Mr. Speaker, the statement I wish to make to the House is still being prepared. It will be ready within a few minutes and then, with your leave, I shall again interrupt the proceedings.

Mr. Speaker, I move—

That the Bill be now read a Third Time.

Mr. Speaker, we come to the end of the debate on a Bill which we hope is going to have far-reaching effects on the marketing of agricultural products in this country. As I pointed out during the Second Reading debate, most members have dealt with the wool industry and the Minister himself has personally pointed out that the amendments here are primarily to satisfy that industry. Sir, we accept that on this side of the House. We wish the industry well and we sincerely hope that the industry is going to have a far better future under the new deal which is planned for it than the position it has had in the past few years.

Unfortunately the hon. the Minister of Agriculture is not here, Sir, but I must express my resentment at the attitude which he adopted in his reply to the Second Reading debate. It was quite apparent that he was not prepared to listen to any constructive suggestions from this side of the House, that he was merely indulging in cheap politics, and I will now proceed to show why I say this. Sir, if you look at the long title of the Bill, you will see that the board will now have certain powers in respect of the propagation of certain plant material. I put to him a perfectly logical request for information as to why this was limited only to plant material and why it was not also applied to animals as well. But all I got was a little bit of cheap politics from him, to the effect that was I suggesting, and did the United Party support, that the control boards, the Livestock and Meat Industry Control Board, the Wool Board and the Dairy Board, should actually propagate and market bulls, rams, calves, etc., and as far as the Egg Board is concerned, that they should propagate chickens as well? I want to draw his attention to the provisions we have here and which we welcome, because I believe it is a good thing, but I still want to know why it is limited to plant material; because the provisions include such provisions as to finance out of the board’s funds, the development, improvement, multiplication, etc., of such materials. Is it his intention that the board itself will do all this sort of thing, or does he intend also using the funds of the board to assist the breeders, the experts who know about these things? Will he allow the board to assist them financially to propagate these things and, if so, why should it be limited to plant material and why should the same assistance not be given to the breeders of livestock in this counry? Or is he satisfied that we have got as far as we can go with our livestock in this country, and that no such assistance is necessary? I accuse him once again of making cheap politics instead of answering the question.

I must go further in regard to the provisions regarding the marketing of agricultural products, where we have in the Long Title that there are provisions “to amend the provisions of that Act relating to … the undertakings and research work that may be assisted by a control board; the stimulation by a control board of the demand for a regulated product”. All I said was that I welcomed this and that at last we had some sense coming into our marketing system, where the board was going to be used to stimulate the consumption; that they must now market their products; that they must promote their products. But what was the inane reply of the hon. the Minister? Am I now asking that the boards themselves must physically sell each package of their particular product? That is the sort of answer we get from this Minister. Do you wonder that we have the inefficiency that exists in the agricultural sphere in this country today when you have that sort of Minister who is not prepared to debate a matter at a reasonably decent level, and is not prepared to consider accepting suggestions that are made, but just indulge in cheap politics? I repeat what I said before. This Bill is a great step forward, and these provisions which have been made, these additional powers and additional instructions that are being given indirectly by the powers which are being taken in this Bill, are going to work for the benefit of agriculture. Agriculture can only benefit from these, and we wish the whole of the agricultural sector well. We sincerely hope that what we see as the positive aspects of this Bill today, will benefit the agricultural industry.

I think the hon. member must admit that he made a mistake.

He usually makes mistakes.

The Minister replied very clearly. This clause was to allow the Deciduous Fruit Board, for instance, to have virus-free, clean plant material distributed amongst nurseries and to help those people to distribute it to the farmers, so that they can have virus-free plant material. It includes the Potato Board or any plant material which can be produced by some of these boards. But the hon. member asked the Minister specifically why not allow the other boards, for cattle and sheep to do the same, and the Minister asked him what his intention was; does he want the Wool Board or the Meat Board to have bulls and rams distributed in competition with the farmers? That is ridiculous. We cannot take away the living of the farmer and give it to the boards. But the farmer has neither the machinery nor the mechanics to have his own virus-free plant material. I cannot see where the Minister made a mistake.

Why only deal with virus-free material?

This clause is to help the distribution of virus-freeplant material, but what the hon. member does not know is that for instance the Meat Board gave R50 000 for a bull station at Vryburg and one at Queenstown. These funds were made available to farmers to help them to improve their stock. But must the Meat Board start farming in competition with the farmers and distribute bulls? That is the reply the Minister gave the hon. member. It was not the Minister’s intention to play politics. He only protected me as a farmer. That was his reply, and not to play politics. I think the hon. member must admit that he has made a mistake.

Motion put and agreed to.

Bill read a Third Time.

Mr. Chairman, I move as an amendment—

In line 58, to omit “this Chapter” and to substitute “sections 16, 19 (1) and 22 (1)”

Agreed to.

Clause, as amended, put and agreed to.

Title:

Mr. Chairman, I move as an amendment—

Agreed to.

Title, as amended, put and agreed to.

House Resumed:

Bill reported with amendments.

We have in this clause provision to establish a board. I think we can call it the Survey Regulations Board, which will have specific power to make regulations in regard to the subjects mentioned in clause 7. Sir, I am sure you will allow me briefly to mention some of the subjects for which regulations may be made. These are the fees to be paid by an owner of land, the manner in which surveys should be performed and the degree of accuracy. In other words, the Board will make regulations controlling the actual practice of these land surveyors, but we find that in a later clause the Minister takes the power to make these same regulations, but subject to the proviso that any regulations so made shall not repeal or be inconsistent with any regulation made by the Survey Regulations Board, and approved by the State President. To me it is a little incomprehensible that we establish a board—and let me say right away that we welcome the establishment of this board; we believe it is the right thing to do—which will have one function only, and that is to make regulations in regard to the subjects mentioned. I wonder if the hon. the Deputy Minister can tell us why we require this dual control. Why do we take the trouble to establish a board and give it that particular function—only that particular function and no other function whatsoever—and then give the Minister the power to do exactly the same thing as the board is doing? To me it is a bit incomprehensible and I wonder if the hon. the Deputy Minister can explain this to me.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member will notice in clause 6 that the regulations are subject to the approval of Parliament and the State President. In addition the Minister has powers to exercise control. Even if this Survey Regulations Board should take decisions, such decisions would still be subject to decisions of Parliament, the State President and the Minister. The hon. member will actually find the reply to his question in clause 8, because the whole matter is set out there. It is very clear to me that a board cannot just be appointed, and even if it is a United Party Minister, he will not appoint a board with full powers to do just what they like to their heart’s content, without his having the power to exercise control. This question of the hon. member is covered under clauses 7 and 8.

Clause put and agreed to.

House Resumed:

Bill reported without amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I move—

That the Bill be now read a Second Time.

In moving the Second Reading of this Bill, I must, on behalf of the Rhodes University and myself, thank you for exercising your discretion under Standing Order No. 1 (Private Bills) and permitting this Bill to be dealt with as a Public Bill. Our appreciation must also be extended to the hon. the Leader of the House, who has allowed time, during a busy session, for this Bill to be dealt with. A most important debt of gratitude is also owed to Mr. van der Merwe of the Department of National Education, because without his assistance and expert advice we could not have shaped this legislation into an acceptable form in time for this session of Parliament.

It is not necessary to make a long Second Reading speech on this Bill. The preamble sets out the intent and purpose very clearly. Nevertheless, to avoid confusion, I believe it is necessary to explain the various clauses briefly. Clause 1 provides that the Dean of Students and the registrar shall become constituents of the university. It also clarifies and extends the powers of the university as a body corporate.

Clause 2 provides merely for an improvement of grammar in both the Afrikaans and English versions. Clause 2 (b) omits the words “and the procedure”. It is felt that, the procedure being standard and accepted, if it was to remain in the Act, it could only cause confusion. These words are also omitted in clause 3 (a) (5).

Clause 3 clarifies the rules and the delegation of power by the senate subject to the control of the council. In clause 3 (b) provision is made for a consequential amendment which was omitted when the Bill was previously amended.

Clause 4 is consequential on clause 1, providing for the inclusion of the Dean of Students and the registrar as constituents, and it also removes the two years’ limitation on students who qualified before 1949 when the university was still a university college. This means that all past graduates may now apply to become members of the convocation.

Clause 5 is aimed at avoiding confusion between an Act of Parliament and the statutes of the university; clause 6 further clarifies the rules and the disciplinary code, while clause 7 provides that the powers of the university as a body corporate shall not be affected by vacancies or deficiency in numbers. Clause 8 contains the short title.

Motion put and agreed to.

Bill read a Second Time.

Committee Stage taken without debate.

Bill read a Third Time.

Mr. Speaker, I request leave to make the following statement: Hon. members are aware of the hijacking of the S.A.A. aircraft on flight SA 0929 between Salisbury and Jan Smuts on Wednesday, 24th May, at approximately 2 p.m., near Jan Smuts. Near Jan Smuts two hijackers who had dynamite with them, first forced the aircraft to fly to the Seychelles. By adroit action, Captain Flemington succeeded in causing the aircraft to land at Salisbury. When nothing could be done there to save the situation, attempts were again made, after most of the passengers and a few members of the crew had been allowed to leave the aircraft, to force the aircraft to fly to the Seychelles. Again the captain succeeded in his attempts to make the hijackers change their minds and to have the aircraft land at Blantyre.

Within half an hour after the hijacking the General Manager of the South African Railways and the Acting Manager of the Airways had assembled an efficient team who maintained continuous contact with the situation. All the necessary steps were taken to protect both the passengers and the members of the crew and, if at all possible, to keep the aircraft intact.

The object of the two hijackers was, firstly, to blackmail Mr. H. F. Oppenheimer into paying an amount of money to which one hijacker, Kamil, laid claim. He wanted to meet Mr. Oppenheimer on the Seychelles at all costs.

The latest position is that the head of the Malawian Police this morning at 6 o’clock issued an ultimatum to the hijackers, who were alone in the aircraft, to leave it immediately or else they would open fire on them. They did not respond and shortly afterwards machine-gun and rifle fire was directed at the aircraft. The hijackers emerged from the aircraft via the back door and surrendered themselves, whereupon they were removed to the Zomba gaol. Negotiations in regard to their extradition are taking place on the diplomatic level. Damage to the aircraft is such that we hope to bring it back to South Africa soon. A repair team of South African Airways is already on the way to Malawi.

Mr. Speaker, I move—

That the Bill be now read a Second Time.

Hon. members will recall that quite recently the hon. the Minister of Water Affairs introduced a Water Amendment Bill. Clause 6 of that measure dealt with the modification of precipitation. With that is meant a modification of the natural occurrence of atmospheric precipitation which could have an effect on the run-off of water or on the quantity of subterranean water.

The Bill is supplementary to the relevant section of the Water Amendment Bill to which I have just referred. It deals with weather modification, under which is understood the artificial promoting, accelerating, increasing, aggravating, impeding, suppressing, retarding or altering of the natural occurrence of rain, snow, fog, hail or similar atmospheric precipitation, or lightning, or a tornado or cyclone, or a similar atmospheric phenomenon. During the Second Reading of the Water Amendment Bill the hon. the Minister of Water Affairs emphasized the increasing importance and interest in the modification of precipitation, and pointed out the importance of the proper control and planning thereof.

This Bill is necessary in order to obtain control over the matters in respect of which the Water Amendment Bill does not make provision. The one Bill supplements the other so as to eliminate loopholes. The one without the other loses its value as far as effective control is concerned.

Present-day developments in the sphere of technology are spectacular and scientists are venturing into more and more fields in order to find methods to make the existence of mankind on earth more pleasant.

In a country such as South Africa, with a low average rainfall and a high frequency of thunderstorms, which are often accompanied by hail damage, it is to be expected that farmers in particular will be eager to take note of any progress which is being made in the field of meteorology, and more specifically of the attempts to increase rainfall artificially and the possible reduction of hail damage.

Work in this field has been done for a considerable time in overseas countries, but in our own country we have only recently proceeded to take positive steps in this sphere.

It is very important to remember that any deliberate human action with the object of effecting a modification of weather conditions will not simply produce positive results every time. Numerous projects carried out in the past in overseas countries were poorly planned, and it was subsequently not possible to determine whether or not they had been successful. So, for example, it is pointed out in a recent publication of the World Meteorological Organization that commercial projects in particular are prone to such deficiencies. Out of hundreds of projects tackled since 1946 in the U.S.A. only 23 were carried out in such a way that reliable analyses of the results could subsequently be made, and by far the most of these were done by universities or State institutions. Another disturbing conclusion drawn was that in the majority of these projects human intervention had led to a decreased rather than to an increased rainfall, although it is equally certain that in a considerable number of cases an appreciable increase was caused. After further developments in the scientific investigation of this aspect of meteorology it is at present possible to explain where mistakes were made which led to the unexpected decreases.

The foregoing emphasizes the need to allow only well-planned, strictly scientific projects, carried out by highly-trained and qualified meteorologists if we want to ensure that the country as a whole, as well as the more local interests, derive the maximum benefit from any project of this nature. Provision is being made in the Bill for the issuing of licences to enable persons or organizations to undertake weather modification projects. With the issuing of the licences the technical skill, qualification and financial means of such a person will count as the primary consideration.

With the allocation of permits to carry out activities in given areas, representatives of the different interested parties will be afforded an opportunity, on the advisory committee, of considering the desirability or otherwise of such activities.

Precautions will at all times be taken to ensure that only work of the best quality is carried out, and that data is continually collected in such a way that independent assessments of the results will be possible. This means that any commercial operator will have to take constant pains to ensure that his activities do not perhaps lead to undesirable results. In this way we are hoping to safeguard the country from the activities of organizations that are more interested in making a profit than in furthering the interests of the country.

Mr. Speaker, we on this side of the House naturally support this Bill. The other half, as the hon. the Deputy Minister said, was before us in the Select Committee on the Water Amendment Bill. We passed it there. It probably is strange that this Parliament finds it necessary to consider two Bills dealing with exactly the same matter in one session. We deemed it necessary to act as we did be cause the interests of the two departments are affected so intimately by the activities that are dealt with by this Bill. We must now get a very clear explanation from the hon. the Deputy Minister on how the administration of this Bill and that part of the Water Amendment Bill which also deals with this matter, will be done by these two departments. As the hon. the Deputy Minister said, this field is undoubtedly a very large one for research, also for people who want to make a few cents out of it. We should like to have the assurance that the way will be open for people who want to undertake this kind of work.

† Overseas snowfall is being sold as a commercial commodity. There are companies which contract with power companies in the United States to increase the snowfall in certain areas in order to give a more regulated flow of water into the power dams. Just think what could be done in our country if that sort of thing was possible, for instance for tourism by creating snow in the mountain areas. Just think for this one instance what could be done. We should like to know that there will not be any falling down of administration between the two departments. I raise this particularly because the Water Act controls the modification of precipitation whereas this Bill will control, amongst other things, the increase in rainfall. The problem is to whom does a person make application and whether there will now be joint administration? Will there be one committee to whom application will be made, one scientific advisory board and so forth, so that there can only be the closest possible coordination in respect of this activity? We want to know that the attitude of the two joint departments will be sympathetic towards this kind of activity. It is really an open question—and I merely raise it here —whether it is absolutely necessary to have two Acts of Parliament which cover virtually the same thing. Thinking about this, I personally feel that it is going to take a very astute lawyer indeed to decide as to which of the two departments is going to be involved either in the increase of precipitation or the modification of precipitation and the increase in rainfall. I wonder whether it might not be advisable at some later stage for the hon. the Deputy Minister to consult with the law advisers to find out if there should not be merely the one channel. In terms of the Water Act, the power was taken to give immediate control over something which could have developed into a serious threat to the farming community, among others. Now the hon. the Deputy Minister, from the side of the department which deals with the Airways and natural conditions which may affect the flight of aeroplanes, has taken control. I think it might pay us to consult with the law advisers at a later stage perhaps to find whether this cannot be ironed out so that we have merely the one channel of control. We support this Bill.

Mr. Speaker, I should like to avail myself of this opportunity to convey our sincere thanks to the Department of Transport for the competent way in which this Bill has been drafted. One appreciates the fact that the Opposition is supporting this Bill at this stage. I think the importance of a Bill such as this also makes it essential that there should not be a difference of opinion about the Bill in this House. The hon. member for Mooi River expressed his concern about the fact that there are two different State Departments that are exercising control in this new field at this stage. I do not think this is altogether strange. In the United States of America there are five State Departments at the moment which deal with the weather modification scheme. I think the opinion on this in South Africa, which has developed from a scientific point of view, has made it essential for the experiments which affect two departments to be controlled by them. In the first place Water Affairs wants to stabilize the catchment area of the Vaal Dam in this way as far as water is concerned, and on the other hand it also affects the weather conditions and the control over aircraft, which in turn affect the Department of Transport. As regards the desirability of being very strict in respect of various organizations that want to enter this field, I think we should express our thanks to the hon. the Deputy Minister for this strong stand. When one thinks that this is a field over which there is still a mystic veil of uncertainty, it is a field in which some irresponsible persons, the uninformed, could very easily be taken in.

When one studies the history of these techniques, one finds that in 1946 a certain Vincent Shaefer in the United States succeeded in establishing that dry ice, when placed in an ordinary food freezer, produces large numbers of small ice crystals of nucleus size. Subsequently, with the cooperation of Dr. Bernard Vonnegut, he also conducted experiments with aircraft in the clouds. Then another person, Dr. Langmuir, found that silver iodine is a catalyst for the formation of these nucleusforming particles around which the ice then accumulates. As far back as 1951 the father of this development, Dr. Shaefer, said the following in respect of these mushroom organizations which have sprung up in America—I may just mention that only five years after this project was begun in America one-third of America was already involved in weather modification. Then Dr. Vincent Shaefer said—and I quote from the World Meteorological Organization Technical Note No. 105—

Therefore we are grateful that the hon. the Deputy Minister wants to eliminate organizations of that type in South Africa. The hon. the Deputy Minister referred in his Second Reading speech to the large number of reports which have already been written, of which only 23 serve the statistical purposes. The hon. the Deputy Minister also indicated that only six cases showed that an increase in rainfall had been obtained; in seven cases there was no change and in 10 other cases there was a definite drop. It is very easy to make statements based on superficial personal observations. It is a field in which very spectacular changes are brought about when the clouds have been sprayed with silver iodine. When these statements are made the uninformed can very easily be taken in. To give an example, in Soviet Russia they claim to have been 90 per cent successful in hail prevention. But none of their reports qualifies for the statistics standards set in the Western world. Then it may also be interesting just to mention that in Russia they use a type of bomb which is fired from a cannon. The container of the bomb may weigh up to 315 kg. Apparently Russia is not so concerned as we are about where or on whom the splinters of the bomb will fall afterwards. In South Africa we found that there were some persons who claimed early this year already that the weather bureau would also achieve success in South Africa in reducing the occurrence of hail. These statements were made purely on the strength of the ratio between the number of claims received by an insurance company this year as against the number received last year. What these persons seem to have lost sight of is that the C.S.I.R. has established that in the Wit-watersrand area, where no weather modification scheme was undertaken, there has also been a drop in the incidence of hail this year. It certainly does not give persons the right to make these statements just on the strength of one attempt of a few months.

Mr. Chairman, I certainly think that South Africa has not left things too late in this field, but that we are certainly in time to prevent the irresponsible entry of some groups into this field.

I should like to express the hope that this Bill will contribute towards enhancing the status of the Weather Bureau in South Africa. For some reason the Weather Bureau in South Africa has not yet attained that status which one finds in Britain in particular. In Britain it is one of those departments which offer choice positions only to the select few. In South Africa we have not adopted that point of view in respect of the Weather Bureau up to now and we really want to express the hope that the Weather Bureau will also gain in prestige when this Bill has been piloted through this Parliament. We certainly have the people who can compete with the best in the world. At the moment South Africa is still a member of the International Meteorological Organization, which has also made a request in its publication for cooperation in respect of statistics in this connection to be combined in order to ascertain in which way the world can be served by this scheme. I do not want to assert that South Africa will be responsible for a dramatic break-through in regard to weather modification. When we think that in 1947 South Africa, with its research in respect of polio, was the first country which was able, after Dr. Salk had developed the vaccine in America, to apply it in South Africa, we believe that it is essential in South Africa for this department, too, to keep abreast of developments, so that if dramatic break-throughs are made, they can be applied in South Africa as well.

Finally I should just like to put a request to the hon. the Deputy Minister. The weather modification in South Africa is taking place mainly in the eastern Free State at the moment, with Bethlehem as the central point. Now the position is that the period during which research in regard to weather modification can be conducted only lasts from October to about the middle of April. It is unfortunately the position that during December and the first part of January that region is harvesting the winter grain, the wheat crop. So there is a very short period in which to harvest these crops. The danger exists that if the research were to be conducted there during December or January, the rainfall might be such that it might be difficult to harvest the crops. Consequently I should like to ask the hon. the Deputy Minister that this department should consider offering the farming community of that region the necessary co-operation and that it should be decided on a very high level when it will be desirable to continue the experiment, also as regards the rainfall. We want to convey our thanks to the hon. the Deputy Minister and we should like to wish the weather bureau every success in this almost unknown field.

Mr. Speaker, I think you would agree with me that it is a great pleasure to listen to a person who is master of his subject and who knows what he is talking about. I want to congratulate the hon. member for Bethlehem on this very thorough study he has made of a very important scientific subject. I want to congratulate him not only on that study, but also on the clear and positive way in which he stated the results of his studies here to the advantage of everyone of us in South Africa. One can understand why he is able to do this; I think it is necessary for me to tell this House that one of our most competent men in the Weather Bureau, Mr. Du Toit, is at Bethlehem. Apparently they co-operated to some extent in this regard. While I am mentioning this, I want to point out that what the hon. member said was true, i.e. that it might be necessary for us to take the position of this section of our department into consideration. I think it is necessary for the Weather Bureau to be given more status. Often, for example in Budget debates, etc., we tend to select a few minor matters and not to discuss these all-important matters which affect South Africa in so many respects. I want to thank the hon. member for this suggestion; I personally believe that this legislation will have the effect of giving more status to the Weather Bureau, or at least of more knowledge being available. I want to associate myself with an appeal he made which was that we should have more people in choice occupations in this division of the department. Furthermore, I want to give him the assurance at once that since we are engaged in these experiments and research, we shall take local circumstances into account and that we shall make use of the co-operation of that farming community. What is more, we shall continue the harmonious mutual consultations which are in progress there.

In replying to the hon. member for Mooi River, I cannot neglect to express a word of thanks also to the Select Committee which inquired into the Water Amendment Bill. I also want to mention the names of the hon. members for Piketberg and South Coast specifically. Those hon. members saw immediately—and this, to a certian extent, is also my reply to the hon. member for Mooi River—that that legislation of the Department of Water Affairs, as far as weather modification was concerned, could not remain in the hands of the Department of Water Affairs only. It is impossible, because as hon. members know, the Department of Water Affairs is concerned with the flow of water and with subterranean water, but they are on the ground and my department is up in the clouds. [Interjections.] No. it is not up in the clouds in any wrong sense. We are up in the clouds not only with aircraft; we are also up in the clouds in this regard, where we have to provide security, etc., and weather modification belongs with this department. The hon. member asked whether it was essential for us to have two Acts. I think that the Select Committee also realized that this was essential for the time being. The hon. member also pointed out the duality, and wanted to know whether the control would be effective. Hon. members will see that we are making provision for this. In regard to the composition of this advisory committee, etc., the Minister of Transport shall act in consultation with the Minister of Water Affairs, as it affects Water Affairs as well. There is an advisory committee which will advise us in this regard, and which will be appointed by both these Ministers.

Only the one committee?

Yes, only one committee. In other words, each department will not have a separate committee. There will be one committee which will advise us. This means that the control will not be dualistic and that it will be co-ordinated.

The hon. member also said: “Snowfall is sold as a commercial commodity.” This very thing is one of the problems. It is true that this is so, but the hon. member for Bethlehem also pointed out that the statistical data and the actual data were complicated for the very reason that in the past so many people applied themselves exclusively and without control to the commercial benefits they could obtain by modifying the weather, either to prevent hail or to cause rain. We may be on the threshold of an investigation, but I want to tell the hon. member this: With the necessary co-operation, as he himself requested, we shall take further action with the other department. May this investigation and the work being done, always be controlled in such a way that generations to come may also enjoy the fruits of proper statistical and scientific data made available in a controlled way. The whole object is to have proper control.

Motion put and agreed to.

Bill read a Second Time.

Mr. Speaker, I move—

Hon. members will recall that the Minister in his Budget Speech during March this year indicated that Parliamentary approval would be sought for the construction of two new lines of railway, namely one to serve the new harbour extension in Table Bay and one from Drummondlea Station to a terminal point on the farm Grasvally in the Northern Transvaal.

