Mr. Chairman, may I request the privilege of the half hour? In rising to participate in this debate, I must emphasize the fact that I do so with great misgivings. We are to discuss this afternoon matters concerning the wellbeing and the welfare of some 2¼ million citizens of this country, people who have participated fully in the development of our country, but we have to discuss the position of these people without a single representative of that community in this House. In my opinion this must inevitably lead to a debate of this nature being a fairly futile exercise. Later this year another debate will take place in the CRC in which the Coloured community will participate. There they will discuss problems concerning their future and we who must inevitably also be drawn into those problems will not be present there either. The tendency is and will be—this has also been the pattern over the previous years—that in this debate and the debate that takes place in the CRC we will be talking past one another when in fact at this stage of the history of our country we should be talking with one another.

It may perhaps be interesting to note what Gen. Hertzog said in 1925 at Smith-field.

Do you believe him?

I believe what he said and what I want to quote. It may be interesting or wise for us to take note of what that hon. gentleman said. He said—

Perhaps we in this hon. House should be thinking along those same lines today. I am fully aware that new proposals to improve the liaison between this Parliament and the CRC have been put forward. We understand those proposals and we welcome them but as far as we on this side of the House are concerned we do not think that they go far enough. The liaison proposed by the hon. the Prime Minister is with the Cabinet and not with Parliament. The time has surely come for a permanent standing committee to be appointed where members from all parties and also from this Parliament and the CRC can meet in order to thrash things out. This has been the suggestion and the policy of this party over a number of years. Since the new proposals are an improvement and we on this side accept them as being such because they may be seen as the first faltering steps towards an acceptance by this Government of the principle of a genuine sharing of power and responsibility, we welcome them. Because the hon. the Prime Minister has indicated that these steps are not the end of the road and inasmuch as they raise the standards of the CRC to a limited extent, in conveying our congratulations to the leaders of the Coloured community on their election, we wish, to express the hope that they as the leaders of the Coloured community will make the fullest use of this new situation. During the course of the debate on this Vote it is our intention to identify and highlight the weaknesses in Government policy. We will direct the attention of the hon. the Minister and his Deputy, indeed every hon. member in this House, to those matters in regard to which we believe Government policy has failed and is failing. We will also highlight matters where we feel there is an urgent need for a change of approach in our attitude towards the Coloured community and a dire need for the adaptation and adjustment of the policy of this hon. Minister in order to improve the relationships between the Coloured people and the White people of this country.

The Department of Information has published what I consider to be a very good report indeed on the Coloured people entitled Progress of a People. As far as I am concerned this is a factual report. It highlights many of the achievements of the Government and of its policy and I have no quarrel with it. I am one of those who freely acknowledge that there has been progress in many fields. I am one of those who realize that certain things have been done of which one can be proud. I think of the Dower Training College in Port Elizabeth and the magnificent sports fields for Coloured people in Worcester. There is also the Olympic swimming pool at Gelvandale. These are things which please us. However, this report by no means tells the full story; it only tells half of it. If we are to believe this report then we can safely say that there is in fact no problem as far as the Coloured people are concerned. As far as I am concerned, however, this report leaves many a story untold. There is no mention in the report of the massive effort that will be required by this Government and everybody in South Africa to uplift the 30% of the Coloured people who find themselves entrapped and enmeshed in what is referred to as the “culture of poverty”. The report does not even mention this and this is one of the most serious matters affecting the well-being of the Coloured people. There is progress as far as the Coloured people are concerned. Those who are making headway are doing so at a faster rate, but I am concerned about the fact that those who are staying behind— these 30% to whom I referred—are also falling back faster. It is in this field that the Government will have to renew its efforts. I hope that the hon. the Minister will tell us what he proposes to do in order to solve this urgent problem. In that report, Sir, there is no blueprint as to how the Government is going to tackle the desperate shortage of housing. No reference is made as to how they are going to eliminate the interdepartmental lack of co-ordination which is very often the reason for the lack of progress in the provision of housing. There is no mention in this report of the desperate shortage of school accommodation. There is no suggestion as to how the double-session situation is going to be alleviated, and there is no reference as to what plans the Government has for training the vast numbers of pupils who leave school early. Only 1½% of the children who go to school, in the Sub A and Sub B standards, reach matriculation. In this report there is no reference as to what the Minister is going to do to give these people who are leaving school at an early age some special qualifications. I hope that during the course of this debate we will hear from the hon. the Minister that he is going to follow the very good example of the Minister of Bantu Administration and Development by making funds available for the establishment of technical training schools for the in-service training of operatives. In Port Elizabeth we have the extraordinary situation that the Minister of Bantu Administration is giving some R200 000 for the establishment of just such a college, but we in Port Elizabeth are a Coloured preferential area, and I wonder if this Minister is going to do the same in respect of that situation in Port Elizabeth. There is a desperate need to give these people who are leaving school at an early age some form of training to acquire skills which will enable them to increase their earning capacity. I believe that in order to be able to cope with inflation and its problem, our slogan should be “Train for productivity”. Sir, I do not believe that the Government is meeting the challenge in this regard. The figures that I have here show that of the 500 applicants who applied for housing in Port Elizabeth, 45% had an income of less than R100 a month, a completely inadequate wage. We have to see that their wage is increased, but we must do it by increasing their productivity. There is a desperate need for increasing the facilities available for the training of these people. Sir, when I talk about “operatives”, I want the hon. the Minister to understand that I do not mean that this must be a permanent situation. We want to reach the situation where there are training facilities to train thousands more Coloured people as apprentices. This would be an interim measure, but it is urgently necessary to bring about an increase in skill.

