I move—-

Mr. Speaker, it is necessary to ask the House for additional supply of R24,564,000 on Revenue Account and R3,296,000 on Loan Account.

Hon. members will recollect that in Committee of Supply on the Treasury Vote last session (1962) I announced that the balance on Revenue Account for the financial year 1961-2, after allowing for certain expenditure included in the Supplementary Estimates for that year, would be credited to the Defence Special Equipment Account. The amount is R7,000,000 and is included in the R9,000,000-odd requested under Vote 40—Defence.

Strictly speaking, therefore, the extra amount asked in respect of the 1962-3 financial year is R 17,564,000 or 2.2 per cent of the amount originally voted which is most reasonable and is equal to the average percentage of additional amounts asked for during the past six years. Especially so when cognizance is taken of the large amounts requested for essential services under Votes—Public Works (R2,245,000); Social Welfare and Pensions (R1,690,000); Posts, Telegraphs and Telephones (R 1,054,000); Health (R 1,875,000); Agricultural Economics and Marketing: General (R2,704.000); Police (R 1,590,000); and Defence. I do not intend going into the reasons for these supplementary amounts at this stage —my colleagues will give full details of the amounts that are asked for under the Votes relating to their portfolios.

As far as the Loan Account is concerned, we are requesting an amount which is well below the average over the past six years. Nearly half the amount requested is required to supplement the Police Standard Stock Account due mainly to the switch over to the new type of police uniform and the increased establishment of the Police Force.

I agree with the hon. the Minister that this is not the moment for a long debate on the motion to go into committee. The hon. the Minister comes forward with these Additional Estimates each year and he tells us the percentage of increase for which he is asking. Of course, it can be extremely misleading to talk about percentages because it entirely depends on what amount you are asking a percentage of. The amount this year is 2.2 per cent, but it is 2.2 per cent of a considerably larger amount than the amount last year, when it was 2.3 per cent. It is no excuse to come along and plead that your illegitimate baby is only a small one. It is our duty this afternoon to make sure that the baby the hon. the Minister is foisting on the House is a legitimate one. He has told us that his colleagues are here to give us full details as to why these amounts are necessary. That being so, I agree with him that the best thing to do is to get into committee and to allow his colleagues, supplemented by himself, to give the House information about the reasons for the very substantial additional amounts being asked for.

This Vote is being increased by nearly 200 per cent and I think the committee would like to know the reasons for this large increase.

I can give full details if hon. members would like to have them but briefly the position is that there is a saving on salaries of about R5,000. But there are additional costs which are mainly attributable to the Economic Advisory Council, the Scientific Advisory Council and the South West Africa Investigation Committee. That amounts to roughly R34,000. Then there are also charges for additional post, telegraph and telephone services in connection with the same three new services which have been added lately to my Department. The same applies to printing costs. There is an additional expenditure therefore of R37,900 and a saving of R5,200, which taken together represents this additional expenditure of R32,700.

I do not think we should ask the Prime Minister for further details, but I think in printing the Estimates it should have been indicated that the increased expenditure was due to two major items which were not really considered when the Estimates were originally framed, namely the Economic Advisory Committee and the South West Africa Committeee. If that fact had been mentioned, I think the Prime Minister would have had no queries at all.

Vote put and agreed to.

On Vote No. 9.—" Public Works”, R2,245,000,

This Vote is, of course, becoming a very big Vote. It involves something like R22,000,000 and the increase is something like R2,250,000. There are three items here which one wonders how they are split up. I refer to J, K and L. Item J is “Rent, rates, electric current, etc.” and the additional amount to be voted here is R803.000. Item K is “General Maintenance Services”, where an additional R20.000 has to be voted, and Item L is “General Repair Services”, for which an amount of R598,000 extra is required. That takes no account of R153.000 which is the increased amount to be voted for furniture, safes, plant, machinery and tools. I do not know how maintenance is separated from general repairs. When is maintenance not repairs? I should have thought that in most circumstances when you are maintaining something you are also repairing it.

Order! The hon. member must confine himself to the reasons for the increase.

I am confining myself to the R1,250,000 which is being asked additionally for these three services. Perhaps the hon. the Minister will explain what the position is.

At the risk of contravening the rules of the House I may say that there is a difference between repairs and maintenance. If you re whitewash a house it is maintenance and not a repair. But I will give the hon. member the reasons as far as I can. With regard to subhead J there is an increase of R803,000, which is made up as follows. Firstly, rent accounts for R242,100. This increase is due to (i) the demand for additional hire accommodation for expanding departments and (ii) increases in rentals in respect of existing leases arising from higher property valuations as well as increased costs of cleaning. Secondly, assessment rates account for R 19,400. This increase is due, firstly, to newly erected Government-owned rateable properties; secondly, higher municipal valuations and tariffs and, thirdly, the provision of R4,000 to meet late accounts rendered by the Durban and Kimberley Municipalities. In the third place, municipal services (water, sanitation, etc.) account for R198.500. This increase is due to, firstly, the erection of new buildings and the taking over of certain technical colleges by the Government; secondly, continual increases in municipal tariffs; thirdly, increased water consumption as a result of drought conditions which prevailed throughout the Republic, and fourthly, the restoration of military camps for occupation by the Permanent Force. The fourth item is electric current and gas. This increase of R343,000 is due to (i) the occupation of additional Government and hired buildings by Government Departments; (ii) the restoration of military camps for occupation by the Permanent Force; (iii) the taking over of certain technical colleges by the Government, which I referred to previously; (iv) the replacement of coal by electric stoves in Defence official quarters, and (v) continued increases in municipal tariffs for electricity. With regard to sub-head K, General Maintenance Services, the increase here is R20.000. The continued expansion of the Public Service inevitably results in corresponding increases in the provision of State-owned occupations. The increase of R20,000 is due to (i) the maintenance of installations and gardens at newly erected Government-owned buildings; (ii) the maintenance of installations in Defence camps which are being restored for occupation by the Permanent Force; (iii) an increase in the price of coal, and (iv) more cleaning materials required for newly erected Government-owned buildings.

Under sub-head L, General Repair Service, there is an increase of R598,000. The additional provision is required to enable the Department to carry out essential and urgent repairs to State-owned buildings, furniture, plant and machinery, postponement of which would be uneconomical and in some cases constitute a danger to public safety. At the request of the Treasury the Department’s original estimate of expenditure under this subhead was reduced by R200.000. In the absence of details of the work involved, no specific position for the restoration of camps for housing the full-time Defence Force was made in the original Estimates. Treasury approval was subsequently obtained by the Department to include in the Additional Estimates for 1962-3, an amount not exceeding the estimated expenditure of R367,197 during the current financial year on the restoration of accommodation for the full-time force.

Are we being asked here to approve of the expenditure of money which has already been spent?

Some of this money has been spent.

We are being asked here to vote a good deal of money and we are really being asked in advance to validate the expenditure of money which has already been spent. I must say that sub-heads J, K and L generally do indicate the necessity for the closest possible eye being kept by the hon. the Minister on this continued expansion and extension of buildings occupied by the Public Service. Wherever you go in the Republic to-day there are new buildings going up and as soon as they have been built they are leased by the Government for a new Department. I do think that this very substantial increase of R1,250,000 does indicate the necessity for the hon. the Minister with his colleague, the Minister of Finance, to keep the closest possible check on the undoubted tendency of Government Departments to spread, in giving effect to Parkinson’s Law and hiring premises and extending themselves without any obvious increase in the efficiency of the Public Service.

I think one is entitled on this occasion to emphasize that we do expect the Minister concerned to keep the closest possible eye on the tendency of the Public Service continually to grab and demand extended accommodation, extended offices, extended buildings and thus increasing the cost of this Vote which we have to deal with every year.

Vote put and agreed to.

On Vote No. 10.—“Foreign Affairs”. R249.000,

I shall be very glad if the Minister can give us some information in regard to sub-head E, “Miscellaneous Expenses; Relief of distress in Iran”, where we are being asked to vote an addition R17, I56. I would like to ask the Minister whether this was a direct contribution to the Government of Iran or was it a contribution assessed through the United Nations agency to which the contribution was made for this particular relief. Then in regard to sub-head K, “United Nations”, there is an increase of R96,400. I should be glad if the Minister could give some details of that item. Are we to understand that this is an increased contribution to the United Nations as the result of United Nations’ operations in the Congo or does this represent an increase in our own contribution to the United Nations?

With regard to sub-head E, these extra funds are required in connection with the relief of distress in Iran. There was an earthquake there and like other nations we felt that we should make a contribution towards the relief of that distress. The amount of R17.156 represents the cost of medical supplies donated to Iran following upon the earthquake disaster in that country. We have done that in the past too. In the case of the Madagascar catastrophe some years ago we also contributed very liberally by sending food and also medical supplies.

As regards the other points raised by the hon. member in connection with the amount due to the United Nations, the position is that the annual contribution varies from year to year. It is worked out on a certain percentage of the costs.

The original estimate of R250,000 in respect of the annual contribution to the United Nations for 1963. payable in March 1963, was made in the light of the assessment in respect of the 1962 contribution. South Africa’s assessment in respect of the 1963 contribution is, however, now to hand and amounts to R346.200, i.e. R96.200 in excess of the original provision. Then there were the annual contributions to the Voluntary Funds (UNICEF—Children’s Fund; EPTA—Expanded Programme for Technical Assistance, and the Refugee Fund and also the Special Fund) which amounted to R53.800 and then there was also the emergency force in the Suez to which we have regularly contributed, unlike a very large number of other United Nations members who have not contributed a penny. We have again contributed this year the sum of R75.000.

I should like to have certainty from the Minister in connection with sub-head K, “United Nations”, on which nearly R 100,000 is being spent additionally. I should like to know from him whether any of that money is going toward the military operations of the United Nations in the Congo.

The reply is “No”.

I would like the Minister of Finance to give us some information regarding sub-head E, “Miscellaneous Expenses: Ex gratia payment to Schmidt, le Roux and Company,” R5,952.

The position in regard to this ex gratia payment is as follows: A contract for the supply to Government institutions of first-grade potatoes at 57.5c per pocket during the period 1 January 1961 to 30 June 1961, was granted to Messrs. Schmidt, le Roux and Company, Johannesburg. The quantity of potatoes to be supplied was estimated at 27,153 pockets. The firm was, however, eventually required to deliver 52,186 pockets, i.e. 25,033 or approximately 92 per cent more than the quantity originally estimated, whereas the firm allowed only for an oversupply of 10 per cent. Due mainly to protracted rains in the Eastern Transvaal Highveld from April 1961 which severely affected the quality and availability of supplies, the price of first-grade potatoes rose steeply and in some months increased by as much as 100 per cent. The firm therefore suffered extensive losses by having to acquire potatoes for supply to the Government at considerably higher prices than the contract price of 57.5c per pocket and consequently submitted representations to the State Tender Board for compensation. The Tender Board investigated the matter thoroughly in consultation with the Potato Board and in view of the exceptional circumstances recommended that relief be granted. On the representations of the Tender Board the Treasury approved of an amount of R5,952 being included in the Additional Estimates as an ex gratia payment to the firm subject to parliamentary approval.

There appears to be an increase of 50 per cent in sub-head B, “Subsistence and Transport ”. Perhaps the Minister can tell us the reason for this increase.

The actual excess on this sub-head is R16,000 but an amount of R 10,952 could be met out of savings on other sub-heads, leaving a balance of R5,048 to be voted. The R 16,000 is made up chiefly by the following factors: Firstly the Registrar and Deputy Registrar of Financial Institutions proceeded on official visits to the United States and New Zealand, the costs of which amounted to R3,500—the Registrar in connection with the International Congress of Building Societies and the Deputy Registrar in connection with investigations in New Zealand into third-party insurance. Secondly, three officials have been transferred from the South African Embassy, London, to the Treasury, resulting in unforeseen expenditure of R6,000; thirdly the appointment of the Commission of Inquiry into Stock Exchange matters necessitated the payment of fees to the members attending meetings and transport costs; and, fourthly, no provision was made in the original Estimates for the increased subsistence allowance payable to parliamentary staff with effect from 1 January 1962.

I wonder if the hon. the Minister could tell us how the transfer of three officials from one Government Department to another Government Department resulted in an expenditure of R6,000?

The one Department was in London and the other in South Africa. Under the ordinary rules the families of these officials were entitled to come to South Africa at Government expense. This represents the cost of the transfer of the three families from London to South Africa.

This item shows an increase in the subsidy for the provinces. Will the Minister tell us how this is divided amongst the various provinces and at the same time indicate when he expects the Commission on Financial Relations between the provinces to report.

Order! The hon. member may only inquire what the reasons for the increase are.

The question which is not allowable was answered by me on another occasion when I said “in the second half of this year” but I cannot answer it now.

_ In regard to the other matter, the amount is made up as follows: It consists largely of adjustments of the accounts of previous years. Firstly there was due to the Cape in respect of 1961-2 R242,757; the Auditor’s Certificate has been received that that amount is due. Then there is due to the Transvaal, also in respect of 1961-2, R512,170, and the Auditor’s Certificate has also been received. Thirdly, there is an estimated amount due to the Transvaal resulting from the fact that salaries and wages paid to the domestic staffs at provincial hostels and to departmental school bus drivers were inadvertently omitted from the figure on which the subsidy claims from 1958-9 to 1961-2 were calculated. Those are the main additions and they amount to R850,927. Then there is also an increase in the Estimates of the Transvaal as the result of regarding of posts, the creation of additional posts, the filling of posts previously vacant and unforeseen overtime payment, and finally there is the adjustment of salaries of all employees in the Provincial Administration, of which we have to bear a share, with effect from 1 January 1963. The first quarter falls within this financial year.

Vote put and agreed to.

I notice that the increase under sub-head A, “Salaries, Wages and Allowances,” is R9,700.

Does that mean an increase of staff? Will the hon. the Minister please enlarge on this?

The increase in Salaries, Wages and Allowances, which is R9,700, is mainly due to an increase of 4 per cent in the salary scales of locally recruited staff, which came into operation with effect from 1 April 1962. This increase required additional provision for the payment of United Kingdom income-tax. Secondly, there is also an increased foreign service allowance payable with effect from 1 April 1962 and thirdly the common factor In most of these increased expenditures was the adjustment of salaries wtih effect from 1 January 1963.

The Minister will correct me if I am wrong but I take it that the very substantial increases in sub-heads D and E, “Printing, Stationery, etc.” and “Miscellaneous Expenses”, is largely due to the work that has been done to prepare the country for P.A.Y.E. and that being so I think that this is an appropriate moment for us to express our appreciation of the way in which the work has been done by the Department of Inland Revenue in preparing the country for the switch over from the old income-tax system to the new system. I think the work they have done, the steps they have taken and the endeavours they have made to make the new system intelligible and understood by the people as a whole call for an expression of great appreciation from this House.

I would like to refer the Minister to sub-head G and ask him to give us further details in regard to these refunds and remissions of grace or favour.

The first is the case of Romer. The taxpayer, who is a New Zealander by birth, has been ordinarily resident in South Africa for the last 13 years. On the attainment of her 21st birthday in 1923 she inherited 5,000 £1 shares in a New Zealand company. The dividend from this investment amounts to approximately R4,000 per annum, but in Mrs. Romer’s hands it has been exempt from tax in pursuance of the provisions of Section 10 (1) (k) (v) (b) of our Income-Tax Act of 1941, as amended. During October 1960 Mrs. Romer donated these shares to her son who is also ordinarily resident in South Africa. The value of these donations amounted to R35,370, on which the tax due and payable is R3,005.50. The transaction is also subject to donations tax in New Zealand where a tax of R8,793.60 has been paid. Mrs. Romer felt—and I was inclined to agree with her—that morally the New Zealand taxing authorities are entitled to the donations tax in view of the fact that the assets represented by the shares are situated in that country and that the company conducts its business there. She was of the opinion that the fact that the dividends will henceforth accrue to her son, who is domiciled in South Africa and will be subject to South African tax, is a mitigating factor in her application for relief from the payment of a South African donations tax, otherwise she would be paying donations tax there and here, and having regard to the benefit which the fiscus will enjoy for a period of years by way of tax from the donee, I think generally this was a fait case in which we agreed to authorize the remission of the tax plus interest as an act of grace subject to prior parliamentary approval being obtained. The amount of "the tax, as I have said, is R3,005.30: the interest is R488.50, making a total of R3,494.

The next case is Cobra Brassware. That is a question of the non-residents’ shareholders’ tax. Section 42 (1) of the Income-Tax Act provides that the non-residents’ shareholders’ tax shall be paid in respect of any dividend declared by any company if the shareholder to whom the dividend is payable, is inter alia, a person other than a company not ordinarily resident nor carrying on business in South Africa or a company not registered nor carrying on business in South Africa. The shares in the above-mentioned company were owned by a company registered and carrying on business in Switzerland. On 28 June 1961 the South African company declared a dividend of R442,000, having first obtained permission from the exchange control authorities to remit the dividend to Switzerland. Non-residents’ shareholders’ tax on this amount amounted to R33,153.75, and that was duly paid on the above dividend on 25 July 1951. Before the net dividend could be remitted on which the tax had been paid, more stringent exchange control measures were introduced and permission was given to transfer only that portion of the dividend which consisted of profits earned during the preceding year of assessment, namely an amount of R 124,775 less the non-residents’ shareholders’ tax amounting to R9,358. In view of the above-mentioned restrictions the South African company, at the request of its shareholders, rescinded the dividend declared on 28 June 1961 to the extent of R317,275. Section 89 of the Income-Tax Act does not permit the Commissioner to make a refund in cases of this nature. Non-residents’ shareholders’ tax will, however, again be payable on the sum of R317,275 when it is utilized at some future date for the payment of further dividends. Double taxation will therefore result. The Treasury advised the Department that the Minister was agreeable to this refund, as an act of grace, of the amount of R23.795 being the non-residents’ shareholders’ tax on the amount of R317,275 which was not actually declared as a dividend.

The next one is the Pieter Haak Trust; the Willem Haak Trust (Pty.) Ltd. and the Seti Investments (Pty.) Ltd. are very much the same. It is also a case of undistributed profits tax. It was not paid over within the specified period. They paid over all their profits but part of the dividends fell outside the specified period in their particular cases. They carried out the spirit; they paid over all the dividends; there is no undistributed profits tax, but there is only this technical mistake that it was not within the 12 months. They could have withheld the dividend and then paid it over later, but they carried out the spirit of the Act and we are now putting the cases right. All the dividends have been earned within the 12 months.

In the case of the Pieter Haak Trust it is just a question of a special licence for a club dinner for 31 December. The licence was given from 10 p.m. to 12 p.m. on the Sunday. This was cancelled and withdrawn when this was discovered. We are now refunding the R4 paid for this special licence.

I take it that the amount of R437,088 represents increased imports by the Protectorates for which we are making an equivalent payment. Is it as a result of increased importations by those territories that our contribution has become bigger or what is the reason?

The contributions are all in terms of a fixed percentage of total imports as originally laid down in 1910. Up to 1956-7 it was always done by way of draw-back; it was not appropriated in this way. Since 1956-7 we appropriate the whole amount instead of having a draw back from Revenue. I can give the percentages. Of this total Basutoland gets R227,287; Swaziland R38.234; Bechuanaland R70.879 and South West Africa R100,688.

Vote put and agreed to.

On Vote No. 20.— “Social Welfare and Pensions,” R 1,690, 500,

We have here the second largest additional estimate. It is a sum of almost R1, 750,000 which the Minister has subdivided into headings H, J, K, and L. We are pleased that this large amount is asked for but will the hon. the Minister please be good enough to tell us how these amounts have been estimated and how they have been disbursed?

As hon. members will be able to understand, this falls under various heads. There are certain larger amounts connected with certain heads and smaller amounts connected with other heads. In the main the position of this particular Department is that it is very difficult to frame Estimates. In certain circumstances one may overestimate and in others one may underestimate. Let me give hon. members the reasons. Under H, for example, there is a sum of R50,000 for retirement benefits. It is very difficult to estimate the amount required for retirement benefits. It is very difficult to estimate the gratuities. One does not know how many people are going to retire. Then there is a further R60.000 for compensation in respect of injuries or fatal accidents in the course of duty. One does not know how many cases there are going to be. In this case the number of beneficiaries who will have to receive benefits in the future shows a greater increase than was anticipated. Then there are, amongst other things, the temporary allowances and bonuses payable out of the civil pension fund. The anticipated requirements for this financial year were underestimated. Amongst other things I can mention this example: Until last year the position was that people who retired before a certain date all received a fixed amount. We have now switched over to the new arrangement, which met with the approval of all hon. members. A bigger bonus is now being granted to those persons who suffered because they retired earlier. It is difficult to estimate to how many increased bonuses will have to be granted. One never knows precisely how many will be retiring. The greater the number of people who retire, the more the expenditure rises. I want to mention an example under sub-head J. The original Estimate there was R1 4,044,000; the revised Estimate is R1 4,700,000. The reasons for the increase are, inter alia, an increase of R600,000 in the R for R contribution to the Pensions and Government Employees’ Fund. This increase is necessary as the result of the increases in the salaries of public servants. I want to mention another example in this connection and that is the interest on the arrear contributions of members. When a member falls into arrear with his R for R contribution he is allowed to make his contribution the following year, but the State does not make its R for R contribution until the employee has made his. It is very difficult to know whether the employee will make his contribution next year. If he does make that contribution, we have to be ready to add our R for R contribution. The biggest item under J is the increased provision that has to be made as the result of the increase in the salaries of public servants.

