries, but against one’s own people.” Sir, here is a definition of devaluation; I do not have the time to go into the matter, but devaluation embodies nothing of that. The hon. member then went further and made this statement—

That is true.

Sir, with all due respect to the hon. member for Yeoville I want to say that he is hopelessly wrong. A deed of devaluation is not a deed of bankruptcy. A deed of devaluation can abolish a depression; devaluation can wrench a country out of a depression, as was the case here in 1933. Devaluation can prevent a recession or a depression. What happens in a recession or a depression? These specific people he is speaking about are saved by devaluation, because as the result of devaluation they no longer run the risk of possibly losing their money. Growth is created; new business is created, and their money is saved in that way. I want to agree with the hon. member that they can lose their money to a certain extent as a result of inflation, but inflation is not created by devaluation alone. The hon. member then went further and referred to the hon. the Minister’s use of the words “bold devaluation” in his Budget speech. The implication of the hon. member for Yeoville’s statement was that we simply devalued at will on a one-sided basis because we were ostensibly in financial difficulties. Sir, I think it is time for the Opposition to see this matter in its correct perspective and realize that devaluation was not a one-sided deed. We were confronted with a situation that developed not as a result of what the Government did; it developed because of actions and events abroad.

But some countries devalued upwards.

The hon. member for Parktown accepted devaluation and the same hon. member for Yeoville recommended before the time that this should happen. Because of actions abroad we had no other choice but to devalue.

We had to devalue because of the mess we had landed up in.

The hon. member may twist and turn at will, but I tell him that he has done a somersault. Devaluation and import control were introduced primarily for two purposes. Firstly to protect and safeguard our balance of payments and, secondly, to align our standard of exchange with that of the rest of the world. Devaluation is a recognized monetary measure used throughout the world in international circles to correct imbalances between countries and to prevent monetary chaos developing. We did not do this one-sidedly. If other countries do it, and if it is a recognized step, why may we consequently not do it? Now that we are doing it, it is suddenly a deed of insolvency. No, Sir, I am amazed; I did not think the hon. member for Yeoville would come along with that argument.

Sir, let us now come back and see this Budget in its correct perspective against the background of existing economic conditions.

May I ask a question?

No, I am sorry. My time is limited I do not want to be discourteous, but there are still other members that have to speak. Sir, I should like to see the Budget in perspective in the light of the economic conditions that prevailed prior to devaluation and before import control had to be applied. Sir, prior to devaluation we were in a position of acute inflationary pressure and the Government then set itself certain priorities. The object of those priorities was to break the inflationary forces. The Government took certain steps to do this. The Opposition then predicted that the Government would not succeed in this. Sir, what happened towards the end of last year? Let us look at the index figures. I do not have the exact figures here, but you will remember that in September/October the cost of living index rate rose at about, 6 per cent per month. This gives us an inflation rate over 12 months of 7,2 per cent. What happened then in November? In November the inflation index rate dropped to ,3 per cent. In December it went up slightly to ,4 per cent, but in January it decreased again to ,2 per cent. Sir, I and every hon. member in the House would, I think, have liked to have it at ,1 per cent or ,0 per cent, but that did not happen. There was, however, a tremendous improvement in the inflation index rate in relation to what it was previously. In those three months there was an average increase of ,3 per cent per month, and this gives us an inflation rate of 3,6 per cent per year. Sir, if we were not compelled to apply import control and devaluation, we could have argued that we had broken the backbone of inflation, that the measures the Government took had been extremely successful and that we could look forward to an inflation rate of about 2 per cent to 3 per cent per annum. Unfortunately those other events took place then which will, of course, again bring about inflationary pressure, which I shall come back to at a later stage. But as far as I am concerned the steps the Government took in implementing its economic policy were a brilliant success. I want to add that although this was a success the Railways suffered. The Railways had to pay the price for the success of the Government’s economic policy. The deficit with which the Railways ended the past financial year was primarily attributable to a decrease in demand, the successful combating of the inflationary forces and the cooling down in the economy, because the Railways is the prisoner of the country’s economic situation. In the light of that I want to say that this Railway deficit is not a disaster at all. It is not a disaster for the Railways and neither is it a disaster for the country, because the Railways has made provision for such an event by creating a Rates Equalization Fund that serves a cushioning effect and is used as a bridging method in times of economic slackness. Sir, if the hon. the Minister had followed the advice of the hon. member for Yeoville and that side of the House last year and had not increased the rates, we would have been in a difficult position. Those rates had to be increased because of the general cost increase in the country. The decision of the hon. the Minister not to increase rates now, but to wait and have confidence in South Africa’s economy, is a very good one and one with a strong foundation. What happened in the past after devaluation. We devalued on two occasions. In 1933 and 1949, and history has taught us that immediately after those devaluations there was an increase in the price of gold; there was a greater interest in gold overseas; gold and minerals were mined on a larger scale and money streamed into the country. This time, notwithstanding devaluation, import control was also instituted. The institution of import control can entail large amounts of foreign exchange being saved. In other words, the country can experience much greater liquidity, and if a country experiences greater liquidity, demand increases, and if demand increases one has greater production. Sir, after every devaluation we have thus far had there was an increase in the gross domestic product of the country, which results in growth. That is the present situation. At this stage I do not believe that devaluation and import control have had a very great effect. Under the present circumstances, in the light of what has happened in the past, we can expect an upsurge in our economy. There is still the Budget that lies ahead. The Government can take further steps to stimulate growth in the country if this appears to be necessary. The Estimates are not available for my scrutiny but I think that anyone may conclude that the Government will, in fact, take steps to stimulate growth. I have very great confidence in the fact that this Government will ensure that there is an upsurge in the country’s economy. And we can be very glad that if there is an upsurge and we again have inflationary pressure, this will begin at the low level at which it now stands, and not at the high level at which it previously stood, and this will be of great benefit to us. I believe and hope that this year’s deficit will be converted into a surplus at the end of the year. Last year’s Budget gave us a message and conveyed a theme of growth and productivity. I believe that this year’s Budget brings us a further message of stability as far as prices are concerned and a message of great confidence in the future, and it brings us the message of additional productivity, because the Railways has gone ahead with its capital spending to lay down the infrastructure for further development in the country. I want to state that the example the Railways has set for increasing productivity is very good for the country. I also just want to mention that in the years since it began the Railways has grown with great difficulty because of South Africa’s geographic circumstances. I want to state that no private undertaking could ever have brought the South African Railways in this country to where it is today. State action was the only way of doing this. If a private undertaking were to have done this, it would have had to work out its rates on a cost principle. This transport system of ours has overcome many great problems. Our coastline has few harbours that one has to develop at great cost. Large dry areas had to be crossed to reach the economic heartland of the country, and we were not blessed, like other countries, with large navigable rivers.

I want to conclude by telling the Minister that we are amazed at the achievements of the Railways under the circumstances.

We are glad he is sticking to the old principle of rating, i.e. a blend of the cost principle and the principle of what the goods can bear. I want to say that we are amazed at the services the Railways has furnished, and this is because of the competent officials we have. I want to say that man for man our Railway officials are as good, if not better, than those of any other Railway organization in the world.

Then I want to thank him very much for the development that has taken place on the Pietersburg Station, the large extensions there that are now creating separate facilities for the large numbers of people of the Lebowa community, the Sepedi and the Ndebele, who travel from Pretoria and Johannesburg to Pietersburg to visit their people. The urban Bantu enjoy visiting their people. I therefore want to conclude by wishing the hon. the Minister every success for the year ahead and I hope that the Rates Equalization Fund will not shrink, but will be much bigger at the end of the year.

A Third Reading debate gives one the opportunity to reflect on what the Second Reading and the Committee Stage have meant in so far as this Appropriation Bill is concerned, and more particularly in this case is it important to reflect on its effect because it plays such a vital part in the life of our nation. So when one listens to the hon. member who has just sat down, dealing with his reflections on what this Railway Budget means, one can well understand that his thoughts are coloured by the gloomy picture which was painted to us when the Budget was unfolded in this House; because there can be no question that this must be one of the few Railway Budgets we have heard in this House, where we have had such a gloomy picture and where we have seen, as he rightly says, an organization which is hide-bound—not place-bound but hidebound—by the general economy of the country as administered by this Government. I can well understand too that all those who have spoken on the Government side, have been completely on the defence, that they are hoping that things will improve in the future, as we all do. We certainly agree with the hon. member in his expressions of hope that we will have a very much brighter picture next year than has been disclosed to us, because I do not think that we can minimize in any way the seriousness of the position. Despite all the protestations about the Rates Equalization Fund that have been made in the past, when leading spokesmen on the other side have always taunted this side of the House by saying that we can look to this nest-egg in order to alleviate any of the difficulties with regard to tariffs and other problems, the Minister with one fell swoop has virtually the entire nest-egg, the enormous sum of nearly R80 million, not only to meet the losses of the past year, but also to balance up the projected loss for the coming year. And he made it very clear in his Budget speech that he does not contemplate much improvement in the financial position of the Railways in the months that lie ahead.

What is your alternative?

He hopes things will improve, but he does not see very much likelihood of any improvement at all. The hon. member who has just sat down talked about the slight improvement in the cost-of-living index in November and December.

A big improvement, fifty per cent.

First of all he must realize that there were just two particular months following on each other, but in rather extraordinary circumstances. There was the imposition of import control, followed shortly by devaluation, and there are also seasonal factors which enter into the picture. One swallow does not make a summer, to use a well-worn cliché. I hope that it may foretell some improvement for the future, but the Lord knows whether it will. One cannot really contemplate it in view of the Government’s policy hitherto. The hon. member seems not to regard the Railway losses as a disaster, but I should like to tell him that for years it has been said on the Government side that the Rates Equalization Fund represents the insurance to the Railway worker of his stability and his future. If that means anything at all, God knows what his future can be, if that is the basis on which his future has to rest. But I am not being critical of the Administration, which is working under very difficult conditions. I rather look upon this as a big business undertaking, and the address of the Minister in the Railway Budget was to give us almost the accountant’s point of view of what is taking place in the administration of this great business. All of us realize, even the Government supporters realize—I have said this before, but I think it bears repetition—that the Railways unfortunately is the victim of Government policy. It is the victim of Government mismanagement over a number of years. It is the victim of all the ills that their policy has brought to South Africa, retarding progress and preventing us from maintaining a growth rate which is so important in administering the affairs of this country. We differ from other countries in that our growth rate has to be a little faster and bigger than that of other well-established countries, like Britain, and even parts of the Continent, because we have the difficulty that we have to build an enormous infrastructure for a non-White population of some 16 million, most of whom are completely unproductive. We do not blame the Railways for that; we blame the Government for having brought about this gloomy picture which the Minister painted. Do you think, Sir, that the hon. the Minister was happy at having to tell us that he has taken R39 million and a further R39 million from the Fund? One could almost see the agonized expression on his face as he virtually sounded the death-knell of one of the most important reserves of the Railways. He went even further and did something else about which I feel very perturbed with regard to the future infrastructure of the country, and that was the diminution of the Renewals Fund and the other funds which constitute the main reserves towards replacing the present infrastructure and assisting towards the future infrastructure. I should like to quote to him, as an example, a scheme which the Johannesburg Municipality embarked upon many years ago, when it built up in its Renewals Fund and all the other reserve funds that provide for replacement of goods etc., such large funds that they were actually able to finance internal undertakings of the local authority. This is what we really would have liked to have seen, that a great institution like the Railways can build up sufficient funds in reserve for the various purposes, so that the stage eventually arrives where it internally funds itself. There are undertakings that can do it. It is a policy which should be very carefully considered. [Interjections.] It is no good just being critical. I do not have the details but I am convinced that this is a good policy because it is nothing new in world finance that through these reserve funds that are provided from year to year, you build up a nest-egg from which you can actually fund yourself internally for your capital requirements.

How many types of reserve funds will there be?

I cannot argue with people who … [Interjection.]

I want to deal with another aspect which is very vital. The income of the Railways largely consists of the carriage of goods. You will find that the earnings of the Railways from 1964 to 1971—according to the figures given in the Annual Report—show that an average of 67 per cent was earned by the conveyance of goods. We find ourselves in an extraordinary situation. Devaluation has taken place, something which we hope will help the country. We know for instance that in the field of gold the benefit to South Africa already amounts to over R100 million without giving the general advantages any thought. That is one product which is continuously being exported and which has been brought to a very high standard of efficiency as far as its export is concerned because of its importance to us as a revenue-earning product. Right away devaluation has made all that difference. But what other differences will it make to us as a country when the Government has done almost nothing to satisfactorily encourage exports from South Africa? What steps have they taken over the last ten or 15 years to initiate some encouragement for business and commerce in this country to ensure that there is competitive exporting of goods from South Africa? What steps have they taken to develop our consumer market internally to a standard where we can compete with world markets in the field of export? The Railways would have had something thrown into their lap with devaluation if Exports would have risen considerably. Earnings from goods traffic would have risen considerably and would have off-set this drop in revenue because of import control. It would have given a fresh lease of life to Railway undertakings. I feel sorry for the hon. the Minister because he himself very proudly said during the course of his reply: “I do not want to be subsidized by the Consolidated Revenue Fund. I want to run a proper business.” That is why he tries to run it in accordance with proper business principles. That is why he has dealt with labour in the way he did. That is why nobody else in Government wants to assist him because nobody else in Government is running a business. He is trying to run a business. It is very difficult; I feel very sorry for him. I think to run a business with the type of Government colleagues that he has, who are trying to bend South Africa to a peculiar form of sectional ideology which does not allow the country to develop or to improve this great undertaking, must be very difficult. It is rather sad to have to sit back and listen to the defensive attitude and statements on the part of members on the other side of the House.

We are not glorying in this unfortunate situation; we are saddened because it is a tragedy. Our difficulty is that we see 112 000 Whites and 113 000 Blacks all suffering because of this. The hon. the Minister cannot deal with any increase in salaries. In fact, let me give you another point of view, Sir. I hope that the same thing does not take place when the principal Budget is announced, because if anything at all, you can call this Budget we have listened to, a panic Budget. It is doing everything in its power to avoid any rise in the cost of living. I do not blame them. Of course the hon. the Minister wants to avoid a rise in the cost of living. Any effort that is now made on the part of the Government in regard to any of its undertakings is primarily to keep the cost of living down. The public is out of touch with the Government on that. The public are the sufferers, whether they work on the Railways, in the civil service, in industry, or wherever they may be. They are suffering because the rise in the cost of living brings down the value of their money and destroys the value of their rands. If Government policy is such that this inflation continues as it has been, in this galloping manner, one can understand that panic budgets will be introduced by a Government which does not know how to control it and which does not know what satisfactory and sound steps to take, steps not only to hold it back, but to inject something which will enliven the economy in order to give encouragement to those who are helping to build the economy so that they can rationalize re-investment and generate fresh capital. In this manner you will eventually be able completely to overtake and bring down to a normal level this galloping inflation to which we have become accustomed. Therefore I say in conclusion that I have the highest regard for the work of the Railways. It is a business undertaking. It can only be run as such if it is to be a success, particularly if the hon. the Minister wants to remain financially independent of the Consolidated Revenue Fund. But it is going to be very difficult for him to do so unless his colleagues in the Cabinet who sit round the table with him decide to run South Africa in the interest of the people of South Africa as a whole and certainly in the interests of good economy.

The hon. member for Jeppes is very worried and he objected strongly to the use of funds from the Rates Equalization Fund to cover the deficit. It is strange for the Opposition to be furnishing this criticism without suggesting a solution. There is no alternative proposal. There was, of course, quite a bit of destructive criticism. I find it very strange that last year, in the hon. member for Yeoville’s amendment, the Opposition stated very clearly that they did not want rate increases, but that the money should be taken out of the Rates Equalization Fund.

Exactly.

That was their proposal last year. The hon. member for Jeppes, who is now so worried, voted for it. Now that their proposal is being carried out they are tremendously indignant and the world is going to come to an end. That United Party, sitting there now, had only criticism to offer, but now they must state their alternative. They must now propose that the rates be increased. Is that what they are saying? No, there is only criticism.

We have now virtually come to the end of the debate. It strikes me that all the criticism we have had was not aimed against the organization of this tremendous transport undertaking. This undertaking virtually employs ¼ million people. That is indeed an achievement. The criticism we heard concerned financial matters. It was so feeble that even the Opposition Press could not get enough information out of the speeches of the Opposition speakers to write a proper report about it. I regard it as a special feather in the cap of this Government and the entire Railway organization as such that their operations were launched so successfully. This powerful transport organization is administered so efficiently that the entire United Party, which tries like a bee to suck the poison from the tree, could only trade in trivial gossip, on which they depend so heavily. They had no substantial criticism. The productivity is so high that any criticism against the Railways would be unjust. This efficiency, this productivity, the co-operation and the loyalty, the generosity and the diligence of the railwaymen constitute the key to the success. That is the secret of the Railways being able to make that achievement a reality. I think this deserves the high praise of every citizen of our country. I include the Opposition in this.

More than one of the United Party speakers expressed his disappointment here because no salary increases were announced. I think it is extremely irresponsible of members of the Opposition to make such a suggestion under these circumstances. It is extremely irresponsible to come along with even a suggestion of that nature. I regard that as extremely irresponsible and I say this because if they were in power they would not have been able to offer anything better at all. If they were in power and matters stood as they do at present, they would not have been able to give the railwayman an increase either, but now they indulge in this cheap politicizing. Let us look at what their proposals are. We accept that they were sincere when they proposed last year—and voted in favour of the proposal—that we should not increase the rates. That would have meant our having R58,5 million less. The next proposal that came from the hon. member for Yeoville and other hon. members, was that we should divorce the oil pipeline from the Railways. Had we done so—and I accept that if they were in power they would have done so—this would have entailed, in the past year alone, a loss of R50 million for the Railways. Adding the pipeline profits over the past five years together and subtracting them, together with the R39 million deficit, from the Railway Estimates, we would have had a deficit of R250 million. That would have happened if we had carried out the proposals of those hon. members. That would have happened if we carried out only the one proposal of theirs. Notwithstanding all that they come along here and advocate salary increases for the railwaymen. The railwaymen trust the National Government because they know that the Railways … [Interjections.] Yes, ours is a good record, it is not as poor a record as those hon. members’ record. The railwaymen do not trust them and I, as a representative of one of the biggest Railway constituencies in the country, can tell the hon. member that the United Party has never been able to draw more than 1 200 votes in that constituency. Neither will they ever manage to do so. That was the case as far back as 13 to 15 years ago, in my predecessor’s time, and today they would still not obtain any more votes. [Interjections.]

We must remember that in recent years the Railways had to furnish services under exceptional circumstances. Many additional burdens were placed on the Railways, burdens the Railways was not established to carry. Under those drought conditions, for example, they were compelled to transport thousands of head of cattle. We think of the thousands of loads of fodder that had to be transported; we think of the water that had to be transported. All these matters placed a very heavy burden on the Railways, but they carried out their duties in such a way that we cannot but express our sincere thanks and appreciation to them. We thank them for the exceptional way in which they carried out the services. They also handled the coal crisis and subsequently the maize surplus. It is asking a lot of a transport organization to transport such products that simply arrive in millions upon millions of tons. It is asking a lot of the Railways to expect it to handle the 35 million bags of maize that is exported in one year. The Railways did this without one of the ships ever having to lie and wait in our harbours to load up the cargo. It is indeed an achievement that everyone ought to be proud of. The hon. members of the Opposition speak so very much about the dissatisfaction of the railwaymen. They are speaking, of course, of those in their constituencies, those whom they prompt. I now want to ask why so many railwaymen, who left the service of the Railways, are trying to return. According to statistics it is clear that there are even more railway workers coming back daily than there are members who are leaving the service. The Railways cannot employ all of them.

Nonsense. You do not know what you are talking about.

I told the hon. member the other day that he is a very young member of this House and that he will still learn a great deal. He does not believe what he sees and neither does he believe what he hears. He thinks for himself, but he is usually wrong. Many of these people who left the service of the Railways went to the private sector. They obtained higher salaries, but they very soon realized that they did not have that stability and the fringe benefits. For that reason they come back to a good and just employer who does everything for the benefit of the worker.

In thinking of the additional services they get, I particularly want to refer to the four extant housing schemes. These schemes make provision for the railwaymen’s housing. More than 45 000 dwelling units are being supplied. It is our endeavour that every family should have its own house. I do not believe there is any other industry in which the employee can obtain accommodation and various facilities as easily as he specifically can in the Railways. We also realize that housing is very important, because if your people are happy when they reach home and there are no problems causing tension, they are truly happy. This is one of the factors that has contributed to the labour potential of the Railways being increased to such an extent.

I want to continue and say that this is only one of the fringe benefits. We can think of the many hostels erected for the accommodation of youths receiving training. More than 6 000 youths live in these hostels. By the way, I want to say thank you very much to the hon. the Minister for the large amount of money made available for supplementary facilities at Bloemfontein. The parents of those young men are grateful that their boys have safe accommodation, that it is a place where they are taken care of and that they are very happy with the conditions. It is a particularly outstanding achievement that we can bring happiness to these young men who are receiving their training. We are glad those young men are not left to the wolves when they leave their parents’ home. We are giad to know that they have very good accommodation and receive very good care. This is one of the fringe benefits one can mention. There is, of course, a further long list of fringe benefits, a few of which I shall mention.

I refer to training facilities, university bursaries for persons who want to enter the service, and opportunities for persons in the service to take extra-mural and correspondence courses. By making use of these training opportunities the railway employees can improve their salaries. This is one of the most important tasks. We must properly qualify our people for the labour we want to use them for.

Business interrupted in accordance with Standing Order No. 30 (2) and debate adjourned.

The House proceeded to the consideration of private members’ business.

Mr. Speaker, I move the motion standing in my name, as follows—

I feel that at this stage it is possibly fitting that the House expresses its sympathy to those people in South-West Africa in the Hardap and Mariental area who have suffered any material loss. We express our gratification that the flood waters there are subsiding.

I have given the matter of flood control and this particular motion considerable thought. I must express my regret to the House, and in fact to the nation, that I did not include in the motion such other national disasters as earthquakes, cyclones and severe droughts, for any planning on a national scale will have to make provision for such disasters as well, because many of them are inter-related. Very often droughts are broken by floods and equally often cyclones are accompanied or followed by torrential rain. Even earthquakes are frequently accompanied by rain and hail, as was the position at Tulbagh and Ceres.

