Mr. Chairman, the Department of Public Works fulfils a very important function in the provision of buildings for the various Government departments. I do not think that I am exaggerating when I say that through the years this department, in the construction of buildings, has made an important contribution to the development and growth of many of our towns and cities. Many of our Government buildings are not only well-equipped from a functional point of view but are also architectonically well-planned and well maintained. It is unfortunately a fact that because of the tremendous increase in building costs during the past years, this aspect of the department’s activities often became a consideration. This was so because the expense and the limited funds had of necessity to be taken into account. Every department, in the nature of the matter, aims to provide as much as possible in the form of services with the money it has at its disposal, but I do want to express the hope that as times change again and as this important task is proceeded with through the years, the architectural, artistic and the aesthetic aspects of the planning and construction of our Government buildings will not be lost sight of.

Since I have some first-hand knowledge of the activities of the department, I want to mention a few points in the form of appreciation on the one hand and on the other hand make a few practical suggestions as well. I think that as far as durability and thoroughness of the work of this department are concerned a very high standard is being maintained. Very high standards are being maintained generally. I may point out to you, Sir, that in regard to the damage done by the Boland disaster as a result of the earthquake which struck the towns of Ceres, Tulbagh and Wolseley in particular, it appeared to me after investigation that the Government buildings erected in recent times according to the present standards, stood the test of that earthquake very well. When I say this here today—and I have made inquiries; what I am saying here is not unfounded—it is an extraordinary compliment to the standards this particular department maintains with regard to the construction of State buildings. I should like to congratulate the hon. the Minister, the Secretary and the officials of the department on this score; there is no doubt about this.

I should like to state a second fact, and that is that the officials of the department maintain sound standards in the handling of contracts. During the past 16 years I have dealt with work done by various Government departments, and in those 16 years have come across only one official who was obviously bent on making money for himself through contracts. I may add that it was not an official of the Department of Public Works; it was a person who was temporarily in the employ of another Government department. In saying so now, I want to express my appreciation for the fact that this is true, for the fact that the people in this department, who handle large contracts and large sums of money, maintain those high standards of integrity. This is something which is tremendously important in regard to the whole Public Service. It is a very important consideration in regard to this Department of Public Works, which deals with contracts for a large variety of Government departments. I say this with pleasure because I feel that these people, perhaps do not often receive appreciation from this side for the work they do and for the standards they maintain not only with regard to the quality of the work, but also with regard to considerations of integrity. That is why I want to state these facts.

Then, Mr. Chairman, because my time is limited, I should like to mention a problem which I regard as important in regard to the handling of contracts. I mention this for the consideration of the Minister and the department. In recent times, in the past few years, contracts have often been awarded on a divided basis. In other words, when a particular service must be carried out, certain portions of the work are awarded to independent sub-contractors. I shall furnish an example of this. Earlier it was the practice that the department itself handled the electrical installations in buildings. This work was carried out by its own work teams. I have had experience of those services, and I may say that those work teams of the Department of Public Works did outstanding work. They were flexible and mobile; when a problem cropped up in a particular service, the department itself was able to send some of the people to investigate the problem. But in the past few years it has become the practice to have certain portions of the work carried out by independent contractors—I refer again, as an example, to contracts for electrical installations. I have some reservations about this because in practice this can lead to disintegration of services, to a disintegrated contract, in which neither the department nor the chief contractor is able to exercise proper control over the various services. You will understand, Sir, that when something of this nature happens, all kinds of considerations enter into the picture and the question of compensation and cost claims also arises. For example the department is negotiating with a particular subcontractor, and it is not always easy to wipe someone off the map when he is unable to fulfil his obligations or carry out the particular services. While those negotiations are in progress, that service has to be proceeded with and then all kinds of problems arise with regard to the progress of the work, with regard to accumulated damages, and so forth. I therefore want to submit for consideration that wherever possible—I can accept that in respect of certain works it would probably not be possible—the practice be followed of bringing in the subcontractors under the main contractor as far as possible; the department would not only be in a position to exercise control itself, but the main contractor will also be able to exercise a reasonable amount of control. Sir, I submit this for consideration with the idea of making a contribution by means of this suggestion because many problems could arise while a service such as this is in progress. I have made inquiries and I have gained the impression, on the authority of certain senior officials, that this is being considered or that this is now being done. If this is being done, in other words if these subcontractors are brought in under the chief contractor, I think this is a step in the right direction. I just want to conclude, Sir, by saying that it is my considered opinion that this department renders very good services to our country, to the public in general, and I want to say that I am confident that in the future, particularly in the light of the development of our country, they are still going to make a major contribution.

Sir, I wish to associate myself with the remarks of the hon. member for Piketberg where he spoke about the very high standard maintained by the Public Works Department and by its officials. It is indeed a treat to realize that we have got away from the old stero-typed buildings and that we are now getting something more aesthetic as well as more functional. I would like, however, to make a plea to other departments here this afternoon. One finds that other departments are continually grousing that the Department of Public Works is holding up important works. In this connection I would like to suggest—and I hope that it will be regarded as a positive contribution—that the Department of Public Works should appoint a PRO who can explain to the various departments why there are delays. Even magistrates and commandants of police districts can never quite understand why there are delays in putting up buildings when they themselves know that the building concerned is pretty high up on the priority list. When there is any delay, this department is always blamed, and I think this is wrong. I want to make the plea, therefore, that provision should be made for some sort of liaison so that there will be less grousing about the Public Works Department.

Sir, this being a Vote where one cannot help but be parochial, I would like to refer the hon. the Minister to Loan Vote B, page 30: “(13) Police: New service: Brighton Beach”, where the estimated cost is shown as R860 000 and R50 only is being voted this year. I know from personal experience that this police station (the district headquarters) was approved way back in the ‘fifties, and that this item came on to the works programme in the early ’sixties. Although I do not agree that the site is perfect as police district headquarters for that complex, I know from my own personal experience, when I was looking for alternative ground, that no alternative ground was in fact available, so we have to make the best use of this site. I would like to know from the hon. the Minister why there has been this delay. After all, this is a pressing matter. The Police had to get out of the old Wentworth district headquarters because Wentworth had been declared a Coloured area, and we were chasing helterskelter for alternative accommodation. This has been going on for the last eight or nine years, and surely a much more generous sum than this measly R50 could have been set aside for this very urgent work at Brighton Beach for the new district headquarters and police station there. I hope that when the architects come to plan the police headquarters it will be aesthetically more pleasing than the present married quarters put up by the Department of Community Development. Here I take issue with his predecessor because the building put up there is just like a big red barn and nothing else.

I would also like to refer to Loan Vote B, paragraph 15, “Transport”, in connection with the Louis Botha Airport. More and more people today are using air transport and the Louis Botha Airport gives the first impression to visitors coming to Durban. Let me say here and now that for the second biggest airport in the Republic, Louis Botha is a disgrace. It is outmoded and inadequate in every respect. The staff are working there under terrible conditions and more power to their elbow for the work they are doing. It is an absolute disgrace to think that Durban, which is the busiest harbour in the Republic, if not in the whole of Africa, and handles air traffic which is second only to Jan Smuts, should have to put up with such an awful building. It is a disgrace, and I make a plea to the hon. the Minister to see that improvements are made. Here again only R50 is being expended where for the year 1972-’73 R600 000 was approved. Unlike the hon. member for Kempton Park I am afraid I cannot wax lyrical about Louis Botha Airport. I know there is talk of a new airport being built at La Mercy but it will take some years yet before La Mercy is finished. In the meantime jumbo jets are calling at Durban and there are direct charter flights from overseas. I have been there when direct charter flights from Mecca and Mauritius turned up at the same time, and all you could do was just about stand and move with the tide because the departing passengers’ baggage platform which is about 7 plus 7 plus 7 plus is absolutely inadequate. The bags of those people who are standing in the front come out last, and the bags of those standing at the back come out first. So there was quite a scramble and not a few lost tempers.

I should also like to know why R20 000 has been set aside for civil engineering services at Louis Botha whereas there is only R50 set aside for the buildings.

It is quite clear that the hon. member for Umlazi would not wax lyrical when referring to certain buildings in his constituency. I do not want to comment on that because I am not very familiar with that particular airport. However, I do want to say that whereas this Department to some extent determines the outward appearance of our State departments, i.e. what they will look like, and since this department is responsible for the public image of our State departments, and hon. members on that side of the House are not satisfied with the appearance of the public buildings in their constituencies, it is probably attributable in large measure to the lack of vision on the part of the previous Government because it is a fact that the appearance of South Africa in future is determined by what Ministers of Public Works think in this decade. If the present appearance of South Africa does not move the hon. member for Umlazi and other hon. members to wax lyrical about it, this is surely due to the lack of creative ability at the time the United Party was governing this country. If hon. members want to form an idea what the South Africa of the future will look like, they must look at the buildings which have been erected under National Party rule. I refer to the Cape Town Station, the Hendrik Verwoerd Building and all the other Government buildings which have been erected recently.

I should like to make a few general remarks about the activities of this department. Firstly, I want to make the statement that whereas at present we are dealing with inflation the productivity of all its people is one of the most important factors determining the rate of inflation in a country. I think that in this regard the Department of Public Works can play a tremendous role by helping to raise the production ability of all State departments to as high a level as possible because this department not only exercises control over the outside appearance of buildings in which Government officials have to work, but also the inside appearance of such buildings. The Department of Public Works therefore helps to determine the efficiency of the official in the work he has to perform, the time which he will waste, whether he is happy in that office or area where he has to perform his daily task, and so forth. I therefore want to make the statement that we must also view the activities of this department as one of the most important in that the efficiency of the whole of our national administration is in large measure determined by the activities of this department.

I think that this department to a large extent also determines the level of productivity of the private sector, because it is a fact that the activities of the State are so vast in extent that, to a very large extent they determine the efficiency of the private sector. If State planning is not of a nature to enable an undertaking to adjust itself to the State’s activities as well as possible, such an undertaking is necessarily placed in the position where it is unable to offer its maximum potential to the State. I therefore want to appeal to the Department of Public Works to take note of the tendency which has developed among large business undertakings in recent years. We know that during the past decade the two largest insurance companies in South Africa have moved their head-offices, which were previously in the middle of Cape Town, to the suburbs—in the case of one undertaking to Bellville and in the case of the other to Pinelands. A third large insurance group has transferred its head-office to Rondebosch. Nevertheless these large insurance groups, which really have to serve the whole of South Africa, perform their functions as efficiently, if not more efficiently, as they have in the past. They no longer have their head-offices in the large urban complexes, but the convenience of the hundreds of officials working in those buildings, the head-offices have been moved. These insurance companies have only retained branch offices in the large urban complexes to serve the public who work there. I wonder whether the Department of Public Works could not perhaps also consider the sites of the public offices, in which hundreds and sometimes thousands of officials work every day. An investigation must be carried out into the possibility of applying some degree of decentralization in this respect, too, and to assist in this respect that the thousands of officials, who have to travel from the suburbs where they live to the central city in centres like Cape Town, Durban and Pretoria and then be delayed for hours in the evening before reaching their homes, may also be afforded the opportunity to work in their own neighbourhoods. I think that in future it will be the duty of every department to find out where the majority of its officials work and whether it is essential for those officials to have their offices in any particular area. If we consider what happens in Cape Town and on De Waal Drive every morning when the roads, in spite of all the wonderful road systems have been developed, simply cannot cope with the traffic and, as a result, the central areas of the city can only be reached with great difficulty during rush hours, one wonders whether the State could not make a major contribution to greater decentralization of its activities and particularly of its buildings. I should also just like to point out that tribute should be paid to this department for the fact that it makes optimum use of the space allocated to it. In this respect I want to refer to paragraph 29, page 3, of the latest annual report in which it is stated that in the past year alone, R9½ million was saved, based on probable construction costs, through inspection of the areas which were requested for use. These inspections are carried out to ensure that the best use is always made of buildings owned by the State, as well as those it has to hire from private bodies and people.

After the Government has decided that annual surveys have to be made of available areas and whether these areas were being fully utilized by the State departments and for these facts to be reported to the Select Committee on Public Accounts, I find it remarkable that in this respect the State had a very fine and unblemished record. There were very few cases in respect of which it was able to report that available space has not been fully utilized by State departments. In this respect we as the general public must be grateful that these steps are being taken and that it is seen to it every year that each State department is utilizing the available space to the best advantage.

Since provisional estimates of their future requirements are now made by State departments on a five-yearly basis and since it is the task of the Department of Public Works to ensure that these requirements are complied with, I should like to plead that the work be distributed as evenly as possible among the professional men—by this I mean engineers, architects, quantity surveyors and so forth—of whom there is a great shortage. I am personally aware that in recent years there have been firms of architects who have kept going by commissions they received from State departments or from the provincial authorities. One is grateful that there is such a degree of advanced planning in this respect. I just want to pose the question as to whether it would not be possible for State departments to make a provisional estimate of their activities and their requirements for longer than five years to enable this department to distribute its activities and its work as evenly as possible. In this way we would not only avoid having to cope with tremendous shortages in certain years while in other years, again, tremendous pressure is exerted on the available manpower, but Government departments would also do their share to prevent the phenomenon that in years of excessive pressure, the high wages and fees demanded by professional people are so high as to push up costs to such an extent that we have a permanent escalation of building costs in South Africa. If there could be a more equitable distribution of the activities of our Government departments and if these could be so channelled by the Department of Public Works in that way, we should ensure that the disturbing rise in building prices over the past decade would not necessarily constitute the pattern of the future. In this regard I just want to point out that whereas R63 million is being voted for Public Works on the Loan Account this year, after completion of the work there will still be a balance of about R240 million. This R240 million is the approximate cost for completing the projects. This gives us only a small indication of the tremendous extent and role played by Government expenditure in regard to the erection of buildings in South Africa and of the influence it has on the rate of inflation.

Mr. Chairman, I should also like to express a few ideas similar to those expressed by the hon. member for Vasco. Before doing so, however, there is another matter I want to refer to. On page 9 of the annual report of the department it is stated in paragraph 70—

The problem here is really twofold. The first is that there is still a demand for new accommodation to be supplied because state activities are expanding. Bound up with that is the fact that existing accommodation must also be improved and the quality of existing accommodation does not contribute towards the pleasant working conditions which should exist, and that this should be improved and remedied. In the new buildings, so we have heard from hon. members, the quality is good and pleasant working conditions are provided; this is how it should be. As far as the existing accommodation is concerned, we find that it is inadequate and that the quality is poor. However, I am concerned about one aspect, and that is why I mention this matter, namely that we do not have enough regard for old buildings. By an old building I do not mean a dilapidated old building; by this I mean a building which has stood for many years, although its structure is still very sound, a very sound and solid structure, but the interior of which is no longer functional for the purpose for which it is used. The private sector in South Africa is really reckless in the demolition of old buildings and I want to plead very seriously that our department and the State should not follow its example. There are many buildings belonging to the State, buildings which are the property of the State, the interiors of which are not quite suited to their purpose. I believe that in such a case we should rather examine the interior and equip them more functionally in order to establish more pleasant working conditions there. We can achieve a great deal by doing that. We effect a saving, because often the alteration of the interior is not as expensive as the erection of new buildings. Together with that we also facilitate the task of the construction industry. The construction industry in South Africa is subject to a heavy burden and where work of this nature has to be done, it can often be done by artisans other than those employed in the construction industry. I believe that we would also retain our sense of history, because those buildings which might appear old and which, judging by their appearance, no longer fit in with the times, also have their cultural-historical significance. They are also a link with earlier periods, and we must not be a party to the thoughtless demolition of these old buildings.

I now want to come back to what I said at the beginning and which has a bearing on what was said by the hon. member for Vasco. It concerns the decentralization of government buildings. In normal life, if one has a big and strong neighbour, one can boast about it and often it is to one’s advantage. However, when it comes to cities and towns, a large and important neighbour such as this is not always to one’s advantage, and if I take my own constituency, which is situated near Johannesburg, one can detect a tendency for Johannesburg to draw everything away from the surrounding areas. The town of Germiston, which is really extended over three constituencies, namely Germiston, Germiston District and Primrose, and then, too, a small area of Brentwood, is the third largest city in the Transvaal and the sixth largest city in the Republic of South Africa. Germiston has a total population of 214 000, of whom about 86 000 are Whites. I believe that through the years the concentration of government buildings in Johannesburg has consisted mainly of regional offices, and that these have been so large that some of the surrounding areas have been neglected. If I go further and mention those things we have in Germiston which are bigger and better than anything one will find anywhere else, hon. members will perhaps believe that I come from Texas and that I am inclined to boast like those people do. But I say that I believe that there has been a tendency for the larger urban areas such as Johannesburg to draw away more of these buildings, particularly regional offices, and that there has perhaps been too great a concentration of Government buildings in those areas. One could argue that Johannesburg is easily accessible by train or by means of the new freeways, but that is where one must stop, because after one has brought the people to the city via these approaches, one is saddled with parking problems. Particularly when people are not familiar with the city, this causes a wealth of problems and there is a tendency rather not to visit regional offices. This also leads to estrangement between the public and state institutions. I believe that whereas in this case, too, decentralization can be applied on the Witwatersrand, more of the regional offices of departments should be transferred from Johannesburg and established in other areas on the Rand, inter alia, Germiston. We can lay claim to them because Germiston is a large city in its own right and we feel that such a large city, apart from hired buildings, ought to have a larger quota of its own Government buildings. The population of a city of this size also justifies such a request. But it does not only concern the local conditions; what is involved is a service to the whole of the Witwatersrand. If one considers the East Rand, there are other cities and towns which could also make use of this so that it would not be necessary for them to continue past Germiston to Johannesburg. I also believe that it would effect a saving in costs because the rentals in Johannesburg are far higher than anywhere else on the Rand. Available land in the centre of Johannesburg is naturally much more expensive anywhere else. If therefore we were to do something about this and bring about a more even distribution of Government offices, I believe that the State would save considerably in this way. I believe that the department could profitably consider this matter, as the hon. member for Vasco also requested. We must adopt a completely new approach in regard to this matter so that this decentralization we are requesting, would be to the advantage of the country and those people whom we should like to serve.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. members for Vasco and Germiston dealt with various matters concerning, mainly, decentralization and other factors affecting their particular constituencies. We on this side of the House believe that where decentralization is necessary and practical, it is a policy which should obviously be followed as far as the convenience of the public is concerned when erecting buildings for the various departments. Hon. members also mentioned the question of the efficient administration of the Department of Public Works. The hon. member for Vasco in particular dealt with this aspect. I would like to follow along similar lines, particularly with regard to some examples which I should like to quote to the hon. the Minister. I refer to the co-ordination with regard to the demands and requirements that are made by the various departments, the designing of the buildings by the Department of Public Works or by a private architect where it is under contract to him, and finally the responsibility of the Department of Public Works as far as the actual buildings are concerned. I would like to refer particularly to the building which was recently completed and which is referred to on page 25 of the Estimates—Loan Vote B “National Education”. Here we find that for additions to a technical college at Durban an amount of altogether R440 000 was approved and that an additional amount of R22 000 is now required, which is almost the last of the payments with regard to this particular project. This technical college is situated in my constituency and I took the opportunity some months ago when I was in Durban to have a look at these buildings, as they appeared to be complete, to see what has been provided for at this technical college. I must say at once that it would appear that this building was designed and erected by a person who was possibly unaware of what the requirements for this particular type of building were. I do not want to criticize the building as such, but it would appear that the designing of this building was possibly undertaken at the headquarters of the hon. the Minister’s department or possibly by an architect who was unaware of the situation of this particular technical college. There has not been a great increase in the number of White apprentices requiring training. Therefore there has not been a tremendous demand for an increase in accommodation. Yet I think 18 additional classrooms have been erected at this building, together with six magnificent chemistry laboratories and other rooms such a storerooms which go with the chemistry laboratories. In actual fact, however, one finds that chemistry is not a subject that is being studied at that technical college. In addition to that there is a storage room for inflammables. Upon inquiry I found that the only inflammable material at the technical college is the fuel mixture for the lawn-mower. Then there is a bicycle shed designed to hold some 400 bicycles. In actual fact the greatest number of bicycles on any day at the school is four. Most of the pupils are young working apprentices, nearly all of whom have motor cycles. Then last but by no means least there is a magnificent hall that can really be described as a theatre. It is fully air-conditioned and has the most elaborate and up-to-date stage lighting which one could perhaps find anywhere in the country. Now, what is this large hall used for? These apprentices are attending this technical college on the block system and are there for approximately three months to undertake a special course. One therefore wonders what on earth this theatre will be utilized for.

Nat meetings.

My colleague says “Nat meetings”. The position is that there are no cultural activities taking place there. These pupils attend the school for a short period and consequently it is hard to imagine why this theatre has been built at a technical college providing training for young apprentices. It does seem that there is some sort of lack of co-ordination between the requirements of the various departments and the designing of the additions to these buildings.

There is another matter which I wish to raise with the hon. the Minister which concerns an item on page 35 in respect of the Department of Social Welfare and Pensions, namely “Cullinan: Rehabilitation Centre”. The estimated cost is given as R1250 000, while a token amount of R50 is to be voted. I recently had the opportunity to read the first report of the National Advisory Board on Rehabilitation Matters which was established in terms of the Abuse of Dependence-producing Substances and Rehabilitation Centres Act, 1971. Since the passing of this Act there have been various statements from time to time by the hon. the Minister of Social Welfare and Pensions for greater accent to be placed on the rehabilitation of both drug-dependent persons and alcoholics. This is obviously an expansion programme at Cullinan for this rehabilitation centre. I should like to ask the hon. the Minister what progress has been made in this regard in actually establishing this rehabilitation centre. I should also like to know what progress has been made in regard to the preparation of plans in view of the footnote to page 35 which indicates that this is an approximate estimate in the absence of full particulars. I am hoping that the hon. the Minister would perhaps be able to give this Committee some additional information in respect of this amount which will eventually, according to the estimates, amount to R1¼ million. We will watch with interest any developments that will take place in regard to the establishment of the rehabilitation centres.

The other items that are being voted under Social Welfare and Pensions concern accommodation for educational purposes at the Norman House place of safety in Johannesburg. We are indeed pleased to see that the sum to be voted this year amounts to R220 000. This will allow educational facilities to be made readily available at places of safety. We have seen in the past that young children have been placed in a place of safety, often as a result of truancy or uncontrollability and that they then spend three months or more in that place of safety where there are no educational facilities available to them. So, Sir, this item is welcomed. Perhaps the hon. the Minister, in his reply, can give us an indication as to when it is anticipated that the educational facilities available at this particular place of safety will be completed and when they will come into operation, so that the limited facilities which are in existence at the present moment at that place of safety can be extended.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Umbilo posed a few pertinent matters to the hon. the Minister; accordingly I am leaving the matter at that, and will not respond any further to his address. In this illuminating report of the Department of Public Works for the financial year 1971-’72, a few paragraphs appear of which particular note should be taken, and to which, perhaps, serious attention should be given. I refer in the first place to the section concerning the architectural division, on page 4 of the report, where inter alia the following is stated—

Sir, that goes to show that the private sector benefits tremendously if they can get hold of the officials of a department. In my opinion this is also one of the reasons why there is a shortage of staff. These shortages are reflected on page 2 of the report. I go on to refer to paragraph 40, on page 4, where the following is stated—

The staff at the disposal of the department must necessarily be used for control functions instead of production functions in the department. This tendency to lose staff as a result of their joining private bodies, is a fairly serious embarrassment for the department. A large portion of the available manpower must be applied to guard the interests of the State with the result that departmental projects are detrimentally affected. Besides these two paragraphs I have just quoted, namely paragraphs 39 and 40, I also want to refer to paragraph 53 on page 6 of the report, which concerns the civil engineering section. It reads as follows—

And yet one has this startling amount. In other words, it shows that private initiative is doing quite well for itself at the expense of the department when work is farmed out to them. No wonder, then, that they are able to attract the staff of the department to their service by offering higher salaries. Sir, in the quantity surveying division the position is even more disturbing, and here I quote paragraph 62, on page 7 of the report—

It is almost sufficient to quote part of the contents of that paragraph, but one looks for the reasons why there is a shortage of staff, particularly in the technical and technological divisions and in many cases, too, in respect of bricklayers, carpenters and joiners. The reason why this state machinary is sometimes thwarted, is the reason I have just mentioned, namely the higher salaries offered by these firms which get hold of a colossal mass of work from the State and are therefore able to offer higher salaries to the Government officials. I do not think it can be said that the salary scales in the department are inadequate. The remuneration in the Public Service is good; the privileges in the Public Service are good and the conditions are not to be despised, and I also believe that the increases granted recently, might perhaps put a damper on this exodus of officials, particularly technicians and technologists, from the Department of Public Works. Sir, in my opinion there is another important reason lying at the root of this evil, and that is the artificially attractive pastures offered outside the Public Service. Sir, we need not go far from here to see what is happening. A few yards from this House there are huge buildings, which the hon. member for Germiston also referred to— colossal, solid, serviceable, well-built buildings—which must simply give way before the hammer, the bulldozer and the drill to make way for other modern buildings. This does not only happen at one place. One finds the same thing in Adderley Street and St. George’s Street and in other cities. In other words, these private firms need technicians and technologists and they entice these people away from the department by offering them higher salaries, and that in itself causes a spiral of rising costs in the form of higher salaries and so forth as compensation for those people. In this way they attract staff from the Department of Public Works to their so-called promising pastures. Sir, I think it is a crime for such solid buildings which are old but still imposing, to be demolished to become the prey of new creations which are not always better ones. I think that this technical staff, which is now leaving the department for these new pastures, should be warned. I think, too, that a formula ought to be found so that they do not leave the service of the Department of Public Works so easily to flee to a so-called better livelihood. That little fountain out there will dry up and then they will want to return to the old fountain, and then it might be too late to be re-employed at the salary they receive today. I think that we from our side should impress upon our people that the Public Service offers a good livelihood for anyone who wants to work, for anyone who is worth his salt and for anyone who wants to help to build up and extend the infrastructure of the State. Sir, with all these difficulties the department has, with all these vacancies which exist in its technical and professional sections, as many as 19 out of 24 as far as the quantity surveyors are concerned and—to come back to the hon. member for Constantia— as many as 13 superintendents of gardens out of 21, one is amazed that the department was nevertheless able to achieve such a great deal. According to the report before us, major works for more than R21 million have been tackled in the past year and major works at a cost of more than R20 million have been completed, besides a legion of other projects which have also been carried out over this period. I think that we owe deep gratitude towards the Department of Public Works, from the Secretary down to the most junior official in the department, for this wonderful work which has been done. [Time expired.]