As far as K is concerned I can only say that the number of beneficiaries has not decreased. The Department had reason to believe that the number would decrease, but the number has in fact increased. The number of Indian beneficiaries has also increased to a small extent. The increase in the case of Whites is R80,000 and in the case of Indians R1,000. With regard to the question of old-age pensions, although the number of White old-age pensioners showed a decline at a certain stage, we discovered in October that there had been an increase. Since October the figures have started to rise again. The increase in the case of Indian pensioners is also greater than was anticipated. The increase as from October has been calculated at R1 80,000 in the case of old-age pensioners and in the case of Indians at R20,000. We have had the same phenomenon in connection with disability allowances. The increase in the case of people drawing disability allowances is higher than we anticipated. In the case of Whites it is R290.000 and in the case of Indians R30,000. That is more or less how these items varied.

Then I come to L, “Child Care ”. Child care forms a very important part of the Department’s activities. Under “Child Care” there is a deficit of R320,000. Amongst other things, the reasons are as follows: In the first place there are the non-State places of safety for the temporary detention of children. When a child is picked up in the streets he is taken to a temporary institution, a non-State institution. The expenditure under this item is constantly increasing because of the larger number of children who are taken to these institutions. From those institutions they are sent to children’s homes. It goes without saying that there is an increase in the expenses in connection with children’s homes when there is an increase in the number of children who are temporarily detained. Increased provision had to be made therefore in the case of these children’s homes.

The next item is maintenance allowances to children who are cared for by their parents, guardians or attendants. We are getting more and more cases where children have to be cared for by their parents, guardians and attendants. We do not know, therefore, how many applications we are going to get. A considerable amount is therefore required under this item. Then there is the question of family allowances. There has also been an increase in the number of beneficiaries under the family allowance scheme. These are more or less the main items under sub-head L; these in the main are the general increases which have taken place. It is like Shelley’s cloud; the position constantly changes and one cannot budget with any degree of accuracy. There is the possibility that one may underestimate. In the case of certain items, however, one may overestimate. There is, however, always a tendency for the amount to increase, however, and we are making provision for all unforeseen circumstances which may arise during the year.

The amount under sub-head D “Printing, Stationery, Advertisements and Publications” has been increased from R418,000 to R520,000. This is an increase of well-nigh 25 per cent. I regard that as an indication that the budgeting in this particular case has not been very good. In connection with this sub-head I should like to hear from the hon. the Minister, firstly, whether any new publications, since the Estimates were framed last year, have come in which fall under this sub-head, and secondly whether the Minister can give us a general indication as to the nature of the increase in the sum spent on advertisements by the Department under this sub-head.

I do not have the details of the various publications on hand, but this increase is due on the one hand to a greater outlay and on the other hand to an increase in printing costs.

This sub-head makes specific reference to publications and advertisements. The hon. the Deputy Minister has given us no further information. I asked him whether any new publications which have to be paid for have come in and I also asked him what the nature was of these advertisements for which we are being asked to vote an additional sum of R102,000. Surely we cannot be expected to vote such a huge sum if all that we get from the hon. the Deputy Minister in his reply is just a single sentence.

This is a 25 per cent increase in expenditure over a period of less than a year. I think the hon. Deputy Minister owes the House an explanation as the hon. member for Orange Grove (Mr. E. G. Matan) has asked: What are the details?

I should have liked to have furnished the details but unfortunately I do not have the details here. I shall try to furnish them when the Vote comes under discussion.

May I ask that this Vote stand over until the Minister has the necessary information. Parliament is not prepared to pass this Vote …

Order! The hon. member can move that this Vote stand over.

I move—

Agreed to.

On Vote No. 24.— “Education, Arts and Science,” R21.711,

I move—

Agreed to.

On Vote No. 27.—“Agricultural Technical Services (Administration and National Services),” R50,000,

I see there is a reference here to “Epizootics ”. Can the Minister tell us whether that is a body affiliated to the United Nations? What is “Epizootics ”?

Read the Afrikaans.

This is another case where the Minister concerned is not present and I therefore intend to move—

The hon. the Minister of Agricultural Technical Services is in the Other Place. I have the reply here. If the hon. member wants to know what it is, I can only say to him that the Afrikaans is perfectly clear. This is an International Office for Epizootics. It was originally established in 1923. At that time we were not a member, although we became a member later on. Our membership lapsed, however, and we are now becoming a member again. This is the annual subscription that we have to pay as a member. The annual subscription is calculated on a fixed scale. It is very important that we should be a member. We have always taken a lead in combating stock diseases and it is only right that we should play our role here too.

In view of the Minister’s explanation I am prepared not to press my motion that this Vote stand over.

Can the hon. Minister tell us why there is this large increase in wages and salaries and allowances under A? Is there any special significance why these general maintenance jobs are being done under G? There is an increase of R26,000.

I should like to know whether this is an increase in the salaries of existing officials or whether more officials have been employed; if so, how many new officials and in which departments?

This increase is for salaries and for an expansion of the establishment—for new appointments, for promotions, salary adjustments and improved salaries. All these factors contributed to this increase. The amount is approximately R53.000. Then there is an increase in the holiday savings bonuses as the result of promotions, new appointments and salary adjustments. Then provision is being made for an additional assistant secretary as the result of the establishment of new soil conservation committees. Altogether this amounts to R58.004. There have also been reductions under this head and that is why we are asking for R51,000.

The hon. member for Pietermaritzburg (District) (Capt. Henwood) referred to Item G, “General Maintenance Expenses.” The original Estimate for general maintenance expenses was R701,400 and the revised Estimate is R727.400. We are now asking for an additional sum of R26,000. The increases are as follows: This increased provision of R33.390 is due mainly to the late delivery of laboratory equipment ordered from overseas. There is also an increase of R450 in respect of coal for the dairy research buildings in the Free State region, which were formerly provided by the Department of Public Works. In the case of the Karoo region there is an increase of R 1,000 which is covered by a similar amount that was received from the Mohair Advisory Board for the equipment of a laboratory, and R500 is required to cover the cost of obtaining data in a survey of the mohair industry—a total of R 1,500. Then there is also an increase as a result of the late delivery of equipment and machinery on the farm—not in the laboratory. This equipment was ordered in 1961-2 but it was only received and paid for in the present financial year, the amount being R4.320.

In the case of the Agricultural Faculty at the University of the Orange Free State there is an increase in respect of chemicals, glassware and equipment that was ordered in the 1961-2 financial year and only received and paid for in 1962-3. The delivery of a great quantity of similar equipment was delayed when the Kirsten Skou sank. A corresponding saving of R17,000 was shown in the previous year in respect of this increase. In connection with Groot Constantia, wood was imported for the manufacture of casks for the purpose of maturing wine. This wood also arrived late, and the amount of R1,200 that was ploughed back in the previous financial year will be used in the financial year 1962-3. The total amount is R57,860. Then there are reductions amounting to R31,860 and the net increase which is being asked for under subhead G is R.26,000.

In the case of C, “Postal, Telegraph and Telephone Services”, there is an increase of 10 per cent over and above the amount originally voted. I should like to know what the hon. the Minister has to say in that connection and to what this increase is attributable. I hope that the reason is not …

Order! The hon. member cannot suggest reasons.

The additional amount of R4.000 is required as the result of the installation of new telephone lines for the Transvaal region (R1,000), two lines in the case of the Free State region at R610 and the increased use of telephones as the result of the increase in the staff, R2.390.

Vote put and agreed to.

On Vote No. 33.— “Mines”, R1,000,

What does this Vote mean?

This expenditure of R1,000 is in terms of the provisions of the Diamond Trade Ordinance of 1903. In terms of Section 20 of this Ordinance a duty rests on the Receiver of Revenue when issuing a licence to a trader in diamonds to see to it that he is a suitable person and that he gives a guarantee for R1.000. That guarantee was given in the case of a certain Mr. Vorster. He was found guilty in the magistrate’s court of having contravened the law in that he did not keep a proper register of the diamonds sold by him. He was called upon to forfeit the R1,000. Subsequently he applied for a refund of the R1,000 on the ground that the contravention was only a technical contravention. A sentence of ten days’ imprisonment or a fine of RIO was imposed. The magistrate who tried the case found that it was purely a technical contravention and that there was no intention to trade in diamonds illicitly. The S.A. Police as well as the Department supported this application, and that is why we are asking here that provision be made for the refund of this R1.000.

Can the hon. Minister please tell us why there is such a big increase of R825,000 under A, “Salaries, Wages and Allowances ”? Was proper provision not made initially for the increased allowance? Secondly I should like to know whether the reason is also that more persons have been employed?

In view of the fact that the Coloureds in the employ of the Post Office are expecting an increase in salary …

Order! The hon. member must confine himself to the reasons for the increase.

I should like to know whether this sum of R825.000 which has to be voted additionally, also makes provision for any increase in the salaries and wages of Coloureds in the employ of the Post Office?

My one question also relates to this increase of R825,000 in salaries, wages and allowances under this Vote. If this has anything to do with the recent …

Order!

My second question deals with sub-head P, which is a new item of R190,000 namely “Contribution to British Post Office for the Maintenance of Overseas Cable System I should like to know why this new sum appears on this Vote and why this amount has not appeared in the Estimates in the past?

In reply to the hon. member for Drakensberg, I want to say that it is estimated that as a result of the revised salaries payable from 1 January 1963, a large amount will have to be made available, practically all of the R825,000, but there is also an additional amount due to an increase in overtime payments necessitated by the release of officers for military training, and also resulting from certain structural changes in certain ranks of the Post Office, especially clerks who qualify for long service increments.

The hon. member for Boland (Mr. Barnett) asked whether Coloureds are included under this increase. This amount covers all employees, whether Coloured or European.

*The hon. member for Orange Grove (Mr. E. G. Malan) referred to sub-head P, the contribution of R 190,000 to the British Post Office far the maintenance of the marine cable system. The hon. member will see that no amount was voted in the original Estimates, but the amount payable every year to the United Kingdom as the result of an agreement between South Africa and the United Kingdom for the maintenance of the marine cable system was R190,000 per annum. This cable system has always been regarded by us as being of strategic value in times when there are atmospheric disturbances which make it impossible to make use of the radio services between South Africa and Europe. As the result of the necessity for using this cable an agreement was entered into between Britain and South Africa, in terms of which we paid an annual amount of R190,000. But recently South Africa left the Commonwealth and the Post Office did not know what the amount would be in future. That is why originally when these Estimates were framed no amount was mentioned, but in die meantime the agreement with England has again come into operation and the original amount of R190,000 now has to be voted.

Is the amount the same as it always was in the past, or has it been increased?

The amount remains precisely the same.

Then I just want to ask a question in regard to E, the ex gratia writing off of salaries which were overpaid. I want to ask whether that cannot be accepted as a precedent in the case of veterans and old-age pensioners.

Before a postmaster can pay anything to his staff, he receives a Letter of authority which clearly states what he should pay each official. Then instructions are issued to postmasters from time to> time to make any alterations which become necessary. There are continually adaptations in salary as the result of marriages or promotions or as the result of increased salaries. This often makes it very difficult for the postmasters in the various post offices, and mistakes are sometimes made. But unfortunately in this case a mistake was made, and when it was discovered an excess amount of R2,605 had been paid to 14 officials. Unfortunately all of them are people drawing small salaries. The mistake was not due to the officials themselves, but to the Department. These poor people spent the money they received every month, and now the Post Office regards it as unreasonable to demand repayment from people who can hardly afford to repay it, when in fact it was due to a mistake on the part of the Post Office itself.

The hon. the Minister has informed us that the additional amount falls under various heads, like overtime due to the fact that certain ballotees were called up for service and other people had to do their work, etc., but he gave us no details in regard to the figures. How much of it resorts under “increased salaries ”? We do not have a clear picture of the position.

I can just tell the hon. member that in regard to revised salary scales an amount of R550.000 has to be voted, and in regard to increased overtime payments arid certain changes in rank an amount of R275.000 is required.

There are three items that I would like a little further information on. The first is the enormous increase in what is already an enormous Vote, namely, the additional amount of R1,200,000 for tuberculosis. Furthermore under N, “Other Infectious Diseases”, I should like to know what was the outbreak which caused the expenditure of the extra R60,000. Lastly, under R, there are two items in respect of tuberculosis and venereal diseases clinics under the Divisional Council of the Cape, and apparently neither of which had been estimated for. Was it presumed by the Department that there would be no more venereal disease and has there now been a recrudescence in that respect?

The hon. member will appreciate that it is very difficult to estimate exactly what the expenditure by local authorities is going to be. As the hon. member will remember, the Central Government pays back a refund of seven-eighths of the expenditure incurred by local authorities. You cannot say in advance what their expenditure is going to be, and as a result of that exact budgeting becomes very difficult. The increase is due to the following factors: Firstly, an increase in the number of tuberculosis sufferers who require treatment; it is due also to the increase in the number of beds that have become available in the various hospitals; it is also due to the increase in the daily fees of the hospitals and the SANTA institutions; and also due to a larger number of patients receiving out-patient treatment; and finally, to the more expensive drugs which are being used in increasing quantities, and in addition it is due to the expansion of the B.C.G. vaccination scheme. The hon. member will be interested if I mention this: If he will go back to the Budgets of previous years, he will find that under this head there has always been an additional expenditure amounting to R1,000,000 to R1, 500,000, because obviously the Department wants to budget conservatively, and it means that it generally underbudgets. In 1957, an amount of almost R 1,000,000 was under-estimated and this year it is in the neighbourhood of R1, 200,000.

I have received no information about the new venereal clinics in Cape Town.

I am sorry, I forgot to answer that question. Two new schemes are being started in Cape Town, the one is the Tuberculosis and Venereal Diseases Clinic in Nyanga East Bantu Township and a similar one at Nyanga West, and then there is an additional amount to provide for isolation accommodation in various mission hospitals in the Northern Transvaal.

I want to refer to the first item B, “Dairy Products”, “Loss on the Importation of Cheese ”. This is a new item and I would like to ask the Minister concerned— he apparently is also not here at the moment —why it was necessary to import cheese into South Africa, when it was imported, and if during about the same period we exported any cheese from South Africa to other countries. I would also like to ask the hon. the Minister the price at which the cheese was imported and why it was necessary to incur a loss of some R42,000 on the importation of cheese. At what price was it imported and at what price was it sold to the consumer in this country? I know we have had the answer given to previous questions, that the importation was due to the fact that certain parts of the country were suffering from drought affecting dairy production as a whole, but there has also been a suggestion that we had heavily exported cheese and never kept a sufficient reserve, and therefore allowed ourselves to be landed in this position that we had to import. I would also like to ask the hon. Minister what quantities of cheese were imported, incurring the loss of R42.000.

Sir, this importation is a reflection of the chaotic conditions existing in the control of the dairy industry as a whole, a chaos which is affecting not only the producer but also the consumer in this country. It has been most marked over the last month or so that it was practically impossible to get any adequate supply of a decent quality of cheese in South Africa. Much of the cheese that is offered to our local consumers to-day is just about sufficiently above the grading margin to save it being used for the manufacture of soap; you certainly cannot call it cheese. One would like to know what this heavily subsidized dairy control board is doing to permit this state of affairs. I am sure the manufacturers of cheese themselves are not very happy about the position. We have in this country manufacturers who can produce first quality cheese that compares favourably with anything produced in the world, but they are not permitted to do so, and then we are calmly asked in an estimate such as this, by an absentee Minister, to approve of the expenditure of another R42.000 to cover losses which his Department has suffered on the importation of cheese. It is no excuse to say to me that the hon. the Minister is busy in Another Place. I understand that this particular Minister is not busy there in any case. He was well aware that this particular matter was to come before the House to-day. The whole Vote amounts to R2,750,000 additional expenditure. Surely we can expect the Minister responsible for that expenditure to be here and give adequate explanations for the increases.

I can only give the hon. member the information I have before me: In comparison with 1961 there was from the second quarter of 1962 a decrease in the production of cheese; in the second quarter of 1962 it was 902,000 lbs., in the third quarter it was 2,295,000 lbs., and in the fourth quarter it was 1,946,000 lbs. The Dairy Board launched an intensive advertising campaign from 1961 which resulted in the consumption, particularly during 1962, increasing sharply. As compared with 1961, the increased consumption in 1962 was as follows: First quarter, 570,000 lbs.; second quarter, 671,000 lbs.; third quarter, 518,000 lbs.; and fourth quarter, 1,137,000 lbs. Although sufficient supplies were available to satisfy current demand, the Board considered it desirable to import 505 tons of cheese, which is only approximately two weeks’ consumption, so that there would be enough time sufficiently to mature the local cheese in order to provide cheese of the desired quality, for which a market had already been built up to the consumers. The imported cheese was sold at the same price as local cheese, and if we calculate the cost of importing the 505 tons, it works out to a loss of approximately 4.2c per lb., but customs duties had to be paid on the imported cheese which in fact made up for the loss of the 4.2c per lb.

May I have more details in regard to “D”, the subsidy on fertilizer, including the loss on the sale of guano. I should like to know what the position is in regard to guano.

Order! The hon. member must confine herself to the reasons for the increased amount.

Yes, Sir, but here two reasons are provided for the increase in the amounts. Am I out of order then in asking precisely what the position is? There is reference here to a subsidy on fertilizer including a loss on the sale of guano. Am I not allowed to ask why there is such a difference?

The hon. member may ask what the reason is for the increase. The hon. member may not suggest reasons.

On a point of order, the hon. member is referring to two subsidies and surely she is entitled to an explanation of those amounts.

Mr. Chairman, I do not want to give reasons. I said two reasons were mentioned here.

Order, order!

May we have the breakup of the subsidy in respect of fertilizer and guano?

The hon. Minister of Finance who has to deputize for his absent colleague, the hon. Minister of Agriculture, has endeavoured to reply to certain of the points raised in regard to the loss of the importation of cheese, but the hon. Minister still has not made it clear why it was necessary to sell this cheese at a loss. Surely any businessman in South Africa who imports cheese would not sell it at a loss. What type of cheese was imported? We are being asked on this Vote to approve of a total additional expenditure of R2,750,000 by a Minister who is not in the House to justify the reasons for this extra expenditure. I certainly think that it is showing scant courtesy to the House if this state of affairs is allowed to develop.

Under Item E an additional amount of R1, 840,000 is asked to meet additional expenditure in connection with the stabilization of the price of maize. Is there any connection between that figure and the export of maize?

In reply to the hon. member for Simonstown (Mr. Gay) I can say that the cheese was sold at a loss because we did not want to penalize the consumer here, and we sold the imported cheese at the same price as the local cheese. But on the other hand we gained the import duty on the imported cheese.

*In reply to the hon. member for Simonstown (Mr. Gay), I may just say that in recent years there has been an annual increase in the consumption of fertilizer. The Government pays a subsidy of R2 per ton of high-grade fertilizer, and the additional amount to be made available becomes necessary as the result of this increased consumption. Guano has just been included here because it appears together with it every year, but I cannot say how much falls under the one or how much under the other item.

In regard to Item E, the maize, the position is that the Government last year undertook to contribute 5 cents per bag towards the transport of export maize and primary maize products exported during the 1961-2 season. This amount was paid into the Stabilization Fund of the Mealie Board to compensate for the increased expenditure on bags and other costs flowing from certain protective measures which affect the production cost of mealies and thereby have a deleterious effect on the competitive position in the export market. In the beginning of the maize season, 1 May 1962, certain claims for subsidies were still outstanding and an estimate was made of it. It later appeared that the outstanding amount had been estimated at too low a figure. I may just say that there was an increase in the Board’s sales for local consumption, but this amount is in regard to export maize where 5 cents per bag was granted.

It is quite obvious that the hon. the Minister of Finance has not been properly briefed by his colleague. Is it not a fact that the cheese when it arrived in this country was found to be so inferior in quality that the South African consuming public was not prepared to buy it? Is it not a fact that a quantity was put on sale in Durban and even after the price was reduced, the consumers still were not prepared to take the cheese? That give rise to the question as to what arrangements were made for inspection, and what general supervision there was in regard to this purchase. These are points that want clearing up. The general information in the country is that the cheese was so inferior in quality that it was completely unsuitable for our local consuming public who expect a high quality cheese, which we can produce in this country if the Dairy Control Board will allow the producer to produce that quality.

I am instructed that that is not the case.

May we know from the hon. the Minister from where the cheese was imported? According to the Minister’s figures the production of cheese during the first three-quarters was 4,200,000 lbs., whilst the consumption was 2,900,000 lbs. Why did the Board deem it necessary to import cheese?

The cheese was imported from New Zealand.