Sir, as a background to this debate, there are certain important things that I want to mention here. We value the hon. the Prime Minister’s efforts to normalize relations in Southern Africa. We are aware of the pledge by our ambassador at the United Nations, where he said that discrimination because of the colour of a man’s skin cannot be defended and that we should do all in our power to move away from discrimination on a racial basis. If the hon. the Prime Minister is to succeed in his total mission—and I believe he must—then it is an absolute prerequisite that this pledge of our ambassador be fulfilled here at home with the greatest haste. Discrimination must go, and I hope that the hon. the Minister will spell out during the course of this debate what his priorities are in respect of the elimination of discrimination in so far as it affects the daily lives of the Coloured people in South Africa. Sir, this Minister is moving too slowly. There are many things that he can do in terms of his own policy. He must not allow himself to be held back by the contra-forces in his own party; he must move on. Let me assure the Minister that the Coloured people are not asking for a great deal. They are not asking for the earth. They are not asking for handouts.

One man, one vote.

Sir, the hon. the Minister said in a previous debate that I was learning too slowly. I am a little bit suspicious that perhaps I am learning a great deal faster than he is.

He is looking over his shoulder.

Sir, what do these people demand; what do they want? They want the right and the opportunity to develop their skills to their full potential and the right to practice these skills without any restrictions. That is all they are asking. They are also asking to enjoy the rights, privileges and obligations of full citizenship in South Africa. But I think the hon. the Minister must take note that as far as these demands are concerned there is no difference whatsoever between the approach of the Federal Party and that of the Labour Party. It is against this background that we must examine the results of the recent election. I think the hon. the Minister will agree that the result of that election was a massive vote against the policies of this Government and in favour of a rejection of the CRC. Why have they rejected it? For the simple reason, firstly, that as a political instrument it is not capable of giving fulfilment to the legitimate political aspirations of the Coloured people. That is the one reason why they voted as they did. Rightly or wrongly and in spite of the intrinsic merits of the CRC —and I want to say there are many merits—the Coloured people see it as a symbol of their impotence to redress the wrongs and disabilities to which they have been subject over a long period of time. I ask in all sincerity whether we can blame the Coloured voters in South Africa, the Coloured electorate, for taking the stance which they did? We certainly cannot blame them if we look at the history of the Coloured people in South Africa. Another reason why they have rejected the CRC is because they know and realize that it is this Parliament and this Parliament alone which takes the decisions affecting their well-being. For instance, it is this Parliament which decides where the Coloured people can live, what their schools should look like, what work they may do, what salaries their teachers may receive, where they can go to university, what their townships should look like and through which door they may enter a post office. These are decisions affecting the daily lives of these people, decisions which are taken by this Parliament alone, and over which the CRC has no jurisdiction whatsoever. It is for this reason that the Coloured people voted as they did in the recent election.

But, Sir, some progress has been made. We have, for instance, improved the status of the CRC. The hon. the Prime Minister has indicated that the liaison committee will be transformed into a consultative Cabinet council with possibly, statutory powers. I hope the hon. the Minister will tell us in the course of this debate what these statutory powers will be that this new consultative Cabinet council will enjoy, what powers they will have and what authority they will have. Secondly, there has been the suggestion that there should be representatives from the CRC on the various statutory councils and commissions of this Parliament. We would like to know what progress has been made in making those appointments, what those councils and commissions will be and how many representatives will be given to the Coloured people. Then there will be a revision of the fiscal arrangements. I think we are entitled to know what such a revision entails, what the extent of the revision will be and how much more money will be available to the CRC than has been previously voted by this Parliament.