With regard to flood control I believe we are on the brink of two significant developments in the history of South Africa. Firstly we have the completion of the giant Hendrik Verwoerd Dam as the first phase in the vast Orange River project. This dam has already had a marked effect in flood control. Had it not been there, serious damage would have occurred in the lower reaches of the Orange River after the recent heavy rains in the catchment area. How much more effective will this control be when the whole scheme is completed? I can foresee that the minimum flow of that river will be substantially increased, while peak floods will be substantially reduced and perhaps almost eliminated. To substantiate this forecast, permit me to quote from the Annual Report of 1944 of the Tennessee Valley Authority under the heading “Water Control Operation”—

In this instance they reduced the flood crests by more than six feet at this particular point. The year 1944 is a long time ago. While we do not expect to have navigation on the Orange River, the increase in minimum flow will produce more power so that, by controlling our peak floods, we have much more water to put to productive use, not only for rural and urban use, but as a general generator of power, which is the life blood of any nation.

The second significant development is the advent of weather modification or weather control, which, until recently, was the dream of cranks and a profitable field of operation for charlatans. Such great advances have been made in the United States of America, Soviet Russia and Australia in recent years, especially with the advent of the computer and the mathematical models which are fed into them, that this has now become a science and a reality; so much so that the Water Amendment Bill, which was referred to a Select Committee before its Second Reading, has a whole chapter dealing with the control and usage of this particular scientific practice. Well-controlled experimental research is already being successfully conducted within the borders of the Republic. Because the advances in this field have been so rapid and scientifically so recent, the layman is apt to think of weather modification only in terms of rain-making. This of course is not the case. There are methods of cloud seeding which, under certain conditions, can reduce hail and rain and can disperse clouds and, in this manner, control floods. In the U.S.A., project “Storm Fury” is a weather modification project specifically aimed at reducing the force of cyclones and controlling them. This project has produced a great deal of useful scientific data, but so far has met with limited success. I believe that they have managed to reduce the wind speeds in these cyclones by 50 per cent. This sounds a lot, but when one is reducing a wind speed of 200 miles per hour to 100 miles per hour, the damage it does is not much less. This method of control depends on the regular and continuous gathering of accurate meteorological data so that the weather and cloud patterns can be fully understood and predicted. The importance of the Weather Bureau in this field cannot be overstressed. The success or failure of weather modification in the Republic in fact rests squarely on their shoulders, and it is important to us both in the cities and on the land that it is a success from the flood and hail control point of view as well as from the rain-making point of view. These are two significant milestones in the history of South Africa because they will both contribute vastly to the controlling of the more violent forces of nature and enable man to plan with greater accuracy and certainty for the future. I mention them because they are both pertinent to the principle of the motion before the House. They both form part of the planning I envisage for the immediate future, that period in which we advance from the twentieth to the twenty-first century.

I must now sound a warning to the Republic of South Africa and to officialdom in particular. The tendency in the 18th century was one of Empire-building in the territorial sense of the word. This was carried over to a small extent into the 20th century. It was ultimately destroyed by two crippling world wars. As this type of Empire-building faded out, we found another type of empire being built up throughout the world. The empires I refer to here are departmental empires that jealously guard their rights and privileges and are continuously seeking new fields to conquer. If we are to plan meaningfully for the future generations of this country as is envisaged, the boundaries and barriers that have been built up in these empires must be broken down and meaningful working relations established. So many departments are involved in national planning of this nature that a co-ordinating factor must be found, whether it be through an advanced and statutory form of the Prime Minister’s Advisory Council, or through a National Conservation Council as suggested by the hon. member for Kensington in his maiden speech, or by a Ministry of Environment, as suggested by the hon. member for South Coast in his private member’s motion of a few weeks ago. That co-ordinating factor must be found.

*Mr. Speaker, I mention these matters of departmental co-operation deliberately and purposely because, as I have said, so many departments are involved in any planning of the nature under discussion. We want to plan in order to save lives and to prevent damage to property whenever a section of the population is hit by flood disasters. Let us start at the local government levels and then proceed to the provincial levels and the State departments. As far as the local level is concerned, Sir, our cities and towns are becoming larger by the day. The use of concrete and tar surfaces on our streets and roads is continually increasing, and because of the shortage of suitable land for development close by, and our industrial and business centres, gardens and parks are becoming smaller and smaller in comparison with the area of the townships. Despite laws and active steps which have been taken, the pollution of our atmosphere is increasing daily. Much of the storm-water drainage in our central urban areas was planned 50 to 100 years ago for conditions which were quite different from those of today. What is the result, Sir? I can speculate with a large measure of certainty on how a storm cloud that would normally precipitate over a wide area, would build up and, driven on its course by the wind, settle over an urban area, to be polluted and strewn there with particles of polluted matter which thousands of inhabitants, innocently and unintentionally send up into the air daily in various ways. As a result of this pollution, the cloud bursts upon the city with unparalleled violence, on a surface of tar and concrete where there is no sponge area; the water cannot drain away anywhere, the storm drainage cannot cope with it and the streets become rivers. There is loss of life and enormous damage. Here is a task for our town planners, local and provincial, to make effective provision for such conditions in their future planning. Sir, in passing I may just add here that I am not making this statement on this kind of disaster frivolously. I cannot speak with any certainty on the Johannesburg floods, but in the case of Port Elizabeth and East London the highest rainfall over the flood period was registered in the urban areas. In the Gamtoos, too, this may well be classified under the definition “Extended Area Effect”. I have not yet come across an apt Afrikaans translation for this definition. In America it has been found that the seeding of clouds over a specified area can have an effect on the rainfall in areas up to 150 miles from that area. In other words, if air pollution over Port Elizabeth was in fact the cause of the cloudburst, it may well have caused the rains in the Gamtoos catchment area.

Sir, let us now move to another level and to other departments. The Department of Transport, with its weather bureau, can give warnings to areas and towns long before the real danger strikes them. Storm and flood warnings will have to become an essential part of their services. There were no warnings in the cases specifically mentioned in my motion, and there must have been someone who knew the facts. I may tell hon. members that I flew from Durban to Cape Town the day before the East London flood and that I, as a layman, could clearly see that a terrible disaster would strike the East Coast within the next 24 hours. But no warnings were given. The signs were very clear; the clouds were terrible; I had never before seen such clouds in my life, and the sea beneath us was terrible. The clouds one saw from the aircraft were very far from the sea at the time, but one could see that they were moving inland. The Department of Transport and the Department of Water Affairs will probably be able to act and to plan in co-operation with Weather Modification in future in order to disperse or to reduce the extent of similar storms in the case of the coastal regions, to cause them to spend themselves over the sea to some extent.

Then, Sir, we come to the departments which become involved in the case of storms which are uncontrollable and which break over certain areas, the rescue work which has to be done, the provision of food and warm clothing and subsequent repair work. In the first place, the Army plays an important part, and one can only speak with the greatest praise of what they did in the cases mentioned, and in the Gamtoos Valley as well. Then there is the Department of Social Welfare, under which the voluntary organizations such as the Red Cross, the Noodhulpliga and St. John’s Ambulance fall. These organizations, the first-mentioned in particular, rendered excellent services in the case of the disaster which struck the Gamtoos Valley.

Then we come to the repair work, which involves Community Development in the urban areas and the Department of Agriculture in the rural areas.

†Then, Sir, there should be some kind of national disaster fund which could be controlled by the Department of Social Welfare and which could be called upon for the more immediate relief that is so necessary to a community struck by a flood disaster. We realize that relief does eventually come to most people struck in this way, but the purpose of the fund, I suggest—and this will be dealt with by other hon. members on this side of the House—is to provide that essential relief which is necessary immediately, particularly when there is no housing for a person and, in the case of the smaller farmers on the irrigation schemes, when their farms are totally washed away; we believe that this is essential in the case of any long-term plan to be able effectively to reduce human loss and suffering caused by these phenomena.

I have explained the need for effective forward steps in our future town planning and the role which weather modification and the Orange River project can play in controlling the forces of nature. There are three other factors which can play a most significant part in controlling floodwaters. First of all, there is the protection of our catchment areas under the Mountain Catchment Areas Act. I believe that a great deal can be done here, and is already getting under way, in increasing the water absorption in our catchment areas so that the run-off is not so violent. Secondly, another method of reduction of the runoff is by the wider application of the Soil Conservation Act and by better town planning. I believe that we should apply the Soil Conservation Act more widely in the farming community and, with the assistance of the Department of Bantu Administration, more widely in the Bantu territories so that the water will not run off violently but will stay and soak into the land and gradually filter out to our water reservoirs. Thirdly—and I believe this is most important to avert disaster—there is the cleansing of our atmosphere by a strict application of the Anti-pollution Act. I believe that this is very, very important, because, as I said earlier in my speech, the pollution of the atmosphere can accidentally seed a cloud and cause a disastrous storm to fall over the city where there is very little or not absorption of the water. Sir, I have spoken of the role that the various departments can play in alleviating suffering and preventing loss of life and property in the case of flood disaster. Each of these departments has its own particular function during normal times. Each would have its own particular function in the prevention of flood damage; each would have its own particular function in the event of a disaster striking a specific area, but, Sir, in order that these functions should dovetail smoothly at all times, it is essential that a co-ordinating factor be found—a central organizing authority which can look at the whole picture, study the various needs and requirements and issue the necessary orders. That is why I suggested earlier either an extension of the Prime Minister’s Advisory Council or a Co-ordinating Ministry such as suggested by the hon. member for South Coast, perhaps we should take a careful look at the Tennessee Valley Authority, which I quoted earlier on, and find out to what extent we can apply a similar scheme or control bodies in the various regions of the Republic. Such a scheme may require agreements with neighbouring states but if mutual advantage is to be gained, particularly in the case of flood control, then I see no difficulties arising. I can foresee the whole Orange/Vaal/ Fish/Sundays complex fitting easily into a scheme such as this. I believe that we stand on the threshold of great scientific achievement. Let us plan now in order to harness all these achievements for the benefit and well-being of all future South Africans.

I want to congratulate the hon. member by whom this motion was introduced. To my mind, this is a difficult subject to discuss, but I can say that, in general, he acquitted himself of his task quite well and succeeded in maintaining the discussion at a high level.

Sir, politics is quite an interesting occupation for various reasons. To my mind the first reason is that it gives one an opportunity to state and carry into effect one’s convictions. The second facet I should like to mention as to why it is interesting is the possibility which exists of persuading with facts and the force of persuasion, an Opposition which yesterday and the day before was of a different opinion in regard to certain matters, to think the same way as you do, and to get them to go along with you and to agree on certain matters. If a person admits and no longer thinks as he did yesterday or the day before, he is simply magnanimous, and when an Opposition does that, it is magnanimous and when a leader of the Opposition agrees to do that, he is all the more magnanimous. I mention this matter because I made a similar plea in regard to disasters in South Africa from my back bench here two years ago during the Budget debate. Unfortunately I found at that time that the hon. the Leader of the Opposition, for whom I have a great respect, spoke immediately after me and, as far as this matter was concerned, was strongly opposed to what I had to say. I say I respect the hon. the Leader of the Opposition, and the fact that, although they adopted that point of view at that time, they feel today as we felt at that time, increases my respect for him, because it is only a great man who is now able to agree. [Interjections.]

Order!

I want to congratulate the hon. member for Albany once again for introducing this motion, because he proved to me that he not only has the interests of his voters at heart, but also the interests of the country as far as this matter is concerned, and that he looks after the interests of his voters as well as an United Party M.P. could.

In dealing briefly with this motion, I want to place this motion on two legs for the purposes of discussing it. There is an old saying that prevention is better and easier than cure, and I want to call one of the legs of this motion “prevention”. I want to say straight away that as far as this well-known saying is concerned, viz. that prevention is easier than cure, this is not true in this case, because we are dealing here with nature. I want to mention this for argument’s sake. We are sitting in Cape Town today, and how do we know that tomorrow or the day after tomorrow or next week, Cape Town will not be subjected to a cloudburst or a terrific hailstorm or a tornado? This is something over which we do not yet have any control. It is therefore difficult to do something to prevent this as far as these matters are concerned. Nevertheless, something can be done to prevent this to a certain extent. I have in mind here some of the measures which may be taken by town planners, municipalities and local authorities as far as stormwater drainage and so forth is concerned. Precautions should also be taken as far as possible to prevent houses from being built in low-lying areas. If floods should occur these houses and people would not be subjected to such great danger.

There are also indirect measures which are being taken. We are thinking here of the dams we build. We are thinking of the rain which caused the Hendrik Verwoerd Dam to overflow two weeks ago. If that dam had not been there, we know that damage running into millions of rands would have been caused to the lower reaches. We heard this morning over the news broadcast about the floods at Mariental in South-West Africa. My colleague from Mariental told me this morning that if it had not been for the Hardap Dam, Mariental would have suffered enormous damage and possibly loss of human life. By rendering a service, and by building dams for irrigation purposes and so forth, it serves as a precautionary measure in this regard.

I call the second leg of the motion cure. It is easier to effect cure because it is quite discernible after a disaster has occurred. I am thinking for example of the Boland earth tremor of a while ago. In this connection the Government rendered assistance amounting all in all to approximately R13 million. When all the work has ultimately been completed, the cure that was effected in this respect will amount to approximately R13 million. I am thinking of the floods we had in Port Elizabeth, on the Witwatersrand and at other places. Some of my colleagues will deal with them in greater detail.

The motion also mentions loss of human life. To me this is a most important aspect. Material losses are much easier to recoup than the loss of human life. For that reason I want to give my hon. friend from Albany some solace. I have gone to some trouble and tried to do some research work as to how many people have lost their lives as a result of floods compared with other disasters which occurred in South Africa during the past 13 years. I found that since 1956, 607 people lost their lives in South Africa as the result of mine accidents. Since 1956, 135 people lost their lives in South Africa as a result of train accidents. 13 people lost their lives as a result of bus accidents. 158 people died as a result of air disasters. In 1962 a three-storey mine-building collapsed on the Witwatersrand, as a result of which 34 people lost their lives. In 1963 we had a dynamite explosion in which 35 people died. In 1966 —something quite peculiar and interesting —10 people were trampled to death in a narrow passage in Johannesburg during a rush in which thousands of people were involved. 33 people died in South Africa as a result of fires and bush-fires during the past 13 years. This gives a total of 1 142 people who lost their lives in disasters which I describe as disasters caused by the human factor.

What I want to say now is interesting for the purposes of this motion. Since 1959 only 60 people lost their lives as a result of floods. Only 60 people lost their lives compared with 1 142 as a result of disasters caused by the human factor. I therefore want to mention this to my hon. friend as some solace. I want to tell him that under the circumstances the picture here in South Africa is after all not so gloomy.

I think it is quite appropriate on this occasion for me to raise another minor matter which has been causing me concern for quite some time and in which I am particularly interested. We see from time to time people who go out on rivers and dams in boats and small boats. It sometimes happens that these small boats sink and that some of the occupants drown. I think it is time that we laid down by means of legislation in South Africa that every boat, small or large, should be licensed. The most important requirement for obtaining a licence should be that every small boat should be fitted out with the necessary lifebelts. During the last few years—these are only cases that I know of—I lost three people by drowning in my constituency as a result of their using small boats, which were not seaworthy or waterworthy. It sounds unbelievable, but do you know, Sir, that experts maintain—I tried several times to ascertain the validity of this statement and I do not doubt the figures—that it cost South Africa between R10 000 and R20 000 to bring a White person to maturity. I now want to ask : Can we afford it any longer that our people should lose their lives in such a foolhardy manner? After all, it is a fact that every vehicle must be roadworthy and must comply to certain safety requirements. I think it is time that we considered this matter in this light. I made some further calculations and found that if three people lost their lives in my constituency during the past year, it meant a loss to the State of between R30 000 and R60 000. Furthermore, I found that if we were to lose three persons per year in each of the 140 constituencies in South Africa as a result of their drowning in a foolhardy manner in small boats which were not waterworthy it would cost South Africa the enormous amount of between plus minus R4 million and R8 million a year. I would therefore like to suggest that consideration be given in future to the licensing of such boats. If a person who ventures out on boats like these does not have the necessary licence and lifebelts, he should be punishable in terms of the law and punitive measures should be applied to him. I think I am allowed to say this, because we are in the position in South Africa where we do not have a large number of White people and that we should attach great value to the life of every man, woman and child in South Africa. For that reason we can no longer, as a result of foolhardiness of this nature, run the risk of constantly losing some of our people in this reckless way.

I want to conclude by telling the hon. member for Albany and the Opposition that it is pleasant and encouraging that we, as two opposing political parties, are able to discuss a matter of such national importance with such a large measure of agreement.

Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased indeed that I have the opportunity to support my hon. colleague from Albany in moving what I consider to be an important and constructive motion before this House today. I wish to congratulate the hon. member for Heidelberg on his contribution. Obviously, he gave considerable thought and devoted considerable time to preparing his speech, and I think he has made a valuable contribution. I think that we must accept that he is in favour of greater control by the central Government, provincial authorities and local authorities to avoid the unnecessary loss of life in South Africa. I believe that what the hon. member said and the statistics he quoted strengthened the argument of this side of the House that steps ought to be taken on a national level to prevent this kind of occurrence.

He mentioned that man-made disasters contributed to far greater loss of life than perhaps disasters of a natural kind, like floods etc. I would like to point out to the hon. member that, although floods have not been so severe in respect of the loss of life, they have certainly been very severe as regards damage to property. It has cost the State and individuals many millions of rand to restore the damage after the floods. Therefore I think the hon. member for Albany is justified in mentioning specifically the damage that floods do create in this country from time to time.

The motion before the House calls for an investigation to be undertaken into possible effective steps which can be taken, firstly by planning on a national basis to prevent—and this I emphasize—loss of life and, secondly, damage to property by floods, such as has occurred at East London, Port Elizabeth and the Witwatersrand in recent years. I regret that the motion was not set a little wider, because in a country like ours, damage to property and loss of life can well be cause by disasters brought about by other than climatic phenomena, as the hon. member said, by man-made disasters. I believe that in discussing this subject we should take into account other kinds of disasters that affect our country.

In recent years the country has been subjected to several different types of disasters. One thinks back two years ago to the very serious earthquake in the Ceres area. We think of the Wafra incident and, recently, the grounding of the oil ship Tigris in the Durban harbour. Thinking about the recent incident of the Tigris one wonders whether, judging from the Press reports—one does not know whether they are all accurate, but one must accept them as being based on facts—in that particular case the kind of immediate action that was taken was adequate to deal with the consequences of that ship perhaps having broken up in the Durban harbour.

There are other kinds of problems we face. We think of the great fire in the last century that raged from Swellendam almost to the borders of the Port Elizabeth district and the damage that that fire caused. One can still see scars of if along that countryside. One may well find that with the implementation of our stock-reduction scheme and better cover on our veld and natural pastures, fires can again become a hazard.

We think of disasters caused by droughts and unprecedented locust invasion. Just recently I was at the receiving end of a locust invasion. Many people do not realize what damage a locust invasion can cause. My farm was virtually denuded. Not only was the vegetation denuded but in combating the locusts tons of DDT or PHC was distributed on my farm. We think of Newcastle disease which could become a national disaster. I think of a Railway smash in a heavily built-up area. There are many kinds of disasters about which we have to think when we are planning our future strategy. No doubt floods occur most often. They are the most spectacular and no doubt they make the biggest impact on the mind of the public. That may be what motivated the hon. member who moved the motion, but I believe that if we have to find a modus operandi to effectively control flood disasters and the consequences thereof, the same organization could well be responsible for dealing with disasters of another kind. Similar remedial action could well have to be taken.

Those of us who have had experience of the army, will well know that after every training exercise the leaders get together and have a lessons-learnt study group. They do this to get the benefit of all they can learn from the action or exercise which has taken place in order to be able to conduct better planning for future action which may be necessary. For that reason the motion which is before this House serves a very valuable purpose. During recent years we have had several disasters. The hon. member for Heidelberg has mentioned some that he has knowledge of. We had several disasters, we had the exercise and this motion serves the useful purpose that we have a debate in this honourable House to decide what will be the best action to take in order to minimize the loss of life and the loss of property in future. In support of the hon. member for Albany I suggest that steps ought to be taken to appoint a directorate that will be responsible for initiating appropriate action immediately when any disaster strikes any particular area. In the case of a disaster an essential thing is speed. I believe that unless there is an organization, a permanent standing committee and a director in charge of the organization who can immediately bring the correct action into play, valuable time will be lost, valuable property lost and valuable lives lost. I believe that such a directorate or permanent standing committee could well operate within the framework of the Department of Planning. I am not calling for any new department of State but my emphasis is mainly placed on efficient planning and co-ordination. I believe that such directorate could well operate within the framework of the Department of Planning. This department must evolve the blueprint for the speedy action that must be taken. I have only 20 minutes at my disposal and therefore time does not allow me to go into detail. However, one visualizes at the head of this directorate a director who has special knowledge in the field of handling disasters. One name readily comes to mind. I think that all who were involved in the recent floods at Port Elizabeth, Durban, the Gamtoos Valley and East London are aware of the wonderful work that Brig. Dutton did. He is the officer commanding the Eastern Province Command. He played a leading role in bringing assistance and relief in those particular places. Such a directorate would coordinate all necessary action through the various departments concerned, through the departments most intimately connected with that particular type of disaster. We think of the Department of Defence which has a part to play and the Department of Community Development. Then in respect of floods the department of the Minister of Water Affairs has a leading role to play. Naturally the Police will have a part to play and also the Department of Agriculture. The director of this directorate would be the man responsible for taking immediate action and for co-ordinating the efforts that each department is called upon to make. What we must avoid above everything else in this matter is complacency. So often when things are going well people forget about the bad days. We forget that we can be subjected to a disaster and we are inclined to let things slide. I want to refer to a debate which was held in this Parliament …

Mr. Speaker, when the debate was adjourned just before lunch I was developing the theme that it is important that the Government give consideration to establishing a directorate that can take immediate and appropriate action when any particular area may be confronted with a serious disaster. I made the point that the time to plan such a directorate is now while there is no emergency, because we all know these emergencies come upon us without any warning.