The hon. the Minister of Finance with the best will in the world cannot be expected to know the details of another Minister’s department, and I should like to know where is the responsible Minister? Has he made his apologies to the Minister of Finance? We have not had a word from the other side of the House as to why the hon. the Minister is not here. Two years ago we had quite a show-down over this business and last year the hon. the Minister had mobilized his platoon and they were all here, and we got through the Votes quite quickly. The hon. the Minister has done his best this year, I know, but there are one or two backsliders. Surely both the Ministers of Agriculture cannot be in the Senate together; they are not Siamese twins. I think the House is entitled to some kind of explanation as to why those Ministers cannot be here.

Might I say that the hon. Minister has offered his apologies to the Minister of Finance, and he is unfortunately at a conference in the Free State dealing with Item E.

Vote put and agreed to.

On Vote No. 40.— “Defence”, R9,015, 728,

I know the hon. the Minister is labouring under some difficulty, just as we are in putting questions on this Vote, but nevertheless there are questions that must be put and we would like the Minister to give us some answers if possible. After having approved a record budget for the Minister, we are being asked to vote another R9,000,000 additional for the Special Defence Equipment Fund, and we would like the Minister to give us some information as to what has caused this fairly large increase in the Defence Vote, in view of the record amount already approved of in the beginning. Is it that defence equipment which has been ordered is now coming forward?

Order! The hon. member can only ask for reasons?

I want to point out that reasons have already been given through the Press which the Minister should either confirm or deny now.

The hon. member cannot discuss that now.

I do not want to discuss the reasons in detail, but I want to ask the Minister whether he can give reasons for this increase, and does it include material which is now coming forward?

Order! The hon. member is suggesting reasons now. He should wait for the reasons.

Then I will wait for the reply. The other point I want to ask about is the four new items where there have been ex gratia remissions and payments. These are new items altogether. Will the Minister give us some information about them?

My question should possibly be more correctly directed to the Minister of Finance than to the Minister of Defence. I want to ask what is the purpose and the significance of this footnote which says “includes R7,000,000 balance of 1961-2 surplus on Revenue Account to be credited to Defence Special Equipment Account”?

I explained that in introducing this motion. I said where it came from.

The reason why I ask is that obviously at this stage there is no surplus to be dealt with because it has lost its identity. The Minister himself included the surplus in his budget of revenue for the current year and the Auditor-General confirms that there is no balance left.

I also stated at the time how any excess would be appropriated, and I said that this was all the rest.

With respect, that is misleading. There is no surplus left. It is part of the revenue for the current year and if he is going to appropriate it it must be appropriated. But surely the Minister should give the House a more specific reply to my question as to what is the purpose of it.

I want to ask a question under “R”, Special Equipment and Reserve Stocks. Is there any provision for medical equipment and particularly for anti-radiation equipment?

Order! The hon. member can only ask for reasons.

The reason for the R9,000,000 is this, that after the Budget was passed last year the Government decided to buy more major equipment, e.g. the Buccaneers which have been mentioned, and helicopters for the Navy. Those are the main reasons for this additional expenditure.

And the Canberras?

As far as the ex gratia sums are concerned, the first one concerns the supply of isoniazed powder to the Central Medical and Veterinary Stores, Pretoria, in terms of Contract No. FT.7647 dated 27 February 1961. The tender of International Rotterdam S.A. (Pty.) Ltd. of Johannesburg was accepted for the supply of 2,000 kilos of this powder. This firm ordered the powder from its principals in Communist China, who later declared that their firm offer had expired and that the powder had been sold elsewhere. The State Buyer, however, maintained that the order was despatched in good time, and that if the powder was not supplied at the tender price of R10,262.50 it would be ordered from another source for the firm’s account. The powder was subsequently ordered from Messrs. Lennon Ltd. at the contract price of R 12,390 and Messrs. Internatio Rotterdam S.A. (Pty.) Ltd. were informed that they would be held liable for the increase of R2,127.50. The latter firm, however, maintained that they acted and handled the transaction in good faith, and that they could not possibly be held responsible for their supplier’s inability to execute the order. The State Buyer recommended that the relative firm should not be held liable for the additional expenditure involved.

The second item is this: From the beginning of 1957 Field Cornet C. F. van der Merwe attended the University of Stellenbosch for that year, and thereafter the Military Academy for two years to acquire a B.Mil. degree at State expense. He signed a memorandum of agreement on 3 January 1957 whereby he undertook to serve as a member of the Permanent Force for a period of seven years after the successful completion of his course, and that if he resigned his appointment within that period he would refund portion of the costs incurred by the Department on his behalf. He successfully completed his studies during 1959. After serving two years he resigned his appointment in the Permanent Force with effect from 1 March 1962. As the Department felt that it was unrealistic to expect candidate officers to refund the whole or part of the actual cost of the three-year course, it was decided to fix the costs at R200 per annum, with effect from the 1960 academic year. In order to amend the then existing memorandum of agreement, all second-and third-year students were requested to sign an addendum to the memorandum of agreement. As Field Cornet van der Merwe completed his course during 1959, he did not sign the addendum. On the State Attorney’s recommendation, the Department only claimed the amount which he would have had to refund had he signed the addendum to the memorandum of agreement, i.e. R360.19. The Treasury agreed, provided the balance of the costs amounting to R3,600 incurred on his behalf be accounted for as an ex gratia decrease of the amount outstanding. I want to mention further that it costs about R19D per annum to keep a student at Stellenbosch University.

But that is very cheap.

It is a good university. It costs us much more to keep a student at the Academy at Saldanha and we are now asking the young men to refund a sum which is a little more than it costs us to keep a student at Stellenbosch.

The explanation of the third item is this: A bomb explosion occurred on the Grahams-town Commonage on 6 November 1960 and the son of Mr. du Toit (Desmond) was seriously injured. It transpired that Desmond was target shooting with an airgun on the commonage and hit a live bomb which exploded. The State Attorney maintained that as the ground was accessible to the public, and due to its failure to remove live bombs after practice, the Department was liable to the full extent of the claim, but as the claimant failed to render his claim within die specified period it became prescribed. The State Attorney, however, recommended that as the boy was seriously maimed an ex gratia payment of R6.000 was justified.

The explanation of the fourth item is this. Lt.-Commander G. F. Gower who was a passenger in a vehicle was injured in an accident on the Maltmesbury-Hopefield road. In spite of an amount of R528 paid to him by the Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner, he instituted a claim of R8,000 against the Department. The Deputy State Attorney, after negotiating with Lt.-Commander Gower, recommended R4.000 in full settlement of the claim for pain and suffering, loss of amenities and possible loss of future income (over and above the amount of R528 already paid to him in terms of the Workmen’s Compensation Act). Lt.-Commander Gower, however, was under the impression that the Department would waive its rights in so far as the six months’ period of prescription was concerned. It, however, transpires that the prescription period is two years. A period of two years has elapsed since the accident occurred and the claim appears to have become prescribed. In view of the above, an ex gratia payment of R4.000 was approved.

Under Item “B”, General, there is an extra amount of R470.000. What is the reason for that?

The Minister has been called to higher duty, so I will give the reply.

Do you mean he is dead?

The increases were due to the following: Oil and petrol, R300,000; police garages, spare parts and accessories, R120,000; workshop equipment, R 10,000; commercial garages, for repairs, R32,500; lease of private garages and driving licences, RI,000; maintenance of other vehicles, R4.000; purchase of motor vehicles, R 122,000; and the purchase of other vehicles, R4,500; and service contracts, R2,000. Does the hon. member want details of each item?

In regard to Item “F”, there is a large increase compared with the original Estimate, and I shall be glad to hear the reason for it.

Provision for increased expenditure in respect of the following items became necessary: Purchase and maintenance of personal equipment, R15,000; purchase and maintenance of equipment of a general nature, including physical training equipment and furniture not provided by the Department of Public Works, R25,000; orchestral instruments and music, R 1,000; weapons, R67.000; ammunition, R 12,000; technical requirements like photographic material, etc., R37,000. Does the hon. member want details of each one?

I should like a little information in regard to Item “D ”.

Provision for increased expenditure in respect of the following items became necessary: Printing, R76,000; stationery, R10,000. Does the hon. member want reasons for it?

I should like to know the reason for the increase in Item “H”, seeing that the Police Force is now mechanized.

Fodder, saddlery and harness, blacksmiths and veterinary services, R 10,000. The increased amount is required for the purchase and maintenance of police dogs, RIO,000. Those are the animals referred to.

I should like information in regard to the ex gratia payment to

J. Dineka, R4,000.

R4,000 is required as an ex gratia payment to one J. Dineka, whose husband was arrested on a charge of attempted robbery and who was then assaulted by the police officials who arrested him. He was then locked up in a cell, where he died the same night. His wife, J. Dineka, instituted an action against the State for R30,000, arising out of the death of her husband, but the case was later settled and she agreed to accept R4.000 as compensation. The responsible police officers were sentenced by the court to four years’ imprisonment.

I do not want to repeat the question I put before. The hon. the Minister now surely has the information and can give the reply.

Under sub-head “D”, where the increased expenditure is R1 02,000, that is due to increased publication of the Government Gazette, and State publications. It may interest the Committee to know what the increase in this regard was during the past three years. In regard to the Government Gazettes, for the year 1959-60, the cost was R1 85,000, and for 1961-2 it had risen to R303,000. In regard to State publications the expenditure in 1959-60 was R141,000 and now it is R320.000.

Order! The hon. the Deputy Minister should merely confine himself to this year’s amounts.

Then I just want to say that this increased expenditure is due to work which had to be done for the State Department speedily. It is also due to the larger numbers of Government Gazettes published, both the ordinary and extraordinary gazettes. In this regard my attention has been directed to the fact that when the Government Printer appeared before the Select Committee on Public Accounts, the principle was accepted that the Government Printing Office was a commercial undertaking and that it could not refuse to render the services asked for but had to comply.

What proportion of this increased amount of R 102,000 is due to publications?

I cannot give details about that. The R102,000 is in respect of the two items, Government Gazettes and publications, together.

The hon. the Deputy Minister mentioned the figure of R141,000 and I just want to know whether this R102,000 reflects the increase on that amount.

The R141,000 is in respect of a previous year. This year it was R175,000.

May I ask whether any new publications are being printed? As the Minister knows, there are State Departments which publish and distribute publications. Are there perhaps any new publications?

I do not have the details at my disposal.

Vote put and agreed to.

On Vote No. 24.—“Education, Arts and Science,” R21,711,

I would like to ask the Minister to inform the House what increased services have been rendered by the Africa Institute to warrant this increase of R4,000.

Under “M” there is mention of the Johannesburg School and Treatment Centre for Cerebral Palsied Children, a new item of R8,670. I should like to know whether this is a subsidy, or whether it is an amount which will be paid every year in future?

It is the Forest Town School for Cerebral Palsied Children, and this is a two-thirds grant made by the State and of which the Treasury has approved, for the establishment of a residential school to accommodate 150 students.

My reply to the hon. member for Albany (Mr. Bowker) is this. The additional R4,000 is for the Africa Institute, which has been established to make a study of the culture and customs of the various people in Africa and to publish the information so acquired. The Institute performs a valuable national service, particularly in present-day circumstances in Africa. The plan is to publish an international bulletin containing detailed information about South Africa for distribution abroad, and also a local edition for distribution amongst South Africans. The additional expenditure is constituted as follows: Additional staff, R8,780, and the deficit on the amount available for salaries is R2,220, a total of R11,000, less the amount which the Institute undertook to find elsewhere, R7.000.

Is the Africa Institute a private undertaking, or is it Governmental?

That is not relevant.

Under grants-in-aid to State-aided institutions an extra amount of R1.000 is asked for. May I ask some details about it?

It is in connection with the visit of Dr. Gear, who attended the second South African Genetic Conference. The Treasury approved an amount of R2,500 for the invitation of three delegates, but only Dr. Gear arrived.

Could the Minister give us information under “M”, the grant to the Witwatersrand Technical College? It seems to be a new item.

The Treasury approved an out-and-out grant of R19,000 for the erection of prefabricated classrooms at the Germiston branch of the above-mentioned college, the Witwatersrand Technical College. The accommodation was urgently required as the result of the demand for technical education. The final cost was, however, only R8,041, and as it is a new service it must be specially voted by Parliament.

This is a new item and a big item, and I will appreciate it if the Minister will give us some details about it.

The position is that the standard stock capital controlled by the Department of Police stood at R2,100,000 at 31 July 1962. Due to the switchover to the new type of uniform and the increased establishment of the Police Force, which necessitated larger reserve stocks of material and equipment, it became necessary to supplement the capital of the standard stock account. State President’s special warrants Nos. 5 and 15 were issued for the purpose to cover the parliamentary approval that is now sought. Most of these Departments have their standard stock accounts. From time to time those accounts must be replenished or increased, and this one is now being increased by reason of the fact that there is an increased establishment, and the switch-over to the new type of uniform.

We are asked to vote the little sum of R604, but actually the Committee is being asked to approve an expenditure of something like R3,500,000. There seems to have been a severe outbreak of new police stations and prisons during the recess, and we are being asked to approve in principle of the establishment of a large number of these new places by means of token payments of R50 or even less. I think this Committee should be given a good deal of information about these new developments before we can be asked to agree to them. One wonders why it is necessary, right at the end of the financial year, to introduce a number of completely new items, about a dozen of them, within a month of the end of the financial year. I can understand it once the principle has been approved and progress has been made and more money is needed, and one can understand where a scheme has been approved of and larger ideas have prevailed, but where it comes to completely new schemes it becomes very difficult for this Committee at short notice to approve of such large sums. For instance, we have here at Paarl (Switzerland) a new prison. The estimated cost of it was R700,000, of which we are asked to vote R50 now. I think the House is surely entitled to a full account of just exactly what is -envisaged there. I think the hon. the Minister of Finance will agree with me. I do not suppose he has ever known any Public Works undertaking of that nature which has been carried out at less than 50 per cent above the original estimate. So when we are talking about R3,500,000, we are probably talking about something nearer R5,000,000 in the long run. Then, of course, we have, inter alia, the proposal to acquire two new residences in Pretoria for Ministers. There is one which is estimated to cost R63.000 and there is one which -costs R35.000. In other words, we are being asked to spend R (00/100 for two ministerial houses in Pretoria and I think we are entitled to ask for some more information in that regard. Perhaps I can assist the hon. the Minister by asking him one or two specific questions. I would like to know where these houses are; I would like to know from whom they either have been purchased or for whom it is proposed to purchase them; I would like to know what accommodation they have and the valuation of the properties, and we would like to know for whom they are intended. Depending on the information that the Minister furnishes we can decide whether or not to pursue this subject further.

The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS; As far as these prisons are concerned, I can only tell the hon. member what we have done, but I cannot justify them; that is for the Minister of Justice to do. In regard to the Paarl prison, the farm known as Switzerland near Paarl was recently purchased, and it is proposed to develop the property into a prison for 1,500 White males. On completion of the proposed building it will be possible to transfer prisoners from other centres in the Republic, thus alleviating the condition obtaining at other institutions.

Then the hon. member raised the question of two ministerial houses that were purchased in Pretoria. As the hon. member no doubt knows, there has been a shortage of houses there and we have had to hire houses for Ministers in Pretoria. We advertised for houses last year and two suitable houses were acquired. The one cost R62,9Q0. That was bought from Mr. Kirkness—and that is a residence which will be occupied by the Minister of Finance. I do not know from whom the other residence was purchased. It was purchased for the Minister of Defence. They arc both situated in the Brooklyn area of Pretoria. They are both suitable houses. They are both very well built …

They should be at R63,000 and R35,000.

The one house is situated on a large site and quite a considerable amount of the purchase price was in respect thereof. We are considering whether jt will not be possible to divide the property into two portions and to use the other half for some other purpose.

As the Minister has indicated that the one house would be occupied by the Minister of Finance and the other by the Minister of Defence, would I be in order in asking the Minister who will be occupying the bouses that these Ministers will then vacate?

Other Ministers. There are two or three Ministers—I am not quite certain which—who are living in hired houses. There are two living in hired houses and one living in his own house in Pretoria. We will accommodate the Ministers who are living in hired houses in the two houses which are vacated by these two Ministers.

I wonder if the hon. the Minister can give us some explanation with regard to item (5), “Defence—re-Votes” at the top of page 22. The explanation offered at the bottom of the page is “for parliamentary approval of the increased costs which is partially provided for under Revenue Vote— Defence ”.

The total costs as approved in 1961-3 wasR124, GO0. Due to the additional requirements asked for by the Department of Defence, the amount has now been increased to R1,277,000. This has to do with Defence matters, and the Minister of Defence might feel that it is in the public interest to furnish this information or he might feel that it is not in die public interest to do so. I am not in a position to state whether it is in the public interest to release this information but these are buildings which are required for Defence purposes.

I take it that this new prison at Paarl to which the Minister referred is intended to be a large new central prison. I see that the Minister of Justice has arrived; perhaps he will supplement the information given by his colleague. The other point is the question of ministerial houses. I must say that I do not think the Minister said anything to justify the expenditure of R63.000 on a ministerial house, however worthy the occupant himself may be. The hon. the Minister simply gave us this information very briefly, but I do not think that there is any justification for expenditure of nearly R63,000 on a ministerial house at a time especially since there have been undoubted signs in recent years of very reckless expenditure by this Government on matters of this nature. I therefore wish to move—

What is the municipal valuation?

I would like to support the hon. member for Constantia (Mr. Waterson) in his amendment. I think that few people can deny that R63,000 is an extravagant amount to spend on a ministerial house, particularly when we take into account the money that has already been spent on these ministerial homes. Only last year when a question was put to the Minister of Public Works, information was provided which showed that already there were properties being occupied by Ministers with a total municipal valuation of R1,056,690, and that was last year’s figure. We are now being asked to vote two additional amounts totalling R98,500, and it would be interesting to hear from the Minister what the municipal valuations of these properties are. The hon. member for Constantia asked this question but unfortunately the Minister has not yet told us what the municipal valuations of these properties are. Then if the Minister has the information available I would also like to inquire what rent is being paid and will be paid by these two Ministers occupying these houses. With this tremendous capital outlay, if the Minister concerned were to pay only 5 per cent he would have to pay a rent of something like R3,150 per annum. I should be glad if the Minister would try to justify the expenditure of these large amounts on this Vote.

I would like to support the hon. member for Constantia (Mr. Waterson) too. I suggest that purchasing houses of this size flies right into the face of Government policy. If people are only going to be allowed to have one servant in future, how can you run a house of this size with one servant?

You can mechanize it.

The municipal valuation of the one house was R59,000. It stands on four erven in Pretoria. The municipal valuation of the other house which was purchased for R35,000 was R39,000.

Can the Minister tell us whether there are any outbuildings or servants’ quarters attached to both these premises and, if so, will these servants’ quarters ultimately become useless.

The hon. member for Constantia (Mr. Waterson) asked me for information in regard to the farm Switzerland. It is a farm situated between Paarl and Fransch Hoek along the Berg River, and the object is to rehabilitate young White youths between the ages of 18 and 25 years there. I invited hon. members—and some made use of the invitation—to visit Leeukop in the recess, and they will know how successfully Bantu are rehabilitated there. It was in order to establish a similar rehabilitation centre that this farm was bought. Hon. members will also know that to an increasing extent, and quite correctly also, we are moving away from closed institutions in urban areas to open institutions in the rural areas. We have confidence that as the result of purchasing this institution we will be able to do proper and sufficient rehabilitation work in respect of Whites. The reply therefore is that this farm Switzerland should mean to Whites what Leeukop at present means to the non-Whites.

In supporting the amendment moved by the hon. member for Constantia (Mr. Waterson) I would like to put a further point to the Minister in regard to the purchase of these ministerial houses. Has the Minister any estimate from his Department as to the additional cost that will have to be incurred before these houses can be occupied?

Very little.

Are we to assume that the moment the houses have been purchased, the Ministers will be able to move in without any additional expenditure on these properties? Then I would like to have some information from the Minister in regard to Item 14, “Police Dog Training Depot” in Pretoria. The revised estimate of the total cost is R28.000. This is a new item. This amount is for “additional lecture room and dormitory accommodation ’’. Is the dormitory accommodation for the dogs or for those who are going to give the lectures? This item reads in a most peculiar way; it says “Police Dog Training Depot; additional lecture room and dormitory accommodation ”. Is that for the instructors or for the dogs.

I might point out to the hon. member that these are particularly intelligent dogs; they are also very sensitive indeed and if they are not treated in the right way they are apt to get nervous attacks and inhibitions, so it is necessary to have dormitories and lecture rooms both for the dogs and for those people who are being trained to train the dogs, and taking everything into consideration I think these two items were necessary.

In support of the amendment of the hon. member for Constantia (Mr. Waterson), I should like to ask the hon. the Minister whether the Public Works Department was not asked whether they could build ministerial houses for an appreciably lower figure, and what that Department’s reply was. The hon. the Minister said that the municipal valuation of the one house for which R63,000 was paid is R59,000. In other words, R4,000 more than the municipal valuation was paid. But in the second case the position was just the opposite. There the municipal valuation was R39,000 and R35,000 was paid for the house. It seems to me that something went wrong here. I should like to know from the hon. the Minister whether they cannot build houses cheaper departmentally.