We welcome these proposals but we say again they do not go far enough because in spite of these proposals the CRC will remain a subordinate body unable to fulfil the genuine aspirations of the Coloured people and unable to solve this Government’s problem of having two sovereign Parliaments in one State. That is why I hope the hon. the Minister will spell out in greater detail to what extent the proposals made by the Prime Minister when he opened the CRC last year, will be implemented and how soon. You see, Sir, there is an urgent need to raise the status of the CRC and not to do what this hon. Minister did during the early part of this session when he came with legislation which in fact diminished the status of the CRC. And he did that with two simple amending Acts, one-clause amendments, in 1972 and again during this session. Thereby the Minister placed himself in the position to take over all the powers of the CRC, except its limited legislative powers.

Order! The hon. member is not allowed to criticize legislation passed by this House this session.

Mr. Chairman, we welcome the steps that are being taken to improve the CRC, and we hope that the hon. the Minister will bear in mind that it is important for the status of this institution to be improved and raised as rapidly as possible.

I now want to turn to the Vote which we are being asked to approve today. Firstly, there is an amount of just over R163 million which is to be voted for the CRC, an increase of approximately R22 million over the amount voted last year. This represents an increase of some 15%. I submit that this amount hardly takes account of the present inflationary trend in South Africa. We could say, quite rightly, that this increase is minimal. I want to say too that this money is being voted almost entirely for administrative purposes. Sixty three per cent of this amount will go towards the salaries of teachers and 37% is for paying the pensioners. In respect of both these items, the pensions and the salary scales applicable to teachers are determined by this Parliament. The CRC has no say in this matter. How can we for one moment justify the fact that teachers, who play a vital role in the uplift of the Coloured community, and who will continue to do so, are paid a salary which amounts to only 80% of the salaries paid to their White counterparts who have the same qualifications and responsibilities? I believe that this is a matter which must be rectified as quickly as possible, because I believe it is holding back the advancement of education which is such a vital factor in the Coloured community. This decision rests with us and not with the CRC, and I hope that the hon. the Minister will deal with this matter as quickly as possible.

Sir, let us take the matter further. In the case of the capital account, that portion of the Vote which deals with additions to schools, the improvement of the University of the Western Cape, improvements to existing schools and amenties in the townships, things which are vitally important, the decisions also rest entirely with this Parliament and not with the CRC. The Coloured people have no say in this matter. The hon. the Minister must know that the normal increase in the number of school-going children alone will be 33 000 per annum for the next five years, and that he will require an additional amount of some R25 million to meet that increase. But we find, when we look at the Estimates, that there is an increase in respect of capital works on the Public Works Vote of only R1,3 million. Where does he expect to get the money to build the schools that will be required to meet this increase? Mr. Chairman, other members on this side will deal with these matters in greater detail. My time is restricted. There are many other issues I should like to deal with, but I shall leave them safely in the hands of my competent colleagues on this side.

Mr. Chairman, before this House assembles again tomorrow, the new executive management of the CRC will have been elected, and the council, as it has recently been constituted, will have met formally for the first time. Then the members will have been sworn in. I want to avail myself of this opportunity to convey to all the members of the CRC, those who were elected and those who were nominated, as well as the incoming executive committee, particularly the chairman, Mr. Sonny Leon, and the gentlemen who will be elected tomorrow, Parliament’s best wishes for the five year term which lies ahead. In this connection, there may be political arguments, but I want to say to you that for my part, to the extent that I am dealing with this situation and with the leaders on that level, I have detected a new atmosphere among the Coloured community and the Coloured leaders. There is a new willingness to serve their own community and a new willingness to accept responsibility. I want to express the confidence that where we are now discussing this Vote here, we in this House shall leave room for that new team which must start work tomorrow and shall not disturb the atmosphere in which they have to carry out their task. In view of this, I want to thank the hon. member who has just spoken for the way in which he participated in this debate. In spite of the criticism which he expressed, he showed a positive approach. I think that we all know the hon. member as a person who definitely takes a positive interest in this subject and who is particularly interested in the Coloured community, because of his membership of the Theron Commission. Just as I expressed my gratitude to the hon. member and did not begrudge him the right to level positive crictism at the Government, the hon. the Minister and the department, he should not begrudge me the right either, on this occasion to point out certain of his statements which hold no water.