I wish to refer the hon. House to a debate which took place in 1966 on the proposed Emergency Planning Bill. At this stage I also want to query what the hon. member for Heidelberg said in his speech earlier in the debate when he referred to the fact that, when a motion similar to the one we are debating this afternoon was before the House and the mover of that motion was expressing views similar to those expressed by the hon. member for Albany, the hon. Leader of the Opposition saw fit to oppose the point of view which he had made. I cannot find the relevant debate, but I cannot accept that …

You will just have to accept his word for it.

… my hon. leader, knowing him as I do, would oppose such a motion which was in the national interest. This is borne out by the fact that when this debate on the Emergency Planning Bill took place, which dealt with something similar to what we are debating this afternoon, no less than five members on this side of the House, including the hon. Leader of the Opposition, took part in that debate supporting the Bill and saying that it was necessary that co-ordinated planning be instituted. The problem there was concerned with an act of war, but a similar situation could arise in such a case, namely loss of property and loss of life. As I have said, no less than five of my hon. colleagues took part in that debate. The hon. members for Pietermaritzburg District, Pietermaritzburg City, East London North and Mooi River all took part in that debate. What intrigued me, or tickled my fancy, if I may use that word, was the response of the hon. member for Geduld, Dr. J. C. Jurgens, to the speech of the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg District, who preceded him. Just for the record, I wish to read what the hon. member for Geduld said:

Just in passing, I want to say that the hon. member for Geduld, in saying that, did not realize what he was letting himself in for.

He did not say he must keep us busy over-time!

In dealing with this particular debate, I think it is interesting to recall what the hon. Minister had to say at the time. The hon. Minister of Justice, who was dealing with the Bill, said:

In dealing with nature, one can never anticipate what may happen. The hon. Minister mentioned that we have never been confronted with earthquakes but it was not many years after that the very serious earthquake took place which struck the eres district. So I say there is no room for complacency; the time to act is now, when things are going well, to plan for the kind of emergency that may arise at any time. In saying that, I in no way wish to detract from the wonderful work that was done by charitable organizations and departments of the Government in dealing with the recent floods we had in East London, Port Elizabeth and in the Gamtoos River Valley. One thinks of the work that was done by the Red Cross, the Noodhulpliga, the Police and the Army and many others. I think it fitting that I should mention the wonderful work that was done by the magistrate at Hankey during the floods in the Gamtoos River Valley. Here was a man who, at short notice and with no training in this regard, took his own life into his hands to try to minimize as far as possible the loss of life of other people. I think it is well to record what that gentleman did. I have no doubt that, despite the wonderful work that those organizations have done, if we could establish what I am pleading for here this afternoon, namely a directorate to co-ordinate all activities to take immediate and appropriate action when it is necessary, the activities of this kind of organization and the various departments could be so much more efficiently planned and so much more effective.

I believe, too, that an important function of such a directorate would be to establish a disaster fund. I believe a disaster fund is something that is absolutely essential and to which the Government should give serious attention. We need a disaster fund, and I suggest that a fund in the region of R10 million would perhaps be adequate to meet the requirements. Such a fund should be established in the first place to provide immediate relief to those who have lost their homes and who have lost the source of their means of support and their incomes. I believe, also, that that directorate should be responsible for the administration or the spending of the fund to rehabilitate in the long term those who have suffered the loss of their farms, properties, etc. It is important that the directorate should have this responsibility because, if it acted in this way, it would establish uniformity and could decide by precedent how best these moneys could be utilized in future. I believe that there is such a disaster fund in the United Kingdom, which is contributed to by the Government, by industrialists and other interested organizations. I believe that, if the Government took the initiative, there would be no problem establishing such a fund with the R10 million which I have suggested.

I want to come to another matter that refers particularly to an area, the Gamtoos River Valley, that was recently struck by a flood. In referring to this particular region in South Africa, I want to draw members’ attention to a book that was published by the hon. member for Humansdorp. I am very grateful that he gave me a copy of this book, which is titled Die Brullende Leeu Getem. This book is a history of the Gamtoos River Valley.

Let him pay extra for it.

It is a very good record of what life is like in that valley, although I cannot say whether it is a literary masterpiece or not. It is at least an accurate record. He describes the weal and the woe of the Gamtoos River Valley; the woes have mostly been created by floods. It is interesting to reflect that several floods have been recorded in the Gamtoos River Valley. In 1905 there was a flood and in 1916 there was another flood which is described in this book as: “baie groter as die vorige oorstroming”. In 1932 there was another flood which was described as “die grootste van alle tye”. At that stage they apparently had telephone warnings and a certain loss of life was obviated. In 1945 there was another flood and by that stage the Beervlei Dam had been built, which helped to obviate the seriousness of this flood. This brings me to the point which was made by the hon. member for Albany. He said that if we have proper planning of all the river valleys in South Africa and that if dams, not necessarily used for irrigation purposes, are constructed at strategic points, in other words if a study is made of complete river valleys from the source to the estuary and if proper co-ordination is exercised in the building of these dams, flood disasters can be obviated. More recently they built the Paul Sauer Dam in the Coega river. The interesting thing is that the hon. member wrote this book Die Brullende Leeu Getem with the firm conviction that what had been done in that river valley would obviate all further floods. In spite of all the action, this last flood was the biggest and the most serious they have ever had. Therefore planning can never cease and we can never be complacent about what nature might do to us next.

In conclusion I want to say I believe the hon. Minister of Water Affairs must give his attention to taking steps in the very near future to institute a system of warning signals which can be given. It is no good relying on telephone communications and it is no good relying on radio communications. Many of the people who lost their lives in this recent flood had neither radio or telephonic communication. In this Gamtoos River Valley where floods start so quickly and so unpredictably, I believe a system of sirens such as they have in Holland to warn the population against water breaking through the dikes, should be instituted. I believe there is a report which the hon. Minister has which suggests something similar. It is my plea that this matter be thoroughly investigated so that although in future we may have loss of property, loss of life can be obviated.

Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt in my mind about the good intentions of the hon. member for Albany in introducing this motion. In my humble opinion an endeavour is being made here to find one method or other to be able to prevent the enormous damage and the loss of human life caused by these extraordinary floods. It is noticeable that there is an increase in the magnitude of these floods and the abnormal rains we have from time to time. These floods also differ from place to place. In this way planning to prevent damage and loss of human life in a city will differ from planning in the rural areas. I have in mind here particularly the heavy downpours we had in Port Elizabeth a few years ago.

What does the university have to say about that?

Fortunately the university is not like the United Party Press which reports everything incorrectly. I am thinking particularly of the heavy downpours we had in Port Elizabeth a few years ago, when we had 22½ inches of rain within three hours. I believe that, except myself, nobody in this House was a witness to it. I do not think anybody in this House has ever seen 22½ inches of rain falling in a matter of three hours. It is a frightening thing to see. Streets were turned into rivers and certain tarred roads were washed away completely. I wonder whether anybody in this House can picture the washaways and fissures caused by the flood-waters in the tarred roads. A heavy downpour started in Port Elizabeth at 8 o’clock that Sunday morning and continued unceasingly until 11 o’clock that morning. The streets were turned into rivers and one cannot blame any eyewitness for involuntarily thinking at that moment of Noah and his ark. One could not help thinking of that when you saw how the streets were turned into rivers by the water that was flowing four to six feet deep through the houses. Where happy families had been living peacefully together before, you could then see people fleeing from their houses. They were fleeing with their families and they carried their children to safety on their shoulders. Elderly people were taken to safety while their possessions, such as furniture and other household requirements, were being swept away by the raging torrent. Port Elizabeth was fortunate in that the misfortune or disaster struck at 8 o’clock on a Sunday morning. The storm struck at a time when the majority of the city dwellers, men, women and children, were at home—as is the tradition in our country for the family to be at home on a Sunday morning. One shudders at the thought of the chaos there might have been in Port Elizabeth had the storm struck during the night or on a week day while hundreds of children were attending school and the inhabitants were working in the factories. One shudders at the thought of what might have happened if these people had to return to their homes. Just imagine what would have happened if these tremendous fissures had been caused by the flood-waters and streets were turned into rivers. Hundreds of people would have lost their lives. One of the most encouraging features at the time of the disaster which struck Port Elizabeth was the teamwork between the fire brigade and its crew, the police and the reservists, the Red Cross and the Noodhulpliga, the Defence Force, the civil servants and the numerous other members of the civil population who tried their best to render assistance during and after the floods. Planning to prevent damage from being done at the time of such fearful floods, is impossible or virtually impossible. Planning in the cities differ from that in the rural areas. It differs because the people in the cities are not in a position to build storage dams to contain the mass of water. The only precautionary measure one has at one’s disposal in the cities, is the stormwater pipes. It is simply a fact that the storm-water pipes are not large enough to cope adequately with such overwhelming downpours. For example, they cannot cope with the flood water when there is a downpour of 22½ inches in three hours. It would be a great help if the authorities could see to it that more storm-water pipes could be installed in the cities and, secondly, that, where possible, houses are not allowed to be built in the low-lying areas except after adequate storm-water pipes have been installed. Floods in the rural areas can easily be contained by building storage dams, such as the Hendrik Verwoerd Dam. This dam has made a tremendous contribution towards containing the flood-water of the Orange River. One could imagine the tremendous washaways that would have occurred and the damage that would have been done to the lower reaches of the Orange River had the Hendrik Verwoerd Dam not been built. However, if storms of this magnitude should occur again in future and if we should have such heavy downpours again while the Hendrik Verwoerd Dam is full, there would be nothing to contain the flood-waters. For that reason it is difficult to say that one can prevent these floods. Storage dams can only be built at suitable places. They cannot be built all over the place, and they cannot be built if they are not economic. Take for example the Mentz Lake. The capacity of the Mentz Lake is 160 000 acre feet, and when we had that tremendous downpour it took only six hours before it was full and the sluices had to be opened. For six hours it contained the flood-water in the Sundays River and after that the seething mass of water found its way to the sea. For that reason I feel that we, in the rural areas, can contain the flood-waters by building dams wherever it is possible to build them. I do not think there is any other solution and I am convinced that it will justify the cost when we think what could be done to prevent these floods by building dams in the rural areas. For that reason it gives me pleasure to support this motion moved by the hon. member for Albany. I know that, in moving this motion, his intentions are sound and honest. We accept and support this motion as strongly as we can.

I am rising to say a few words about the flood damage which is being caused to one of the towns in my constituency today. I am referring to Mariental which is situated below the Hardap Dam. Sir, as far as I was able to ascertain telephonically—I was in contact with the town clerk—the town of Mariental has been severely affected by the flood. From the railway line in a westerly direction the town is under three to seven feet of water. You can imagine yourself, Sir, what the position would have been if there had been no dam in the upper reaches to exercise some measure of control; the whole town would then have been washed away. It has not been possible to ascertain the damage yet. Before lunch time when I telephoned the town clerk the town was still under water. We have been told that the damage will be considerable. The Department of Social Welfare is helping to establish an emergency relief fund in order to render assistance. We should like to give this fund our blessing and at the same time express the hope that generous contributions will be made to this fund. Up to now it has been impossible for me to ascertain what damage has been done to the irrigation settlement. As far as I could ascertain the south eastern part of the irrigation settlement is also under water, and as far as I could establish the tourist camp immediately below the dam wall has virtually been destroyed. We want to express the hope and we trust that the Government will contribute its share when appeals are made to it for assistance as soon as it is possible to ascertain the damage, which we hope will be soon. We hope that the Government will contribute generously for those people who suffered so severely. My intention is to go there on Sunday. I told the town clerk that I would offer my assistance where possible, and he will keep me informed on developments there. I was told that the water level was subsiding but I could get no indication when it would be possible to commence clearing-up operations. As far as we can ascertain there was no loss of life, and for that we are grateful. The people were warned in time and as far as I could ascertain virtually all the people were able to leave the town and sleep in safety last night.

With these few words I want to express once again my sympathy, on behalf of this side of the House and, I think, also on behalf of that side of the House, to all those people who have suffered such a great deal.

Mr. Speaker, I should like to identify myself with the thoughts expressed here by the hon. member for Mariental. We also take cognizance of what he said. I should just like to add that one cannot help wondering whether something might not in fact have been done by draining the dam to a certain extent in advance to provide for the flood-waters which came down the river.

The rain fell immediately above the wall of the dam. More than 100 mm fell there and the dam was full.

Then nothing could be done about it, of course. Sir, the events of the past two years and of the last few months provide sufficient evidence, I think, of the fact that South Africa is particularly vulnerable to flood disasters. On 12th May, 1970, there were reports in the Press about a non-White bus which was struck by flood-waters halfway across a low-water bridge across the Avoca River near the entrance to the Kwa Mashu Bantu township on the Mount Edgecombe road, and which was swept off the bridge. The bus had approximately 65 passengers, and 44 of these people were drowned, and I think there were 20 survivors. According to Press reports 59 people lost their lives in the Natal floods and storms. On 22nd December, 1970, another bus was swept off a low-water bridge near Tzaneen by flood-waters; eight people were drowned and 50 were only just saved. These are cases which might perhaps have been easily prevented. The same can be said of the Olifants River bus disaster, in which 17 people were killed and 6 are still missing according to the latest Press reports I saw. During the storm and floods on the East Rand, particularly near Alberton, several cars were carried along by the flood-waters and several people were drowned. In this month a policeman was drowned in the flood-waters of Doringspruit near Cathcart when the wall of the Sam Meyer Dam was on the point of collapsing. Many of these lives could have been saved by timely precautions. Self-evident are the fixing of protective steel rails along the low-water bridges and concrete drifts, the improvement and building up of these bridges where possible, and the regular inspection of bridges on a national basis, to ascertain whether they meet the minimum standards. Planning must also be conducted on a national basis so that warnings of flood-waters may be sent out in advance and so that such drifts and roads may be barricaded in time by the Police or other departments concerned. From experience I know that the South African Police and the provincial police, and the municipal traffic departments as well, are not equipped to set up such barricades at short notice. Then there is the danger of dams which break and are washed away, and then cause the dams lower down to break one after another, resulting in a flood down the course of the river. The dams of the Department of Water Affairs are built according to minimum standards, and large safety margins are built into these dams as well. Inspections are also conducted regularly to see whether everything is still in order. But, Sir, the danger lies in the private dams in the smaller branches and upper reaches of small streams and rivers and even in some municipal dams. Many of these dams are constructed according to weak standards; they are never subjected to inspection, and one often sees that their overflows are quite inadequate to cope with the water from the catchment area beyond them. During the floods on the Rand in January several municipal dams overflowed and walls broke. A serious and appalling disaster was only just averted when the largest of the three dams in Bartlett, Boksburg, was saved by the Grinakers Construction Company when they widened the overflow of the dam at the last minute with their heavy road-building machinery. In that way they relieved the pressure on the wall of the dam, which had been partially washed away. If it had broken it would have added to the serious flood waters in Benoni’s three dams; it would have washed away the S.12 speedway and caused a serious local disaster. On the Witwatersrand and in the Free State there are also mine-dumps blocking valleys, where beautiful dams and pleasure resorts are being created, but these very mine-dumps and beautiful dams can also be extremely dangerous and can hold a serious threat. In particular one sees these large coal mine-dumps at places such as Witbank and in Natal, which can be particularly dangerous. There was the classic example in West Virginia in the United States this year, where such a mine-dump in Buffalo Creek was washed away and swept before it all the towns and houses below. One would like to see and to have the assurance that there is a department which will conduct regular inspections of such dams and of such situations on a national basis, and which will also accept the responsibility for ensuring that dangerous situations such as these do not arise.

†In countries overseas there is legislation to cover such situations. The United States has an Act to authorize federal assistance to states and local governments in major disasters and for other purposes. This was approved on September 30th, 1950. They also have the Disaster Relief Act of 1966 to provide additional assistance for areas suffering a major disaster. Then they also have Public Law 91-79 which provides for additional assistance for the reconstruction of areas damaged by major disasters. It states : “Congress hereby recognizes that a number of states have experienced extensive property loss and damage as a result of recent major disasters including but not limited to hurricanes, storms, floods and high waters and wind-driven waters and that there is a need for special measures designed to aid and accelerate the efforts of these affected states to reconstruct and rehabilitate the devastated areas. “Even the United Nations makes provision for such assistance. The General Assembly on 7th December, 1965, authorized the Secretary-General to draw on the Working Capital Fund to the amount of 100 000 dollars for emergency aid in any one year. A normal ceiling was fixed of 20 000 dollars per country in the case of any one disaster. In 1968 the Economic and Social Council proposed a draft resolution for adoption by the General Assembly which was adopted unanimously as resolution 2435 (CCIII). The Assembly thereby (1) invited governments to make national preparations to meet natural disasters; (2) invited governments, United Nations bodies and other organizations concerned to give full recognition to the need to promote scientific research on the causes and early manifestation of impending disasters, to ascertain and assess areas of high vulnerability, and to encourage preventative and protective measures; (3) urged the Secretary-General in co-operation with the United Nations organizations, the league of Red Cross Societies and other bodies concerned to consider ways of expanding assistance to governments in such matters; (4) requested the Secretary-General to strengthen security staff arrangements for dealing with natural disasters; and (5) appealed to members of the United Nations and members of specialized agencies to consider offering emergency assistance to meet natural disasters including standby disaster relief units. One wonders whether the South African Government was able to comply with any of these requests, such as the making of national preparations to meet natural disasters, and also to assess areas of high vulnerability and to promote scientific research on the causes and early manifestations of impending disasters. I would like to support this motion on the Order Paper and I would like to see the establishment of our own national disaster fund to cater for all man-made disasters as well as natural disasters.

I must say thank you to the hon. member for Walmer for the publicity he gave me today in connection with my book. I have, of course, been teased a great deal about the book. But I must say honestly that I believed that with the building of those dams in the river the flood could be subdued. The recent flood of 22nd August of last year has only shown again how unpredictable such a disaster is and how little human planning can really do. We have probably had very good suggestions from the Opposition, such as the idea of a directorate. I do not want to express any opinion about that. I do not think that one can plan too much; one cannot plan for every eventuality and we have bodies that can take immediate action. We have also found that floods such as that one bring out the best in people. Everyone jumps in to give assistance. I want to add my voice to what hon. members said and express my thanks to all those who gave assistance, including the magistrate of Hankey. Those people furnished particularly extensive services to the community. We immediately established a flood fund and collected more than R200 000. That fund was able to cover all the losses to personal possessions and houses, including those of Coloureds, and everything that had to be done as far as restoration work is concerned. We are grateful for that. The fund will also be able to cover a percentage of the crop damage that farmers suffered. We are fateful to everyone who so lavishly contributed to that fund. I want to thank everyone who gave assistance there.

But now we come to planning for the future. In the first place can we prevent such a flood ever happening again, and secondly can we limit the damage? The hon. member for Albany said we could have given warning before the time. I want to tell him that that flood occurred on a Saturday night. It had rained since Thursday. Saturday night when we went to sleep it still did not look anything like a flood, but throughout that night the water simply poured down, and the next morning at 5 o’clock, when I woke up, there was a flood. How could one have given any warning? The rain simply fell so quickly that no warning could have been in time. The dams undoubtedly helped. The Beervlei Dam was virtually empty, but in a few hours it overflowed. The Kouga Dam had filled up with the previous week’s rain and overflowed, and it could not check the flood either. The dams nevertheless served a significant purpose in delaying the water so that it did not all come down in one big mass. But no advance planning could have prevented that flood. We had more than 200 mm of rain that night, and one cannot plan against that.

Now one can, of course, do a great deal, and I want to express my thanks here for what the Government did in sending a Water Affairs engineer immediately after the flood to institute investigations and make certain recommendations about what could be done. This engineer issued a preliminary report, and I briefly want to mention what this report contains because I believe it to be relevant to this matter and because I believe that a lesson can be learnt from it. He recommended that better means of communication should be established, because in the event of such a flood all telephone lines are cut. I also want to ask the hon. the Minister of Water Affairs to consider giving his staff at the dams radio communication units so that they can not only communicate with each other from dam to dam, but can also be in touch with Head Office. You know, Sir, many difficult decisions must be made at such a dam. Must the sluices be opened or must they be kept closed? Rainfall observers can be appointed in the catchment areas, and I think it is very important that there should be such people. Such observers could inform the engineers at the dam in time, particularly when there is a big downpour. If more rain falls than a chosen 50 mm, for example, there must be immediate notification of a heavy down-flow approaching. In addition, each area can draw up a list of persons that must be warned. It is actually one of the big problems that we do not know what persons to warn. In the olden days, when we in the Gamtoos Valley still all had shared service lines, there was a certain ring that called everyone to the telephone to listen, and so they could warn each other. Today, with our modern means of transport and communication, we no longer find it necessary to have such devices. It is actually a pity, because then the people could easily warn each other. I consequently want to suggest that at the offices of our sectional engineers the Department of Water Affairs should have lists of the various police stations, of nominated individuals of farming associations, possibly, or other bodies that must be notified when water is approaching or rising.

I think that a great deal can be done in connection with the control over such dams if rainfall tables are drawn up of the quantity of water than can be expected if a certain rainfall occurs in a specific area. The tables must also make provision for readings so that it can be determined what the effect of opening sluices to various heights can have on areas situated below those points. I believe that if we could have more information at our disposal, a better control of floods could be achieved, particularly where there are dams.

Consideration must also be given to the possibility of allocating space in our storage dams to cope with floods. I know that the Beervlei Dam was originally built as a flood control dam. A flood can best be controlled by a dam if the dam is kept empty, but it would be a great pity, though if we have to let water flow away unnecessarily, water which could otherwise be usefully employed. I nevertheless think it is essential for the Department of Water Affairs to give attention to setting aside space in a dam in case of a flood. I do not know how practical this is, but I nevertheless think it should be investigated.