Sir, the hon. member for Innesdal has displayed this afternoon the typical mentality of the Nationalist-indoctrinated civil servant. He stands here this afternoon and tells us that the salaries paid to the professional people in this Department of Public Works are adequate; that the conditions of work are good; that everything else is lovely, but they are still leaving the service of the department.

And you got fired.

Instead of saying, “What can we do to improve conditions and somehow to persuade these people to come back to the department,” he says: “You know what we must do, Sir? We must warn them; we must warn them that if they leave this department, they must not think that they can come back, because by the time that they want to come back we might have found somebody else to take their place.” Where is he going to find other people to fill these vacancies? Surely, Sir, the hon. member must have looked at the reports of this department over the years and have realized the problems that they are facing with staff and how short they are of staff. For him to speak, as an ex-magistrate, as he did here this afternoon, really surprised me. Was he happy with conditions when he was in the Service?

Yes. He was a loyal man.

I am sure he was not happy. The hon. member for Carletonville says that he was happy. I want to say to him that he bears out my opening phrase when I said that the hon. member displayed the mentality of the typical Nationalist brain-washed civil servant. I am very glad, Sir, that this hon. member has raised this particular subject, because it follows on what my hon. friend, the hon. member for Green Point, said when he opened this debate yesterday and drew the attention of the hon. the Minister to the shortage of staff and the difficulties under which this department is working. I want to say here and now that I believe that this department is doing a good job of work under extremely difficult conditions. It is the general dogsbody of the Public Service and every public servant who has any complaints always blames the Public Works Department. It is always the fault of the PWD, although I must admit that there has been a change since my days in the Service, because we now have a diversity of control; it is no longer only Public Works that exercises control, but it is still only Public Works that always gets the blame. Sir, I want to say to the hon. the Minister that he has a department which is doing a good job of work under difficult circumstances, but I wonder if he will not look into certain things and see if he cannot make things easier and better for the department. I refer to the diversity of control. What is the position of this department? Half the time it does now know whether it really has control or whether it should do the job, or whether it should not. Take the question of buildings. It has to erect Government buildings, offices, garages, prisons, police stations and magistrates’ offices. It is the department’s responsibility to erect buildings of that type but, Sir, it must not erect dwellings, flats or single quarters or houses for officials. All these things which used to be done by this department are now being done by the Department of Community Development.

But it goes even further than that. When it comes to bridges, certain of the bridges in this country are under the control of this department, bridges which are described as being “inter-provincial” bridges, except those connecting national roads. I know of two in Natal. In fact I can think of four in Natal connecting Natal with the Free State and Natal with the Transvaal. Only those four bridges in Natal are under the control of the department. Other bridges fall under the control of one or other of the roads’ departments, either the national roads’ department under the Department of Transport, or under one of the provincial roads’ departments. I wonder whether the time has not come for this Minister to look at this diversity of control in conjunction with his colleagues in the Cabinet, to see whether perhaps we should not return to the Public Works Department a lot of the functions it had in the old days. I believe the Minister could well spend his time in perhaps even going further than that, especially if we look at the report of the Commission of Inquiry into the Fiscal and Monetary Policy in South Africa, which reported in 1970, where we have the following passage—

In fact, this report goes so far as to suggest that there should be one department which controls all the planning, building, maintenance—everything to do with public buildings, all of them. I find support for this particular viewpoint in the report of the Secretary for Public Works for the year ended 31st March, 1971, where he points to this very question of shortage of staff, shortage of building artisans, shortage of professional people particularly and where he suggests that the Government as a whole might look into this matter and see whether it is not possible to co-ordinate all its building activities within the control of this one department.

I am sure that this would go a long way towards solving the staff problems of this particular department and other departments because then you would not have this vast diversification. We have departments which do almost all their own building at the moment. I am particularly thinking of the Department of the hon. the Minister of Bantu Administration and Development. In certain areas it does all its own work. The Minister must have in his department also quantity surveyors, architects, builders, plasterers, etc., all of which are now duplicated in the Department of Public Works. But there is one department I want to suggest to the hon. the Minister that he should leave out, and that is the Department of Prisons. You will find in the Estimates a number of amounts allocated for prison services and a note to the effect that this is for materials only, and there is nothing included for labour because the actual construction will be undertaken by the Prisons Department.

I believe that this is in the nature of rehabilitation training for prisoners and I think that this is a good thing. So, therefore, I would suggest to the hon. the Minister that he must not interfere with that section where the actual construction is undertaken by the Prisons Department because I believe it is a good thing that they should undertake it. But I sincerely feel that in this regard the hon. the Minister can take note of the comments of the Secretary of his department in the report which was tabled here last year and I think he should investigate this whole question of bringing all the control of all Government buildings under this one department.

Mr. Chairman, this afternoon in the introduction to his speech, and when commenting on the speech by the hon. member for Innesdal, the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg District once again showed us that he was very hurt and he is still hurt and suffering from frustration because he left the Public Service. I leave the hon. member at that.

I want to come to the Vote under discussion. In my humble opinion it has become urgent and imperative for us to get away from the traditional methods of building construction. It has become imperative to investigate new building methods, such as industrialized building, and to evaluate new materials and components. This is a challenge for us to move in this direction and there are good reasons for doing so.

Before dealing with that, I want to express my deepest gratitude and appreciation to the department which has, through its research and other activities, established the Agrément Council on the recommendation of the Building and Construction Advisory Council under the chairmanship of Mr. Howard, Secretary for Public Works. The aim of this Agrément Board is to evaluate industrialized building techniques as well as new materials and components.

The reason I say with conviction that we must get away from the old, traditional and conventional building methods lies, in the first instance, in the fact that when we approach the building industry from the labour point of view, we find that in our country, with its tremendous manpower shortage savings can be affected in the building industry as far as skilled labour is concerned. There is no doubt that this shortage is escalating. At the same time I have in mind the policy of the Government in regard to labour.

When we approach the matter from an economic point of view, we find that the traditional building methods are an expensive one. They cause problems because they are continually subject to tremendous wage and price increases. This means that tenderers have to make adjustments all the time. In addition, it must also be kept in mind that alternative methods could allow improved utilization of other resources and even by-products. In Natal, for example, sugarcane fibre is used for panels for interior work. Furthermore, there is a wood and plastic mixture which is very hard and can even be used for exterior work.

I now come to a very delicate matter and that concerns the question of health. In my constituency we have very serious problems because we have seven very large brickworks there. One of these brickworks produces face bricks. In the area between those two ridges which prevent the smoke from dispersing, columns of black smoke are discharged into the atmosphere. I say that those columns are discharged into the atmosphere. If we are to go on in this way for many more years, I do not know what the outcome will be.

I thought that we might apply ourselves to the manufacture of raw bricks, but I am told that large quantities of gas are pumped into the atmosphere when these bricks are produced. These gases and smoke do not disperse.

One of the important reasons why I say with conviction that we must move in the direction of industrialized building, is that these problems of tremendous air pollution will be eliminated in this way. Conditions would be greatly improved for our people in the Moot. We have already considered and tested all kinds of methods of getting rid of this problem of air pollution.

Order! The hon. member must come back to the Vote under discussion.

With respect, Sir, I am dealing with the Vote.

Order! No, the hon. member must come back to the Vote.

I say, therefore, that we are faced with a challenge in the field of industrialized building, and that is why I welcome the industrialized building methods investigated by the Agrément Board. When we consider this matter from an aesthetic viewpoint, we have in mind the damage that is being done to the environment. This again is a challenge to consider industrialized building methods and to promote industrialized building methods as much as we can. Then we consider the fact that the manufacture of face-brick and ordinary brick is locality bound. This …

Order! The hon. member must discuss matters falling under the Vote “Public Works” and not building construction in general.

Mr. Chairman, with respect, I am dealing with industrialized building methods and that falls under this Vote and under the Department of Public Works.

Order! No, it does not fall under that.

I want to convey my best wishes to Prof. Louw, the chairman of the Agrément Council, who is now visiting Israel to investigate certain matters. I want to wish him and his council everything of the best; I hope they will make a success of that tour. In his recommendation to the Minister, Mr. Howard said that the reason for Prof. Louw’s overseas visit, was the following (translation)—

I want to wish these people success in their research on industrialized building in South Africa because we can only benefit by it.

Mr. Chairman, this is the first opportunity I have of bringing matters to the attention of this Minister in his new capacity as Minister of Public Works. In the past I crossed swords with him when he was still a Deputy Minister, but I hope that he will be less sensitive in the new position he occupies and that I will not make things as uncomfortable for him as I did in the past. In any event, I congratulate him on his appointment to the new post and I hope he will make a success of it.

†I want to deal with an item under subhead G on page 224 whereby an amount of R196 000 is voted for financial assistance to the Simonstown Municipality. I would like to ask the hon. the Minister what that aid to the Simonstown Municipality is and I would like to express the hope in anticipation of a favourable reply, that it would be to assist the municipality in providing recreational facilities not only for its own use but also for the servicemen in the town of Simonstown.

While I am dealing with the provision of funds for buildings in Simonstown, I want to ask the hon. the Minister to request his department to give the most careful consideration to the type of building that they erect in that historic old town. As hon. members know, Simonstown has roots that go deep into the past, and there is a move afoot on the part of an historical society that has recently been formed in Simonstown, to try to preserve the historic buildings in the main street. The hon. the Minister’s department is in fact building enormous buildings in Simonstown. That is necessary, of course, because it is the naval base. I would ask him and his department, however, to give very careful consideration to the type of building they erect in Simonstown and that when they erect these buildings they should see to it that these buildings fit into the general geography and the aesthetic beauty of Simonstown. I think this is an important matter. So far, the buildings that have been erected by the department have generally been well received and accepted as being necessary.

I want to congratulate the department on several buildings which they have erected in the Simonstown constituency. I particularly refer to the submarine pens and to the tidal basin in the Dock Yard. The tidal basin seems to be taking a bit more time than we had hoped but I would like to pay tribute to the hard work, detailed and technical work, that have been done by the department in providing the submarine pens and tidal basin. I also want to pay tribute to the department for the erection of the submarine headquarters, known as the “Submariners Hilton” in Simonstown. Judging from reports I have had from officers who use that accommodation, they are very satisfied with it and I think it is appropriate to pay tribute to the department for the planning of that building and to express the hope that further buildings that they erect in Simonstown will be of the same calibre and of the same standard.

I would also like to refer to the maritime communications headquarters at Westlake the opening of which I had the privilege to attend recently. I know the department played a large role in the erection of that very important structure, and here again I should like to pay tribute to them, a tribute which was also paid by all those who were present at the opening of those headquarters.

Under the heading “Defence” there is reference to an amount of R2 million which is to be spent in the naval village of Da Gama Park. I am assuming that that is for the building of the new Simonsberg, the old Simonsberg having become inadequate. If I am correct in that assumption, I want to ask the hon. the Minister to give his personal attention to the necessity of providing facilities not only for the new building that they are going to erect at Da Gama Park, but also for the other residences at Da Gama Park. They have no recreational facilities there whatsoever. They have no recreation hall, no swimming bath, and no sportsfield. Yet there must be something like 300 families living at Da Gama Park, providing the bulk of the naval men serving in the Fleet.

On page 11 oí the report reference is made to the erection of a maximum security prison near Pollsmoor. The hon. the Minister will perhaps not be aware of this, but the planning of this maximum security prison has been a very contentious issue between the department, various land-owners’ associations and the divisional council, which is the local authority with responsibility for the area. The Department of Prisons has decided to go ahead with the plans to build this maximum security prison, and there is actually a considerable sum on the estimates to provide for the initial building of that prison. I want to tell the Minister that that building is going to be an enormous structure. It is either three or four storeys high and it overlooks a very well-built and proud little township, Annaty Bank, at Retreat, which has been there for some time. I think it can be argued that the plans for that township were perhaps passed in error by the local authority, because it is so very close to the prison grounds, but I do not for a moment think that the local authority thought that the Prisons Department would erect a maximum security prison of three or four storeys high immediately adjacent to a quiet residential area. In fact, this building is. I should think, nearly twice as high as the building we are in now, and it is to overlook within something like 20 feet the nearest houses in this residential area. I want to ask him if it is not even at this late stage possible to give consideration to the resiting of this maximum security prison. I know that the area has been levelled and that parking spaces are already being provided, and I think they have even gone so far as to lay pipes, but even at this late stage I want to ask him if it is not possible to resite that maximum security building on the other side of the present prison. There is plenty of ground there. The only argument that remains is who is going to pay the wasted cost for the planning of the present maximum security prison. We have tried to get the local authority concerned to make its contribution, but they are short of funds. But if the Minister places any value on the beauty of the Constantia valley and on the fact that there are already erected townships in the area, in areas which have traditionally and historically been wine-growing areas, he would even at this stage give consideration to the re-siting of this prison. The land is available; there is no question about that. I think it is a case of a certain amount of red tape. If he cuts through that red tape, he will earn himself a name which will be very greatly respected by people who have an affection for the beauties of that part of the Peninsula. If, however, it is not possible to resite that prison, I want to ask the hon. the Minister if he would give his attention to the possibility of providing fences and hedges between the security prison and the residential township on which it borders. I think it is possible to beautify it to the extent that any enormous structure such as it can be beautified. It may also be possible to provide access to that building on the other side of the building away from the township. I have a suspicion that at least one of the entrances to the building will be between the building itself and the township. I think the Minister should give his attention to that. I am sure he will appreciate that this building is going to result in an enormous depreciation of the houses in this township which adjoins this maximum security prison. Quite apart from the depreciation of property, there is a very real fear that exists among young married couples who live in this township—a new township—of having a maximum security prison on their borders. They are also worried about the disturbance of the peace and quiet that they have enjoyed to an extent up to now. Even in the existing buildings they have what they call choir practice in the evening. I am sure the hon. the Minister is not familiar with these things, but they do have choir practice in prisons between about 5.30 p.m. and 7.30 p.m. and the people in the township can hear the voices of the prisoners even from the present buildings which are at least 300 yards or 400 yards away from the township to which I am referring. So much worse will it be when the maximum security prison is built on the boundary of that township. I must ask the hon. the Minister please to give his attention to this situation.

Mr. Chairman, today is the first opportunity we have had to see the new Minister acting in this capacity. We want to wish him every success in this important task with which he has been entrusted and which he has to fulfil here in South Africa. We hope and trust that our co-operation with him will be as pleasant as it was in the past with the other Ministers who were in charge of this department. I want to congratulate the department on the two fine terminal buildings erected at two airports in South Africa. To begin with I want to refer to the fine building at the Jan Smuts Airport at Kempton Park.

The member for Kempton Park has already referred to that.

That has nothing to do with it. I can also put my own case if I want to. The hon. member may also have dealt with the matter. I just want to say that I think that people who have travelled overseas, may congratulate South Africa on these buildings. We need take a backseat to no one in the world as far as these two buildings at the Jan Smuts airport and D. F. Malan are concerned. They are as fine as any technical building to be found in the rest of the world.

I want to come back to another aspect of these buildings. I want to congratulate the department and the Minister in particular on the beautiful works of art in these buildings. Many of our people will certainly also be critical of these works of art; all people cannot always agree about all works of art, or have the same opinion about them. However, I want to congratulate the department because it has made a start at these buildings with something for which I want to plead here this afternoon, and that is that as regards all public buildings we erect in South Africa, we should earmark a percentage of their construction costs for the installation of works of art in those buildings. We in South Africa have a large number of very promising and budding young artists. These people have just as much of a right to earn a living in South Africa as has the bricklayer, the carpenter, any tradesman or anyone else in South Africa. Here we have a golden opportunity to allow those people to sell their works of art. I want to plead here today for this to be done. R305 000 was spent in respect of the works of art at Jan Smuts airport. This is a large amount which has gone into the pockets of those men and women who are not always very well off. We know that the artist in South Africa finds it very difficult to make a living. I think that is the moral duty of the State which provides employment to our citizenry to ensure that a chance and an opportunity be created for those people to offer their work. I am pleased and grateful for the fact that this is being done.

There is another matter which I want to deal with. Hon. members may tell me that it is a “hardy annual”. However, I shall press on with the matter until I see something being done about it. I want to talk about the planning of the area surrounding the Parliamentary buildings. We raised this matter with the previous Minister. He praised to go into the matter once more, but today I want to bring it to the attention of the present Minister, too. At that time there was talk of Marks Building being demolished up to Plein Street and another giant building complex being erected. I think that in what I want to say I am speaking on behalf of the majority of the citizens of Cape Town. I am not merely speaking on behalf of people accommodated in a certain complex here. I am speaking now as a citizen of South Africa who would like to see that our Parliamentary buildings are situated in surroundings which do them justice. Today Parliament is situated on a small piece of ground cooped in on both sides. If it were not for the Gardens on the western side, we would have had nothing but a concrete jungle around us. Here is an opportunity for us to do something of real value. If this building has to be demolished one day—I do not say we must do so now because I do not think we can afford it now—the garden on the eastern side of this building must be extended. Only then will full justice be done to this Parliamentary building of ours. An attractive garden could be laid out there and if we display a little imagination there could be an attractive link-up between this building and Plein Street. That is why I am pleading that this matter be given the necessary attention so that proper planning of the area can be done. I do not know what progress has been made with the plans in regard to the other building or whether any expenses have already been incurred. If any expenses have already been incurred we could profitably try to transfer that building to the site we possess on the southern side of Stal Plein.

Are you suggesting that Marks Building be demolished?

If it were decided one day to demolish Marks Building, I just want to plead that this site should not be used for the construction of another multi-storey building. Some planning must be undertaken so that the garden space around Parliament buildings may be expanded.

The hon. member for Hercules referred to the Agrément Board. I want to ask for one thing to be done. Those of us who have any experience of approval which has to be granted by the Agrément Board, are a little concerned about one thing, i.e. the tremendously long time taken by this board before approval is granted for one building, article or another. The Agrément Board operates on instructions it receives from overseas. A great number of the articles used in the building industry today are articles which have already been approved by the Agrément Board in Europe and other places. If that same article is manufactured in South Africa under licence, I fail to see why we should go through this whole process of approval once again. If that article was brought to this country and it had already been approved overseas by an Agrément Board existing there, I think we should grant some sort of automatic approval in regard to that article in South Africa, because here we operate in accordance with those very same instructions. I therefore want to plead that this be done, Sir.

Mr. Chairman, I shall simply begin at the beginning and refer in the first place to the observations made here by the hon. member for Green Point. He congratulated me on my appointment to this post, as various other hon. members also did. I want to express my appreciation in regard to that. What I want to express my appreciation for in particular are the friendly comments in regard to the work of my department which were made by virtually all the members who participated in this debate. I should like to express my appreciation for that on behalf of the officials of my department who are concerned in that work. A particular case which I have in mind, for example, is the Jan Smuts Airport, which was mentioned by the hon. member for Green Point and also by other hon. members. It has come to my knowledge that some of the officials of the department overtaxed their strength to achieve the results there, and for that reason I am pleased that it is not going unnoticed.

Sir, when I was appointed to this post, I was aware of the popular criticism which is levelled in general at the Department of Public Works. It is virtually a general occurrence, and we are aware of this. It is perhaps as a result of the fact that the work of this department is probably more in the public eye than the work of most other Government departments. Everyone sees what is happening in this connection all the time. It puts me in mind of the advocate who said to the doctor: “It is easy for you to talk; you bury your mistakes, but mine are hung.” Perhaps this is to a large extent the case here.

The hon. member for Green Point asked whether a more realistic view should not be taken of the staff requirements and the composition of the establishment. The position in that regard is that Public Service inspections are carried out from time to time. Creating posts on the establishment in respect of which there is no possibility that they will be filled is guarded against as far as possible. But in spite of that, with circumstances as they are today, the position cannot be avoided that there will be vacancies. Other hon. members also referred to this, but it is perhaps unavoidable that we should set our sights higher than what we really expect to achieve. The hon. member then referred to the personnel manager, to whom the Secretary for Public Works referred in his previous annual report and who is no longer there. I have the comment of the Secretary here; he said—

I think that replies to the question raised by the hon. member.

The hon. member then referred to advance planning for a period of five years. He spoke of a time lag of possibly five to six years, and he referred to the original estimate of R224 million, while the eventual figure was R365 million. I think that advance planning over a long period—the aim at present is five years—undoubtedly increases the efficiency and the effectiveness of the department. I think it is a good measure. Another hon. member also recommended it and, in fact, recommended planning even further in advance. I do not think I would furnish the hon. member with a more adequate reply on this difference than to refer him to the comment made by the Secretary in the foreword to his annual report. I think that a very clear explanation of the reasons for the difference between these two amounts is furnished there.

Sir, I have already referred to the Jan Smuts building, on which the hon. member congratulated the department. In respect of his comments on works of art in public buildings, I agree with him completely, in so far as it is realistic and possible. In any case I think it is realistic, when one is dealing with a building which costs R1 million or even a few million rand, to spend a few hundred thousand rand on works of art to enhance the appearance of the building. As far as I know it is already being done to a reasonable extent. I have now raised the matter to which the hon. member for Langlaagte also referred. I can give both members the assurance that I am sympathetically disposed towards this matter. One will find of course, as normally happens with works of art, that some people will accept the work of art with great acclamation as being something wonderful, while other people will say it is a monstrosity.

And the Minister is in the middle.

Yes, the Minister will be in the middle, as the Minister was for example in respect of the Pritchard sculpture at the Civitas Building, to which the hon. member for Green Point also referred. The only reply I can give the hon. member at this stage is that that sculpture will, as anticipated, be erected on a suitable podium in the Civitas Building in December of this year.

In addition the hon. member referred to the unsightliness of the parking area at the top end of Stal Plein, and also to the position of the old Marks Building. Sir, planning in this direction is in progress, and three phases are being envisaged. The first phase will be the replacement and the renovation of the section at the back of Marks Building, which is an older and more unsightly section. With the second phase the front section of Marks Building, which we can see from here, will be dealt with. In this connection I could perhaps refer at the same time to what hon. members said here about the demolition—the reckless demolition, as one hon. member termed it— of old buildings. In that connection I can say that in my discussions with the Secretary to the Department of Public Works, I had doubts concerning the question of whether it is necessary to demolish this building, which in my opinion is still a very sturdy building. The department is of the opinion that it is necessary; that it will have to be replaced. That is the situation at present. Then there is the third phase. This brings us to the parking area to which the hon. member also referred, i.e. that underground parking, with gardens above, is being envisaged, which would then improve the appearance of the area in front of the State President’s residence considerably. But it will be rather a long time before this is accomplished.

The hon. member then referred to financial assistance to municipalities in regard to rates, and he referred the figure which was increased from R2,4 million to R2,9 million. All I can tell him is that my department does not really have much control over this. An agreement is reached between the Treasury and the municipal executive authorities on what the amount will be which will have to be paid to them.

It is not pegged; it is considered every year, not so?

Yes, it is considered every year. I shall come to that. In any case, at this stage my department and I know nothing of any idea of this being pegged. The other question which the hon. member put concerned the subsidizing of Simonstown. The additional subsidy was paid as a result of sewerage works constructed there. That work has now been disposed of.