The Railways and Harbours Board examined both proposals and has recommended the construction of the proposed lines. Full details are furnished in the Board’s report which has already been tabled and my remarks will, therefore, be brief.

A double line is required to serve the new harbour extension in Table Bay and will be utilized exclusively for departmental purposes, i.e. for the conveyance of goods traffic to and from the harbour extension. As the Paardeneiland yard from which Table Bay Harbour is presently served, is being utilized to the extent where no additional traffic can be handled, the new harbour extension will have to be served from the Bellville yard.

Five possible routes for a rail connection were investigated and the implications of each route were thoroughly considered. The route finally decided upon will branch off from the existing railway line between Kensington and Chempet at a point approximately 8,28 kilometres from Cape Town. After passing to the north of the Ysterplaat Air Force Base, it will run between Rugby and Milnerton to the beachfront from where it will follow the coastline to Paardeneiland before entering the new harbour extension. The proposed line will be approximately 7,19 kilometres long and will also link up with the proposed railway line between Kensington and Bellville. There will also be a direct link between the Woltemade/Epping industrial area and the new harbour extension.

When it became known that it was intended to construct a railway line through the area in question, representations were received from the residents of the Milnerton area in regard to the route of the proposed line. The objections were thoroughly investigated and the matter was also discussed at a meeting which representatives of the residents and other interested parties had with the Minister.

The route has been so determined as to cause the least inconvenience to the owners of adjoining properties and/or residents of the area concerned. The line will be electrified and there will be no level crossings; bridges or subways will be provided where streets and roads cross the line.

As a result of the construction of the railway line approximately 40 residences will have to be demolished. It is, nevertheless, considered that of all the routes, the proposed location would cause the least disruption to existing structures and residential areas. It will take approximately four years to complete the work and the estimated cost of the project is R9 million.

I will now deal with the proposed line from Drummondlea Station to the farm Grasvally. Grom ore Limited, a subsidiary of African Metals Corporation Limited, has approached the Railway Administration in regard to the construction of a guaranteed single line of railway between Drummondlea—a station on the main line between Pretoria and Pietersburg—and the farm Grasvally, approximately five kilometres from Drummondlea Station, for the conveyance of chrome ore mined on the farm.

The company originally intended to build its own private line, but as difficulties were experienced in obtaining the necessary rights of way for the line, the company formally requested the Administration to acquire the land at the cost of the company. The company has undertaken to finance the line and to construct it and the associated facilities to departmental standards and on completion thereof, to hand these over to the Administration who will then exploit the line under guaranteed conditions. This offer is acceptable, especially as the Administration will not be called upon to invest any capital in the construction of the line.

The guarantee period will extend over a period of 25 years only, instead of the usual 30 years. The company will not receive any compensation when the line is taken over by the Railways, but during the term of the agreement the company will be compensated in respect of its capital investment in the line. As the Railways will also be indemnified against operating losses during the guarantee period, provision is being made in the agreement for the payment of special surcharges which will be utilized on the one hand to defray any losses which may be sustained in the working of the line during the agreement period of 25 years, and on the other hand to refund the company its capital investment. The special surcharge which the company will be required to pay in respect of the capital investment will be credited to its ledger account, so that the company will in effect not pay any surcharge for that purpose. The Administration will operate the line at cost until such time as the capital investment of the company has been fully accounted for; only then will the Administration effectively be in possession of the line.

Although the Administration will not be guaranteed against operating losses for the full period of 30 years, there is no objection to this arrangement as the capital which will be invested in the line will already have been recovered in full at the end of the guarantee period of 25 years.

The proposed line will be almost 4,14 km —approximately 7,28 km with the inclusion of sidings—long and the cost of construction is estimated to be of the order of R750 000.

Mr. Speaker, at the outset we on this side of the House would like to object to the very, very short time that has been given to us to consider this Railway Construction Bill. Sir, the one line is a guaranteed line, and I do not wish to say anything about that. The Minister has outlined the arrangements in regard to that particular line. I wish to confine myself to the other line. That line is going to run from a modern commercial dock and then through a built-up residential area. I feel that more time should have been given to us by the Government so that the whole plan could have been examined. This plan has only just recently been put before us. We have not even had the chance to go out and hold an inspection in loco, to which I think we are entitled. I feel that an important item like this should not be sprung upon us like this in this House. More time should have been allowed for a proper examination of the whole position, as was done in the case of the planning of the Cape Town harbour. We know that it took a long time to plan that harbour. There was a controversy about the whole scheme; there was a departmental commission appointed to go into the whole matter; there was consultation with the Chamber of Commerce and there were alternative suggestions as far as Rietvlei was concerned. Sir, one wonders whether the department ever considered the possibility of the rail link. When you read this report, you see that consideration was given only recently to the question of a rail link. Five routes were apparently examined and they came to the conclusion that this route would be the best one.

Sir, to those of us who know this area, it does not look like the best route. Future extensions to the harbour may be contemplated, but one wonders whether proper consideration was given to the whole planning of this scheme when one bears in mind that this railway line is to be constructed solely for the conveyance of goods through a built-up area; that it will involve the demolition of houses, and what effect it will have on the residents concerned and on the city itself. Sir, the construction of a railway line through an urban area has a terrific dividing effect. Once this line is built and it crosses over from the beach through my colleague’s constituency, it will be fenced on both sides, and this will have the effect of completely dividing the residential area. We know what difficulties are being experienced in a city such as Durban, where there is a railway running through the centre of the city. We are faced here with the fact that the Administration has selected this particular route, which I do not think is the very best route, but one wonders why provision was not made for the building of the line, from the point where it leaves the beach, in a closed cutting.

A cutting from where to where?

From where it crosses the road from the beach to where it links up with the line on the Kensington side. The soil there is sandy and there is a certain amount of gravel. This may be a little bit more expensive, but I do not think that the line would then have this dividing effect to which I have referred. Sir, when one goes to a city like Barcelona, one finds that all the main railway lines run underground, under the main boulevards of the city. I think it is all wrong to build open railway lines through built-up urban areas. Sir, some ridiculous statements have been made in the Report about the effect that this fine is going to have on the beach. A lot of people use this beach. The section near the Total oil tanks is one of the finest surfing beaches that we have. Once this line has been built, the whole beach from the dock will be closed, except for a portion at the Milnerton end of the beach.

We are told that the building of this line will not affect the beach to any extent but, of course, that is not correct. I would like to ask the hon. the Deputy Minister to give consideration to the question of building tunnels under the line. There is a big industrial area at Paardeneiland. In summertime the people working there are accustomed to going down to the beach for a dip. On Sundays quite a lot of people use this particular beach. It is also a favourite surfing spot. I wonder if it is not possible for the department to give consideration to the building of access tunnels under the line so as to avoid the closing off of this particular beach to the public. I think it would be all wrong to close this beach off. The excuse they make is foolish, namely that the sea water there is so cold that nobody uses the beach. It says in this report that as the result of the construction of the line, possibly 40 residences will have to be demolished but it appears that only a small portion of the beach in the vicinity of Milnerton will be affected.

I agree with that, that a small portion there would be affected, but the major portion down at the oil tanks will of course be closed off completely by this line. Then the report says that it must be borne in mind that the water in the area is very cold and therefore it is not suitable for bathing purposes; and it is considered that the part of the beach which will be lost will be of little value. Sir, honestly, whoever composed this report is not acquainted with conditions in the Cape, and this is a ridiculous statement to make. One might as well say that Clifton must be closed down or the beach at Blouberg must be closed down because the water is too cold. It is a ridiculous statement to make. I want to ask the Minister to give serious consideration to providing an access to the beaches. I think the public are entitled to that access and I would like the Minister to accede to it. If one looks at this plan, one wonders why the railway line was not taken up the Salt River canal. There is a broad river canal there and I am quite certain the line could have been taken up there and then linked to the main fine.

We use trains, not boats.

I know that we are dealing with a Minister who is not very well acquainted with engineering, and he may find difficulty in really understanding it. but in Japan they build a railway line right over a river.

I know he has been to Japan and has seen that. You can take a railway line up a canal and I think the same thing could have been done here. Furthermore, in the opening sentence of this report it says that it is the intention to have a direct link through to the Bellville yards. If you look at the plan you find that the proposed link with the Bellville yard is only a proposed line. This House has never dealt with it and the Minister is not asking us for money to build this link line to Bellville. I know it has been in the thoughts of the Government for a long time, and that it has been on the Brown Book, but there is no line going to be built at present. That is the position. If you look at the plan it looks like a complete Heath Robinson affair. One wonders what planning was really put into this scheme. I am certain that with a little more consideration they could have produced a much better plan than this. If it is the intention to use the Bellville yards, that are being replanned, then why are they building this line to link with the main line?

As I said, in the short time that has been given to us, the effect of building a line through an urban area, its effect on the city and on its town planning, is serious. It is said that there was consultation with the various local authorities, but from what I have heard they were just told about it and they could do very little about it because the Government had made up their minds to build the line.

Anyway, I would make this appeal to the Minister to give consideration, when this line leaves the beach, to put in a closed cutting all the way until it reaches the other link on the main line, so that it does not act as a dividing element in this community; and furthermore to make access from the road to the beach under this line available. I do not think it will be very costly, and at least those people who use the beach for surfing will still have that facility left to them.

The hon. the Deputy Minister will know that virtually the whole of the railway line which will link up the new harbour area with the existing railway line will be situated in the constituency which I have the privilege to represent. The hon. the Minister also knows that I was a member of the deputation which came to see him and the Minister of Railways about the matter and pleaded with him to see whether it is not possible to find an alternative route for this railway line. The hon. the Deputy Minister will also know that his standpoint and that of the Minister and the engineers was that there was no other alternative and that this railway line was the only one that could be built.

I want to say immediately that there is deep concern among a great many people about the construction of this railway line. The people feel that there might have been another way out. However, I want to add that even those people who are concerned about the matter are not people who should like to stand in the way of progress. These are people who realize that when one deals with a new harbour area it is necessary for you to have an exit from and a railway link with such harbour area.

But what I should like to point out, is the fact that construction work on this new harbour extension has been going on for a number of years now. I think they are busy with the second leg of the extension. Only recently, however, representations were made to the hon. the Minister in regard to this railway line. I am not an engineer, but what worries me, as a layman, and the public outside, is this: How is it possible that, when this harbour was initially planned, no thought was given as to where the exit should be? It is unbelievable that at this advanced stage, when one thinks of a new harbour area which costs tens of millions of rand, representations still have to be made in an attempt possibly to find an alternative. Surely, there must have been people in the initial stage, when the new harbour area was considered, who have wondered how the existing railway line was going to be reached. And, Mr. Speaker, when you look at the map made available by the hon. the Minister, I am convinced that any person who was aware of the extensions to that harbour, must have had only one thing in mind, and that is that this railway line which has to be linked up with the harbour, must go along the Salt River canal. This is the obvious route the ordinary man would have thought about. But what is even more serious, if I am correct in saying that consideration to this exit has been left for too long, I say to the hon. the Minister, with all due respect, that it seems to me that what we are dealing with here is a serious case of a lack of planning. I hope the hon. the Minister will try and furnish me with an explanation in that respect if I am wrong in my views.

We are told in the report that all the local bodies, the provincial council, the City Council of Cape Town and the City Council of Milnerton, all three bodies which are most deeply involved in this matter, have been consulted. The hon. the Minister makes no mention in this regard in his report, but I should nevertheless like to know from him across the floor of the House whether he received permission from the local bodies? Have they agreed to the road as it is shown here now? But now the hon. the Minister comes along and presents us with a fait accompli. He also presented the deputation with a fait accompli, and that is that this was the only way out.

What are we dealing with? Let us consider all the disadvantages this entails for the public. In the first place, one is going to destroy completely that small portion of the beachfront that was available to the people of Ysterplaat who used to visit it on Saturdays and Sundays. Many of those people do not have their own transport, and it is within walking distance from Ysterplaat. As a matter of fact, this was one of the main reasons why Ysterplaat objected to the establishment of a possible lido, because they regarded it as their local beach. That beach is now going to disappear. Those people will no longer enjoy that privilege. In the second place, this railway line will cause 40 housing units to be demolished, and in these times when we are experiencing a housing shortage in the Peninsula I think the hon. the Deputy Minister will know what I am talking about when I tell him that this is an extremely serious matter, a matter which has a profound effect on many people. In the third place, what we are doing here, is to introduce the noise of a train into a quiet area, an area in which there is no noise at the moment. In addition. I notice from the report that although the line is going to be electrified or that diesel traction may probably be used, steam locomotives will be used initially. We are therefore going to introduce not only pollution in the form of noise, but also air pollution.

I now come to the question of the linking-up of the line. We have to accept the position in that regard. We are being told that, technically speaking, there is no other alternative. However, I want to say that when one looks at this map the ordinary man simply cannot understand why there is no other way out. He simply cannot accept it. However, as I say, we are the ordinary people. We are not engineers. The Railway Administration says that it has consulted all the authorities and that they are satisfied. The Railway Adminis tration is also satisfied that the railway line has to be built. I should like to know from the hon. the Deputy Minister to what extent he has obtained the consent of the local authorities in this regard.

In conclusion, I should like to make a few requests to the hon. the Deputy Minister. In the first place, I want to repeat what the hon. member for Salt River has already asked, and that is that some or other attempt should be made to allow the public to have access to that little portion of the beachfront. I am not talking now only of the beachfront of Milnerton, but also the Ysterplaat/Paardeneiland beachfront. This is the first request I want to make. In the second place, I want to ask the hon. the Deputy Minister that, if steam locomotives are going to be used initially, this initial stage be made as brief as possible. I simply cannot believe that this area will not be immensely disturbed. In passing, I also want to mention that the railway line which is going to be built there is going to divide a church parish in two. I am referring to the parish of Sonnekus. The Rugby portion will be cut off and Milnerton will remain. I foresee that the practical effect of this will be that the parish will in due course be divided in two.

In the third place—and this to my mind is far more serious—I should like the hon. the Deputy Minister not only to say that he will notify the people well in advance that their houses are going to be expropriated. This is not enough. Those houses are not expensive ones; they are not expensive in that houses of R15 000 or R16 000 will have to be expropriated. The majority of these houses are probably not so expensive. I want to ask the hon. the Deputy Minister to co-operate with the Department of Community Development in an attempt to provide those people with alternative houses. This matter affects the socio-economic aspect of this community and unless the hon. the Deputy Minister wants to damage seriously the image of the State, he will have to see to it that there is perfect co-operation between Community Development on the one hand and the Railways on the other hand in an attempt to provide these people with alternative houses. The Railway Administration must not only expropriate, but it must also try to provide people whose houses have been expropriated with a similar house under similar circumstances.

I have already told the hon. the Deputy Minister that I support his case, because there is no other way out. Finally, I just want to say that I cannot understand why construction of this railway line should take four years. I have learnt recently that construction of the railway line from Sishen to Saldanha Bay will take four years. Here we are dealing with a distance of five miles or eight kilometres, and I believe construction of this railway line will also take four years. The longer the construction period the greater will be the inconvenience experienced by the area through which the railway line is going to run. I want to ask the hon. the Deputy Minister to have this railway line built as soon as possible and that it should not, in the first place, take four years to construct this line, but a considerably shorter period. In the second place, I ask the hon. the Deputy Minister that the necessary liaison be established as soon as possible with those people whose properties have to be expropriated. They have to be told what the Railways are prepared to pay for those houses and they must also be given the undertaking that the Railways on its part and in conjunction with the Department of Community Development will try to provide them with alternative houses. If this matter is going to be handled in this way I believe that the deep concern there is at the moment will to a certain extent be eliminated. I want to make an earnest appeal to the hon. the Deputy Minister to see to it that this matter will be handled in this way.

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Maitland repeated the representations made and the many objections raised by the hon. member for Salt River. In the first place, I want to deal with the first aspect and this is not an objection the hon. member for Maitland had, but one which was raised by the hon. member for Salt River. He said: “We object to the very short time to examine this proposition and this line.” The hon. member for Salt River has been a member of the House of Assembly for quite a number of years now and he surely knows that, before submitting legislation to Parliament on the construction of a railway line, we have always carried out the necessary investigations first. What is more, all the bodies concerned are consulted as is, in fact, mentioned in this report. Before we approach Parliament, a report álso has to be prepared by the Railway Board, a report which must be tabled in Parliament. It takes time to do all these things.

The hon. member and other hon. members were therefore well aware of the negotiations and the possibility that such a railway line would be constructed. As a matter of fact, the hon. member for Maitland quite rightly said that he had led a deputation right at the beginning because I have here in front of me the minutes of a meeting which took place on 7th February this year. That deputation had an interview with the Minister and the Railway Board. The deputation consisted, inter alia, of the chairman of the Milnerton Ratepayers’ Association, the mayor and also representatives of the Dutch Reformed congregation Sonnekus in Milnerton. The hon. member for Maitland, the responsible M.P., led the deputation. All these circumstances were discussed with us at that time.

Both the hon. member for Maitland and the hon. member for Salt River mentioned as first accusation the fact that there was apparently no planning and that it was only afterwards that we had discovered that a railway line had to be constructed there. Surely, this is a stupid thing to say. In the first place, the harbour has been constructed and after it had been constructed the Railways knew from the outset that it must be linked up. The Railways knew right from the outset that the railway linkup at Paarden Eiland was carrying too much traffic and would not be able to cope with this link-up. However, it is not necessary to have a railway line surveyed prior to the construction of a harbour. This is done as and when it becomes necessary. Surely, the railway line cannot be constructed up in the air; it has to be on the ground, not so? To level the accusation now that there has been no planning since we intend constructing this railway line at this stage, is nothing but a debating point the hon. member wants to score for the sake of convenience.

What were the viewpoints when the harbour was planned originally? What route was the line supposed to follow?

Now you will have to make sure your lines are not crossed!

It makes no difference what the viewpoint was in regard to what route the line was to follow, because the Railways have a planning engineer. They know there will have to be a railway link-up and for that reason five different routes were investigated. I want to ask the hon. member a question in return: Should the Railways first have said that they were not going to build the harbour because they possibly had to let the railway line run through a township and possibly had to expropriate 40 houses and because they were not sure exactly where the line had to be constructed? In the first place, the harbour must be built; this is essential. On account of the development of our sea traffic, as a result of the development of Cape Town, as a result of the industrial development we have, this harbour becomes a necessity. I now want to ask hon. members whether they now want to tell the voters and this Parliament that the harbour development should be subject to a line which may not be constructed through a township? If this cannot be done, a harbour must not be allowed. This is the kind of argument hon. members advance. The hon. member for Maitland quite rightly says that the ordinary man would have thought that the railway line should have followed the Salt River canal. The hon. member for Salt River said himself that the line should be constructed along the Salt River canal. But the engineers investigated all the various aspects. The hon. member for Maitland says quite rightly that he is not an engineer. I do not believe that the hon. member for Salt River is an engineer either. The Railway Board investigated the various alternative routes submitted to it, and then decided that it would be the best to construct the line as is being suggested now.

The hon. member, on account of this report, now asks whether the hon. the Minister obtained the permission of the local authority for the construction of this line. Does this Parliament now want to make the Minister of Railways and the progress of South Africa subject to the permission of the local authority?

Consent.

What is the difference? The hon. the Minister and the department consulted the Provincial Administration in regard to the routing of the whole of the road, the road construction programme, the overhead bridges and the subways. Consultation also took place with the local authorities involved in and affected by this matter. The Minister went so far as to grant an interview to a deputation led by the hon. member for Maitland. That deputation consisted of the local authority, the chairman of the Maitland ratepayers, the mayor and representatives of the church communities and they had personal discussions with the hon. the Minister. He gave them the assurance that there was no alternative and that this line had to be built. They accepted it as such.

The hon. member said that this railway line is going to be constructed to run through a quiet area and is going to create a noise there. Throughout South Africa we have railway lines running through townships and densely populated areas. If this is really such a terrible inconvenience, if this is such a terrible evil, do all those people simply have to put up with it there, but not these people? When that hon. member and his deputation had an interview with the Minister, they were told by the General Manager of the Railways (translation)—

We have many railway lines running through built-up areas and we have never had any trouble about noise. On the contrary, human beings find it easier to adjust themselves to such circumstances. As a matter of interest, I want to say that it is not only human beings who adapt themselves to noise. Here at the D. F. Malan Airport we find that even game adapt themselves to the noise. We had to have the steenbuck there caught. They adapt themselves to the noise of those large aircraft coming to land there. We had to catch them so that they did not go onto the mac. So this argument about noise holds no water.

Another argument advanced by the hon. member was that the construction of this line would cut a whole church parish in two. Surely, the report indicates that there are not going to be any open level crossings anywhere, and that the necessary crossings, the necessary bridges and subways-will be built. How can the hon. member now say that a church parish will be cut in two by this line? Surely, this is not a factor which has to be taken into account in this matter. The hon. member also wanted to know why it would take four years to have the line constructed.

He thinks it is a Berlin wall.

Yes, it is true what the hon. member says here. That hon. member thinks that this is a Berlin wall, because that is the only thing that completely divides a community. We say that it will take four years to have this line constructed, because this will be done in conjunction with the final development of the harbour as such. We do not want to complete the line before the harbour is ready.

What I want to deal with finally is a question put to me by both the hon. member for Salt River and the hon. member for Maitland. I am as fond of swimming as those hon. members. I also believe that that part of the coast is particularly suitable for surfing. I can merely tell hon. members that it is being planned to leave the necessary access roads open for pedestrians to be able to reach the beachfront. We shall give this matter proper consideration. I will ask my department once more to give proper consideration to the representations made by the hon. members in this regard as far as planning is concerned.

That hon. member cannot swim. He is a political castaway.

With this I think I have replied to all the matters raised here.

Mr. Speaker, can the hon. the Deputy Minister tell me whether consideration will be given to the suggestion I made, namely to sink this line in an open cutting to where it connects up with the other line?

Mr. Speaker, I have told the hon. member that the line will go through a cutting along the airport. That cutting will almost be the same as a tunnel. From there the slope will gradually rise. The line cannot be sunk, because it must rise to ground level at the beach. It will be sunk as far as possible without letting water into it.

Motion put and agreed to.

Bill read a Second Time.

Mr. Speaker, I move—

That the Bill be now read a Second Time.

The Sale of Land on Instalments Act, No. 72 of 1971, came into operation on 1st January, 1972. The Act contains provisions relating, inter alia, to the contents of contracts for the sale of land to which the Act is applicable, and the amount which the seller may recover from the purchaser in terms of such contracts is restricted by the Act.

Section 4 (1) (o) of the Act requires each contract to which the Act is applicable to contain an indication of the party who shall be liable for the payment of the costs incurred in connection with the transfer of land to the name of the purchaser. The parties to such a contract may, as indeed often happens in practice, agree that the purchaser shall pay the transfer costs. On the other hand, however, representations have been submitted to the Government claiming that section 6 (3) of the Act prohibits the recovery of transfer costs by the seller from the purchaser, and in addition it has been alleged that an irreconcilable conflict exists between sections 4 (1) (o) and 6 (3) of the Act.

Whatever the legal position created by the relevant sections of the Act may be, it is clear that differences of opinion on the interpretation of the Act may arise. Under these circumstances it is deemed desirable to amend the Act suitably in order to state the provisions thereof more clearly in so far as the possible payment of transfer costs by the purchaser is concerned.

The proposed amendment to the Act, which is being submitted to this House for its approval, will amend section 6 (3) (b) of Act 72 of 1971 so as to state clearly that a seller may in fact recover transfer costs from the purchaser provided the contract makes the purchaser liable for the payment of such costs and the costs have actually been incurred by the seller, and provided that the transfer of the land to the name of the purchaser has already taken place or is tendered against payment by the purchaser of the amount due.

I have to point out that various contracts have in all probability been entered into since the coming into operation of the Act, contracts to which the Act is applicable. If the Act were to be amended at this time and if the amended provisions of the Act were not to apply to those contracts, it would create considerable uncertainty with regard to the legal position in respect of those particular contracts. The only way in which this uncertainty can be eliminated, is to make the proposed amendment to the Act of retrospective effect as from the date of coming into operation of the Act itself. Consequently it is being proposed that the Act be amended as from 1st January, 1972, in terms of the provisions of the Bill which has now been submitted to this House for its approval.

Mr. Speaker, we believe that this amendment is necessary. Actually we referred to the matter during the Second Reading last year. It certainly clarifies a position about which there has been a great deal of doubt. It conforms with the normal business practice that, in the main, the purchaser of land should be liable to pay for the cost of transfer and we support the Bill.