There is also another aspect, i.e. what happens in a river course when the water flows down. In that connection I think we must ask the Department of Water Affairs to make a better study of the question of the stabilization of river courses. I know that in other countries a great deal of work has already been done in connection with stabilization. Use is made of what they call “jetty fields”—I do not know what the Afrikaans translation of that is. This is done by making use of steel traps that catch up the silt, thereby stabilizing the river course. In that connection I should like to quote a short passage from the engineer’s report because I feel that it will be of interest to the hon. members who have an interest in this debate to learn what happens to a river course when the water flows down. This is a description relating to the Gamtoos—

I am just pointing out that it is a very difficult task to stabilize a channel in any river course. I nevertheless think that very good work is done in stabilizing a river course. It is, in fact, possible to do this in practice.

I want to say that a flood directorate of emergency planning, as proposed by the Opposition, may perhaps help. About the other proposal they made, that a national disaster fund should be established, I just want to say that there is already such a national disaster fund. When we established the disaster fund for the Gamtoos, we found that the balance from previous disaster funds had been fully paid in to the national disaster fund. In difficult times one can fall back on that balance. In supporting this motion we must also be grateful to the hon. member for having moved it.

Mr. Speaker, when I first saw this motion, when it appeared on the Order Paper some time ago, I wondered what course the debate on it would take. If you were listening to what was said here you could have judged for yourself how deeply affected our people in South Africa have been by the events of the past few years, and also by what happened today at Hardap, and with how much interest we discuss and give thought to matters of this nature when an opportunity to do so presents itself. Therefore I am very grateful that this debate was conducted in the spirit in which it was conducted. I am grateful to the hon. member for Albany who introduced the motion for the way in which he did it and the level on which he and all the other members who participated in the debate, conducted it.

Before I go further, I want to associate myself with the observations which have already been made in regard to the events which are at present occurring below the Hardap Dam. Apparently the catastrophe which is occurring in that area is a very serious one. As yet we are not precisely aware of its extent—it is still occurring— but our impression is that the flood disaster there is very serious. According to the information received during the lunch hour it would appear that the little town of Mariental has been struck very hard. However, we shall in due course ascertain the extent of this disaster. But I want at this opportunity to express sympathy and commiseration with those who have been struck by this misfortune, and also say in anticipation that the State, as in previous cases when such a disaster struck an area, will be at hand to do what has to be done.

We will simply have to accept that we as human beings, under normal circumstances, can only try, with our planning and in the way in which we try to take precautions, to predict what can happen in nature and to prevent disasters. No person and no country in the world can succeed in taking the extraordinary into account. The matters we are discussing now are extraordinary circumstances which occur from time to time. If we were to cast our minds back over the past few years it would have to be admitted that disasters have struck in South Africa at places where no scientist could have predicted that this would happen. There was no indication from the experience gained over the past 100 or 200 years that these could be of such a nature. It happened at places where it could least be expected. I want to remind you of a few such cases. Do you recall how a few years ago a flood disaster occurred in the bushveld of the Transvaal which drove people living in that area, who had themselves thought that they should get away from the rivers, up into the trees over a radius of a few miles. In some cases they had to seek shelter 20 feet above the ground level. This was a disaster of a magnitude which no person in that part of the world could have foreseen. You must recall a great disaster which took place and very heavy rains which fell in the region of Prieska a few years ago, when the Smart Syndicate dam was washed away, and how there was a sea of water stretching for miles in that area. This is an area which, according to all our records, had never before within living memory experienced a disaster of that magnitude. But hon. members who come from Port Elizabeth will recall that when the flood disaster struck Port Elizabeth for the first time, a few years ago, it struck in an area and with a magnitude which exceeded even the worst expectations of any person who had before that time tried to judge the possible extent. What I am trying to say is that it is a characteristic of South Africa that it is a country with an extraordinarily dynamic atmospheric or hydrological cycle. The more dynamic such a hydrological cycle is the more unpredictable it is. It is with this very factor that science is trying to cope at the present moment. It is very clear that even in a country like America where research is being done to make it possible for situations such as these to be predicted in advance, it is becoming all the more impossible and difficult for the scientists to make accurate forecasts in that part of the country where the hydrological cycle is becoming a dynamic one. We could compare ourselves to countries in Europe. It would be easy in the countries of Europe, where there is a uniform natural course of events, to make a forecast which would place the country’s scientists in a position to develop a pattern with a reasonable measure of certainty—for a person cannot do this with absolute certainty—and to predict from natural events, by means of a graphical representation of past events, what could be expected in future. But the more dynamic the hydrological cycle in a country is, as is the case here, the more exceptionally difficult it becomes to do this. Now I would also be able to explain to you on the basis of many figures how one can determine this or make a more realistic analysis of this matter in South Africa. Let us for example take a river like the Hartebees River, a river which drains a very large area. It drains the western part of the Karoo, and then joins the Orange River. In a period of three months the rainfall in the Hartebees River area at one stage was as much as it had been in the previous 29 years. It is very difficult to forecast what can happen. I am therefore making the first point that it is extremely difficult for scientists who have to make these forecasts in the first place, but particularly for the planners of a country as well, who have to follow the course mapped out by the scientists, to make a determination with which a country can keep pace, within its physical means, if one is dealing with a dynamic hydrological cycle.

But when we consider this motion, we see that it expressly states:

It deals with steps which have to be taken. The entire argument today centred around trying to take preventative steps. Examples were mentioned here of steps which have to be taken by the Government to prevent certain types of events. Then Port Elizabeth, East London and the Witwatersrand were mentioned as being the places where the events took place which gave rise to this motion today. Sir, when we talk about steps, we must be very practical about such a situation. We must be very practical if we consider what is within human means. We dare not, in a situation such as this, think beyond the physical, scientific and financial means of a State in an attempt to try to prevent such a situation. I agree that one has to do what you are able to do. One goes as far as you can. It is our duty to do our best in such a situation. Having said that, I also want to say that if we want to be practical we must come back to the legislation we have at our disposal. We must also take into account the knowledge which the Department of Water Affairs itself and also other scientists who deal with this matter, have at their disposal. We must come back to the scientists who can assist us in the struggle to control such a situation. Before I elaborate on this, I want to ask in the first place where these events are now occurring. These events occurred in low-lying areas or in recognized flood areas. Some of these low-lying areas are not recognized flood areas. They may be valleys or marshy areas where a storm occurs, although those areas are not normally subject to storms or strong torrents. In other words, this happens in areas where one can expect a natural disaster to occur. The only thing which is difficult to predict is where such a disaster is likely to take place. When I speak of such likelihood, I am speaking of something beyond our reach; this then passes to the scientist who has to determine, within his limited ability, the likelihood of what is going to happen in nature in this dynamic hydrological cycle where nature for the most part determines the course which conditions will take. Now we must also distinguish between conditions in the past and conditions today. If for example we had had the knowledge we have today 200 years ago, before we built our towns and cities, and had had the sense of planning and forecasting which we have today, we would probably have laid out many existing towns and cities in a different way. In a place like Port Elizabeth, for example, we would never have laid out certain housing schemes. We would probably then have warned against this. I am not trying to allege now that the people who developed Port Elizabeth did not do that development carefully. It is easy to be wise after the event, but it is not always as easy to look ahead. Looking back now one finds that one would, in my opinion, have developed a section of that town in a different way. We must therefore distinguish between what was, and what is still to come. I do not think we need argue a great deal about the situation which developed in the past. We can be clever today in regard to those who preceded us and ask why they allowed the establishment of towns and other developments in certain areas. However, we cannot do this, because their knowledge was more limited than ours. What is however within our reach is that we can encourage one another in regard to the future. As far as the past is concerned therefore, I want to say that I would rather not argue about places where development has taken place and where that development should rather not have taken place. All that one can do is to be more careful in future. What is important for us, is what we are going to do at present and in future. When we talk about the future, there are a few matters which have to be mentioned. The first is the way in which we are able to do this within the physical capacity of the machine which has to do this, i.e. the Department of Water Affairs, and to what extent the department is ready and prepared to deal with similar situations in future. When one considers the Water Act one sees that it makes generous provision for proper planning, for proper research into these matters and for proper practical control which can be exercised by the department. Having considered our legislation now, we must also see to what extent we are in fact doing a number of the things mentioned by hon. members. I want to summarize now what various hon. members said. I do not want to return now to all the arguments put forward by individual members, but I want to summarize in brief the one which was mentioned by all.

I want to return to the argument which was before the House today, i.e. to what extent we can use our dams to apply flood control and in that way have a means of control. I want to say at once that this is what the Department of Water Affairs is already doing today. There are few large or important rivers which can be dammed up, and in regard to which the danger of flooding does exist, where steps are not already being taken. I want to mention two of these rivers today.

I want to mention the Vaal River. The House will still recall that the basis of the variable draft operation in the Vaal River was explained, how there are a number of successive dams and how attempts are made to feed the one out of the other in time so that the maximum benefits can be derived from the available water, but how sufficient storage space is also created so that floods can also be absorbed. This is already being done. It is a system which is being applied. It is being applied so effectively that it can be regarded as an example to us and also to many other countries. I am taking the latest scheme, the Orange scheme, the Verwoerd Dam. The Verwoerd Dam has a net capacity of plus-minus 2,15 million morgen-feet of water. The gross capacity is in fact greater than that. If that portion which will eventually become silted up is taken into account the dam is slightly larger. We are now considering that river, and what has happened in recent years. The greatest flood measured above Prieska was a flood in the region of 14,2 thousand cumecs of water. A cumec is 35 cusecs of water. When we begin to talk in terms of thousands of cumecs, we are talking about an enormous quantity of water. I have said that the figure was 14,2 thousand cumecs, but because a person cannot be absolutely certain, and in order to have a round figure, I shall refer to 14,5 thousand cumecs. Now we have constructed a dam wall. This wall has quite a number of outlet sluices plus an overflow mechanism or overflow outlet which enables us to accommodate any flood which may occur. The dam is designed in such a way that if a flood, not of 14,5 thousand cumecs, but of 31,5 thousand cumecs, were to occur, and we did not use all the sluices, we would be able, by means of the absorption capacity of the dam itself to break the flood and to reduce it to 14,8 thousand cumecs. If we begin to use the sluices, that figure can be reduced to 10,2 thousand cumecs. Once the P. K. le Roux Dam has been completed, and if we were to begin exercising control in time, it would be possible to reduce that figure to 7,6 thousand cumecs. The flood which occurred recently, was a flood of 7 thousand cumecs. That was not a major flood. In other words, we are already able to exercise proper control over a flood by means of such a flood system. If I were to be asked now what we are doing, I cannot say more than to give an example of what could happen there. I could mention many examples. Let us take the Paul Sauer Dam, to which reference was also made. The Paul Sauer Dam is not a large dam. It has a beautiful, large wall, but it is a small dam with a small surface area. It so happens that when the unit is full and the flood extensive, there is almost nothing one can do. Even if we were to try to control that flood with the sluices built into that dam we would not, with such a small volume of water in the dam itself, be able to exercise control to such an extent that it would be possible to prevent great devastation. What happened a while back? A while back a great flood occurred in the vicinity of the Gamtoos. Where did the flood occur; where did the rains fall? The rains fell only in the vicinity of the dam itself and the valley above Port Elizabeth, below the other dam. The speed with which the water fell and the volume thereof was of such a nature that nothing one could have done would have been of any use. We were able to do something in respect of that area where we had control, but we had no control in the other area. We experienced the same difficulty in Port Elizabeth. A disaster struck that area and the rains fell in that area in such a great volume and in such a short time that regardless of what one had tried to do in advance, it would not have been humanly possible to do anything about it.

To the hon. members who discussed this matter I want to concede that we cannot say that because it is as I have now said, we are going to wash our hands in innocence and that we are going to do nothing about it. No, we are there to accept the responsibility in so far as it is within our physical means to exercise that responsibility. That is why I say that science is now beginning to play an important role. We must establish to what extent we can do two things by making use of science itself, i.e. to what extent we can make a forecast through knowledge acquired in the past and the interpretation of that knowledge so that we can bring a part of those problems within our control—it will never be possible to bring this completely under control—and how it can be applied so that it will make an actual physical difference. I want to say that this is why I and, I think, all the hon. members, are delighted. When we discussed the Act the hon. members on that side of the House and we were agreed that it had become essential that we should for example have the Water Research Commission and that we should by means of such a commission have a quantity of money available annually to tackle this problem on a much larger scale than was done in the past. That is why I think that the study of these matters is very important. Hon. members must not think that, now that we have a Water Research Commission, and it is being said that we are going to make a greater study of this matter, that studies have not actually been made. I want to tell hon. members that the Hydrology Division of the Department of Water Affairs has been working on this for years. They have been working on this for so long that we can already make specific forecasts. With the data at our disposal, which we received from hundreds of meteorological stations in South Africa, and with the correlation of the information we have obtained, which is still being studied, in conjunction with international organizations and our universities, the Weather Bureau and the C.S.I.R., in so far as they are able to make contributions, we have reached the stage today where we are able to make forecasts in respect of our important and major rivers and where we were able to succeed, a few weeks ago, in controlling and regulating the Verwoerd Dam a week before it was opened. I can inform this House today that if we had not wanted to give the public the pleasure of watching that spectacle, we could have prevented that dam from overflowing. Hon. members will agree with me that it would have been unfair to do so. We wanted to let South Africa see it, but we could have prevented it.

We are standing on the verge of this development. A new problem is now emerging, i.e. that the private sector itself is trying to intervene and is itself trying to do something about this. Hon. members will realize that this could give rise to a very dangerous situation. I want to compare South Africa’s situation to that of America. In America, I can inform hon. members, billions have been spent on this subject. There are State as well as private organizations functioning, which are spending at a rate which South Africa simply cannot afford. We know that, in spite of all the good work they are doing, they themselves concede that they are merely standing on the verge of development. On the one hand, in areas where there are proper forecasts, results have been achieved, and methods are being applied as a result of which they say that they can increase the rainfall or prevent it and perhaps reduce it. The same people say that at this stage they still know so little that in certain other areas they achieved with all their attempts results which were the opposite of what they had envisaged. This makes things difficult and dangerous for South Africa. That is why we are again coming to this House with legislation. We are doing this to cope with that situation. We are engaged in scientific research. Since we are doing this on a larger scale, we must adapt what we are doing to what the private sector is going to attempt. We must correlate these matters so that their research and their practical application will also be under control so that we will have the benefit of that and not eventually allow these to be economically exploited. That is why we are coming to this House with legislation.

I therefore want to inform this House that as far as our scientific research is concerned, we have made great progress. Not only have we made great progress, but we are today able to do what hon. members requested, i.e. to succeed, albeit to a lesser extent, in making forecasts in areas over which we have control. We are on the verge of great development.

I also want to refer to another matter. We have mentioned many arguments already. As far as dams are concerned we had the argument for example that all that we can do to keep water in South Africa under control is to build dams. How are we going to build dams across thousands of rivers, and for when are we building them? I can mention to hon. members the first floods which Whites have experienced in this country since their forebears first arrived here. There have within our living memory never been floods such as those we have recently experienced. I do not have the figures with me to prove this now, but I would be amazed if we had been able, with all the knowledge at our disposal, to have predicted in advance that a flood of the magnitude of the one which is at present occurring at Hardap, would occur.

Yes, Mariental is an example.

We cannot determine these events in advance. In other words, this is impracticable. What we can in fact do, is to make the forecasts we are already making in the areas in which the economic development of the country takes place. I am afraid that we shall have to omit a great deal of this. How are we going to build a dam across the Hartebees River for example, which might have no water for the next 200 or 300 years. We do not know whether this is what will happen. We do not know whether next year is not perhaps going to be the worst drought year in history. All the Department of Water Affairs is able to do is to undertake—and this it does—to design its dams for a flood once every five years, once every 10 years, once every 100 years or perhaps even once every 1 000 years. In other words, our sluices, our overflows and everything are adjusted in such a way that they can control a flood. We cannot go further than that. Anything that we do further than that goes beyond the physical control of a country. Having said this in regard to our research and also in regard to the way in which we are using our existing dams to exercise control, I want to say that there are also lesser measures which can be applied. There are hon. members here who advanced arguments here and who asked why we cannot introduce an alarm or warning system. We are trying to do this; we are doing this very effectively along the Vaal River, along the Orange River and along the other major rivers where we have the machinery, the people, the telephones and the offices, but it is difficult for us to introduce a warning system along a river which flows once every 50 years. We must therefore do this where it is practicable. The hon. member for Humansdorp mentioned the example of people Who were sleeping, but who had their own warning system. When the disaster struck, they spread the alarm. This kind of thing happens, but I can give the hon. member the assurance that we are already planning a warning system for the present as well as the future. The telephone is not an adequate warning system, but we have in mind a warning system which is able to determine in advance whether the likelihood of rain exists. In this way, if it is possible, we will be able to sound a warning hours before the time or even days before the time. This applies not only to those who live along the banks of the river, but also for the persons involved in the immediate control measures. This we are trying to do. I assume that as we make progress with the plans as we foresee the situation, an efficient warning system will in future be developed. Other observations were also made, observations to the effect that we should take a look at how people are occupying the river banks. Of course we must take a look at this—that is a very sensible thing to do. At present, when we build dams, we buy up land beyond the flood line; we buy up land up to the maximum flood line of the basin, and as far as the other area is concerned, we warn the people and we tell them in advance that they should not wilfully move into the area along the river and in that way cause trouble. I could mention an example now, but since my colleague in whose constituency the town falls, is not present here at the moment, I shall not mention the name of the town. Some time ago I paid a visit to this town and people there were angry with me. They said to me: “Just look at what is happening here; you people moved in here, and now we have been flooded out”. I then asked them whether they realized what they had been doing during the past 10 years. I asked them whether they could not see that they were ploughing and planting in the riverbed. I told them that they should never have done this and that the Government could do nothing to prevent what happened if they acted in such a foolish way. Their excuse was that it had not rained in recent years. I then said: Correct, these people moved into that area because it was dry. The other day we experienced the same difficulty in the Pongola River area. Because it was dry people gradually came closer and closer in their wagons. When torrential rains began to fall a few weeks ago and a tremendous amount of water came down, the area was flooded. They were flooded out because they had been attracted closer and closer to the riverbed by the drought. The drought caused the riverbed to become narrower, and when conditions returned to normal, they found themselves inside a danger area. We try to effect a built-in control, and I should like to give hon. members an assurance in this regard. We shall also try to do this in future. However, I must tell hon. members that the State cannot do more than to adopt sensible measures, with our feet planted firmly on the ground. I agree with the underlying principle of planning that there should be co-ordination. This must not happen within the department only, but in regard to all interested parties. This is in fact being done today. Various controlling and co-ordinating measures exist. I should like to point out to hon. members that we have recently created more machinery so that there can be greater co-ordination in regard to the solution of these problems. I think hon. members will agree that we have recently achieved results as a result of the co-operation we have received. In principle I therefore want to concede immediately that a greater degree of co-operation by all organizations is essential. That is the course we have already adopted. I concede that we must, as far as we are humanly able, try to make provision and render assistance in time, when such disasters strike us. I also concede that when disasters strike, we must immediately take action and offer our assistance. In regard to the disaster which is at present assuming alarming proportions, we will play our part. Hon. members will also have to concede that during the past few years we have not neglected any of these disaster areas and that we have on each occasion been present there immediately.

I want to add that this is not always all that easy. In the case of the Gamtoos Valley, it was impossible to get near the place; we were only too glad that the people there had managed to get away and that they had not lost their lives. It was impossible to get near the place; there was so much mud that it took two to three weeks before it was possible to see properly what was going on there. I hope that the situation at Mariental is not as bad as that. In other words, one must do what is practical and within your power to do. I concede that it is essential that we should take action, and I think, too, that we agree on both sides of the House that this should be done. This is all I have to say about this matter, and I thank hon. members for their contributions to the debate.

Sir, I have found it interesting to hear what the Minister has had to say in this debate dealing with floods and flood relief. It is obvious that one of the main functions of the Department of Water Affairs in building some of our largest dams in South Africa is to control the flow of water. I am one of those who have watched the construction of the Hendrik Verwoerd Dam from its early stages, and I realize that one of the main functions of that project is to control the flow of water in times of flood. I remember well what happened shortly after the hon. the Minister had opened one of our largest dams in South Africa in the Eastern Cape, the Bridledrift Dam. When the hon. the Minister opened that dam it contained barely one-third of its capacity of water, and within 12 hours that dam was running over so strongly that we feared the wall would break. The overflow flowed into the Buffalo River and swept all the small craft out into the sea. It is difficult to visualize what would have happened if the dam had not been there. The dam certainly did stop the greater flow of water just at that peak period. But even some of our larger dams can fill up within a matter of 12 to 24 hours. To a certain extent I agree that storms of exceptional magnitude can be determined by our Weather Bureaux, which have at their disposal some of the most modern instruments such as radar. As you know, Sir, a Select Committee of this House has been examining a Bill on Weather Modification. With our modern instruments, I believe—and I think most of us believe—that we can foresee storms coming. Within a matter of hours after the hon. the Minister had opened the Bridledrift Dam, we were flying back to East London; we had left East London in pouring rain; the storm had just started; it was the beginning of one of the greatest floods that we have ever had in that area. As soon as the aircraft reached the level of the clouds I looked out and saw only one cloud hanging over that area. If at that time our Weather Bureau could have forecast the storm, I believe it is possible that they could have minimized it by sending aircraft into the clouds or above the clouds with dry ice and so forth to dispel the clouds and to modify the storm which broke out. What I want to do this afternoon in the limited time at my disposal, Sir, is to discuss the administrative side of floods in our country, and not only floods, but droughts, earthquakes, hurricanes, tornados, plagues, pest invasions, fires and so forth. We should have some administrative body standing by at all times ready to cope with anything that might happen in the form of a storm or other disaster.