In the one case it was a good buy and in the other it was a particularly good buy. In Pretoria we built a ministerial house ourselves and then we came to the conclusion that if we could find a suitable house it would be better to buy it than to build one ourselves. As the hon. member perhaps knows, there is a saying that fools build houses for wise people to live in.

The Minister has informed the House that this price of R63,000 includes a lot of land; that it may be possible to cut off a portion of the land and erect another house on it. Could he give us some idea of the value of the land as opposed to the value of the house. We would like to have some idea as to what the value of the house actually is as compared to other ministerial houses.

Is the Government aware of the fact that these large houses under to-day’s market conditions are almost unsaleable? Was due account taken of that fact when deciding what to pay for these houses, because throughout the country houses of this size to-day are extremely difficult to sell.

I would like to point out to the hon. member, although he knows it perfectly well, that the actual value of a house and the municipal value of the property often bear no relation to each other. I think in both these cases we actually made bargains because I think we acquired the properties considerably below the market price, or let me rather say that we purchased the houses at a price very considerably under the costs of building similar houses at the present time.

In regard to this Paarl prison project, can the Minister tell us whether that has any bearing on the policy that we discussed previously with regard to changing the set-up at Pollsmoor and Westlake? The intention was to build a very large central prison in Paarl which would gradually relieve the position in Westlake and in the Constantia Reformatory. Has this any link-up with that?

No, the Switzerland project has nothing to do with Pollsmoor and it is not going to stop building operations in Pollsmoor at all.

Can we ask the Minister of Justice whether, when this new Paarl prison has been completed, it is the intention to close down the Tokai Rehabilitation Centre?

As the hon. member knows, Tokai is a reformatory and this is a prison. They have nothing to do with each other whatsoever.

Amendment put and the Committee divided:

Ayes—48: Barnett, C.; Basson, J. A. L.; Basson, J. D. du P.; Bowker, T. B.; Cad-man, R. M.; Cronje, F. J. C.; de Kock, H. C.; Dodds, P. R.; Durrant, R. B.; Eaton, N. G.; Emdin, S.; Field, A. N.; Fisher, E. L.; Gay, L. C.; Gorshel, A.; Graaff, de V.; Henwood, B. H.; Hickman, T.; Hourquebie, R. G. L.; le Roux, G. S. P.; Lewis, H.; Malan, E. G.; Miller, H.; Mitchell, D. E.; Mitchell, M. L.; Mool-man, J. H.; Moore, P. A.; Odell, H. G. O.; Oldfield, G. N.; Plewman, R. P.; Radford, A.; Raw, W. V.; Ross, D. G.; Russell, J. H.; Steyn, S. J. M.; Streicher, D. M.; Taurog, L. B.; Thompson, J. O. N.; Timoney, H. M.; Tucker, H.; van der Byl, P.; van Niekerk, S. M.; Warren, C. M.; Waterson, S. F.; Weiss, U. M.; Wood, L. F.

Tellers: A. Hopewell and T. G. Hughes.

Noes—95: Badenhorst, F. H.; Bekker, G. F. H.; Bekker, H. T. van G.; Bekker, M. J. H.; Bezuidenhout, G. P. C.; Bootha, L. J. C.; Botha, H. J.; Botha, M. C.; Botha, P. W.; Botha, S. P.; Cloete, J. H.; Coetzee, B.; Coetzee, P. J.; Cruywagen, W. A.; de Villiers, J. D.; de Wet, C.; Die-derichs, N.; Donges, T. E.; du Piessis, H. R. H.; Fouché, J. J. (Sr.); Frank, S.; Froneman, G. F. van L.; Greyling, J. C.; Grobler, M. S. F.; Haak, J. F. W.; Hertzog, A.; Heystek, J.; Hiemstra, E. C. A.; Jonker, A. H.; Jurgens, J. C.; Keyter, H. C. A.; Knobel, G. J.; Kotze, G. P.; Kot-zé, S. F.; Labuschagne, J. S.; le Roux, P. M. K.; Loots, J. J.; Louw, É. H.; Luttig, H. G.; Marais, J. A.; Marais, P. S.; Maree, G. de K.; Maree, W. A.; Martins, H. W.; Meyer, T.; Mostert, D. J. J.; Mulder, C. P.; Muller, S. L.; Niemand, F. J.; Otto, J. C.: Pelser, P. C.; Potgieter, D. J.; Potgieter, J. E.; Rall, J. J.; Rall, J. W.; Sadie, N. C. van R.; Sauer, P. O.; Schlebusch, A. L.; Schlebusch, J. A.: Schoeman, B. J.; Schoeman, J. C. B.; Schoonbee, J. F.; Serfontein, J. J.; Smit, H. H.; Stander, A. H.; Steyn, F. S.; Steyn, J. H.; Treurnicht, N. F.; van den Berg, G. P.; van den Berg, M. J.; van den Heever, D. J. G.; van der Spuy, J. P.; van der Walt, B. J.; van der Wath, J. G. H.; van Niekerk, G. L. H.; van Niekerk, M. C.; van Nierop, P. J.; van Rensburg, M. C. G. J.; van Staden, I. W.; van Wyk, G. H.; van Wyk, H. J.; van Zyl, J. J. B.; Venter, M. J. de la R.; Venter, W. L. D. M.; Verwoerd, H. F.; Viljoen, M.; Visse, J. H.; von Moltke, J. von S.; Vorster, B. J.; Vosloo, A. H.; Waring, F. W.; Webster, A.; Wentzel, J. J.

An appreciable additional amount is being asked for here and I should like to know whether in this case it is due to an increase in the price of land.

Order! The hon. member may only ask the reasons for the increase.

The reason for the increase is the purchase of land for the Public Works Department, Defence, mainly, and Agricultural Technical Services. Apart from that, it was also necessary to buy land for the Indian University in Natal, and that alone amounted to R500.000.

Vote put and agreed to.

On Loan Vote F.—“Forestry,” R150,000,

Can the Minister just explain what “Utilization” stands for?

“Utilization” means the cutting and processing of the products of the forest. For instance, we had a very big fire in the George district. That wood had to be used. We had to cut it, which is part of the utilization of wood, and we had to sell it, which is also part of it, and a large amount of it was sawn in our own sawmills, which is also “utilization ”.

Vote put and agreed to.

On Loan Vote Q.— “Bantu Education,” R202.400,

I refer to Item 2 (b), University College of Fort Hare: Erection of Administrative Buildings and Offices. The University College of Fort Hare has a long record and their administrative buildings have lasted very well. This is a completely new Vote. This is an exceptional Vote because it comes under the Bantu Education Account. If money is utilized for this purpose it has to be drawn from some other section of the Vote—a section of the Vote which is even more important than these administrative buildings. I refer to the section which deals with the provision of primary schools and secondary schools for the Bantu. I should like to ask the hon. the Minister how he explains that this service is urgent at this stage.

The reason for the particular hurry in regard to this matter is that for several years there was talk about the State taking over the University College of Fort Hare. In all those years the previous Council of the University College did not extend the buildings, which was really essential. There was a tremendous backlog in building requirements at Fort Hare. After the transfer the question was whether Fort Hare would continue to remain on the present terrain. During the period in which there was uncertainty about that, nothing was done in regard to the building needs at Fort Hare either. After negotiations between the Government and the Church societies owning the ground adjoining Fort Hare, and which cuts Fort Hare off from the Bantu area, those Church societies agreed to transfer the ground to the Native Trust or to Bantu churches so that the whole area, including that on which Fort Hare stood, should be incorporated into the Bantu area. It was then decided that Fort Hare should remain on the terrain where it is at present. After the decision was taken we immediately tackled the tremendous need which existed in regard to buildings. The greatest need was in regard to the administrative building which was much too small. They actually had to make use of lecture rooms in order to do their administrative work. In order to get the administrative staff out of the lecture rooms it was necessary to tackle this work immediately.

Item 21 relates to a Bantu Training School at Eshowe. This is a new item and the amount involved is R82.000. Will the Minister tell this Committee what type of training school this is to be, whether an existing educational establishment has been purchased, what type of establishment that was and why this is apparently a matter of great urgency?

This amount refers to the teachers training school and the secondary school near Eshowe. This complex of buildings belonged to a missionary society, I think the Lutheran Mission Society. This society some time ago entered into negotiations with the Department and asked it to buy the buildings from them. They wanted to use the money to build a training centre for evangelists of their Church elsewhere, because we did not want to allow them to give that training at the State institution which we were leasing from them. That could have caused confusion. They asked us to buy the buildings from them instead of continuing to lease them as in the past. The valuation they put on the buildings, and with which the valuators of my Department and of the P.W.D. agreed, was R1 13,000. The Church Society, however, said that if this transaction could be completed before the end of March they would be prepared to accept an amount of R82BOO in full settlement for the buildings. Under those circumstances it was decided to obtain the necessary approval to put through this purchase this year, because this Church was prepared to abandon a large part of the actual value of the buildings in order to receive the cash earlier.

I move as an unopposed motion and as amendments to this amendment—

Amendment, as amended, put and agreed to.

Amendment in Clause 2, made in Committee of the whole Hemse, put.

I move as an unopposed motion and as amendments to this amendment—

I second.

Agreed to.

Amendment, as amended, put and agreed to.

Amendment in Clause 3, made in Committee of the whole House, put.

I move as an unopposed motion and as amendments to this amendment—

I second.

Agreed to.

I do not wish to move an amendment, but I want to focus attention on the responsibility of the maintenance officer, and to draw attention to the fact that this is a new sphere, I think, for a member of the Civil Service previously connected only with prosecution. This will have to be a very versatile person; somebody in the nature of the family lawyer; somebody who will be coping with the maintenance problem of two persons who are at arms length. I want to emphasize the need for a wise selection when it comes to this particular official. You will see from the clause, Sir, that a very great responsibility is placed upon this official for this further reason: Where a complaint is made on oath he is obliged to investigate the complaint and he may institute an inquiry. It is required that he acts speedily to ensure that maintenance is forthcoming at the earliest moment. At the same time he will need to exercise caution in not launching inquiries where they are not required. It is very easy as the law stands for a person who feels in any way aggrieved to institute an inquiry. I think he will have to use his discretion very carefully. As I said at the second: reading there will have to be adequate staff because once it becomes known that this procedure is available, I think there will be a considerable demand for its facilities, which of course points to the value of the institution. 1 hope therefore that the hon. the Minister will look around for appropriate people to undertake this task and it may well be that he will have to appoint additional people to staff his Department to cope with this work. I think very possibly persons experienced in this work, perhaps people from the Side-Bar will be valuable as additional recruits for this work.

It is indeed as the hon. member for Pinelands (Mr. Thompson) has said. He knows that the prosecutors are the people who mainly do this work. For the rest they are people with years of experience. We shall naturally gain experience as we go along but it is obvious that we shall not make work unnecessarily for ourselves and that we shall not start court cases unnecessarily in this connection. I think these people have only one thing at heart and that is the welfare of the children and because that is their motive I believe we have every reason to take it that they will do their work properly.

I just want to ask the hon. the Minister whether he will consider appointing Coloured people in cases where the maintenance of Coloured people is involved. This is a golden opportunity for the Government to give Coloured people who have legal training an avenue of employment. If not, will he tell us whether he intends appointing European people only. I do not want him to bind himself, I merely want him to consider appointing Coloured people, Coloured people who are suited to deal with maintenance cases.

I can only give the hon. member the same reply which I gave him last year and that is that if Coloureds are available I shall make use of them. I told him last year that it was precisely with that object in view that we established a Department of Sociology at the Cape Western University and because we made such a great deal of propaganda for social workers to be trained we shall be only too pleased one day to employ them because that is our policy and because it is common sense that you are able to understand the people of your own racial group better than anybody else. When the day dawns that such people are available, I personally will be a very happy man.

I wish to move as an amendment to this clause—

In line 45, to omit “whereof”, and to substitute “in which

It is simply a question of language. It is rather distressing that what seems to me to be an elementary point has gone wrong. I do not think the hon. Minister will have any difficulty in accepting the amendment but it does lead one to be concerned for the language in which our laws are couched. It also takes one to the whole question of the involved language in which our laws are couched. I will not develop that aspect at this stage, but merely move the amendment which I think puts it in correct English, and with which I think hon. members will agree.

I am, of course, not an authority on languages but it does seem to me that the hon. member is correct. I cannot, of course, give a considered opinion on the matter. It also happens that during the afternoon the hon. member for Durban (North) (Mr. M. L. Mitchell) notified me of certain amendments which he intended to move. From the nature of things it was not possible for me to place those amendments, as well as the amendment moved by the hon. member for Pinelands (Mr. Thompson) before the Department. It will only be a waste of time for us to argue about it at this stage before I have had an opportunity of going into those amendments. With the permission of hon. members I now wish to move—

Agreed to.

Would the Minister just indicate why the date of 4 July has been selected for the coming into operation of subsection (1)? Is it because that is the date on which the 1962 amending Act itself came into operation?

The reply to that is that a mistake crept in when Section 72 of Act 39 of 1962 was amended. That Act was promulgated on that date and it is in order to put that right. It has nothing to do, of course, with the American Day of Independence.

Clause put and agreed to.

May I ask the hon. the Minister a question? I just want to say that I think there is something which the hon. the Minister should investigate in connection with the appointment of justices of the peace. As I understand the position it is divided into wards and each ward has six justices of the peace. We have the position that justices of the peace move away as far as 20 miles and even further but they remain appointed as justices of the peace. That means that their services are lost to the public and that there is not a sufficient number of justices of the peace. I think the position ought to be that justices of the peace should act as such where they are living. In my constituency for example, we have the position that there is a shortage of justices of the peace on account of the fact that some of them have moved.

It is a very simple matter. In terms of Clause 2 a justice of the peace remains in office as long as it pleases the Minister. He is also appointed for a specific ward. If he leaves that ward without resigning of his own accord because of his departure, and the Department is notified that he is no longer resident there, it is customary to withdraw his appointment and for somebody else to be recommended in his stead. If the hon. member experiences difficulty in this regard he need only bring it to the notice of the Department that the justices of the peace concerned are no longer resident in that ward and the necessary will be done.

Clause put and agreed.

On Clause 10,

I move—

1. (a) prescribing the matters in respect of which fees shall be payable to justices of the peace appointed in terms of Section 2, and the scale of such fees;

and to add the following sub-section as a sub-section (2) to the clause:

1. (2) A differing scale of fees may in terms of paragraph (a) of sub-section (1) be prescribed in respect of different areas, and different regulations may in terms of paragraph (c) of the said sub-section be made in relation to different commissioners of oaths or in relation to commissioners of oaths of different classes.

I want to raise the position of certain people who hold their position ex officio, attorneys for instance. Will the hon. the Minister see to it that when the new regulations are published, they come into force pari passu with the new Bill, that is to say the new Act, so that there is no lapse in the period in which attorneys are renewed as commissioners of oath and appointed under the new regulation.

I can give the hon. member the assurance that that will be done.

Clause put and agreed to.

Remaining Clauses, Schedules and Title of the Bill put and agreed to.

House Resumed:

Bill reported with amendments.

I move—

More than two members having objected amendments to be considered on 26 February.

During the second-reading debate the hon. member for Simonstown (Mr. Gay) raised a point which I promised to go into namely that it says in that clause “all civil actions” and the hon. member argued that there were certain civil actions which ought not to be protected. I have gone into that matter and I have found that he is right and I now wish to move the following amendment—

This only means that such a member must also give notice that he is undergoing such training. Sub-sections (3) and (4) become redundant as a result of the first amendment in respect of contractual debts incurred by such a citizen.

At first glance, the hon. Minister's amendment meets the situation I had in mind. I had particularly in mind the individual who is involved in a motor accident and who according to the law has to be in possession of a third party policy. Therefore, although legally he is responsible, he has a contractual arrangement with some insurance company who are really the people who have to pay whatever damage is finally assessed. One wants to make sure that in a case like that, the person aggrieved will not have to wait, but the hbn. the Minister’s amendment appears to meet my difficulty.

There are two other matters in regard to this clause which I want to raise with the hon. the Minister. The first is in respect of sub-section (2) (b) dealing with the payment of rent. In terms of the Bill as it is now before us, rent which falls due as the result of occupation of a dwelling house, room or tenement whilst the ballottee is in training, is not excluded from legal action. That is to say, the landlord can take action for the recovery of rent which accrues to the landlord while the ballottee is in training. The position therefore is that if a ballottee for instance is the tenant of a flat which he has leased under a long-term agreement, a year or two years, or whatever it may be, and if he happens to be a married man, and his wife continues to occupy such flat, then as the clause now stands, his wife could be ejected from that flat, whilst he was undergoing his training. On reflection it seems to me wrong that we should create a situation where because a man is called up to do duty to his country, where he has no option, and where he is only paid a nominal amount, that we should put his family in the position where the wife might be thrown out on the pavement, and he would not be able to do anything about it. There is of course provision in sub-section (5) which gives certain rights to any person who feels that a trainee is taking advantage of this Act. In referring to this sub-section I want to draw the Minister’s attention to this right which a landlord would have if he felt that this moratorium Act was merely being used as an excuse to evade payment. I hope the hon. the Minister will give us his reaction to this point, and perhaps he can remove our difficulties.

I appreciate the objection raised by the hon. member for Durban (Point) but I just want to point ont to him that I regard it as an ordinary necessity of life and if we wish to afford moratorium protection in that respect as well, we would be faced with the danger that people might be deprived of an ordinary necessity of life. Just as it is provided that nobody may enjoy moratorium protection in respect of ordinary necessities of life which he purchases after his training has started, we have to protect this ordinary necessity of life of people. I may just say that that has been the position in all the moratorium laws which we have had so far, since 1914. All of them treated this as an ordinary necessity of life. If we were to meet the hon. member’s objection I envisage that these people will not be able to rent a house. We should also remember that a married man who occupies such a house receives an allowance as a married man. He does not draw the maximum nominal amount which an unmarried man receives, but he gets an allowance.

The hon. the Minister has pointed out that this provision has formed part of the old laws ever since 1914, but the position was different then. Firstly the allowance paid to wives and children was higher during the war period; special provision was made to ensure that the family of a man did not suffer. There were also emergency measures which laid down that people could not be ejected. There were other provisions which protected persons as far as their housing accommodation was concerned.

That is the position even to-day.

No, that is not the position here. There are certain provisions but the protection which existed previously is no longer there, and where we are dealing with a new measure I feel we should not overlook this problem. Not many people will come under this. Not many of the youths will be married at the age of 17 and 18; there will be a mere handful, but the boys who will experience this difficulty will be those who marry at a young age and I feel that we should at least afford that protection to the wife of a person who is undergoing training.

Nonsense!

Those hon. members say

“nonsense They do not care if the wives are thrown on to the streets. I am making a serious plea to the Minister and hon. members say “nonsense

You have a big mouth (lawaaibek).

*Mr. RAW; We have had the experience and this is a serious matter.

On a point of order, is the hon. member for Cradock (Mr. G. F. H. Bekker) entitled to say the hon. member for Durban has a big mouth (is a lawaaibek)?

Did the hon. member for Cradock use those words?

Mr. Chairman, this man has …

Order! 1 am only asking whether the hon. member used those words?

Yes, but I …

Then the hon. member must withdraw them.

I withdraw them.

We are dealing here with a serious matter, and 1 appreciate the hem. the Minister’s difficulty namely that he is afraid to deprive a person from an ordinary necessity of life. But in the first place people are protected against being ejected from a house or a flat at random; unless they break their contract. But if necessary we should afford additional protection to the wife of a person who is undergoing training so that if he has a contract in respect of a flat or a house that contract would be binding for the nine months’ period of his training. I think the Bill can be improved in this respect.

I want to discuss Section 2 (2) (e) with the hon. the Minister and his proposed amendment. If one looks at (a), (b), (c), (d) and (e), one sees a reason for it. Here provision is made that the moratorium should not apply to certain contracts which the trainee enters into because these are necessary amenities that he must acquire during his period of training. For instance he may want to rent a dwelling in the same town in which he is doing his training so that he can accommodate his family, and there is no advantage of the moratorium. Now under (e) certain exemptions are made in respect of hire-purchase contracts, but it seems to me that the effect of that will be that the supplier of goods will not extend the advantages of hire purchase to a trainee if he knows that he is in training, because the suspension of civil remedies under the moratorium will apply. That means that unless the trainee is able to purchase furniture for cash, it will be impossible for him to obtain the advantages that the hire-purchase system normally offers. I would like the hon. Minister to explain that, because it seems to be in conflict with the purpose of the other exemptions. The purpose of the other exemptions is to enable the trainee to acquire these particular facilities, to contract for them and even to get credit if necessary, and the creditor is protected in that he can take the necessary action. I am thinking now of rent and other necessaries of life.