Motion put and agreed to.

Bill read a Second Time.

Mr. Speaker, I move—

That the Bill be now read a Second Time.

The Hire-Purchase Act, No. 36 of 1942, requires that an appraiser shall, for the purposes of the Act, be licensed as a sworn appraiser in terms of the Licences Act, No. 44 of 1962, or shall be exempted from such licence in terms of that Act.

Arising out of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry into Trade Licensing and Allied Problems, full and effective powers to make ordinances in relation to the licensing of trades and occupations were allocated to the provincial councils during 1968 in terms of the Financial Relations Further Amendment Bill, No. 69 of 1968. Section 8 of that Act provides that a provincial council may repeal the provisions of the Licences Act in so far as such provisions apply to its province and relate to trades and occupations in regard to which it is empowered by section 14 of the Financial Relations Consolidation and Amendment Act, No. 38 of 1945, to make ordinances.

The provinces appointed an inter-provincial committee to make recommendations to the Executive Committees of the various provinces in regard to a uniform Ordinance on Licences, as envisaged by the Commission of Inquiry to which I have referred. According to report the inter-provincial committee has now completed its task and the provincial council will repeal the Licences Act by ordinance with effect from 1st January, 1973. In view of this it has now become necessary to amend the definition of “appraiser” in the Hire-Purchase Act.

In terms of the provisions of the Licences Act which will now be repealed by ordinance, sworn appraisers as well as assessors who have not been sworn, may act as appraisers for the purposes of the Hire-Purchase Act. In order to maintain this position in practice, it is being provided in the proposed statutory amendment that an appraiser shall be any person who, by virtue of his experience, knowledge or skill as well as his ability and reputation, is competent to determine the value of goods for the purposes of the Hire-Purchase Act. Since the courts may in terms of section 16 of the Act exercise control over the appointment of assessors for purpose of the Act, it is regarded that the proposed provision in regard to persons who are competent to act as appraisers will provide adequate protection to the parties involved in a hire-purchase transaction in which the value of goods has to be determined.

Since the Licences Act is to be repealed with effect from 1st January, 1973, it is being proposed that the Hire-Purchase Amendment Act, 1972, shall come into operation with effect from 1st January, 1973.

Mr. Speaker, the hon. the Minister has given us a fairly lengthy explanation of the necessity for this Bill and the change in the licensing set-up. We have no objection to it. We do not think that there will be any prejudice in terms of the new definition of “appraiser” because there are other sections in the Act which will protect the parties who are involved. Therefore we support this Bill.

Motion put and agreed to.

Bill read a Second Time.

Mr. Speaker, I move—

That the Bill be now read a Second Time.

The Explosives Act, 1956 (Act 26 of 1956), came into operation on 2nd May, 1956, and makes provision for control over the manufacture, storage, sale, transport, importation, exportation and the use of explosives in the Republic of South Africa.

The Act is not applicable in the territory of South-West Africa, but matters relating to explosives are controlled by means of the Ordinance on Explosives, No. 31 of 1962, and Regulation 52 of 1958 of the territory of South-West Africa. In accordance with Government resolutions on financial and administrative relations between the Republic and South-West Africa, matters relating to explosives were entrusted to the Minister of Economic Affairs, while the Department of Mines undertakes the administration of the Ordinance and the regulations on explosives in South-West Africa on behalf of the Department of Commerce.

It has been deemed desirable to exercise control over explosives in the Republic and South-West Africa in terms of one Act. With a view to this the Explosives Act of the Republic is being made applicable in the territory of South-West Africa, including the Eastern Caprivi Zipfel, and the ordinance and regulations of South-West Africa dealing with explosives are being revoked.

The South-West Africa Ordinance and regulations are in almost all respects iden tical to the Act and the regulations relating to explosives which apply in the Republic. The minor exceptions will cause no inconvenience to those who have to comply with the provisions of the Act. When the Explosives Act comes into effect in South-West Africa, the control over explosives in the Territory will be taken over from the Department of Mines by the Department of Commerce.

Owing to the metrication of the weights and measures system in the country, certain expressions are being suitably amended to bring them into line with the metric system.

Mr. Speaker, we have no objection to this Bill. Therefore we support it.

Motion put and agreed to.

Bill read a Second Time.

Mr. Speaker, I move—

The Copyright Act, 1965 (Act 63 of 1965), came into operation on 11th September, 1965, and is also applicable to the territory of South-West Africa. This Bill provides, inter alia, for the protection of copyright sound recordings, cinematographic films, television and sound broadcasts and literary, dramatic and musical works. During the last few years reproductions of overseas cinematographic film productions have been imported by certain bodies which make it available to the public to be shown privately without royalties being paid to the manufacturers of the original cinematographic films. The result of this practice is that the provisions of the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (Copyright) are violated and that the interests of the authorized importers who do, in fact, comply with the requirements of the Convention, are in this way seriously prejudiced.

Authorized distributors of cinematographic films have found that there are certain deficiencies in the present provisions of the Copyright Act which make it difficult to apply the Act in such a way that their rights will be adequately protected. As the Act reads at present, producing evidence when violation of copyright cases are heard in courts of law entails considerable expenses because persons have to come from abroad to give evidence here.

In order to make it easier for authorized distributors to protect their rights against the unauthorized distributors, it has therefore been deemed advisable to amend the provisions of the Copyright Act so that copyright will exist in the case of all cinematographic films, whether published or unpublished, and for the name of the person appearing on a published or unpublished cinematographic film to be recognized as the manufacturer of such cinematographic film.

Modern developments in the manufacture of cinematographic films make it advisable to promulgate, by regulation, the instructions in regard to the identification of the manufacturer of the cinematographic film so that these instructions may easily be adapted to ensure that this Act is applied effectively.

Such an amendment to the Copyright Act will be in accordance with the amendment affected at a diplomatic conference in Paris in 1971 to article 15 of the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (Copyright) and will comply with international requirements.

The Bill amends sections 14 and 21 of the principal Act to give effect to the objects I have referred to.

Mr. Speaker, we shall support this Bill because we believe that the amendments which are now asked for merely give effect to the intention which the original Bill sought to provide, but in regard to which it did not give sufficient clarity. As the hon. the Deputy Minister has said, the Copyright Act of 1965 is part of an international agreement to which we are a party, and this Bill will bring the position in South Africa into line with what is happening in the rest of the world. We think that this protection is necessary for people who are involved in copyright, and we shall support this Bill.

Mr. Speaker, I shall not detain the House long. I merely want to ask the hon. the Minister a question in regard to a provision of this Bill. I agree, naturally, with my hon. friend that it is good that copyright should be protected, particularly where the hard work of artists, writers, and so forth, is involved. There are, however, going to be new developments in this country in the next 5 or 10 years, in regard to the copyright of material which can be broadcast on one’s own television screen. I should like to know to what extent this Bill is providing for matter of that nature. Let me explain shortly. As the hon. the Deputy Minister knows, it is possible abroad to obtain video-casettes, or tapes, on which there is a whole television programme. You could, for instance, have a BBC programme such as a serial, on such casettes. These casettes can then be shown privately in one’s own home on a television screen. Does this Bill in any way affect, say, the renting of such a video-tape for private use in one’s own home on a television screen, or does the Bill not cover cases of that nature?

Mr. Speaker, as far as I can see, it depends on whether a royalty is paid or not. There can be no action, as far as this Bill is concerned, if a royalty has been paid. We are dealing here purely with cases where a royalty is not paid.

Motion put and agreed to.

Bill read a Second Time.

Mr. Speaker, I move—

That the Bill be now read a Second Time.

The Nama, who according to the provisional returns of the 1970 population census number 32 853 belong to the Khoisan group of peoples, and their language contains the characteristic clicks of the Khoisan languages. After the Bushmen and Damara, the Nama are among the oldest inhabitants of the southern part of South-West Africa, formerly known as Great Namaqualand. Consequently they are the first indigenous nation with whom the Whites from the south came into contact. Traditionally they consist of different groups each of which has its own form of Government in its own territory.

With the arrival of the Hereros and their penetration circa 1830 into the pastures of the Nama, fierce and protracted conflicts arose between these two groups which lasted until almost the end of the previous century. This struggle was aggravated by the arrival of the Oorlams early in the previous century from the old Cape Colony.

After the Oorlams had conquered the Nama and had virtually amalgamated with them, forces were joined in continuing the earlier struggle against the Hereros. With the arrival of the Whites the struggle was terminated and the German régime made land available to the Nama who, after great loss of life, were exhausted, impoverished and fragmented. After the establishment of the Mandated Territory under the Union of South Africa, these areas were recognized, and in due course some were enlarged and a few additional areas were also made available to the Nama.

With the arrival of the Oorlams the Nama were strongly influenced by changes since the former had adopted various aspects of the way of life of the Whites south of the Orange River. In addition, the Nama had already come under the influence of mission work during the previous century. With the development of a new economy in the southern part of South-West Africa, considerable numbers were employed by White employers. In their areas, however, the Nama still maintained a great measure of subsistence economy based exclusively on animal husbandry.

As far as the government and administration of the Namas are concerned, it may briefly be mentioned that the administration of Native Affairs, including the Nama, since the suspension of military rule in South-West Africa, has been controlled by the Administrator in terms of powers allocated and adapted from time to time by proclamation of the Governor-General or legislation of Parliament.

In terms of the South-West Africa Bantu Affairs Administration Act, 1954 (Act No. 56 of 1954), the powers in respect of the administration of Native affairs were transferred to the Minister of Bantu Administration and Development. With regard to certain local legislation affecting both Whites and Natives and which does not fall under the ambit of the abovementioned. Act No. 56 of 1954, the Legislative Assembly of South-West Africa provided in the South-West African Native Administration Ordinance, 1955 (Ordinance No. 4 of 1955), that the implementation of such local legislation, to the extent to which it is applicable to Native territories and to Natives, will be done by the Minister.

A readjustment was made in terms of the provisions of the South-West Africa Affairs Act 1969 (Act No. 25 of 1969), when the administration of matters aEecting the Nama in particular was transferred to the Minister of Coloured Affairs on 1st April, 1969. In this way, in terms of existing Acts applicable to the Natives, a separate administration was established for the Nama. In terms of the provisions of the South-West Africa Bantu Affairs Administration Act, 1954, the existing position remains unchanged, however, in respect of land (and certain mineral rights attached thereto) which has been or is to be set aside for Natives, and in respect of certain funds established for Natives and which in terms of the latter Act were transferred to the South African Bantu Trust.

To adjust said matters to the separate administration of affairs relating to the Nama, supplementary legislation is required.

Furthermore, arising out of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry into South-West African Affirs, 1962-’63, the Odendaal Commission, an enlarged and consolidated area was held out in prospect for the Nama. while the reservation of a number of separate reserves was to be suspended. Such progress has already been made with the acquisition and reservation of land for the said consolidated Nama territory that only three more properties, with a combined area of approximately 27 000 ha. still has to be purchased. On the other hand, inhabitants of the separate reserves, with a few exceptions, have already been settled in the consoldiated area. It is therefore opportune and desirable to give expression by law to this undertaking given to the Nama, in order to further the development of their territory, the introduction of a suitable settlement system, the overhaul of the administration and the rehabilitation of the Nama. with which progress has already been made.

The object of this Bill as set out in the long title, is consequently to make provision for the abovementioned matters. The most important proposed provisions are the following:

Clause 2:

The establishment of Namaland through the reservations and setting apart of specific land for the Nama.

Clause 3:

The transfer of that land to the Minister of Coloured Affairs in trust for the Nama and the withdrawal of certain of that land which is vested in the South African Bantu Trust.

Clause 4:

The recission and declaration as unalienated State property of certain separate reserves vested in the South African Bantu Trust.

Clause 5:

The transfer to the Minister of Coloured Affairs of certain funds established for the benefit of the Nama but which are still vested in the South African Bantu Trust.

Clause 7:

Prospecting and mining in Namaland in respect of which arrangements have become necessary owing to the withdrawal of land in Namaland vested in the South African Bantu Trust and to which certain mineral rights attach.

Clause 8:

Provisions in regard to existing laws through which the status quo in that respect is maintained, but by means of which executive powers in so far as such Acts apply to Namaland, are conferred on the Minister of Coloured Affairs.

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of this side of the House I want to inform the hon. Minister that we support the Second Reading of this legislation. The hon. gentleman sketched for us the historical background to how the Nama originated as a tribe, and also how they obtained their territory. I must say that the hon. the Minister’s explanation in this regard was very interesting. The hon. the Minister also sketched for us how these people will all be settled and already have been settled, with very few exceptions, in certain areas in Keetmanshoop, Gibeon and Bethanie. In this regard I want to tell him that although we support this legislation, he must not think that because we do we in any way support it with a view to agreeing with the Government’s ultimate policy of making all these small nations and small territories completely independent and sovereign. Since these territories belonged to these people historically, and it is in fact possible to give them some or other form of government I think that the hon. the Minister understands the attitude of this side of the House which, of course, as far as the end result is concerned, differs entirely from the direction which his Party advocates.

It is also interesting to note that with the passage of time the Nama not only established themselves in their own area, but have to an increasing extent been taken up on the farms in the territory of South-West Africa, and that more and more of these people have also in due course entered commerce and industry. One can therefore expect that in due course there will be ever-fewer of these people in their own area. Consequently they will become established in the White area to an ever-greater extent. While some of these people are at present employed in the White area and in this way enjoy a high standard of living, it will also be desirable if those people are able to utilize in their own area more of the money and income they are earning, so as to uplift the rest of their population group. In that respect we have no objection to this legislation and if it is the intention of the hon. the Minister to teach the Nama better farming methods in due course, good and well. We have no objection to that, because we think it is in the interests of those people. Another thing we would not like to see in these areas which are being given to them is a loss in any way in soil fertility and therefore it is necessary for them to acquire far better farming methods.

I think that as a result of their animal husbandry background, this is probably the most important aspect of their agriculture which ought to receive attention. We on this side hope that the hon. the Minister, with his administration, will do everything in their power to improve animal husbandry among those people so that they may become better farmers. With these few words I want to say that we support the Second Reading and the passage of this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, as one of the South-West Africa representatives I should also like to welcome this legislation. It is a good thing that this Parliament is in this way according recognition to one of the oldest population groups of South-West Africa. As the hon. the Minister rightly said the Nama are members of the Khoisan group. The word “Khoisan” is actually derived from the Nama word “Koikoi”, and from the word “San”. The “San” is the Bushmen group, and the “Koikoi” are the Hottentots. The White population of Southern Africa made the acquaintance of this particular group in South-West Africa for the first time on 1st May, 1670, when G. R. Muys, a Dutchman, disembarked from the Grundlingh along the west coast of South-West Africa. Muys is the person after whom Muizenberg was subsequently named. He saw five of these people and a dog along the coast. He landed there and followed them to a distance of three miles from the coast, where a little skirmish took place and one of them was killed. The landing party then returned.

Actually the Nama consist of seven different groups. They have their special names. There are the Khaugoa, the Gei/- Khauan, the Kara/gei/khoin, the Nara/- nin, the Gamu/nun, the Ogei and the Hawobe.

How can Hansard report that?

The farmers were unable to pronounce these names successfully, as the hon. member on the opposite side has also indicated now. For that reason they simply gave them fine discriptive names, namely the Velskoendraers. the Topnaars, the Swartboois, the Grootdode, the Fransmanhottentotte, and so on. These people played a special part in the history of South-West Africa.

One thinks in particular of one person whose life history is really engraved on the early history of South-West Africa, namely Hendrik Witbooi. Hendrik Witbooi had a very good schooling. He could write High Dutch very well. He left behind a diary of 192 pages, written between the years 1884 to 6th April, 1893. This Hendrik Witbooi was really a very interesting person. He grew up along the Orange River wnere he was a sheep-herder for his father, Moses Witbooi. He had an uncle by the name of Paul Visser. Paul Visser was a verger in the church, and a very religious man. One evening, while Hendrik Witbooi was walking along the banks of the Orange River, he heard someone speaking. He went closer and saw Paul Visser on his knees, saying a prayer. He approached even closer and realized that the man was praying, and tried to imitate him. It made a tremendous impression on Hendrik Witbooi, so that in fact he also received a very good religious training. Subsequently Paul Visser and Moses Witbooi had a fall out. They took up arms against each other and in fact Moses Witbooi was executed by Paul Visser, after Paul Visser had made him dig his own grave and sing Psalm 57. All this is very interesting.

This same Hendrik Witbooi was a good man. I now want to mention his good qualities in order to emphasize what good people these Nama were. Hendrik Witbooi was such a good man that after his father had stolen cattle from other tribes Hendrik drove them out through the back-door and returned them to their owners. On one occasion—this I must really mention to you—he was making a journey to the north, towards Windhoek, and was captured by a Herero patrol, and his entire group was executed. When they eventually came to the last man—this was Hendrik Witbooi—one of the oldest Hereros said: “But look, I know this man—he is a very good Christian, and you must spare his life.” This they did. They left him with just his horse, and told him that he could return. He returned, and was a very disheartened and lonely man. On another occasion, while making a return journey, he rode past the farm Hoabetsaus, between two koppies, and there Hendrik Witbooi saw a vision. It was a vision which descended from the clouds, and he later described it to missionary Ebner.

In this vision he received a command. There were in fact three messages, complicated messages which I do not want to repeat to you. Nevertheless, Hendrik Witbooi regarded it as a command, a Divine command, to wipe out the Herero population of South-West Africa. Consequently, this is what he tried to do throughout his career. He actually kept a record of how many he had killed, and this amounted to thousands. At one stage leaders of the other population groups of South-West Africa said to him: “Man, in heaven’s name, put a stop to your wars.” But he just did not want to. Subsequently Dr. Goering—this was the father of the later notorious Hermann Goering—made a special appeal to him. He then replied to him in High Dutch. It was a very interesting letter, and in it he stated that he was unable to do so. He said (translation)—

But he went on to say in that letter that before he received that message he would not stop this war of extermination in South-West Africa. Hendrik Witbooi died in the battle of 1905 against the Germans. With that one of the finest chapters in the history of the Nama was closed. His was such a reign of terror that the rest of the population, and particularly the Hereros, continued to speak of Hendrik Witbooi long afterwards, and do so even to this day. They called him “the short one”, because he was so short. The Hereros still ask today “Otjikorta, tji ri pi”? (The short one, where is he?) They think he is still living in South-West Africa. Sir, with this I just want to indicate that these Nama have really played an important role in the history of South-West Africa. They engraved their particular pattern and qualities on it. It is a good thing that this Parliament should on this particular occasion accord them recognition in this way.

Mr. Speaker, I am rising to say a few words because most of the territory which is being consolidated for the Nama by means of this legislation is situated in the Mariental constituency. Therefore I shall not confine myself to the past of the Nama—I shall confine myself to those of them who are still living, and to what is being done for them. That is why I am also pleased that the hon. member for Newton Park on the opposite side of the House also supports this legislation, on behalf of the Opposition, because it is in the interests of the Nama population.

If one considers the past history of the Nama population, one finds that they were distributed over a host of small areas in South-West Africa, with the result that it was not possible to give very much attention to them. If I may mention this, they lived to the south of Warmbad in two reserves, namely the Warmbad and the Bondelswart reserves. They also lived in Berseba and Tses, as well as in other small reserves to the west of Bethany by the name of Soromas, at Kranzplaas and west of Maltahohe at Neuhof. Now Kranzplaas, Tses and Berseba have been joined. Upon the recommendation of the Odendaal Report, to which the hon. the Minister referred, a lot of White land has been purchased and added. This took place in terms of resolutions adopted by this Parliament, the Legislative Assembly of South-West Africa, with great majorities by the White population, and also in co-operation with the Nama. That is why we believe that this legislation can constitute only advantages for the Nama in future. Because they have been consolidated into one large region and now fall, as the hon. the Minister said, under the Department of Coloured Affairs, it is possible to give proper attention to these people, which holds great promise for their future.

We know that the department is even now providing them with information in various spheres, including the sphere of agriculture. They are stock farmers first and foremost, and they are receiving instruction in this. Attempts are being made to improve their livestock. We think that the position is far better than it was in the past. Therefore we are pleased that there is unanimity in regard to this this morning. In regard to the recommendations of the Odendaal Report, I may say that the Opposition of South-West Africa crossed swords frequently with the Administration and the Government. We are pleased that this Parliament has today achieved unanimity in this regard. Consequently we hope and believe that the remaining land will be cleared shortly. As far as I know Warmbad and Berseba to the south have almost been completely evacuated. The people have already been moved to Namaland. The reserve to the west of Maltahohe, Neuhof, has also been completely evacuated. We think that the land will subsequently be transferred back to the Administration of South-West Africa, which will then decide in what way it will be utilized. We hope that this will in future be done.

I want to thank the hon. the Minister for this Bill which he submitted to the House this morning, and we, as South-West Africans, support him wholeheartedly. By way of repetition I also want to say that we are pleased that we also have the support of the Opposition in this regard because it is in the interests of the Mama population as a whole.

Mr. Speaker, I should just like to express my appreciation of the fact that this Bill has been received and welcomed so unanimously by the House. I think the discussion was interesting; we enjoyed it very much. Actually, I want to inform the hon. member for Newton Park, the entire House, as well as those people from South-West Africa, that we will take pains to preserve the soil of the consolidated Namaland in the best condition for the future. Our department has well qualfied extension officers in its employ. I may also say for the information of the House that we are already working on the planning of Namaland. It is true that individual farms will not be subdivided and transferred to individual Nama farmers, but we are undertaking planning for that area and we are establishing our paddock system for collective grazing. My department and I will take great pains, and will go out of our way, to preserve the soil of Namaland for future generations.

Mr. Speaker, I do not think there are any further observations I need make. I just want to repeat that I appreciate the support hon. members have given this measure.

Motion put and agreed to.

Bill read a Second Time.

Mr Chairman, when the debate on the hon the Minister’s Vote was adjourned, various matters of considerable importance had been raised. Many of these matters will, of course, be replied to when the hon. the Minister replies to the debate. One particular aspect in which I am interested and, indeed, in which many people in Natal are interested, is the question of the provision of a medical school for the benefit of White students in the province of Natal. It has been said on many occasions that there is a considerable shortage of doctors in the country. The hon. the Minister himself and his predecessors have had a committee of inquiry investigating the position. The hon. the Minister has made a statement on a previous occasion indicating that during the period of the next five years, the intake of medical students will be doubled at the existing universities. The latest position is that the hon. the Minister, in reply to a question earlier this Session, said that it would not be possible to take any such steps apart from one step at the University of the Witwatersrand, but in the light of the financial situation of the country, he was unable to take any further steps at this particular stage as far as the other universities were concerned.

Business suspended at 12.45 p.m. and resumed at 2.20 p.m.

Afternoon Sitting

Mr. Chairman, just before the adjournement I was dealing with the question of the training of medical students and medical doctors in South Africa. It appears that, as the situation is today, we have the ridiculous position that there is a tremendous shortage of doctors. Indeed, many hospitals, both Provincial and State hospitals, are having an enormous struggle to meet their staff requirements. Yet, at the same time, we have a situation where a large number of potential doctors are unable to obtain admission to any of the existing medical schools. The number of applicants has increased considerably over the years. I should like to refer particularly to the position as far as English-speaking students are concerned. There are only two medical schools available to them, viz. one at the University of Cape Town and one at the Witwatersrand University. If one looks at the figures over the past few years, one immediately sees that at present only about 20 per cent of the applicants are successful in gaining admission to these medical schools. For instance, over the pat few years, 1971 and 1972, no fewer than 3 396 applications were received at the University of Cape Town and the Witwatersrand University medical schools of which a total of 708 were able to be accepted as the intake for the commencement of their studies during those years. Consequently we have the situation that the English-speaking students are finding it increasingly difficult to obtain admission. If one looks at the figures for 1965, for instance, one sees that the figures have certainly grown since those applications were received in 1965 when, of the 687 applications received from White students, 246 were accepted. The number of applicants increased enormously. Many of the young people in Natal are at a distinct disadvantage without any medical school in existence in that province. They have to face the additional expense, if they are fortunate enough to gain admission to the University of Cape Town or the Witwatersrand University medical schools, that is involved in studying away from home. In addition to that, the shortage of doctors at our hospitals is indeed tremendous in Natal. There appears to be no reason why a medical school should not be established at the Natal University either in Pietermaritzburg, where the Grey’s Hospital could be used as the teaching hospital, or in Durban where Addington Hospital could also be used as a teaching hospital. The question of the provision of these facilities is one about which the people of Natal are most anxious to receive some further information from the hon. the Minister. There are other young potential doctors who have found that, even after enrolling at the university in Pietermaritzburg and completing virtually a first-year medicine course and passing all their subjects, they are still unable to gain admission to one of the medical schools either at the University of Cape Town or the Witwatersrand.