What concerns me is that when we had the storm in East London, this flood—I happen to have a farm which is only ten miles from the centre of East London—I measured 3 ft. 8 in of rain on that farm in 30 hours that is a lot of water; it is a large volume of water and it is impossible for any planning we may endeavour to do to control that volume of water, 3 ft. 8 in. in 30 hours. After the storm I immediately flew back to East London by helicopter and had to contact certain departments and bodies who were dealing with flood relief. The departments I had to deal with were the Minister of Community Development, the Department of Social Welfare and Pensions, the Minister of Agriculture, who deals with agricultural technical services, the Minister of Transport and the Administrator. We had to deal with all these departments plus the relief fund which was being raised at the time. Various municipalities and cities in our country were contributing towards this relief fund. My experience was that there was nobody controlling the whole problem. There were too many cooks busy with different parts of it. I will not say there was chaos, but it did lead to a lot of dissatisfaction, dissatisfaction about which I still hear today. I believe that we must seriously consider a national disaster relief fund being established, under a director, one person to be in charge of this disaster relief fund. It is my function here this afternoon, and I have not the time anyway, to suggest how we must raise money for this fund and when we must start collecting, because none of us can foretell when the next disaster will come, but this must be done on long-term planning. Now I want to mention how we were misled and how our task was made ever so much more difficult during this flood in the Eastern Cape which covered the whole of the East London area and King William’s Town, an area of 50 square miles. The Town Clerk of East London rightly told the public at the time in a Press report that the relief fund would operate on a regional basis and would not be confined to East London only. He said anyone in East London and the outlying areas who suffered loss in the floods could apply for financial relief. I at that time believe that this was the case, because it was a relief fund and anyone who had suffered damage through the flood would receive compensation through that channel. The cost of that particular flood was not less than R20 million. That was the estimate on 25th September, The flood had actually taken place in late August. On 25th September they calculated that the flood would cost at least R20 million, and it did; it cost even more than that. But everyone was compensated with that R20 million and they were happy with that fund. Those were the people of East London who were covered under insurance, who had lost their houses along the Nahoon valley and the other areas below the water mark. They were covered by insurance and those who were not covered by insurance were paid out compensation from the relief fund. Those who lost motorcars or motor vehicles not covered by insurance were also paid out from the relief fund, also for motor bicycles, cycles, wheelbarrows and everything, even to the re-laying of their gardens. They were compensated for all these things under the relief fund.

But when it came to the agriculturalist, the farmer, of the amount of over R20 million which was paid out to the ordinary people of East London, the people who were farmers, of whom I was one, received only R493 000. I found everything satisfactory until I had to plead on behalf of the farmer. I then walked up against a stone wall. I walked up against officials with miles and miles of red tape and I could get no further. We never got any further. I am not blaming the unfortunate officials. Those people did their very best. I know them personally and I know that they worked overtime. The problem was that the Department of Agricultural Technical Services in the first instance refused, and they still refuse, to pay out any farmer whose farm was not planned before the flood. In the second instance they refused to pay out in respect of any works which were damaged by the flood but which had not been subsidized; in other words, which had not been planned either. I know of farms there which were swept clean, as clean as a slate, but because those unfortunate farmers who had been farming there all their lives had not planned their farms and dams, their weirs, pumps contours and irrigated lands, and were not subsidized in respect thereof, they never received a cent. The farmers were dissatisfied.

This is why I come back to the point that we must have a disaster fund which will cover agriculture and everything in respect thereof. When it comes to compensation, why must the farmer suffer simply because his business was not planned? Yet our city dwellers, people living in the suburbs of East London, were all paid out. There were no arguments and no queries as to whether their gardens were planned or subsidized in any way, wether their motorcars were insured or not. They were paid out, but the farmer was not. I have here a Press cutting dated 15th September, 1970, according to which the farmers say that they need more flood relief. I quote—

I happen to have here a warrant voucher. It happens to be my own. I suffered a lot of damage, too, on my property at East London. As I have said, I had 44 inches in 30 hours. My estimate of damage included a weir which I myself built across one of the big rivers there. I wanted to have this weir built on a subsidy basis, but the extension officers there advised me not to, because it would fall under the Department of Water Affairs and not under the Department of Agricultural Technical Services and we know what the problems are there.

That is right.

No problems!

I do not even want to start talking about the problems you encounter if you want to build a weir with the assistance of the Department of Water Affairs. Nevertheless, this weir was built three feet high, according to regulations, and I built it three times stronger than my friends, the extension officers, advised me to build it. They advised me in their private capacity. The storm came and the weir held. It never moved and there was no damage to the weir. However, the river changed its course and the bank of the river was torn away from the weir. Trees were uprooted. According to their estimation, the damage to that weir alone was R300. I had hundreds of rands’ damage to other things, such as dams, contours and cultivated land. I estimate it at about R700 worth of damage. Do you know, Sir, how much compensation I got for it? I received nothing from the Flood Relief. From the Department of Technical Services I received R39. Here is my voucher. I am not the only one. This applies to almost every farmer in that area who suffered, because his farm was not planned and he never received subsidies in the first instance, he could not receive anything. This is not good enough. We knew that another flood was going to come and in fact it did come. Those farmers along the Gamtoos Valley, I believe, were paid out, whether their farms were planned or not.

There is also a surprise coming their way.

There may be a surprise coming their way. I know it takes a long time. They are hoping to get a lot of compensation money. I was hoping too. The flood in East London came in late August, 1970, and I was paid out on the 22nd June, 1971, almost 12 months later. That I can understand. It took those extension officers a long time to inspect all the damage that had been done to every farmer and to assess which project was eligible for compensation or not. In the Gamtoos Valley, I understand, the farmers are very happy. Well, I sincerely hope they are. There may be a shock coming their way. But if they are happy and they were paid out, it just shows how inconsistent we are in this country, that farmers in some areas should be paid out and be happy and in other areas, they have to go through all this trouble and not be paid out sufficiently. You cannot tell me, Sir, that when East London suffered over R20 million worth of damage, the farmers in that area suffered only R493 000 worth of damage. It is impossible. It just shows how inconsistent we are. If we can establish a disaster relief fund under one directorate, when a disaster comes, even something like the stranding of the Wafra, action can be taken immediately, so that we will not have to call in the advice and opinion of all the different departments before action can be taken. How long was that ship not lying on the rocks before action could be taken? This is the answer, when we are faced with a disaster of such magnitude. As in the case of Port Elizabeth, East London, Johannesburg and now the Gamtoos Valley, as regards floods alone, the sooner we can take action, assess the damage and assist the people, the better.

It is regrettable that the hon. member for East London North added a slightly false note to this very fine motion which I think was moved with very good intentions by the hon. member for Albany. As hon. members on this side indicated, we are inclined to support the motion.

The hon. member said he had built a weir across the river, but that he did not do so through the Department of Water Affairs because there are many problems. He did not tell as what the problems are, but I just want to tell him that in my part of the world a great deal of such work is done, work that is too big for the Department of Agricultural Technical Services or the Soil Protection Department, but which is done by farmers with the help of the Department of Irrigation. I can bear witness to only the very best of co-operation. I can attest to numerous farmers not only obtaining the necessary and correct advice with respect to the construction of such weirs, but also to the department’s aid scheme enabling them to erect very fine works and also to their obtaining the utmost co-operation from the Department of Water Affairs. I therefore cannot understand why the hon. member has so many problems.

I want to come back to the flood in the Gamtoos Valley which, as the hon. member for Humansdorp sketched it here, was a disaster in itself. That flood is regarded as a much greater one than the flood of 1936. As a farmer in the area where the actual rain fell that caused this flood, I can probably speak with reasonable authority about the matter. I want to submit that in the first place the Beervlei Dam perfectly fulfilled its purpose. The dam was not completely empty. It contained a little water, but not very much to speak of. It perfectly checked the flood from the rain that fell to the north of Beervlei until the rain that fell below Beervlei had sufficient time to flow away. Beervlei did begin to overflow, but only that Sunday afternoon. The result is that the water from all the rain that fell to the south of Beervlei had an opportunity to drain off completely. Thereby the dam perfectly fulfilled its purpose that of floodwater control, for the third time in its history—in 1961, 1963 and now again in 1971. That is what it was originally constructed for. If Beervlei Dam did fulfil its purpose, we must look for another cause of this flood. I submit that the rain that fell in the southern and south-western portion of the Aberdeen district and in the immediate northern part of the Steytlerville district was the actual cause of the great flood in the Gamtoos. There are two rivers that actually feed the big river that flows past directly below Beervlei. The one is the Du Plessis river that has its source in the immediate south-western portion of the Aberbeen district. The water from the entire Aberdeen plain flows into the Du Plessis river. I can tell you that in the vicinity the Du Plessis river was a metre deeper than in 1961. Then there is another river, which incidentally flows into the Grootrivier at my farm, i.e. the Heuningklipspruit. Hon. members must not be mislead by the name Heuningsklipspruit. It is not a “spruit”, a small stream; it is a particularly large river. The rainwater that falls in the southern part of the Aberdeen district and in the northern part of the Steytlerville district, flows down the Heuningklipspruit. Without fear of contradiction I want to submit that these two rivers were the cause of the flood in the Gamtoos. In fact, I thought fit on the Saturday afternoon at 4 o’clock to phone the hon. member for Humansdorp and tell him : “Warn your people, there is a flood on the way.” How right I was! Because at that stage I already had knowledge of the flow of the Du Plessis river and could also personally see what was happening to the Heuningklipspruit, I could foresee this. I want to claim that before those two rivers are tamed, we will not possibly be able to apply efficient flood control in the Gamtoos Valley. I am convinced that in August 1971 exactly the same thing happened as in 1961, i.e. that the two rivers below Beervlei were the cause of the flood and that the Department will very strongly have to consider properly taming those two rivers if they want to cut off future floods of the Gamtoos.

In 1961 the Department paid out about R1 million to the farmers in the Gamtoos Valley. We are not aware of the amount that is now going to be paid out, but I expect that it could be in the vicinity of R3 million to R4 million. I think the effort of ordering a proper inquiry into the possible construction of another two dams that could possibly prevent these expenses in the future, will be rewarded.

Business interrupted in accordance with Standing Order No. 32 and motion lapsed.

Mr. Speaker, I move the following motion as printed in my name on the Order Paper—

This motion happens to be the last private motion that will be discussed during this session of Parliament. I nevertheless think that it is one of the topics which probably occupies the mind of every thinking person in South Africa, namely what stand the Coloured communities, and the Coloureds in their communal life, will in future take towards the Whites in their communal life. In this regard I want to point out that since 1948 the National Party has consistently been advocating one policy, i.e. that as far as the Coloureds are concerned, it stands for a policy of neighbourliness with proper boundary-lines. This is the policy which today is called the policy of parallel development for short. This policy rejects, on the one hand, the idea of a Coloured homeland, and does so mainly for three reasons. The first is that it is physically impracticable to create a Coloured homeland in South Africa. If we look at the figures of the 1970 census and take all the larger towns in South Africa where Coloureds are living at present, and if we ignore the Coloureds living in various districts in rural areas, we find that there are more than 300 such places in South Africa where Coloureds are settled permanently today. If we also have regard to the fact that to date approximately 250 various group areas for Coloureds have already been proclaimed, we must realize that these group areas are in fact permanent places of settlement for our Coloured population. In other words, we are dealing here with a few hundred places where the Coloured population will in future be settled permanently in towns and cities. Therefore I say that it is physically impracticable, just for this reason alone, ever to think in terms of a Coloured homeland in South Africa.

Furthermore, we should also bear in mind that we have limited natural resources. In referring to natural resources, I am thinking primarily of water. When we look at the position in the Western Cape, and, in fact, also at the position in the whole of White South Africa, we find that the potential of the majority of our rivers for supplying drinking-water, has already been utilized or planned to a large extent. This utilization and planning are done by the White Governmental authority, and I cannot imagine that, if one should think in terms of sovereignty even for a large number of Coloured towns and cities, one could have a position where such a sovereign country would even have to be dependent on, and buy from, another country its water, drinking-water and water for other uses. Also with a view to other practical measures that have to be taken in every independent country, namely to supply power for its business life, houses, and wherever it may be necessary, I can hardly imagine that, since we shall in future years be dependent mainly on hydro-electric power on the one hand and nuclear power on the other, any homeland idea can be put into practice, because one cannot visualize that one sovereign country would be totally dependent, also for its power supply, on another country. For that reason I say, therefore, that merely because of the fact that we are restricted in respect of our natural resources, and because there are, in addition, certain other essentials that cannot be given to the Coloured community independently, the idea of a Coloured homeland should be rejected for this reason.

A third reason is to my mind that, whereas the idea of freedom for Bantu homelands is a practical one because the Bantu have their rights of ownership in them and have to date not acquired rights of ownership in White South Africa, the exact opposite holds good for the Coloureds. In all their places of settlement, in the more than 300 places where they are settled at the moment and in the more than 250 group areas that have already been proclaimed for them, the Coloureds have already become owners or have the right to become owners. I want to state that the policy of the National Party totally rejects any thinking along the lines of a Coloured homeland, not only for the present, but also for the future.

On the other hand, the policy of parallel development also rejects any idea of integration between the White and the Coloured populations of South Africa. We reject this because the Whites in South Africa are not prepared to give up their own identity, and because they realize that under integration with the Coloureds their identity will necessarily be lost in the process. As far as the Coloureds themselves are concerned, we also reject this idea because we realize that integration, even to the limited extent to which it existed previously, brought them no advantages but only disadvantages. That is why the National Party has consistently, from 1948 to 1972, stood for a policy of parallel development for the Coloureds.

The question that arises now is what, then, is the physical basis for the policy of parallel development. I want to leave the political basis at that. The fact of the matter is that the physical basis of parallel development is the communal life of the Whites on the one hand and that of the Coloureds on the other. That means that apart from the rural areas, the Coloureds are to be settled in their own towns and in their own cities, which should have the full-fledged character of a town or a city. In passing I just want to mention a few things that have already been done by this Government in order to implement this policy of parallel development in practice.

I have already pointed out that the Group Areas Board has up to now proclaimed nearly 250 places as places of settlement for our Coloured population. This task, which we may perhaps call the negative side of parallel development, has to a large extent been completed in South Africa. As far as the future is concerned, in so far as it has to be carried through further, it will amount to new places of settlement having to be found for future Coloured cities and towns.

Furthermore, in having regard to the question of housing, one finds that under National Party Government since the year 1948 up to the end of 1971, roughly 99000 houses were built for the settlement of Coloureds in towns and cities at a total cost of approximately R123 million. I do not want to suggest that nearly enough housing has been provided for the needs of the Coloureds. However, the fact of the matter is that by way of the provision of these 99 000 houses for Coloureds over the past 23 years, a major contribution has been made by the National Party Government towards making it possible for the Coloureds to live in their own homes in their own towns or cities.

A third step which I should like to mention and which was taken under the National Party Government for the promotion of the idea of Coloured towns and cities, is the educational development of the Coloureds. I do not want to mention too many figures here, but I just want to point out that from 1960 to 1970, whilst there was an increase of 32,9 per cent in the Coloured population from approximately 1,5 million to approximately 2 017 000, the number of Coloured children attending schools did not increase by 32,9 per cent, but by 70 per cent to reach a total of 517 000. It is also estimated that the number of Coloured children will increase to such an extent in years to come that at the end of this century there will be approximately 1,7 million Coloured children attending schools in South Africa. The question of the education of the Coloureds did not stop at providing them with schools of their own. More or less in 1958 a start was made with the Technical College for Coloureds, which is called the Peninsula College for Higher Technical Education at present and is situated in Bellville South. Initially progress was slow, but at present the position has already been reached where the college facilities which, according to planning, would only have been fully utilized towards the end of 1974, has already become too small at this stage. Last year there were 838 students studying at that college. The demand is already so great that new ideas have to be tried out in order to meet the technical educational needs of the Coloureds after matriculation.

In a third sphere, too, the Coloureds have been provided with an institution of their own in that the University College of the Western Cape, which is the University of the Western Cape today, was established for the Coloureds. What was initially called the bush college out in Bellville South, has today become a full-fledged university. Those persons who are lecturers and professors at that university, happen to be persons I know intimately. Whereas I have over the past 20 years acquired an intimate knowledge of that university, I can state here today that, although it may perhaps not comply as yet with the standards laid down for White South African universities, the Coloureds have already accepted that university as their own in every respect. Therefore I want to say that as regards facilities for scholastic education for Coloured children, as regards their technical education and their university education, gigantic strides have been made for the Coloureds under National régime. To that extent a contribution has been made towards the proper settlement of full-fledged Coloured cities and towns.

But also in the sphere of business it was under a National Government that the Coloured Development Corporation was established in 1962. At first its capital was small, i.e. only R500 000. But at the end of the present financial year its capital will amount to approximately R8,5 million. I think it will come to just R10 000 short of R8½ million. To date a total of 148 loans have already been granted to various forms of Coloured business enterprises. Apart from that it is of special importance to note that of these 148 loans, no fewer than 77 were granted in respect of the retail trade, with the result that through these loans that were granted by the Coloured Development Corporation, it has become possible for the Coloureds to play their part in the establishment of their own business centres in their own towns and cities. But the Corporation has also gone beyond that by establishing certain enterprises of its own, of which I just want to mention a few, i.e. the Spes Bona Bank, the capital of which is still small at this stage, but which is already operating on a profit basis; the Superama Supermarket; Cortem Properties, etc. The fact of the matter is that this small idea of 1962 has already become in 1971-’72 a small snowball which, if it is developed further in an imaginative way, can play a leading role in the future development of Coloured towns and cities.

A fifth step I should like to mention is the announcement made on 26th September, 1971, by the Minister of Coloured Affairs, who is also the Minister of Planning, when he proposed on a broad basis that in respect of the local government of Coloureds a system be established in terms of which the Coloureds would manage their own affairs on a local authority level. Although this is virtually no more than an idea at this stage—and in those cases where it has been established for the Coloureds it is mainly in the form of an advisory council co-operating with White municipalities—the basic outline has already been provided for the manner in which local government may be developed in the future so that the Coloureds in their own towns and cities will be able to govern themselves.

I have now mentioned these five steps taken under a National Government in order to establish the idea of the establishment and development of Coloured towns and cities. Now I want to ask where we are headed from here. As far as the future is concerned, I want to plant this idea first of all, i.e. that we should at all costs get away from the idea that a Coloured township is a Coloured location near a White town. We should by all means get away from the idea that a Coloured township is merely an appendage to a White town. We should, as far as the future is concerned, see the position of the Coloureds’ communal life in a full-fledged town for the Coloureds or a full-fledged city for the Coloureds, a place where, in the broad sense of communal life, they may maintain their own identity and also be themselves. In order to achieve this ideal, I think that there are certain ideas to which we may perhaps give consideration.

The first one I should like to mention, is the question of name-giving. With very few exceptions in South Africa, we virtually do not know any Coloured town by name. We know a Coloured town as an appendage to an existing White town. In thinking of the Coloureds living in Worcester, Pearl, Stellenbosch or wherever, we think of a Coloured township which is an appendage to an existing White town. I think that we shall only be able to build full-fledged Coloured towns and cities in South Africa for the future if we, as far as name-giving is concerned, would see to it that such a town or city bears its own name. Just as each of us, just as every White town throughout the world, and just as virtually every institution only develops its own pride and character and is not merely considered to be an appendage to somebody or something else, and is not merely regarded as a virtually insignificant digit in a large number, so the Coloured town or city will only, once it has been given a name of its own, be able to develop its own pride through which it will be able to establish an identity and a character of its own for itself. That is why I think that, as far as the future is concerned, it is desirable for us to give strong consideration to the idea that, in developing Coloured towns and cities, names should be given which are characteristic of those places.

In considering the population position in South Africa, I think it is necessary that there should be proper overhead planning in regard to where the Coloureds may establish themselves in South Africa. I have already mentioned that from the year 1960 to 1970 the Coloured population increased at an annual rate of approximately 2,99 per cent as against the average annual rate of increase of 1,98 per cent for the Whites. This has had the effect that relatively the Coloured population in South Africa has increased at a much faster rate than has the White population. Since its numbers have already reached 2 017 000 it is important to note that 75 per cent of these 2 million Coloureds are settled in urban areas. At present 1 500 000 Coloureds are living in urban areas, as against the 500 000 who are living in rural areas. But what is also important to note, is that in the whole of South Africa there are only 23 places where more than 100 000 Coloureds are concentrated. Seven of these places are situated in the Cape Peninsula, so that, if we see the Cape Peninsula as one complex, there are only 17 places in South Africa which have Coloured populations numbering more than 10 000. Then we should also note that by the year 1970 the total Coloured population of the Cape Peninsula had already reached 589 000, which is equivalent to 29,3 per cent of their total population in South Africa. As this concentration is so dense a few areas only— i.e. Johannesburg, Durban, the Cape Peninsula, the Greater Western Province, in and around George, the South Western Cape, Port Elizabeth and East London—I think it is necessary that consideration should be given, in the first instance, to decentralization where necessary, but, in the second instance, also to centralization where it may serve a better purpose for the proper administration of Coloured towns and cities. Therefore I want to make the appeal that the idea of overhead planning be tackled by the Department of Planning on a more imaginative scale than has ever been the case before so as to ensure that the Coloured town and city of the future will also take into consideration the natural resources required for the purposes of proper planning. I am referring here to seaside resorts, dams, rivers and nature reserves. These assets, too, will in the future have to be used by the Coloured population of South Africa to an increasing extent. Therefore it will be necessary for us, if we are thinking of places of settlement and if we are thinking of decentralization, to bear in mind that these places of settlement will have to fit in with these holiday resorts which will in the future be used by the Coloureds to an ever increasing extent.

There is also a third step that has to be taken, namely that we shall to an increasing extent have to see to the proper development of every Coloured town and city. We shall have to ensure that proper provision is made for their own shopping centres, public places of entertainment and all those facilities required for a proper communal life. Whereas my time is particularly short now, I should like to ask here today whether it is not possible for the work being done today exclusively by White local authorities and provincial administrations as regards town and urban planning, to be handled, with the assistance of the Department of Community Development, by one central body for the Coloureds. It is immaterial whether this is the Department of Planning or a subdivision of it or any new body. It should be possible for this body to concentrate on town and urban planning for the Coloureds. In this regard I want to ask for proper use to be made of the Coloured Development Corporation as well. In view of the experience gained by that Corporation over the past nine years and in view of the major task it has to perform in the future for the development of the business life of the Coloureds, I want to ask that we should also make use of the knowledge gained by that body in undertaking town and urban planning.