Then the hon. member for Kempton Park, who apologized for not being able to be here today, raised the question of Kruger House in Switzerland, of greater publicity for that House; he also referred briefly to Kruger House in Pretoria and the problems experienced by the public there. Kruger House in Switzerland is in fact under the control of the Ambassador in Switzerland. My department makes certain provision in his estimates for the maintenance there. My information is that the maintenance is good and the building is sound. As for publicity in this connection, that is more a matter for the Departments of Information and of Foreign Affairs, and consequently I cannot comment on this matter any further. The matter should be brought to their attention. As for the house in Pretoria, the position is that when the long-term planning of the Department of Community Development, to which reference was made, is implemented—and it will be quite some time before this is done —and Kruger Square is established there as envisaged, full justice will be done to Kruger House in Pretoria and also to the Kruger Church. The hon. member then went on to express appreciation for the standard of buildings which are being constructed.

The hon. member for Constantia raised a question in regard to “Constantia” and also “Hoop op Constantia”. In this connection I received notes from my department which read as follows (translation)—

This is “Hoop op Constantia”—

In addition, as far as Groot Constantia is concerned, the hon. member would probably find it interesting to know that this building is also a declared institution and as such the maintenance thereof is also being done by the department. Consequently, the gardens are also the responsibility of the department. Over the years a great deal has been done to preserve the oak avenues there, and new trees have been planted regularly. The old existing oak trees are becoming more and more diseased, which is aggravated by drought conditions as we are having this year. Because so many of the old trees are dying, a nursery was established approximately 15 years ago for the specific purpose of cultivating enough trees to plant at Groot Constantia. These trees are now big enough to be transplanted, and the first trees from the nursery will be planted in July and August of this year. I think that answers the questions put by the hon. member in regard to these two buildings.

The hon. member for Piketberg presented a plea, inter alia, for the preservation of the aesthetic or architectural beauty. I think I can give him the assurance that my department is trying, within the limits of what is practicable, to preserve these qualities as far as it is a realistic proposition, as was also testified to by means of certain comments which were made during the course of this debate.

As regards the awarding of contracts on a divided basis, to which he also referred, I have been informed that the position has been reconsidered and the suggestions which he made are, for all practical purposes at least, the present practice. In future therefore there will be a form of more unified contract.

The hon. member for Umlazi referred to Loan Vote B, and in that context he discussed Brighton Beach. The position in that regard is that the service is in the planning stage. It is expected that it will be possible to call for tenders in January, 1974. The tender period is estimated at 24 months. I think that answers the hon. member’s question. It may therefore be expected that by the end of 1976, or perhaps a little later because of the waiting period for tenders, etc., great progress will have been made with that project, or it may possibly have been completed.

The hon. member also referred to the Louis Botha airport. The date on which tenders will be called for in this connection as well has been set at January, 1974. Attempts are being made to expedite the work as much as possible.

In regard to his ideas on the relations between departments, I have the following remark to make: Departments are advised on the progress on each and every project. I must be honest in my reply to the hon. member and say that it was not quite clear to me what he was trying to get at.

I can also point out that I obtained the following information from the department in regard to the hon. member’s remarks on the Louis Botha airport: Engineering services are continuing in order to be ready at the time of the erection of the building. The services include the provision of roads and groundworks which must be done before the erection of the building.

The hon. member for Vasco referred to the question of the decentralization of public buildings, as well as to the question of advance planning for a longer period than five years. I think we agree that such planning, if it were practicable, would enhance efficiency. I can point out that our system of advance planning for five years is at this stage reasonably practical.

The hon. member for Germiston also referred to the question of the decentralization of State buildings. This is a matter which, in my opinion, can be discussed in great detail and at great length. However, I believe that the main object with the erection of State buildings should be that old, hackneyed adage which nevertheless contains a profound truth, viz. that one should establish the services in such a way that they will be to the greatest benefit of the largest number of members of the community. In my opinion it would not be very realistic to establish buildings where they will be readily accessible to certain officials who have to work there, for the officials usually live at different places throughout the city. They are transferred from time to time and replaced by other officials. In addition our officials sometimes move from one suburb to another. I think we should proceed from the assumption that buildings should be situated where we can derive the maximum service and benefit from them, taking into account such considerations as the availability of land, the availability of sites, the cost of the sites, etc.

The hon. member for Germiston referred to the reckless demolition of old buildings. I have already given him the assurance that I share his feelings in this regard, in fact, the Department of Public Works already knows where my sentiments lie. In the Public Service we have the strange situation that we are confronted in such a way by facts and statistics that sentiment frequently has to bow to hard reality.

The hon. member for Umbilo referred to the Durban Technical College, and as I understood him, he wanted to imply that the provision made was excessive. In that connection I can only say that the planning, the advanced planning, and everything relating to that, is done in the first place by an inter-departmental committee and that the department which has to state the requirements, is the department which will make use of the services. In this case it was the Department of National Education which had the greatest say, and they had to indicate what their requirements were. My department is the supply department and has to provide what the department which is going to make use of the facilities requests.

Was the architect from the Department of Public Works?

Yes, but the architect has to comply with the requirements set by the department which is going to occupy the building. They therefore have the final say as far as these matters are concerned. My department of course gives technical advice by virtue of its technical experience, as far as this is practicable. From the experience I have gained in public life, I must say that I wonder whether the hon. member for Umbilo was not perhaps a little hasty in his judgment. Experience has taught me that one thinks there is too much accommodation when the building is opened, but that one very soon finds that the accommodation is not adequate.

The hon. member for Umbilo then put questions in regard to certain buildings belonging to the Department of Social Welfare and Pensions. The hon. member raised the question of the buildings at Edenvale, if I understood him correctly. As far as accommodation for educational purposes is concerned, the position in that case is that the tenders have just been accepted and that the construction period is estimated to be nine months. As for the swimming bath and the sports facilities at Edenvale, no tenders have been received and the period over which tenders may submitted has been extended. The period estimated for the construction of those facilities, is also nine months.

The hon. member also put a question in regard to Cullinan.

The rehabilitation centre there.

This is in its planning stage, and the tenders were called for last month. The construction period is estimated at 15 months.

The hon. member for Innesdal devoted most of his speech to the shortage of staff which is being experienced in the department. I think he was speaking on the basis of the years of experience he acquired in the Public Service. I want to inform the hon. member that, to a large extent, I agree with what he had to say about the shortage of staff. The following is a standpoint which I, too, have frequently stated, and one which I do not hesitate to state again here today in spite of the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg District, viz. that when things are very attractive and look very attractive outside the Public Service, people are sometimes very frequently and very easily inclined to leave the Public Service. However, they lose sight of the stability of the Public Service. Conditions outside do not always remain as attractive as they may have been on the day when that person was enticed away from the Service. There is no threat in this statement; it is quite simply a fact and the reality of the situation. When conditions outside, in the private sector, begin to deteriorate, those persons must realize that they are not going to enjoy the same stability and security with the private concern as they would have in the Public Service. It is simply sensible of people in the Public Service to take this into account, and that is what the argument of the hon. member for Innesdal amounted to. I think that what should also be said here, while we are discussing this situation, is to mention the loyalty of highly qualified and very competent people in the Public Service, people who could walk out and earn higher salaries—as administrative person or professional person or whatever their position is. Out of loyalty to the State and to the Service, and in the realization that there is work which has to be done, they remain on in the Service. I think all of us could quite easily mention the names of persons whom we know could walk out of the Public Service and be better off, financially speaking, than they are in the Public Service today.

I think this fact also deserves to be mentioned.

The hon. member for Pietermaritzburg District found fault with the speech made by the hon. member for Innesdal. In this debate, which was relatively free of political scavenging, he could not resist the temptation of doing this in any case. If a person gives way to such a temptation, one will probably have to forgive him.

Then, too, the hon. member raised the question of divided control over construction works. I want to inform the hon. member at once that this matter is under consideration. In fact, it is under consideration as a result of that passage from the report of the Secretary for Public Works which I quoted. I can inform him that there are more problems in this connection than may appear on the surface. I do not want to go into this in detail now, for nothing is to be achieved by doing so. However, the matter is problematical; it is not easy simply to include everything under one department. I could mention just one example. There are for example the provincial administrations, each with its own public works department. The S.A. Railways also have a large “Public Works” division, if one could call it that. Apart from that there are budgeting problems as well. All those problems cannot simply be ironed out all that easily. The hon. member also mentioned the example of Prisons which undertake their own construction work with a view to useful objectives and other considerations which enter the picture. The hon. member for Hercules commented on research in the building industry, to which I want to refer with appreciation, and in regard to which I should also like to convey my compliments to the Agrément Council, and also to the National Building Research Institute of the C.S.I.R., because the department has a great deal to do with the work of these bodies. Today I want to emphasize particularly the work which is being done by the National Building Research Institute, and say a few words about it. One need only make a few elementary calculations to realize at once how important the work of this institute is. For example it is calculated that construction work in South Africa today amounts to approximately R2 000 million per annum. People who have knowledge of this matter estimate that by the end of this century construction work in South Africa will total R10 000 million per annum. Then one might as well make a calculation: If the Building Research Institute through its research, the work which it is doing, could find a way of saving on building costs to only a small percentage, say 1%, the saving when this is calculated over a period of years, say for example to the end of this century, is a simply fantastic amount. That shows how important this institution is. The same applies to a very large extent to the work of the Agrément Council, which enables us to construct cheaper buildings, with the assurance that the buildings have withstood the test.

The hon. member for Simonstown also congratulated me on my appointment, and in the process paid himself a few compliments. Since we are dishing out compliments and wishing one another well, perhaps I could wish him the following: That in the new capacity in which we will now cross swords, he will encounter fewer mishaps than was previously the case. The hon. member put certain questions and made certain observations in regard to which I have subsequently obtained certain information. As far as assistance to the municipality of Simonstown is concerned, I have been informed that the amount for which provision was made was intended as compensation in regard to tax on Government buildings. In regard to this the hon. member could look at subhead G on page 224 of the Estimates. The amount given there is R196 000.

As far as the Pollsmoor prison is concerned, the position is that it is no longer possible to alter it. I would prefer not to use the term the die has been cast, for it could perhaps create the impression that a tremendous error has been made, and I do not want to insinuate that. The tender for the construction of the building has already been awarded. A tender for approximately R3 million has been accepted. It is no longer possible to construct the prison on another site. We are on the point of commencing the construction, and the fruitless expenditure which the replanning of the building would entail, would be tremendous. That the hon. member may himself infer from the amount of the tender.

R100 000.

The Divisional Council of the Cape also addressed representations in this regard a few years ago, but we did not see our way clear to carrying the fruitless expenditure which would have had to be incurred even at that stage. In addition I want to say that shady and rapidly-growing trees and shrubs will in fact be planted on the boundary between the residential area and the prison. A few months ago a submission was made to me in regard to which it was then decided not to buy out any private residences. At this stage I do not want to say more about this than is necessary, but it is also a fact that many of the people who own private residences there and who are complaining today, moved in there when it was a well-known fact that it would become a prison site and that a prison would be built there. That is the information I have at my disposal. In some cases the people knew very well what the position there would be.

The hon. member for Langlaagte pleaded for the promotion of the aesthetic. He also referred to Marks Building. He would prefer to see a garden rather than a building there. I think a garden there would be more attractive than looking out at a concrete structure. I want to express my appreciation for his fine idea. It will be borne in mind, but whether his suggestion will be able to withstand the test of practical consideration, is a question to which the answer will gradually have to be found.

Votes agreed to.

Revenue Vote No. 34, Loan Vote K and S.W.A. Vote No. 20.—“Community Development”:

Mr. Chairman, may I have the privilege of the half-hour? We had a pleasant and quiet discussion with the hon. the Minister on the Vote Public Works. I think we are now going to leave those placid waters and enter into waters which are a little more turbulent. There are a number of matters of importance about which we would like to seek information from the hon. the Minister. We would also ask for certain explanations of certain matters which have taken place within this department.

The department has grown considerably. The latest report before us indicates, for instance, that the National Housing Fund now stands at R603 million, the Community Development Fund at R136¼ million, while the buildings in possession of the Community Development Board in respect of properties owned in our residential and business areas in South Africa total a purchase price of R122 599 724. It is therefore no exaggeration to say that this Department of Community Development is now perhaps the biggest property owner, townships developer, landlord and rent collector in the whole of the Republic of South Africa. According to figures in the latest report, properties were purchased during the year for an amount of R10 million, while at the same time they found it necessary to sell property to the extent of R6¼ million. The rent collected from various properties under the control of this department totalled R2 353 000. Now, Sir, I do not believe that this has led to a healthy state of affairs. The State, armed with powers of expropriation, is in a most favourable position when it comes to the acquisition of property. Too many properties have been acquired by this department. Too many properties have been acquired either by purchase or by negotiation with the threat of expropriation always looming, which have proved to be unnecessary and unwanted, only to be resold by this department. This information has come out in reply to questions which have been put on the Order Paper during this session. When those properties are resold, even if resold by tender, the profit does not accrue to the original owner who was deprived of his property, but goes into the coffers of the State, at the expense of the original owner. I do not propose in the time at my disposal to deal with that aspect in great detail. Other members who will speak will ask for explanations in regard to specific cases where that has happened and where there has been a profit-taking, because property which was not necessary has been acquired by the department. Then there are also delays in the development of properties that are acquired, which we believe are to a great extent unreasonable.

I want to deal with the question of housing. Today when we consider housing it is necessary, apart from considering the requirements and needs of the different race groups in this country, that we also have to approach the question of the availability of housing to certain categories within the White group of our people. One has what is termed the sub-economic one. Then we also have the so-called economic one, where applicants are assisted to a certain ceiling of annual income. The next group is that of public servants and members of State organizations such as Iscor and so on, who are entitled to 100% bonds and an interest subsidy for the acquisition of homes. Then, Sir, one realizes—and this is apparent from the Estimates which we have before us—that a vast building programme is taking place to provide housing for public servants such as those in the Defence Force, for instance. The hon. the Minister of Defence said in this House that it was his aim that every member of the Defence Force should be housed by the Department of Defence. Such housing will, of course, be provided by the Department of Community Development.

A large spectrum of the White population find themselves in favourable circumstances, and I want to say at once that I believe that in the case of the sub-economic group particularly, and also in the case of the low-level economic income group, progress has been made. I give credit to the department for this progress which has been made. The backlog in respect of this income group has pretty well been made up. It has been made up in certain areas, although not entirely … [Interjection.] Yes, I am dealing of course entirely with the position as far as Whites are concerned. I am not referring to the other race groups.

Then one looks at the next sector that is concerned here, namely the public sector where the home-owners’ saving scheme is theoretically available. Here the Building Society/National Housing Commission joint scheme is available, which provides 90% bonds. But, Sir, there is then the residual public at large. I concede that there has been a marked improvement in the last decade as regards housing for Whites who are eligible for National Housing Commission assistance, and that there has been great expansion in housing for State employees. There is also the hope that further alleviation will be provided now that the brain-child of the hon. member for Pinetown and the hon. member for Parktown, namely sectional title, is a reality. There is the possibility of a further alleviation of the problem as far as Whites are concerned because of sectional titles not only in the case of flats, but also in the case of cluster-housing. I also believe that there has been a levelling-off—one must be realistic in looking at the figures that are available—in the actual cost of construction of what one might call the “cottage” type of home. I think one finds that there is a levelling-off in the prices of these properties. The steep increases that were taking place, seem to be slowing down.

But, Sir, even with these improvements, the limits which are imposed in regard to building society bonds, the ceilings applicable to bonds that can be obtained under the home-owners’ scheme and the ceilings which are applied to the economic sector of the White population are still unrealistic; they are still too low, in spite of some measure of relief which was announced by the hon. the Minister of Finance in the Budget this year. We also have the problem that an income limit has been laid down in respect of the home-owners’ saving scheme. This scheme is limited to those whose income does not exceed R500 per month. With the rising cost of living it is impossible for these persons to save the money to enable them to qualify for the home-owners’ saving scheme’s subsidies on interest. One finds that, in the case of this particular group of persons, who are not within the scheme of the Public Service, far too many of our young married people in this country are having to pay rents, or bond and interest payments, in excess of 20% or 25% of their monthly income. That could still be alleviated; we have suggested over and over again that there should be an income tax deduction in respect of money paid towards home purchases, in other words, on the interest paid and the redemption payments on bonds. There should be some alleviation in this regard for tax purposes. The hon. the Minister of Finance has not seen fit to grant this.

I am sure that the Deputy Minister of Finance, seeing that he is listening so intently, will no doubt ask for this in the right quarters when he discusses financial matters with the Minister of Finance. I believe that that is something which can count. We welcome the reductions that have been announced in respect of transfer duty. This is something we have asked for year after year, as an obvious means of helping these people in the acquisition of homes. But it takes so long to get these things into the skulls of the members opposite.

One thing that amazes me is to find that, in terms of the 1966 Act, which provides for the 90% loan scheme through building societies, where the National Housing Commission guarantees a certain amount to the building societies, only 79 loans of this type were taken up during the year 1971. What is the reason for that? Has sufficient publicity not been given to this scheme, or is it the fact that the limitations regarding the income groups are such that it is not really worthwhile to the persons who should benefit from this particular scheme?

Sir, when I talk about improvements in housing generally for the White people, I believe that we in this country owe a tremendous debt of gratitude to the property development companies that are operating in this country. We owe a debt of gratitude to them because they are able to do what this Government will not do, and has not done. Even although they operate on a profit motive, they have been able to offer homes to the general public at a very low deposit. In other words, a young family is able to obtain a house at a reasonable price. It is a competitive price, admittedly, but they are able to acquire that house with a low deposit on the strength of their own standing and not because, as is required in the case of Government departments, they have mortgaged a pension fund or pledged some other fund. If the private sector can make these offers, then I see no reason why this 90% scheme which is provided for by the 1966 Act should not be made available to all and sundry who wish to avail themselves of that scheme, provided their earning power is such that they are able to meet the required repayments.

I believe that we must look also at the position of flat construction. At the present moment there is no incentive to any property owner to build flats which can be let at rentals which people in the middle income group can afford. The costs are high and there is no incentive whatsoever for persons to build that type of flat complex. There is a great deal of building of luxury flats going on. The incentive I have pleaded for, which I have asked the hon. the Minister of Finance to consider, and which has been and is being asked for by the South African Property Owners’ Association, is the introduction of a depreciation allowance which will be deductable, for income tax purposes, by the person who builds such a block of flats. Sir, all that I suggest is that we apply to the construction of blocks of flats the same principle that is applied and has been applied so successfully to encourage the building of hotels for our tourist industry in South Africa. Sir, this is not a question of evasion of tax; it is merely a question of delaying the day when that tax has to be paid.

Sir, while I am discussing blocks of flats I want to turn to the question of the Rents Act. For the life of me I cannot understand why the hon. the Minister continues to drag his feet when it comes to taking action under the Rents Act. Many injustices are being perpetrated every day by unscrupulous landlords. Last August, nine months ago, the hon. the Minister made a statement in the Press to the effect that if he found anything awry, he would act immediately. Sir, we have not seen any action; nothing has been done. The Johannes Commission was appointed in December, 1971. The Minister has had that report in his possession since, I believe, December, 1972, but he refuses to publish it. He keeps it like a poker-player, holding the cards to his chest, and nobody can see what is in this report. He produces no legislation to give effect to any recommendations contained in the report, and I cannot believe for one moment that there are no recommendations in the report of the Johannes Commission. Sir, I want to say to the hon. the Minister that this is not good enough. The public is entitled to know what the finding was of this commission that was set up to look at the problems of the investor, to look at the problems in the administration of the Act and to look at the question of reasonableness in the determination of rentals. I believe that the public is entitled to see that report, and I would urge the hon. the Minister to make the contents public. I hope at the same time that he will do what has been done in the case of other reports—the Niemand report and others— and that is to issue a White Paper to indicate which of the recommendations contained in the report are to be adopted.

Sir, I have dealt so far with White housing and some of the problems in general, and I want to deal now for a few moments with the question of Coloured housing. Sir, the position with regard to housing for Coloured persons throughout the Republic remains as serious as it has been in the past, if indeed it is not more serious. Here again, Sir, the hon. the Minister has really done nothing to meet this problem. In reply to a question, in which I asked him how many houses it was proposed to construct for Coloureds this year, he gave the figure of 5 586 for the Cape and 7 876 for the whole of the Republic. Sir, on 21st February of this year the hon. the Minister informed me that at that stage 26 725 houses were needed for Coloureds. In that same question I asked him what the demand was to meet the increase in population amongst the different race groups; and in so far as the Coloureds are concerned, the figure which he gave me was 10 363; in other words, some 2 500 more than the total planned construction of houses in the Republic during this year for Coloureds, according to the information given to me.

Sir, I also asked the hon. the Minister a question about Mitchell’s Plain, a new township to be built on the Cape Flats. The hon. the Minister told me that the financial arrangements had been settled between the Government and the local authority and that the construction of buildings would commence at the beginning of next year.

Sir, there is a great need for the early construction of dwellings at Mitchell’s Plain to house a considerable number of persons, because these figures that I have given to this Committee exclude the housing required for persons who are to be moved under the Group Areas Act. The position is serious, and yet the construction of houses is to start only in 1974. Does the hon. the Minister know that while he is investing State money in the building of this township, some considerable way from Cape Town on the Cape Flats, his colleague in the Cabinet, the Minister of Transport in charge of Railways, has not made provision for one cent in his Budget for the construction of a railway line to convey those persons from Mitchell’s Plain, where they have to go and live, to their places of employment? Does he know that? He is expecting Coloureds to live in this place out on the Cape Flats without any means of transport being provided for them, because there is no provision in this connection in this year’s Budget of the hon. the Minister of Transport.

While this position goes on and while it is as serious as it is, I want to mention the occurrence at Brakenfell during this year about which I put questions to the Minister on 4th May, reported in col. 815 of Hansard. In short, the position appears to be that a number of Coloured families, squatters, built shanties on a farm in the Brackenfell area which fell within the municipality of Brackenfell. These shanties were of course erected without complying with the local building regulations of that municipality. I am informed that they in fact paid a rental to the farmer for the sites in order to erect their shanties, and then the municipality took action on the ground that the structures did not comply with the building regulations. Bulldozers were sent in and these shanties were demolished. I do not blame the Minister or his department for what actually took place that day but I want to draw his attention to this, that when that sort of thing happens, where do these people go? They do not go to the municipality which caused the demolitions. They come to the department of the hon. the Minister or they come to us in this House and ask where they can live.

I was amazed and distressed to find that within the Brackenfell municipality there is no Coloured residential area. There is no Coloured group area within that municipality. I cannot believe that there are no Coloureds who are rightfully and lawfully within the municipal area of Brackenfell. I want to draw the hon. the Minister’s attention to the provision of section 3 of the Slums Act which was amended in 1971, to which reference was made by the Secretary for the department in his report to us. He said—

Now, that is the law. How is it possible that a municipality such as Brackenfell can say that they are not making any land available for the Coloured people in their area? It seems to me that there is a flagrant disregard of the law in this respect, apart from the inhumanity which was shown in so far as these people are concerned. I know it is a great problem but while there is a shortage and a dearth of houses, however primitive, to house these Coloured persons in South Africa, and particularly in the Cape, they must go and squat somewhere. One shudders to think, if they are allowed to squat without any control over it, and we have the development of shanty towns within municipalities, what a health hazard they may become and what a festering sore within that municipal area. I have thought about this matter a great deal and I wonder whether the time has not come, while we are still trying to deal with the shortage, to see that areas are set aside with the necessary water and sanitary arrangements laid on where these people can at least shelter until they can be housed in proper houses. If we do not do it they are going to squat illegally, with all the evils which will flow from it. I wonder whether that is not the only way in which we can deal with this problem until such time we are able to catch up with this housing shortage.

I want to say that there are other organizations and bodies who can help considerably to alleviate the position in regard to the shortage of Coloured housing. I want to ask the Minister why it is that White-controlled utility companies, non-profit companies, have been precluded from building houses for Coloured persons. I want to read from the report of the Citizens’ Housing League in Cape Town in this connection. They say—

For the life of me I do not know why this should happen. The same position has occurred in regard to the Pinelands Development Company which was building the most attractive type of Cape Dutch homes on the Cape Flats which they were selling to Coloured persons at the most reasonable price. They were suddenly told that because they were a White controlled utility company they were no longer allowed to build for Coloured persons.

I want to say in conclusion that it appeals me, when I see the figures, the need and demand for housing under the Coloured community, that the Government’s policy can be of such a nature and applied in such a way as to stop persons who are willing and prepared and able to assist to meet this and who are getting on with the building of houses. They do not require financing from the Government to be able to do this, but then the Government informs them that they are not allowed to do the job because they are a White orientated company.

I trust the hon. the Minister will appreciate the concern of this side of the House as regards the problems of this department. We are concerned about the build-up and the magnitude of this department as a property-owning, property-letting, property-hiring concern in South Africa. We are also concerned about the cost which is involved in the slow development of properties in which millions of rand has been invested in the acquisition thereof. If you are paying 8½% per annum on those millions it means that every year there is a tremendous drain on the pockets of the taxpayers of South Africa in wasted expenditure on interests on Loan Account.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Green Point touched upon quite a number of matters, but I want to refer only to a few of them. Other hon. members on this side will also deal further with the matters he touched upon. In this regard I am thinking, for example, of the last matter to which he referred, viz. the provision of Coloured housing by utility companies.