The other matter which I want to raise with the hon. the Minister is in regard to the item of reform schools appearing under his Vote. These reform schools and the schools of industry, which are established in terms of the Children’s Act, are the responsibility of the hon. Minister of National Education. These schools play a very important role in the re-education of the young people. Particularly as far as the reform schools are concerned, juvenile offenders and others who have committed offences are committed to a reform school to undergo the treatment that is available at the reform schools, where there is only one reform school for boys and one for girls. The position here seems to be that, in spite of the fact that a degree of success is obtained in the rehabilitation of these young people, there appears to be a necessity for a further amount of research to be undertaken in this regard as far as the training and re-education of the people at the reformatory and reform schools is concerned. It is alarming to note that the number of persons amongst young people committing offences has increased considerably over the past few years. If one makes a study of statistics of the Department of Justice and also of the Department of Police, one is immediately struck by the fact that there is a large number of young people, an increasing number of young people, committing offences. There is a tendency amongst these crimes for there to be an increase in sexual crimes. The number of cases involving sexual offences has almost increased by 50 per cent over the past five years. I mention this because we have had cases where young juveniles have been convicted of sexual offences and committed to reform schools which falls under the jurisdiction of this hon. Minister. If one looks at the only exhaustive inquiry and survey that was undertaken some years ago by Dr. hotter entitled “Die Rehabilitasie van Blanke-jeugoortreders”, it appears that he conducted a follow-up survey of 544 former students of the reform school at Constantia. Looking at the figures that were provided at that stage, it appears that almost 70 per cent of those who are undergoing rehabilitation and re-education at the reform school, have been convicted of criminal offences. The follow-up of these cases also shows that only 26 per cent could be classified as having been successfully rehabilitated, as the balance were found to have committed offences within the five-year follow-up period after their release, discharge or abscondment from the reform school. These figures show that there was also an increase in convictions involving sexual offences after the release of these persons from the reform school. The figures show that some 5,5 per cent of those they were able to follow up and trace, which constitutes 382 former pupils of the reform school, were convicted of sexual offences within five years of leaving the school.

We have recently had the position, too, where a young man was convicted of five cases involving rape and attempted rape, and was sentenced to death. This person was also unfortunately one who attended the reform school at Constantia and had a previous record. He evidently absconded from the reform school and, from the information I have received, was never returned to the reform school at Constantia. I should therefore like to suggest that the hon. the Minister should institute an investigation into the effectiveness of the rehabilitation that is being carried out, particularly amongst this type of case that is receiving attention at the reform school at the present time. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, 24 years ago, on 26th May, 1948, South Africa witnessed the greatest ever intellectual achievement, i.e. when the National Party took over.

Look what they look like now!

When they tried to hijack us we outwitted them, and they have been in gaol since 1948. They have been caught for the past 24 years, they have been intellectually stagnant and politically they have been pedagogically impotent, having been subjected to the castration of all political initiative and enterprise. Every crisis they converted into a worse crisis for themselves, and every opportunity they had they did not employ as a privilege, but converted into a crisis for themselves. Here they sit, and just look what they look like. Just see how resigned and dejected they are; no hope for the future!

[Inaudible.]

That hon. member has no cause to speak. That was when the wool prices were still good and when doctor’s degrees were not obtainable for advertising or commercial purposes. [Interjection.]

Mr. Chairman, today I should like to make a request to the hon. the Minister. In the first place I want to ask the Minister whether he cannot consider removing all the obstacles and bringing the schools, in which retarded children are today accommodated, schools which are at present under the Department of Labour, under the auspices of his department. I am merely asking this question; the Minister can elaborate on it himself.

I want to begin by saying, in the discussion of this Education Vote, that our coun try has incomparable physical sources, but man is the most valuable of all our sources. Man accommodates the forces which, through the proper utilization of those sources, will eventually determine the outcome of the power struggle in which we are involved. There are two elements in God’s creation which are of primary importance as far as the educationist—the teacher—in the education process is concerned. One is the unfathomable depths of the human spirit and the second is the sublimity of the achievement in developing to maximum human capacity that power sources, the beauty and the diversity of creation. The sublimity of the achievement in the education process, and in the Creator’s revelation to man, is inextricably bound up with man’s ability to order his brain power, his capacity and his knowledge, and to follow this up productively to the greater veneration of God and the greater happiness of man. As far as I am concerned, that is the great meaning that lies locked up in that. That is why I say that the spiritual and intellectual creation of capital is infinitely more important to us than the economic creation and investment of capital. It is primarily the educationist —the family and the teacher—who is able to allow the measureless, unfathomable, hidden forces that reside in man to develop in the right direction and to let them unfold to transform the crises, in which the Republic of South Africa and the world around it move today, into greater opportunities. We in the Republic will have to challenge our own crises, with all the fronts that are today arranged against us, and all the boundaries of the unknown future, and we shall have to do this chiefly with our own intellectual powers and the tenacity of our moral fibre. We have no alternative. Our ability to transform the passions welling up in Africa and the world outside, and which dominate the relationships towards us today, into relationships which are motivated by realism and correctly balanced, non-militant considerations, will determine our future. Our ability to transform this will be determined by two big factors. The first is our scientific and technical ability, and the second is the faith and the intellectual equipment of our citizens which is supported, and will inevitably have to be supported, by greater responsibility, loyalty, perseverance, ethical relationships between people, regardless of colour and creed, and respect for authority. Here the teacher occupies a central position. No people will be subject to greater demands during the last half of the century in which we are living than specifically ourselves. Even if we could militarily defeat all the militant enemies active on various fronts, the need and the pressures for higher standards of living, the elimination of the sweat and the strain, the struggle to free from ignorance and poverty all those who stand within our ranks, and around us, in the process of economic and political emancipation, cannot be escaped from.

I want to say that in this entire process, and in this whole task that lies before us, the teacher has vanished as the central figure in the whole hierarchical structure. His disappearance has gone hand in hand with the greater rejection of authority amongst the youth, and with a shift of emphasis from the spiritual and knowledge-founded norms to the utility level on which we have evaluated the teacher. The teacher has been deprived of his status, his image of authority in his own sovereign sphere in his class-room. He must exercise authority according to a lot of prescriptions. Today he shares his sovereign level of authority with parents, principals, the department and a lot of regulations. The recognition of his position as a central developer, architect and supplier of the product that goes to the universities and elsewhere, has indefensibly been undervalued by all of us in the recent past. His denigration was the result of an undervaluing by us of his social status, his financial demands on service and his own sovereign level of authority. Today I appeal to those of us sitting here as a Parliament to recognize, within the framework of this tremendous task entrusted to our educationist, the authority of the teacher as being central to the whole process. I appeal to us all here to give the teacher the recognition he deserves. Through that recognition of his authority and his status we will share in the beneficial consequences that will result, that will illuminate the heart of the Child, and that of the young man that goes to university and elsewhere, with the essential, interwoven components of respect for authority, loyalty, a sense of responsibility and. above all, a re-emphasis and a revaluation in our youth of that which has eternal value and is more valuable than money, and the position and newer obtained by money. This is the serious appeal I am making today. May we as legislators succeed in giving more serious thought to the place of our teachers, and may we have a greater appreciation of our teachers, who occupy the central position in our whole education process.

Mr. Chairman, there are two matters I briefly want to mention. The first is that I should very much like to express a few words of sincere thanks and appreciation to the Minister and the department for the concession that has been made in respect of the schools for children who are badly retarded intellectually. In any area there is one of those schools, a school that is doing a very big job. Up to now that school has had to depend on an allowance of 25 cents per child per school day, and that is why we were very pleased when we saw in the Estimates that instead of 25 cents per child per school day, the amount is now R1 per child per school day. Of course, this is not yet what was requested at the time by the Van Wyk Commission’s report, but we know that that report is still receiving the attention of the Minister and his department. In the meantime it means a tremendous amount, and for that we want to say thank you very sincerely.

The second matter I want to emphasize here very strongly has a bearing on the valuable work that is being done—this falls under this Minister’s department—by the Human Sciences Research Council, the HSRC. While I was listening to the various Estimates submitted here, the Estimates of the Railways, of the Minister of Posts and Telegraphs and of the Minister of Finance, two aspects permeated the various Estimates like a refrain. The one is the great manpower shortage, and everything in our power must be done to discover, retain and utilize our manpower to a greater extent. The second matter that was emphasized is that everything must be done to increase productivity. These two matters are emphasized very strongly today. I want to say that it is disquieting, for example, to see certain figures furnished in the 1968 South African statistics. According to those statistics it was found, over a period of 12 years, that only about 60 per cent to 70 per cent of the boys who passed Std. 6, and a little more than 60 per cent of the girls, reached Std. 8. But what is more alarming is that only about 30 per cent of the boys who were in Std. 6 during those 12 years, reached Std. 10. In the case of the girls the percentage was even lower. Sir, one asks oneself where these talented young people were lost. The scientists tell us that one of the causes will perhaps now be removed when we have more to do with differentiated education, so that children’s talents can be summed up and measured at an earlier stage and so that they can be channelled in a direction in which they will achieve the very best they can. But, Sir, it is impossible to have differentiated education unless one has the necessary scientific means of measurement that can gauge the ability, aptitude and the interest of those pupils so that they can subsequently be placed in certain homogeneous groups where they can make the best use of that educational system, and this is where the HSRC’s psychometric division plays an extremely important role. As far as productivity is concerned, it is generally accepted that one cannot make a person more productive unless one places him in a job or in job surroundings for which he has the necessary aptitude and interest, and which he can cope with. This not only enables him to realize himself, but it motivates him and moves him towards higher productivity. One is amazed to see what a tremendous number of tests have already been standdardized by the HSRC, and are continually being improved, but then one is saddened to learn, as is apparent from the HSRC’s annual report for the year 1970-’71, that at the end of that year there were about 200 tests and other projects on this institute’s waiting list. At the end of the 1971-’72 financial year this had increased to 400. With the scant growth the HSRC is allowed, this backlog will increase from year to year. Sir, if this work the HSRC is doing is virtually the laboratory that must give birth to those aspects that make it possible for us to better utilize our manpower and increase our productivity, one asks oneself if something drastic must not be done to enable this important institution to meet the great need that exists, not only in respect of the Whites, because one cannot, after all, apply to the non-Whites the tests that have been designed and standardized for Whites. One needs other types of tests, particularly for the various ethnic groups, tests that have been standardized according to their mental abilities and their specific aptitudes. Sir, since there is a big shortage even in respect of the Whites, since the demand for the work that is being done by the HSRC’s psychometric division increases by the day, and since it is an investment for us to utilize each of our work forces properly, one asks oneself whether it is not essential that more be done to enable them to continue to develop their extremely important work. I saw recently what a saving it was for America to determine whether young men who are selected are fit for military service. Those young men, who are not fit for military service, are excluded and separated so that unnecessary money is not wasted on their training. A phenomenal amount was saved in this way. Sir, when one is lodging a plea for this type of work one feels one is lodging a plea for something that will bring about a saving for the State and, what is more, that will enable all population groups in this country to produce more and maintain a better standard of living.

Sir, the subject that I wish to discuss with the hon. the Minister today is the question of children suffering from minimal brain dysfunction. In March 1969, an extremely interesting and very comprehensive report was submitted by what was known as the Murray Commission on this whole subject. It would appear that of the approximately 126 000 children with learning difficulties in our country, some 45 000 to 50 000 fall into this category of minimal brain dysfunction. These are children with either average, or even higher than average, I.Q., and who only suffer certain disabilities, which the commission felt should be recognized and dealt with. In 1971, when I asked the hon. the Minister a question about this report, he replied that he had received the report, that he had considered it, that he had accepted it, but that he had not at that stage implemented it, as certain of the recommendations concerned various educational bodies to whom he was referring the matter. Then during this year, in reply to a question put to him by the hon. member for Wynberg, the Minister said that his department accepted the responsibility for Group C pupils, that is to say, children for whom special schools would be required in terms in this report, and that the Administrators had been asked to consider the implementation of the recommendations with regard to children in Groups A and B, that is to say, children who would have attention given to them within the framework of the normal schools and through the medium of a specific class, where they would be taught during the normal school hours, so that they are not removed from their normal surroundings and so that they do not grow up with the complex that they differ from ordinary, normal children; because in every other respect, except for this difficulty that they experience in learning, these children are perfectly normal. Sir, these children in the minimal brain dysfunction group represented somewhere in the region of 7 per cent, I think, of the total number of school-going children in our country. It is almost certain that half of these children would be in the Transvaal and the balance distributed over the other provinces. In the hon. the Minister’s reply of 3rd March of this year, to which I referrred earlier, he said—

Sir, the concern of parents who have children of this type is that nothing has been done with sufficient haste to promote what has been so strongly recommended in this report. One of the most important difficulties is the provision of teachers who have received proper training to deal with children of this kind, because they cannot be dealt with by the normal school-teacher, no matter how able that teacher may be. There is a certain technical knowledge which teachers of these children must acquire. The commission bases this opinion on the experience gained in the United States and on works written by educationists in other parts of the world. It is a recognizable type of difficulty and it needs teachers who have received proper training, and my plea to the Minister is that this must be done as expeditiously as possible. I was very disappointed to find in this reply that only the Cape Education Department had already commenced to try to do something. I feel that the hon. Minister should regard this as a matter of urgency because above everything else it will keep within the viable community some 50 000 children who will be citizens who can be properly prepared to find their place in our normal society and make their contribution to the welfare of the community and the country. I feel that every year’s delay is retrogressive in so far as the fate of these children is concerned. Of course the number of children does not remain static. It increases. In Johannesburg an experiment was started before the hon. the Minister acted in terms of this report. It was started through the efforts of a mother who herself went to the U.S.A. in order to receive the necessary training to handle these children. This mother was herself a qualified medical practitioner and a class was started in a normal school. Then friction arose because of the introduction of a teacher who had not been trained in this specific manner and unfortunately the whole system broke down despite the fact that some R10000 had been spent on special equipment which is now apparently just a wasted asset. This mother at the moment—I am not sure whether she has the legal right to do so—is continuing with the training of her own child and some six or seven other children of friends of hers. My point is that taking into account the tremendous complexity of the problems which the Department of Education faces, some of which were referred to by the hon. member for Kimberley South and also by the hon. member for Carletonville, who dealt with the importance of the teacher, I believe that where we have an opportunity to avoid further deterioration and retrogression in the standards of the M.B. Dysfunction child with his normal, if not above normal, IQ, there should be a very much greater sense of urgency in our approach to this problem. I believe that the Minister should perhaps confer with universities and point out the urgency of the problem and confer with the administrators so that whatever assistance can be given, can be given immediately, even if that assistance comes from people who are not on the permanent teaching staff or part and parcel of teachers’ organizations. Everyone who can possibly assist in this problem, I believe, should be brought together at some sort of conference so that the Minister can get this work moving as fast as possible. I feel further that financial provision should also be made, and I think the Budget gives the hon. the Minister sufficient scope to enable him to make that financial provision. He should make provision to give every opportunity to the various bodies to proceed with the work so that Parliament can from time to time have a report on what is taking place. I believe this is a matter of very great concern and importance. I feel that the problems which the Minister has faced —we know that at that time he was unable to do very much—must indicate to him that there may be certain barriers that one has to break down. One has to break down difficulties in the thinking of principals who do not like anything abnormal in their routine school administration. That is possible. I do not allege that it is taking place, but it is possible. There can also be a clash of personalities, and so on. But if the Minister lays down a policy after a conference of this nature and makes it absolutely clear that as far as his department is concerned this is what he expects to be done, I do feel that he will find a very much different attitude and a greater response, and above all, he will bring home to the people who look at this problem with a sense of hopelessness, because of the lack of facilities, a greater measure of harmony and joy. He will bring harmony into the lives of families who have children of this nature. We as citizens of the country in addition will feel encouraged by the fact that here, where expeditious steps can be taken and the matter can be accelerated, the Minister is sufficiently aware of the problem and needs as little encouragement as possible because he knows himself that this is something which will be to the benefit of the welfare of the nation.

We have now come to the end of the discussion of the Education Vote. Before I forget, I should like to express to all the speakers on both sides of the House my sincere thanks for their participation. You will have noticed, Sir, just as I did, that the second and the third parts of this discussion—I almost feel like saying this debate which has unfortunately been cut into so many pieces—passed off in a much more tranquil and positive manner than the first part of it did. You will probably have noticed too, Sir, that even the hon. member for Orange Grove, who actually raised the matters relating to the S.A.B.C. and television, was much quieter and calmer than is usually the case. You will probably think that he has now undergone a change for the good, and that he now wishes to adopt a more positive attitude. But I want to warn you not to be too optimistic. I think the hon. member has completely overtaxed himself. I shall tell you why I think so. I have gone through the Press reports published over the past few months on the hon. member’s actions, and I must tell you. Sir, that when I see how he worked and carried on, I find it a pity that the Americans did not know about him, otherwise they would probably have had him in the boxing ring against Joe Frazier last night. For, what do we read? This is what we read here—and all of these are headings supplied by his good friends, the English-language newspapers —“Malan challenges the S.A.B.C.”; “Malan hits at the S.A.B.C.”; “Malan slashes the S.A.B.C.”; “Malan slams the Broederbond plot”; “Malan slates ban on religion”. I think all of us have sympathy with the hon. member for the fact that his friends, The Star and the Natal Daily News and the Pretoria News, plunged him into all these miseries, for what did the hon. member do? What is the only thing he did? According to those newspaper reports he put a question to me in this House, a question in which he objected to the S.A.B.C. because this body had allegedly imposed a prohibition on religious broadcasts from Radio L.M., and because I was ostensibly unwilling or did not have the courage to reply to that question. But, Sir, do you know what the joke of the matter is? He never put that question to me. All he did, was to place that Question on the Order Paper to be replied to by the hon. the Minister of Posts and Telegraphs, and the Minister of Posts and Telegraphs wrote a letter back to him because he wanted a written reply. As a result of that one finds all that exaggerated language which the newspapers are now imputing to their hero. But while I am referring to that, let us rather get serious in the limited time that is left.

The hon. member touched upon the matter of the S.A.B.C.’s co-operation in regard to Radio L.M. and its actions in regard to religious broadcasts, and I want to reply to this matter at once. I want to tell him that it is known as a result of public announcements that the S.A.B.C. is acting as the commercial manager of Radio L.M. Now I do not know whether the hon. member has ever heard of a commercial manager placing his services at someone’s disposal free of charge. Then the hon. member asked me. by way of a supplementary question in Parliament, whether I had so little consideration for all the thousands of licence-holders that I could allow such a thing. I want to tell the hon. member that the S A BC. is earning a good fee through this function it is performing, and that this will benefit the listeners in South Africa. Regarding the religious broadcasts from Radio L.M., I want to say that the S.A.B.C. is probably one of the few broadcasting organizations in the world which does not commercialize religion but leaves ample time for free broadcasts of religious programmes. The hon. member knows that this is the policy of the S.A.B.C., and that this is the policy which is also being followed in respect of Radio L.M.

[Inaudible.]

I said that the S.A.B.C.’s religious broadcasts were free of charge. This is a matter of policy with them; they do not commercialize religious programmes.

Sir, now I come to another point mentioned by the hon. member in passing. He objected to the reappointment of Dr. P. J. Meyer as chairman of the S.A.B.C. Control Board. I want to tell the hon. member that I am convinced, and this goes for the Cabinet as well, that Dr. P. J. Meyer is the best and the most competent person for this particular task. I want to make an offer to the hon. member. If, with a view to the next appointment, he knows of a better person—excluding himself, of course—then he may submit such names to me and I shall consider them.

The hon. member also commented on “Current Affairs”. He objected to “Current Affairs”, claiming that this amounted to indoctrination and that it was one-sided.

Not I; Rapport did.

And he quoted Rapport. quite correct. But I wonder whether the hon. member read that whole report in Rapport. The heading of that report in Rapport was contradicted completely by the article. I have the data here in front of me. The first question put by Rapport in that survey, was whether the listeners thought the S.A.B.C. was politically impartial. Those who replied that the S.A.B.C. was in fact impartial, were as follows: All those questioned—44,8 per cent; Afrikaansspeaking people—59.7 per cent; English-speaking people—23.2 per cent. Now. the hon. member actually spoke on behalf of the English-speaking people, who are objecting so much to this “Current Affairs” programme. Only 23 per cent of them responded to this survey, saying they thought the S.A.B.C. was impartial. But, Sir, we know what the value of surveys of this nature is. We may as well leave the matter at that. In this regard I also want to read out a brief report which was published in Rapport on 21st February and in which this person wrote the following—

This is a reference to “Current Affairs”—

The hon. member at the back there wanted to know who had written it. It was written by a regular columnist of Rapport, Mr. Calpin. Sir, let us now leave these matters at that.

The hon. member touched upon the important matter of television. He tried to suggest that over the past year, since the announcement had been made, nothing on earth had been done by the Government in regard to television. We know the hon. member; he has a penchant for exaggeration.

I did not say you had done nothing; I say you have too little.

Very well, I accept the hon. member said we had done too little. But I want to point out to the hon. member what we have done, and then I want to ask him whether he does not want to reconsider his opinion. In the first place, I want to call to mind our Afrikaans proverb, namely “Trou is nie perde koop nie” (marriage is a serious thing). I want to tell the hon. House that the introduction of a television service with the objects which the S.A.B.C. has in view, as far as efficiency and satisfactory service are concerned, is no minor task either. It is not merely a matter of a building being erected. It is not merely a matter of another railway line or another dam having to be constructed. What is involved here, is something much more comprehensive. Now, I do not wish to repeat. In the first place, I want to refer the hon. member, as the hon. member for Springs also did, to the report of the S.A.B.C., in which important information is furnished. There is no need for the hon. member to consult the report now; I am only going to refer to it in passing. In that report important information is furnished up to the date of its completion—it is, of course, last year’s report. Reference is made in it to the important project committee constituted by the S.A.B.C. The names of those committee members are furnished. All of them are technically qualified people, experienced people, reliable officials. In addition reference is made to the technical advisory committee. I do not think I have ever heard any criticism against the constitution of the technical advisory committee. It includes the best scientists we have in this country.

May I put a question to the hon. the Minister? Is there a representative of the Department of Labour on the technical advisory committee, and, if not, why not?

No, we do not have a representative of the Department of Labour on the technical advisory committee, but we do have representatives of that department on the manpower committee, with which I shall deal later on.

That is a subcommittee.

Yes, it is a sub-committee. I also want to refer to the financing of the planning and the preparation phase of our television, a matter which is also reported in that annual report. Now we have the curious observation made by the hon. member in this House that not one single cent has been voted for television in these Estimates. That is true, Sir, To the man outside, who is uninformed, this may perhaps be a very serious omission. But, surely, to a member who ought to be informed, a person such as the hon. member for Orange Grove, this is an unforgivable statement to make. Surely the hon. member knows that in our Estimates we only find particulars on loans made to the S.A.B.C., for instance, in respect of its external services, its indigenous services for South-West Africa and the development of the F.M. mast system and, in addition, in respect of the smaller amounts from Revenue Account which we recover from the South-West Africa Account. Now, by making that statement the hon. member thinks he can put us off with fair words. Surely that does not become a member sitting in a front bench. After all, the hon. member knows that we authorized the S.A.B.C. in this House this year to negotiate a foreign loan. We read in the newspapers that a foreign loan of R18| million had in fact been negotiated for the preparation and planning phase of television, and that it was a revolving credit with a term of six years.

In that case, may I ask the hon. the Minister why the S.A.B.C. has not yet been given permission to proceed with the introduction of a television service?

Sir, I did of course expect that question, because on a previous occasion the hon. member put a question to me in this regard and had replied to it in the negative. The interpretation attached to it by my advisers, is that we should give them instructions when we fix the date on which they are to start with the service. But the Cabinet’s instruction that the S.A.B.C. should get this service to be assigned to it, is the instruction which the S.A.B.C. requires.

In that case, why do you give them permission to borrow money overseas?

Why do I not give them permission?

Because you have not yet given them permission to introduce television.

Sir, the hon. member is now trying to make this an academic matter. The Cabinet gave the S.A.B.C. permission to plan and prepare the service. The formal consent which I as the Minister must give, will be granted to the S.A.B.C. on that day when the Cabinet— we may as well emphasize this point, too —decides on the date on which a start will be made with transmission. For the information of the hon. member and the House I should like to mention a few facts on the planning which has been done by the S.A.B.C. since October, 1971. In the first place, I want to say that the S.A.B.C. found the site south of where the present radio complex is being built in Auckland Park —as the hon. member comes from Johannesburg, he will know that this is the site on which the Auckland Park police station is still situated at the moment—to be suitable for a television complex. The excavations required for the building have already been done. A master plan for the planning of the television complex has already been drawn up, a master plan which holds considerable advantages. One of the most important advantages which that complex will hold is its elasticity with a view to the longterm development of the complex. The studios for all phases are on the same level, and the studios with their control rooms in phases II and III are mirror-images of those in phase I. That work has already been completed. This is great and important work if one wants to start with a television network.