My point is that furniture under hire purchase is as important to the trainee as the necessities of life which he purchases. Every creditor is then in a position to know that in giving credit under the hire-purchase facilities, he can still take action and is not held up for the period of training plus three months. Then he will be prepared to enter into a hire-purchase contract; but the way the clause now reads, the creditor will not extend those facilities and the trainee will not be able to acquire anything on hire purchase, even be it a moped or a bicycle or any other form of transport which young people usually acquire on hire purchase.

I would like to ask the hon. the Minister to give very serious attention to the point raised by the hon. member for Durban (Point) (Mr. Raw) with regard to the protection to be afforded to wives of people called up under that particular sub-section. The hon. the Minister did mention that this particular protection advocated by the hon. member was not afforded in previous moratorium Acts, but I think the hon. member for Durban (Point) has made it quite clear that there is a complete difference between the conditions appertaining to wives under the old wartime measures, when wives and dependants drew very considerable allowances so as to enable them to meet their liabilities, and what exists here where they have to depend entirely on the amount drawn by the trainee. I believe it will make a better Bill of it if some such protection is provided, and if the hon. the Minister can see his way clear to accept it, I think he would be on the right track.

In this instance I really want to oppose the amendment of the hon. member for Durban (Point) (Mr. Raw) because I think he is rendering a disservice to people by suggesting such an amendment. If we change it the way he wants us to it will mean that it will be possible to give notice to anyone of those people in which case he will have to vacate the property concerned. People will no longer be prepared to grant facilities to them and it will be impossible for them to hire premises because the lessor will be unwilling to let the premises because he knows that they enjoy moratorium protection. In that way a disservice will be done to those people. As the clauses stand at the moment it is actually affording them protection; it is not as though it does not protect them as the hon. member would make us believe. The fact of the matter is that if you give moratorium protection creditors will simply not let premises to such people. While I am on my feet I should like to raise another point. I do not know whether this is a mistake on the part of the legal draughtsmen and whether it is a mistake on the part of the translators but I think the time has arrived that we drafted our Bills in proper Afrikaans. I object to the word “order ”. In Afrikaans the court issues a “bevel” and not an “order”. You may perhaps still find a sergeant-major issuing an “order” on the training field when the soldiers “drill” but a court issues a “bevel ”.

I cannot agree with the hon. member for Durban (Point) for the same reasons as those mentioned by the hon. member for Heilbron and also on account of what I have already said. The hon. member for Florida (Mr. Miller) has for example pointed out that if we accorded moratorium protection young people would find it impossible to buy furniture. But the hon. member for Durban (Point) also wants the moratorium to apply to housing. In that case those poor people will not be able to find accommodation either. I cannot reconcile those two attitudes. I regard housing as a necessity of life. If hon. members were to read the proviso at the end of (f) they will find that it says—

I really cannot heed the plea of the hon. member because I am convinced that it will not be in the interests of those young people if I did heed it. Housing is a greater necessity of life than furniture and if it is already dangerous in the case of furniture, how much more dangerous will it not be in the case of housing as such.

I want to say to the hon. member for Florida that I already explained in my second-reading speech that I realized that the benefits of the hire-purchase system would probably not be extended to them, but that I regarded that as a good thing and I still regard it as good that not too many such contracts are entered into.

Amendment put and agreed to.

Clauses, as amended, put and agreed to.

On Clause 4,

Clause 4 lays down that any person shall be entitled to claim interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum on all moneys due to him which are affected by the application of this Bill. I feel that this is unfair in the case of contracts or agreements which are already in existence. Let me take a bond on a property where a person has an agreement to pay a fixed rate of interest (whatever that rate of interest may be). He borrows against the bond a certain capital sum on which he is going to have to pay the agreed rate of interest even if the payment thereof is delayed during the period of his service—but he is going to pay in full on the capital which he has borrowed at the stipulated rate of interest. Now in terms of this clause, that person is going to have to pay not only the interest which has been agreed upon by contract, but in addition he is going to pay 6 per cent.

No.

Yes, as the clause stands now. “Whenever a person is debarred under this Act from obtaining payment of any money due to him … the interest of 6 per cent is due to that person who has advanced the money, and he shall be entitled to 6 per cent on all such money due to him. Now if the interest due is interest already on a capital loan, if it is interest on anything at all, he has an agreement to pay a fixed rate of interest on that.

But that man has had the u&e of the interest.

He has borrowed a fixed amount of money and he is paying a fixed sum of interest. In order to make my point clear, I want to move as an amendment—

That will make the clause read that a person will pay money at the rate of interest already stipulated in a contract, or failing such specific agreement already existing, he shall then pay 6 per cent. If there is an agreement with any creditor that interest will be charged on overdue accounts at 10 per cent or 3 per cent, this Bill as printed provides that the person shall not pay the stipulated rate of interest, but shall pay 6 per cent. Let us take it from either point of view. If the person has incurred a debt and under his agreement or contract, he has to pay 3 per cent on any overdue amount, why should we now specify that he should be penalized over and above what has been decided in an agreement between him and the person to whom he owes the money? Let us look at it the other way. If a person has an agreement with any person and part of that agreement is that arrears shall bear 10 per cent interest, we are now saying no, that agreement must go by the board and because a man is unable to pay as the result of his military service, although he has agreed by contract to pay 10 per cent, he will now pay only 6 per cent, whereas the amendment means that contractual agreements will stand, but where there is no existing agreement 6 per cent will be paid. There are very few agreements without provision. The case the Minister made by way of interjection was that the person would have had the use of the money in the interim, but that is normally provided for in any agreement. It is normally provided that if a person gets into arrears in his payments interest will be paid on such arrears. If you take municipal rates, if you do not pay them on a certain date you have to pay a fixed rate of interest. I do not feel that it is right that we should now interfere with agreements and contracts made between people and lay down an arbitrary rate which a person shall have to pay irrespective of whether it is going to harm him or harm the person to whom he owes the money. Therefore I ask the Minister to consider this amendment.

I hope the Minister will be able either to accept this amendment or to deal with the point raised and clarify the clause, because I have no doubt whatever that this clause will be read in different ways by different people. The Minister shook his head when he was told that it may be a question of paying double interest, but it is my firm conviction that as the clause stands there are cases where double interest will be paid. e.g. if a person has a mortgage bond and has to make capital payments. In terms of the bond he has to pay interest and in terms of this clause he would be obliged to pay 6 per cent interest on arrear instalments, notwithstanding that he is already obligated to pay interest in terms of the bond. As I understand the amendment of the hon. member for Durban (Point), it makes it clear that where there is a stipulated rate of interest, whether it be 3 per cent or 7 per cent, that is the rate of interest which will continue to be paid, but on a debt in respect of which no rate of interest is provided, unless the amendment is accepted, the interest will be 6 per cent. I think that achieves exactly what the Minister wishes to achieve, but I think it is quite wrong, and that it is not the Minister’s intention, to pay interest twice on the same amount of money, because a man has to do his military service.

I cannot accept the amendment at this stage. It is clear to me that we should also protect the businessman. If I were a businessman and money was due to me, I would make my calculations accordingly and if I did not receive that money I would have to borrow money in order to carry on with my business. The average rate of interest is 6 per cent. I think this affords reasonable protection to the trader, the businessman. From the outset we adopted the attitude in this House that we should be very careful that we did not apply a moratorium in peace-time in such a way that we unnecessarily hamshackled commerce. We should also treat the traders fairly. I simply regard it as a protection to the businessmen. I must say, however, that I am not a lawyer. I cannot go into all the implications at short notice because I was not given notice of this amendment. I shall, however, study it and if necessary I shall accept it in the Other Place.

May I thank the hon. the Minister for his undertaking to consider the amendment in the Other Place. I just want to make this one point. In terms of my amendment a person will not be prohibited from charging interest on money due to him. In other words, if he does not receive his money he can charge interest. But in that case that interest must conform with any agreement which has been entered into, and if there is no agreement it will be 6 per cent. In other words.

if he falls in arrear and his agreement provides that he will pay 3 per cent on all arrear instalments, that agreement remains of force. It is only when there is no agreement that he will have to pay 6 per cent. It does not prevent a person from charging interest on arrear payments. It only ensures that the interest is in line with the original agreement. The amendment does not place a prohibition on the payment of interest oh arrear payments; it is simply to protect existing agreements. Where there is no agreement it will be 6 per cent. As the clause stands at the moment the original agreement falls away and 6 per cent will apply irrespective of what was provided in the original agreement. I hope the Minister will regard it in that light.

Is the hon. member withdrawing his amendment?

Yes, with the leave of the committee.

Amendment withdrawn, agreed to.

Clause, as printed, put and remaining Clauses and Title of the Bill agreed to.

House Resumed:

Bill reported with amendments.

COLOURED PERSONS EDUCATION BILL

Thirteenth Order read: Adjourned debate on motion for Second Reading, —Colouerd Persons Education Bill, to be resumed.

[Debate on motion by the Minister of Coloured Affairs, upon which an amendment had been moved by Dr. Steenkamp, adjourned on 21 February, resumed.]

Before I proceed with what I was saying when the debate was adjourned last week. I would just like to deal with some of the figures which were queried by the hon. member for Malmesbury (Mr. van Staden) who is not here now. He questioned the figures given by the hon. member for Hill-brow (Dr. Steenkamp), but I have here now the latest figures from the Cape Provincial Administration dated the 21st of this month, from which I see that the amount allotted to Coloured education this year was R21,385,000, out of a total Education Vote of R47,943,000. The figure quoted by the hon. member for Hillbrow that it was 39 per cent of the total Education Vote. I have now checked those figures and I find that my hon. friend was correct.

When the debate was adjourned last week I was dealing with the claim by the Minister and by the hon. member for Malmesbury that they were doing something wonderful for the Coloured people and their education in this Bill. I went on to say that so far from doing anything wonderful and asking us to give them praise for it, they were to be blamed for their dilatory approach to the subject and for the fact that they have been in power now for some 15 years and that they have been very late indeed in paying attention to this matter, and that they have year after year applied their minds to all sorts of ideological concepts and that this Bill which is designed, according to them, to give benefits to the Coloured people, was something which they had left until the very last minute. I went further and pointed out that the machinery was there already whereby the Provincial Administrations could deal with this particular problem, and that they could have used the existing machinery without now expending extra money on establishing new Departments to do the work already satisfactorily being done by the provinces; and all that was necessary to give the benefits they claimed for the Coloureds was to make the money available to the provinces. The whole of the machinery was there and all that was necessary was to make available the extra money. They are now promising the extra money to the Coloured people if their education comes under the Minister, but why was that necessary? Why was not the money made available in terms of the existing arrangement? The existing Education Departments had more than 100 years’ experience in dealing with education and the whole of that experience is to go for naught now and education is to be taken away from the existing Departments and handed over to another Department. We should be realists and realize that the Government was following their own policy of fragmentation, and that is why it is being taken away from the provinces. It has nothing to do with benefits for the Coloureds, or with better education.

Through the Department of Information there was issued to the Coloured people a little pamphlet in 1962 with big headings saying that “transfer paves the way to improvements. Transfer leads to positive results ”. Let us look at the improvements which this pamphlet dangles in front of the Coloureds to get their support for the change-over. They are such as, firstly, compulsory education. Why is that important for an improvement? There is compulsory education in my province already for the Coloureds, and also in the Cape, under certain circumstances, and what are the circumstances which limit it? Money. The Minister of Coloured Affairs only had to get his own Government to accept the principle of assisting the Coloureds, and not the principle of the fragmentation of our population, but the trouble is that we have the wrong principle here. He could not get the money from his Government to give better education to the Coloureds, but he can get plenty of money if he can tell the Government that if they give them the money he will help them to get more fragmentation. What is the. second promise? The fullest development of talents. What a mockery!

Job reservation.

Why cannot there be the fullest development of talents under the existing system? Why is there a limitation of their talents? Shame on the Government for having done nothing for 15 years! And the next is more and better facilities for vocational and technical training. Technical training was taken away from the provinces and we were told about the wonderful benefits that would flow from it, but now we are told that if only they leave their training to the Minister they will get still better education, with special attention to the specific needs of the individual. What is this that is being held out as a carrot before the Coloureds to try to persuade them to agree to the changeover? Then we come to the statement that transfer leads to positive results because the salary scales of teachers will be raised. That is said in an official document to try to get Coloured teachers to support the transfer to the Union Department. It is sheer, utter, outrageous bribery. It is an appeal to self-interest, to dominate the thoughts of the Coloured teachers who are being appealed to. It says that, secondly, all teachers are to be afforded the opportunity of improving their qualifications. Where is there a barrier to any Coloured teacher improving his qualifications, and if there is, who put it there? This reminds me of the famous story of the days of Cecil Rhodes when he had thousands of pamphlets printed before an election saying: “Vote for Cecil Rhodes, and no tax on wool,” but no one had ever suggested a tax on wool. There is nothing to prevent the teachers improving their qualifications to-day. They do not have to go over to the Minister’s Department to improve their qualifications. Then it says that parents will have a say in the education of their children. We have that to-day in my own province. We have parent teacher associations, exactly as for the other race groups, and as far as I know, that is also the position in the other provinces and in the Cape.

Why do they not give it to the Whites as well?

Then it says that with centralized control further improvements in the education system are possible. Sir, further improvements need money, and it is money and the will to develop the education of the Coloureds that has been lacking so far. The money was there all right because it can be found now, but the will was absent. Then it says that full attention is to be given to adult education. Well, that is something for the Government to attend to in any case and it does not need this Bill to do so. So much for this precious document which was circulated to all the Coloureds to persuade them to put their education under the control of the Government. As far as I know, amongst the teachers’ associations throughout the whole length and breadth of the Republic, with the possible exception of one body, not a single organized body of Coloured teachers accepted in principle the transfer of Coloured education to the Government.

Let us look at one or two of the points made by the hon. member for Malmesbury. He said there were one or two special principles he wanted to lay down. One principle was that it was very undesirable that one body such as this Parliament should tax and hand the money to the province, which should then spend the money. The hon. member waxed quite eloquent about it. He did not like Parliament to raise money by taxation and hand it to the provinces on the rand-for-rand basis. But the hon. member should study his brief better before making such a statement, because I would like to quote to him a very important opinion in that regard, in connection with the development of Coloured affairs and taxation for the purpose of financing Coloured services. The statement is this—

So the suggestion here is that the direct and indirect taxes paid by the Coloureds should be collected into a global sum and paid over to the Coloured Affairs Board instead of to the province. I want to ask the hon. member for Malmesbury what is the difference? And who said this? The hon. the Prime Minister, in December 1961. He said Parliament would tax and collect the money and pay it over to the Coloured Control Board. Now what happens to his sacred principle that it is wrong to do things like that? Here is the Prime Minister repudiating it 15 months before he made his speech last week.

But the hon. member went further and said that the most unfair thing is for Coloureds and Whites to get education out of the same pot—a very earthy metaphor. He did not want education to come out of the same pot for White and Coloured children, and then he elaborated and said there should be differentiation. Sir, I am wondering whether the hon. member has not let the cat out of the pot my making that statement. What is the Minister going to say about this differentiation that his colleague talks about? Is not that the point, that there will be differentiation, and that the education for the Coloured child has to be differentiated?

An educational system should meet the needs of the people.

An educational system should provide teachers who keep their mouths shut and who do not interfere in matters which do not concern them, especially when they become members of Parliament and Whips. When the Chief Whip of the Nationalist Party makes that interjection, he is bearing out what was said by the hon. member for Malmesbury, and he is now making it worse and saying in the clearest possible language that to meet their needs the Coloureds will have to get a different education from that of White children. What is their destiny, in the mind of the hon. the Chief Whip? What kind of education do the Coloured children need to fit them for their destiny? Is it to be a separate destiny from that of the rest of us, the Whites, the Asiatics and the Bantu.

May I ask the hon. member a question? What is wrong with it when I say that an educational system should meet the needs of the people? That is educationally sound.

Yes, I accept it, but what is the inference? It is that the Coloured child needs a different education from the White child. Does the Chief Whip deny it? No, he does not. Here we have a responsible man, the Chief Whip, admitting that differentiation and fragmentation in the field of education, as well as in the racial field, is now the policy of the Government. We feared that this step was going to lead to a diminution of the standards of education of the Coloureds, and I say now without any doubt that I believe that that must be so. I cannot believe that the Chief Whip and the Minister will see to it that their standard of education is put at a higher level than that of the White children. So that is what we are faced with, and now we know precisely where we stand—differentiation, because educationally it will be the right thing for the Coloureds, bearing in mind their destiny, whatever that may be.

Their separate needs.

Will they live in a country of their own where they have different needs? Will their industry and their economy be different from ours?

Business suspended at 6.30 p.m. and resumed at 8.5 p.m.

Evening Sitting

When the adjournment took place, I was dealing with a certain document which had been circulated by the Department of Information, and with other points. Now I should like to come back for a moment to the question of the organization which has been in existence and in this regard still is in existence, namely where we have in the four provinces the different departments of education, so that in their own educational institutions, i.e. the Whites in theirs, the Bantu the Coloured and the Asiatics in theirs, they receive education in their own areas. All the races therefore had their own schools under the jurisdiction of the Provincial Administration concerned with its department of education. And I think I can say that subject to the limitations imposed upon them by considerations of finance, they did a very good job of work. What was needed was finance.

May I in this respect draw the attention of the House to a similar situation in the past where the provinces ran short of finance for education. I quote this as an example to show what would have been an easy step for the Government to have taken in this matter. I want to go back to the policy which was at that time and by the then Opposition, called the “Hofmeyr-beleid ”. Mr. Hofmeyr felt that more should be done for the education of the Natives. The money was not there—the provinces did not have the necessary funds. The net outcome—without going into detail—was that Mr. Hofmeyr arranged for the necessary funds to be provided by vote of Parliament. That money went to the four Provincial Administrations in toto for Bantu education. They were therefore not expected to contribute anything. Whatever the Central Government felt should be expended on Bantu education, was provided by Parliament. The present Minister of Bantu Administration and Development was one of those who issued a pamphlet at the time in which he criticized most strongly the expenditure of such large sums of money. However, my point in this connection is that a precedent was created then and that there is no reason why this Government could not have followed that precedent, i.e. to have voted more money for the expenditure by Provincial Administrations on education. But, no! That would not do for them. That is why I say that we must be realistic and realize that this Bill has got nothing to do with the education of the Coloured people and that despite all the protestations of the hon. the Minister and the hon. member for Malmesbury. This Bill has nothing to do with that. What this Bill does is to bring about fragmentation of our population.

I know that the hon. the Minister is going to be very philosophical about this when he replies to the debate when the time comes. He might put on a show of wrath, but that does not matter; that would just be fending his way. We understand that by now in this House. But why do I say that the Minister will be philosophical about this matter? Because he knows that he is simply here filling a gap for the time being. The Minister knows that very well.

You have been filling a gap since 1948!

I am not talking about that hon. member’s intelligence, Mr. Speaker. That has not been filled since 1948— there still is a gap! Let me, at this juncture, deal with a certain speech made by the hon. the Prime Minister and in doing so, I am sure there is going to be no voice of protest raised from the other side, whatever members, may think. There will, on the contrary, be a dumb acceptance of what the Prime Minister said on this occasion. That is why I said —in the light of the Prime Minister’s words—that the Minister of Coloured Affairs is not going to complain too loudly when the time comes. This is what the Prime Minister said in December 1961 namely—

In other words, this member would be like a Cabinet Minister. In other words, the present Minister of Coloured Affairs is serving as a stop gap. How long did the Prime Minister visualize this transition to take place? In the same speech the Prime Minister also said—I am not going to quote at length from it because I am not a free advertising agent for the Prime Minister—that it would last ten years. He said he was in a hurry and that he was going to get on with it. That was why he fixed ten years. That he did in December 1961 —one year and three months have already gone by since.

Here then is the position which we have to face under this Bill: What we must see in this Bill, Sir, is not an attempt to take Coloured education away from the provinces for the purpose of handing it over to a Minister here in Parliament, but an attempt to take Coloured education away from the provinces to hand it over, for the time being, to a Minister until such time as a central Coloured body has been built up with a Coloured Minister of Coloured Education who then is going to take over control. It is quite interesting to surmise as to who is going to have precedence in terms of status—the Coloured Minister of Education or our own Minister of Coloured Affairs—and whether, when the time comes, the present Minister of Coloured Affairs will simply abdicate when that transfer has to take place at the next stage of development. The present stage is only a temporary measure until the time when Coloured education will be taken over permanently by a Coloured Minister. This, then, is the position which is facing us under this Bill. We are not being asked to vote or fight against the passing of control from the provincial administrations to the Government. That is not the point at all. What is being done in terms of this Bill is merely a temporary measure because ultimately Coloured education must go to the control of the Coloured people themselves. And where does the question of finance come in then?