Finally, I want to ask whether it is not possible for the Coloured Development Corporation to take another look at its own image. In spite of what it has already done, the fact remains that the needs of the Coloureds will become greater and greater in the future. In the year 1960 the per capital income of the Coloureds was R130, as against the per capita income of R1 200 of the Whites. By the year 1970 the per capita income of the Coloureds had increased to R250, as against the per capita income of R2 240 of the Whites. The total earnings of the Coloured population of South Africa increased from R201 million in 1960 to R520 million in 1970. In the year 1960 the total income of the Whites in South Africa amounted to approximately R3 600 million, i.e. approximately seven times as much as were the total earnings of the Coloureds in the year 1970. If we bear in mind that in numbers the Whites are virtually twice as many as the Coloureds, it amounts to the fact that by the year 1970 the purchasing power of the Coloureds was approximately one-third of that of the Whites in the year 1960. If we bear in mind what had already been established for the Whites in South Africa by the year 1960, and if we consider what the White towns and cities looked like at that stage already, it is obvious to me that there is going to be enormous purchasing power in the Coloured towns and cities of the future. Furthermore, we should bear in mind in this connection that as the per capita income of the Coloureds increases, so its rate of population growth will show a downward trend, as has been found to be the case with other peoples. With the increase in their income it will have a virtually catalytic effect. That means that between the years 1970 and 1980 we shall have a greater increase than we had from the year 1960 to the year 1970. In order to utilize this purchasing power properly, in order to canalize it properly for its own enterprises, the Coloured Development Corporation should to my mind give consideration once again to whether there may be new enterprises capable of meeting the very extensive needs of the Coloureds. Merely in passing I want to ask whether it is perhaps possible at this stage to start a building society of their own for the Coloureds. Such a building society could assist in financing housing for the middle income group among the Coloured population. I want to ask whether it is not possible for a large transport enterprise of their own to be established for the Coloureds. In this way it would be possible for bus transport to be managed by the Coloureds for the Coloureds themselves. Thirdly, with a view to our export position, I want to suggest that serious attention be given to the establishment of a cutting works for precious stones smaller than half a carat. I do not have the time to point out once again the important role such an industry could play in South Africa. I want to refer hon. members to a speech I made a year ago on the Economic Affairs Vote. I believe that these are but a few trends to which attention may be given by the Coloured Development Corporation in taking stock of its own future. I believe that this Corporation can be developed dramatically and that it can be a major instrument which may lead to the establishment of full-fledge Coloured towns and cities in South Africa.

Mr. Speaker, the speech made by the hon. member for Vasco consisted mainly of three parts. The first part of his speech was aimed at boasting of what the Government had done over the past few years. In fact, this part is therefore the propaganda part of the motion before the House at the moment. The hon. member wanted to boast of the 99 000 houses which had been built for the Coloureds at a cost of approximately R120 million. Then the hon. member pointed out that between 250 and 300 separate group areas had been set aside for these people, and, in the third instance, he referred to the educational facilities that had been made available to them. I believe that the last part of his speech contained quite a great deal about the positive side, i.e. when he said that there were many things that could be done amongst the Coloureds in order to exploit their purchasing power and in order to start new enterprises amongst them. I want to tell the hon. member that in that respect I do not find any fault, and I do not think that anybody on this side of the House can find any fault with what he said. When one really wants to discuss urban and town development for the Coloureds, the hon. member’s motion is to my mind a very confined one. We on this side of the House want to move an amendment to it at once. We want to give notice of it at once, and I move—

It is correct, as I have already said, that if all the factors are taken into account, this Government has done a great deal and has spent a great deal of money in regard to the establishment and erection of Coloured residential areas and houses. It does inevitably cost a great deal of money to make provision for the housing needs of the rapidly growing Coloured population. But, Sir, the Government should not only have made provision for that. While laying out residential areas for the Coloureds, it should also have made provision in these residential areas for those who had to be resettled in terms of the Group Areas Act, and this is in fact where one of the Government’s first difficulties started. It developed separate residential areas for the Coloureds, with the proviso that a considerable number of dwellings had to be set aside for those who were being resettled. This situation gave rise, in the first instance, to overcrowding in many of these areas because accommodation could not be found for all of them. Clear proof to this effect is to be found in the report made by Mr. Cleary, who was appointed at the time to inquire into the trouble at Gelvandale.

When was that report published?

Last year. The memory of the hon. member for Parow is very short. This commission found that there was a tremendous amount of overcrowding in some of those areas. Mr. Cleary pointed out that in these new Coloured residential areas there were 4,4 occupants per room, and that was because of the fact that accommodation had also to be found in those areas for those who were being resettled. In looking at the report issued by Prof. Cilliers some time ago on the situation in Cape Town, one finds that in our residential areas today there are a tremendous number of Coloureds for whom sufficient accommodation cannot be found. One finds not only that there is insufficient accommodation, but also that this shortage of accommodation does of course have a tremendous effect on one’s schools. In an address delivered by him he said the following in respect of the Western Province—

Are we doing too little for the Coloureds?

I have already told the hon. member what the reasons were which gave rise to this. The reason is that where new residential areas are laid out for these people, a large percentage of that housing should be set aside for those who are being resettled. The second consequence is that the normal development and establishment of adequate facilities in the form of schools, shopping centres and sports grounds, are not receiving sufficient attention. In that connection I can mention another example. It is estimated that in the Port Elizabeth area, where 61 sports grounds are required for the Coloureds, there are presently approximately 15 only. As a result of this development adequate provision has not been made for all the facilities required by these people. An additional consequence of this is that transport facilities for the Coloureds from and to their places of work have become hopelessly inadequate and too expensive. The need for residential areas for the Coloureds to be established within a short time, resulted in stereotyped houses having to be built on an economic as well as a sub-economic basis.

Sir, the hon. member for Vasco spoke about towns and cities for the Coloureds. He went so far as to say that these towns and cities had to be given their own names. Sir, I do not think that anybody could have any objection to a town or a residential area getting its own name, but I think that the hon. member is making a very big mistake in regard to this approach. As I see the position, these areas can make no more progress than to become suburban areas of the metropolis. Did the hon. member for Vasco refer to separate residential areas only, or did he refer to cities and towns in the true sense of the word? If that was not what he meant, he should tell us.

But, surely, he did say it.

When one talks about towns and cities, one does not only mean houses and flats in which people are living; one means a place which has an inherent economic vitality, such as a separate industrial area.

He did say that.

Sir, I want to put this question to the hon. member for Vasco : Is he thinking in terms of towns and cities for the Coloureds where they will also have industrial areas?

Yes.

Is the hon. member thinking in terms of an area such as Cape Town, with its own industrial areas in, for instance Tiervlei and Parow?

Why not?

If the hon. member is thinking in those terms, he should tell us exactly where these towns and cities are which he wants to start, because his motion says that the Government should proceed with this policy. After all, we are most certainly entitled to hearing from the hon. member what planning is taking place and where these parts are where they want to have towns and cities for the Coloureds.

Surely you can see that for yourself.

Are you blind?

The hon. member asks me whether I am blind. I think I know Cape Town, and I know Port Elizabeth just as well as the hon. member for Moorreesburg does. I want to ask him whether it is possible to set aside separate industrial areas for the Coloureds in its residential areas.

Yes.

If the hon. member wants that, then his policy is that we should have two separate economies, one for the Coloureds and one for the Whites. If that is his view, then surely it is sheer nonsense to say that we should develop in the direction of separate industrial areas for the Coloureds as well. If this is not the case, I want to say that the hon. member for Vasco has come forward here today with something new. In that case he is thinking along the lines of two separate economies. We on this side of the House believe that it is impossible to have a separate economy for the Coloureds and a separate economy for the Whites in this country. On the contrary, it is quite impossible, even in the Cape Province. I believe that close to every city and bigger town industrial areas should be set aside, and if there should be entrepreneurs amongst the Coloureds who are interested in industrial development, one could have no objection to those industrial areas also being used by them. They would then, of course, be available to both Whites and Coloureds. Now the hon. member wants to know what the difference is. There is a world of difference between setting aside an industrial area in Port Elizabeth, where Coloureds may also establish their factories and where Whites also have their factories, and establishing a separate town or city for the Coloureds where they will have their own industrial area. The Coloureds in the Cape Province are the main source of labour in such factories.

And you want to keep them here.

No. The Coloureds can develop into an entrepreneurs’ class. We admit that. To this side of the House it has already become apparent that certain basic mistakes have been made through this policy of separate development. In the first place, these areas are demarcated and set aside without proper consultation with the Coloureds. It often happens that these areas are situated far away from the places of work of the Coloureds, which causes them a great deal of inconvenience. It should be accepted as a matter of course that the White man alone cannot demarcate these areas, and that he cannot do so isolated from the Coloureds. We may not select for ourselves the best in this country. The co-operation of the Coloureds should be obtained in this respect. Up to now all the residential areas in the country have been demarcated on a one-sided basis, and the Coloureds have simply had to accept what they were offered. I am pleased that the hon. member for Vasco made one important point in saying that after the 250 to 300 areas for the Coloureds had been set aside, those areas would have to be regarded as permanent. In other words, if at a later stage development should, in turn, spring up around them, even White development around them, those people would stay there and would not have to be moved. I think in that respect the hon. member for Vasco made his line of thought clear. When such residential areas are set aside, due regard should be had to the emergence of a sophisticated middle-class amongst the Coloureds. They are there already, and will become an increasingly stronger group in the future as South Africa develops economically. But their taste differs and they are selective. It would be out of place to treat this sophisticated middle class amongst the Coloureds in the same way as those who are at a lower level of development. [Interjection.] Now the hon. member is being ridiculous. The idea is that when one sets aside residential areas for these people, one has to make proper provision in those separate residential areas for those people to rise even higher above the rest as time goes by. If we expect the Coloureds to accept residential separation, their facilities should be equivalent to ours, or stand a chance of becoming equivalent to ours as time goes by. The planning of residential areas may perhaps be seen as the atmosphere in which the socio-economic upliftment of the Coloureds should gain its real shape. In other words, there should be sufficient schools in those areas in order that compulsory education may in due course be introduced in definite stages. Many Coloured children are still loitering in the streets today because there is insufficient room for them at their schools. Double sessions have to be held, and there are not enough teachers amongst them.

Are you huckstering with the Coloureds?

Even if one wants to have so-called parallel development, it is necessary that our other facilities for these people should be sufficient and that they should have compulsory educational facilities as soon as possible. If attention is only given to township development, without having regard to these concomitant, important and essential amenities, residential area development will become nothing but an empty shell. That is why I also said that when these areas are developing, we should give due attention to the recreational facilities, and that we should afford these people an opportunity of allowing their cultural development to progress in a normal manner.

Are you also going to say this in Oudtshoorn?

I shall also take the speech of the hon. member for Vasco with me to Oudtshoorn, for that hon. member boasted of what had been done and he boasted of what more this Government was still going to do. [Interjections.]

Now I want to conclude by saying that the development of residential areas can only be significant if we also make available to those people proper educational as well as recreational facilities.

I could rise here now and deal very harshly with that hon. member who has just resumed his seat. I could take him back to a period, prior to 1948, when his party was in power in South Africa, one of the most sterile periods in the development process of the Coloured population of our country. That was the situation under bis party. It was the period when his party were only interested in the Coloured people of our country every five years when they used the Coloureds against their White political opponents. That was in the time of the United Party. I shall come back to the hon. member later. I should like to use my time more positively than to go on reminding him of that period.

The hon. member for Vasco, in my opinion, pointed out in a very effective way and also proved in all respects this afternoon that our Government has in an imaginative way during the past few years been engaged on what I want to call an impressive programme of Coloured community development in this country.

Nonsense!

The hon. member says it is nonsense. No one who wants to give an honest opinion can deny this today. The old shadowy, ambiguous existence on the fringes of every White community is rapidly giving way to the establishment of a population group in its own right. Nobody can deny that today, except when the hon. member climbs onto a political platform from one place to another and uses it against this Government. The old general dispensation of a White town with an unstable and amorphous location surrounding it, as we used to know it, has in recent years been deliberately and permanently reorganized by this Government into a sound and more fruitful neighbourliness. [Interjections.] Nobody can deny that today. Within the pattern of these dual towns which are arising today, our Coloured people have freehold title. They have freehold title, or may acquire it. What is more, in these dual towns our Coloured people have their own churches and schools. Here they have their own business concerns. I want to admit that we can still go a great deal further towards initiating, developing and giving added momentum to this, as the hon. member for Vasco said. What is more, here these people have their own community centres in their own neighbourhoods. And please note, the opportunity is there to ensure that these things can only be established with added momentum in future, towns, as the hon. member for Vasco said, with their own name and their own character.

To sum up, this is an indisputable part of the new ties which are being forged and the new structures which are being erected in the process of White/Coloured relations in this country. The hon. member cannot deny it. To sum up further, as far as living space is concerned, the White and the Coloured people today share one homeland, and we will keep on sharing it unless the inability to do so plunges us all into a catastrophe in this country. Personally I think that the pattern of growing parallelism which is taking place, for the most part here in the Boland, is, in its essence, an almost unparalleled adventure in human relations. This is the challenge confronting us, and under the guidance of this Government and under the guidance of the imaginative new process developed over the past few years in regard to the Coloured people of our country, I think we will in this respect be entering a new world. It is against this background that I want to make a few fundamental remarks today about the position of the Coloureds, particularly here in the Boland. What situation do we find if we consider the pattern of development over the past few years in the Boland, where three-quarters of the Coloured people of our country are concentrated, particularly in the Lesser Boland? In the first place we have the vast Cape metropolis, Cape Town with its Cape Flats; this vast growth region. Over the years all growth and development has radiated out from this metropolis. I have said this on a previous occasion and I again want to state very emphatically here today that all growth has radiated outwards in a northerly direction from Cape Town along the main transport routes, the main railway line to the north. Over the years a line of development has developed stretching out from this Cape metropolis in a northerly direction. You can see this with the naked eye: Vasco, Goodwood, Parow, Bellville, Kraaifontein, Brackenfell and right through into Paarl, Wellington and Worcester. That was the old growth pattern of the Boland.

As far as this growth pattern is concerned there is concern in Boland circles today—this is one of the oldest parts of our country—in regard to two points. You see it every day in letters appearing in the newspapers, and so on, and in studies published by our two Southern Universities over the years. The first is the situation of over-concentration in the Cape metropolis The hon. member for Bellville will elaborate on this in a moment, and I do not want to spend much time on this topic, except only to mention that it is a fact that in certain parts of the Cape Flats region there are places today where the natural growth of the Coloureds still verges on the biological maximum. Apart from that the Page Report, which appeared recently, indicates very clearly that the magnetic attraction of this metropolis on the surrounding Coloured population of the Boland today is such that they are being drawn here at an annual rate of approximately 3,43 per cent. Consequently I say that it is time we found an answer to this dilemma in our Cape metropolis. I shall return to that in a moment.

The other reason for concern, the other dilemma in which we find ourselves, is situated at another point along this line of growth which I indicated to you and which has developed over the years. The situation today is that in the Paarl, Wellington, and Franschhoek regions, where the best Boland agricultural land is to be found, that agricultural land is being utilized for housing schemes, inter alia also for our Coloured people. This is a source of concern.

How do we escape from these two dilemmas? We shall have to establish, with dramatic certainty—I want to call it this again—another line of development running from this Cape metropolis all along our coastline where our poorer agricultural land is situated. This line of development is already partially there and is discernable. We have Milnerton, the refinery, Blouberg and Melkbos, the proposed nuclear power station, the Minister’s announcement last year of the envisaged Mamre complex and so on. In embryo it is already there. I want to make a plea to the hon. the Minister today to the effect that we should develop this line of growth in such a way that it is not aimed inwards at the Cape metropolis, but outwards, away from the Cape metropolis. We must therefore at its furthermost point, beyond this envisaged Mamre set-up, where a new concept can be created with new planning, make use of an important means which we have at our disposal today to ensure new space and to bring new organization. What is that means? It is the principle of border area benefits. Other countries in the world are using many methods, a sliding scale for taxes or whatever it may be. In South Africa, particularly where we are creating new patterns in respect of our policy of divided territorial occupation, a separation between White and Black in the country, we are using this weapon, if I may call it that, of border area benefits.

Where do we stand today in respect of the Boland where three-quarters of our Coloured population is concentrated, and where we want to create new situations? An analysis can be made, and the Rieckert Report can be studied. In fact only sporadic mention is made in that report to this situation. Throughout the whole of the Cape today border area benefits are only being applied at a few points, i.e. in George, Oudtshoorn, De Aar, Kimberley …

Beaufort West.

No, Upington is the other one. Here in the Boland, where three-quarters of our Coloured population is concentrated, we have not even begun yet to apply this principle. In order to create this growth in that specific direction, in order to organize it as I have advocated, I want to ask the hon. the Minister to make an immediate start by introducing border area benefits at the furthermost point of this growth line, i.e. that point which will have Mamre as its nucleus, according to the announcement made by the hon. the Minister last year, in an environment which has a town of its own, namely Darling, just beyond this line at the furthermost point of the Mamre complex. I maintain that we should introduce those benefits there as a principle. I say without fear to the hon. member that we can subsequently develop a Coloured set-up around that Mamre complex, with free scope for the imagination and complete freedom. We are not afraid to do so. We must first stimulate this line of development which has to fit into the Boland structure at its furthest point. I want to make a plea to the hon. the Minister today that we should not only use this principle when dealing with the Black and White situation in this country, but that we should also make use of it where three-quarters of our country’s Coloured population is concentrated. At a later stage we can go further.

Last year the hon. the Minister of Water Affairs announced the Boland water plan. I want to say that in a brilliant way he gave one of the best formulations of what I have been advocating here. He came forward with certain ideas. He told us that the water of the Lower Berg River has a very high saline content and that in our Boland growth pattern we will ultimately have to take cognizance of the fact that the entire area of the Lower Berg River, owing to its saline water content and its poor agricultural land, is the region where the Boland will have to develop its industries. That is why I am advocating and requesting whether we cannot introduce this principle to stimulate, organize and develop our Boland growth pattern. This is one of the oldest and most beautiful civilized parts of our country.

I come next to the other point. I said that the other dilemma is the Paarl-Wellington-Franschhoek Valley where our greatest asset, our Boland agricultural land, is today falling victim to overlarge schemes in respect of our Coloured people. Here, too, there is a way out. I have advocated this here on a previous occasion, and I want to repeat it today. The starting point here is the same as the one found in the old traditional Coloured town of Mamre. In the vicinity of Mare one finds the poorest Boland agricultural land. One also finds a connection with another old traditional Coloured town such as Saron. This lies within the area of the water plan announced by the Minister, for it is situated on the Voëlvlei Dam and in this network which will develop in respect of the future Boland water supply. Today it forms the nucleus of this network. It is situated on the main transport route to the north. It lies in the poorest agricultural region of the Lesser Boland. Sir, I also want to make a plea to the hon. the Minister this afternoon. I can produce evidence from investigations which have been made. I can bring you letters from leading Bolanders published in the newspapers who are concerned about this situation. I want to advocate to the hon. the Minister that we should, as I have suggested, give added momentum and content to the Mamre situation. Let us take these two points as well in our Lesser Boland and create here a new situation which will make it possible for White and Coloureds to coexist to better advancement in future.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to say first of all that I always enjoy listening to the hon. member for Moorreesburg. I believe that he has the welfare and the interest of the Coloured people of the Western Cape, and particularly of the Boland, very much at heart. I have always been interested in his concept of a growth line up the Boland as a means of providing economic development and work for the Coloured inhabitants of that area. But I think that this idea is something for the very far distant future, if it is a practical idea.

I think what is necessary this afternoon is to consider the motion which we have in front of us, which is to deal with what the Government is doing in regard to the physical planning of towns and cities for the Coloured people of South Africa. The motion also suggests that what the Government is doing in this regard is helping to achieve their so-called policy of parallel development for the Coloured people. To me the whole concept of parallel development has always been something that I have found very difficult to understand. I must say that this afternoon’s debate has not helped me understand the concept any better. To me, parallel development has no meaning whatsoever when it is applied to the present position of the Coloured people. To me, the paths which the Coloured people are following in relation to the paths which the White people are following are not going parallel. In some cases, they are converging towards each other and in other cases they are diverging away from each other. In no case can I see parallel paths being followed, nor can I see in the so-called policy of parallel development where the ultimate aim of it is and what, in the minds of the Government, the ultimate achievement of this policy is to be.

It is just a bluff.

I am therefore this afternoon going to direct my remarks towards the position, as I know it, of the Coloured residential areas in South Africa, and examine what the true position in those areas is, as well as what progress they are in actual fact making towards developing into towns and cities. Because it is the area which I know best and where by far the greatest concentration of Coloured people in South Africa exists, I am going to relate my remarks to the greater Cape Town area. In that area some 600 000 Coloured people are living, which is about 40 per cent of the total urban Coloured population of South Africa and 30 per cent of the total Coloured population, urban and rural.

First of all I would like to say, and I say this with all emphasis, that I regard the provision of houses and homes as an end in itself, because the home is the shell in which the family unit lives, and our Western civilization and society is based on the family. The provision of housing is therefore one of the most important problems facing us I do not, at the same time, regard the establishment of towns and cities as an end in itself. They are a means to an end, a vehicle to provide the inhabitants who live in those areas with the means of satisfying their requirements and their social, economic, religious, cultural, recreational and other aspirations. Inherent in the concept of a town or a city is a concentration of people who have come together in a geographical area which can provide them with their livelihoods. It is a concentration of people who share services such as roads, lighting, draining, water and transport and who share amenities such as shops, halls, swimming pools, libraries, playgrounds, sports fields and so on, and who finance this concentration in one geographical area by some form of communal finance, usually in the form of a rate on immovable property within that area. This matter of finance and the ability to finance the concentration of housing and population presupposes that there should be an element of economic and financial viability within that area. In other words, to form a town or a city that concentration of population must be an economically viable one. It is against that background that I think we should judge whether the Coloured residential areas in greater Cape Town are measuring up to becoming towns and cities.

I would like to have a look at the five largest Coloured residential areas in greater Cape Town. These are Elsies River, which has a population of 63 000, Athlone 59 000, Bonteheuwel 40 000, Grassy Park 38 000 and Manenberg 36 000. All of these Coloured residential areas I have named are on the Cape flats and have all been established on the sandy waste areas of the Cape Flats, and they certainly all show signs of that fact. To a very large extent these Coloured residential areas have been established or expanded as a result of the need to rehouse the Coloured population following the implementation of the Group Areas Act and the resettlement of Coloured people from other areas. All of these areas, with the exception of Elsies River, are within the municipality of Cape Town where, shortly, the inhabitants of them will lose any right to vote for the body that will govern them. All of these areas, except parts of Athlone and central Grassy Park, where there are quite a number of attractive houses, contain in the main unattractive houses, mass-built houses, low-quality housing, and they are all overcrowded, as the hon. member for Newton Park has already said.