Now I come to another point. The hon. member referred to the training of staff. His hon. colleague for Florida, who apologized for not being able to be here this afternoon, responded to this particular point. He also called attention to the enormous need which would exist for trained staff. I could speak about this matter for a long time, and there are various aspects to this matter of manpower. In the first place, I want to tell you, Sir, that the S.A.B.C. itself, as behoves any undertaking which plans and controls its affairs properly and thoroughly, has taken upon itself the task of undertaking the training of the staff it requires. What has it done? It has planned for a training centre for television staff. This will be housed in one of the buildings forming part of that large complex. The hon. member knows that area. He will know that there are many buildings which will be serviceable for a long time. The training centre for television staff will be housed in one of the buildings on the site of the old police station. But that is not all it has done. The S.A.B.C. was keen to learn from people who knew more about this matter than they themselves did —I want to say at once that the S.A.B.C. knows a great deal about this matter—and it made inquiries of its overseas contacts. Inquiries were sent to five different organizations abroad with a view to acquiring an expert knowledge in regard to the training of staff for television purposes. The services of the Belgian Radio and Television were accepted, and two of their officials came to South Africa in April of this year already. In conjunction with the S.A.B.C. staff they immediately started to draw up a master plan for the training of staff. This work has already been completed and will, inter alia, imply that the S.A.B.C. will have to recruit—on a contract basis, of course— a number of instructors, each of whom will have to be a specialist in some technical sphere or other, to assist in this training. In other words, the S.A.B.C. has done the spadework. In addition, we know that for a long time already the S.A.B.C. has been having its technical staff trained mainly at the Wit-watersrand College for Advanced Technical Education. I want to add that as far as the private sector and industry are concerned, a considerable amount of preliminary work has been done, and later on, when I talk about the technical advisory committee, I want to come back to this point. I want to say, furthermore, that the S.A.B.C. has its plans in order for the purchase of suitable film material abroad for stockpiling purposes. Of course, in conjunction with that, facilities are also required for doing the necessary language dubbing. If one wants to broadcast film material in Afrikaans, one has to see to it that the language is Afrikaans, but if its language medium is English when it is purchased, it goes without saying that dubbing is not always necessary. The S.A.B.C. is well on its way to making these preparations.

May I put a question to the hon. the Minister? Is the S.A.B.C. also going to make use of the films of the South African Film Board and also of the film board for the production of motion pictures?

I am coming to that in a moment. I just want to say that a second language dubbing facility will be installed in the old police buildings on the Auckland Park site, with which the hon. member is familiar too. Now I come to the point on which the hon. member has just asked me a question, namely the compilation of programmes on film. It is essential for the S.A.B.C. to have its own facilities on a limited scale, particularly with a view to flashes. That goes without saying. In addition, just as the S.A.B.C. avails itself of sources abroad, it will also have to avail itself of other sources, including inter alia those of the Film Board which are already available here in South Africa. The film studio facilities to which I referred, will also be housed in a part of the old police set-up at Auckland Park.

Next I come to the work of the Technical Advisory Committee. In this regard I could furnish the hon. member with a mass of information. I shall try to cover the matter quickly. The hon. member wanted to know what had been accomplished. The report of the S.A.B.C. contains certain references to it. I shall omit them. The hon. member knows what the constitution of the committee is. He knows that the committee published a report on the choice of a colour system; I shall therefore omit that too. The hon. member also knows that a report was published on the socio-cultural influence of television.

Is that available to us yet?

It became available after the hon. member had put the question to me. This report has not yet been considered, but it has in fact become available in the meantime. I may tell the hon. member that the S.A.B.C. has decided to make available at its own expense R12 000 per annum to the Human Sciences Research Council for starting with this important project, for which interest is also being shown abroad. I do not wish to discuss the further implications of that report at this stage. It is a matter which is still to receive the attention of the Cabinet in due course.

Then the hon. member spoke about a satellite ground station or ground stations. Actually, he pleaded for two of them. The Technical Advisory Committee has recommended that for the time being one satellite ground station will have to be sufficient, and that the Post Office ought to make provision for it. The hon. member referred to the enormous cost. Well, this hon. member knows how the cost of living and the cost of manufacture has risen throughout the world. It stands to reason that he should not expect it to be possible for a satellite ground station to be erected at the same cost that was mentioned in the report at the time. The recommendation made by the Technical Advisory Committee is therefore that the Post Office should provide the facilities for a satellite ground station.

Could I ask the hon. the Minister why the estimated cost of that satellite station has increased from R1 million to R4 million within such a short period?

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member and his colleagues take delight in attacking my colleague the Minister of Public Works from time to time on the increase in the cost of building houses, and in attacking my colleague the Minister of Finance on the increase in the cost of living. The hon. member may simply ask himself why his own salary has increased over the same period, and then he himself ought to get the answer as to why the cost of a satellite ground station has increased too. The hon. member will, of course, agree that one can make a start with a television service without having a satellite ground station, although in that case one’s system will, of course, not be so effective that it will be possible to join up with the rest of the world. That is something we are taking into account as well.

Furthermore, the hon. member put questions to me on antennas and cable systems. In the course of the debate on the Vote of my colleague the hon. the Minister of Economic Affairs, mention was made of the problem of common antennas so that antenna jungles such as those found in many countries abroad, would not result. I may tell the House that one of the advantages of the late introduction of our television system, is that we need not build up such an artificial jungle. These reports are available and will receive attention in due course.

Then the hon. member spoke about manpower and training. His hon. colleague for Florida actually contradicted him to a certain extent, so much so, in fact, that I had to ask the hon. member for Florida whether he was pleading against the introduction of television. The two of them will simply have to settle the matter between them. Regarding the training of staff, the manpower needs, I want to say that this Technical Advisory Committee and its sub-committee, in conjunction with the Department of Labour, has done very important work. Major, important calculations were made, calculations taking various starting-points into account, for no committee can determine an exact figure of precisely what is required. They adopted various standpoints and made projections on that basis. As far as my own department is concerned, I want to remind hon. members that I spoke about this matter on the occasion of the graduation ceremony at the College for Advanced Technical Education in Johannesburg last Wednesday. I pointed out that one needed technicians; people who had matriculated or obtained an equivalent certificate or had completed a course of intensive training of at least three years. A technician is not simply a person who can tamper with apparatus or perform conjuring tricks on a motor-car and so get the apparatus or car to go again. A technician, as we understand it, is a thoroughly trained person. Next year the colleges for technical education throughout our country—and there are six of them —will start a course concentrating inter alia on training for our television service. Moreover, at training colleges throughout the country, training will be provided in accordance with syllabuses adapted and drawn up with a view to this for the other grades of trained staff, i.e. people who have to instal sets, maintain them and have to do rerepairs. These are people who require a training period of one year or, in any case, of less than three years! I think the hon. member may rest assured that that aspect is in good hands.

Then he asked me what investigations had not yet been completed. The investigation that has not yet been completed, is the influence television will have on the Press. The hon. member has been trying to suggest that this is the reason why the Government does not want to introduce television sooner.

Is that so vitally important?

It is very important. I shall now tell the hon. member how important it is. Perhaps he does not realize how important it is. This is also bound up very closely with the other aspect of the investigation of the Technical Advisory Committee which has not quite been completed, i.e. the implications of television on the economic and financial position of our country. I want to tell hon. members that thorough preparation has also been made. The Committee also adopted various standpoints and made its calculations accordingly. It will eventually be the task of the Cabinet to take a decision, with due regard to those various possibilities and needs, on how and when it will deem the time opportune for proceeding with this matter.

But have they not yet decided to proceed with it?

That brings me to the next point—which is actually the “sixty million dollar question”—i.e. to what the hon. member wants to know. He wants to know when television is coming on the air. That is actually what he wants to know. I may just remind him of my announcement on 27th April of this year, when I said the Cabinet had found, in view of certain factors explained by me, that it would not be possible to commence transmission within four years of that date, i.e. by 1975 at the earliest. But I want to emphasize, as I also did a moment ago, that this is a matter on which the Cabinet, and the Cabinet alone, will decide; i.e. whether we are going on the air and when we are going on the air.

“Whether” we are going on the air?

Yes, at a specific stage, I mean. It has already been decided in principle that we are going on the air, but when we shall do so, is a matter on which the Cabinet will decide.

May I ask the hon. the Minister a question? Is he going to inform commerce and industry and other interested organizations in good time as to what that date is going to be, as it is going to take at least years to introduce it?

I agree with the hon. member that it is necessary, even for the S.A.B.C., to know in good time what the date is. But, of course, what he understands by “in good time”, and what the Government understands by it, may differ. However, I think we are agreed on the principle that it is desirable for this decision to be announced well in time.

Then, as far as this television aspect is concerned, only two matters are left according to my notes. The hon. member spoke about the local content of sets. His colleague the hon. member for Florida also referred to the manufacture of image tubes and to screen sizes. I want to tell the hon. member that this is actually a matter he should have raised on the Vote of my colleague the Minister of Economic Affairs. This matter falls under the Industrial Committee.

It falls under you.

No, it is a matter which was specifically referred to the Minister of Economic Affairs. In the announcement it was stated explicitly that the Government was desirous of seeing in the beginnings of the television industry also the beginnings of an electronics industry. Whereas the hon. member has apparently missed the opportunity of putting this question to my colleague the Minister of Economic Affairs, I may tell him …

I have his speech here as it appeared in Hansard.

… that thorough preparations have been made and that that committee has also made a great deal of progress and done important research work. I do not want to take this matter any further than that. I want to tell the hon. member for Florida that the S.A.B.C. is obviously not going to manufacture the sets and the tubes. As far as sets are concerned, i.e. the exterior or the Cabinet itself—of course, this has nothing to do with the actual inner works of the set; one can get a large variety of cabinets with the same inner works, to put it in simple language. One should therefore not think that an excessive number of sets will become available.

I should like to ask the hon. the Minister a question. Does the Minister envisage these tubes being manufactured in South Africa, or are they going to be imported?

This matter does not fall under me either, but since I am a member of the Cabinet, I may say that if it is one’s endeavour to establish an electronics industry here, one cannot build it up on the manufacture of those components which are least expensive. One must also have a money-maker amongst those components that are manufactured domestically. Therefore this committee is also investigating that possibility. This would be very desirable, but that committee must find whether we can in fact do it.

But you do not have the answer as yet?

No.

Nor Commerce and Industry?

I think I have now replied to all the questions on television put by the hon. member for Orange Grove. I have dealt fully with his list of questions because I had the time to do so.

Not all of them.

Now I want to proceed to the Education aspect of my Vote. The hon. member for Durban Central quite rightly pointed out that differentiated education could only succeed if one provided the right guidance and had enough psychologists and the right teachers providing guidance to make this possible. I do not want to say that this is the only basis for success, but it is a very important contributory factor. I want to agree with him on that score. The hon. member for Kimberley South also referred to this matter when he spoke about the important work done by the HSRC, the work it does through its Institute for Psychometric Research. In studying that report of the HSRC, the hon. member will see that several pages have been devoted to the work done by the Institute for Psychometric Research. This institute concerns itself mainly with standardizing existing tests and drawing up new ones, not only for Whites, but also for the other population units we have in this country. Therefore I want to tell the hon. member that, coupled with the research and the training taking place and the boost which teachers trained in psychology will now receive, I have high hopes that we shall be able to meet all the needs in due course. It stands to reason that one cannot meet all the needs at once. But if one has to wait until the day when one can meet all of them, one will, of course, never start. The hon. member also referred to the junior secondary phase in the differentiated education set-up. He pointed out the fact that we were grouping Std. V with Std. VI and Std. VII in this phase, but that physically Std. V was attached to the primary school. Of course, the whole system is a renovation; it is a whole revolution. One cannot draw a line through the past and start on a new page; one has to adapt the system, and for that reason I said the following in the announcement I made on the radio—

Sir, what did I mean by that? I meant that it was not the object of the Education Departments to take away the Std. V classes from the schools where they are at the moment. This would obviously give rise to revolt throughout the country. But where one starts with new planning in urban areas, one will obviously take that into consideration. This is what I actually meant by that announcement.

The hon. member also referred to a case of the adjustment of examination marks obtained in the English question paper of the Department of National Education. Sir, this is of course not a new concept amongst educationists. I do not know whether it is necessary to go into the reasons. As an ex-teacher the hon. member will know that the object in adjusting marks is to maintain and normalize the standards, and that this is actually effected through co-operation between the examiners and the moderators and is done on the basis of a curve representing the distribution of marks. If he does not understand this clearly, I am sure that the hon. member for Hillbrow will be able to give him the information, for we are now dealing with his subject. As far as this particular case is concerned, I assume that what happened was in keeping with the general practice followed in the Education Department.

The hon. member also mentioned here a specific case, at which I want to express my regret. He asked me about an irregularity which occurred in an examination in Durban. I want to tell the hon. member that my department is the biggest examination department in the whole country. I am not referring to the provincial departments now. There are several hundreds of thousands of subject entries in my department, and I would not find it astonishing if an occasional error crept in. The hon. member made inquiries about that case, and I informed him that a serious case was involved. What was involved here, was a case of irregularity, which, according to law, I referred to the Police for investigation. The hon. member had all that information, thanks to the fact that I trusted him and informed him of these facts in confidence. The Police reported back after a long time, for it is not easy to investigate such a matter; they reported back that they could not find evidence for laying a charge against the guilty parties, but that it was unquestionably true that an irregularity had occurred. What did we do? We gave the 13 candidates involved in the matter the benefit of the doubt, and today those 13 candidates are probably walking about with certificates in that subject, for which they may have obtained higher marks than they would have had if that irregularity had not crept in. But I want to ask the hon. member: Is it cricket to discuss across the floor of this House a matter such as that one, which has a very serious implication, after I had taken him into my confidence?

Would the hon. the Minister reply to the point I made? It was the long delay I criticized.

I have already replied to that. I told the hon. member that the Act laid down certain procedures to be followed by me in the event of irrgularities occurring. In this case the instruction is that I must report it to the Police. I cannot tell the Police that I have a case of irregularity here; I want a report from you tomorrow or the day after that or next month. It is obvious that these people, who have many duties, require time for investigating such metters, and that is the reason for the delay.

†I am indebted to the hon. member for Gardens for his positive approach to the care of the retarded and handicapped child. In this context I could also mention the hon. members for Durban Central and Jeppes and Carletonville. They all raised the same matter. The hon. member for Gardens referred specifically to the report on early childhood autism. I fully agree with him that it is indeed a very important report, the investigation having been headed by one of the senior officials in my department, an official whom I have now lost to the University of South Africa. But all the same, it is a very important report and I very much appreciate the positive way in which the hon. member for Gardens approached this matter. This report has been tabled in Parliament, as you know, and it has been referred to the universities and also to the provinces. That is the usual procedure. I have to refer this type of report to the provinces. In due course they will let me have their views and then we will determine how to set about implementing this report. The hon. member will be happy to know that I have accepted the recommendations of this report, and that I am only waiting for the provinces to comment on the report. I already have three replies and I am waiting for the fourth, and then we will start. But the hon. member will also appreciate that in the present financial circumstances it will be exceedingly difficult to implement this report immediately. I shall in due course also refer to some of the other reports and explain what we have achieved in the meantime. I start with the speech made by the hon. member for Jeppes, who referred to the report on minimal brain dysfunction. The hon. member will know that as far as this type of handicap is concerned, we have identified three categories. Let me say that in this field we have made very important progress. Due to research work done, especially in the medical, psychological and psychometrical fields, we are able these days to identify and to diagnose various forms of handicaps much sooner than was the case in former years. I am very happy to say that although I did not know much about this sector of my department’s work when I took over, this has become one of the very interesting aspects of my work. I am glad to say, and I think we can all be proud of the fact, that the achievements we have attained in South Africa in the field of special education are second to none.

*The hon. members for Durban Central and Carletonville spoke about the mentally handicapped, but first, with reference to what was said by the hon. member for Jeppes about minimal brain dysfunction. I just want to point out that we have identified three categories as far as this type of handicap is concerned. After talks with the provinces we decided that two of those categories should become the responsibility of the provinces. They will make provision for those children, and only the most severe form of handicap will be my department’s responsibility. The factor of the training of people is bound up with this. It is no use starting a class for handicapped children if one does not have a teacher who has a knowledge of that subject, for all of this is specialized work. For instance, we referred a report such as the one on children with minimal brain dysfunction to the universities and asked them to start immediately with the training of teachers who will be able to give special attention to this handicap. Good progress has been made in this direction, and once the provinces get into their stride—the preparatory work has already been done—I think it will be possible for them to identify what children are candidates for further attention by my department. Without entering into too many details, I think I may tell the hon. member that this matter is taking a very satisfactory course. I have high hopes that in due course we shall also be able to make provision for these children, on a satisfactory basis. I want to say, since the hon. member referred to it, that I am also familiar with the case to which he referred. I know the family and I know what their problem is. I may tell you this: Any parent who has a handicapped child, has a very heavy responsibility and burden to bear, such as few other parents have. On our part we shall do everything possible to help them to bear that burden.

That brings me to the point mentioned by the hon. members for Durban Central and Carletonville, and this concerns the care of mentally handicapped children. Actually, it was more specifically concerned with the training of these mentally handicapped children. You know the position at the moment, Sir, namely that the mentally handicapped children are the responsibility of the Department of Health. In so far as they are not living in their own homes, they are cared for in institutions by the Department of Health. We had the Van Wyk Committee of Inquiry, which determined that there were educable mentally handicapped children amongst them and that those children had to become the responsibility of my department. It was decided, furthermore, that as from the age of 18 years those children who were trained —now, in using the word “trained”, I mean that they can perform the most simple routine tasks; they can acquire good habits, dress themselves, eat by themselves, etc.— could become the responsibility of the Department of Social Welfare, by which they could either be placed in sheltered employment, or where other provision could be made for them. My department has, in accordance with the Cabinet decision, already done that preparatory work. We have prepared a detailed draft Bill for making the take-over of those children possible, for what is actually involved here, is a few—20 odd—day centres which have been established all over the country. These are day centres to which these children are brought by the parents or by a small bus. They attend school and in the evenings they return to their homes again.

There are a number of these institutions where members of the public were so generous that they made it possible for hostels to be built and for these children to live in them. In needy cases the Department of Health contributes R35 per month per child living in such a hostel. After we had done all this preparatory work, the Government was confronted with the financial and economic position in which we find ourselves at present, and the Government was of the opinion that it would not be able to provide in the Estimates this year the approximately R1 million which would be required just for the running expenses of these few centres which are already in existence. That is why the introduction of that legislation has been delayed. It is lying in my office, and the moment financial circumstances permit, it will be introduced and those children will become the responsibility of my department. This will then be effected on the basis on which we take over the other schools. In other words, we shall bear the responsibility for buildings, the staff, equipment, etc. This, then, is the reply to the question put by the hon. member for Carletonville.

I do not wish to waste the time of the House unnecessary and shall only use five minutes of its time in this regard. If the Press really wanted to do something good, they would do a great and important deed if, arising from this discussion, even if this were all they did arising from this discussion, they would only make an appeal to our public not to leave in the lurch these organizations which care for our handicapped children, and more specifically for these mentally handicapped children, simply because they, the public, are under the impression that the State has taken over the care of these children. This also applies to the School for Autistic Children and the school for children with minimal brain dysfunction. There we have truly meritorious undertakings which came into being as a result of the love of the public and which are maintained with great difficulty. If the Press would only make an appeal to members of our public not to withdraw their assistance from those institutions! For it is as yet not the time to do so—the State have not taken them over yet. It cannot take them over at this stage already. In this manner the Press can make a very great and important contribution. I should also like to express my sincere appreciation to these institutions for the work done there, for this work is truly of an astonishingly high standard.

I have now devoted a great deal of time to special education. Bound up with this is the whole matter which my colleague the hon. member for Kimberley South mentioned, namely psychometric research, which is extremely important. Without that we cannot do this work. I agree with him wholeheartedly, and he may rest assured that if it is at all possible the Cabinet will increase the amount of money voted to the Human Sciences Research Council, apart from the self-evident annual increase.

Now I come to my hon. friend for Hercules, who spoke about our method of counting. He wanted to know whether we could not change over to a more logical method of counting. I am aware of this trend which exists in our country, I want to tell the hon. member that, judged on paper, the system advocated by him is not without logic. It contains a great deal of logic. But in saying that it is logical, I do not know whether the change is psychological. You know, Sir, language is a strange thing. Language also has a strong emotional bias. It is true that Afrikaans, Dutch and German have this method of counting. To change it, to bring this home to our people, is not so easy. I want to tell the hon. member that the Suid-Afrikaanse Akademie vir Wetenskap en Kuns, having given careful consideration to this matter, has taken a stand against it because they regard it as too drastic a change. You know, we are in the process of metricating. Some of our people are still referring to pounds, shillings and pennies today. At the moment we are metricating weight, or rather mass, and all of us are still struggling with it. I think if we were now to change our method of counting as well, some of our older people would have a very hard time. Perhaps we should simply leave this to the future.

He also spoke about the pronunciation of the word “rand” in English, i.e. whether the Afrikaans or the Anglicised pronunciation of the word was to be followed. I think the hon. member may consult our good old friend, Mr. Flippie Moore, who actually introduced that motion in this House and who obtained permission from his caucus to vote with the Government when we introduced metrication, and call upon him to bear witness to the fact that he said the Afrikaans pronunciation of “rand” should be followed for this monetary unit. I can but hope that our English-speaking people in the country will follow Uncle Flippie’s good example. I do not know whether one can do more about it than that.

The hon. member for Springs spoke— later in the debate he also gained indirect support from the hon. member for Kimberley South—about the standard six pupils who dropped out and thus did not get to matric. He claimed that more pupils dropped out on the Rand than was the case in the rest of the Transvaal. This is a very interesting topic, but I want to tell hon. members that the figures I have here —I do not want to quote any more figures now, because I notice that I have already been speaking for an hour—show that more pupils are in fact dropping out on the Rand than is the case in the rest of the Transvaal. One would actually expect this if one considers that a far larger number of jobs are offerred on the Rand than is the case in the rest of the Transvaal. However, this position is improving consistently. I believe that when we start with our system of differentiated education, with all the aids we have now and with the termination of our divided control on the secondary level, and once we get properly into our stride with this system, this position will progressively improve to an even greater extent. I hope the hon. member will forgive me for dealing with the matter so cursorily, but time does not permit me to deal with the matter in detail now.

He also pleaded for more language laboratories at our technical colleges, where immigrants could learn our languages. I want to tell him that this is a very important aid. I have in my personal possession letters from people who came to our country from France and America in connection with, for instance, nuclear research, people who sojourned here for a few months and who subsequently wrote letters to me in Afrikaans, the standard of which would astonish many of us. This aid is undoubtedly a successful one, but it costs a great deal of money and we cannot allow it not to be fully utilized. But as the means permit, we shall extend those facilities.

The hon. member also brought up a point of which we have probably not heard the end for a long time. He referred to the language medium of immigrant children. I want to tell the hon. member that my department, with the assistance of the Human Sciences Research Council, has caused a very thorough and comprehensive investigation to be made into immigrant pupils. In other words, the education departments know exactly where these people are, what their problems and needs are and how we should try to make provision for them. As a general statement of policy I want to say that it is the policy of my department that all immigrant children who come here should become bilingual as soon and as effectively as possible, and that we should help them to become so. But in saying that, I want to make the plea to hon. colleagues that we should not revert to spreading those indoctrination stories tomorrow or the next day. We shall do this on lines which can be justified educationally. At the moment the Committee of Educational Heads is in fact dealing with this extremely important matter. I think that at this stage I should not say any more about it.