I want to deal with this matter very carefully. I have already quoted from this report where the Prime Minister said the taxation presently being levied from the Coloured people, could be taken and paid over to this central body of four Ministers for them to distribute. Mr. Speaker, the hon. the Minister laughs and smiles. That means that I have his acquiescence. I know him well enough to appreciate that gesture. At present, Sir, there is a heavy subsidy necessary for Coloured education. What is then to be the position in future? If this interim step is to inveigle the Coloured people into accepting a new set-up with the aid of promises of higher salaries for the teachers, higher benefits in terms of money for the purposes of Coloured education, etc., what then is to be the position after that? What will happen then? Can the hon. the Minister answer this question when he replies? What is the destiny of these people when he ceases to be the Minister of Coloured Education having passed Coloured education on to its permanent home, namely to the shoulders of a permanent Coloured Minister of Coloured Education? Are the Coloured people then to find the money for their own education from their own resources?

You see, Sir, when Mr. Hofmeyr arranged for Parliament to vote all the necessary funds for Bantu education within what was then the Union, he did so because the taxation then allowed to the provinces was very small indeed; there was very little income for them. There was, in any case, very little direct taxation coming from the Bantu. What is, in the main, the position with the Coloured people to-day? Surely they are a section of the population who to-day are not economically in a position to pay for their own education? They do pay indirect taxes, like the rest of us do. Our revenue account benefits from the indirect taxation levied on all sections, even the poorest—by way of customs duties, and in many other ways. The Coloured people are therefore paying their whack. But are they, when the time comes, going to be told that now that they have their own Cabinet, their own independence and their Minister of Coloured Affairs, they have to find the money to pay for their education and that to the extent that they will be able to finance themselves in this respect, will they be allowed to spend money for their own education?

This, Sir, is I think a detestable approach to the whole problem. Here we have a section of our population who, at any rate from the days of the public statement made by General Hertzog, the leader of the Nationalist Party at the time, is an appendage of the White folk in this country. We have accepted that all along. They are our natural allies in regard to all matters—including culture. Their education builds up their culture in the same way as it does ours. Their songs, their writings, etc. are part of the stuff which is being read by White people of this country. Are we going to throw them aside now on account of this policy of this Government to bring about fragmentation of our population? And that an unready and unprepared people? If we want to do that, let us first give them an education which will fit them for all those responsibilities; let us first put them in a position where they would be able economically to pay their way as a viable community and where they would have understanding and appreciation of precisely what responsibilities they would be accepting. Do not let us throw them into this atomic age with the call for freedom and for self-determination which we are manufacturing for them because they did not ask for it, Sir. They never asked for it! They have never asked for freedom and self-determination in regard to their education! We are manufacturing it for them because we tell them that we are going to give it to them, i.e. the right to determine their own future in regard to education and in other ways. Thereby we are throwing an unready 1,500,000 people into a condition for which they are completely unprepared. From whatever angle we view it, I think it is absolutely fundamentally wrong. Let us spend the money, the revenue of this country to which they have contributed their small widow’s mite, to build them up into a viable community and then to give them a free choice as to whether they want to go their own way in regard to education or anything else. Then we will be playing the game by the people whose trustees we are to-day.

When the hon. member for Natal (South Coast) (Mr. D. E. Mitchell) accused the hon. the Minister of “filling a gap”, I told him by way of interjection that he had been “filling a gap” since 1948. Then he mumbled something about “intelligence”, I do not want to draw comparisons between his intelligence and mine, but would prefer to leave it to the judgment of others who are more objectively disposed towards this point than he is. The hon. member for Natal (South Coast) was elected to Parliament in 1948 because General Smuts wanted him as a member of his Cabinet if he won the election. But they did not; with the result that he had to stay in Opposition. He is still there to-day, and I predict that he will never be anywhere else.

Because the hon. member for Natal (South Coast) attacked the hon. member for Malmesbury (Mr. van Staden) this afternoon. I want to defend the hon. member for Malmesbury and say that he had to withdraw from the discussion of this matter this afternoon in order to prepare for a meeting which is to take place in his constituency this evening. The fact that he is not present, was not intended as a slight or anything of that nature. To return to the speech of the hon. member for South Coast, I may say that his whole speech can be summed up in the word “fragmentation ”. To his way of thinking, everything is being fragmented. All that I want to ask him in this connection is whether, if it is fragmentation when the Coloureds receive their own school system and the Whites, Bantu and Asiatics each have their own, it is not fragmentation also if the same type of thing is applied to the various groups of the population in other spheres? I take it therefore that the hon. member will agree with me when I contend that according to this view it was also fragmentation to place the Coloureds on a separate voters’ roll? Will it also be fragmentation if they are kept on a separate voters’ roll?

I have here a cutting from the Cape Times of 24 September 1959 of a report on a speech which the hon. member for Natal (South Coast) “The Leader of the United Party in Natal” made in Johannesburg. He is reported as having said—

I ask now, Mr. Speaker, whether what the hon. member is advocating here does not also amount to fragmentation of the people? [Interjections.] Yes, during that meeting somebody put a question to the hon. member by way of an interjection, to which the hon. member reacted as follows—

The hon. member now wants to know what our intention is by fragmenting the people in this way. May I refer him to his own province, the province of which he is the Leader of his Party. In Natal the promotion of Coloured education was started in 1885. No progress was made in that connection; they left the matter to the mission schools. But in 1900—still before the other provinces were able to do so—Natal made a positive effort to establish Coloured schools in order to accommodate Coloureds and Whites in separate schools. This happened in his own province; in other words, his own province started as early as in 1900 with the fragmentation of the people. The hon. member later became Administrator of that province, but he neglected to tell us what steps he took to combat this fragmentation of the people in Natal!

But I want to discuss another consideration. If it is fragmentation to divide up the Coloureds, Whites and so forth into separate school systems, then surely it is also fragmentation to divide up Whites and Whites into separate schools? And is that not what they are doing in Natal?

And in the Cape Province?

Separate Afrikaans-medium schools were only started in 1924 in the Cape …

And the hon. member was opposed to them!

Mr. Speaker, that hon. member has never known anything about education. Let me teach him a few things. What he has said is not true and he ought to know that it is not true. But he knows nothing about it and that is why he says these things.

But the hon. member was my teacher!

Yes, but I had a stupid pupil! I could not drive any sense into his head.

But let me return to Natal where we find the greatest differentiation taking place between Afrikaans-and English-speaking children. They have had separate school systems for Afrikaans-and English-speaking children there for more than 100 years. Is that not also fragmentation?

That is last year’s debate.

I can well understand that this hon. “Little Pitt” is thinking about last year. But I am sure that he noticed what happened recently at Michaelhouse, one of the English single-medium schools, when a survey was taken there and it was found that a fairly large percentage of the children in that school were Republicans and Nationalists. For that reason hon. members are now concerned about fragmentation! [Interjections.]

The hon. member for Natal (South Coast) asked what this Government has done for Coloured education. In reply to that question I need only refer him to the Cape and ten years of United Party Government, that is to say, from 1935-45, as compared with ten years of Nataionl Party Government, that is to say, from 1950-60. During the ten year period from 1935-45 the number of Coloured scholars in the Cape alone increased by 58,726, while during the period 1950-60 the increase was 127,951. Moreoever, this number increased by a further 30,000 in the next two years. I think that this is an adequate answer to the question of the hon. member in regard to what the Government has done for Coloured education.

In pursuance of the hon. member’s argument that segregation is fragmentation, I want to ask the hon. member whether he is not the same person who lead the agitation against single-medium schools and in favour of parallel-medium schools?

That is a very stupid question and so it is very easy to answer. I led the agitation for parallel-medium schools because I was opposed to English-medium schools as separate schools. I have always told Afrikaners that if Bishops and other schools of its type were parallel-medium schools, so much more attention would be given to Afrikaans. [Interjections.]

But to return to the hon. member for Natal (South Coast). He wants to tell this House that this Government is doing so little for Coloured education and that by means of what he calls the “process of fragmentation”, we are apparently neglecting the education of the Coloureds, the Indians and the Bantu. Let me prove to him how much better off the Coloureds, Indians and Bantu in South Africa are than the Indians in India. I have here the latest that is to say, the 1961 issue of The International Yearbook and Statesmen’s Who's Who, on page 339 of which we find the following—

Hon. members say now when we try to promote Coloured and Indian education that we are introducing fragmentation, but fragmentation in India means that only a small percentage can read and write. Our Coloureds and our Indians are far better off under this Government.

We heard the old complaint from the hon. member for Natal (South Coast) and also from the hon. member for Hillbrow that the proposed transfer of Coloured education to the Department of Coloured Affairs will mean that this education will become inferior education. But that same accusation was forthcoming from them when we wanted to do and did the same thing with Bantu education. Then they also told the world that this would mean inferior education; that it would actually mean nothing because it would be of a lower standard. But when the curricula were announced, the instructors of the hon. member for Houghton, the Institute of Race Relations, stated that those curricula compared well with the best in England. [Interjections.] Mr. Speaker, I want to ask you to appeal to the hon. member for Durban (Point) who is making a noise like one of those empty vessels we hear so much about, to try and conceal that emptiness.

Order! I could not hear the hon. member for Durban (Point) …

Fortunately for you, Mr. Speaker.

Order, order! I will also have to take action against the hon. member for Karas if he does not remain silent.

This argument of inferiority was also used at the time when we wanted to establish separate universities for Coloureds, Indians and Bantu. At that time the United Party also tried to tell the world that those university colleges would be inferior institutions which would actually amount to nothing more than differentiation in education. It would be education in the bundu, so they said. But what is the case to-day? A senior lecturer was recently appointed to the teaching staff of the University College of the Western Cape, a man with more qualifications than any other man in his subject can lay claim to in any other university either in South Africa or, for that matter, in the world. Let me also refer to the University College of Fort Hare. I have the honour to be a member of the Council of that college. That is why I feel that I am in the position of being able to state that Fort Hare has never in its history had a teaching staff of the standard and calibre as that which it has to-day. It has never had such an extensive curriculum; it has never had as many faculties; and it has never had such highly qualified people as it has to-day. Let me demonstrate this in regard to one subject. As it happens, I am interested in Greek because Greek was one of my branches of study.

As far as I am concerned, the hon. member is still talking Greek!

Yes, what I am saying is Greek to the hon. member because he is too stupid to understand Afrikaans.

Order! If the hon. member for Durban (Point) cannot understand Greek, I am sure that he can understand Afrikaans. That is why I ask him to give the hon. member for Fort Beaufort an opportunity to finish his speech.

Because as it happens, I am interested in Greek, I investigated the position in this connection at the University College at Fort Hare. I found that under the old régime, that is to say, of the United Party, there were eight students in the Greek class of whom seven did not pass. Under the new régime there are seven students—and they write the examination set by the University of South Africa; in other words, of a world-renowned standard—and all seven had passed. I believe that one of them even passed with distinction!

Order! Which hon. member whistled?

I did, Mr. Speaker. I apologize.

Now, Mr. Speaker, these are the results of a régime which hon. members of the Opposition have tried to make out has lowered the standard of non-White education. Because the hon. member for Natal South Coast) how much to say about fragmentation, I would like to confine myself to this matter and I want to draw your attention to the fact that the hon. the Minister of Coloured Affairs pointed out that Coloured education would be planned as an undivided unit. In this he touched on a principle which is fundamental to all education, that is to say, that education of itself is indivisible. While education as such is indivisible, the control over education is something which must be divided. In all civilized countries of the world which have to deal with various race groups and language groups, there is a system of divided control over education. What the hon. member therefore calls “fragmentation of the population” is nothing less than divided control over education. As against this education as such ought to be planned for every group as a unit. But when we come to the control of education, we can simply take our own country as an example. In the Republic we have no fewer than four different education control systems, that is to say, one for each province. Besides this we also have South West Africa with a fifth system. But can we call this “fragmentation of the people ”? Take a country like Belgium. There they have separate control over schools in the Walloon and Flemish areas. In the one area Flemish is used as the medium of education and in the other area French is used as the language medium. The universities there are either Flemish or Walloon universities. Only last year the Gelbium Parliament adopted a Bill to draw a linguistic boundary through Belgium. Those on one side of that boundary speak Flemish and those on the other side speak French.

Are you suggesting that the Coloureds use a different language from that of the Whites in South Africa?

The hon. member does not quite understand what I am talking about. I say that if divided control over education means fragmentation, then we have fragmentation of the population in Belgium. I have also pointed out what the true position in Belgium is. If the hon. member investigates these matters a little more and keeps quiet in the meantime, he may perhaps get to know something more about them.

What is the position in Great Britain in this connection? Remember, the hon. member for Natal South Coast said that divided control over education means the fragmentation of the people. But in England there are separate education systems for England and Wales. This is provided for in terms of the Education Acts of 1944 and 1953. In those Acts it is provided that local education authorities—the county and county borough councils—will be responsible for education in their various areas. The whole of Britain and Wales is divided into various areas for this purpose. Does this amount to fragmentation of the people? Scotland also has its own system. The Scots do not follow the British system at all; they have their own system of education under their own laws. Does this mean fragmentation of the Scots and the English?

Are there Scots living in England?

The hon. member for South Coast lives in Natal as does the hon. member, “Little Pitt ”—the younger Pitt. In any case, what he says has not “pit”. I want to take the case of Israel.

On a point of order, may the hon. member for Fort Beaufort call another hon. member of this House “the hon. member for Little Pitt ”?

Mr. Speaker, I said: “Little Pitt”, then somebody else said: “Younger Pitt”, and then I said: “In any case, he has not *pit’ at all”.

Order! The hon. member may only refer to another hon. member by mentioning his constituency. Hon. members must not bring personalities into the discussion.

I was referring to the hon. member for Durban (North) (Mr. M. L. Mitchell). If divided control over education means the fragmentation of the people, then it will be difficult for me to find a better example than the Republic of Israel. In the Republic of Israel there are Jewish schools to which no Arabs are admitted and there are Arab schools to which no Jewish children are admitted. They have complete segregation between Arab and Jew. In the Arab schools the language medium is Arabic and in the Jewish schools the language medium is Hebrew. Yiddish cannot be used. They used to have a theatre in which Yiddish plays were performed but even this was later forbidden by the State. The language medium is Hebrew and control over education falls under the Ministry of Education although the curricula differ. The curricula for the Jewish children and the curricula for the Arab children are completely different. The strongest complaint of the small Aram minority within the State of Israel is simply that they have no control over their own school system. That is as much fragmentation of the people as one can find anywhere.

Under one department?

Fragmentation under one department is still worse. Mr. Speaker, if differentiation in education, if various controls over different languages for population groups means the fragmentation of the population, then we have fragmentation of a far more serious nature in Canada. Public education in Canada excludes all Indians and Eskimos. They are completely excluded; they are beyond the pale! In Quebec they have a Roman Catholic system with French as the language medium. This is controlled by the State of Quebec. In the other nine provinces they follow the Protestant English tradition. In Newfoundland the schools are denominational. There they have the following control in one State: Anglican, Roman Catholic, United Church, Salvation Army and Seventh Day Adventists. The control over education in one State is divided up amongst all of these denominational bodies. Fragmentation! To my mind it is more like complete destruction! I quote from the same book that I quoted from just now—

Every province has its own department headed by a Minister of Education. They go on to say—

One cannot find a better example of the fragmentation of education and the fragmentation of the people than that of Quebec. And still the hon. member for South Coast—for whom this argument has now become a little too much and that is why he is sitting next to and chatting with the hon. member for Kensington (Mr. Moore)—says that this divided control, this school system for Coloured children under the Department of Coloured Affairs together with the fourfold school system for White children under four provincial systems, is fragmentation of the people.

I want to mention the further example of Switzerland. In Switzerland primary and secondary schools are controlled by the various cantons. The cantons are French or German or Italian. Each has control over its own schools. Each educates its children in its own tradition; in the French tradition or in the German or Italian tradition with French, German or Italian as the medium of instruction in the various schools. If fragmentation of the people means different school systems, different school control for different race groups, what do they have in the United States of America? In the United States of America there is no national control or management of education. The legislative body in each state sets its own minimum requirement itself. They dare not leave the hon. member for South Coast alone so that he is able to listen to what I am saying. They must keep him occupied. Every state in the U.S.A. has a separate legislative body which sets the minimum requirement for education in that state. They narrow it down even further; the educational programme, that is to say, the curriculum, is not set by the Federal State; it is not set by an individual state but it is set by community school boards. Every small area within that state has a community school board which fixes its curriculum. In certain states with a large Negro population there were and still are separate schools and colleges for Negroes. I do not have the cutting here but you know that a retired judge in one of the states in America said recently that this was one of the most hypocritical things that could happen in America—that the Federal Court should decide that the separate school system was a contravention of the Constitution of the United States. You know how they have forced the policy of integration on the people; they have forced this policy on the people by means of rifles and bayonets. [Interjections.] I am talking about fragmentation of the people; I am not talking about the fragmentation of the hon. member himself. In 1934 the Federal Court ruled that this was unconstitutional but they have had and still have certain states in America to-day which have separate schools for Negroes and for Whites.

The argument of the hon. member for South Coast therefore does not hold water but is merely a smoke-screen in regard to something which exists throughout the world. Every country has it. If anyone wants to he can read the latest book written about Rhodes, the latest biography of Rhodes, and he will see that mention is made of the fact that the Rhodes bursaries were instituted because they wanted to give a particular type of training to certain people, people to be trained in what was called the British Colonial system. We have hon. members here who were Rhodes scholars. The hon. member for Wynberg (Mr. Russell) who is now entering the Chamber was one of them. They were sent here to be trained under a particular system of education, a particular indoctrination, a word of which hon. members are so afraid. All education is indoctrination.

By means of this legislation probably one of the most important forward steps ever taken for the training of Coloured children will now be taken. We have said that the only difference is that we cannot make Coloured education compulsory for all Coloured children; we can only do so in places where circumstances permit of this being done, that is to say, at places where there are adequate school facilities and so forth. But we already have compulsory education for Coloured children here and when they have their own fully-fledged Ministry of Education and their own fully-fledged system under the Minister of Coloured Affairs, a future will be created for Coloured education such as it has never had in the past; a future which these people have not had in Natal or in the Free State or in the Transvaal and to a large extent in the Cape as well, although the Cape has progressed furthest in this sphere.

I want to say therefore that the hon. the Minister must not allow himself to be upset by this talk of the fragmentation of the people but must continue with this great ideal which he has set himself. I am very pleased that he has already made provision in this legislation for the appointment of a Coloured Education Advisory Council, something that I asked for last year. When the hon. the Minister announced the transfer scheme, I told him that it would be a wonderful thing if, at the start, he could make provision of a Coloured Education Advisory Council. This is something for which we as Whites had to fight for many years before we received it—for which we had to struggle many years because we only received it last year. A Coloured Education Advisory Council is being established here right from the start, an advisory council which will be able to inquire into all the aspects of Coloured education and advise the Minister from time to time in order to enable him to supply the needs of Coloured education as such. The hon. member for Malmesbury (Mr. van Staden) was quite correct in saying that one cannot treat Coloured education and White education in the same way, as the hon. member for South Coast apparently wants to do. These are two different national groups and each has to be educated according to its own nature and its own requirements, its own traditions and its own civilization. Even in his own party the hon. member discovered what happened when one tried to treat different groups in the same way. He has had that experience—that fragmentation in his own party. I hope that he will not begrudge the Coloureds the opportunity of going forward to meet a brighter and better future under their own education system under the Department of Coloured Affairs.

I have no desire whatsoever to become involved in the political argument between the hon. member for Fort Beaufort (Dr. Jonker) and the hon. member for South Coast (Mr. D. E. Mitchell). This is far too an important matter for me to waste my limited time on entering into their dispute. I am sure, Mr. Speaker, that they will both forgive me if I concentrate my remarks on this measure before the House for the reason that I have just mentioned.

I must say at once that I am not very impressed with the hon. the Minister’s reason that this Bill has been introduced by the Government largely because the Cape Provincial Administration could no longer carry the financial burden of Coloured education. [Interjections.] Someone says it is true, but I am not impressed at all with that reason. During the course of his introductory speech the hon. the Minister said that the financial implications of Coloured education in the Cape, where 90 per cent of the Coloured people lived, were such that the Cape Province could no longer carry the burden of Coloured education. The Minister went on to point out that there were 347,730 Coloured children at school in this country; that there were 10,793 Coloured teachers; that there were 13 Coloured teachers’ training colleges and then he went on to say that the State could not shirk this ever-increasing task or shift the financial responsibility on to the shoulders of others. I think that this reason, when carefully analysed and examined.

will carry no weight whatsoever. The hon. the Minister claims that it is the Government’s intention to face up to the financial responsibilities of giving to our Coloured children in this country a proper primary and secondary education. At long last, Sir, we have had the pronouncement made by the responsible Minister that the Government is prepared to face up to that responsibility. I say, Sir, that if financial considerations were the chief reasons which motivated the Government in introducing this Bill, I suggest that there was a much easier way of dealing with the matter. All that the Government need have done, if it were only the financial implications that were involved in this matter, was to have acceded to the request of the Cape Provincial Council to increase the Government subsidy. On 16 May of last year a motion was introduced by the National Party leader in the council calling on the Government to pay the province a subsidy of at least 80 per cent of its annual expenditure on Coloured education and failing that to take over Coloured education itself. I repeat, Sir, that if financial considerations were the most important aspect in the Government’s approach to this matter, all that the Government need have done was to give effect to that resolution which was passed in the Provincial Council and moved by the leader of the National Party in that council. By doing that the Government would not have disrupted the well-established educational system in the Cape; it would not have diminished the power, the authority, the work and the status of the provincial councils in this country and, above all, it would not have disrupted or interfered with the Provincial Education Department. It would not have caused the province to lose control, as they are going to lose, of more than half the school children within its borders. If this Bill becomes law the Cape Provincial Council will lose control of more than half the school children within the borders of the Cape Province. I think that the Government would have done much better had it been frank with this House and declared that, in accordance with the Government’s apartheid policy, it had now decided to transfer Coloured education to the Department of Coloured Affairs.