The one matter to which I want to refer is the question of expropriations which the hon. member mentioned, and which are being carried out by the department. The properties which are expropriated are then sold to a third person and the profit made from this sale does not go into the pocket of the original owner. The hon. member knows what my sentiments in regard to expropriation are. All that I can say is that where the State expropriates for its own purposes great care should be exercised. However, where the State expropriates with the purpose of eventually selling such property to a third person, it should only be done in extreme cases because, as I have already said in the past, many emotions are aroused as a result of expropriation.

The hon. member also referred to the apparent excess provision of luxury flats. On that point I am in agreement with the hon. member. I cannot understand clearly why in South Africa, where there is tremendous pressure on the building industry, dwellings should be built which stand empty for long periods of time. I have in my hand a cutting dated 15th March, 1973, in which the following is stated: “Flat-magnates in trouble in Pretoria.” Flats are simply standing empty. For what reason were they built then? Can we in our country, in view of the tremendous pressure, not only as far as manpower is concerned but also as far as materials and funds are concerned, simply allow buildings to be erected and those residential units to stand empty? I really do not know what the solution is to prevent this, but it is really a matter we shall have to look into.

Then the hon. member referred to the provision of Coloured housing which is lagging behind to a considerable extent, and he went on to say that there are poor conditions in respect of Coloured housing. I must concede to the hon. member that there are grave problems, but there is Something else I also wish to say. When one has a population group like the Coloureds, which are one of the population groups with the highest population increase in the world, i.e. 3,5% per annum, almost no economy could bear the burden of meeting such a great need. There is perhaps a solution, but unfortunately we cannot now discuss the solution under the Vote of this department. This is a matter which we shall have to look into, for our economy will not be able to bear that increased demand, and it will continue to increase with the years.

I shall deal with a few other matters to which the hon. member referred in the course of my speech. I want to point out that in recent years there has been a very rapid rate of urbanization in South Africa, and that in future this rate will accelerate even more. The process of urbanization brings with it a few other factors which affect our general way of life. Since the vast majority of our population is already living in urban areas, this consequently affects the vast majority of our population. There is the question of land for building purposes which is becoming ever-scarcer. We cannot simply allow cities to expand and creep horizontally over the open spaces. We must give attention, and this is being done, to vertical expansion as well. This will of course entail high density housing. The question of smaller plots and better designed houses, with which an attempt is being made to eliminate servants, also enters the picture when we discuss these matters. The provision of a fuller and even a more meaningful community life affects the future urban dweller. Amended forms of ownership as well as amended forms of financing will be needed in the future. When one mentions these things one is in fact indicating a new way of life to which our people will have to adapt themselves. Last year a major international symposium on high density housing was held in Johannesburg and the theme of this symposium was, in fact, “A New Way of Life”. Hon. members will now permit me, in passing, to thank the hon. the Minister, actually his predecessor, as well as his department for having made it possible for members of the groups on both sides of the House to attend that important symposium. As far as I was concerned, I attended all the sittings, and found them to be of exceptional value to me. I heard the same comment being expressed by hon. gentlemen on the opposite side. Everything points to the necessity for us to plan a new way of life. As far as housing is concerned, we must adopt a new course in South Africa and perhaps the secretary to the department summed up the matter best in a paper which he read to the aforementioned symposium, and I consequently want to quote from this—

Here we have the position summarized in a nutshell almost. I maintain that if we adopt a new course in respect of our urban way of life and in respect of housing then it still does not mean that we have solved our problems. Frequently a new change of course brings with it even more problems. I just want to mention in passing the principal problems which we have to cope with at the moment and which we will have to cope with in future. When I mention a few of them now I am not ignoring problems such as the ever-lessening amount of land, socio-psychological problems arising out of high density housing, transportation problems and pollution problems. I am simply mentioning a few which I consider to be very important. The first matter I want to refer to relates to reliable data on our housing requirements. I am convinced that at the present stage we do not have a method of determining our actual needs accurately. I do not think we are taking all factors into consideration in arriving at a really generally acceptable standard figure which can be taken by all, if I may put it in this way, to be at least approximately accurate. I am being honest when I say that in many respects we are indulging in guesswork, and that applies to projections for the future as well. New ideas are emerging which we must really take cognizance of. Housing requirements are now being discussed, and under housing requirements there are the subdivisions of housing needs and housing demands. Housing demand on the other hand is subdivided into a potential demand and an active demand. We shall have to make far more accurate calculations in future, and we shall also have to make more detailed sub-categories in respect of this matter, otherwise we will never really be able to plan in advance properly to be able to meet our needs. I know the Department of Public Works is engaged in a study and we are expecting the results of this study during the course of this year, as was in fact indicated in the latest annual report. Of course one cannot at this stage tell what those figures will indicate to us, but one should like to see over what wide field that study has been made, what the results are going to be, and whether we are really going to have in our hands the instrument which we need in future, and also with projections to the year 2000. When we speak of a provision of 38 000 to 56 000 residential units between the years 1995 to 2000 it is a formidable task, and one cannot set to work on this task with blunt instruments if we want to make proper provision for the future. I really want to advocate that every possible organization should be involved in this so that we are able to determine more accurately our housing requirements in future and are able to devise a method of utilizing that information which we obtain for our future projections.

The second important matter I want to mention, and which the hon. member for Green Point also referred to, is the problem of costs. We need not discuss the high cost structure as far as materials and labour are concerned, for we know what our problems in that regard are. The cost of plots and the cost of services, which already comprise 40% of the total costs of a construction, are matters which we will have to look into. How we are going to solve this problem I really do not know. Mention is already being made of a capital gains tax in regard to the sale of land, but that I do not want to advocate at all. Unfortunately it is the middle income group that suffers here. Provision is being made for the low income group. Those who have higher incomes can look after themselves. I see you are already looking at the watch, Sir, and I have not said nearly all I wanted to say. I want to present a plea here today for the middle income group. I do not know precisely what the solution to this problem is, but we will have to put our heads together to help these people, otherwise we would really not be doing our duty to these people. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, in the time available one does not know how to begin to deal with the monstrous acts of this department over the past years. If I cause the hon. the Minister to look at me when I say the word “monstrous” I hope he will look at me with far more attention and will listen to what I have to say. The affairs of this depart have affected the lives of hundreds of thousands of people, and let me add, ordinary defenceless people of South Africa. I would say to the hon. the Minister that the effect on these lives has been both cruel and dramatic since the institution of this department. I would like to analyse in the time available to me what it has achieved. The first thing I must say is that this department has achieved very little in respect of housing. Apart from White housing, the housing position today for Coloureds and Indians is worse than it has ever been and it is growing worse by the day. Communities have been disrupted and scandals have been rife in this department for the last number of years. Its holdings have risen to R122 million at cost value. I would like to suggest to the hon. the Minister—and I hope South Africa takes note—that the Department of Community Development now holds property to the value of nearly R500 million. The dreadful thing is that this has been achieved at the cost of the poorer sections of our community; by and large the Indian and Coloured sections of our community out of whom the department has made tremendous profits. This department has frozen literally thousands of acres of good land and good areas in all our cities. Land prices have escalated over the last few years because of the holdings of this department. Every single one of us, particularly the young people of South Africa, who would like to buy homes, are unable to do so because of the price of land. I would suggest that the reason for today’s price of land can be directly laid at the door of that department. [Interjections.] Race relations in our townships have never been at such a low ebb. Admittedly in townships and areas like District Six there were problems but I would like to suggest to the hon. the Minister, who is new to this department, that the problems in our new townships are no better but are in fact a good deal worse than in the old ones. Let me say with firm conviction that this department has displayed a callous disregard for human values. The Department of Community Development has been allowed to go unchecked for too long. Perhaps I should have welcomed the hon. the Minister to his new job at the start of my remarks in this debate; I almost said “this exciting new Minister of Community Development”, but even this thought is immediately tempered by the statements of the previous Minister. I cannot help but refer to him because he was noted for two very well-known predictions that he made in this House. It is interesting to note too, that after making both predictions he was fired. I would like to suggest to this hon. Minister, if I can give him an advice, not to offer any predictions or he will be fired as well.

Your advice is worth nothing.

One of the most notable predictions of the previous Minister was that within eight or nine years —he said this last year—all the Coloureds and Indians in South Africa would have been resettled and rehoused. However, the facts of the matter from figures provided by the Minister’s own department, show that within eight or nine years from last year there will be a shortage of nearly 100 000 Coloured and Indian homes in South Africa and the waiting lists are getting longer by the day. While these waiting lists are getting longer, what do we find from the “exciting” new Minister of Community Development? On 4th May I asked him in this House how many townships in South Africa he had visited. He replied that he had visited 12 townships in the Cape area on a day while this House was in session. Twelve townships in one day! What sort of visit is that? Did he get out of his motorcar to speak to the people living in these townships? Did he ask them what their problems were? No Minister of State, no man who feels for these people, no member on the other side of the House can visit 12 townships in one day. In the meantime he has visited six other townships or spent six days visiting townships on the Reef. I would like to ask the hon. the Minister how he hopes to solve this serious problem with such a casual attitude. I am afraid he seems to have taken over the casual attitude to this problem that is epitomized by everybody on the Government side. I would like to ask the hon. the Minister whether he has not heard of Gelvandale where we had riots not very long ago. Has he not heard of Wentworth in the Durban area? Has he not heard of Duranta Road and Chatsworth in the Durban area? There is something I would like to say to the hon. the Minister to which I would like a specific reply. He gave a promise, I understand, to visit the townships in Durban. He gave that promise soon after he took over as Minister. Some eight or nine months have gone past. The hon. the Minister has to my knowledge visited Durban, although my information may not be correct. What is, however, correct is that the hon. the Minister has not yest visited any of these townships. I therefore believe that this Minister is unfitted and unsuited, for this most serious task which his department is handling. [Interjections.] Let me tell those hon. members who make such a lot of noise that the attitudes in our townships which we have built is frightening. They are slums and ghettos we have created. That is what they are. Anybody can see it for themselves. It is breeding a type of bitterness which is a threat to our security. Year after year I have asked for a commission of inquiry into the activities of this department. I will list some of these again just now. For no other reason I now plead, for the seventh or eighth time, for that commission of inquiry to be appointed. The Government seems to have a callous disregard for the lives of these people, and I therefore do not plead in their interests but I do so for the sake of the security of South Africa, something which those hon. members pretend to know so much about. I want to say to this hon. Minister that the security of South Africa is endangered by this situation in our townships to a greater extent than by any other means in South Africa. I want to say to the hon. the Minister that frustration is leading to bitterness, the bitterness is leading to hatred, and the hatred is leading to crime and a breakdown of law and order.

In an earlier debate in this House we dealt with crime in the townships. I want to say that if any hon. member disputes these facts, let him read the crime figures for the Cape Flats alone, not very far from them. Hon. members should not visit these townships by visiting twelve of them in one day, as the hon. the Minister did. Let them go and have a really good look at these townships. They will see for themselves. The police will give them the crime figures and details in regard to prostitution. They will see the frustration and the bitterness that is being built up there. This bitterness is being built up for no other reason than by the actions of the Department of Community Development. In these townships live decent human beings. They are forced to live there. They are not living there through any wish of their own. They are terrified to leave their homes at night. The lack of facilities is shocking. I want to say to this hon. Minister that unless this department is investigated from top to bottom to see what it is doing to the lives of ordinary people in South Africa, White, Coloured and Indian, South Africa is in for a very serious problem. In our mania to separate people —the mania of this Government—we have created scars on the map of every city of South Africa, but, more than that, we have created scars in the minds of the people that we have dealt with in such a haphazard manner. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, it is these acrimonious speeches of this hon. member that are responsible for racial hatred in South Africa. This hon. member is the type of person who incites the people. What were the conditions in South Africa when these people ruled this country? Where were the Indians then living? Where were the Coloureds then living? Let us acknowledge that a great deal still has to be done to accommodate these people properly in certain areas. But to allege what this hon. member alleged, i.e. that these people are generally living in poor conditions and circumstances, is extremely irresponsible. What were the conditions of the Indians in Natal, in places like Cato Ridge and elsewhere? What were the conditions of those people when we took over? Where are they living today? Just go and look at the areas where the Indians are now living. I think the time has come for us at least to say to these people that they should display a measure of gratitude for what this Government has done for them. I specifically want to address this to the Indian community. I want to tell you, Sir, that the Indian community in my own constituency is properly accommodated, in comparison with the conditions under which they previously lived. This also applies to the Coloureds in the Johannesburg complex. Those people have decent accommodation. There is a very small percentage of those people who do not have proper accommodation. But, Sir, we must not place the blame in this connection solely at the door of the Government. The areas where these extremely poor conditions exist, conditions under which these people must live, are areas which are under the control of city councils that are governed by those who are sympathetic to the hon. member who has just spoken. Those are the people who have not done their work. Local authorities have an extreme responsibility in respect of the proper housing of these people, but I want to say that they have shamefully neglected their duty of ensuring that these people have proper conditions in which to live. Now the hon. member for Port Natal finds it very convenient to abuse this Government for not having done its work. I think that the words which the hon. member addressed to the hon. the Minister were improper. The hon. the Minister has not even been in this department for a year, and now the hon. member is saying he is not a Minister who is competent to do this work. That hon. member thinks that one can solve everything by visiting a township area. I want to say that this Minister knows what is going on in his department. He has made a thorough study of what is going on there, and this hon. Minister is fully conversant with where the weak spots are and where assistance must be granted. We have full confidence in him. We shall not allow ourselves to be put off by the kind of words the hon. member for Port Natal used this afternoon. I am convinced of the fact that this Minister will lead this department with great dignity, just as his predecessors also did.

Sir, I should like to dwell on another matter. This concerns the question of the physical dilapidation of buildings in our cities and towns. I read the latest report of the department with great interest, and I also observed with great interest that the Fouché committee has done in connection with this matter. Sir, if one travels through this lovely country of ours, it disturbs one to enter cities and towns and see the extensive dilapidation of certain of our buildings. I think the time has come for certain of the recommendations of the Fouché committee to receive serious attention and be implemented. Throughout the years in which I was entrusted with local administration, we placed quite a few ordinances on the Statute Book in the Transvaal to do this kind of thing, but now one finds that today a measure of responsibility actually rests with the city councils to ensure that these dilapidated properties are restored. I now want to say that I think that the city councils must also bear a great deal of the blame in this connection because they are not always ready to take action as far as these matters are concerned, and also because the identification of these dilapidated properties does not take place properly. But the city councils are also in the position, of course, of not being able to give financial assistance for the restoration of dilapidated properties, and today I want to advocate to the hon. the Minister that we should pass legislation in this connection so that the necessary steps can be taken. Sir, it is also recommended here that this branch should fall under the Department of Community Development. Under the Department of Planning we have now also obtained a division for environmental control and supervision. Sir, in my view the Department of Planning is the department ment where this sort of thing belongs, because it is that department which is responsible for the preservation of the environment. I want to advocate here that we make a start on this so that these dilapidated buildings can be identified and so that the necessary restoration work can be done.

Sir, I am grateful for what the department has done in my own constituency in respect of the provision of houses for the lower income groups, but I want to tell the hon. the Minister that there is still a great need, as there is elsewhere, for housing for the lower income groups. I also want to ask the hon. the Minister to visit my constituency for a day or so at the end of this session so that I can show him what can be done there. I think that the cheapest land for housing development in the whole Johannesburg complex is to be found in the Southern Johannesburg complex. Sir, there is a whole lot of land which could be obtained reasonably cheaply. That is an area which is situated reasonably near the city, and for that reason it is also an area where one’s workers could be properly accommodated with the utmost convenience. Sir, I want to cross over to another point. We are deeply impressed by the brilliant work that is being done by utility companies here in the Cane Peninsula in connection with the provision of housing. I wonder whether the time has not come to activate the establishment of these utility companies in other local authority areas. I want to present to the hon. the Minister for serious consideration that this be done. Those people are doing brilliant work and I think they could very profitably continue this kind of work in other local authority areas. Instead of doing the work itself, I want to advocate that the department should take the initiative in activating and inspiring people to establish utility companies, just as the State inspires welfare organizations and churches to do welfare work, with a view to the erection of housing in other local authority areas. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I cannot be bothered to respond to what the hon. member who has just sat down has said. I want to start where I left off and commence by saying that I accuse this department of tearing human dignity apart among the Coloured and Indian people. Sir, this department’s housing backlog today is bigger than it has ever been. In the last five years in the Cape Peninsula alone, in order to cater for the population increase, it should have built 37 000 dwelling units; in fact it built 29 000 dwelling units, and in the same period it moved out thousands of people under the Group Areas Act as well. That is why I say that this mania to separate people has resulted in the housing crisis that we have today. I would like to ask this hon. Minister, who is new to his job and who, when he visits townships, manages to visit 12 in one day when it takes me one day to visit one township, whether he has seen families living in holes in the ground, as I have, where their only cover at night is a piece of tin over their heads? Has he seen people living in trees, as some people do all over South Africa? Has he seen people living in the wrecks of motor-cars? Has he seen a family of six living in a shack 9 ft. by 9 ft., where two of the children have T.B. and another one has polio? Sir, the hon. the Minister of Economic Affairs can grin like a Cheshire cat, but I tell him that these things are happening in South Africa and that he will pay the price, together with us, if something is not done to put them right. Mr. Chairman, can the hon. the Minister explain to this Committee why millions and millions of the taxpayers’ money were spent in the Pretoria area to buy in property and to freeze vast areas of Pretoria, while these areas are now being let out to private enterprise? Can the hon. the Minister explain that to the people of Pretoria who had their homes expropriated for developments which have not taken place and which, if things go on as they are, are never likely to take place? Mr. Chairman, can the hon. the Minister tell me why for ten years Cato Manor in Natal has been frozen; why for six or seven years Block AK in Durban has been frozen and profits passed to and fro; why the department can sell properties to White people in Block AK and then months later buy them back at a higher price? Can the hon. the Minister tell me what right, what nerve, what audacity, his department has to buy a piece of land in the Chatsworth area of Durban for R15 500 and then two months later sell it to a private person for R65 000? Sir, I would like to know and I demand to know, and the people of South Africa demand to know, what is going on in this department. Can the Minister tell me what happened to the investigation into the destruction of certain files in his Johannesburg office by fire? Can the hon. the Minister tell me how many members of his staff have been convicted of accepting bribes to give houses to people in various townships? Can the hon. the Minister tell me why in the area of Riverside in Durban they are acting as they are doing? Can the hon. the Minister tell me why at Waterval Park in Durban they put up five or six pieces of ground for public tender, and why, when somebody telephoned and asked why only five or six, he was informed that if they put up more it would bring down the price? Can the hon. the Minister tell me why his department is allowed to exploit people in the sale of land and the purchase of property? Can the hon. the Minister tell me how in heaven’s name in a modem state he can operate in this callous, uncaring manner? Can he tell me what he saw when he visited these townships? Did he see the conditions under which these people live? Did he notice the lack of lights and the lack of proper streets? Sir, one could go on for hours citing the various cases. [Interjections.] Sir, hon. members opposite, who are making so much noise, do not understand the position, but what is worse, they do not care. Sir, this is why I ask again for the umpteenth time for a commission of inquiry to investigate the activities of this department. Let us have a commission of inquiry to find out how the department can tell a widow who has lived in one property for 45 years that she has to get out of that property merely because she is of the wrong colour and that she must go and live in an Indian area and displace people in that area as well. Can the hon. the Minister tell me why this should happen; can he tell me why thousands of Indian traders have been displaced? Those who have not yet been put out of their properties are living there under permit.

Sir, I, unlike the hon. the Minister, do not get excited, but I would like to say this to him: The previous Minister, in July, 1972, when we were dealing with the Coloured housing position in Johannesburg, denied an accusation of mine that the position there was serious. His response was that he and his department were building homes faster there than ever before. Sir, when he made this statement, I took the trouble to look up some of the figures that he himself had given me, and I found that in 1971, as compared to 1969, they had built something like 50% fewer houses in this area, not more houses than ever before, as he said in this statement.

In conclusion, let me say that while I attend this House I will raise this matter in the manner in which I have done because these people, by our choice, by the choice of the electorate of South Africa, have no other voice; and while they have no other voice I will exercise that voice in this House to the best of my ability. I would then say to the hon. the Minister, with all the calm at my command: “For heaven’s sake, get out and visit the townships and see what is going on there, see the conditions under which these people live.” Sir, on a completely different note, just to show that I would like to conclude in a calmer atmosphere, would like to make another suggestion to the hon. the Minister, one which I do not believe will probably get further than the walls of this House but one which I believe nevertheless deserves very serious attention. I would like to say to the Minister that when considering the Rents Act the time has probably come that the people who live in rent-controlled buildings should themselves be subject to a means test. Too many people living in rent-controlled buildings are wealthy and the purpose of the Rents Act should not be to protect them—the wealthy tenants.

The second point I would like to make to the Minister is this, that in other parts of the world urban renewal is done on a different basis. What happens there is that grants are made to the property owner so that he can repair and renew his property. I believe that if we were to adopt a similar scheme in this country, whereby funds would be made available to people living in areas to which the hon. the Minister’s department is always very quick to apply urban renewal, to give these people the opportunity of themselves renewing their own homes, this would lead to less disruption in their lives and to less disruption in the community.

During the years I have sat in this House, I have listened to many speeches by Opposition members, but during all those years I have never yet listened to a speech more fraught with hate and frustration than the one this hon. member has just made. I have come to the conclusion that the hon. member for Port Natal, who has just rid himself of so much venom and bitterness and put our country in such a bad light, must probably be a newcomer to these shores. I have heard he is an immigrant, but I want to tell you, Sir, that I find it hard to believe that he does live in this country, for I know South Africa very well and if we but think back to a few years ago, to Cape Town and to the slum conditions which existed here, it does in fact come as a surprise to me that someone who shows such a keen interest in this regard, does not thank the Minister for what has been done during the past year, especially for the non-Whites in our country. If a man does not have that gratitude, one feels that he definitely does not know what those conditions were. He must be totally unfamiliar with conditions in the country if he can make statements such as those he made this afternoon.

But this is not the first time that the hon. member has raised such a hue and cry in this House, and when one considers what headlines he was given in overseas newspapers on a previous occasion, then this has been yet another attempt at gaining popularity. I shall certainly not waste any more of my time on him.

When we look back, the word of thanks which has to be expressed to the hon. the Minister and his department relates not only to what has been done for the non-Whites, more specifically the Coloureds and Indians, during the past years, but also to what has been done for our White community. I can tell you, Sir, that those people are deeply grateful. If there is one group of people who want to express its gratitude, it is those very people in the lower income groups. During the past years, a great deal indeed has been done for them. I actually want to deal with another subject and therefore I shall not quote statistics—there are other hon. members who will do so—but I nevertheless want to point out that South Africa is still, after 25 years of National Party rule, the best place in the world to live in.

We are deeply grateful for having indeed been able to enjoy all this prosperity. When we look back over the past decade, gigantic industrial development has taken place in our country which has made high demands and exerted heavy pressure on housing. We are now on the eve of a new era, one which will probably lead us to even greater industrial development in our country. For instance, think of the implications the Sishen-Saldanha steel project will have for us and what it will mean to our country. What an enormous amount of housing will have to be provided, as a result of this project, in the vicinity of Sishen as well as Saldanha, to Whites and non-Whites! When we think of these aspects, we realize that the pressure is enormous. We are grateful for the fact that the department has thought and planned ahead.

South Africa can offer the world what no other country can. We offer an industrialist unlimited quantities of power, probably the cheapest power imaginable. We offer him cheap and unlimited labour. Our White workers could be fully employed in the ’sixties only, and today we still do not have full employment for our Coloured employees, let alone the Bantu workers. Therefore, for the future unlimited labour resources will be available for industrial development. We have the richest resources of raw materials and at the moment we supply the cheapest steel in the world. Therefore our country is indeed an industrial paradise. This, of course, entails that we may expect a population explosion in the near future which will cause a tremendous increase in the demand for housing for all groups.

I want to make a plea with refence to what has already been done. The hon. member for Port Natal’s greatest objection concerned the amount of land which had been bought for future housing. I want to plead that we should go even further. People who do not fall under the sub-economic groups have to pay outrageous prices for residential plots in our cities. I feel the department should help our people so that they may move to areas outside the central parts of our cities as well. If fast transport facilities, such as tube trains, were available, new residential areas could be established outside our urban areas and the person who does not fall under the sub-economic groups, would then also be able to own a home as he would not have to pay those exorbitantly high prices for a piece of land on which he could build his house. This is a necessity and I want to plead for it. Unfortunately I cannot dwell on this any longer, for I have another matter on my mind.