They all date from the time of the United Party.

These were all established a long time after the United Party was in power. Of these townships I would say that the housing position is worst in Elsies River, where I can only describe it as being quite appalling. You have only to fly over this area, which you can easily do as you take off from the D. F. Malan Airport, to see how unattractive these townships are, what an absence of gardens, what an absence of trees and in fact a virtual absence of vegetation of any kind there is. The amenities in these different townships, such as shops, halls, recreation facilities, vary very greatly in their adequacy. Here I would like to say that I think the Municipality of Cape Town has within its limited resources done a first-class job in trying to provide those facilities. But the amenities do vary and in no case would I say that they compare in any way with the amenities that are available in any White area.

I mention the quality of these Coloured residential areas, because if they are ever to become towns or cities with any form of self-government, I think before that can happen it will be necessary to engender a sense of pride in these communities in the inhabitants of them. I believe that the quality of these townships at present is far from being such that would engender any type of pride. Even more important as militating against the development of these Coloured residential areas into towns, is their socio-economic position in relation to the whole metropolitan complex of which they and the smaller Coloured residential areas are part. Whatever the hon. member for Vasco may say, these Coloured residential areas are satellites of greater Cape Town in the same way as Sea Point, Wynberg or any other White residential area is. Their geography on the fringes of a large metropolitan complex, and the whole nature of the metropolitan complex, dictate that that should be the position.

Mr. Speaker, may I ask he hon. member what the position will be when the present population of 589 000 Coloured people in the Cape Peninsula becomes 1 750 000 in 28 years’ time?

Mr. Speaker, I will be dealing with that in a minute or two. I would like to say that the livelihood of the inhabitants of these Coloured residential areas, as of all the inhabitants of the whole metropolitan area, comes out of the industrial and commercial structure of the area as a whole. It is necessarily so, because that industrial and commercial structure is indivisible. This is where we differ. We say that this is an indivisible economy.

We say it is a supplementary economy.

We in Cape Town, as others in other metropolitan areas of South Africa, are living in a completely integrated economy. It is as well to recognize that fact. There is not one economy for the Coloureds and one for the Whites; nor will there ever be, because to develop in that direction would mean to develop a poorer and not a richer society. Out of recognition of this fact that we are one integrated economy in this metropolitan area flows the logic that the Coloured people must be provided with adequate education, training and job opportunities. Most important of all, they must be paid the same for doing the same work, as any other worker is paid. It is the responsibility both of the Government by setting an example in its own service, as an employer itself, and of employers generally, to adopt a policy of paying the rate for the job. It is only by doing so that the security of the White worker will be guaranteed and that the reasonable economic aspirations of the Coloured people will be satisfied. If we do not do this we are going to engender only discontent, frustration and bitterness amongst the Coloured people and we are going to be left with a White working population that is not secure because, as the hon. member for Vasco has already indicated, there is going to be growth in this economy and that growth is going to come mainly, as far as the labour force is concerned, from the Coloured population.

Before my time has expired, I would like to say something about the social, as opposed to the economic, aspirations of the Coloured people in these Coloured residential areas. Like the Whites the Coloured people fall into different social classes with different social aspirations. It is quite clear that the more they develop and the higher the living standards they achieve, the higher their aspirations will become. Already under the various apartheid measures which are being applied to them they have to suffer under inferior residential areas, a hopelessly inadequate distribution of amenities and they have to suffer by not being allowed to share some of the best amenities that are available in the area. Let us face it, this is something that is causing resentment and this is driving Coloureds not on a parallel line with the Whites, but right away from them. How would we as Whites feel if we were residents of a place such as Kensington, which is one of the better-class Coloured residential areas in greater Cape Town? It is an area that is surrounded by good White areas such as Pinelands, Goodwood, Milnerton and Maitland. It is only two to three km away from the nearest suitable beach, but its inhabitants are forced, if they want to bathe, to go to the nearest place where they are allowed to bathe, namely Strandfontein, which is 25 km away. If they do not like that they must go to Soetwater, which is about 50 km away. In all sincerity I want to suggest that what is needed urgently and primarily is consultation between us and the Coloureds, so that we may talk about these problems “with” the Coloured people and not “at” them or “to” them or “about” them. I want to suggest that secondly a review of the discriminatory measures is needed under which the Coloured people in these Coloured residential areas are suffering with a view to taking into account the dignity and aspirations of those people. That is what is needed and not a will-o’-the-wisp policy such as so-called parallel development. I have much pleasure in supporting the amendment.

Mr. Speaker, we owe the introducer of this motion a fairly large debt of gratitude today for having created various opportunities for us. He created the opportunity for us to reflect on this question of the establishment of Brown towns in cities here in the Western Cape, and to do so in a meaningful way. We are grateful to him for that. I think we are also grateful to him because he elicited certain standpoints from the side of the Opposition, which make their thoughts a little more clear to us. We have, inter alia the amendment which was tabled. If I heard that amendment, correctly, it actually upbraids the Government to some extent for not having done enough in connection with the creation of housing here in the Boland. Alternatively, the amendment tells us that we have declared too many group areas. In other words, the standpoint of the hon. member for Newton Park, who moved the amendment, is either that we have provided too little housing for the Coloureds and that we have not done enough for them in this sphere, or that we have declared too many group areas, with which he then does not agree. He must adopt one of these two standpoints, also for the voters of Oudtshoorn.

Oh, but that is logic for you!

Then there is another standpoint of the United Party which has become clear to us today, and that is that they are still adhering to the principle which has been applicable for 300 years in South Africa, i.e. that the Coloured population must remain the lackeys and attendants of the Whites in the White cities. One finds this in a remark made by the hon. member who has just sat down. With reference to the Coloured towns situated on the Cape Flats, he says: “They are mere satellites of greater Cape Town”.

That is their character.

When I asked the hon. member what was going to become of them in the future, the reply of the hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central, of which we should also take cognizance was: “Will Blikkiesdorp ever get off the ground?” This is the kind of reaction one gets from these hon. members when one wants to conduct a meaningful discussion on the creation of new living space, as I should like to call it, for our Brown people here in the Western Cape. There is something they do not appreciate, and that is the fact that the towns, and these include even the sub-economic schemes, which have been established under National Government rule over the past 25 years, have been established so as to be economic and so as to enable the Coloureds eventually to acquire ownership within those schemes. It has been done in such a way that they will eventually be able to realize their pride in the schemes which have been established. They do not face these facts, but they regard these schemes which have been established on the Cape Flats merely as “satellites” or “blikkiesdorpe”, to use the words of the hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central.

I want to say that I, like the hon. member for Constantia, want to approach the motion from the point of view of those of us living in the Peninsula, and then I am speaking of the magisterial district of Bellville, Cape Town, Wynberg and Simonstown in particular. I want to say that we are concerned about the larger concentration of Coloureds in the Peninsula. The over-concentration of Coloureds is the first problem to us. There is not only the natural growth with which we have to cope, but also the influx to which the hon. member for Moorreesburg referred. The 1970 census figures tell us there are approximately 2100 000 Coloureds in South Africa, and 86 per cent of them, i.e. 1750 000, live in the Cape Province. Of those Coloureds, 29 per cent live in the Peninsula alone. That is approximately 600 000 people, which is almost a third of the Coloured population of the entire country. These 600 000 Coloureds all live within the magisterial districts I have just mentioned. We are concerned not only about this concentration, but also about the growth. This growth creates an imbalance as far as the concentration of Whites and the concentration of Coloureds in this area is concerned. This growth can, in the first instance be blamed, if one may use this word, on the birthrate of the Coloureds. We find that the White birthrate is 22,4 per 1 000 per annum—this is a 1968 figure if I am not mistaken—whereas the Coloured birthrate is 42 per 1 000 per annum. The net growth of Whites is only 13,4 per 1 000 as against the 27,1 per 1 000 of the Coloureds. Hon. members will see that their growth is virtually twice the growth of the Whites. It is calculated that for every fertile woman there are 6,6 babies, and once again I repeat that these figures are based on 1968 figures. These figures may already have changed.

We are concerned not only about the normal growth, but also about the movement of the Coloureds to the cities. We have experienced a tremendous population increase in the Peninsula over the past decade. When the census figures of 1960 are compared to those of 1970, they bring the following interesting figures to light: The total population growth of the Whites in the Cape was 11 per cent during that period, whereas the population growth in the four magisterial districts in the Peninsula was approximately 24 per cent. The population growth of the Coloureds over the entire Cape Province was 33 per cent for that decade, whereas the population growth of the Coloureds in the Peninsula was approximately 43 per cent. Therefore hon. members can see that there has been a tremendous influx of Coloureds into the Peninsula over the past decade; as a matter of fact, the Provincial Administration in its overall planning of the Cape Flats, in which it has made an advance estimate for the period 1960-’80, envisages a White population growth rate of something in the order of 331 per cent up to the year 1980, whereas the growth rate of the Coloureds will be something of the order of 100 per cent in the corresponding period. I have already given the figure of 43 per cent as the population growth of the Coloureds in the past decade, and consequently it seems as though the Coloureds will in fact reach the 10 per cent mark. The White population of the Peninsula is at present approximately 380 000, and I am speaking in round figures, whereas we have a Coloured population of approximately 600 000. We as Whites in the Peninsula are concerned about this imbalance, and about this growing imbalance. We think other steps will have to be taken in order to create space where the Coloureds can settle. For that reason I sincerely endorse the views expressed by the hon. member for Moorreesburg. He pleaded for the establishment of new cities and towns so that the increasing population growth of the Coloureds may be established in their own areas, i.e. at Mamre, at Saron, and wherever other growth points may be created. Moreover, I sincerely endorse his idea that border area benefits should be given to these areas. Then I also sincerely endorse the idea that these towns and cities should be transferred fully to the Coloureds so that they may undertake its administration altogether.

We as Whites here in the Peninsula, draw the conclusion and observe that where the Whites come into competition with the Coloured labour market in the Peninsula, the Whites show an inclination to move to the northern provinces. In this way the market is then left completely to the Coloureds. In this way we find that the trades of plasterer, joiner, labourer, shoemaker, plumber and all the different trades are virtually fully occupied by Coloureds. Whites who have to compete with them, prefer to move elsewhere. The reason for this is obvious. It is, to be specific, the exploitation of cheaper, and let me say it, more obliging labour from the side of the Coloureds. Our employers are not prepared to pay the higher wages involved in the employment of White labourers.

This uncontrolled growth has detrimental effects for the Coloureds themselves too. I use the term “uncontrolled”, but one could rather use the term “continuous” as far as the growth of the Coloured towns on the Cape Flats is concerned. We have a backlog as far as housing is concerned, and we do not deny this. Apart from this backlog, we have the enormous influx from the rural areas. In our environs we already have the squatters camps which have to be replaced by proper housing. Apart from that, we are experiencing an enormous problem at present with squatters who move into the cities and who are not able to find any housing. Then they simply settle down among the Port Jackson bushes around our White cities. Serious attention is being given to these matters, but it will demand all our attention to combat this attraction which the Cape metropolis has, and to attract these squatters to other centres. To us there is also a definite correlation between bad housing, i.e. housing in squatters camps or in squatters huts, and the exceptionally high population growth of the Coloureds. It appears from reports that as soon as the Coloureds are provided with decent accommodation, their birth rate decreases. We are concerned about this very exceptionally high birth rate. For example, it is estimated that, as far as housing is concerned, we shall have to build approximately 28 500 economic houses and 14 800 sub-economic houses from the year 1970 to the year 1975. These houses have to be built at a rate of at least 10 000 units per year. We are afraid that if we continue at this rate, the whole of the Cape Flats will eventually be taken up by Coloured housing and that by the year 2000 we shall find on the Cape Flats a Coloured city twice the size of the present-day Johannesburg. With this idea in mind, we who live here in the Peninsula think that alternative space and an alternative attraction will have to be found for these masses of people.

We hardly see our way open to provide proper housing for the Coloureds looking for housing, and then one still has the middle class and the upper middle class to whom speakers on that side referred. They are people who want their own facilities, people who want a view and people who want a choice of areas. I have a feeling that the emigration of our Coloureds to other countries is connected to the fact that their middle and upper middle class do not have upper middle class facilities. They want to get away from an environment in which crimes are committed, and in the year 1968, 69 out of every 1 000 Coloureds committed some crime or other. The illegitimate births among the Coloureds are known. Whereas this figure is 1,63 per 1 000 among the Whites, it is 36,76 per 1 000 among the Coloureds.

Apart from this need for housing, there are also needs for the building of communities. We hardly have enough time and money to provide proper housing, and in addition we must still create communities in which these people can live, otherwise we will create one big Brown proletariate which we shall have to take into account in the future. We must get communities in which the people live. We must, as the hon. member for Constantia put it, give these people living space, but I am asking for more than just living space. I say that we must give them living space, a place where they will be able to realize themselves, and one which will meet all their social and political needs. We are aware of the fact that these services are at present provided mainly by White institutions—White institutions which promote this community life, such as the Police, the schools, the magistrate’s offices, the municipalities and churches. Sir, while I am on this subject of churches, I have to point out that the idea of the creation of a community life in these Brown cities on the Cape Flats is receiving and has received the serious attention of the White sector here in the Cape Peninsula. To be specific, a mission campaign has been launched here by the Whites, a campaign which envisages the collection of R½ million for the building of churches for the Coloureds on the Cape Flats. I think this is a commendable and praiseworthy campaign. A great deal of money has been collected in this regard. These community services have been provided by Whites up to now—to my mind, too much by Whites. The situation must come about where the Coloureds provide these community services for themselves so that they will be able to develop their own pride in this respect. These Coloured towns must stop being mere appendages of the White cities. They themselves must take over their protection; they themselves must take over their municipal services; they themselves must provide their professional services—the services of medical practitioners, the services of attorneys, the services of auditors. They themselves must be able to provide all these services for themselves in their own towns. But because they are situated so nearby, here at the foot of Cape Town, under the traditional economy which has developed here in Cape Town and its environs over the years and which is controlled by the Whites, it is difficult for the Coloureds to find their own feet here.

Sir, then I come to the idea of trade facilities. I think it is also difficult for them to develop their own trade facilities in this big complex. With the large concentration of Coloureds here on the Cape Flats, where there are approximately 600 000 people, it surprises me that large chain-stores such as Checkers and the O.K. Bazaars have not been established as yet. The reason for that is the fact that the established White interests in this area are still too strong and the fact that the Coloureds do not feel themselves up to competing with them, because they have a lack of experience, because they have a lack of entrepreneurs, a lack of capital, a lack of know-how, a lack of leadership in the business world. This situation may be remedied if they get towns of their own, towns they themselves will control completely, towns which are removed to a certain extent from the strong White influence which obtains at present.

By way of summary, I want to say that it is in the interest of both the Whites and the non-Whites that very little or no further Coloured development will take place in the Cape Peninsula. I am now speaking of the extension of residential areas. It is in the interest of both the Whites and the Coloureds that industries and towns should be established elsewhere for them where they will be removed to a certain extent from the strong economic influences which obtain in this established Cape metropolitan area. There we shall have to make provision not only for housing for them, but also for residential areas with full community services. There we want to create new living space for them, not only living spaces but living space in which they will be able to give full expression to their own aspirations. The freedom we do not begrudge ourselves we gladly give to them as well.

Mr. Speaker, I have listened with very great interest indeed to the three hon. members on the other side who have spoken to this motion, and I must confess that I am totally nonplussed by the failure of any of them to speak to the motion as printed on the Order Paper. The hon. mover himself gave us all kinds of statistics; he spoke about the social conditions of the Coloured people and about their education, but he did not touch at all on the question of the physical planning of towns and cities for the Coloured population in order to realize the orderly and successful evolution of the policy of separate development. Sir, I am half-inclined to believe that this was merely put on the Order Paper to give the hon. member for Moorreesburg a platform to put forward again the plea which he makes year by year for the development of the Coloured people in the Boland. Sir, the one thing which the hon. member for Moorreesburg has not yet told us in this House, and which not one single Nationalist has ever touched upon, is how you are going to achieve a separate status, a separate development, a parallel development, for the Coloured community away from the strength of the White economy. The hon. member for Vasco, by way of an interjection, said that he regarded the economy of South Africa not as being a unitary economy, but as being a fragmented economy. [Interjection.]

It was the hon. member for Pietersburg.

Did I misunderstand the hon. member?

I said “a supplementary development”.

Sir, now we have another one: We now have a supplementary development; we now have parallel, supplementary development. I must confess that I would like somebody on that side to explain just exactly what we are getting to.

How do you explain your integration?

Sir, the hon. member for Parow uses the word “Integration”, which has become such a swear word in South Africa, but I want that hon. member to tell me where there is any sign in the Western Cape, or anywhere else in South Africa that the Coloured community is moving apart form the White economy. We have been told that there are going to be something like 2 million Coloured people here in 28 years’ time. If you are going to have parallel development of any sort at all, where are the people to develop other than, to use the words of the hon. member for Constantia, in areas which are satellites of the White cities of South Africa where all the economic development of South Africa is concentrated? This is why the hon. member used the word “satellite”. You can create cities, towns or settlements or anything you like, but the one problem that we have been discussing the whole of the week is the Railways, and the Railways today are focusing their prime attention on moving masses of non-White people into the urban areas where employment is concentrated.

You are now talking about something that nobody spoke about.

Sir, I am talking to the motion. I am the only one in the House who has spoken to the motion, and this is what the hon. the Minister will have to talk to this afternoon when he talks about the orderly planning of towns and cities for the Coloured people.

Tell us how you would do it.

Sir, I will come to the hon. the Minister in a minute. Sir, the hon. member for Moorreesburg makes this yearly plea for these people, and it is a plea from his heart; he asks that this area should be given border area facilities. Is the hon. the Minister going to give them border area facilities?

Is it wrong to make such a plea?

Why does the hon. the Minister not accede to the hon. member’s plea? If the hon. the Minister is attempting to create parallel development for the Coloured people, why does he not assist the hon. member for Moorreesburg to achieve what he is trying to achieve? Sir, if we are going to have parallel development for the Coloured people, then let us accept one thing, and that is that what you have to do is to identify and to mobilize Coloured capital. Surely if you are going to have a parallel community, that is not to be merely part and parcel of the White community, which I believe it is the stated intention of the Nationalist Party to avoid ….

But surely it does not mean that South Africa will have two economies?

The hon. member for Vasco talks about a supplementary economy.

Why did you not listen to him? He talks about industrial development in the Coloured areas as supplementary to the White economy.

In the rural areas.

May I ask then when this is going to start, because the figures given to us in respect of the Coloured Development Corporation show that the corporation, with a capital of some R8 million, has made loans to 148 businesses amongst something like 2 million Coloured people in South Africa today? When are we going to start with the development and stop talking about it?

On the lines you suggest, never.

Because at present we have not even got onto Square 1. The hon. the Minister should wait until his turn comes, then he can have a chance to talk. I really think that we have a National Party today with a policy which is in shreds and tatters. They have been talking and talking about parallel development, but they have not even left Square 1. The thought has crossed my mind that the National Party for many years has had this popular mythology in its mind that they are the latter-day Israelites escaping out of Egypt, but I must say that to-day, in the state they are in, they look far more like the Egyptians escaping out of Israel. [Interjections.] Whether they have their shoes on or not, I do not know.

Do you know what that means?

I believe this is one of the great problems we have, and that is that if you are seeking any kind of development, even political development— and I am sure the hon. the Minister will agree with me that the idea of the Government is that there should be separate political institutions and separate political development for the Coloureds—now can you find any kind of meaningful political community unless there is a firm economic base on which that community is going to be built?

And a firm territory.

The territory is something which is beyond my understanding. I am in good company. If you wish to have a political community which is going to be separate, there has to be a firm economic base for that community, otherwise it cannot exist or maintain a separate identity. One of the great problems is the poverty of the Coloured community. For some years I have been asking the hon. the Minister questions as to when he is going to come to a decision in regard to the allocation of Coloured areas in Pietermaritzburg. I have a statement here by the hon. the Minister which sets out the reasons why he is going to go from the Woodlands area, which is now fully developed, and create a new development for the Coloured community of Bishopstowe.

Did you not see the plan?

I saw it, and that is the reason that made me decide to speak in this debate. I want to ask the Minister the reason. I am making a statement and the Minister can refute it if he wants to. I want to know the reason why the Coloured community in Piertermaritzburg has been split as they have been by the declaration of Bishopstowe. I say it is basically for one reason only. The reason why the Coloured community has been split, with all the attendant discomforts which are being forced upon them, is the poverty of the Coloured community of Pietermaritzburg; because the prime reason is that the extensions of the Woodlands area is of such a nature that only high-cost development can take place there, which is regarded, as I am given to understand, by the hon. the Minister’s department and I believe by the Corporation of Pietermaritzburg as being that the development is of such a nature that the Coloured community cannot afford and support development of that nature. As the result of the poverty of the Coloured community, the whole of the development of that community, which is a tightly knit community today, a community with a very definite sense of purpose and of common interest, is now to be split and a totally new community will be created. I fail to see that this has anything to do with the ordinary and successful realization of the policy of parallel development. It merely means that there will be another group area allocated to the Coloured community which is close to the sources of industrial employment in Pietermaritzburg. I will await with interest to hear what the hon. the Minister has to tell me about this, and how he can relate the decision that he has made with what is stated here in this motion, that the Government are embarked upon a policy of parallel development.