That was the second reason I gave.

The Minister gave that as the second reason; I think that is the primary reason. I want to say that after all this decision to transfer Coloured education to the Department of Coloured Affairs is in line with the Government’s policy of apartheid. It is in line with the Government’s determination over a number of years to centralize and to administer every aspect of our citizens’ lives from the Central Administration. I think the Government should have been absolutely frank with this House and the country by telling us that this Bill is part of the pattern of the Government’s policy of apartheid.

You were not here when I introduced this particular measure.

No, but I read the speech which the hon. the Minister made. The Coloured people, and I include those who are not opposed to this measure and there is a number of them who are not opposed to it, generally view this Bill in the light that it is part of the pattern of the Government’s apartheid policy. They feel that this is an inevitable step in the Government’s ideological policy of apartheid. It is also important to remember, and I want to emphasize this, that no Coloured body or any responsible Coloured leader asked for this change. The proposed transfer of the control of Coloured education emanates entirely from the Government because it falls in line with the Government’s policy of apartheid.

There appears to be, in the Cape Province at least, a mixed reaction on the part of the Coloured people towards this Bill. I will endeavour to the best of my ability to place before this House both sides of the opinions expressed by Coloured leaders themselves on this very important measure. Those who support this fundamental change hold the view that the Coloured people as a whole are likely to receive greater benefits by way of educational facilities from the well-disposed Coloured Affairs Department than from a Provincial Administration which is dependent for the amount of the subsidy it obtains from the Central Government for Coloured education. They feel that from a benign and well-disposed Coloured Affairs Department they are likely to get greater benefits for their Coloured people. To my mind they have no doubt been influenced by the Government’s failure to respond favourably to the Provincial Council’s request for a larger subsidy. I think that they have also been influenced to a very large extent by the statement made by the hon. the Prime Minister when he urged the Coloured Affairs Council and through them the Coloured people of the Cape, to accept the situation that when Coloured education was removed from the Provincial Administration to the Coloured Affairs Department, brighter days would lie ahead. I will quote the actual words used by the hon. the Prime Minister in a moment.

The leader of the National Party in the Provincial Council, when introducing his motion, asked for a subsidy of at least 80 per cent of the cost of Coloured education. He quoted a large number of statistics to show that the Province was no longer in a position to keep pace financially with the rapid strides which Coloured education was making to-day. I will, in due course, deal with some of the statistics used on that occasion. For the present, all I wish to emphasize is that this motion adopted in the Cape Provincial Council and later subscribed to by the hon. the Prime Minister himself, has no doubt influenced a large number of Coloured educationists to give support to the principle of transferring Coloured education to the Coloured Affairs Department, because they feel that they will get a more sympathetic treatment from this Department.

Now, Sir, this was what the hon. the Prime Minister told the Union Council for Coloured Affairs in December 1961 in respect of this very matter that we are now discussing. The hon. the Prime Minister said this—

Those Coloured people who support this measure feel that once Coloured education is taken away from the Provincial Administration and vested in the Coloured Affairs Department the Government will be obliged to provide the necessary funds in order to give to these approximately 350,000 Coloured children the best possible education on an equivalent basis to that given to our European children. I think they have been influenced to a very large extent by the statement made by the hon. the Prime Minister himself in that regard. They feel that under a so-called benign Coloured Affairs Department, in terms of the hon. the Prime Minister’s statement, Coloured parents will be able to share in the control of Coloured education by means of their own school committees and by means of their own school boards. They feel, Sir, that a Coloured inspectorate will be created, that Coloured officials will be able to occupy important administrative posts, that there will be a substantial improvement in the salary scales applicable to Coloured teachers and Coloured principals, and that there will be facilities to serve the educational requirements of the children of Coloured farming families. I have no doubt, Mr. Speaker, that all these factors have influenced a large measure of support from the Coloured leaders to this proposed change.

On the other hand those Coloured people who oppose this measure—and there are many of them—contend that the aspirations of the Coloured people are to obtain education, not Coloured education. I am sorry that the hon. member for Fort Beaufort is not in the Chamber at the moment, because the trend of his remarks was—and I hope the hon. the Minister will, during the course of his remarks, disassociate himself with that—that these Coloured people would receive what some of them regard as Coloured education as distinct from education. These Coloured leaders have expressed the fear that a full-scale switchover of Coloured education to the Coloured Affairs Department may bring Coloured education down to the standard of the highly unpopular Bantu education in this country.

Unpopular with whom?

With the Bantu and with a large number of our Europeans. They contend, and I say not without justification, that a racialistic balkanization of education might very well lead to a special type of education being given to the Coloured people to fit in with the social position of the Coloured people as seen by the Government, and not as seen by the Coloured people themselves. I do not say for a single moment that that is the intention of the Government. I am merely expressing the views that have been expressed to us by certain Coloured leaders.

Who advised them?

If the hon. member will bear with me I shall tell him in a moment.

The leaders of the P.L.S.A.

They are also divided. I have given you one side of the picture where some of the Coloured leaders support this measure for the reasons that I have advanced. I am also giving you the other side of the picture in fairness to that section of the Coloured population who oppose this measure, for reasons which I have also advanced. This latter category contend—and here I say with absolute justification; I side with them here—that the intellectual needs of the Coloured people are the same as those of people of any other race. This fear on the part of some of them of a retrogressive and retarded form of education has alarmed a large number of educationists and has caused them to voice their protest against this measure. This section of Coloured educationists claim that in this Bill the Government is aiming at channelling the education of the Coloured people into the ideological framework of apartheid. For that reason, Sir, they oppose it..

I have indicated to this House as fairly as I possibly could the two divergent views of leaders of the Coloured people, the views of those who oppose the Bill and those who support the Bill. My colleagues and I are now faced with the necessity of deciding whether the placing of the control of Coloured education in the hands of the Department of Coloured Affairs will better serve the interests of the Coloured people generally in South Africa than the continuance of the existing system under which the control of Coloured education is vested in the Provincial Administration. I would like to say immediately that my colleagues and I have given this matter our most serious consideration. We have had most serious deliberations with both sections of the Coloured leaders, with those who support this measure and those who oppose it. We are motivated in our decision by one thing only and that is to do what we consider to be in the best interests of the Coloured people. We have given this matter the most careful consideration and we have endeavoured to collate as far as we possibly could the system which presently exists in regard to Coloured education and to compare it with the system which is envisaged under this Bill. I think, Sir, it will be of interest at this stage for me to give to the House some of the basic figures which apply to our present system of Coloured education as compared with the present system of European education. I think it is necessary that some hon. members who simply do not realize the importance of Coloured education, should appreciate the conditions which prevail with regard to Coloured and European education in this country. My figures of necessity relate to the position in the Cape Province where the largest number of our Coloured people live. The hon. the Minister has told us that 90 per cent of the Coloured people live in the Cape Province.

In 1961 the total enrolment in all schools in the Cape of European pupils amounted to 204,419. This represented an increase of 3,574 on the number for 1960. The enrolment of Coloured pupils in 1961 in the Cape amounted to 275,415, more than 70,000 more than the Europeans This figure represented an increase of 16,390 as compared with 1960. As we are principally concerned, however, in the Cape with primary education I think I should give comparative figures in regard to primary pupils in the European and Coloured categories for the same period. At the end of the second quarter of 1961 the number of primary European pupils in our schools in the Cape was 139,815. This represented 1,149 more pupils than in the previous year. As far as the Coloured children were concerned, the number of pupils in substandard A to Std. V—which I regard as the primary school—was 261,557 in September 1961 as against 139,000-odd European pupils. Almost double the number of European children. That represented an increase of 14,467 on the previous year as against 1,149 in the Cape of European children. The enrolment in the primary classes of mission schools was 188,426 as compared with 180,048 for 1960. The House will therefore see how the number of Coloured pupils is increasing from year to year and how important it is to ensure that these Coloured children whom we regard as part of the Western civilization of this country should receive the same type of education as our White children.

It is also appropriate for me to draw attention to the position of the mission schools in our midst. According to the latest report of the Superintendent-General of Education of the Cape, the mission schools were managed by 25 different bodies. Six church bodies, however, controlled the largest number of schools, and incidentally the largest number of Coloured children attending those schools. In 1961 the Dutch Reformed Church controlled 543 mission schools with an enrolment of 59,329 pupils; the English Church controlled 182 mission schools with an enrolment of 34,996; the Congregational Church 155 schools with an enrolment of 21,052; the Roman Catholic Church 78 mission schools, with an enrolment of 18,924; the Methodist Church 83 mission schools with an enrolment of 12,616; and the Moravian 52 mission schools with an enrolment of 9,198.

How is this relevant?

I will tell the hon. member the relevancy now. From these figures it will be obvious to anyone that the Government will have to take steps to provide for these large masses of Coloured children who are attending these mission schools and for whom the Churches are trying their very best to give them the best possible education, but who have not the funds to do so, the Government will have to accept the responsibility of giving to those children the necessary education to which they are entitled as citizens of this country. From these figures it will be seen that the Dutch Reformed Church manages by far the largest number of schools and controls the largest number of pupils, and all credit to them for having done this. They need as much financial help as can possibly be given to them to give to these children the education to which they are entitled.

Another interesting feature which emerges from the report of the Superintendent-General of Education is the ratio between the number of pupils instructed mainly through the medium of English, and those instructed mainly through the medium of Afrikaans. The percentages show that a considerable majority of pupils in the primary standards receive their instruction mainly through the medium of Afrikaans. The percentages decrease somewhat in the secondary standards, but compared with 1960, the 1961 records show an increase in the percentage of pupils receiving their instruction through the medium of Afrikaans even in the secondary schools. This would indicate to my mind that fewer Afrikaans-speaking pupils have left school at an early age. Again all the more credit to them. It also indicates that the policy of giving instruction through the medium of the language which the pupil knows best is being applied more consistently in the secondary schools, again a feature which I think should be perpetuated by the Government if this Bill goes through. The unfortunate feature which emerges from the report is that the number of Coloured pupils leaving school after Std. VI, is still very great indeed. This is an unfortunate feature of Coloured education in this country, and this is due to the fact, undoubtedly, that the children of necessity are obliged to go and look for work by reason of their economic position, in order to supplement the earnings of the breadwinners of their respective families. This unfortunate position strengthens our contention that whilst the Coloured children remain at school they should be given the best possible education in the interest of our country. These unfortunate children who have to leave school at tender years should get every possible advantage to get the best possible education.

I have mentioned these figures in order to impress upon the House the great problem with which we are confronted when dealing with Coloured education. I agree with the hon. Minister of Coloured Affairs when he said during the course of his second-reading speech that the task of educating the Coloured people was continually growing and that the State should not continue to shirk this ever-increasing task. I agree that it is an ever-increasing task, and the time has come when someone must face up to the responsibility of giving them the education to which they are entitled.

The question therefore arises: How are my colleagues and myself best able to serve the interests of our people in this educational field? Quite obviously there would be a simple solution, as I have said already, to this problem if the Government were prepared to face up to the requests that has been made to the Government from time to time by the provincial administrations for an increased subsidy to enable them to continue to give the best possible education to our Coloured population.

Do you really believe that that would be better?

Without any question, because after all the provinces have established over many, many years now, a professional and administrative staff in the teaching field which can hold its own in any part of the world. They have established a magnificent team of men and women who are dedicated to the service of teaching our children, European and non-European.

Why should they not be available to the Coloured people?

Provided funds are made available, this well-established educational system could deal adequately with the question of Coloured education. The Government, however, has decided that it is not prepared to make available increased subsidies, without which Coloured education cannot progress. There cannot be any doubt whatsoever that in making this decision, the Government was influenced by its own policy of apartheid, which I mentioned previously. Whether this is a wise move or not, remains to be seen. At present, however, we are confronted with the decision of the Government that it is not prepared to grant increased subsidies for Coloured educational facilities. What are we to do in these circumstances. The Government has come forward with this measure to transfer the control of Coloured education to the Department of Coloured Affairs, and we have the statement from the responsible Minister himself that if this change of control takes place, the Government will not continue to shirk its responsibility of meeting this ever-increasing task, and that it will not shift its responsibility on to others. In those circumstances I ask myself whether I would be right to take up an attitude in relation to this Bill which might do harm to the interests of the Coloured people. Is it not wiser, I ask myself, for us to try and obtain from the Government specific assurances with regard to the future educational facilities that they intend to make available to our Coloured people? It is quite obvious that the Government is determined to transfer Coloured education from the provinces. The very fact that they have come forward with this measure as a Government measure shows their determination to effect this transfer of control. In the interests of the Coloured people therefore, we have to obtain from the Government specific assurances which I believe are most essential in the interests of our Coloured people. I therefore want to move a further amendment asking the Government to give us those assurances which we regard essential before we can consent to the transfer of control. I move as a further amendment—

1. (a) providing that there will be no curtailment or diminution in the standard of education;
2. (b) enforcing the principle of compulsory education for all Coloured children as expeditiously as possible;
3. (c) providing for a progressive extension of school hostel and transport facilities for Coloured children;
4. (d) implementing a uniform system of administration for all Coloured education. including Church and mission schools;
5. (e) progressively adjusting the Coloured teachers’ salaries so as to bring them into line with the salaries of White teachers; and
6. (f) providing for a progressive extension of avenues of employment for Coloured professional, administrative and clerical personnel in this new field of Coloured education.”

The assurances which we now ask, I suggest, are most reasonable. We regard them as essential and in the interest of our Coloured people.

If the hon. Minister in the course of his reply is prepared to give us these assurances and have them placed on record he will do much to allay the fears and suspicions which exist in the minds of many people in regard to this measure.

Let us examine these assurances. My first request is that the Government assures us that in their programme there will be no curtailment or diminution in the standard of education. Surely the Government can have no other intent. Surely the Government intends to give our Coloured children the same and equal type of education which is given to our White children. Surely the hon. the Minister can unequivocally give us this assurance. I would remind the hon. the Minister of a request that was made in the form of a recommendation by the Inter Church Joint Committee on Coloured Education, where they said this (and the Dutch Reformed Church was a party to it)—

I mention this to the hon. the Minister because I feel certain that he can unequivocally give us this assurance.

Secondly we ask that in the Minister’s programme he will enforce the principle of compulsory education for all Coloured children as expeditiously as possible. We know that compulsory education for Coloured children cannot be brought in overnight. It would be an unreasonable request to ask for that. But even under our existing system compulsory education operates already in six areas, in towns like Alice, Simonstown, Kimberley, Cradock, King William’s Town, and I think in the Keiskama. All we ask is that the hon. the Minister will say by way of an assurance to this House that principle will be extended as expeditiously as possible. I suggest that this is an assurance that the hon. Minister can also give without any hesitation.

We then ask that the hon. the Minister should give us an assurance that there will be a progressive extension of school hostel and transport facilities for our Coloured children. Is there anything unreasonable about that request? Surely the Government does not intend not to provide for an extension of these hostel facilities and transport facilities.

We also ask that there should be a uniform system of administration for all Coloured education, including the Church and mission schools. I suggest that there is nothing unreasonable in that request that this should be the policy of the Government.

Then we ask that there should be a progressive extension of avenues of employment for Coloured professional and administrative clerical personnel in this new field of Coloured education. Surely we are entitled to ask for that in the light of the statement made by the hon. the Prime Minister himself to the Coloured Council when he said that the transfer of this control to the Coloured Affairs Department would provide these additional avenues of employment for Coloured personnel.

Finally, we ask that there should be a progressive adjustment of the Coloured teachers’ salaries so as to bring them into line with the salaries of White teachers. Is there anything unreasonable in that request? These salary adjustments are long overdue. Surely under a sympathetic department the Coloured teachers are entitled to expect fairer treatment than they have received hitherto.

These assurances if given by the hon. the Minister in the course of his reply, will have the effect at least of establishing the Government’s bona fides. If the hon. the Minister cannot see his way of giving these assurances, he cannot blame us if we come to the conclusion, and he cannot blame the outside world for coming to the conclusion, that this Bill is motivated by reasons other than the general welfare of the Coloured people. I have no doubt that the hon. the Minister will be in a position to give these assurances. I think in accordance with the promises that he and the Prime Minister have made to Coloured leaders, through the mouthpiece of the council, and in public statements that they have made from time to time, these assurances can well be given. I sincerely hope that the hon. the Minister will dispel any such belief and suspicion that exists in the minds of people and will give to this House these reasonable assurances which we ask for in this amendment. This is the least that we can expect in the interests of the people whose educational future we are determining to-day. I move the amendment.

I second the amendment. As the leader of our group has said, political considerations did not count with us. We considered this matter only in the light of what was in the interest of the Coloured population, and after having thought for a long time as to what would really be in the interests of the people whom I represent, I came to the conclusion that if the hon. the Minister can give me these assurances, which I know he has in his heart, then the people outside will be satisfied and I will be satisfied. But what was peculiar to me in connection with the whole matter was that when the hon. member for Fort Beaufort (Dr. Jonker) spoke I almost changed my mind again. He told us here how Coloured education had expanded in the last ten years under the Nationalist Government. But surely that was under the provincial system! The hon. member was such a good advertisement for the provincial system that I really had to scratch my head and wonder whether I was not judging wrongly in the light of what he had said. He is an educationist and I am a layman.

I do not believe in beating about the bush and uttering sweet blandishments. The fact remains that in my humble way I regard the matter as follows: At the moment we have in the Republic five different systems of education for our Coloureds, and there are five S.G.E.s. Under the proposed scheme we will have only one man, one director. Talking about fragmentation, as the hon. member for South Coast (Mr. D. E. Mitchell) did, I think we have it at the moment, but in terms of this Bill we will put an end to fragmentation in so far as Coloured education is concerned. What makes me feel further that perhaps there is something really good in this transfer is that hon. members will remember that three or four years ago we had grave doubts when we started the separate university college for Coloureds, and two years before that we also had doubts when we discussed the separate technical and vocational training of Coloureds. We had doubts about all those things and made a great fuss about them. A few of us were bold enough to say that we thought it was in the interests and to the benefit of the Coloureds. To-night I am proud to be able to say that experience has proved that my judgment at that time was correct. Now there are also doubts again in respect of this new idea. Let me tell hon. members that a year ago 90 per cent of the Coloured teachers were opposed to it and did not want to know anything about it. But what is happening now? Now the hon. the Minister comes into this House, and the hon. member for Malmesbury (Mr. van Staden) begins it, and they say: We no longer mind what anyone says, what the Coloured Council says, or what anybody else says, but next year we are going to take over Coloured education. Well, I know the Coloured man as well as I know myself. They struggled and made a rumpus. Now the Minister was clever. He appointed a Director of Coloured Education, a person of whom the Coloureds are fonder than of anybody else on account of sport. Long before he had anything to do with our education he was already popular with them. He went along and got acquainted with the teachers and, Mr. Speaker, he came to certain places where the teachers had said: If he comes here we will stone him; we want to have nothing to do with him. And they asked me: “Mr. le Roux, what do you think we should do?” I said: “People, just listen to what he has to say and you need not do anything else.” And almost without exception, in almost 99 per cent of cases, when that man left they cheered him! Now I again come to the conclusion which I mentioned in the beginning, that the Coloured teachers on the whole have really thrown in their lot with us to-day. They have no alternative. I am not saying that they could have done anything else. They are now throwing in their weight with us. and I cannot but say in all honesty that I think this thing will be a complete success. If this principle is accepted, we will have our Coloured education, from the youngest child right up to the university, all under one Department. There is no fragmentation. It will be under one Department throughout. And how many other branches of education will we not establish in future, whereas to-day nothing tangible has been done under the provincial system? Here we now have a Department which will devote its full attention to the Coloureds, and every day we see the various directions in which we should train these people, not with the idea of giving them inferior education, but of qualifying them better for life.

How can you second the amendment?

Mr. Speaker, this is no easy matter on which to decide. It was very difficult for us first to see what would really be in the interests of the people we represent. We then came to the conclusion that if we received these assurances we must accept it. Everything the Coloured feels in regard to his education is embodied in these few points mentioned in our amendment. If we can satisfy the Coloureds in regard to these matters they will go along with us 99 per cent, and then it cannot be anything else but a success. Then things will go well under this set-up. If we cannot satisfy them, there will be suspicion. As far as I personally am concerned, I do not think that the hon. the Minister is in any way dishonest or that/he has other motives in regard to this legislation. He wants to do what he feels is to the benefit of the Coloured people.