I want to come back to my own constituency. In the vicinity of Bloemfontein and in the vicinity of many of our large cities there are many smallholdings. Years ago we obtained the concession of loans being granted to people living on these smallholdings for the redemption of a certain percentage of their bonds, as well as for water facilities and for the building of a house. Each of these loans amounted to a total of R6 500. This concession was obtained years ago and very few people could make use of these loans as there were not sufficient water and other facilities. At Bloemfontein, for example, we have the Welbedacht scheme which will supply water to the city and the smallholdings. In the future when water is available, these loans will be of great value to the people living on those smallholdings in the vicinity of Bloemfontein. I want to ask the hon. the Minister to consider the possibility of adjusting these housing loans to the higher costs. I expect that these loans will have to be increased to an amount of from R12 000 to R13 000 so that the people living on the smallholdings will be able to build the necessary housing facilities on their smallholdings. Therefore I suggest that these loans be brought into line with the higher building costs and the higher costs of building material. We know that the provision of effective housing can definitely not be over-emphasized and that it plays a very important part. The lower income groups appreciate the measures which are taken for the provision of housing facilities. The best way of combating inflation is by having labour efficiency. Labour efficiency is promoted by proper housing and a happy family life; this will ensure an occupied cradle. A concession such as this will make a major contribution in this regard. It is for this reason that in the past we enjoyed the support of these people who had to do the work for South Africa. If we were to increase the amount of the loans, we would be making a real contribution to the improvement of our labour efficiency in the future.

Mr. Chairman, I want to go further on certain points which have been raised by my colleague, the hon. member for Green Point and to reiterate some of the questions which he has already posed. It will be remembered that earlier on in this session we sought an opportunity in this House to draw attention to the inadequacies of the Rents Act and to indicate how certain ruthless landlords were circumventing the provisions of this measure and were in fact exploiting the very people that this measure sought to protect. We did so at the time primarily to give the hon. the Minister an opportunity of reacting to this situation and to indicate to us what steps he intended taking to rectify what is a most unhappy situation. We must admit that we were greatly disappointed by his reaction at the time because he gave us nothing of any substance. There were vague generalities and he reiterated the normal sort of platitudes. He conceded that exploitation was taking place, and promised that he would react to it most positively. We have seen no signs of this positive reaction. He told us that there were statutory provisions against intimidation, but the question we asked was why he had not invoked these statutory provisions because intimidation was rampant and was increasing all the time. We have known about this situation for a long time. It was indeed one of the reasons why the hon. the Minister’s predecessor appointed the Johannes Commission. As my hon. colleague pointed out this commission reported a long time ago but apparently the report is gathering dust in the office of the hon. the Minister. We have seen no signs of it; we have heard nothing about it; in fact, there has been no reaction at all. This is a Government that boasts of its “kragdadigheid” and this hon. Minister thinks he positively radiates “kragdadigheid”, but on a matter which affects thousands upon thousands of people he seems to be completely powerless to act.

Since we have raised this matter, the situation has not improved at all; in fact, it has deteriorated. These ruthless landlords are continuing with a campaign of harassment which is in fact growing in volume and which has certainly not been abated. In fact, the king-pin in this whole situation has become quite contemptuous of the department. He is cocking a snook at the Government. He refers to rent control as sheer “communism” and I think right at the moment he wants to sue the Rent Board. What sort of a situation do you arrive at when this is permitted to continue in South Africa? When the hon. the Minister is approached by the Press, all that he says is that he is receiving a large number of complaints. That is just not good enough. The country wants to know, and certainly this House wants to know, how he is going to cope and contain this very undesirable situation that has arisen in South Africa. Previously we have made certain suggestions to him as to what ought to be done. We have suggested, for example, that at the moment there are certain loopholes between the Housing Act and the Rents Act. As I understand it, when letting premises become vacant then alterations become permissible. Quite clearly this is a situation we cannot sustain. We have suggested to the hon. the Minister that he should think in terms of reviewing the Rents Act so that reconstruction will only become possible once there has been application to and approval obtained from the Rent Board and such other appropriate bodies as are specified in the Rents Act.

There is yet another inadequacy. At the moment services may be withdrawn and in such cases there is normally an appropriate lowering of the rental. What the hon. the Minister and his department should consider, is a review of this particular provision so that a withdrawal of services will not be permissible until such time as approval has been obtained from the Rent Board or from his department.

There is another thing that we do not understand. As I understand the Rents Act, it provices a period of grace of seven days to pay your rent. Indeed the relevant provision, section 21(1), read more or less as follows:

There are certain landlords in Johannesburg, and elsewhere, who insist on it that the rental be paid on the very first day of the month. If this is not done, the tenants are evicted. We want to know what the legality of this provision is and to what extent this can be done. Is it possible to circumvent and to supersede the Rents Act in this particular way? If it is done, it makes this provision which was passed by this House entirely meaningless. We have also previously suggested that attention should be given to the possibility of introducing penalties where frivolous and vexatious applications are made for rent increased every second day or week. Some of these landlords do precisely this and we feel that there should be a penalty against them. I think the time has come where this whole situation must be reviewed. Quite obviously the rent boards as they exist at the moment are not fulfilling their functions, because every day there are people who are unhappy about the kind of decisions that come from these rent boards. Surely the time has arrived where the Minister must now consider introducing a standing judicial commission which could act as a board of appeal so that in all cases that go to the rent boards where people want to appeal, either the landlord or the lessee, they can in fact automatically take it to such a commission.

I think a commission of that kind should furthermore be given the function of investigating the activities of some of these landlords. We have mentioned before that some of them really ought to have their wings clipped, because they are bringing the property owners as a group into disrepute. Some of them will become an absolute menace in South Africa. We have referred previously to the Wainer organization which is one of the most paramount in this field. I want to conclude on this note: This situation cannot be allowed to continue and we ask the hon. the Minister to freeze all the applications for rent increases from the Wainer organization and to stop all the conversion practices and investigate fully this organization so that the facts can be put before the whole of South Africa.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Hillbrow is a person who always wants to deliver himself here of so-called profundities. He is one who always comes along here with instant solutions to any problem we may have. The Johannes Commission was appointed to investigate the Rents Act. I want to ask the hon. member whether he went to give evidence before that Commission.

No, but I know …

No, he did not! He had the opportunity to give evidence and to give those people all the solutions about which they raise such a hue and cry here. It is very easy to be wise after the event! If he is so wise and has all the solutions, surely he had the opportunity to give evidence. Perhaps I can put the hon. member wise to some extent. He spoke of people having to have the right to appeal if they were dissatisfied with the decision of a local rent board. There is, in fact, such a rent board to which people may appeal and which will reconsider their case.

I want to confine myself to problems pertaining more particularly to my own constituency. I want to refer to the resettlement of Indians on the East Rand, with specific reference to the Indians who still find themselves in Boksburg at the present moment. Hon. members will recall that approximately ten years ago a group area was declared for Coloured people at Boksburg. The Coloured people were resettled in that area expeditiously and the undertaking was given in Boksburg that Boksburg would take the Coloureds and that the Indians would be re-settled at Benoni. The undertaking was given, with regard to the Indians, that the resettlement would apply to their businesses as well as to their homes. I want to tell the hon. the Minister that quite a number of those Indians were indeed resettled residentially in Actonville in the Indian area there. But at the moment there are still 45 Indian businesses in Boksburg, of which 18 are in the Coloured area. I should like to tell the hon. the Minister that the presence of those Indian dealers in that Coloured area is creating dissatisfaction amongst the Coloured community. I appreciate the problems; at this stage Actonville is full. Therefore I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether the time has not arrived when we may have an extra group area for Indians on the East Rand so that, in the first place, that promise and undertaking which was given to Boksburg may be kept, in the second place, satisfaction may be created amongst the Coloured community, and, in the third place, the uncertainty which exists amongst the Indian community with regard to their future, may be removed.

I should like to confine myself to another subject. It is a subject on which the hon. member for Germiston only touched, i.e. the poor utilization of our land here in South Africa with regard to residential areas. One of the greatest problems of our middle income group and of young people, is to find land and to acquire house ownership. Some of the problems they encounter are, in the first place, the availability of such sites, which are scarce, and, in the second place, if they are available, the tremendous cost at which they have to be acquired. To my mind it is the God-given right of every person in South Africa to own a piece of land, if a person has that ideal. That ideal is becoming more and more difficult to realize because of the declining availability of land and the cost involved. To my mind the most important cause of this problem is the uneconomic utilization of our land which is set aside and developed as residential areas. When I speak of uneconomic utilization, I mean that the sites to which we are used, are much too large. It is obvious that the larger the site, the more expensive the service for the supply of electricity, roads and sewerage.

The hon. member for Germiston mentioned that if a site measured 10 000 square feet, it was calculated that the cost of the services to such a site was approximately 40% of the price for which that plot was ultimately sold. If that plot measured 800 square feet, it was calculated that those service costs decreased by approximately 25%. Now I wonder whether the time has not arrived when a stop should be put to these so-called prestige residential areas with large plots which the ordinary working man cannot afford. However, that is not the end of the story, for this also results in the rates and taxes in our towns and cities becoming higher and higher. This makes it simply impossible for the man in the street to own a property. For that reason I am of the opinion that the time has arrived for the Government to intervene and to put a stop to the large prestige plots which are created by land developers.

A short while ago I had the privilege of going on a tour through Cape Town. We saw houses, inter alia, in Pinelands which were built on plots measuring from 3 500 to 4 000 square feet. Sir, I can tell you that there is absolutely nothing wrong with the houses built on those plots. They meet all requirements and, moreover, there is a small piece of land left for a garden. We shall simply have to get used to it. We also saw a beautiful group of semi-detached houses which made a neat impression. Therefore I wonder whether the stigma attaching to semi-detached houses is not something which ought to have died out. If we can utilize that land more effectively and if we can build more dwelling units on it, we shall be able to house many more people at a much lower cost.

Another matter which I want to bring to the attention of the hon. the Minister relates the uniformity of building regulations in South Africa. Do you know, Sir, that we have the situation where virtually every one of our roughly 800 local authorities still has its own building regulations? To my mind we can, simply by the introduction of uniform building regulations throughout the Republic, lower the cost of housing in that way as well. These will relate to the material which may be used, to the construction methods which may be used and also to the saving of land through the planning of the available plots on which buildings may be erected.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Hillbrow mentioned various aspects of the Rents Act which he considered should be amended. I should like to mention one further point in this regard which will perhaps deserve further attention when the new Rents Act is drafted, or when amendments are effected to the existing Rents Act, and that is the question of the retrospective effect of rent board orders. It is true that the Rents Act was amended only recently so as to make provision for the first time for the principle of imposing a limit on the period for which rent board orders may be made of retrospective effect. This period is three months. However, it is also true that increases are often substantial and that in some cases the increased rents for which tenants must make provision may consequently be substantial amounts, even though this period is only three months. I should therefore like to request that consideration be given to a new Rents Act, or to amendments to the existing Rents Act, in terms of which no provision will be made for rent board orders to be of retrospective effect, except in cases where they only serve to cover such expenses as increased rates and taxes or increased insurance premiums on buildings. I feel that in these cases, too, the landlords have the opportunity of applying in good time to the Rent Board for relief. If the landlord were to fail to submit his application to the Rent Board, or if he were to wait too long before doing so, then in those cases, too, I do not think he should enjoy the protection of the Rents Act. Even in the case of expenses of the kind I have mentioned, increases in rent should not be made of retrospective effect for too long a period.

Sir, this afternoon mention was also made of the shortage of Coloured housing in the Cape Peninsula. On page 13 of the latest report of the department, it is pointed out that this is still one of the department’s problem areas. The shortage of housing for Coloureds in the Cape Province, but particularly in the Cape Peninsula, is still a problem to them. Because I have the privilege of serving on the boards of directors of both the Citizens’ Housing League and Garden Cities, I have already, on behalf of the boards of directors of these two companies, addressed a request to the hon. the Minister asking that the restriction imposed on the activities of these two utility companies may possibly be reconsidered. The Citizens’ Housing League was established in 1929, 43 years ago. The very first land owned by this company, and the very first houses it built in the Cape Peninsula, were for the Coloured community. Recently this company built its ten thousandth house in the Cape Peninsula. In all the years in which it has provided housing to the people of the Cape Peninsula, it has played a tremendous role in regard to the Coloured community. An example is Bishop Lavis, established for a population of more than 25 000 people. This holds true not only of houses, but of all the community services. Similarly, between the years 1962 and 1968 Garden Cities established a small town called Square Hill. The building of a larger town for the Coloured community, a town called Elfindale, was commenced in 1969. They, too, have therefore rendered major services to the Coloured community of the Cape Peninsula. I want to go so far as to say that I doubt whether here is any organization in this country of ours which has established finer houses at a lower price for Coloureds than Garden Cities. Since the hon. member for Boksburg referred to the group housing in Pinelands and Edgemead and other places where Garden Cities operate, I want to say that the group housing established for Coloureds compares very favourably with the group housing established for Whites, which in a certain respect, could virtually serve as a model for South Africa and for the Western world. Sir, not only are these houses provided for the Coloured communities, but they are provided at a price which the private sector is simply unable to equal. For example, in the case of Square Hill the houses cost between R4 000 and R4 800. I am convinced that if those houses were to have been provided by the private sector, they would have cost much nearer to R10 000 each. Mr. Chairman, since these companies are now equipped with teams of workmen and with knowledge gained over many decades, since they have also built up a tradition of providing housing for the Coloured community in the Cape Peninsula, I should be pleased if it were to be possible for the department to give these two companies the opportunity once again to continue with their work here in the Peninsula for the Coloured community. I do not doubt that in the course of time it will be possible for similar utility companies to be established by the Coloured people to serve themselves, but until such time as it does happen, I think that a gigantic contribution can be made in regard to housing for our Coloured community by these companies, which are not out to make a profit, and that these companies could also be of great assistance to the department.

Sir, I should like to pay special tribute to the Department of Community Development for the work done for the Whites in my own constituency. I think that what has been established in the area which is now known as Tygerdal, may surely stand as a monument as regards co-operation between a Government department on the one hand and local authorities and other Government departments on the other. Instead of what almost ended in one of the biggest fights between a department and a local authority, a model was established, through the good offices of the Secretary for Community Development personally, with the support of his Minister and through the work of all the officials in his department, a model which could be announced over the past weekend. Seeing that necessary services are already being provided in that area, I should just like to address this final request to the department: Since something fine has now been planned in an area which was an eyesore in the Cape Peninsula, I want to ask whether this co-operation could not be taken further; whether these premises could not be offered to all communities in Cape Town at a reasonable price. I want to ask that it should be ensured that the tendency of rising prices which has been experienced in the surrounding areas, including the municipality of Goodwood, where this area is situated, does not extend to Tygerdal, but rather that Tygerdal should serve as an inhibiting factor on the continually rising prices of premises in the Peninsula.

Then, Mr. Chairman, in conclusion I should just like to ask whether it would not be possible at this stage to review the limits for sub-economic housing once again. The income limit was increased from R100 to R130 in the year 1971, and with the rising cost of living and the resultant increase in the salaries and pensions of the poorer section of our population, the position is not only that there are many people who are excluded from sub-economic housing at present, but also, unfortunately, that there are many persons living in sub-economic houses today who may have to be given notice to vacate those houses. With the differentiated rents, depending on the income of the tenant, there are many people who now find that the increase in rent exceeds the increase in their wages, with the result that they are worse off than before. I should appreciate it if this matter could be given attention at the present time so that this department may be able, in the midst of inflation, to make provision for these people through the limits it imposes for sub-economic housing, even after the increases have taken place.

I want to come to another subject altogether, although I shall return to the question of housing if I have an opportunity. All sorts of new ideas appear to be crowding in on the Government this year; it seems to be teeming with new visions. We have had new visions on sport, as the hon. the Minister of Sport has shown us in Pretoria; we have had the right to strike introduced in a Bill which has been tabled, and we have had the admission that urban Africans will be with us for many years to come. I am rather hoping that this Minister will also have a rush of blood to the head and that he will change the policy as regards the use of the two theatres which are causing such considerable difficulty and dismay in the two main cities of South Africa. That is the use of the Nico Malan Theatre in Cape Town and the use of the Civic Theatre in Johannesburg by persons who are not White. Now, I have been trying to get to the bottom of the original decision in regard to the Nico Malan Theatre. As far as my research has gone, I understand that the original decision was made by Dr. Verwoerd’s Cabinet in about 1964. There have been many changes in policy since those days and I think the time has come for the hon. the Minister also to consider changing the policy as far as the Nico Malan Theatre is concerned. I understand that it is no exaggeration to say that 90 % of the directors of Capab, of the work force of Capab, and of the committees that work through Capab, and the people who aid in the productions of Capab, are all in favour of a change in policy. They all want their theatre to be open to non-White audiences, and I might say that some are in favour of those audiences attending as segregated audiences while others, which would be my view naturally, are in favour of audiences attending together, that is, non-Whites together with Whites. There is one way in which the Government can save face over this issue, as it appears to me, and that is by declaring this theatre to be an international venue, the same way that it has declared Jan Smuts Airport an international venue, where all the “Whites” and the “non-Whites” notices have disappeared and where, I understand, they will soon be able to sell liquor legally to Africans. This is in the General Laws Amendment Bill of the hon. the Minister of Justice. All sorts of interesting deviations from the colour laws of South Africa have also been introduced. I might also mention Ellis Park, which has been declared an international venue so that spectators of all races can watch international tennis tournaments. I would suggest that the hon. the Minister declare the Nico Malan an international venue so that members of all races can attend, and I would suggest too that the same thing be done in Johannesburg with the Civic Theatre, where I think the case is almost worse in some ways than it is at the Nico Malan Theatre, because this theatre in Johannesburg was built on the clear understanding that it was going to be available for members of all races, and to cater for audiences of different races, probably on separate nights, but that is not the point. The fact is that all the facilities were provided as laid down by our regulations, including that all important factor in our lives, separate toilet facilities. They are all there at the Civic Theatre. Now, last year the hon. the Minister’s predecessor refused an application for the world-famous ballerina, Margot Fonteyn, to appear before a Coloured audience. Of course he has changed his mind considerably about matters of this kind since he went to Rome. This year two requests that, the Follies be allowed to perform for Coloured and Indian audiences were turned down. In all I understand there have been eight applications to allow non-Whites to attend performances at the Johannesburg Civic Theatre, eight applications since 1965. There was one for an opera, one for a ballet, one for a mannequin parade, one for a stage production and four for musical concerts or musical comedies. Every single one of these applications was turned down. The reason which was given to me in March this year was that alternative halls were available, which is patent nonsense because there is nothing to compare with the facilities of the Civic Theatre either for opera or ballet. The City Hall certainly is not adequate while all the halls available to Coloured or Indian audiences are obviously not able to offer all the facilities. The other reason given to me was that the demand for the use of the Civic Theatre by Whites was so great. I think we Whites must stop being so greedy in this regard. I believe that the city fathers of Johannesburg have supported the applications in many cases where performances were requested for non-White audiences. We must stop being so greedy, Sir, because it is going to be our downfall in the end, and I am quite sure that the White audiences in Johannesburg are quite prepared either to share their theatre or, if they have not got that far yet, at least to have certain nights set aside when non-White people can enjoy the same facilities and entertainment as they themselves. The third reason given was that it was considered that refusal would not cause hardship. Well, I think that the deprivation of entertainment of the type that Margot Fonteyn, for instance, could provide is certainly a hardship. Finally, I was told that it was refused because the granting of the application would not be in the interests of the White group as required by the Group Areas Act. Under the applicable section the Minister has to be of the opinion that granting of the application would be in the interests of the White group. I cannot see why the granting of such applications would not be in the interests of the White group. To the contrary, I say that it would be very much in the interests of the White group if we shared some of these sophisticated entertainments with our non-White fellow citizens. People who want to go to concerts and to opera and to watch Margot Fonteyn dancing are a very much more sophisticated audience than the average non-White in South Africa and South African White people would be well advised to realize that there is a growing class of educated people, of cultured people who are not of the same colour as themselves but have an equally strong desire to enjoy entertainments of this kind. It seems to me a tragedy that one of our great opera singers, the Coloured singer Gabriels, who went overseas some years ago because of restrictions like these, and who I am sure would very much like to come back to this country, is unable to come back to perform at a theatre like the Nico Malan. However, he can perform at the Metropolitan in New York, at the Scala and at other threatres in Europe. I think that it is high time now, as I say, since we are getting a breath or two of fresh air blowing through the racially discriminating cobwebs that surround us in South Africa, that the hon. the Minister might give some consideration to changing the ruling on these matters and also to granting these applications.

While I am on the issue of R.26, I want to know why it is that his department has taken it upon itself to refuse permits that are not required. People who apply for permits when they do not need to apply for permits in the case of, for instance, the Press ball in Cape Town last year for which it was never necessary to apply because it was not open to the public—it was a private entertainment by invitation and did not require the permission of the department to be a mixed entertainment—should be told that they need not apply. However, instead of so informing the people who apply, the department takes it upon itself, and not only in this instance but in others too, to refuse permits which are not required. The reply given is that it is not the department’s business to give free legal advice. Well, that may very well be so, but I would also say that it is not the department’s business to refuse permits which by law are not required to be issued. A great deal of ill-feeling and inconvenience, I might add, has been caused to the public of South Africa by this unnecessary attitude —a churlish attitude is the only way I can describe it—on behalf of the hon. the Minister’s department. I sincerely hope that he will see that an instruction is given that in future, when people who are ignorant of the law apply for permits which do not in fact require to be issued, the information that such permits are not required is given to the applicants.

In the few minutes left to me—I shall have to try to come in again on this Vote— I want to say something about the housing situation. Other hon. members have mentioned it and I want to continue on that. There is no doubt about it that the Group Areas Act is largely responsible for, or at any rate, is a major factor in the tremendous shortage of housing, particularly for Coloured people in the Cape and Indian people elsewhere. Of the houses that are built by the local authorities—and there are too few of them—I think about half, or at least a large percentage, is taken …

In the Cape it is 50%.

The hon. member confirms it is 50% for the Cape. Fifty per cent of these houses are taken by the department in order to rehouse people who are being moved as disqualified persons under the Group Areas Act. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, if I may distort an English proverb, I wonder whether the hon. member for Houghton is not a “round hole” with a “square peg”.

It is very likely. I often feel that that is the case.

I almost said “great minds think alike”, but then I would have to include the hon. member. The hon. member is like a serial, sometimes even boring serial, because for how many years, year in and year out, from one sitting day to the next, has the hon. member not been telling the same story over and over again. She tells the same story over and over again without taking into consideration that South Africa is ruled by a White Government, that South Africa’s Government is in the hands of Whites …

You are changing you know?

… and that it is also this Government’s object to give the non-Whites, for whom she is so assiduously lodging pleas, their own facilities, and everything accruing to them, in their homelands. If the hon. member is so keen to speak about these matters, I wonder if I should not obtain for her the address of a certain Chief Buthelezi or the address of a certain Chief Matanzima so that she may preferably speak and put her case so convincingly to them.

That will come about in spite of yourself.

I rather want to leave this matter at that.

Yes, do that.

I cannot let the fact pass that today is Wednesday and that this causes one to think back to a certain Wednesday 25 years ago. I must tell hon. members that the Whites in South Africa had a very narrow escape, as I see the matter. I am saying this because if those election results had been any different to what they were 25 years ago, I am asking hon. members in all seriousness how many Sam Kahns would not have been sitting next to the hon. member for Houghton and how many additional Coloured representatives would there not have been? I ask myself how many Soviet embassies and other communist embassies there would not have been in Pretoria if that had been the case.

It will happen in Zululand.

I really think the Whites had a narrow escape, and I believe it was an act of God that the National Party won.

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

Mr. Chairman, with your permission I just want to complete my argument. [Interjections.] As a result of that day we are celebrating two silver jubilees this week. The one silver jubilee is for the hon. members opposite and other jubilee, which I hope will be like a silver cloud and which we can all celebrate together, is that of this side of the House …

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

Twenty-five years ago the Department of Community Development, which was then still called the Department of National Housing, obtained an unsavoury inheritance which resulted from the administration and government of hon. members on that side of the House. If the Greeks tell one that one has a big task to perform, they speak of the seven tasks of Hercules. I firmly believe that this department which was then still known by another name, had all the seven tasks of Hercules rolled up into one ball. If there was ever a department which was …

You won’t get promotion.

… in a sad state, then it was the Department of National Housing. That was the case because hon. members opposite saw too many red flags, with hammers and sickles, in their mind’s eye and did not give attention to the housing emergency in the country.

What are you talking about now?

Thanks to the results of the election at the time, the National Party came into power and, as hon. members have heard previously, it gave so much attention to housing and spent so many millions of rand that the department can today state proudly that this year more than R100 million is being voted for the Community Development Vote, Vote No. K. It is really an exceptional achievement that so much attention is being given to this matter.

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

Mr. Chairman, when the House adjourned for dinner I was just speaking about the past 25 years and our silver jubilee. It does my heart good, after dinner, to particularly mention four people, i.e. our present Speaker, the Leader of the House, the Minister of Finance and the Chief Whip on this side who were members of this House in 1948 and to congratulate them on that fact. There is another person I could add to this list and whom I should like to congratulate …

Order! I have already told the hon. member prior to the adjournment for dinner that he must confine himself to the Vote.