The hon. member for Boksburg pleaded for a faculty of engineering at the Rand Afrikaans University. The hon. member for Potchefstroom sent me a note saying I should remember him too. I know that the hon. member for Algoa also nodded at me all the way from over there. I know that there are universities that are keen to obtain such a faculty. In the Senate I dealt with this matter at length, and I just want to remind hon. members of the various scientific inquiries we had over the past number of years into this matter of the training of engineers. We had the Straszacker inquiry and reports. Then we also had the A. W. Schumann Report, as well as the recent report of the Human Sciences Research Council. The figures we obtained from these reports indicate that it is to be doubted whether a new faculty of engineering is an absolute necessity at this stage. In this regard I want to mention a few figures. According to the report of the Human Sciences Research Council it was found that our universities would have to train an average of 540 engineers per annum between the years 1968 and 1980 if we want to meet the demand. At the end of last year our universities already produced 718 engineers, of whom 9 were non-White engineers. In other words, we have already passed the target set by all these inquiries. I want to conclude the discussion of this matter by saying that all the data is in the hands of my department and that a decision will have to be taken on this matter in the light of this data. I just want to mention that five faculties of engineering exist in our country at the moment, and that the capital programme of those five existing faculties for the next five years amounts to R16½ million. One asks oneself whether it is advisable to start a new faculty when one considers what the needs of the existing faculties are before they have been properly rounded off. I do not even want to mention staff problems. However, as I have already said, we are fully informed about this matter and hon. members should leave the eventual decision to the Cabinet.

†The hon. member for Umbilo raised the possibility of establishing a medical faculty for Whites at the University of Natal. During the course of this sesison he also asked a few questions in this regard. I would like to point out a few things to the hon. member. In the first instance I would like him to know that up till 1971 the capital expenditure for the medical schools, excluding the proposed transfer of the Witwatersrand medical school, amounted to over R17 million. The hon. member also referred to some extensions and expansions of existing faculties. This work will cost another R15 million. The hon. member will, therefore, realize that the financial implications are enormous. Apart from that the hon. member also referred to the statistics and I would plead with him not to be misled by them. It is a fact that if you total all the students who applied for admission to these faculties, and you take into account how many of them were admitted at the various faculties, there is a large discrepancy indeed. The fact of the matter is that medical students apply for admission to all or to several of these medical faculties. I can give the hon. member figures to prove this statement. At a very well-known medical faculty last year 221 applicants were approved of. The university provided for 221, but only 146 actually turned up, which goes to prove that they must have gone somewhere else. They went to their first or second choice rather than to the one where they were permitted to enter. As far as the demand for doctors is concerned, I would also like to give the hon. member statistics. In South Africa we have one medical doctor for every 400 Whites, which we consider to be more than we really require. The position is satisfactory. For every 900 Indians in South Africa, we have one Indian doctor, which is comparable to the ratio in overseas Western countries. As against that, for every 6 200 Coloureds we have only one Coloured doctor and for every 44 400 Bantu we have only one Bantu doctor. The hon. member will now see where the emphasis really falls. I am sure he will appreciate that the Cabinet, in the circumstances, took the decision that until the extensions at the existing faculties have been completed, no consideration can be given to the establishment of a new faculty for Whites.

May I ask the hon. the Minister a question? Is it still the intention of the Government to complete these additional facilities during the course of the next five years as was indicated last year?

I cannot give the assurance that it will be completed during the next five years, these things take a long time. First you start by increasing the intake facilities and then, of course, it takes six years to produce the ultimate result. I am afraid I am not so well acquainted with the particulars of the development at each of these faculties so as to be able to give a reply across the floor of the House.

*The hon. member also referred to our industrial schools and our reformatories and to the increase in the number of juvenile offenders. This, of course, relates to a very serious matter. A moment ago I spoke about one of the pleasant sub-parts of my department’s work, but now I want to be honest and without being dramatic about this I want to say that the most unpleasant part of my work to me is the fact that sometimes, too often, cases come before me when I have to give my signature for the removal of a youth from a reformatory to a prison. This still bothers me every time I have to do so. Therefore I agree with the hon. member that we should do everything within our power to prevent this. Regular investigations are in fact conducted in co-operation with the people who run these institutions. However, this problem is bound up with the permissive spirit that is developing. That is why, in the first part of my reply, I quarrelled as I did with the hon. the Opposition and said we should come forward positively for our young people and that we should take up a positive stand against any form of erosion of our standards and against permissiveness in whatever form it may manifest itself. I think I should tell the hon. member that with the work done by the Human Sciences Research Council, with the experience we have gained in our department and in these institutions, we are doing everything we possibly can. I want to tell the hon. member that the figures of this country do not compare badly with those of comparable countries abroad.

One other matter still remains, a matter raised by the hon. member for Carletonville, i.e. the importance of the teacher. I referred to that before. I said that in my opinion our educationists, in whatever branch of education they are engaged, were not always rated at their true value by our parents. That is not always true. I am generalizing. One of the problems is the undermining of the authority of the teacher and of the principal in his school and in his classroom. I still grew up in an era in which the word of the school was law. I would never have had the courage to go home and tell my father that the principal did me an injustice in some way or that the teacher did not quite play the game in this or that case, because then I would probably have been punished by my father as well. This may sound oldfashioned, this may be out-dated, and perhaps it will not be found in modern psychology, but I stand by the fact that our parents should form a solid front for the protection of the school and our body of teachers.

With these answers I think I have replied to all the questions. Once again I thank everyone who participated in this debate. As I said before, I think this was a positive debate in the main, and I personally feel happy that we could have devoted these hours to it.

Votes put and agreed to.

Revenue Votes Nos. 42.—“Planning”, R18 497 000, and 44.—“Statistics”, R3 530 000, Loan Vote H.—“Planning”, R11 000 000, and S.W.A. Vote No. 24.— “Planning”, R181 000:

Mr. Chairman, I request the privilege of the half-hour. This Vote, Planning, covers a very wide field, and from the nature of the case I shall be able to refer only to certain aspects of it, but my hon. colleagues will discuss certain matters further with the hon. the Minister.

I want to say at once that we accept the necessity of long-term planning and that we support the concept completely in principle. In saying this, I also want to say at once that our argument is, and indeed our theme will be, that this department is not able to make an optimal contribution, for two reasons in particular. In the first place, so many administrative matters are entrusted to it that they overshadow its true functions. In the second place, the department must act within the framework of an ideological programme as formulated by the Government, an ideology which as such is still changed and manipulated by the Government from time to time.

Just in order to give an indication of what I have in mind as far as these administrative matters are concerned, I want to say that we notice from the department’s report for last year that more than 1 000 permits, proclamations and appeals had to be handled in one year. Everything comes under this heading of areas demarcation. That, of course, involved tremendous amount of work. We also notice from the annual report that in one year there were more than 600 applications for zoning and the subdivision of land in terms of section 2 of the Planning Act. In terms of section 3 of that particular Act, there were also more than 3 000 applications for the employment of Bantu during this period which had to be examined and handled by the department. Our argument is that this demands a tremendous amount of energy and that it is detrimental to the actual planning activities of this department. Let me put the matter like this: Recently we had a problem. It was a particularly important economic problem for us in South Africa. It concerned the two projects, the Saldanha project and the St. Croix project. I do not want to go into the merits of these two cases, but there was dissension on the merit of these two projects. The Saldanha project undoubtedly is the one which has long-term advantages for South Africa, but it requires a tremendous capital investment which we probably cannot afford at the present time. On the other hand, the St. Croix project has immediate economic advantages for South Africa, although we accept that in the long-term it would be inadequate. There was a difference of opinion of this. There was dissension which was reflected even in the Cabinet. There is a possibility, of course, of integrating the one with the other, of phasing the one into the other.I should like to know from the hon. theMinister to what extent the Department ofPlanning was involved in this matter. I amnot referring merely to any personalopinions which the hon. the Minister mayhave expressed in the Cabinet. We wantto know to what extent the Department ofPlanning was requested to carry out a feas-ibility study. To what extent did the de-partment make a motivated analysis pro-ject of these two different projects in orderto see in what way they could be inte-grated with the broad economic require-ments of South Africa? If this was in factdone, we should like to ask whether theserecommendations and this study could betabled, and indeed what the recommenda-tions of the department were. If the de-partment was not involved in this matter inthat way, then we should like to ask whyit was not done. We gain the impressionthat although this department does out-standing work of a technical nature, itsrole is often one which is fragmentary be-cause it is not given that general, thatbird’s-eye view role in the macro-economicplanning of South Africa. We should liketo hear from the hon. the Minister howhe intends rectifying this matter, becausewe accept that he has a plan. We do notknow whether, as he said prior to theOudtshoorn election, he still have to makea plan. If he still has to make one, hemust do so quickly.

In order to illustrate how this depart-ment’s planning is taking place within aneconomic straitjacket, I should like to referto the economic development programmewhich is drawn up by this department. Thisdepartment recommended that we shouldaccept a 5,5 per cent growth rate in ourgross domestic product as a target rate.Once again I do not want to go intothe merits of whether a growth rate of 5,5per cent is too high or too low, but let usfor the moment accept it as a target. Whathappened in the past year, was that wedid not come near this target. There isevery indication now that in the past yearour gross domestic product grew by only3,7 per cent in real terms. In comparingthis to the population increase of 2,7 percent, we see that the real growth in percapita terms, the increase in our standardof living last year, was only 1 per cent.This, of course, is not an achievement ofwhich we can in any way be proud. In1970, Japan grew 12 times more rapidlythan this. Indeed, if we take the last 10 years, because this period was the period in which our economy flourished, the so-called boom period of which the Government tells us so much, we see that as far as economic growth was concerned, we caught up with only one country in the world, and that was Venezuela in South America. To what is this poor achievement due? Why do we grow so slowly and why do we compare so badly with the target rate set by the department? In the first place, because Government expenditure is much too high. It exceeds the estimate in the economic programme by far. In the second place, because fixed deposits in the private sector and especially in the manufacturing sector have been much lower than proposed by the department. In the third place, because productivity has not come near the sort of level set by the department. In the fourth place—and this is the main cause of everything—because there has been too much interference in the economic process by the State. I do not want to work through all these details once again, but let us take a quick look at them. As far as State expenditure is concerned, the figures show us that over the last decade, State expenditure has increased by 8 per cent per annum. This is 20 per cent more than the increase in our national product. At present capital expenditure by the State is 12 per cent of our gross domestic product. This is twice as much as in Canada and four times as much as in the United States of America.

Would you swop our position for theirs?

I am mentioning international norms to the hon. member. Why is he becoming so sensitive about them?

In the second place I said that fixed investment, especially in the private sector and in manufacturing industry, was far too low. I do not want to quote all these figures again, but in its 1970 report the department itself said that fixed investment in the manufacturing sector would have to be increased by at least 20 per cent— this means approximately R150 million per year—in order to come near the target set by the department itself.

The third reason why we cannot reach the target set for us by our economic planners, is that there has been such a slight increase in production. This entire economic programme is based on the supposition that productivity would increase by 2,7 per cent annually. Of course, we do not come anywhere near that figure. Indeed, I see that Mr. Jan de Necker, the president of the Afrikaanse Handelsinstituut, said the following recently (translation)—

This hon. member is always so sensitive when we refer to other countries. Allow me just to tell him that at the moment productivity in Japan and Germany has increased by 10 per cent. In the manufacturing sector in South Africa the output per man hour is decreasing. Last year, even under circumstances of a high rate of inflation, productivity increased by 4,5 per cent in France and by 7 per cent in the Netherlands. We do not come anywhere near those figures. We have reached the situation in South Africa that at present the compensation of the employer has reached the unprecedented figure of 67 per cent of our national income. How can we achieve productivity under these circumstances? From 1920 to 1960, increases in productivity were responsible for 40 per cent of the improvement in our national income. During the post-war years—and these are the years we see in relation to this particular Government—that percentage decreased from 40 per cent to 23 per cent. Therefore, productivity is dropping lower and lower.

We want to ask the hon. the Minister what he is going to do about it, because he is the man who draws up these programmes. He gives us the target rate and now we do not come anywhere near it. I think he owes this House an explanation and he must tell us what action he is going to take now. Why is the increase in productivity so much lower now? There are, of course, a large number of reasons for that. In the first place, there is the lack of training for our workers. One can write volumes about this, but I do not want to take it any further now.

Productivity, as far as the human factor is concerned, is also brought about by a greater mobility of one’s workers in both a vertical and horizontal sense. One’s workers should be allowed to move up in the existing hierarchy of jobs. By means of its job reservation procedure, this Government is preventing this. It is placing an artificial damper on the professional development of our Bantu. The second important fact is that workers should be able to move in the horizontal sense. They should be able to move from the less productive sectors of our economy to the more productive ones. Once again the hon. the Minister is preventing this by means of his physical planning procedures. Under these circumstances, one shall not be able to obtain higher productivity either. On a previous occasion the hon. the Minister told us that he was bound by this measure. In 1970 he expressed himself as follows— and I quote from column 5202 of Hansard—

He even implicated the Prime Minister in that, because he said—

That is, by his physical planning policy. We saw that it could not work and warned against it. In my own case I said that if the Government persisted with this, we would have to pay a big price for this policy. The price we shall have to pay for that, will be a lower national output. And this is what has happened, because surely anyone who has any insight can see that if all these restrictions are introduced, will lead one to greater capitalization. This is what has happened, hence the present pattern in our import and export balance. It will lead to higher and higher wages, and this is precisely what has happened. It will give rise to inflation, and at present inflation is higher than it has probably ever been before. In the last place, it will bring about a lower growth rate. Last year South Africa’s growth rate was probably lower than in any year during the past ten years. Because the Government saw that this policy was a failure, they had to put up a smokescreen once again, and that is how we came to have the Riekert Commission. Dr. Riekert was then told to try to pull the chestnuts from the fire.

†This Riekert Report was made available to Parliament just before we prorogued last year. Since then we have had an opportunity to examine it in detail. What is quite clear when you look at the White Paper which was issued as a result and as a consequence of the Riekert Report, is that the Government is in full retreat from the position it had previously occupied. In fact, the position we had previously taken up has been fully vindicated. What did this White Paper do to the Physical Planning Act? It diluted it to such an extent that only the skeleton remained. The Government has substituted the carrot for the stick, something that we had consistently advocated. Thirdly this White Paper makes provision for the massive training of non-Whites for industrial occupation. Every time we proposed this or suggested it, we were told that we wanted to open the sluice gates. This is precisely what the White Paper is trying to do. It shifts the industrial growth from the metropolitan areas to the so-called border areas. However, these border areas are still part of White South Africa. Are they not? Is Rosslyn not in White South Africa? Is Brits not part of White South Africa? Here arises the unusual situation that the Government is prepared to go to all sorts of lengths to stimulate the growth in these areas and to induce the absorption of greater numbers of Black people, even to the extent that they are threatening that they will suspend the industrial conciliation machinery in these border areas.

And in fact, if industrialists and trade unions do not co-operate, they threaten to come back to this Chamber to introduce additional legislation. That is the extent to which they are prepared to go in the border areas, Sir, But the question arises: If it is permissible to do all these things in the border areas, why cannot it be done in the rest of South Africa? If it can be done in Rosslyn, why can it not be done in Germiston? If it can be done in Brits, why can it not be done in Randfontein? We would like the hon. the Minister to give us an answer to this. Because by one stroke of the pen the Government’s White Paper has completely invalidated the Physical Planning Act, and it is about time, too, that this were done. This legislation has been in existence for four years and over this four-year period they have dealt with over 8 000 applications for additional Bantu labour. If you look at the end result of it, according to the figures supplied to me recently by the hon. the Minister, you find that over this four-year period, all they have succeeded in doing is to retard the inflow of Blacks to our metropolitan areas to the extent of 13 000 workers a year—surely a massive effort, and a very meagre result.

Additionally, Sir, this White Paper on the Riekert Commission introduced two other concepts. They said that certain racial ratios had to obtain in future. These were taken quite arbitrarily. Apparently it must be 2,5 to 1 at the moment, but by 1973 it must come down to 2 to 1. One does not know where they obtained this from, but it makes South Africa unique. We must be the only country in the world that has a programme of industrialization based on a norm of racial ratios. But, Sir, it also introduces a second concept, the concept of locality-bound industries. Apparently if you are locality-bound, then all these provisions disappear and then you can employ as many Bantu as you want to. But who is going to define what is “locality-bound”? Take a simple case such as that of a baker. It might be held that if you bake bread and sell bread, then you are locality-bound becaus you must be near your market. It might equally well be said that if you bake biscuits you are not locality-bound, because you can transport your produce. Anybody who knows anything about bakeries, knows that normally you cannot survive and normally you cannot make a profit unless you bake both bread and biscuits. What is going to happen to the baker now? Is he locality-bound, or is he not? No, Sir, the whole thing is a half-baked affair, and it was quite obvious to us that it was. That was why even last year, when this measure came before us the very first time, I myself said (Hansard, Col. 8508)—

What happened this year? When the hon. the Minister of Finance came with his Budget, he threw the whole thing overboard; he changed the whole thing, because as far as labour is concerned, he said—this was new policy for that side of the House—

Sir, you will notice that there is no mention whatever of economics or politics; he has now reduced it all to a social structure—

Sir, we would like the hon. the Minister to indicate to us precisely what that means, because “flexible” can be held to mean anything. This was seen immediately, by all academicians in this country as a complete elimination of the Riekert proposals. Indeed, Dr. Piet Neuwenhuizen expressed himself as follows—

Dr. Human of General Mining said precisely the same thing, but hon. members on that side of the House, who are accustomed to political acrobatics, put it somewhat differently; the hon. member for Paarl said that in future it will not be necessary to apply this provision with the vigour with which the Government has applied it in the past. But Mr. Kosie Pansegrouw, the hon. member for Smithfield, was quoted by Rapport as having said the following—

Sir, this introduces a new dimension into the whole problem. How can industrialists prepare and plan for the future when they have no guarantee that the provisions which the hon. the Minister of Finance has put before us will remain? Indeed, the whole substance of his argument is that he is holding a stick over their heads: “We will reintroduce it and we will make it even more stringent than it was before”. It is a deliberate threat to industry, and that sort of approach does not help anybody.

I believe that we have now got to the stage where we have to review this whole situation; it is getting out of hand. The Government is changing its mind from day to day. They have built up a massive structure of organizational machinery; there is now a Cabinet Committee; there is a decentralization board and a growth points committee and a host of subcommittees. But, Sir, what are we achieving by this? We are paying an immense amount for this procedure, but what benefits accrue to South Africa? Let us look at the two aspects. First of all, let us look at the homelands. To what extent do the homelands benefit as a result of this border area concept of the Government? The Government’s idea is that these areas must be made politically independent. If that is so, give me one reason then why they should not be made economically viable. Surely the Government wants to increase their industrial and economic carrying capacity. If we accept that as a legitimate objective. Sir, then I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether the homeland leaders have been consulted about this border area scheme and whether they approve of it, because certainly Chief Minister Kaiser Mtanzima is on record as having said that the border area scheme is not acceptable to the Transskei.

Where did he say that?

It was reported in the newspapers. Will the hon. the Minister give me proof that the others have been consulted and that they approve of it? Because if he does not even please the Bantu homelands and the Bantu homeland leaders, what do we achieve thereby? Is that one reason why the Transkei, this Government show-piece of its separate development scheme, has not got a single border area industry of any consequence?

Sir, there is a second thing to which I want to draw attention. Everybody, including Prof. Tomlinson, told us that South Africa constitutes one economic entity and that it is indivisible. If this is so, how can you achieve economic planning when the Bantu homelands are specifically excluded from this planning? How can you plan South Africa when major sectors of it are left completely beyond the field in which you plan? Sir, I want to go further. If the Government’s intention with this scheme is to decentralize industry and to take it to the biggest concentrations of Black workers, why then is industry not sited inside the homelands? Then at least they would get some benefit from it, socially, economically and otherwise, because now you are perpetuating the migratory system; they must move over the border and work in White factories for White bosses who pay White taxes to the White Government. As far as the homelands are concerned, the benefits that they get from this scheme are entirely marginal. But what is happening to our bigger economy? We are paying an immense price for this system, Sir, It has been estimated that it costs from R5 500 to R6 000 for every additional job that you create in the border areas. Look at all the incentives that the Government has provided: Tax reimbursements, loans, rail subsidies and rebates. What does all this amount to, Sir? What is the bill that we are paying for it? South Africa wants to know.

May I ask a question?

I only have five minutes left. Sir, we want to know from the Government what this scheme is costing South Africa. The hon. the Minister should have the answers because it was precisely for this purpose that the Reynders Commission was appointed. We have never seen that report. Will the hon. the Minister table it? Because, Sir, we are paying a massive price, quite apart from all the indirect costs—the wastages, the delays and the frustrations which add up and which are reflected in our rising production costs pattern. We want to know from the hon. the Minister what this scheme is costing us. South Africa wants to decide whether in fact we are getting any worthwhile benefits from it. Our contention is that this Government now finds itself between two stools. With the border area scheme, it is not creating additional jobs in the Bantu homelands, and yet at the same time it is inhibiting economic growth in White South Africa. It is costing immense sums, and yet we are not achieving the kind of economic separation which the Government tells us is necessary for our survival. So we are in the worst of both worlds. Let me say right away that we on this side of the House endorse the principle of selective industrial dispersal, but we also say, as Dr. Rautenbach once said, that unless visible and tangible benefits flow from this scheme, it will not in the long term succeed. I do not think the Government has any idea of the magnitude of the problem they are up against. Some 90 000 Black people come into the labour market every year. On present indications the border areas can absorb at most 16 000 and possibly in two years time about 23 000. If we were to absorb only the Black people who graduate from high school, we will have to have an investment of R1 500 million in industrial development over the next ten years. This is the magnitude of the problem. The marginal cost of border areas will furthermore increase as a greater and greater proportion of industry is diverted. Let me say right away that we on this side of the House will not subvert the foundations of South African prosperity for the sake of dubious ideology. We on this side will not decentralize for ideological purposes only, but our objectives would be to maximize the utilization of all South Africa’s resources so that we can achieve the greatest possible growth in our national income. It is on that that South Africa’s future survival depends.

There are two reasons why I am not going to react to the hon. member’s argument. The first is the lack of time and the second is because the hon. the Minister will reply fully to the hon. member in due course. Thirdly I want to say that since we have had to listen for half an hour to merely negative aspects with regard to this department, we want to try, in the 10 minutes at our disposal, to bring something more positive to the fore in only one small section, the control of this department.

At the very outset we want to give sincere thanks to the hon. the Minister and his department, and to the erstwhile president of the CSIR, for the invitation they extended to members of this House to pay a visit to the CSIR in Pretoria. I want to tell you, Sir, that it is very greatly appreciated. The visit we had the privilege of paying to that institution not only excited our admiration for what that institution is doing, but it also stimulated our curiosity, if I may use the word, to such an extent that we were compelled to make a closer examination of the activities of that institution. I want to begin by taking this opportunity to try to give a brief explanation of the activities of that institution. For example, we want to refer to the assignments for state and non-state bodies given to this institution, with the accompanying revenue for that body. From this we can then obtain an idea of what this organization means to us and of what national importance it is to us. This afternoon we also want to underline, in particular, the international assignments that go out to the CSIR with the accompanying of foreign exchange earned by the CSIR. What struck us initially were the assignments from state departments and provincial administrations in the first place. There is not a single provincial administration, South-West Africa included, which has not given important assignments to this department recently. The provincial departments of the Transvaal, Natal, the Orange Free State, the Cape Province and South-West Africa all gave assignments to this department to do research in respect of the erection of hospitals, the design of school buildings, etc. All these provincial departments, with a few exceptions, gave assignments to the CSIR for investigations and for advisory services in respect of water and the effluent problem. I am not going to tell you at this stage what the CSIR’s earnings were from each of these assignments, but eventually we shall show you comprehensively what the sum total of all the assignments amounted to. We refer also to the Department of Health. We had one motion last year and two motions this year in respect of pollution. The CSIR is still dealing with the matter, but it has already earned more than R20 000 from the Department of Health this year, solely in connection with the investigations relating to air pollution. As far as I am concerned another very interesting assignment, which I want to mention to show you how extensive the activities of the CSIR are, is that of the Department of Bantu Administration and Development for the improvements of the technology and the processes in the manufacturing of Bantu beer. I find this assignment interesting, but what I find even more interesting is the fact that it has gained an income of more than R300 000 for the CSIR. For the same department assignments have been carried out in the homelands to the tune of more than R100 000. For the Department of Public Works, for example, in respect of improvements in the building industry, a gigantic amount has been earned. Then there are the bodies outside the Government departments, control boards and semi-state bodies. What also impressed us on that visit by members of this House who represent agricultural regions, is that we were witnesses to what the CSIR is doing in this connection, and therefore we made more comprehensive inquiries. We can only say that the CSIR did research for the S.A. Wool Board to promote the use of wool in the textile industry, and an amount of no less than R202 000 was spent on that. For the mohair industry the CSIR did research, and more than R20 000 was spent on that. The Mealie Control Board and the Kaffir Corn Control Board harnassed the CSIR, which made tremendous progress with respect to these industries, and there was the accompanying revenue. Road safety is one of the most important matters we are dealing with today. On the instructions of the National Transport Commission the CSIR did research for better and more economical methods of design, construction and maintenance of roads, including the safety aspects. In respect of this matter it deserves to be mentioned that here we had earnings of more than R800 000. I could continue in similar vein, but there is insufficient time.