Certain of the matters we mentioned here is of fundamental interest to the Coloureds. Take. e.g.. the question of compulsory education. The great majority of Coloureds feel that it is essential, but all of them are not in such a position that they can afford it. Do not think that every parent says: My child must go to school. In many cases the child cannot go to school because the parents cannot afford it. On the other hand again, if all the children are to be compelled to attend school say from their sixth year to their twelfth year or up to a specified standard, where will we at the moment find the necessary space for all these children? We cannot do it all in one day. But this Bill provides that the Minister can expand it as and when it becomes possible, and although it may take a long time I should like to have the assurance that the Minister really has this matter at heart and that he will apply it as we make progress. We should not exaggerate anything. We must understand the intellectual capacity of these people in the various areas, and their economic circumstances. It is a very complicated matter, but I think that with the necessary enthusiasm revealed by the Minister in regard to everything he tackles, he will do everything possible.

In this connection we deliberately mentioned the transport of Coloured children and the necessary hostel facilities. As far as this aspect of the matter is concerned, the position is that if we have compulsory education we will have no alternative but will have to bring the children to school. I mention this particularly because this is one of the sore points with the Coloureds to-day. You can go where you like in my constituency and throughout the country and the first reproach the Coloured makes is to tell you: “Yes, my children must walk to school in the morning for four or five miles, or further, and then the bus carrying the White children goes by and even spatters them with mud.” And that is true. We cannot get away from it. We shall simply have to do it. We talk about the provinces which have done their best. I do not deny that, but even in the six areas of the Cape Province where there is compulsory education to-day the children are not yet transported to school. That has been left in abeyance, and the time has arrived for us to show these people that our intentions are honourable. In one of the paragraphs we say that the standard of education should not be lowered. In that we include the existing facilities. The Coloured schools are operating under extremely difficult conditions. They do not have the facilities the White schools have, and their classes are almost twice as big as those in the White schools, with the result that the teachers cannot devote the necessary attention to the children in the way that the White teachers do. This position must be remedied.

Whilst talking about improved facilities, I want to say that we are in the peculiar position to-day that in the mission schools, where the children of the poorest section of the Coloured population receive education, the children have to pay for their books, whilst in the schools falling under the school boards, where one finds somewhat more well-to-do children, the child who cannot pay receives his books free. In Natal the position is that all the Coloured children receive their books free. I take it that the privilege enjoyed by Coloured children in Natal to-day will remain undisturbed. I must say that there are educationists from Natal who have requested me to ask that the privileges they enjoy are not taken away. I do not think that will be an insurmountable obstacle. The Minister is given so many powers in this Bill that he can do practically what he likes.

In regard to the provinces, we have had the position ever since 1910 that the provinces have looked after Coloured education to the best of their ability, but something which has grieved me all these years since I first began thinking about the matter is that the provinces never took the slightest trouble to try to train Coloureds for administrative posts. If one goes to Wale Street one will not find a single Coloured section in that building, except for the man who cleans the floors. I think our Department of Coloured Affairs will not take it amiss if we ask that Coloureds should be trained to do the administrative work themselves. Under the present set-up we have no Coloured inspectors of schools. Now hon. members should not think that I am of the opinion that one can find a Coloured teacher behind every bush to whom one can sav: “You may become an inspector.” That is not so. There are relatively few of them. But the province has had quite a few years during which they could find individuals to show their good faith and to say: We will appoint these people to a few of the higher posts. There was nothing to prevent them from doing so, except that the spirit and the willingness were missing. Now I know that under the present Minister that will be there, and although I am now unfortunately opposed to the Government’s policy, I cannot help myself now. I must simply agree with it in so far as that is concerned, because I honestly think that this proposed legislation, if it is implemented correctly, and if the assurances for which we ask are given, is a sound piece of work, even though we cannot do everything at once, and I think it will do much towards promoting the future happiness and prosperity of our Coloureds.

*Mr. S. F. KOTZÉ: I want to congratulate the hon. member for Karoo (Mr. G. S. P. le Roux) and the other Coloured Representatives on the attitude which they have adopted this evening in regard to this very important matter.

Please do not try to make political capital of it.

*Mr. S. F. KOTZÉ: I want to congratulate the Coloured Representatives on allowing the best interests of the Coloureds to weigh most heavily with them and not trying to make political capital out of this matter, as the Opposition tried to do. In the course of my speech I shall refer to practically all the claims, all the conditions which the Coloured Representatives put forward in their amendment. I want to refer to what the hon. member for Peninsula (Mr. Bloomberg) said. He tried to suggest a very simple solution to the financial problem created in the Cape by Coloured education, just as the hon. member for South Coast tried to do, and that is simply that the Central Government must make more money available. It is not as easy and as simple as hon. members try to suggest. I can assure them that the Cape has been struggling with this problem for decades and that the solution to the problem is not yet in sight. That is why in my speech I want to deal chiefly with the expenditure aspect of this matter, and right at the start, without repeating myself, I want to say that the source of my statistical information has been mainly the Interim Report of the Commission of Inquiry into the Financial Relations between the Central Government and Provinces. One of the points made in that report on which I want to dwell for a moment is that there will be a considerable increase in expenditure in connection with Coloured education in the immediate future whether it stays under the provinces or is taken over by the Department of Coloured Affairs. It is estimated that within the next ten years expenditure in connection with Coloured education will double and that by 1970 it will amount to about R46,000,0000 per annum. Various reasons can be advanced for this fact. The first and most important reason is the natural increase in the number of Coloured children of school-going age. If we note the tendency during the past ten years, we see that the increase in the number of Coloured pupils in the Republic has been 42.7 per cent as against an increase of 29.1 per cent in the number of White pupils. The increase in the number of Coloured pupils has been 39.2 per cent as against only 15.6 per cent in the number of Whites. On the one hand this is due to the fact that the Coloured population is increasing more rapidly than the White population. Over the past ten years the increase in the Coloured population in the Republic has been 34.9 per cent as against an increase of 16.1 per cent in the White population. The increase in the Coloured population in the Cape over the same period has been 33.9 per cent as against 6.7 per cent in the case of the Whites. But on the other hand this is also due to the fact that there is a considerable reserve of Coloured children of school-going age who as a result of the non-compulsory school attendance are continually finding their way to schools. It is estimated that there were about 54,200 of these children in 1960. We also have the right to conclude that Coloured education will increase considerably in the immediate future because the cost of Coloured education over the past ten years has risen by no less than 158.4 per cent and under normal circumstances will continue to increase at the rate of about 7.7 per cent a year. Then there are requests for better and more school accommodation and hostel facilities and better educational facilities, and this will of necessity increase expenditure. We also have the constant request for the introduction of compulsory education on a complete or gradual basis. There is the question of increased salaries for Coloured teachers which is receiving attention and this too will result in additional expenditure. There is also an increasing demand for the taking over of church schools by the authorities, which would also increase expenditure. Moreover, there has been a tendency over the past years for the Coloureds to give preference to departmental schools instead of church schools for the reason mentioned by the hon. member for Karoo (Mr. G. S. P. le Roux), and between 1950 and 1961,17,000 more pupils were enrolled in departmental schools than in church schools.

The swift rate at which the Coloured group areas policy is being implemented will also have an important effect on the cost structure of Coloured education in the immediate future. Take the school board area of Parow which is particularly affected by the implementation of the group areas policy. Notwithstanding the fantastic scale on which Coloured schools are being built there, double-shift classes are being held there this year in no fewer than 49 Coloured schools. This gives us an idea of what the requirements are going to be in the future. The introduction of a system of differentiated education for which there is a great need on the part of the Coloured people and the additional provision that will have to be made for technical and other education, will result in an increase in capital expenditure in connection with Coloured education.

I have mentioned all these things deliberately in order to put it to you, Sir, that if it can be said that the Cape has reached the stage where it can no longer bear the burden of Coloured education, then it is high time, bearing in mind the foreseeable increase in expenditure, that Coloured education should be taken away from the provinces. The provinces, and particularly the Whites in the Cape, will not benefit much by the taking over of Coloured education in that 90 per cent of the schools, 84.4 per cent of the teachers and 86.3 per cent of the pupils are here in the Cape. Let us this evening record our thanks and appreciation to the provinces, and particularly to the Cape which has done most of this work, for the manner in which they have performed their task in respect of Coloured education in the past. The Cape has succeeded in achieving two main ends under difficult circumstances. With the means at its disposal it has given the maximum service to Coloured education. In 1961 the Cape’s unit cost per Coloured pupil was 40 per cent as against 51.8 per cent in the Transvaal and 50.3 per cent in Natal. And because the Cape has succeeded in keeping the unit cost so low, it has been able to educate so many more Coloured children. But on the other hand the Cape has succeeded, with the means at its disposal, in doing justice to the White child. Indeed, over the past nine years, the unit cost in respect of White children has riven by 65.2 per cent as against 59.6 per cent for Coloured children.

On this occasion we must also acknowledge the role played by church schools in the education pattern of the Coloureds, particularly in the Cape but also in the other provinces. 1,257 of the 1,456 Coloured schools in the Cape were church schools; 5,808 of the 8,499 teachers were in the church schools; 196,690 of the 383,770 students were in church schools, and the vast majority of them were in schools of the D.R. Church. There is an increasing need and desire for these church schools to be taken over eventually by the State. Machinery is also being created in this measure to make provision for the possibility of the eventual taking over of these schools through the medium of negotiation. But I want to ask the church never to lose its interest in Coloured education. The church will always have a task to perform in respect of Coloured education, even if these church schools are taken over by the State in the near or distant future. The most important contribution that the church will be able to make in respect of Coloured education in the future will be to make available more hostels and boarding facilities for Coloured children because there is a great need for these facilities.

No one will deny that over the years Coloured education has been a burden which has fallen particularly heavily on the Cape. This has resulted in discrimination against the taxpayer of the Cape, and notwithstanding this fact the increase in the province’s expenditure on education—an average of 5.2 per cent over eight years up to 1960-1—has not kept pace with the increase in the average general expenditure of the province amounting to 8.3 per cent. Education has therefore been cut and pruned at the expense of the inhabitants of the Cape.

The question may quite rightly be asked: How will the Cape benefit by the taking over of Coloured education? It is estimated that on the present subsidy basis the Cape’s net expenditure will be reduced by R8,000,000 per annum, which will mean that at this rate its net expenditure in 1970-1 will be R17,500,000 less than would have been the case had the province retained Coloured education. Having regard to the fact that the indirect expenditure of the Cape in connection with Coloured education, that is to say, its inspectorate and administrative expenses, will not be reduced to any great extent at the start, it is estimated that by 1964-5 the Cape will be receiving R 11,246,000 less in State subsidies but that, by that time, with the loss of Coloured education which by then will amount to R22,480,000, the Cape will show an annual saving of more than R 11,000,000. The result of this will be whereas the Whites pay 90 per cent of the taxation in the Cape, the province will be able to spend more on White education and on other necessary services on which savings were effected in the past because as much as 20 per cent of the province’s expenditure was devoted to Coloured education.

On the other hand the question also arises: What is in store for the Department of Coloured Affairs in taking over Coloured education? We have no illusions in that regard. There will be problems—for example, obtaining the necessary staff with the requisite standard of ability and knowledge and experience. There will be other problems with far-reaching financial implications which will have to be overcome. There are apparently people like the hon. member for Peninsula (Mr. Bloomberg), who are rather enthusiastic about the taking over of Coloured education by the Department of Coloured Affairs because in this they see the realization of their ideals in connection with Coloured education. There is, for example, the Council for Coloured Affairs, which is a responsible body. In supporting the transfer of Coloured education they also ask for a uniform educational policy throughout the Republic, equal standards with White schools, compulsory education, parallel-medium schools and the taking over of all mission schools by the Department. Although we believe that the transfer of Coloured education to the Department will be very beneficial to the Coloured community in many respects, we realize that some of the demands which are being made are very high, excessively high, and that for the present at least they are unrealistic. Take for example a question like the institution of a system of compulsory education. In my opinion this system with the best will in the world cannot be instituted at this stage. The Coloured Representatives do not advocate this either, but there are other people who think that it should be done. We cannot institute this system immediately under the present circumstances. What is more, in large parts of the Cape, as the hon. member for Karoo indicated, it is not practicable at this stage. The socio-economic conditions of the Coloureds, particularly in the lowest strata, must first be considerably improved before compulsory education can be carried out in practice. The Cape Provincial Council adopted a resolution in 1945 giving school boards the right to ask that education be made compulsory for Coloured children between the ages of seven and 14 years, with the proviso that no Coloured child could be compelled to attend school if he lived further than a radius of three miles from the school. What was the result? That resolution was adopted in 1945. to-day there are five or six insignificant little places where this system has been introduced, as the hon. member for Peninsula indicated. The fact that the Cape School Board has not yet found it possible to introduce a system of compulsory education in the Peninsula should prove conclusively to hon. members that this system is not practicable at this stage. The provision of transport and hostel facilities is a most important factor in the institution of a system of compulsory education. The 1956 report on Coloured education emphasizes the fact that the provision of hostel facilities is the most important requirement in connection with Coloured education. In the Cape there are only seven private hostels at the moment which accommodate about 581 student teachers and secondary pupils and they exist chiefly as the result of a general rental allowance from the Department. They simply could not exist otherwise.

Apart from these stumbling-blocks which I have already mentioned, it is estimated that a system of compulsory education will bring about an increase in the expenditure in respect of Coloured education of R2,285,000 per annum in 1965-6 and R3,778,000 by 1970-1. There will be an increase of R1, 178,000 in capital expenditure now and of R3,238,000 by 1970-1. But I think it is unnecessary to be in too much of a hurry to make education compulsory. The urge for education on the part of the Coloureds is such that without making education compulsory the percentage of enrolments of Coloured scholars in relation to the population in the age group six to 14 years rose from 79.3 per cent in 1950-1 to 86.8 per cent in 1960-1 and it is estimated that this figure will rise to 91 per cent in 1964-5 and to 93 per cent in 1970-1 —and that is the position under normal circumstances, without compulsion.

If we have a higher socio-economic standard of living with better educational facilities, with better transport and hostel facilities, I predict that within ten years the number of Coloured children not at school will shrink to an absolutely insignificant percentage. But I think, too, that the question of compulsory education is one of the matters which can most fruitfully be referred to the Coloured Education Advisory Council which is to be established. Secondly, the question of the taking over of the Church schools has been mentioned. As has been stated, this Bill opens the door for negotiations in connection with the taking over of these schools. This will result in very heavy capital expenditure which at this stage must be carefully considered. While strong support is forthcoming on all sides for the taking over of the schools and while the desirability of such action is strongly emphasized, there have always been Churches in the past and there are still Churches to-day which are very strongly opposed to the taking over of Coloured education by the State, particularly the Churches which had benefited considerably financially by the generous subsidies and rental allowances which they had received from the Department of Education. There is no doubt that this transfer will eventually be proceeded with.

But that is not all that is anticipated. Now that the transfer of Coloured education to the Department of Coloured Affairs has become an accomplished fact, there is a very strong feeling that there should be a drastic increase in the salaries of Coloured teachers. Some people even advocate and agitate for equal salaries with White teachers. In this regard too we must be realistic. At the moment the salaries of Coloured teachers are 72.1 per cent of those of White teachers. If they are to be paid the same as the White teachers, it will mean an immediate increase in expenditure of R5,000,000 per annum; and by 1970-1 this increase will amount to about R7,000,000 per annum. But if a more realistic increase of 2.5 per cent per annum is effected up to a maximum of 80 per cent of the salaries of White teachers, the additional expenditure will amount to RI, 678.000 at the moment and to R2,800,000 in 1970-1. This means that the current cost of Coloured education, excluding capital expenditure which in the normal course of events would have increased from R20,518,000 in 1961-2 to R41,306,000 in 1970-1, will amount to R44,144,000 in 1970-1 with an increase of 80 per cent in the salaries, and this without making education compulsory. If education is made compulsory, it will mean an additional R3,700,000. After investigating this cost aspect properly, one asks oneself: What will be the lot of the Cape in five or ten years’ time if it still has Coloured education debited to its account at that stage? It is very clear from enquiries that for the next ten years the Whites will still have to bear most of the responsibility for Coloured education. The Cape is not only responsible for the Coloureds and therefore it is necessary for Coloured education to be taken over by a State Department so that the expense in this connection can be distributed on a national basis.

I want to conclude by saying that apart from the purely financial consideration in a matter such as this, there are also important and broader educational, social, political and other miscellaneous aspects which merit consideration. In its report, the Cape Commission on Coloured Education. 1953-6. stated as follows—

One of the basic problems which we have to consider is the fact that the Coloured people are not a homogeneous group. On the contrary, the community shows great mutual differences. There is a small number of Coloureds who have risen above the masses. Most of the people in this group are teachers who owe their progress in life to parallel development If it were not for the fact that the education of Coloured children was reserved for Coloured teachers, many of the more than 10,000 Coloured teachers would not be able to compete with the Whites. It is tragic to think that many of these Coloureds who have risen above the masses are continually trying to be acknowledged as Whites; that in their striving they try to escape their own people and in this way leave the Coloured masses to their fate. In contrast to this there is the National Government with its policy of socio-economic development which envisages the upliftment of the masses of the Coloureds in order to afford everyone wanting to help himself an opportunity to progress in life. As in the case of Coloured teachers who would not be able to compete with the Whites if they were not protected in their profession, so the Coloureds find it very difficult, if not impossible, to compete on the open market with the Whites in every sphere of society. The Coloureds are now receiving the opportunity to progress to the highest levels in every sphere of life in their own group areas or rural areas. The demand for well-trained, reliable and hardworking manpower is increasing daily in these areas and the Coloured himself feels that he is not capable of performing many of the tasks which are available to him because he has not received the necessary training. Many of them have had little schooling; some have not been to school at all and some have only attended school for a year or two. As is the case with other groups of the population, they do not all have the same talent. If we want to concentrate their education upon giving each one the opportunity for full development, we must give more attention to adult education, practical education and more vocational training. Therefore it is necessary and in the interests of Coloured education for Coloured education as a whole to be planned within that same complex. That is why it is also necessary to put an end to the divided control of Coloured education and to place it under the same control—under the control of the Department of Coloured Affairs.

Mr. Speaker, before I reply to the hon. member for Parow (Mr. S. F. Kotzé), I want to say a word or two about the remarks made about the absent member for Fort Beaufort (Dr. Jonker). He gave us a long talk which was almost a travelogue about what was happening in other parts of the world. One of the most important things he said was the comparison of the state of education and development of the Indians and Coloureds in South Africa as compared with the Indians in India. He gave us some facts and figures and compared it with the populations of that country. If there was ever a reason for education to remain in the hands of the provinces it was his argument. He told us that development had taken place in South Africa at such a rapid rate and so economically and so efficiently that it far surpassed the education of Coloured people in any other part of the world. So how he could stand up here and argue against us on this side when we say we want education to remain in the hands of the provinces, is beyond my comprehension. The rest of his speech was boring and tedious, and if I ever thought that Members of Parliament earned their money it was while listening to him to-night.

Then we come to the hon. member for Karoo (Mr. G. S. P. le Roux), who seconded his leader’s amendment. Why, I do not know. What he said in seconding that amendment is something we will perhaps hear about later, but I do say this, that he should have sat down after his first few remarks when he said that he agreed wholeheartedly with the efforts of the Minister.

It’s about time you sat down also.

At least he was honest.

I am not doubting the hon. member’s honesty, but what I am doubting is his method of approach to this subject. If he wanted to approach the subject in the manner in which he did, he had no right to second the amendment of his leader.

The hon. member for Parow has given us an interesting talk this evening. He told us what it is going to cost the Government, and what it has cost the province, and what it may cost the province in the future to educate the Coloureds. He did not say, and he did not give any reason at all, why we should have this changeover. What it is going to cost the country for Coloured education it will cost the country whether it comes out of the pockets of of the Government or out of the pockets of the provinces. We have in our provinces machinery which has been built up over many years, which is efficient and which has done its job excellently and which we should keep going. We should go out of our way to ensure that the machinery the provinces have, should not be altered. This is a movement towards an erosion of the powers of the provinces. When we talk about fragmentation let us say that it is not only the division of education in the provinces, it is not only the taking away of education from the provinces and giving it to some central body, but it is a step for the taking away of the Coloured people, whom we on this side want to take with us along the road of the future South Africa, and hon. members, led by their Minister, see danger in that. Why I do not know. The fragmentation is that of those people who wish to be associated with the Western way of life in South Africa. We on this side depend and will continue to depend to a great extent on the abilities and the help of the Coloured people. We must do everything in our power to ensure that those people remain with us. I cannot see good in this move of the Minister in taking away education, which is the key-stone of progress, from the provinces and giving it to the Coloured Affairs Department which will, I am sure, put these Coloured people on a way of their own and take them away from the road we on this side want to follow.

What is there that has been promised by the Minister which the provinces cannot carry out? Is there any single aspect which he in his second-reading speech or which the hon. member for Peninsula has put down in his amendment, that cannot be carried out more efficiently and quicker by the provinces than by the new organization which will be set up.