I particularly want to say thank you as well. …

If the hon. member does not pay heed to what I am saying, he must resume his seat.

The Department of Community Development is particularly grateful for what these people have done in the past and I should like to say thank you very much to them.

Then there are a few matters I should like to mention to the hon. the Minister, matters affecting my own constituency. We have three fine schemes for the aged in Pretoria, i.e. one in Danville, one in Eloffsdal and one in Villieria. Aged married couples live in these houses. The houses are fairly cramped, but the old people there are very happy and vote for the National Party. That is one of the great virtues of those people, I would say. There is one great disadvantage in relation to this matter, i.e. that when one of the old people dies, the one still living must vacate the house within three months. This creates many problems. When the aged still have relatives, that family sometimes takes them under its wing, but it is not always that easy. The question is what we must do with those aged. I therefore want to ask the hon. the Minister if something could not be done to make provision somewhere, for example by means of a block of flats, where these old people can be given accommodation, or something of that kind which the department could perhaps give some thought to. There is also another scheme in Pretoria West. It is a scheme consisting of 93 sub-economic houses. The houses have been built regularly and uniformly and for some people this is perhaps not all that attractive. Unfortunately this has recently become a plaything in the hands of many right-wing political parties during elections. Thought has been given to that to seeing whether something cannot be done, and I know that the Pretoria Municipality itself is concerned about that. They thought that if they perhaps planted trees there they would break the regularity of the scheme. I know that the Department of Community Development has already given attention to that as well. Their idea was that large blocks of flats could perhaps be built in that area. However. I should like to present the hon. the Minister with another idea. Perhaps this scheme could be converted into a purchase scheme, so that the people living there could purchase the houses. They could then obtain a loan from the Department of Community Development. It would then only be a few years before that scheme changes completely in appearance, here in respect of a chimney, there in respect of a room that is built on and somewhere else in respect of a verandah or whatever the case may be. It would then be a much more attractive scheme in the constituency. I would appreciate it if the hon. the Minister and his department would consider seeing whether something could not be done about that.

There is a final matter I should like to broach. Often, when families increase in size or for other reasons, it is necessary to build on. If a person intends to ask for a loan, however, he must first go to the municipality. From there the application is taken further to the Department of Community Development. When the matter comes before them, there are very frequently quite small errors which cause the application not to be approved at that stage by the committee. Because the committee convenes every 14 days, this sometimes causes great delays. I want to ask the hon. the Minister if it would not improve matters to accept the application in principle, when it comes before the committee, even if there is a small error. Afterwards it could merely be finalized departmentally. I want to make a very friendly request to the hon. the Minister to give this his consideration.

Mr. Chairman, I think the Opposition has tried to create the impression here this afternoon that, I as the Minister, and my department are quite insensitive to the plight of people in the lower income groups as far as their housing is concerned. Permit me to say that if that is the impression which is being created, it is absolutely untrue. However, I think that the facts are there and that they speak very clearly for themselves. Any person who travels through South Africa today and visits, in particular, its larger cities and towns, will see everywhere the signs of the hand of the Department of Community Development and its two statutory boards. I readily grant that needs do still exist at a very large number of places, but to suggest that the department has been neglecting its duty, has failed to perform its duty, is to my mind, to say the least of it, very, very unfair. In the months during which I have been in this department, I have seen a great deal in this regard. For instance, I am thinking of the day I was at Boksburg in order to take delivery of and hand over the 1 000th economic house. On that day I was informed that the waiting list at Boksburg—i.e. the one for Whites—had already passed the 1 000 mark again.

Yes.

That gives one an idea of the task awaiting my department in the future. The other thing that must be realized, is that the responsibility for housing is, in the first instance, placed on the local authorities and not on the Department of Community Development.

No!

That is the real position. The Department of Community Development is there to assist in and to help with the provision of funds. This is indeed what we are trying to do. The facts of the matter are that over many years this department had to make it its business to activate various local authorities into proceeding to housing schemes for the lower and middle income groups.

Yes, sub-economic.

Sub-economic and economic. The department was in a position to make readily available the funds that were required. More or less during the past two years the position developed, because of economic circumstances, that the department was not able to make the funds available as readily as the local authorities—now that all of them had awakened to the activities of the department and to What they implied for their communities—wanted this to be done. But this does not mean that things have now come to a standstill. I readily grant that housing conditions in the larger centres— here I am thinking of Durban, Johannesburg and the Cape Peninsula in particular —for Coloureds and Indians, especially in Durban, still leave a great deal of room for expansion. But this is being done, in conjunction with the town councils concerned, although my department is also acting on its own. I think this is being done in such a way as may fairly be expected of my department with the means at its disposal.

Now I want to give a preview on the basis of the data I have here. I have been warned against a preview, but if circumstances beyond our control should necessitate alterations to this, no reasonable person would blame anybody for it. First of all I come to the projection in respect of Coloured housing in Durban. As regards housing provided by the city council, the following have already been approved: 156 sub-economic and 144 economic dwelling units at Merebank. This is the programme for the next three years. At Newlands East 1 400 dwellings are being planned, as well as 1 320 duplex flats and 730 flats. On the Sydenham Hotel premises 331 flats are being planned. At Austerville 560 dwelling units, which are being erected by the department, are already under construction. At Marianhill there is a potential of approximately 50 000 dwelling units. As soon as the services are available in approximately three years’ time, a start will be made with the first phase of development of approximately 1 600 units, which will be increased to approximately 10 000 units, according to the needs which may arise in future.

In respect of Indian housing by the city council, 1 100 units are under construction in Chatsworth; 260 are being planned for the future. What is at present being planned for Newlands is 3 715 economic units and 4 437 sub-economic units.

Over what period?

Over the next three years. How much time does the hon. member think it will take to build 4 435 dwelling units? In respect of Phoenix 22 050 units are being planned. The following works have already been approved: The sewage purification plant, which will cost R2,17 million; road building to the amount of R633 000; the provision of electricity and storm water drains to the amount of R822 000. At Shallcross the department is engaged at the moment in a scheme of 250 dwellings, and an additional 50 dwellings have already been approved. This is the position in Durban alone.

Let us take a look at the Cape Town area. As far as the Cape Peninsula is concerned, our planning covers the period up to 1980. At Scottsdene, previously Wolwefontein, 643 sub-economic dwellings, which will be ready during 1974, are being planned. Now I shall furnish the figures in respect of dwellings which will be erected as from 1976 and be ready before 1980. At Scottsdene 2 000 dwellings will be erected, which therefore means a total of 2 643 as from 1974. The present potential of Kleinvlei is 2 000 dwellings, of which the first 200 will be available in August this year, and the rest will be erected at the rate of 80 dwellings per month. By 1980, and with further expansion, an additional 2 000 dwellings can be fitted in. In the case of Macassar, 528 sub-economic dwellings have been completed and are occupied; 4 000 dwelling units, with which a start was made in 1970, will be completed before 1980. In the case of Mitchell’s Plain, 25 500 dwelling units may be ready by 1980.

Without a railway line.

Yes, the Minister of Transport is aware of the position there. He has been informed in that regard. The potential of this area is 40 000 dwelling units, and I shall indicate the objects in terms of which they will be made available. I think the hon. member for Green Point knows that there was a delay in the case of Mitchell’s Plain and what the cause of that delay was. During the first year 2 500 dwelling units will be made available, during the second year 3 000 and after that 4 000 per year. The department received the following applications from local authorities on 10th May, 1973: 4 940 economic dwellings, 1 022 sub-economic dwellings, and another 4 600 economic dwellings. These applications are being considered at present. The total number of dwelling units envisaged for the Cape Peninsula up to 1980, is 34 671.

Now I come to the projects being undertaken at present by the Cape Divisional Council. In the first place there is Belhar. Here, too, living units will be provided over a period of three years. It has been envisaged to start with the provision of services before 1973. By the middle of 1974 a start will be made with the first dwellings, and they envisage making available approximately 1 000 dwelling units per year. As far as Elsies River is concerned, the applications in connection with the first three schemes are in Pretoria at present. They hope to start with the first 500 dwelling units by the middle of 1973. Subsequent to that units will be provided at the rate of 2 000 per year. The full potential of this area is 15 000 dwelling units, and all of these will be for letting schemes. In other words, these will be flats, maisonettes and sub-economic dwellings. In the case of Ocean View, 100 sub-economic dwellings are being planned for 1974. No further expansion is being envisaged there. In the case of Grassy Park, only 1 000 dwelling units are being envisaged before March, 1975. The full potential of this area will then have been utilized. That gives us, as far as the activities of the Divisional Council are concerned, a total of 8 600 dwelling units. It is the hand of the Department of Community Development which can be seen in this; it is doing the financing, which is consistent with the Act.

Sir, now I want to pause at the most important points raised by hon. members up to now. I hope to be able to reply at a later stage to such points as I may omit now. The hon. member for Green Point made the statement, apparently by way of a charge, that the Department of Community Development was the biggest property owner, the biggest landlord, the biggest lessor in the whole of South Africa. He also referred to properties which were being expropriated unnecessarily. Sir, if that is the case, I want to ask whether this does therefore not meet with the approval of the hon. member. After all, is it not the task of my department to do these things, or at least to inspire and to finance them? They want to impose on my department all the burdens in respect of housing, and then, when the logical consequences of such a step emerge, they want to find fault with them. Does this make any sense or appear to be logical to them? This is the logical consequence of what is being done in respect of housing in this country.

I may tell him that the amounts to which he referred here, for instance, are mainly in respect of urban renewal, and in that regard I have in mind areas such as District Six, where an amount of approximately R18 million is already involved; I have in mind Pretoria (approximatey R10 million for urban renewal) and places such as the Jeppe area, Georgetown, Germiston, Riverside, Prospect Hill, Cato Manor and Block AK in Durban, etc. Millions of rand are involved here. Sir, do hon. members opposite want things to be different? Where one starts with urban renewal on this basis, it is simply essential that there should be one owner so that proper planning may be done from scratch and so that proper town planning may be undertaken. This is logical: this is the way it must be, and the logical body for doing this is the Community Development Board. The Community Development Board is not a land speculator.

But it sells at profit.

The statement purporting that that board is a land speculator, is, to say the least of it, an absolutely unreasonable one; that is not the case. The Community Development Board would like to dispose of land as soon as it has fulfilled its function there, so that the money which then becomes available there may once again be applied by it for the purpose and the functions for which it was established. It is logical and to my mind correct that this should be the position, and if it has to be different, Sir, then I cannot see how any hon. member can come along in this House and hold the Department of Community Development with its statutory boards responsible for housing conditions in the country; for in that case there is no function for this department. It seems to me the idea is to pass on to the department all the problems experienced by people, but when the department exercises the functions assigned to it, this leads to scandal-mongering, as we witnessed here tonight.

U.P. scandal-mongering.

Sir, the hon. member for Green Point also mentioned the question of the income limits in respect of economic and sub-economic housing. I may refer at the same time to what he said in respect of the 90% owner scheme. The position is that these limits are under review, but it cannot simply be decided today what the new limits will be. They have to be worked out scientifically. One starts with the Housing Commission; they work out their proposals and after that thorough consultation takes place with the Treasury, which has to provide the money, and once this process has been completed and everybody is satisfied that this is a proper scientific formula, then it will be announced and put into operation.

May I ask that this be expedited?

Sir, thorough work must be done here. It goes without saying that it is being expedited as much as possible, but one has to proceed here on a scientific basis since all kinds of implications are involved in the matter, as the hon. member for Green Point will readily appreciate. Another hon. member also raised the question of limits here, and therefore this is at the same time a reply to his question in that regard.

Sir, then the hon. member referred to rent control. I shall come back to rent control later on. The hon. member for Green Point suggested that nothing was being done in respect of Coloured housing. That was more or less the vein of his speech on Coloured housing. I do not think I need say any more about the matter. Then he referred to the squatter problem at Brackenfell.

When are we going to get the Johannes Report?

Sir, I said that I would come back to it later on, because I want to deal jointly with this matter and with the speech made by the hon. member for Hillbrow. As I have said, the hon. member referred to the squatters at Brackenfell. The position is, of course, that Brackenfell does not have a Coloured group area, as the hon. member knows, and consequently the municipality of Brackenfell is not in a position to make permanent provision there. My department negotiated with the municipality of Brackenfell as far as it could in order to see whether a settlement could be reached, but this was not possible. Sir, I can tell you why a settlement could not be reached. In my reply to a question put here earlier on I indicated what had been the decisive factor as far as the municipality of Brackenfell was concerned. Employment was offered to those people on a neighbouring farm, where it would then have been possible for them to put up huts for themselves until such time as other provision could be made for them. To my regret they declined this offer, while the department reported to me that 12 to 15 men were loitering about there, people who were obviously unemployed and were looking for employment. The divisional council of Stellenbosch tried to step in in respect of these people and made a start there with a system of semi-detached houses, which is probably the cheapest form of housing that can be provided in this case. I want to link up at once that system of the provision of semi-detached houses, which will therefore form part of a housing scheme, with the idea expressed by the hon. member for Green Point; what this idea amounts to is that there will have to be transit camps, that plots with water on them will have to be made available, and that the people will then be able to put up their own huts there at their own discretion. Mr. Chairman, we must simply take into account the fact that the city lights are a major attraction to the Coloureds of the interior, and that they are coming here, to use a term that was used in my presence, like locusts. Neither my department nor any municipality can cope with that situation and bring about satisfactory conditions all the time; that is not possible. These people have freedom of movement. At Brackenfell it has been ascertained that some of those squatters, who are supposed to have lived there for the past six years or so, are Coloureds from places as far afield as Upington.

But they do not have any Coloured area there.

No, they do not, but these people squatted there; these are the people to whom the hon. member referred. I am now referring to that inflow.

But what about the Act?

We had the position there that an officer of my department arrived at a hut and asked the person living there, “How long have you been living here?” His reply was that he had been living there for six years. When this officer looked into the hut, he found that the branches of the Port Jackson tree that had been cut down were still green. These are the situations which must be handled, and I can give hon. members the assurance that my department and I are trying to handle these situations as sympathetically as we possibly can. One must simply take these conditions into consideration and one should not expect superhuman achievements. Sir, one so often finds that comparisons are drawn. The English have a very good proverb, i.e. comparisons are odious, but I want to say this tonight: The person who squats there comes from somewhere in the rural areas; he is unemployed and does not have any money; he has nowhere to live. But after he has arrived here, he picks up a few sheets of corrugated iron somewhere and puts them up against a tree. What happens then? Then one finds that photographs appear in the newspapers and that stories are published about people living in circumstances of extreme distress …

By U.P. newspapers.

Mr. Chairman, if a White person were to do this, what would we think of him; what would we say about him? What sympathy would he get? But because the skin of these people has a different colour, because this situation lends itself to emotions being stirred up, because the situations developing here offer scope for criticizing a policy, these situations are exploited and those people are getting all the sympathy in the world, i.e. when those stories are broadcast in the outside world by a Press which publishes those stories of human sorrow because they sell like hot cakes. That is the only reason, as far as I can see, why these stories are being published.

The hon. member for Green Point also raised the question of White utility companies, such as Garden cities, which are involved in the housing problem here in Cape Town. It was also raised by the hon. member for Vasco. This matter was considered by my predecessors and they did not find it realistic. I am considering the matter again at the moment. I have also had representations from these organizations themselves, from the Housing League and from Garden Cities. I am taking a thorough look at this situation once again, but I am not in a position tonight to give any undertakings in this regard.

The hon. member for Germiston expressed a number of thoughts here, for which I just want to express my appreciation to him. Then I come to the hon. member for Natal. I do not think the hon. member for Natal expects it to be humanly possible to rise here and to reply to each of the questions put by him, but I know of a wise man who once said: One fool can ask more questions than ten wise men can answer.

Answer those questions.

What I cannot understand about the hon. member, is that he is angry whenever he rises in this House, although I do not know with whom he is angry. I do not know why he should be angry with me, because I did not make him angry. But I can give him the assurance that when profits are made on plots sold by the Community Development Board, I as the Minister do not get those profits. I do not even get a commission on them. Those profits, when profits are in fact made, are applied again in the interests of the community served by this Board. Cases will occur where profits are in fact made. This I readily grant, but there are also cases, and very definitely so, where losses are incurred. One case in respect of which I expect a considerable loss to be incurred is here in District Six, because those plots will to a large extent be made available for housing. Do hon. members opposite expect this board simply to ensure that it makes no profits? And if there are losses, in what way should it make them good? This board must try to carry out properly the functions assigned to it by law. I want to refer to a case to which reference was made by the hon. member for Port Natal. The property concerned was bought in for approximately R15 000 and sold for R65 000. What other procedure should the board have followed? The city council of Durban sold that property to the board for its price. R15 000 was its valuation of market value, and the board bought it for R15 000 and was satisfied with it. At the stage when the board was in a position to sell that property, it had its valuation made, and then its own valuation was R60 000 or slightly more. I am speaking in round figures. Then it called for tenders and received one tender for R65 000, and that was the amount for which it sold the property. [Interjections.] That is the story. What was the board to do in that case? No, Sir, when one expresses this kind of criticism, one should at least be reasonable. We are not putting the profits into our own pockets. Those profits are used in the interests of the people in the lower income groups in this country and nobody else.

[Inaudible.]

To give you an idea of the kind of story with which the hon. member for Natal came along here to-night: he levelled reproaches at me concerning a promise I had allegedly made to Durban to pay a visit to Durban. I wonder what business it is in fact of his what I discuss with the Durban City Council. [Interjections.] These are the facts of the matter, and he is free to go and check them with his mayor, namely that without an invitation of the board I informed the deputation of the board in the course of an interview in Pretoria that I had already discussed the matter with the Secretary for the Department in order to see whether it would not be possible for me to make time before the end of last year to pay a visit to Durban in order to have a look at the position there. The idea came from my side; the mayor was friendly and told me at once that he would immediately extend such an invitation. I told him that I could not give him the assurance that I would be able to come, but that I would see whether I could fit it in. I could not fit it in. Now, I do not know whether the hon. member expects me to produce my diary and to give him a precise account of my daily movements since I became Minister, including why I was unable to visit Durban. This shows how unreasonable one can be in this world of ours. This I can still understand, but what I cannot understand is that a person as unreasonable as that hon. member has shown himself to be tonight has been able to gain the confidence of so many people that he is able to sit in this House today. This I cannot comprehend. There is another thing I want to tell the hon. member. [Interjections.] If any hon. member on this side of the House were to rise and make the kind of speech he made here this afternoon, I would be ashamed. Now, I do not know how his side of the House feels about him.

The hon. member for Langlaagte raised the question of the physical decline of buildings. The position in that respect is briefly that the necessary statutory provision was effected last year, and the responsibility now rests with the Community Development Board to be of assistance, in conjunction with the town and city councils, in the attempt to undertake restoration before the decline assumes such proportions that slum clearance has to take place. The first pilot project will be undertaken in Jeppe, in Johannesburg, in the near future. All things considered, it would seem as though the logical thing would be for this supervision, this control which has to be exercised, and the assistance which has to be granted, to fall under the Community Development Board. The hon. member also mentioned the promotion in other places of utility companies such as those we have here in the Cape. I should like to see those utility companies being established, for these companies in the Cape have fulfilled a very important function. I also believe, if my memory serves me correctly, that the department sometimes provides, them with funds from Community Development whenever this is possible, but I really do not think that it is the task of my department to try to activate these utility companies. The task of my department is to maintain liaison with the local authorities and to launch schemes in consultation and conjunction with them.

The hon. member for Bloemfontein District raised the question of loans to owners of smallholdings. I should like to tell him that those limits are being considered along with the rest which I mentioned earlier on.

The hon. member for Hillbrow harped on his old string again—the Rents Act, to which the hon. member for Green Point referred, too. As far as the report of the Johannes Committee is concerned, I must point out that it was placed in my possession in January this year. I studied it—in fact, I am still studying it at the moment, because it is very complicated.

It is taking a very long time.

My department is studying it, too. I was not prepared to come to Parliament this year with over-hasty legislation. The first reason for my decision is that this report had to be studied thoroughly. Rent boards with a great deal of experience had to be consulted. Not all rent boards were consulted.

Nor was Parliament.

I say that rent boards with a great deal of experience had to be consulted, and Parliament will be consulted when legislation is eventually submitted here.

May I put a question to the hon. the Minister? For what reason did the hon. the Minister not table this report for the information of hon. members, seen in the light of the fact that he did consult the various rent boards?

Those rent boards were consulted as bodies consisting of experts who deal with these situations and the determination of rent values from day to day. When I introduce this legislation, I shall come to this House with the full particulars it requires. I do not wish to act precipitately …

Without the report?

This is the report of a committee which was specifically appointed to advise the Minister; it is not the report of a commission of inquiry appointed by the State President. From time to time Ministers appoint committees for the specific purpose of advising them when they envisage coming to Parliament with measures.

May I ask the hon. the Minister a question? Is this House to understand from the hon. the Minister that he does not intend tabling the report of the Johannes Commission?

At this stage I can see no necessity for tabling it. It was not the purpose of the committee and the committee has now served its purpose.

May I put a further question to the hon. the Minister? Does the hon. the Minister not consider that interested parties in the country are entitled to know what the report of the Johannes Commission is?

There is nothing sinister about that report.

Well, let us have it then.

It is not customary and it has never been customary when Ministers appoint committees to institute certain investigations for their information to table such reports.

It is nonsense to say that it is not customary.

It has not been a departmental committee.

What are you trying to hide? [Interjections.]

Order!

I hope to introduce next year the legislation which will result from it. The question which the hon. member has just put, i.e. “What are you trying to hide?”, is a rather silly question.

Yes, what are you trying to hide?

Order!

Just consider how many committees are appointed by Ministers to advise them. Is one to come to Parliament with the report of such a committee in every case, for if one did not one would ostensibly be hiding something? Surely it is absurd to make such a statement.

The United Party is always playing hide and seek with its policy. [Interjections.]

Order!

The position in regard to this rent situation, which has over the past year apparently assumed certain undesirable proportions as a result of the actions of some people and which has become emotionally charged, also as a result of the actions of people, has now developed to the stage where we have the kind of speech which we had in this House earlier on and which we once again had tonight, this time from the hon. member for Hillbrow. Now I just want to tell the hon. member for Hillbrow that I have now been in a position to speak under privileged circumstances for a period of 25 years. For as long a period as 25 years I have been in a position to speak under this protection, but so far I have never found it necessary to say from that protected position things which I was not prepared to repeat outside.

You are defending him now.

By saying this I want to indicate how an emotionally charged situation was exploited. [Interjections.]

Order!

A Minister knows very well what his task is. I want to repeat that it is easy to stir up emotions and to create a situation out of stories about human sorrow. When we look at the newspapers today and consider the reports published in them, I want to state frankly that I cannot approve of the way in which these things are done. I can tell hon. members that all those cases of elderly people, bedridden people and sick people are selected cases—for instance, how many of them may be living in one flat. These, therefore, are the photographs which are held up and which are supposed to create the general impression that my department is neglecting its duty.

And you are quite satisfied with the situation!

It is quite ridiculous to suggest that I am quite satisfied with the situation. I have said this here before, and I say it again tonight, that I envisage introducing legislation in an attempt to remedy that situation. I said this as far back as at the time of the snap debate initiated by the hon. member, but I also said it was no use running away with situations by squeezing every drop of emotion out of them, irrespective of what was to be gained from doing so. There is no point in conclusions being drawn by everybody at his own discretion, for there are after all two sides to every matter. I, in my capacity as the Minister, am not prepared to look at a matter from one side only, but if the hon. members on the other side of the House want to do this, they are welcome to do so.

These people are having a hard time.

The Rents Act has been in operation for many years. Through all these years this Act has been functioning in such a way that a revision of it only became necessary during the past year or two. The function of that Act is to look after the interests of both sides. That Act has to protect the landlord and it also has to protect the tenant. It does not exist for one of the parties only. I have said before, and I say it again tonight, that if we think we are going to make laws which will drive the flat-owner out of his business, i.e. the man who invests his money in that property, then we are making a very big mistake and then it may have disastrous results. When a law has to be made, it will be made in such a way that the man who invests his money in such property, will be assured of a reasonable income, and it will have to be an income—and this is only logical—which will be competitive with other ways in which he may perhaps be able to invest his money with less trouble. There are two sides to this matter. I am not fond of speaking from my own experience, but, while we are talking about the one side, the owner, I want to tell the hon. member for Hillbrow what my experience was. At a certain time in my life, many years ago, I bought a property, and at a later stage I sold it at a big profit. Then I thought there was money in this business, and subsequently I had properties built, with loans, and so forth. “Now I am going to make money,” I thought. I was a landlord. But as a landlord I reached the point where I was pleased to be able to sell those properties at what I had paid for them, because this was not a paying proposition for me. It was not a paying proposition for me at all. I am not going to take up the time of the House any further with this episode, but I want to tell the hon. member for Hillbrow that I can tell him here tonight the most fantastic stories about what a tenant can do to the property of a landlord. This matter has its two sides. On the other side is the side of the tenant. The tenant needs special protection in this case.