Therefore I want to skip what is being done in South Africa, and just refer to what the CSIR has done for us outside South Africa, and to their contribution in the gathering of foreign exchange. The CSIR received an assignment from Nasa in the United States of America to do research in connection with the tracking of satellites. The realization of this target by the CSIR brought us an amount of more than R2 100 000. In passing, before I forget, I just want to say that Government departments, semi-Government departments and control boards furnished the CSIR with an income of more than R3 million. These assignments to the CSIR from the U.S.A., from the British Council of Research, from the Rhodesian Government, from the Government of Malawi and from several firms in the U.S.A., meant an additional income of almost R2½ million as far as we are concerned. This is a grand total of about R5 800 000 that this body furnished us with. While the hon. member, who has just resumed his seat, could only criticize, it is a pleasure for us to have the opportunity this afternoon to point to the contributions the CSIR is making to South Africa, and this is made possible as the result of the aid and assistance that is being obtained from the relevant Minister and his department. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, there is a widespread illusion in Nationalist circles that our economic problems are temporary and that the wealth of this country will endure and ensure that the Government’s uneconomic policies can be justified. Nothing is further from the truth. I want to reinforce the sentiments expressed by the hon. member for Hillbrow that in South Africa we must gauge the economic wellbeing of our people and base our planning not on the gross domestic product as such, the total domestic product, but on the per capita growth. In the ten years up to 1968, while the gross domestic product was 5,3 per cent per annum, the per capita growth was only 2,4 per cent. In 1968–’69 the per capita growth fell to 2,6 per cent, in 1970 to 2 per cent and in 1971 to 1,1 per cent. These are the chickens of the hon. the Minister’s economic planning coming home to roost.

I want to deal, in the brief time available to me, with some aspects of the Economic Development Programme for the period 1970 to 1975, as produced by the hon. the Minister’s department. The current Programme, in contradistinction to the previous programme, deals only with the concept of a 5,5 per cent growth in the gross domestic product and not with three varying percentages, such as were used previously. But I should like to quote the preface of the latest economic development programme, written by Dr. Riekert. He makes this amazing statement and admission—

This frank statement by Dr. Riekert epitomizes more than anything else the false premises on which this Government and this hon. Minister are prepared to base their planning for the future economic progress of our country. We on this side of the House have stressed again and again that we regard South Africa as a country with a population of some 21 million people and not some three million people, and it is for the total population that we would like to see a programme produced. In their planning the Government appear to ignore the vast labour potential which is available to South Africa. I believe it was in the 1970 No-confidence Debate that my hon. leader appealed to the hon. the Prime Minister to allow his Economic Planning Committee to produce a plan based not on the Government’s present shackled ideological labour concepts, but on the total availability of the total labour and capital resources in South Africa. To this challenge the hon. the Prime Minister has never replied. Now I want to ask how the hon. the Minister of Planning can operate effectively in his department while he and the hon. the Minister of Bantu Administration ignore the Bantu in their calculations.

Then I want to deal briefly with the White Paper following upon the Riekert committee on the decentralization of industries. The Government has had forced on it the realization that neither their job reservation legislation nor their Physical Planning Act have achieved the desired results. Dr. Riekert has now been called upon to produce a White Paper to unscramble and clarify the first contentions of this inter-departmental committee. You see, Sir, none of the hon. the Minister’s planning legislation has proved practicable in its original form. So the committee on the decentralization of industries was appointed for the purpose of clarifying this muddle which resulted from the introduction of the original Act, something which, I may say, was pointed out to the Government time and again by this side of the House and also by commerce and industry. In the short time available to me, I want to appraise critically this White Paper on the Riekert committee’s report. The paper itself is perhaps the most important policy document of the present Government in the economic field, since it outlines this Government’s policy with regard to decentralization and labour. Further, it lays down, or endeavours to lay down, the broad guidelines for the implementation of the Government’s decentralization policy. The White Paper recognizes a very important point, namely that it is a fact of South African society that there are large numbers of unemployed persons, mainly Black, in areas far removed from the present centres of industrial development. This refutes absolutely and repudiates the view expressed on more than one occasion by the hon. the Minister of Bantu Administration and Development, who consistently claims that there are almost no unemployed Bantu in South Africa. The White Paper recognizes, as has been stressed by Opposition speakers again and again, that as a result of the apparently unsuccessful progress of decentralization, the Physical Planning and Utilization of Resources Act has had many defects. These have been resented by commerce and industry. The White Paper recognized too that the further implementation of the Physical Planning Act has caused confusion and uncertainty in industry. And certainly, according to organized industry, it has had most adverse effects on investment. Furthermore, the falling rate of unemployment amongst Whites, Coloureds and Asians, has brought to a head the issue of a fuller utilization of the Bantu. It is clear from the White Paper that the hon. the Minister of Planning has had to introduce greater flexibility into Government thinking. The hon. the Minister has had to recognize too the private sector’s repeated assertions that the implementation of the policy of decentralization as first applied has had adverse effects on the economy and that sound growth performances in the existing industrial areas are a prerequisite to the successful decentralization in the border areas or homelands. This has never been explicitly accepted by the Government before. Now, however, the White Paper states—

How many times have the Opposition not tried to drum this home? This principle is considered so important that it is referred to on three separate occasions in the White Paper. To enable the Government to obtain its Economic Development Programme target of an average rate of 5,5 per cent per annum, the White Paper emphasizes that the Government would have to accept the principle of flexibility in its planning policies. One of the face-savers which was introduced in this programme was marked by the new concept of locality-bound industries referred to by my hon. friend, the member for Hillbrow. Unfortunately we find that in the implementation of the Government’s policy of decentralization, they still have to use a combination of the carrot and the whip. By its insistence on the whip, the Government has implicitly recognized that the carrot is inadequate. It is significant that, whereas the object of the exercise was to apply the policy of decentralization in a more effective manner, and so eliminate, where possible, the uncertainties and problems that the Government anticipated, this has not been achieved. The field of uncertainty has been narrowed, but not removed. The continued reliance of the Government on the whip, rather than the carrot, must inevitably have severe repercussions on our economy.

Mr. Chairman, let me, for a start, leave the hon. member at that, because there are two aspects to which I should call the hon. the Minister’s attention. Since the Department of Planning came into being in South Africa eight or nine years ago, our general planning structure has actually taken on a completely new form and shape. There are facets of our larger, broader planning machine on which, I think, we can only look back with great pride today in the light of what has been achieved over the past few years.

But, Sir, there is one facet of this planning structure that I really think deserves a great deal more deliberate attention at this stage on our part and on the part of the department. What I am thinking of now is regional planning as such. Regional planning is being taught as a subject today at several of our universities. As far as that is concerned I think we have already come far. But as far as the practical side of regional planning is concerned, there are various facets which, I believe, the Department of Planning will have to give much more express attention to from now on. Firstly, these regions have been divided up today, and there are actually no areas for which we can say: “Look, this is where this specific area ends”. In other words, throughout the entire area, particularly in the Cape Province, there are parts where development associations do not function at all. I do not know what the situation in the vicintiy of the Transvaal is, but I now know the Cape Province very well. There are areas here, for example our northern urban areas, the parts around Cape Town, and so on—I am thinking of an area like Stellenbosch—where we really feel that with the help of the Minister, or whoever it may be, we must do something about this situation.

Another point I should like to mention is that we do not make a point of encouraging our people to imbue the various citizens with a new spirit of development. One can compare these development areas with the situation that prevailed there years ago. I am now thinking of our coastal areas in particular. Many Strandlopers roamed about in these specific areas. They made small holes in ostrich eggs and filled them with water. After they had taken a drink, they hid them at some or other spot in those grasslands. However, when it comes to the creation of development possibilities in those areas and to instilling new power into those areas, there are no longer these people on whom one can depend. They take no notice of the cold Atlantic Ocean with its rich fishing grounds; it just passes them by. It is when the new people get there that they build on the future that lies in store for them with a certain attitude of mind. We need this new creative ability in man. Where man’s creative power is lacking, poverty reigns. I feel the time has now come for us to take note, firstly, of the true power of the individual there in respect of this new trend of development with the new regions and regional organizations we must now create. It is not the gold, the copper or the other minerals that are the most important factors in such a region. The most important factors, in the first place, are the people who carry the creative power and who want to develop and create their own environment.

I now want to advocate that the department should come to the fore and bring a new constitution for all these regional development associations. Today there are numerous regional development associations of this kind. I have pointed out that there are between 60 and 70 of these associations. What is the result of this? Each of them virtually has its own voluntary organizational machine or their own voluntary agendas according to which they work. I think the time has now come for uniformity. I now want to ask the hon. the Minister whether we cannot, even before the end of this year, get round to bringing these regional development associations together so that we can examine the differences in the various regions and so that proper lines can be drawn for them. We can then bring them to the fore as the bodies that will actually constitute the new practical basis of our planning machine. There is going to be a difference of opinion about where these lines must be drawn, but I really think the department must take the initiative so that we can make this division as quickly as possible.

In addition I also think the time has come for the Department of Planning to set aside one or two of its officials to initiate and stimulate the correct creative spirit amongst our people in these regional development associations. We do not look at these regional development associations as associations that must exert pressure on the Government, or exert pressure on the Minister from time to time. These must be people who will have to build up the future of their own region with a spirit of individuality and with a love for their own region. If the Department of Planning wants to make one of the most important basic investments today in respect of this useful philosophy, it will have to take a new look at its whole planning structure, in fact at the whole format of development associations. I want to ask the hon. the Minister that even before the end of this year we give our full attention to this aspect, not only in respect of the Cape Province, but in respect of the whole Republic.

The second aspect I want to mention here is the attention that a region like the Langebaan lagoon has obtained in recent years from the Department of Planning. The time has come for us to take a new look at this very important asset in the Boland region. There are bodies that are interested in the unfolding and development of this specific region. In many respects their interests clash. I am thinking, for example, of the intention of letting salt pans develop for South Africa at a specific spot in this lagoon. There is the Oude Pos Syndicate in this specific region where there is a large concentration of game today. This clashes in certain respects with other plans being proposed in the specific region. There is the military set-up at Langebaan. On occasion the hon. the Minister of Defence has made it apparent that this set-up can be shifted to Langebaan. I think it is a very important decision. There are also other bodies, for example the yachtsmen, who are interested in bringing new development to this specific region. These are all aspects that will have to be looked at in the future. There is the old whaling station at Donkergat which has, inter alia, its own water and power supplies. But because we have no general planning, and because we do not know what we want to do and in what direction we want to move as far as the overall unfolding and development of this region is concerned, the intentions of these people are hanging in the air. There are numerous bodies who, at this stage, are pressing to start a fish hatchery there, particularly in the vicinity of Rietbaai, such as we have on a large scale today in a country like Japan [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Moorreesburg and I have clashed in this House about various matters on numerous occasions. But this afternoon I want to congratulate him on the plea he lodged. I want to tel] him that I associate myself with the sensible approach he displayed as far as this matter is concerned.

The economic development programme of South Africa is a comprehensive plan. Unfortunately this plan does not always evolve according to expectations. What worries me is that the hon. the Minister and his department do not “up-date” this plan systematically, to “opdateer” this plan, if that is the right word, to adapt it to the country’s altered circumstances. With our limited resources, e.g. labour and capital, we must take note that South Africa must keep the economic objectives in view and leave what I would almost like to call its ideological obsession. It is indeed true that the border industries are adversely affecting the metropolitan industries. Several training courses that have been introduced, several of the objectives that are being pursued, labour agreements, etc., can eventually boomerang to such an extent on the metropolitan industries that they kill the goose that laid the golden egg. I should like to tell the hon. the Minister that the point of departure in respect of planning must surely be the economically sound development of the country as a whole. It is not only shortsighted, but it can also prove dangerous if some or other part of the country or some section or other of the population is neglected.

Therefore I should like to come back to the Port Elizabeth / Uitenhage complex, which is an important component of the metropolitan industrial areas of South Africa. The area, as the hon. the Minister knows, was divided up, and to the west of the Humansdorp/Colesberg line it was a Coloured labour area, while the area to the east of the Fish-Kat River was a Bantu labour area. The strip in between was a dual labour area, but then the area in between, i.e. the Port Elizabeth/Uitenhage complex, was converted into a Coloured labour preferential area while the area has a Bantu-Coloured ratio of four to one. I want to emphasize that the Bantu are indigenous to the area and that they were not brought to that area.

The businessmen and industrialists in this area find great difficulty in obtaining a measure of permanence as far as their labour forces are concerned. The strong bargaining position in which the Coloureds have now been placed, because it is a preferential area for Coloureds, causes up to 100 per cent absenteeism in some of the industries, and liquor and drugs also play a big role amongst the bottom group of Coloureds employed there. In the past we have advocated that the Government reconsider declaring this area a dual labour area, but the hon. the Minister did not think fit to do so. He has, nevertheless, made an important concession as far as Port Elizabeth is concerned and said that if there is up to 2 per cent unemployment as far as Coloureds are concerned, this will be accepted as being full employment and Bantu can then be employed.

Today I want to advocate that the Minister should reconsider this percentage and possibly double it, or increase it so that the Coloureds will have a slightly weaker bargaining position and so that the contracts that are given to industrialists to employ Bantu labourers are extended over and above the period of service that is granted today. There are Bantu labourers who work on a permanent basis today. Those people are trained to do skilled and semi-skilled labour, and I want to give you the assurance that they are doing good work. But if a Bantu is merely employed for a year or two it is an extremely expensive process to give him the training, then to lose him and have to start from scratch again. I have previously said in this House —and my hon. friend, the member for Pretoria North, blamed me for having done so—that Port Elizabeth …

Who is the member for Pretoria North?

Port Elizabeth North. He blamed me when I said the Port Elizabeth/Uitenhage complex can today be regarded as the sick man in South Africa’s economy. The reason is that our industrial growth is, to a very large and dangerous extent, dependent on and linked to the economically sensitive motor industry. I think the hon. the Minister will agree with me that it is very important for further development of the economy to take place in this complex with Government encouragement. One of these days the water of the Orange River project will reach Port Elizabeth; we shall also be obtaining additional supplies of power from Escom; the labour is there; the business acumen is there; the harbour is there; and the necessary infrastructure is there. What is lacking is Government permission for the better utilization of the labour that already exists there. Pretoria, Durban, East London, Brits and other parts of the country today have the benefits of border industries. Why can similar benefits, or other equal benefits, not be offered to the metropolitan areas that do not border on Bantu homelands, for example Port Elizabeth and the Western Cape?

†Mr. Chairman, the Stellenbosch Bureau for Economic Research has sounded a call for dynamic enterprise on the part of private business in order to bring about a new phase of growth. Optimism, regrettably, is not enough. Optimism must be soundly based. That is where the Government’s responsibility comes into the picture. Those who wish to pursue the dynamic enterprise that Stellenbosch advises, need the assurance that they will not be frustrated by official restrictions or discouragements. The Government must be an active agent for encouraging enterprise. They must realize fully how economic growth is stimulated. Professor Arthur Kemp pointed out recently that economic growth is a process of change but what we need is the freedom to make the changes that are required. The Government’s approach must be bold so that South Africa may go forward in the seventies with faith to avail itself of the temporary benefits brought about by devaluation. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central will excuse me, I am sure, if I do not react to his argument. If I have any time left, after I have finished speaking about what I should like to discuss, I shall come back to him.

My hon. friend, the hon. member for Moorreesburg, waxes lyrical in this House every year about the growth potential of the Boland, the larger Boland, and the West Coast. I am acutually jealous of the way he advocates benefits for the future of the development of the Western Cape. I appreciate this and admire it in him. I regard the Western Cape as the foundation of not only the Cape Province, but of the whole of South Africa.

How can you say that?

The Western Cape is the cradle of the White man in South Africa, that is why I say it.

Vrystaat!

Mr. Chairman, it seems to me I have caused a flutter in the dovecote.

No, but you are right there with the truth.

I now want to go to another part, i.e. to the Hendrik Verwoerd project in the Northern Cape. Just as lyrical as the hon. member for Moorreesburg waxed about the development in the Western Cape, I should like to become about the future development in that area. The Orange River project consists of two parts: The portion to the west of the dam or below the dam; the other part is the catchment area of the Hendrik Verwoerd Dam. The catchment area of the Hendrik Verwoerd complex consists of three parts: the Free State part, which stretches up to Ficksburg in the North Eastern Free State; then there is Lesotho, about which we cannot say or do anything, of course; but the third portion, which is the portion I should like to speak about, is the North Eastern Cape. When I speak of the North Eastern Cape, I have a desire to wax lyrical. I said just a moment ago that the Western Cape is the Cape Province’s foundation in South Africa. Similarly the North Eastern Cape is the roof of the Cape Province.

Hear, hear!

You confine yourself only to the Cape Province.

Mr. Chairman, I think the hon. member for Carletonville should just contain himself a little. There are sinkholes in his constituency; here there are no sinkholes. When I am speaking of the North Eastern Cape, I mean the funnel-shaped portion for Whites between Lesotho, Herschel on the north and between the Ciskei and the Transkei for a long stretch on the south. It covers quite a few districts, including a few districts situated in the constituency which the Minister represents, in addition to a few districts in my constituency. A few years ago the Free State University conducted a socioeconomic survey in that area, and it was proved that a retarded economy prevails there. I now come back to the North Eastern Cape area. That area really has the potential, but at present there is a depressed economy as a result of certain demands being made in certain circles. Because there is a depressed economy there is no out side capital coming in. It differs from the rest of South Africa. Therefore I want to advocate to the hon. the Minister today that planning should take place. I have here the list of objectives of the Hendrik Verwoerd project, a few of which I am going to quote to hon. members. I quote (translation)—

The second is—

The last one I want to mention here is—

Here I also want to refer to what Mr. Kuhne wrote in Die Burger the other day when he went camping on the mountains there for the week-end. He said one could buy fresh air there. In the Northern Cape one does not need to buy fresh air; one can go there and enjoy oneself in the mountains. There are spots that are 9 000 feet above sea level. Another cause of a retarded economy in this area is the transport, the lines of communication. As a result of the fact that it is far removed from the markets—far is a relative concept—and does not have proper road links, particularly to the east, the agricultural industry is struggling. These are the things that must be speeded up to link this area with the eastern area, where their natural market is.

I also want to mention that there is no rail link from Maclear to Matatiele. I do not think there will be one in the near future as a result of the fact that the agricultural economy does not justify such a railway line. When the Hendrik Verwoerd project has developed further to the west, the economic development will justify the construction of that railway line. That is why it is of the utmost importance that attention be given to this important area in South Africa. Timely attention must be given to it, because in time the creeping paralysis can strike those parts and this could mean those parts becoming useless to the Whites of South Africa. We want the White community in those particular districts to be strengthened and not weakened.

As a result of these facts, I want to urge the hon. the Minister to ensure the planning of that area. My hon. friend for Moorreesburg spoke a while ago of the regional development associations that function individually without any actual general planning. I want to agree with him in that respect. There must be planning in that specific area because it has the water, the power and the labour. We do not have …

It has the human material.

Yes, it has the human material. We do not have the raw materials, except for agricultural raw materials, but site-bound industries can develop. We can also develop industries there using agricultural raw materials. It is in that spirit that I am today advocating the cause of the North Western Cape, and it is in that spirit that I feel we must now plan, because tomorrow or the day after it could be too late for the planning of that area.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member who has just sat down excused himself for not replying to my colleague who preceded him. I am afraid that I must ask him the same indulgence, because I want to deal with another matter.

I should like to deal immediately with the question of group area proclamations, for which this hon. Minister is responsible. In the first instance, I think it is unnecessary to say that group area proclamations affect the lives of every single South African citizen, regardless of colour. As the population grows, these group areas will continue to be proclaimed and reproclaimed despite what the Minister would like to do. Group areas are going to be reproclaimed ad infinitum, for the simple reason that as populations grow, it will be found that isolated islands for the occupation of different race groups surrounded by particularly White areas will become far too small, so that new group areas will have to be proclaimed. Therefore new masses of people will have to be removed. The time will come, of course, when the people being removed will be White people in the main and no longer non-Whites. Then White people will get a taste of the medicine which had been dished out to the Coloured and Indian people over the last 10 years in particular.

What I should like to say here is that this is inevitable under the Government’s policy. One then turns immediately to the question of how much confidence we can have in the Group Areas Board and its initial proclamations or deproclamations. I should like to show that in fact one can have no confidence in the Group Areas Board and the Group Areas Board hearings. Very often these hearings which take place are nothing more or less than a farce. I say this because experience has indicated in South Africa that over the years, since the activities of the Group Areas Board started, very seldom, indeed hardly ever, has the Group Areas Board paid any attention to the evidence or the weight of evidence given to it in a particular instance. All the decisions in regard to group areas, such as group area proclamations and reproclamations, appear to be made in Pretoria, regardless of any of the facts produced at the various hearings which have taken place throughout the country.

I should like to show to the hon. the Minister that in some instances the decisions of the Group Areas Board have in fact been taken before the hearing takes place. Prior to the hearing taking place, in other words, the decision has already been made. Before I do so, I should like to refer to a statement made by the vice-chairman of the Group Areas Board, Mr. Van Wyk, as reported on 15th July last year. He was talking to a collection of children taking part in a course on the South Coast of Natal. He made the following statement—

I should like to ask the hon. the Minister whether he agrees with such a statement. Does he agree with the statement that more non-Whites were affected by the Group Areas Act because more non-Whites had moved into White areas? It needs hardly anybody in South Africa to point out that before the Group Areas Act came into operation, there was no such thing in South Africa as a White area. How more non-Whites could have moved into White areas, I should like to know. If this statement had been made by the ordinary rank and file of the members opposite, I believe it could be ignored, but coming from the vice-chairman of the Group Areas Board, I believe it is a matter of very grave concern. If this is his attitude when he sits on the board, I believe that it supports my contention that many of these hearings are no more or no less than a farce.

Now I should particularly like to come to the matter of the hearing at Newcastle. It is on record that when the then chairman of the Group Areas Board opened the proceedings at the recent hearing at Newcastle, he said that the board was not prepared to listen to criticism of the proposed master plan. In other words, a master plan had been drawn up for Newcastle, and no matter what evidence was brought before the board at its hearing in Newcastle, the board was not prepared to listen to any criticism of this plan. In other words, what then happened was that a master plan had to be drawn up for Newcastle, as the hon. the Minister has mentioned before in this House, but when the hearing took place no criticism of this plan was allowed. I would like to ask the hon. the Minister how in heaven’s name you can hold a hearing and ask for evidence from the various groups affected when the chairman turns round, when evidence is to be presented by leading legal authorities, and tells them that he will brook no criticism of the plan itself. It came to light a little later on that apparently the chairman had participated in the drawing up of this master plan. Sir, I do not know which strong words I can use in this matter; I am not one for using strong words, as the hon. the Minister knows, but I will say to him that this sort of hearing makes a mockery of the whole system of holding hearings under the Group Areas Act. I would like the hon. the Minister to deal with this particular matter in detail. I see no purpose in the Government drawing up a plan for a particular area, then holding a hearing in regard to that particular plan, and then saying that the people who give evidence cannot criticize it. Why does the department not simply scrap group area hearings and say, “We have declared this area for Group A, Group B or Group C,” and then leave it at that? Why go through this whole farce of holding a hearing when the opinion of people who have gone to the trouble of obtaining expensive legal advice, is simply ignored completely? Sir, I believe that I am justified in making this accusation, because if one studies the various group areas which have been proclaimed throughout South Africa, one seldom finds that they conform to the weight of evidence given at the particular hearing which affected the group concerned. Furthermore, I object most strongly to officials of the Group Areas Board making public statements such as the one, to which I referred earlier, made by the vice-chairman. I believe that this is not their function. Public statements come from the Minister and from the Minister alone. Sir, what confidence can the public have in these group area hearings? I couple that with what I said earlier on, and that is that group areas are going to be proclaimed and deproclaimed for a very long time in South Africa as we sort out our population groups, because as the population groups grow, they will in fact never be sorted out.

When I looked at this statement made by the vice-chairman, in which he said that no discrimination was involved, I was immediately reminded of District Six. I have said before in this House that if we returned District Six to the Coloured community—and it is not too late to do it— we would be rendering the greatest possible service to the cause of good race relations between Whites and Coloureds in South Africa. I would propose that we take immediate action and agitate for the return of District Six to the Coloured people without delay, before the relations between the Whites and the Coloureds become worse than they are today. Unlike District Six, the Malay quarter of Cape Town has been allowed to stay because apparently it is a tourist attraction. What a pity it is, from the point of view of the thousands of people who lived in District Six, that District Six was not also regarded as a tourist attraction. So much for the principle of group areas.