I wish to touch very briefly, because I have not much time left, on something which may be called “this unimaginative development”. The hon. member for Vasco asks the Government to promote this planning imaginatively. Here I have the plan for Milton Canes, where the Government of Great Britain decided to build a new town of some ¼ million people north of London to absorb the excess population of London. There are some criteria laid down in this plan, a plan which is being implemented to contain the full ¼ million people by 1990. There was a corporation appointed. I want to ask the Minister whether he agrees with some of the criteria which were laid down, and perhaps he can tell me where these criteria are being applied. There is the opportunity and freedom of choice; easy movement and access and good communications; a balance and variety in the community; an attractive city; public awareness and participation in what is going on, and an effective and imaginative use of the resources of the community. Now I think that if we were to go through these, as the plan does one by one, we would find that the planning which has taken place up to this stage has been sadly lacking. One of the points already made by the hon. member for Constantia is that if you are going to simply lump together in a community people of all walks of life without any kind of distinction, you are going to extinguish the one thing which has got to emerge, and that is a social elite which forms the basis for leadership. I can see no evidence that this is happening or that anything is being created which will allow that sort of leadership to emerge. Another thing is that the hon. member for Bellville mentioned the government of these areas by the coloured people themselves. On what basis are they going to govern? Where are the rates going to come from? What money is going to be made available so that they can have an effective and real administration of the areas concerned, when they are areas which are in many instances sub-economic? How does the Government intend to involve the minds and the thoughts of those people in the practical affairs of the day-to-day administration of the areas in which they find themselves? There are the roads. In this plan they go out of their way to ensure that where you have a choice of two routes for a road, you take the one which throws you off from the straight and narrow and gives you a variety of views, so that you are not simply hedged in and regimented, but have a choice, so that the thing is attractive, and that you will see a pleasing aspect as you drive along the roads of this community. There is the detailed planning, the thought that has gone into it to make it a place which is attractive to live in and which will have a meaning in the hearts of the people who live there. If you are going to achieve real orderly development of this kind of thing, you have to involve the minds of the people in the places in which they are living. I want to ask the Minister to tell me where in the planning he has done has he succeeded in achieving that kind of thing, and where he has succeeded in achieving a decent and pleasant community in which to live, in which the people are becoming involved and they busy themselves attempting to improve the environment in which they find themselves; because that is going to be the key to the whole of this development. I say that political change very seldom comes from people who are abjectly poor and down-and-out, but from people whose hopes have been rising, who can see a brighter horizon way ahead of them, but find something which has put itself as a block between them and that horizon. That is what this Government is doing to the Coloured community.

Mr. Speaker, the motion was interesting and thus far the discussion of it has been very good. I want to ask the Opposition to pardon me if I say that the introducer’s speech and the other two speeches on this side of this House were very high-ranking speeches and worthy of this motion in all respects. Those speeches were worthy of this House. I do not want to say the speeches on the opposite side of the House were poor, but I do want to say this: the motion is a positive one, and the whole attitude revealed by hon. members opposite showed a completely negative approach. It seemed to me as if the hon. members were only criticizing, only breaking down and only putting questions, but were not giving us a clear indication of what they suggest for the future settlement of the population groups of this country. It seemed to me as though they did not want to commit themselves. I do not know whether this was with a view to Oudtshoorn or for whatever reason.

I shall try to say what I want to say to this House, as briefly as possible, and then I shall use the remaining time for replying to the arguments and speeches of the hon. members opposite. I want to say that thus far our planning of the towns and cities for the Coloured people in South Africa has in the first place been based on the principle that the various population groups should live separately. We believe that for the sake of good relations in this country, there should be separate residential areas for the various population groups. This is the basis on which we work. In view of that, we created machinery, which we are using. That machinery is the Group Areas Act. Not every one is satisfied with what is done in terms of the Act and certainly not all the Coloured people are always satisfied with what is done for them and with them in terms of that Act. However, the fact of the matter is that this Act was and is a good planning instrument, if it is applied with sympathy and understanding, for establishing Coloured towns and cities and then developing them. It remains the policy of the Government that there should be separation in respect of residential areas, and that we should use this machinery in order to bring it about. But where does the Opposition stand in this regard? When I have said what I should like to say, I shall come back to this and then we can thrash out the matter further.

The planning of these Coloured towns and cities is, in the second place, based on reality. It is based on the dire necessity and need for Coloured housing. Therefore it is not perfect; therefore it is not always as one would like to see it, but it is not as bad either as hon. members opposite alleged. Of course, we too should like to see it being different. There are many sub-economic houses, but we must at least bear in mind that those loans have to be repaid. Those rents must be paid by the people living in those houses, and therefore I say that although there is always an ideal, there is also a reality which must be taken into account. Our policy for the planning of these matters is based on reality.

My aim is to provide as many economic houses as possible for the Coloured people. It will be a happy day for us in South Africa when the Coloured people all live in fine towns. There are some already, but the hon. members opposite spoke as if there were no such towns.

Where?

Here in the Peninsula there are various places to which I can take the hon. member.

Mention one place where there is a town.

Belhar, for example, or Bellville South. I can take the hon. member to places where the professional class of Coloured person is living and where there are good residential areas. We would be glad if we could provide more of these. These towns must be given substance. A town must develop character; a community must live in it. It is our endeavour to bring this about, but we have problems to contend with. There is the problem of where the money is to come from. All these things cannot be established simultaneously. We are trying our utmost in this regard. There are business centres in these Coloured towns. The Coloureds themselves have to be trained, and it is a long road. The Coloured Persons’ Development Corporation is playing its part and we are using it in order to achieve this objective. Recreation facilities have to be provided, provision has to be made for entertainment and other social services have to be provided. Hon. members must please not make the mistake of looking only at the Coloured towns existing at present. Those towns were born of emergency and necessity, but they will not be there for ever. They have been planned in such a way that sub-economic housing schemes can be converted into economic housing schemes. We all like looking at photographs of old towns to see what they looked like years ago, and then we ask: “Who would say it is the same town today?” In the same way, photographs taken of these Coloured towns will be displayed in future and then the question will also be asked: “Can one imagine that this is what our town looked like years ago?” At present we are planning the last big Coloured city at Mitchellsplein on the Cape Flats. At least two hon. members opposite have been to see the model of that new town.

Thanks to the Cape Town City Council.

Just listen to that: “Thanks to the Cape Town City Council.” Can the hon. member not rather say: “Thanks to the Minister of Community Development?” However, this is what they are like: Negative, destructive. [Interjections.] The hon. member for Green Point is one of the hon. members who went to look at the model, and he was impressed. He is admitting how impressed he was. [Interjections.]

Order!

He was impressed, but now he adopts a destructive attitude and the Cape Town City Council must get all the credit and the Government must get nothing.

Who provides the funds? [Interjections.]

The hon. member admits, however, that this Government plans. I am so pleased to hear that. That means that he also admits that this motion is correct, that it is 100 per cent correct, because the Government is planning the Coloured towns and cities of the future imaginatively. The hon. member has admitted this now and I am very pleased about it. As the existing Coloured towns and cities in South Africa are replanned, they will all look like that and much better. There will be balanced communities in those towns and they will not merely be places where the people go and sleep at night. The hon. members are for ever staring at what they are seeing now, to the exclusion of all else. What faith, what imagination! Are these people to whom one can entrust a country?

Never! [Interjections.]

I shall come back to the hon. members later, because I want to know from them how they are going to handle these matters.

However, I first want to point out that resettlement played a part in the provision of housing. There must be no mistake about that, and I admit it. What resettlement has this Government done?

Everything!

Yes, and then it must also be remembered that it removed people from slums and resettled them. I want to ask the hon. members opposite whether the Coloured people should still have been living in those slums today. [Interjections.] All the stories those hon. members told here this afternoon mean nothing, because they do not know what is going on. A month ago they drove around the Coloured areas of the Cape for the first time with the leaders of the Coloured Labour Party, but now they talk about them. [Interjections.]

What, to a certain extent, is at the core of our problem? Numbers. I say that numbers cannot be divorced from the Coloured problem and its solution. I should very much like to repeat briefly what I said at the National Party congress at Goudini last year, where the Press was present. In the first place, I referred to the increase of the Coloured population and then I mentioned figures with reference to the 1960 and 1970 census surveys in order to indicate how quickly it had taken place. The hon. member for Bellville also spoke about it this afternoon. I said the following at the time (translation)—

Then I elaborated further on the education question. Subsequently I spoke in the same spirit about pensions and also mentioned all these things which the hon. member for Bellville, amongst others, mentioned. Then I came to housing and said the following—

I went on to say that it was in the greatest interests of the Coloured family itself and that they could raise their standard of living in that way. In that way they could obtain better housing, as well as better care and education for their children. They would be able to progress more rapidly on the road the Coloured people themselves want to take, the road of upliftment and development. I said it was a guarantee of better mutual acceptance and relations between Whites and Coloured people. I said that, on the other hand, uncontrolled numbers were a threat to mutual acceptance and future White-Coloured relations. I am not talking on behalf of this or that individual; I am talking on behalf of the Coloured people, the Coloured mothers, families and community. But I am not going to elaborate further on the matter. I can discuss it further on my Vote.

Then there is another matter. We spoke of numbers here. As in the case of the Whites, a growing urbanization process is taking place among the Coloured people. Reference was made to it here. I do not want to analyse the reasons for it now, but the Coloured people have freedom of movement in this country. They also go to where there are schools and employment opportunities. They also follow the present-day pattern of moving to the cities. But it is not the case that we are simply silently folding our arms, issuing proclamations and building houses—we are also trying to give direction to these developments. One of the ways in which we try to give direction to them is the encouragement of industrial development. For that reason we adjusted the border areas policy a few years ago in order to make it applicable to other decentralized areas as well. Let me mention the Orange Free State to you as an example. In the Free State there are small numbers of Coloured people scattered all over the province. Perhaps there are 80, perhaps 120. They can never form a proper community in the little town in which they are living. On the contrary. They are swallowed up by the Bantu. In the Free State we have now, by means of border area benefits and establishment incentive measures at Heilbron, Bloemfontein and recently at Welkom as well, encouraged industrialists to go and establish themselves there on the basis of the exclusive utilization of Coloured labour. We have already achieved a reasonable degree of success with this. We are applying the same idea in the Transvaal and in Natal.

But let us look at the Cape Province, where nearly all the Coloured people are living. In all our towns, except those in the Eastern Cape, which are still under discussion, we have proclaimed and have already developed Coloured group areas. Our aim is to provide as much employment as possible to the Coloured people in the rural areas and to keep them there. For this reason Kimberley, Upington. De Aar and Beaufort West have been designated —I personally have already visited Middelburg and Graaff-Reinet as well—as places in respect of which industrialists who establish themselves there and employ Coloured people exclusively, may apply to the Decentralization Board for establishment benefits, on the same basis as an industrialist who goes to the Bantu homeland border areas. It is being done in order to try to bring about development there and to try to keep the people there. We all realize the Government cannot send factories there. It is completely out of the question. I do not think there are still people who are under that impression. It is up to the local people themselves, if they have the facilities, to find the entrepreneurs to establish themselves there. This policy also applies to other towns in the Cape Province.

I should now like to confine myself more specifically to planning in the Western Cape. I have already referred to Mitchellsplein. I should like to repeat here this afternoon that this is the last big development on the Cape Flats to which I shall be agreeable. There may be smaller adjustments and finishing touches, but this is the last big development there. It is going to be a big development. A quarter of a million people are going to live there. It has been well planned. If hon. members want to see it, they can get in touch with Dr. Morris, the City Engineer. In his office there is a very large model of that city with its residential areas, school areas, open spaces, hospitals and business and financial centres, all of which are together as one balanced complex.

Is it going to be a city or a town?

I do not know. I suppose the hon. member can call it what he likes. I said a moment ago that in the years ahead the existing Coloured towns on the Cape Flats will be replanned and rebuilt in this way. I really want to say to hon. members that I almost want to refuse to believe that if there can be a town just like Goodwood at Athlone, there can be any objection on earth to it. This is what we are looking at imaginatively and what we are envisaging for the future.

We spoke about the increasing urbanization. I became convinced that we had to establish another large urban complex for the Coloured people. Therefore I announced last year that a large Coloured group area was being proclaimed at Mamre, with a view to the development of a large, balanced urban area or areas. Seven thousand hectares of additional land is being purchased there, and this area may be considerably enlarged and extended as and when necessary. The Government has decided that this Mamre complex will be recognized as a growth point in the industrial decentralization programme. It goes without saying, of course, that it will be done on the basis of Coloured labour. The industrial development will take place in an industrial area which will be developed within or adjoining the new Mamre area. White and Coloured industrialists will be able to go and establish themselves there. The planning and development of the Mamre area, which includes the planning and development of the above-mentioned industrial area, as well as the provision of the necessary infrastructure—we must plan the area as a whole—will still take a considerable time. But it will be an exceptional development. Therefore I decided to make use on a limited basis of the establishment facilities already existing at Darling. In this regard I should like to emphasize a few factors. I should like to appeal to the Opposition please to give me a chance to finish saying this. Firstly, any industrialist who wants to establish himself at Darling—once again, of course, only on the basis of Coloured labour—must do so on the basis of the existing facilities the town council has already provided there or, if not, he must provide the necessary facilities from his own resources. Secondly, such an industrialist will qualify to apply to the Decentralization Board for establishment assistance. Every case will be treated on its merits by the Decentralization Board. Thirdly, with a view to the envisaged development of the industrial area in Mamre, no infrastructure assistance will be offered to Darling. In any case. Darling already has the necessary services to accommodate limited industrial development. I am still negotiating with the I.D.C. to erect the necessary factory installations at Darling on an economic basis according to their customary long-term basis and in terms of fixed contracts which industrialists are prepared to conclude with them. I want to emphasize that what I have just said, does not bind the I.D.C. and that their course of action and assistance will probably depend on the willingness of industrialists to conclude agreements. I may just say that Mr. De Waal of the I.D.C. will be in Cape Town this week to clear up this matter further. In addition, I want to make it clear that I shall consider no further extensions of the Coloured group area at Darling. Therefore, when the present one is full, the housing of additional Coloured persons will have to take place in the Mamre area, where, as I have said, we hope to see a viable, vigorous and in all respects balanced community developing. In conclusion I may just say that I have instructed the guide-plan committee to draw up a guide plan for the Mamre complex so that the planning there may fit in properly with that of the surrounding areas and also with that of Cape Town.

Furthermore, I just want to refer to a second point in the Western Cape where I, as Minister of both Coloured Affairs and Planning should like to see industrial development based on Coloured labour, namely at Worcester, which already has all the necessary facilities and infrastructure. Industrial land with everything that is necessary is available there, and I think that Worcester is able to accommodate considerable industrial development. Any industrialist who wants to establish himself there, can approach the Decentralization Board and apply for decentralization assistance and establishment benefits. I can say a great deal more about this subject, but I want to apologize to the Opposition, because unfortunately I was under the impression that I could continue until half past six. However, this is sufficient to indicate that we are aware of the importance of this matter, that we are continually looking ahead and that, within the framework of the policy of parallel development and the funds we can obtain, we want to look ahead imaginatively and plan and develop the settlement of the Coloured population of South Africa in their towns and cities.

Mr. Speaker, it is a pity that the hon. the Minister could not complete his speech, and I also find it a pity that hon. members opposite confined themselves only to the first part of this motion and did not say a word about the so-called “orderly and successful evolution of the policy of parallel development”. It is a tragic day for the Coloured population of South Africa if the orderly evolution and development of the policy of parallel development is limited to the construction of houses, towns and cities. I want to ask hon. members opposite whether the construction of houses means that the social, economic and political aspirations of the Coloured people of South Africa are being met altogether. In his introductory speech, the hon. member for Vasco propagated an anti-homeland idea very strongly here. Therefore I want to confine myself to the aspect of where this so-called evolution of the policy of parallel development in South Africa is going to lead us as well as the Coloured people.

The physical planning of towns and cities as presented here this afternoon by hon. members opposite, is supposedly the foundation of the evolution of the policy of parallel development. I want to know from hon. members where this evolution of the policy of parallel development in South Africa is leading. Surely the construction of houses, towns and cities is not the alpha and the omega of parallel development. Surely these steps will not realize parallel development in South Africa. Therefore I, as a member of young South Africa, want to know where this policy of the Nationalist Party is leading. [Interjections.] I want to quote no less a person than Mr. Willem van Heerden, who said the following last night in Bloemfontein with regard to this terrible evolution and parallel development—

This is what Mr. Willem van Heerden said, who has also started stating his problems in regard to this policy of so-called parallel development.

I want to confine myself to the last part of this motion moved by the hon. member for Vasco, and I want to ask him where this orderly and successful evolution of the policy of parallel development is leading. The question I want to put at once to hon. members opposite, is simple: Evolve and develop towards what? Although members of the Cabinet differ about the future of the Coloured community of South Africa, we have heard from the hon. the Minister of Coloured Affairs that we should make common cause of the independence of the Republic of South Africa for the Whites and the Coloureds. Both the Whites and the Coloureds must find their welfare within the framework of one common geographical area. I think one may readily accept that the Nationalist Party, too, accepts this policy now. As I have said, the hon. member for Vasco made it very clear that the idea of a Colouredstan had been rejected altogether. We still have the grumbling and growling of the Minister of Social Welfare and Pensions, who still talks of the ideal of a Colouredstan. Then there is the hon. member for Waterberg with his kindred spirits such as the hon. member for Rissik, the hon. member for Sunnyside, and Mr. Gerhard Viljoen of the Rand Afrikaans University who has joined them now. However, the last official standpoint of the Government accepts that the Whites and the Coloureds, and, of course, the Indians, will all remain part of one common South Africa. From one member after another we heard here this afternoon about the creation of separate cities for Coloureds in South Africa. We on this side of this House advocate that Coloureds and Whites in South Africa are economically integrated and that the people living here in Athlone and the other Coloureds living on the perimeters of Cape Town also remain part of the economic unit which forms Cape Town—because surely Cape Town is not for Whites only —one can say this of the other cities as well.

We hear of parallel development and of the Coloured persons’ Representative Council which will supposedly develop into an eventual Coloured Parliament over which there is no “ceiling”, and I am using the word “ceiling” in pursuance of the hon. the Minister’s own words. He said that that Parliament would develop parallel with this hon. House and that there would be no ceiling over them in respect of future development. We must not forget that this means a population group within the framework of White South Africa with a Parliament of its own over which no restriction is placed. I should like to read out to this House the folly of that as it was pointed out in a letter written by a certain “Afrikanerstudent” from Pretoria, which appeared in the Transvaler of 8th November.

“A certain.” Are you not prepared to mention his name?

He describes himself as “Afrikanerstudent” and I cannot call him anything else if he does not divulge his own name. He says, inter alia, in his letter (translation)—

This is what the Afrikaner students, the young people of South Africa, are beginning to ask with reference to this National Party’s policy. The point I want to emphasize this afternoon is : “The Coloured policy : Where has one ever seen two ‘sovereign’ parliaments in one territorial area?” The writer took the word “sovereign” from the words of the hon. the Minister himself. If there are two aspects which can probably never be entrusted to two sovereign parliaments within the single territorial area of one South Africa, they definitely are, firstly, defence, and, secondly, foreign affairs. When from time to time hon. members on this side of the House talk of one South Africa and of a common loyalty and include in that all race groups and communities in South Africa … [Interjections.]

Order!

… we hear cries of integration.

And six representatives in Parliament.

Order! The hon. member for Moorreesburg ! I have been calling “Order!” all the time. The hon. member for Turffontein may proceed.

Especially in respect of the Bantu we are told how they may develop and that the sky is the limit. We are told how the Bantu may become his own secretary of state, his own cabinet minister, his own prime minister, etc. We as the Whites together with the Coloureds and the Indians within one common South Africa, with one loyalty towards one South Africa, will probably have one Defence Force and one Department of Foreign Affairs. Now I want to know from hon. members opposite whether a Coloured person can become a Secretary for Defence?

Order! The hon. member must come back to the motion.

Mr. Speaker, I am dealing with the so-called orderly and successful evolution of the policy of parallel development. [Interjections.] … “Integration”. It is hon. members on that side of this House who always talk so much of integration.

Order! The hon. member may proceed.

Mr. Speaker, I want to know from hon. members opposite whether a Coloured person, together with the Whites here in one South Africa can, become a Secretary for Defence, and whether he can become a general in the Defence Force, a diplomat in our foreign diplomatic corps, a Cabinet Minister for Coloured Affairs, or perhaps Prime Minister of South Africa.

What does the United Party say?

Order! I am warning the hon. member for Moorreesburg.

Mr. Speaker, hon. members must tell us where this will eventually lead in this one common South Africa which they are planning and in which we as the Whites, the Coloured population and the Indian population will be under one flag and have one loyalty. Then hon. members talk of the orderly and successful evolution of parallel development. I want to repeat: Develop and evolve to what? The people of South Africa want to know and the Coloured community of South Africa want to know what this so-called evolution and development means. They want to know where this National Party is leading them if supposedly they have to be parallel with the Whites.

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

Mr. Speaker, I have only three minutes at my disposal and cannot reply to questions now.

Mr. Speaker, may I …

Order! The hon. member is not prepared to reply to a question.

Mr. Speaker, I should like to repeat the question I put to the Minister during the discussion of the Coloured Vote at the end of last session. I want to repeat the question, because it directly concerns the so-called evolution and the future of South Africa’s Coloured community. Will the Coloured people of South Africa never again have representation in this Parliament in terms of Government policy? I want to say that there are other people as well who are beginning to doubt whether this hon. Minister wants to reply to the question or whether he is able to reply to it. I want to quote what Prof. Rhoodie said recently in this regard. He said—

In others words, that the Coloured people will again have representation in this Parliament. The hon. the Minister must give us his reply at the first and best opportunity. I put the question to the hon. the Minister last year and he merely sat looking at me and did not reply to it.

You know yourself that the time had expired.

My conviction is growing that the National Party and, in any case, some of the more realistic members opposite, realize that this Government acted precipitately when it abolished Coloured representation in this House. If we have to go into the future together with the Coloured people in one country, we and the hon. member who spoke like that of the evolution and development of parallel development, will have to think in the direction of one federal constitutional development. I believe two Parliaments in one country to be a supreme folly. Hon. members can talk until they become blue in their faces and can boast about the number of houses here on the Cape Flats, which I regard as concrete jungles, as the building of future slums here on the Cape Flats, but it will not help them at all, because that side of this House is pushing these people from the community life of South Africa, in order to make them into a so-called separate nation, and to crowd the people into those places without any community development. They are being given houses only, and that is the end of the story.

Business interrupted in accordance with Standing Order No. 32 and motion and amendment lapsed.