But that is what we are asking for.

Yes, but the hon. member is trying to extract sensation and emotion out of this matter which is not fair. In an unreasonable manner the hon. member for Hillbrow tried here tonight to impute to me statements which I had allegedly made in my previous speech, statements which I did not make. He drew his own conclusions from what I had allegedly said, from undertakings which I had allegedly given but which in fact I did not give. He tried to make political capital out of this situation. He can read his speech tomorrow, when he gets his Hansard report, and then he can compare it with what I said on the day we had the snap debate, and then it will be very clear to him what I am referring to.

I know exactly what I said.

I say that the tenant needs protection. My sympathies as a human being, like those of any other reasonable person, tend to lie with the underdog. If my sympathies lie with the underdog in this case, the underdog in the normal sense of the word, this is so because the demand is greater than the supply. This situation has the effect that one will have to be on one’s guard and that there will have to be rent control at least for as long as that situation continues. I see there is one owner who says he is intent on destroying the Rents Act. I do not know how strong a man he is. I understand he is a millionaire 20 times over. However, this is none of my concern. I want to say that what is my concern is that I shall make the Rents Act as fair as I humanly can, and that I shall try to apply it as fairly as I humanly can. But when complaints are received, such as those that were mentioned by the hon. member, and when he wants me to shoulder the blame for contracts that were signed and that sort of thing, I want to tell him that I am, after all, not a supreme court. I am not a court, nor is my department. My department is not a firm of attorneys which gives legal opinions. We have the Act, and those people have a place where they can go with their complaints if that Act is infringed. Do hon. members expect my department to visit every flat and look for law-breakers, or do they expect me to do this myself? And if my department does this, is it to do this for one side only or for both sides?

Last August you promised to take action.

Order! I want to point out to hon. members that while they were speaking, the hon. the Minister did not make one interjection. Hon. members should now show him the courtesy which he showed them. Hon. members must kindly accede to my request.

Mr. Chairman, that rents legislation will be introduced in as far as it is deemed wise after consideration of all the circumstances. I hope that in this way it will be possible to eliminate such deficiencies as may still exist at present. Any person who wants to suggest that my department or I am unsympathetic towards tenants, is absolutely wrong. Here again, in one of the latest cases, my department went out of its way to ascertain precisely what the position was in a flat about which a great deal had been written in the newspapers. Although this is in point of fact not my department’s function, it was done all the same, because my department’s sympathies are also with people who may possibly be wronged. However, I am not going to give a decision, because my department is not a court of law. It is the function of a court of law to give a decision. I am not going to assume to myself the right and the power, as did the hon. member for Hillbrow, to be prosecutor and judge at the same time.

The hon. member for Boksburg raised the question of the Indians on the East Rand. The Department of Planning, with the knowledge of my department, is giving attention to the possibility of creating another area for the Indians on the East Rand. I think this answers the hon. member’s question. The hon. member also raised the question of uniform building regulations. In that respect I am in complete agreement with him. The Bureau of Standards has provided standard building regulations at the instance of the National Building Research Institute, which is unhappy about the reluctance of local authorities to make use of those standard building regulations, and these cannot be forced on them.

The hon. member for Vasco raised the question of the retrospective effect of rent increases which have been granted. That position worries me, too. What happens is that a person applies for a rent increase, and then all sorts of delays take place until the Rent Board gives its decision. In such cases it is possible, as the Act has now been amended—previously it used to be different as hon. members know—for the increased rent to be made retrospective for as far back as six months. This places the tenant, who may not be able to afford it, in a position where he has to pay the increased rent retrospectively for a period of three to six months. This is a matter that worries me; I have been looking into it and I hope I shall be able to find a solution to it. The hon. member also suggested solutions, but in this respect, too, as was in fact suggested by the hon. member, both sides of that matter will have to be considered.

The hon. member for Houghton raised the question of the use of the Nico Malan Theatre in Cape Town and the theatre in Johannesburg, and she made certain statements in that regard. She also referred to the refusal of permits by me in certain cases. Then she said in conclusion that the housing shortage being experienced at present, especially amongst Coloureds and Indians, was attributable to the Group Areas Act. She held the Act responsible for it. Sir, how the hon. member manages to arrive at that conclusion, I do not know. She wants to suggest that all the thousands of people who are in distressed circumstances today, would have been housed suitably if there had been no group areas. I do not understand her argument, and I do not think any person in this House can understand it. I can tell her this: Under my department’s policy we do not, in cases where people have to be moved, remove them from their homes until alternative housing can be offered to them, and in the normal course of events the alternative housing is better than the housing they had. It is a matter of principle not to move them until they can be offered other housing.

Then I want to pause for a moment at the question of the use of these theatres.

[Inaudible.]

Yes, the hon. member is making interjections, but I am sorry to say that I cannot hear them and, consequently, cannot reply to them either. As far as the theatres are concerned, I want to make the statement that when such an application is submitted to me, my first reaction is to see whether I can grant it. That is my approach. I can give the hon. member for Houghton the assurance that as a public figure I have been dealing with non-Whites—and now I am referring to Coloureds in particular—for a longer period than she has. I have been dealing with them for 25 years, during which period I have been charged with all sorts of matters. I understand these people. I have no hesitation whatever in telling the hon. member that I think the best testimonials I have yet received in my public career for my work have been given by Coloureds. I am proud to be able to say this. The Coloureds always know where they stand with me, and the same goes for the Indians. But although this is my attitude towards the Coloureds and the Indians, my attitude is also that the Whites in this country have rights too, rights which they can demand for themselves. All the rights are not only on the side of those whose skins are darker. The Whites also have rights which they may demand for themselves, by virtue of their way of life and pattern of life. When the Whites demand those rights for themselves, it goes without saying that I have respect for those rights, too.

Now I want to mention examples to hon. members. When such an application is submitted to me, and I consider the merits, I want to know why performances have to be given to mixed audiences, why a hall which is traditionally and normally being made available to Whites, should also be made available to non-Whites.

Because they have the facilities.

Now I want to give hon. members a list of the considerations mentioned to me. The first one that is mentioned is the desire to make a financial success of it. Does the hon. member for Houghton think that this should be a decisive argument with me, that the Coloureds be involved in order to make a financial success of the undertaking, an undertaking which is basically a White undertaking? The hon. member thinks that this should be a decisive consideration with me. No, Sir!

The next consideration that is mentioned is that I may be quite at ease as those performances will only be attended by Coloureds of the more well-to-do and educated class. When this argument is mentioned to me my attitude changes, and instead of saying “yes” I say “no”. My approach is that that attempt to skim off the more educated and well-to-do Coloured from the Coloured community, amounts to a crime against that Coloured community. [Interjections.] This is my view of the matter. The less well-to-do Coloured desperately needs that person who has the talent and the development. I am saying these things because I speak from my own experience as an Afrikaner. Why did the Afrikaner rise from the dust? Why did he rise when he was down-trodden? It was because the more well-to-do Afrikaner, the learned Afrikaner, the academic, the teacher in the rural areas, whoever they may have been, did not let go of the hand of the less well-to-do Afrikaner. He took that less well-to-do Afrikaner along with him, and that is why the Afrikaner was able to rise. This is why I say it is wrong to try to skim off the more well-to-do Coloured from his fellow Coloureds.

May I ask what that has to do with going to opera? [Interjections.]

The next consideration that was mentioned to me, was that it would be quite a multi-racial occasion; the performing arts would also be staged. It was suggested that no colour-bar would be observed in the restaurant; however, at the entrances to the theatre Whites and non-Whites would be separated by way of some clever manipulation in the sale of tickets. Surely this is not sincerity, Sir. Surely this is hypocrisy; after all, this amounts to swindling the Coloureds, to swindling the Indians. I want to mention some more examples of this nature. I receive applications for mixed parties which will be attended by men and women. At the end of the letter of application this is usually said: Separate toilet facilities will be available. Just imagine, Sir; Mr. A and Mrs. A are White, Mr. B and Mrs. B are non-Whites. They are attending the same party. People are having drinks and are dancing. Mr. A will dance with Mrs. B, and Mr. B will dance with Mrs. A. Then, when the friendly relations are nicely established, the ladies decide it is time to powder their noses. Then, according to these people who are making the application—this is not my requirement—Mrs. A and Mrs. B will part company, and when Mr. A and Mr. B, having had a few drinks in each other’s company, decide to go for a walk, they too will part company.

It is because they think you require that.

That shows one thing to me, namely how ill-considered and immature these efforts with which people come up really are.

The hon. member for Houghton referred to the case where I refused a permit and was not entitled to do so. This was in connection with the Press reception here in Cape Town, and an application was sent to me for a permit. My department submitted it to me and I refused it. Subsequent to that the people ascertained that they did not require a permit, and they proceeded with their party. Now let us see exactly what happened. What happened is not what hon. members opposite think. At that party there was mixed dancing. A certain lady danced with Mr. Buthelezi. The newspapers wrote about it. This lady decided to dance with Mr. Buthelezi and he decided to dance with her. This was lawful dancing, and consequently it was in order. The newspaper subsequently tried to extract from it everything that could be extracted. At the time I read in one of the newspapers that a statement had been made. Whether this had been made by the lady or whether it had been her husband, or whoever, I do not know, but according to the statement published in the newspaper they lady in question said that “she had not touched Buthelezi”. [Interjections.] She did not touch him. Sir, we are having a good laugh about it now, but if ever an insult could be flung at that Black man, then it was this statement. Whereas he had danced with a White woman in good faith, and had thought it was genuine friendship, he subsequently had to read in the newspaper that this woman had not touched him. This is the way bad blood is set. Mr. Chairman, if I had danced with the hon. member for Houghton; and I subsequently read in a newspaper that she had made a statement, or that someone, acting on her behalf, had made a statement to the effect that she had not touched me … [Interjections.] Sir, I think this tells the whole story of why I give the kind of decisions I do. [Interjections.]

Mr. Chairman, until I listened to the hon. the Minister tonight, I never believed that the Department of Community Development covered such a wide field. To cover the field that the hon. the Minister covered tonight, I think it would need at least five Ministers to do the job. I want to say to the hon. the Minister that he accused the hon. member for Port Natal of getting cross every time he rose to speak in this House. I want to say to him that he was almost guilty of the same offence tonight, because at times he bordered on getting very cross indeed. I want to say to him that he should not be so touchy. After all, he is the Minister. He is a new Minister, and quite rightly he must defend his department. I think we would do the same thing if we were in his position. But I think he must accept the fact that however efficient he thinks his department is, complaints are made from time to time against the department. It is the job of members on this side of the House, when complaints are brought to their notice, to raise them in this House.

Mr. Chairman, I just want to react to another thing that the hon. the Minister said. We have the hon. member for Hillbrow, who represents a constituency which is called Fiatland, and quite obviously, when complaints are brought to him in regard to landlords who through their actions upset and inconvenience elderly people, he would be a very poor member of Parliament indeed if he did not raise the matter here. I think the hon. the Minister was very, very unkind indeed to the hon. member for Hillbrow. I think the hon. member for Hillbrow did his duty. I am not saying at this stage who is right and who is wrong, but the hon. member merely asked the hon. the Minister to freeze all applications for rent increases until such time as an investigation had been carried out. I think this was a very reasonable request.

Mr. Chairman, I want to raise another matter. I want to say to the hon. the Minister that we accept the fact that when his deparment makes profits, those profits are ploughed back into South Africa, but I want to say to him that there are times when we believe that those profits are made at the expense of a certain section of the community, and to us that is entirely wrong, even if you plough back the profits. Unless you are absolutely sure that you are not penalizing someone, then I say that this profit should not be made.

Then I want to raise a few matters with the hon. the Minister in regard to the group area of Lenasia. Sir. I raise these matters for two reasons: Firstly, because of the number of complaints which I received from the residents of Lenasia and, secondly, because I believe that the reply which I received from the hon. the Minister himself to questions which I put on the Order Paper makes me believe that there is a good deal of substance in the complaints which have been brought to me. The matters which I want to raise are, firstly, the seemingly exorbitant prices of land in Lenasia in relation to the price that the Department of Community Development paid for this land initially. Then I want to raise the question of the high prices for land which the department is charging religious and cultural associations in Lenasia.

Scandalous!

I want to deal with the high price of certain types of homes in relation to similar types of homes in other group areas, and then I want to deal with what I believe is a serious allegation, and that is the department at times has allowed displaced persons who were desperate for homes to sign deeds of sale in which the price of the house was left out. I want to say here that in answer to my question on the Order Paper the Minister in fact admitted that that type of thing had happened, but I want to say to his credit that he has told us that since he has taken over it cannot happen again. The fact remains that this type of thing did happen. I know the answer will be that this happened, but that in no case was the owner held to this particular contract. But I say that this is not an answer, because we know that these people in their desperate need for housing will take a house under almost any conditions, and when you say to a man like that, “If you do not like the price that I am charging you, you can leave and somebody else will take the house”, then obviously this reaction is going to be that he is going to stay in the house. Sir, I think at this particular stage I should give the Committee a brief historical background of Lenasia.

Then Lenasia, as you know, Sir, is the only group area for Indians in Johannesburg. The Government in their wisdom have decreed that under no circumstances are they even prepared to discuss a further group area for displaced Indians of Johannesburg, which means of course that those Indians living in Lenasia are completely in the hands of the Department of Community Development. I want to say that this piece of land was acquired as far back as 1959. It is some 1 458 ha in extent and the department acquired this land at a total cost of R1,5 million. Now, unless my arithmetic is entirely wrong I believe that this land cost the department approximately one cent per square foot. I want to add too that the land is dolomitic in nature and it is situated in the under-developed southern part of Johannesburg where we know that land values are still relatively low. I want to make the point too that this is a resettlement area and falls under the Department of Community Development, a non-profit-making State department. [Interjections.] Let us have a look at what happened to this land. This land, for which the department paid originally one cent per square foot—and I want to be perfectly fair and say this is just the basic price and we know that improvements have to be brought about which put the price up— was sold in 1965 to displaced Indians at 11c a square foot. In 1970 it rose to 12c a square foot. It remained at 25c a square foot for 1972 but then we find that in 1973 the price jumped to 30c a square foot. This of course represents an increase of about 3 000%. [Interjections.] I want to say that if these people had a choice of land in some other area, like we all have, then of course it is a question of take it or leave it. But we know that these displaced Indians have no alternative. They have to buy land in Lenasia. I would like to know very much from the Minister how he justifies a price increase of this nature? I say again that I admit that obviously services and costs have gone up enormously but I would like to be shown that the costs have gone up to such an extent as to justify an increase of this size. I have had a complaint brought to me from the displaced people of Vrededorp. [Time expired.]

*Mr. S. F. KOTZÉ: The hon. member for Johannesburg North began by saying that the Minister must not be so very sensitive to the criticism that comes from the Opposition, because it is, after all, the duty of the Opposition to criticize. But that is not what the Minister implied, and that is not the Minister’s attitude either. I think that if he had listened to what the Minister said, he would have come to the conclusion that the Department of Community Development is doing very good and praiseworthy things. It provides housing for thousands of people and has, throughout the years, particularly taken less well-endowed people and non-Whites out of the most distressing of conditions and provided them with proper housing. But the Opposition never speaks about these good things which the department is doing. One never hears anything about that from the Opposition. All that hon. members do is to be intent on exaggerating a few exceptional cases that crop up in such a big department with such a comprehensive task, at times in conjunction with the yellow Press. They take the negative aspects, those which are not nice, and exaggerate them as if they form a picture of what is generally taking place in practice. What the hon. member said here in his speech is typical of the kind of thing we get.

But it is true!

It may be true, but I want to point out to the hon. member that in the course of its activities, the Department of Community Development deals with thousands of land transactions. There are many of these transactions that entail a loss as far as the department is concerned. As the hon. the Minister has said, great losses are expected on transactions in connection with the clearance of District Six. When the department suffers a loss, one never hears anything from the hon. members on that side, but when there is an instance in which the department has perhaps made a profit which could possibly be regarded as greater profit than normal, then it is, according to them, absolutely a public scandal, and it is then blazened abroad as if the hon. the Minister and his department are enriching themselves by way of land transactions. Is that not a distorted image? [Interjections.]

Order!

*Mr. S. F. KOTZÉ: Is that now really constructive criticism? I want to see the day when the hon. members for Port Natal and Houghton stand up and praise the department for the dirty slum conditions they have cleared up. I am referring to those dens of iniquity, those Cato Manors, those Sofia Towns, the Mossienests the Windermeres, where Bantu, Whites, Indians, goats and dogs lived together in the worst possible conditions. [Interjections.]

What do you know about the conditions?

Order! I want to warn the hon. member for Umlazi.

If hon. members would just now and then give a little credit for the great work which this department has done and is still doing, one would be prepared to see the criticism in clearer perspective.

In the time at my disposal I should like to come to a few other matters. I want to tell the hon. the Minister this evening that I regret having to speak about a problem which unauthorized persons create in White residential areas. In the first place one is dealing with a group of non-White persons, which includes Bantu and Coloureds, who are so-called “visitors” to domestic servants in White areas. In reality, however, they are nothing more than illegal and unauthorized lodgers in White residential areas. This is a problem one encounters today everywhere in our urban areas, from Sea Point to Kraaifontein. Usually these unauthorized persons are not a great hindrance to the owner on whose premises the relevant servant is staying and to whom a so-called “visit is being paid”. Usually the servants’ quarters for residential dwellings are not situated very close to the houses’ bedrooms; they are usually situated near to the neighbours’ bedrooms. Generally the disturbances which these people cause are tolerated by the home-owner because he is reluctant to get rid of his servant or to give offence.

The fact that so many non-Whites are in our White residential areas, particularly in the evening, in the early morning and late at night creates problems everywhere. The department has already been aware of this problem for years, and for that reason Parliament also passed legislation in 1966 empowering the Minister to take action again such unauthorized persons in White areas. With this object in view proclamation No. 70 of 1970 was issued in terms of that legislation. The problem, however, is that this proclamation unfortunately does not resolve the situation, because as it is at present it makes an offender of the domestic servant if an unauthorized person stays the night with him or her. At present the proclamation reads as follows—

Therefore the domestic servant must not admit such a person.

What is your point now?

I have quoted from the Government Notice. The position now is that if the Police take action as a result of complaints of a disturbance received from the neighbours or as a result of a “cleaning-up operation” such as those which are carried out from time to time in the urban areas, and if they find such an unauthorized person in the servants’ quarters of someone’s house, they cannot prosecute the person, because he is not in reality an offender. According to this proclamation the servant is the offender, and now the servant must be locked up and steps must be taken against that servant. The result is that the employers of the servants rebel against this because they do not want to lose their servants. As I have already said, they frequently tolerate the situation because it is often not a hindrance to them personally, and because they are disinclined to lose these people.

What is the point?

I do not want to waste my time giving the hon. member classes, but I shall meet the hon. member in the passage just now and then I shall tell him. The point is that I am asking the Minister and the department to give attention to this proclamation and amend it so that the unauthorized person will be the offender, so that action can be taken against him. That is the one case I want to bring to the department’s attention.

The other case has to do with the question of non-Whites who are squatting around our White residential areas. The hon. member for Green Point raised the matter with respect to Brackenfell, but today it is general practice for non-Whites to come in large numbers from the platteland to avenues of employment and to the city lights without knowing beforehand whether there is accommodation and whether there is work for them. Then they simply come and squat around the White residential areas. These people are frequently without work for long periods. They then loiter and lounge around in the White residential areas, and because their children must eat, they are frequently driven to theft, burglary and even more serious offences. This is becoming a fundamental problem. We shall have to do something in respect of accommodation for these people in order to get them out of the bush. I want to say here this evening that I fully agree with the municipality of Stellenbosch’s actions. The Stellenbosch municipality has a scheme of semi-detached houses, and I think the department ought to encourage this. They must go further by creating temporary housing or so-called halfway camps where these people will at least be supplied with the minimum sanitary and water facilities and where the health conditions could at least be controlled. If this is not done, these people will transfer tuberculosis and venereal diseases from the bushes into our White homes. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I shall not deal with what the hon. member for Parow has dealt with. I shall not reply to that because it is also a matter of detail relating to this vast department of which we are talking and to this enormous field which the hon. the Minister endeavoures to cover.

If I may, I want to come back to the Johannes Committee report. From what the hon. the Minister has told us, I assume that this is not a report which was brought out by a commission but that it is a report which was brought out by a committee appointed by the hon. the Minister to advise him. I would like to say that the whole country has been waiting for some statement from the hon. the Minister in regard to this report. Not only have tenants throughout the country been waiting, but the landlords have also been waiting. Tenants are concerned because of the enormous problems that face them in this country today. The example the hon. member for Hillbrow mentioned is one example of what happens in a place like Flatland, Hillbrow, where tenants from the majority of the community. There are many other thickly populated communitites of that nature in this country. Secondly the landlord himself is very concerned because in effect it is playing a very important part in hindering the development of housing or dwelling units. Where people live in uncertainty, one cannot expect them as entrepreneurs to invest large sums of capital in this particular field. In fact, a number of entrepreneurs have actually left this field not wishing to invest because of the conditions of uncertainty that exist. That is why we are pressing the hon. the Minister with regard to the contents of this report. We are not inquisitive as members of the Opposition as to what is contains, but the country is inquisitive and it is as representatives of the country that we feel it our duty to press this issue with the hon. the Minister and to ask him that some statement must be made as soon as possible if he is to play any part at all in relieving this rather difficult situation that exists in South Africa today in a very important field of human existence and in the sociological life of the community. Let me go further and tell the hon. the Minister that it has been stated by a predecessor of his, by members of the Government, and by all the experts, that we will require as many houses, if not more, between now and the year 2000 than were built since the day Jan van Riebeeck landed in South Africa. I wonder whether the Minister realises what an enormous amount of housing will have to he provided in the next 25 years. All that housing cannot only come from the department. It has to come from free enterprise from investors and from all sources, but particularly from the department, which is the spearhead for those in the middle and lower income groups, and in this regard a tremendous impetus is required. I cannot, as one who is interested in the subject, nor can anybody else who is interested in the subject, accept the placid manner in which the hon. the Minister has expounded the wonders of his department. I do not deny that they have done a job of work. I do not deny that they are working very hard and I do not deny that they are trying, but we have known now for some years, that it is necessary to exploit many avenues whereby the cost of housing can be brought down. New methods must be found and regulations may have to be changed. We know that the N.B.R.I. through the C.S.I.R. is working on the subject, but I would have expected today from the hon. the Minister a very much more imaginative programme than that which the hon. the Minister has put to us. Let me remind the hon. the Minister of the early years of the 1950’s, when Johannesburg was faced with perhaps the biggest squatter problem this country has ever experienced. Within two years we were building 40 000 houses per year. That was only a municipality, building with Bantu labour which it had to train itself on the spot, with crash-trained labour. That is the way to meet a crisis, under a different administration perhaps than at the moment. But you cannot face up to this matter merely by replying that the department is doing a great deal. Of course they are. Every department is doing a great deal. I have had a great deal of contact with the hon. the Minister’s department and I have the highest regard for its personnel, but I say that the hon. the Minister must give a lead. He and his Cabinet must give a lead to accelerate the rate at which we are building today and they must regard it as a crisis programme, if we are to accept what is admitted by the Government, namely that over the next 25 years we will need as many, if not more, houses than have been built in the history of this country over 300 years.

Let me come to another point and tell the hon. the Minister that I gather from what he has said that he might visit the suburb of Jeppes in Johannesburg, a constituency which it is my privilege to represent. We warmly welcome the hon. the Minister and I sincerely hope that he will allow me to be his host on the day he is there so that I can really show him around. I just want to say to the hon. the Minister that Jeppes is the first area in which this project of urban renewal commenced in a practical way. I want to say immediately that unfortunately, and I do not blame anybody, it started off on the wrong foot, because there it was started off by acquiring land and houses, demolishing them and then rebuilding. In fact, the hon. the Minister’s predecessor was even more ambitious. He built a set of houses, he said, for the upper income groups. When he was challenged as to whether the money of his department should not be devoted to the lower and middle income group he said: “I can build for any group I like, because I am the department.” He said that he had to look after every section of the community. What was the result? He built a scheme consisting of 128 dwelling units which it took almost six months to let fully, and the turnover of tenancy has been extraordinary; firstly, the rents are far too high and secondly, the manner in which it was built hardly constituted an imaginative programme to provide some form of free space and recreation for families and to house families who could enjoy the occupancy which was provided for them. Therefore it led to this peculiar situation where, through necessity, tenants took over a dwelling unit, spent two or three months there paying away most of their earnings in order to meet the rental and, as soon as they could find other accommodation, left, with the result that there was a very big turnover. The outcome was that the department’s rentals had to be lowered because the scheme was absolutely extraordinary; it was not, in my opinion, a sound scheme. There is now a movement to undertake urban renewal on the basis of renovating and repairing; something which was done here in the Malay district, something which immigrants to this country in the building trade have also done in Jeppes. I would like to tell the hon. the Minister what can be done in Jeppes. Instead of destroying and demolishing, because of the high cost of building, etc., they are able to renovate and refurbish dwellings to provide homes at a much lower cost, which can be let at a rental tenants can afford to pay. I do not have the time to say what I said a year or two ago to indicate to the hon. the Minister the experiences they have had in the United States, for that is where I would like to direct the hon. the Minister’s attention, should he want to do another tour on housing. He should go and see the remarkable things they have done there to meet the challenge of the 20th century. They have done the most remarkable things with regard to housing. They are using new methods, methods which have enabled them to cut their costs. Let him not go to the older cities where they had to build virtually from scratch in traditional manner, but rather to a new country where something really imaginative is taking place, something which today is commanding the attention of the world.