Sir, in the very short time left to me I would like to deal very briefly with one or two other matters. The first one is the proclamation of Stockville recently. Here is an area not wanted by the Coloured people, an area which in fact is of no use to the Coloured people for the purpose for which it was allcated to them by the Group Areas Board, who probably made their decision even before they had looked at the ground. No suggestion has been made as to what is to happen to the people affected. In his reply to a question this morning, the hon. the Minister could not even tell the House what amount of produce was produced in that area and how many people depended on that area for their livelihood. Surely, Sir, these are the things that must be investigated when one proposes to move not one family, not five families, but over 100 000 families, who have already been moved under the Group Areas Act. If this is the type of investigation that takes place before people are removed, is it any wonder that there has been so much unhappiness and discontent? I can cite another classic example. In Durban an area was set aside for the development of high-class Indian houses. [Time expired.]

I think I should reply at this stage to a few of the points which have been raised here, and I might just as well start with the hon. member who has made the latest contribution to the discussion, and then work my way backwards to the first speaker. I hope he does not mind.

The hon. member raised the question of group area proclamations, which he says affect the lives of many people. He says that as he sees the position, there will be proclamations and deproclamations for many years to come—ad infinitum. Sir, if time allows me, I will deal with the question of planning, because what the hon. member has said, actually affects the whole question of planning in South Africa. If you can plan, as far as planning is possible, for the foreseeable future or for a reasonable length of time into the future, and you can proclaim group areas under such a plan, then I can visualize that a group area proclamation could be either permanent or very nearly permanent. Perhaps in the past our planning in South Africa has been on a fairly ad hoc basis and that is why we have made mistakes. We have sometimes found, because of new developments, that what we did before was not the correct thing and then we have had to scrap our former plan, which originally was regarded as a good one. That plan might have been prepared by a local authority or by a province. We are now definitely moving in a direction where we hope to lay down certain over-all guide lines for the various metropolitan areas in South Africa, and also for the smaller towns and cities so that everybody concerned, will be able to know more or less within limits and as far as humanly possible, what can be expected for a certain time to come. That is what we tried to do at Newcastle. At Newcastle, as the hon. member will remember, there were certain advertisements with regard to group area investigations. I do not think that anybody in this House or in the country will blame me for looking into the situation at Newcastle to see where people have been living, and for looking at the ground available in that area to see where people are going to live in years to come—say up to the year 2000. Newcastle, if I remember correctly, has a population of about 20 000. By the end of the century it is possible that 200 000 to 300 000 people may be living there. Therefore I make no apology for the fact that we had to go and look at the group areas position in which our different population groups will have to live in the years to come, and how Newcastle has to be organized to accommodate this vast influx of people.

I agree with that.

We all agree. So we advertised. We had the advertisement before the investigation.

You did it in 1962.

Yes, that is so, but in 1962 nobody knew that the third Iscor was going to Newcastle.

What has that to do with this?

I call the whole House to witness. The Government decided that the third Iscor would be sited at Newcastle. I have just said that this could mean, with all the industries that may go there, a population of 300 000 by the turn of the century, and the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg District asks me what that has to do with it! The hon. member for Port Natal will remember that I withdrew those advertisements. I announced in this House that I first wanted to have a guide plan for the Newcastle area, and I instructed my department and we set the necessary machinery in motion and a guide plan committee for Newcastle was appointed. On that guide plan committee the town council of Newcastle was represented and took an active part in the preparation of that guide plan, through its town consultants. The province of Natal was on that committee and also Iscor and the National Transportation Board, the Railways and the Department of Community Development. It was under the chairmanship of one of the officials of my department. The plan was laid before everyone concerned and after complete agreement, as I can say here today, I finally endorsed that guide plan for Newcastle and it was published. Only then did we draw up new investigation proposals with regard to group areas in Newcastle. The town council also made certain suggestions and the plans were incorporated in the advertised plans, as well as that of my department and the province and everybody else concerned. Then we advertised it and held a public inquiry at Newcastle. Even before that time, the hon. member will remember the very severe criticism that appeared in the Natal newspapers, criticism which I considered at the time and still consider today, to be quite unfair, in some cases most unfair. At the hearing which was held at Newcastle, the counsel who appeared for the town council and for the Indian community made accusations and allegations which I think was not fair towards those people conducting the investigation. They were accused of being stooges and various other things.

May I ask the Minister whether he thinks it is right or fair that the chairman of the board at the hearing should have said that he was only prepared to discuss the guide plan?

I have made a note of it. I must voice my disapproval of the way in which senior counsel came to that investigation and voiced certain sentiments which I feel were not worthy of men belonging to the legal profession. In any case, there is the point which the hon. member makes today and which I have not heard before. The hon. member says that various people, or perhaps those same advocates, criticized that guide plan but that the chairman of the investigating committee ruled them out of order. Well, I must say I only heard it for the first time this afternoon, but I must say to the hon. member that I feel like siding with the chairman. What was relevant? What was before that committee of inquiry? The guide plan was not before the board. The guide plan was something with which they did not have anything to do whatsoever. The guide plan was something for a completely different committee. It was finalized and it was published, and they had no right to discuss the guide plan, to say that it was good or bad. I think the chairman of the investigating committee, who is also the chairman of the Group Areas Board, was quite right. What was before that committee, what was relevant was the advertised plan for group areas siting at Newcastle. They could have argued that it does not fit in with the guide plan. That would have been another matter. That would have have been relevant to my mind, because why do you have a guide plan for any area, and why must you have a proclamation that does not fit in with your overall plan? That is the reason why you want an overall plan. So it was relevant to argue that the group areas proposals which they were investigating and on which they had to decide one way or the other—because there were various alternatives—could not be reconciled with the overall guide plan. But you could not say the guide plan was of no value and must be rejected, because it was not part of the job that committee was doing at the time. Now I come to the point the hon. member made at the start when he said we will always have proclamations and deproclamations as long as we live. That could be so to a certain extent. Nothing in this world is final. We think we have a good plan, but then conditions change, as they changed in Newcastle, and as they may change in various other parts of the country, and then you find that you have to change your plan. But if we have an overall guide plan for a certain area, and if we plan well into the future, which we consider should be about 30 years ahead, and if we bring everybody concerned in that area together, the province and the local authority and Bantu Administration and the Railways and the people who construct the roads, and if we bring in everything, including industry, and we then declare something for the future, and under that plan we then proclaim group areas, then I think we have a better chance to have a group area proclamation which will last longer,—although it may not last for all time.

The Minister has mentioned various bodies he would consult in arriving at the guide plan; I accept that, but he seems to have missed out the most important one of all. He has missed out the representatives of the people who will be affected—not the local authorities nor the Government departments, but the very people themselves—the Indians, the Coloureds and the Whites. Surely they should have a say in it.

At this stage we are not bringing on our guide plan committees representatives of, for example, the Indian Council or the Coloured Council. That is so. When we have our group area hearings, as the hon. member knows, they appear at those hearings and they are well represented and they can argue their case very well. They also argue their cases through their departments. The Department of Indian Affairs and my Department of Coloured Affairs also put their case before the Group Areas Board. We also make representations on their behalf. That is my answer to the point the hon. member has just mentioned.

So, Sir, with further regard to Newcastle, I want to say that I have received the report of the board. I am still awaiting the final reply from the province. Subject to the reply of the province being received, I can say that all the noise and all the mischief that has been created in Natal on this point by the newspapers, could well turn out to have no foundation at all. In any case, if I do not finalize this matter by Monday afternoon, during my Vote, I shall finalize it before the end of the session of Parliament. Up to 2 o’clock this afternoon, I had not yet had the province’s reply, so I cannot say for certain what the decision will be. I think, however, that all the people who were so concerned about the matter, had no real justification for their fears. They never had, and perhaps they will not in the future.

I now come to Stockville, and I am pleased to see that the hon. member for Pinetown is present. Stockville, as we all know, is near the Mariannhill Coloured township. It is at present an area occupied by Indian squatter farmers. It is 1 053 ha in extent. I can only say that Stockville, as far as my information goes, is a natural extension of the Mariannhill Coloured group area. It is bordered on the west and north by a European area, but my information is that there is a ridge and a plateau which practically isolates it from the European area. On the east side there is an industrial area and on the other side the Coloured group area, which at present has not yet been developed.

May I ask a question? Why do you classify this as a Coloured area when there are Indians there?

As I have said, the area is 1 053 ha in extent. On about 364 ha in the northern part of the area there are 200 Indian small farmers, and my information is that the total population is about 2 000. That area is in any case completely cut off from every other Indian area in the complex of Durban. It can never really become an Indian group area. In the long term its future is Coloured. I have not quite been accused, but the hon. member has said that we continually deproclaim and never reach finality. Here the position is that if we develop Mariannhill in future, this Stockville area will form a natural extension to Mariannhill. That was why I felt that although we do not need this ground at the moment …

There are no Coloureds there at all.

Yes, there are no Coloureds there at all. Although we do not need this ground at the moment, if we proclaim it Coloured, we will be giving an indication that in the future this ground will be needed for Coloured housing. We shall need such land in Durban in future; there is no doubt about it. The area now being developed is Newlands East, and when Newlands East is full, we shall have to go over to that Mariannhill-Stockville area. I have consulted the Department of Community Development and they have given me the assurance to be able to say that those Indian farmers will be able to remain there for at least ten years. They will be able to remain in Stockville for at least ten years. But they now know well in advance that Stockville will not permanently remain an Indian area although there are Indian people living there now. After ten years the Government of the day can reconsider their position. All I can say to the hon. member for Pinetown is that I was under the impression that the area would be needed sooner and that is why I signed this proclamation. If I had known that it would take at least ten years before we might need the ground, I could have left it as a controlled area. In any case, nothing can happen to it unless I give my consent. As I have said, I am going to look at the Stockville area after I return to Pretoria. I must say that I honestly do not feel that I have made a mistake, but I am one of those people who, if they have made a mistake try to rectify it as soon as possible. I do not think I have made a mistake here, but I can give those Indian farmers the assurance that they will be left there for at least ten years. Some time or another, however, the area will be needed for residential development. There is no doubt about that. It will not be needed for Indian residential development; it will be needed for Coloured residentail development. Those were the reasons which prompted me to give my consent to the recommendation of the board for Stockville to become Coloured.

Have you been there?

No, I have not been there.

*While referring to the Group Areas Board, and before coming to the hon. member for Aliwal, I just want to say that I have decided—and I have obtained the approval of the Government for this— to appoint two additional members to the Group Areas Board, both in a part-time capacity. The one is Mr. Howard Odell … [Interjections.]

Now I am really worried.

Sir, this is a person whom the United Party considered good enough to send to Parliament, and now I find it very strange that they want to split their sides with laughter when they hear that he is going to serve on this board. Let us forget about his politics now; we are not speaking about his politics now. We are speaking of Mr. Odell as a person and if we speak about his politics, then we are speaking about other matters. He is a person of intelligence and one who possesses sound judgment. The best evidence I may mention in support of this, is that when his political views were not a factor that side of the House regarded him as being of such high standing that they sent him to the highest council of South Africa.

And what did he do then, thanks to his common sense?

Yes. That is just how they are, Sir, If Sonny Emdin were to come over to us tomorrow, they would hate him just as much as they hate Howard Odell. Sir, I have appointed him on a part-time basis. I expect that Mr. Odell will devote approximately half of his time to the business of the board and that he will give me sound and unprejudiced advice in respect of aspects relating to group areas in Natal. In any case, he knows the local conditions better than the rest of us do, and I have sufficient confidence in him to know that he will not give me bad advice.

Who is the other member?

The other member whom I am appointing as from 1st June, is Prof. Dr. Erika Theron of the University of Stellenbosch. I am appointing her because I have as much confidence in her, because I know that she has been interested in the Coloured people all her life, that she has made studies, both social and otherwise, of and published works on the Coloured people, and because I think that, as far as group areas planning for the Coloured people of the Cape Province is concerned, she will bring to bear primarily a scientific, but also a sympathetic view which will only be to the good of the board in its planning as far as the Coloured people of our country are concerned. As she is still attached to the University at present and will only retire in December, she will for the rest of this year be expected to devote about a quarter of her time to the business of the board. I have already asked her to take a look at the housing position in a few towns in order to write reports for me. She will, therefore, have enough to do. But, as from 1st January next year, she will, like Mr. Odell, be a part-time member of the board on a 50 per cent basis—in respect of both time and remuneration.

The hon. member for Aliwal spoke to me about the North-eastern Cape, which he termed an area with potential, but as an area which is lagging in the economic sphere at present. I would agree that it could only be in the interests of South Africa if that area could be strengthened in the economic sphere. He pleaded that we should plan in respect of that area. I may tell the hon. member that we shall do so. If I still find time this afternoon, I shall speak about it—if not, I shall speak about it on Monday. We are also dividing the country into certain regions in respect of overall national spatial planning. Subsequently we shall plan each one of these sub-regions as a region. I shall not go into that asepct now. Accordingly, that part of the country, which includes everything east of the line between Aliwal North and Port Elizabeth, will be one of our sub-regions, and we shall plan that entire area. Its potential, what one can get from it, how one can strengthen it, its needs in respect of transport, roads, etc., will all be determined. I may tell the hon. member that, as he knows, we have on our programme a national road through that area. The province is busy with other roads, but we shall take a look at all the transport networks to see how adequate they are. We shall examine the greatest potential of the area at the moment, its wonderful scenic beauty and what it can offer in that regard along its rivers, streams and mountains, and then we shall plan that area as a whole. In this respect, I may tell the hon. member that I give the undertaking that we shall look at the planning of that area.

The speaker who spoke before that hon. member was the hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central. Now, I do not want to discuss the E.D.P. with that hon. member, because I have to discuss it later with the hon. member for Hillbrow. Every two was the one who said that we do not adjust the programme. But surely the hon. member cannot tell me that we do not adjust this programme. Surely the hon. member knows—or ought to know—that we do adjust the programme. If he does not know this, he should only ask the hon. member for Hillbrow. Every two years we adjust the programme in the light of the new facts and figures we have obtained in regard to what the various ramifications of the economy have actually realized. On the basis of those facts and figures we readjust the programme for two years to come. If one has a five-year plan and one adjusts it, one adds two years at the end and lops off two years at the beginning, and it remains a five-year plan. The five-year plan is continually being adjusted in its actual figures and projections, on the basis of the actually realized results one has.

The hon. member spoke of the P.E./ Uitenhage area as a preferential one for Coloured labour, and that is so. But the hon. member will also know that I met the industrialists in Port Elizabeth and that I made representations. The report of the Riekert Committee is very satisfactory on this point. The hon. member asked whether we were making further relaxations, but the Riekert Committee said that as soon as Coloured unemployment in that area fell below 2 per cent, it was deemed to be full employment of Coloureds. Then Bantu labour was granted to industrialists; not only on a temporary basis, as the hon. member said, but on a permanent basis. That is so. Since the hon. member asked me to allow Bantu labour to be employed in that area permanently, I may therefore tell him that under these circumstances it is already being done in the P.E./Uitenhage area. The industrialists are highly satisfied with the position. I may tell the hon. member that I see those industrialists from time to time and they all tell me they are now quite satisfied with the labour set-up in the Port Elizabeth / Uitenhage area.

Then the hon. member asked for the subsidization of the industrial activities in Port Elizabeth. I am sorry, but I cannot even consider it. The fact of the matter is that if we were to subsidize our industrial activities as a whole in South Africa, one would not in the long run have a sound industrial economy. We cannot, in areas where industry has got off the ground, where it has at least gained a little momentum of its own, subsidize industrial activities. The Port Elizabeth/Uitenhage area to my mind really does not qualify for that. We have given that area a great deal of assistance in other ways. Through the various phases of local content for the motor industry we have nevertheless stimulated a great deal of industrial action in that area. If the hon. member speaks to the motor manufacturers in that area, he will hear that they also received certain concessions from the State for the transport of their motor vehicles to the Rand market. The hon. member knows that. I do not think we can go any further than that. I am sorry.

Then I come to the hon. member for Moorreesburg. He said here, quite rightly, that regional planning is one of the most important facets of our entire planning activities in South Africa, and that the various regional associations have to play an important part in this regional planning in South Africa. The hon. member asked whether he could not bring them together and whether my department could not take the initiative. Then he raised a very important point which I want to emphasize at this early juncture. He said that the view we should take, is that these regional associations should not become pressure groups, but should be positive groups which should make a positive, creative contribution to the overall planning activities. There are 52 regional development associations in our country today. Some are completely inactive, but there are others which play an important role, which are very active and which even form an important link today in the planning machinery maintained by my department. One of the reasons for our welcoming their participation so strongly, is that to us they represent the local viewpoint. Since I began to understand this work, it is my view too that one cannot plan without the local viewpoint. That is why I am in various ways trying to include the local viewpoint in my planning. It has nothing to do with politics, and I have now started to do this with the Opposition by consulting them where certain matters in their constituencies are affected. I need not take their advice and of course they need not give me any opinion. However, I think that the local viewpoint is very important in our planning activities. In the whole set-up of regional planning it is very important. When we want to draw up regional plans, we need these regional development associations. I just want to tell hon. members that in one of the sub-regions of the Cape Province—a while ago I mentioned the division of our country into certain sub-regions for planning purposes—my department is convening a conference for later this year, a conference of all the regional development associations in that sub-region. Then we want to discuss the boundaries of the various regional development associations with them, because their boundaries are in actual fact determined on an ad hoc basis only. We feel there could be far better planning in respect of the boundaries of such regional development associations as well. In some cases, the boundaries overlap and we feel that doing this and organizing them properly and placing them on a permanent basis, we shall be able to give them a place in our country’s planning machinery. After that congress we shall also proceed to do this with the regional development associations in other sub-regions of the country. I think the hon. member will be satisfied with what I have now said.

As far as the Langebaan Lagoon and related matters are concerned, I want to tell the hon. member that my standpoint on this matter is known. Ever since I paid a visit to the Langebaan Lagoon for the first time and subsequently, I have adopted the standpoint throughout that I do not think the lagoon should be used to produce salt. It is such a wonderful place and it has so much potential in other respects, that we should rather develop it in that respect. I cannot do more than that. It is a fact, and I also said it at that time, that a valid agreement or contract entered into years ago exists. The people who held or hold this contract have renewed it every year by paying the necessary amount. In my opinion there is an agreement therefore and the negotiations taking place are still taking place in this regard. Only recently, I think it was last week or the week before, I read in the newspapers that a conference was held in Cape Town in regard to this whole matter. I cannot say more than that, and I only hope that everything will work out in the end.

As far as the hon. members for Cape Town Gardens and Hillbrow are concerned—I mention this only in passing, because I first want to reply to the hon. member for Smithfield before returning to the two hon. members—they have today really paid my department the best compliment they could possibly have paid it. In regard to the really fundamental work my department does in the field of physical planning, which is in the interest of our country and the future of South Africa, they expressed not one single word of criticism. No criticism whatsoever was levelled at the policy or at the administration of my department. I appreciate it, because I do not think there is any reason —and I do not want to be conceited—for criticism in that regard. Their criticism was levelled simply and solely at the economic planning of my department—I shall speak about that later—and at the Physical Planning Act as it was and as it is now starting to take shape as a result of the report of the Riekert Committee and the White Paper. The hon. member for Smithfield expressed appreciation for the CSIR, and strongly commended the work which is being done by the CSIR for South Africa in the field of research and many other fields one may mention, for industry, and therefore for the private sector, as well as for the various State departments. He also mentioned the very good work which is being done by the CSIR in respect of our foreign relations, which are maintained in the fields in which the CSIR operates. He also referred to the satellite tracking station we are running for the American Space Administration. I appreciate the fine tribute which the hon. member paid to the CSIR and to myself, and I am certain that the CSIR will also take note of them with great appreciation. I thank him for those words and I shall convey them to the CSIR. I want to associate myself with what the hon. member said. The CSIR falls under my department and they do not give me much work. It is a pleasure for me to cooperate with them. They are people of outstanding calibre who are doing outstanding work for South Africa.

I come now to the hon. members for Cape Town Gardens and Hillbrow. Those two hon. members spoke in much the same vein and in the time at my disposal, and also on Monday, I should like to say a few words about that. I just want to tell the hon. member for Hillbrow and the hon. member for Cape Town Gardens that they should at least draw a distinction between drawing up an economic programme and the determination of economic policy. I do not lay down the economic policy in South Africa, and I am not responsible for fiscal and monetary measures and for general economic policy. That is the responsibility of my colleague, the Minister of Finance. Much of what the hon. members wanted to lay at my door, has nothing to do with me, and I think they will grant me that. These are matters they should have discussed, and did indeed discuss with the hon. the Minister of Finance, and as we firmly believe, without any success. That is why they are again coming to me with those matters today. The hon. member for Hillbrow again said how badly our economy fared last year with a growth rate of only 3,7 per cent. The hon. member will grant me that he is a little too late in the day, because everyone is already speaking about a growth rate of 5 per cent this year.

The hon. member for Cape Town Gardens also spoke about the growth rate and I just want to say to him that in the period covered by the previous five year programme our growth rate was at least 5,4 per cent. It was only 0,1 per cent less than the target growth rate. So in actual fact there is nothing to criticize. It is a fact that the growth rate dropped last year, but that has also happened before. I am not sure about the year, but I think in 1968 the growth rate was only 3,8 per cent. In spite of that we had an average growth rate of 5,4 per cent during that five year period which included 1968. If we have a growth rate of only 3,7 per cent or 2,7 per cent, it will certainly be a serious matter in the long run, because our population increase is such that if it is deducted from the increase in the growth rate, very little is left to ensure an increase in the standard of living. But surely this is not the case each year. Surely this must be taken over a period of time, because this is what determines the standard of living. The standard of living is not determined by whether the growth rate is temporarily low today and high again tomorrow. There are reasons for this. We had a serious drought. We produced far less in the agricultural sphere. As far as that portion of the agricultural produce is concerned that we were able to export we received far less money on account of an overall recession in the world markets. It also coincided with a major drop in the world price of the minerals we export. That is understandable.

Mr. Chairman, then the hon. member for Hillbrow told me that Government expenditure is too high. Of course, that is an argument which hon. members also used during the Second Reading debate. As I said, that is not a matter for the Minister of Planning. My reply to that is that we have a country which can hardly be compared with some of the other countries. I have not been to Japan yet, but I imagine that in Japan everything is in close proximity so that no problems are experienced with basic services. But in South Africa Cape Town is situated here and Johannesburg a 1 000 miles away. Just look at our railway system, our road network and the entire communications system. South Africa is a large country and one of wide expanses and the infrastructure, as they call it, is expensive compared to production. That is one of the reasons why our State expenditure is so high. We have debated this matter on so many occasions in this Parliament that I do not want to debate it any further today. Moreover, the Opposition continually brings pressure to bear on us to spend more in certain directions.

Then it has also been argued that investment in the industrial sphere has dropped. That is a fact. We know it. It causes us concern. But investment in the industrial sphere already began to rise at the second half of last year. It began to rise sharply. We hope that in view of the measures we have taken, i.e. devaluation and import control, there will be substantial improvement. In the last few years we had many problems in selling of our gold. Those hon. members know it. They know about the uncertainty which developed in the international monetary system. People sat waiting for things to happen and they invested their money in those countries they expected would revalue. At one stage they were withholding their money from South Africa, from America and other countries as well. The hon. members know it.

Then the hon. member also spoke about productivity which dropped. That is a fact. At one stage productivity dropped in our country. It is characteristic of all countries where inflation prevails. Wages and salaries increase and they increase more rapidly than production. England has experienced it. The strong country, Western Germany, experienced a year or two ago that its productivity was dropping. That was the experience in all countries where one had an inflationary situation in the economy. As soon as things change, the opposite happens. I want to tell the hon. member for Cape Town Garden that comparisons are continually drawn in respect of the per capita real growth of our national product, but the fact of the matter is that one cannot compare South Africa with Western Germany or France. South Africa is a country with different population groups. That is the reason why we cannot be compared with other countries.

Mr. Chairman, on Monday I hope to reply further to the question of whether my department drafted the E.D.P. well and correctly in terms of the facts and the information at my disposal, because that is my only task. I shall then proceed to discuss the role played by the Physical Planning Act and the amendments there to affect our economy for better or for worse against the general aspects of the planning activities in South Africa.

Business interrupted in accordance with Standing Order No. 23.

House Resumed:

Progress reported.