Then I would like to draw the hon. the Minister’s attention to one factor which I think is very important. Hansard will show that I asked the hon. the Minister’s predecessor a year or two ago what the basis of rentals was that were being charged by the department in respect of homes that were acquired and let until rebuilding or renewal took place. What do you think it was based on? It was based on a return of 12¼% of the cost of acquisition. I think that that is absolutely outrageous on the part of the department. First of all, very few landlords in the country ever go as far as that, but I am not complaining about them. What I am complaining about is the position in which the unfortunate tenant is placed. In the case of people living in some of these poorer homes in Jeppes and in other similar working class districts, they have increased their rentals by 20% to 25% beyond that laid down by the Rent Board. What did the hon. the Minister say then? He said he was not concerned with the Rent Board. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, a moment ago the hon. member for Jeppes again raised the question of the so-called commission and said he would like to see the commission’s report. I think that we must just remind him again that there is no commission report; it was only a committee appointed by the Minister to advise him on this matter. In due course, with whatever steps he may come to this House, I believe the Minister will fully inform the House about what the legislation is based on or whatever steps he wishes to take. The hon. member for Jeppes also referred to housing. I cannot disagree with him when we are speaking about housing. Housing is surely a subject about which there ought not to be any difference of opinion. Everyone, from the richest to the poorest, from those in the highest to those in the humblest of ranks—and it makes no difference what language or culture one attaches to —needs a home. Neither does it make any difference how luxurious or how modest it is; a roof over one’s head is of primary importance. There can be no difference of opinion or misunderstanding about that. Once that has been said, it has been said well, and the final word has been spoken, and if instructions are issued, this is done in all seriousness, and woe to him who does not carry out those compelling instructions. This House of Assembly makes the necessary machinery available. Votes the funds, expects results and demands reports. That is all well and good, and the highest authority has then spoken. What is frustrating, nevertheless, is that we sometimes distort this fine view we have of matters by coming along with attacks that do not match up to the subject we are speaking about.

The hon. member for Jeppes has just said that he would like to convey to the hon. the Minister the experience he has gained in America. I think the Minister would welcome this. Any good, constructive advice is always a good thing. But I think I can also tell the hon. member and other hon. members opposite that many visitors to this country, who have come to look at our housing, have also said that they could teach us nothing. They have seen things here that are not yet being done in other countries, particularly for the less privileged and less well-endowed. I therefore do not know whether there is a great deal more for us to learn, but where there is in fact, something to be learned, I believe the Minister and his department will go out of their way to do so.

Sir, a moment ago I said that it is a pity that one sometimes has to revert to things that are not beneficial to the fine subject we are dealing with. But if I look at this report about pollution in the country, I see that there are subjects like Environmental Marring. Environmental Abuse, Environmental Defilement, Environmental Contamination, Environmental Poisoning, etc. But two subjects which one finds remarkable are Environmental Marring and Environmental Contamination. If one just listens to the names—we are all honourable members of this House—the conditions which prevailed in certain areas in the past must loom up before one’s eyes. Remember, this department is not even ten years old. Even if we were to go and look for them, we could no longer find places such as those which the hon. member for Parow mentioned here. They have disappeared, and they have done so within the short space of a few months short of 10 years, the period of this department’s existence. Apart from all the other machinery that existed, this department had to climb in and remove the stench, rubbish, scrapheaps and so on. I consequently do not think that it befits us (since those conditions are being replaced by the fine conditions that prevail today, the good housing that we do, in fact, have—forget for a moment that there are still slum conditions; we all acknowledged this) to overlook what has already come into being, to think that one can have only criticism when one is still standing amidst the dirt and the muddy waters. I think it was Langenhoven who said (translation): “If there is mud around you, you throw mud; but if your hands are clean, you cannot throw mud.” I think it befits each of us to get out of the mud puddles and the sewage ditches which this report mentions and to give the department credit for what it is doing.

But, Sir, let us also be a little more objective. This is the year of our Green Heritage, and since our people have developed a mania for the cities—and it is not only the Whites who are involved, but also the Coloureds and Bantu; everyone has a mania for the cities; everyone has a mania for the lights, and everyone comes jogging along to those flickering lights—I think it is also advisable to issue a warning in this debate to the effect that we must ensure that our fine heritage, particularly our hills and our ridges do not all become plastered up with concrete. I am thinking, for example, of the Magaliesberg in my constituency. If they were to be crammed with buildings, it would be a sad day for that area. Table Mountain has already been marred by horrible concrete jungles that are rising up here against the ridges. What would it look like one day if buildings were to rise up to the very top of Table Mountain, if one wants to think in such ridiculous terms? Just imagine what kind of a view it would be if our summits were to be plastered up with concrete and if our mountains and our graceful hills were to be covered by a mixture of brick and concrete. I do not think we must allow more of these ridges and hills of ours to be covered up by concrete structures. There is also another small matter which has recently become alarming and Sir, you and I and everyone must guard against that: With the advent of greater population densities in our cities, spaces have become fewer in number; Spaces for our schools have become fewer in number; the spaces for the recreation of youth, of children, have become fewer in number, and although this is perhaps a matter which belongs to Planning, Finance and National Education, I nevertheless think it would be a good thing if the hon. the Minister would discuss this aspect with his colleagues so that, where there are insufficient recreational spaces at schools, we could provide for their needs as quickly as possible. Mr. Chairman, I know that blocks of flats have become essential. I take my constituency, for example, where three years ago there was virtually not a single flat and where there are at least 20 blocks of flats at present, which makes it a matter of urgency to look after the green spots because children are increasing in numbers and have nowhere to go for recreation and because school areas in that vicinity are also becoming too few for their purposes.

Sir, the hon. member for Innesdal says that he has 20 blocks of flats in his densely populated constituency. I should just like to tell him that he should drive through Sea Point one day and see how many blocks of flats are standing there. [Interjection.] No, they are very new, and Sea Point is teeming with young people. The hon. member says we must climb out of the sewerage ditches in this debate. It seems to me as if the hon. member regards all criticism, even the constructive criticism furnished in this House this evening, as comparable to sewerage ditches. As long as we stand up and thank the Minister, we are very good people, but if we tell him of housing requirements, then this is wrong criticism. Sir, this evening I should like to try and satisfy the hon. member, and I want to begin by thanking the hon. Minister; No, the hon. the Minister has a specific duty to perform, but the people I want to thank are his officials here in Cape Town who have always given me excellent service. They have done so, in particular, with respect to making dwellings available in the new Bothasig area. I have the privilege of representing Bothasig, and I want to tell the hon. the Minister that as far as Bothasig is concerned, I believe that his department, under the guidance of outstanding officials, has done an exceptionally good job and that the inhabitants of Bothasig today are exceptionally proud of being able to live in that specific area.

It is just the name that is wrong.

The name just puts us off a little.

Sir, I see that there are certain people present in this House, and I do not want to argue about the question of names at the moment. I am satisfied; it is a very good residential area.

Change the name to John Vorstersig.

Sir, I should like to make two requests to the hon. the Minister. If he were to go through Bothasig at the moment he would find, particularly with respect to the new development, that there are numerous plots that are undeveloped. I want to tell him that as far as I can see not a single house would ever stand empty in Bothasig for longer than a week if the foundations could just dry out quickly enough. I also want to tell the hon. the Minister that the housing crisis in the Cape Peninsula, particularly as far as the lower income groups are concerned, is tremendous, and I therefore want to ask him to do everything in his power to have the spare plots in Bothasig occupied with the least possible delay by establishing the necessary housing. He must also lift the curtain for us slightly so that we may know what is planned for Bothasig and how long it will take before that area there is fully built up so that the people may move in.

The hon. the Minister would also find that specific premises have been set aside for businesses. In the case of premises for a shop, premises for a general dealer or premises for a petrol station, I want to ask him please not to wait until 1 000 houses have been erected before that petrol Staton, etc., are placed there. He must endeavour to have the facilities established there for the people of Bothasig as soon as possible. So much for Bothasig.

Then I want to tell the hon. the Minister that there is a very great need in the larger Peninsula area. At present houses are being built by municipalities, divisional councils, the provincial authority and also by the Minister’s department. Do you know, Sir, how many people in the Peninsula do not know where to apply if they want a house? Do you know that thousands of man-hours are wasted by people who are on the way to look for a house and do not know where to apply? I have previously made a suggestion to the hon. the Minister’s predecessor. I told him that what we need in the Peninsula—I am only speaking about the Peninsula, where I am familiar with the circumstances—is a central housing bureau which would co-ordinate all building schemes that exist and the houses that are being offered, so that the people who need houses can go to one central point. Such a central housing bureau can liaise with all the various bodies and ensure that the houses are made available with the least possible delay. But as things now stand, I want to tell the hon. the Minister with all due respect that the people are searching their heads off for houses and do not know where to apply.

Thirdly, I want to tell the hon. the Minister something about the Coloureds. We have heard a great deal about the Coloureds this evening. The position with respect to Coloured housing is just becoming impossible in the Peninsula. I want to advocate to the hon. the Minister that he must not just say that he is prepared to help financially. That is fine, but it is not enough. The municipalities of the Peninsula, as far as I can see, simply cannot keep pace any longer with the growth in the Coloured population, and particularly with the influx of Coloureds from the platteland. I do not believe that as far as you, Sir, and I can see into the future, we will ever reach the stage where the Coloured population, with its natural increase in numbers, plus the influx, will be provided with housing. In some way or other an attempt must be made to establish a central body, a metropolitan body, which would handel the entire housing situation of the Coloureds in the Peninsula and with which the hon. the Minister must co-operate dynamically, not only by way of financing, but also by way of planning and guidance, to provide housing for these people. The Peninsula simply cannot do it and the municipalities cannot do it. They do not have the means. These people will have to receive co-operation from a higher level to combat the situation, which could very easily develop into all kinds of distressful conditions. I should like to leave this idea with the hon. the Minister.

In conclusion I want to say that the hon. the Minister must not think that we are trying to play politics when we come to him and say that there are tenants who are experiencing difficulties. Here we are dealing with a fundamental matter. While I am also familiar with the landlord’s side of the question. I am also familiar with the tenant’s side of the question. I want to tell you that today there are really tens of thousands of tenants who have a very heavy time of it in South Africa. And who has the worst of it? Specifically the aged who can no longer afford to go and look for houses. I have numerous such people in my constituency. The landlord simply increases their rent and they cannot even afford legal assistance, with the result that they have to pay more and more rent. The old people have no refuge. They are too young to go to old-age homes and too old to look after their own interests when it comes to the rent boards and other bodies. I want to ask the hon. the Minister to make a specific point of doing something, particularly with respect to the aged and their accommodation. The hon. the Minister must not tell us that we must not come to him about this matter. We know that there are two sides to the question. Everyone realizes this. However, there are specific groups of tenants amongst the public who do not have the best of it, and it is on their behalf that we are lodging a plea this evening. I think that perhaps the hon. the Minister did not promote his case by intimating that we want to play politics in respect of a matter which affects tens of thousands in South Africa.

Mr. Chairman, I am particularly grateful that the hon. member for Maitland declared that he had no intention of thanking the hon. the Minister, for it will be my privilege to thank him. The hon. member for Maitland praised the department and criticized the Minister. He praised and boasted of Bothasig, but with whose funds and through whose instrumentality was Bothasig established? Was it not in fact named after a former Government Minister of Community Development? Very conveniently the hon. member for Maitland omitted to mention the fact that Community Development funds were utilized in the large Montague Gardens development in his constituency. [Interjections.] He conveniently omitted to mention that an enormous old age home is now being constructed in his constituency with Community Development financing.

He probably does not know about it.

Do you know about it, Tony?

However, I want to continue in a more positive vein and refer specifically to the finest example of this type of housing. This is in fact to be seen in the constituency of the hon. member for Maitland. In the limited time at my disposal I do not have the opportunity of spending much time on the housing which is being financed on a sub-economic or economic basis, nor on the luxury housing units of R25 000 or R30 000 or more. I should like to spend some time discussing housing in the more popular group— that is in the R12 000 to R25 000 price range—for which State subsidizing and funds are not readily found but for which building society funds must for the most part be used.

The person who has to buy houses in this price category is the person whom one can more frequently regard as the martyred toiler for he does not qualify for State subsidies on an economic or sub-economic basis, and in addition he actually earns too little money to have enough to pay for the deposit on his house and the transfer and bond registration fees. I should like to break a lance for this person since it is in fact this person who does not fall into the highest income group but it is at the same time that person in fact who wants to and is prepared to make provision for his own housing out of his hard-earned and with difficulty accumulated funds. He does not want to be dependent on the State for favours. He wants to make an honest attempt to use building society funds to the extent to which these are available, at prevailing building society interest rates. Precisely because this person is prepared to do so much on his own initiative, he undoubtedly deserves maximum assistance from the State as far as this is practicable.

For that reason it is my special privilege to thank the hon. the Minister, his department and to the hon. the Minister of Finance in so far as they have under this Vote and in the Budget in its entirety established means of assisting this person. In the first place. I should like to draw attention to the important assistance—i.e. the raising of rebate limits on transfer duties, by means of which transfer duties have been reduced considerably. It was my special privilege to have advocated this matter earlier this year in my maiden speech, and it is a great pleasure for me to see even at this early stage what effect these reduced transfer duties are already having on the acquisition of houses in terms of the various home-ownership schemes. Unfortunately this was accompanied by a slight increase in attorneys’

fees, which would have followed in any case, but the fact remains that it has been made considerably more attractive for any person to acquire a house. This particular increase of the rebate limits has also had a secondary effect which is equally important, viz. that of stabilizing the prices of houses below these rebate limits, as appears from the reports of various chairmen of building groups and development companies.

In the second place I am pleased that a second means of assistance has been made available which has brought about a favourable improvement in the benefits under the Government’s State-aided house-ownership saving scheme. In terms of this the maximum purchase price of houses was raised from R16 000 to R20 000, and the maximum permissible loan was increased from R12 000 to R16 000. The maximum income limit of the applicant has now been increased from R5 000 to R6 000, and the maximum amount which he may deposit in a savings account with a building society has been increased from R4 000 to R5 000. Here we have a fantastic scheme where a person may open a savings account with a building society on which he earns annual interest of 6½%. He then receives a 2% subsidy, which means that over a minimum period of 18 months he earns 8½% per annum on a savings account, as against the customary 3½% or 4% on ordinary savings accounts. However, there is one aspect in this connection which causes me much concern, viz. that this scheme has not yet met with a great and dynamic response, as it ought to have done, on the part of the general public.

I think it is as a result of the ignorance which exists among the general public concerning the particular privileges which they may enjoy in terms of this scheme. I regret having to say this, but it could possibly be as a result of obvious slowness on the part of building societies to make this scheme sufficiently known to the general public so that they may share in the benefits of this scheme to the maximum extent. Unless this scheme increases tremendously in popularity during the present financial year, the hon. the Minister, or whichever Minister may be concerned in this matter, will have to give serious consideration to introducing measures which will require building societies to publicize this scheme among the public of South Africa with true dedication.

A third means of assistance is the 100% housing loans for public servants. Although the limit of the loan still remains at R15 000, the price maximum per residential unit has been raised from R15 000 to R20 000.

In the fourth place there is an additional means of assistance which results from the Sectional Titles Act, which falls indirectly under this Vote, in terms of which it is now being made possible for a person in the middle and upper middle income group to acquire a residential unit at a relatively fair price of R8 000, R10 000 or R12 000. I want to address an earnest request to the effect that building societies in particular should make quite sure that conservative valuations are made in order to prevent speculators taking advantage of this and causing inflationary trends as a result of excessively high prices.

The Budget in its entirety accentuates throughout a positive contribution towards implementing an honest attempt to make as many houses as possible available on an economic as well as sub-economic basis. I am grateful that the hon. the Minister also bore in mind the inflation bug, that bug which has already left its mark, in that he raised the level in regard to transfer duty rebate limits to R25 000 and increased the maximum purchase price of houses—I am referring now to the schemes which I have just mentioned—to R20 000. Here we have a clear indication that it is no longer very easy for one to acquire housing at a reasonable or fair price.

Arising out of this, I come now in conclusion to the building societies which are facing a prosperous future and are at present going through a flourishing period. They are at present experiencing a period of growth, and have record funds available. And since people are now applying for mortgages for the purchase of houses in the important price category of R12 000 to R25 000, the problem is that building societies are being subjected to a tremendous restriction in that they are only allowed to spend 27½% of their asset funds on loans of R15 000 and upwards. Now one finds the anomaly that there are frequently too few applications for the 72½% funds which are available for house loans below R15 000, while there are at all times up to two or three or even more times as many applications for housing loans above R15 000. It is my sincere request today that serious consideration be given to accommodating building societies by raising this R15 000 limit to R20 000. If this were to be done, it would be possible to allocate 27½% of all loans to persons applying for loans of R20 000 and more. If this could be done, half of all building societies problems would be solved, it would be a milestone for the building societies, it would be a milestone in regard to house ownership in South Africa, and in this way it would be possible to establish another monument in the constituency of the hon. member for Maitland.

Mr. Chairman, I am not going to react to the hon. member for Malmesbury. He has covered a lot of ground, like the hon. the Minister who also covered a good deal of ground this evening. He is a new Minister and he and his department has a tremendous task in front of them in providing housing in South Africa.

I want to come back to a subject to which the hon. the Minister also referred, namely District Six. We have been waiting a long time as far as District Six is concerned. This area was frozen in 1964 and it is now 1973. I can still remember that there was indecision as far back as 1949 and 1950 as to what was going to happen to District Six and things were allowed to slow down in that particular area. During this session I put certain questions to the hon. the Minister and it is rather revealing to see that in this length of time of nearly a decade that up to now about 2 500 families have been moved out of this area and that another 5 000 families still remain to be moved. Up to now it has cost the Government something like R18 million to acquire properties while another R12 million still has to be spent to acquire further properties. When you go through the whole area of District Six you find that demolition has been taking place and that the older buildings have been removed. But little else is taking place. One wonders when the whole of this urban renewal scheme for District Six is going to get off the ground. I think we have got beyond the stage of conferences and talks and things like that. In reply to a question I put I received the following answer: “With the exception of the land required for Government and municipal purposes the remaining land will be made available for development by the private sector. At this early stage no decision has yet been taken regarding the basis on which the land will be made available.” Surely it should read “at this late stage”? One possible method may be to make the land available to developers by way of public tender, who can then sell the land directly to the public which requires the land. Has nothing been decided over all these years? Before anything can happen, before you can complete this gigantic urban renewal scheme, one has to remove the the affected population. In 1966 District Six was declared a White are in spite of a lot of opposition. This area was traditionally a Coloured area and in spite of a lot of opposition it was declared a White area. At the present moment well over half of the original number of families are still living there and nothing is happening. The trouble is, and everyone who is close to the renewal scheme knows it, that before you can move these people you have to have something to move them into. At the present moment 50% of the money that is made available to the city council for housing is used for this urban removal. However, that is going along too slowly; there are insufficient funds.

Then we are told about Mitchell’s Plain. I have attended other conferences and I would like to tell the hon. Minister that other developers and representatives from other Government departments quite openly say that this is still a dream, something people are just talking about. It would be interesting to hear from the hon. the Minister at what stage Mitchell’s Plain is. Some people say it involves the question of transport. That is of course not so. The railways are only too willing to put down a railway line; it just depends on when they are told where they are to put it. The planning section of the Railway Administration says: “You just tell us where you want it.” At the present moment it is just a dream. We do not know what is going to happen.

Who says that?

In the meantime, at the rate at which we are moving at the present moment, nothing will happen in District Six in the next 25 to 30 years. It is quite obvious to everyone that the Government does not have the machinery or the know-how to get this huge scheme off the ground. Never mind the money, they just do not seem to know how to get this scheme off the ground and they have no idea how they are going to move these families. The net result is that no money is being spent to keep up the buildings in District Six—they are just standing there. In fact, they are deteriorating. While there are still families living in them, the buildings that have been acquired by this department are falling to pieces.

That is not true.

Do not talk rubbish! You do not know the area. Those Ministers who drive over De Waal Drive —those who do not, may not know—will see, if they look at the ribbon development on the left-hand side, properties every one of which is owned by the Department of Community Development. At the present moment those properties are housing Whites, but those properties were acquired quite a long time ago. Admittedly, the department does a good job in housing those people there, but one has only to go and inspect those houses to find to what extent they are deteriorating. They are falling to pieces and becoming a slum whereas at one stage those were very nice houses. I want to plead with the hon. the Minister to stop the District Six scheme and the removals, look around and again make portions of District Six available to the Coloured community.

Hear, hear!

Not all the Coloureds want something for nothing. A lot of them are in a position to acquire property and to build their own homes. I am going to suggest to the hon. the Minister to look at District Six again and to make sites available to the Coloured community to build their own homes. This dream of urban renewal in District Six is just that, a dream. It is like Mitchell’s Plain. I want to suggest that the hon. the Minister should during this Vote disclose to the House exactly how far they have got with preparing the plans for Mitchell’s Plain, where the money is coming from and how much money has been spent there. We certainly hope that Mitchell’s Plain is not going to be another Bonteheuwel. I can tell the hon. the Minister that I had some American visitors here recently. I took them through Bonteheuwel to show them how we house our Coloureds. They said: “Well, we take it, Mr. Timoney, that this is just temporary; this sort of slum area you have here you will have to remove one of these days.” We must be careful not to remove an old slum and create a new one. When you go out into the Cape Flats and you see the accommodation that is being built at the present moment—at speed, admittedly, and at low cost—you realize that that is not what we want. The hon. the Minister of Defence was at one stage Minister of Coloured Affairs. He was very interested in the Coloured man and made a speech in this House in which he said: “It is the ambition and policy of this Government to build up the Coloureds, to uplift them socially.” [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, this evening we have listened to tactics which are typical of the United Party, i.e. to disparage a Department which is doing its duty. It is a pity that the United Party are forgetting their history so soon. History will be read for many years more, even if we are no longer there. But it seems as though they have already forgetten the history of 1948 and earlier. I want to ask the United Party tonight whether they were in favour of our removing and clearing the Bantu out of flats in Hillbrow, when the top living areas of the flats in Hillbrow were occupied by Bantu which we subsequently removed to Madeleine. When we cleared that squatters’ camp, Sophiatown, those dirty townships, what opposition did we not get from the United Party and their clergymen? How they fought us! Throughout the world it was shown on television how the Afrikaner, the National Party, allegedly was the oppressor of the non-Whites. Have they forgotten how we cleared Race Course, one of those large squatters’ camps on the Witwatersrand? The hon. member for Port Natal must pay attention now. You see, he runs away from the truth; he does not want to hear the truth, because it hurts him. Unfortunately he cannot understand Afrikaans either, because he is unilingual.

Chew him up!

Sir, we inherited those conditions from the United Party. Can they remember what it used to look like around Pretoria? Can they remember what the squatters’ camps around the Witwatersrand looked like? Can they remember the Cape Flats? What did they do about this? No, that part of the history they forget. All they want to do is pelt the Minister and the department with unjustified criticism. Sir, their negative action is a blot on the history of this country. Let us be honest. The Minister of Community Development has broad shoulders; the United Party can pass everything on to him. He can take it. But not one of them can take anything. Constructive criticism is a good thing; if necessary, they may criticize, because what large department such as this does not sometimes make mistakes? I do not want to bother hon. members with figures, but since 1948 this department has spent millions of rand to create housing schemes in our cities. What has the United Party done? At every polling station their chickens are coming home to roost. The people no longer believe the policy of the United Party. Let them change their policy, and say thank you as well. I want to say tonight that I am grateful that one of the hon. members on the opposite side, i.e. the hon. member for …

Port Natal.

Sir, we might as well write him off. We might as well put a full stop after his name because he was just another little black smudge in history. The hon. member for Maitland rose tonight, and, at least, also used the word “thank you”. He thanked the Minister for certain things, and at the same time asked for others, but the good things were hidden by him. He pleads for his constituency, because, after all, he wants to return to this House.

Business interrupted in accordance with Standing Order No. 23.

House Resumed:

Progress reported and leave granted to sit again.