Let us begin with the political aspect. The hon. member started by complaining that we were supposedly in the impossible situation that there is not a single representative of the Coloureds here while we are discussing this Vote and also that nobody from this House will be there when the CRC meets later this year. But the hon. member knows as well as I do that the policy of his party does not make provision for members of the Coloured community to sit in this House either. What does he achieve by stating such a standpoint? What is he able to achieve by that except to arouse emotions? Surely he must also explain to this House why it is the standpoint of his party that there will not be one, but two councils on the level of the CRC. The hon. member has much to explain in this connection. He also said that we are talking at cross purposes, that we are not talking to one another. I want to be fair towards the hon. member. His party and the other parties which are off-shoots of his party, also talk to the leaders of the Coloured community from time to time. The hon. the Minister, the department, and I too, on occasion, talk regularly to leaders of that community. From half past eight this morning until 12 o’clock this afternoon, we held three separate consultations with leaders of the Coloured community. If I may refer to that, I want to say that the message which I was given there this morning is that leaders appreciate opportunities for consultation and discussion. They were outspoken in expressing their appreciation for the fact that this Government is creating opportunities for consultation to an increasing extent.

What kind of powers do they have?

Will the hon. member please keep quiet for a while? In other words, not only do these leaders appreciate all this, but that which the hon. member is advocating also takes place. He welcomed the new form of liaison which is going to come about himself.

The hon. member also had praise for this fine publication Beeid van Vooruitgang/ Progress of a People. I am very glad that the hon. member expressed praise for that. I want to go further today and say that hon. members in this House, if they did not look superficially at this document, but read it properly, would know more— if they had done that—about the problems of the Coloured community and of the people themselves than they had ever known before. However, the hon. member said that this publication does not include the whole story and that there is no reference to the large masses who live in poverty. It is a well-known fact, something about which we have been talking for years in this House already, that large numbers of our Coloured community live in poverty and that special measures will have to be taken to pull them out of their poverty. After all, that is what the policy of the Government amounts to.

I should like to inquire of the hon. the Deputy Minister why this book was not supplied to all hon. members.

The hon. member is a little off the point. He complained of this to me a few days ago. I was given to understand that all the members of Parliament were included in the address list of the Department of Information who sent out the publication. I apologise if the publication did not reach the hon. member. My information is that it was sent to everybody. Since the hon. member has asked that queston, I want to say that it is surely proof that this publication tells the truth about the Coloured situation and about the opportunities which exist for the Coloureds, something which hon. members on that side of the House wanted to argue away in the discussion of this Vote last year. The hon. member also referred to the fact that in this publication there is no reference to the way in which the large housing shortage will be eliminated. Surely it is general knowledge that this department is not a housing department, but a liaison department. However, thanks to its efforts, the Department of Community Development is going out of its way to solve this large problem. I hear the hon. member for Green Point groaning, and I should like to ask him to show a more positive approach. He knows that the department of the hon. the Minister of Community Development is responsible for the fact that for every single house which is built for Whites at the moment out of Government funds, there are built for the Coloureds. I could quote further figures, figures which also appear in this publication—once again we have proof here that the hon. member has not read the publication properly—because this publication indicated that the Government is engaged, through the Department of Community Development, with a housing programme exclusively for Coloureds, a programme which is unprecedented in the history of our country. If I say, however, I do not want to suggest that more cannot be done, because the Government strives to make even more progress in this field. It is the easiest thing in the world to be negative and to say that one is not told in this publication of the acute housing need which exists and how it is to be eliminated. In fact, the story is there—if the hon. member only wants to read it. Nor do I want to deny that there is a backlog in respect of school accommodation. However, hon. members must not only blame us for that. That backlog comes from the time when the Opposition was in office and ruled the country. The amounts which are spent and the training programmes which are used to make teachers available, is something of which the department and the Government can be proud. By that I do not want to suggest that there is not room for further growth and development.

The hon. member spoke about opportunities for technical training. This story also appears in the publication, and the hon. member would have known it if he had read the publication properly. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, it is good that the hon. the Deputy Minister referred to the opening of the Coloured People’s Representative Council. The ironic fact is that, although we in the sovereign Parliament of South Africa are going to discuss Coloured/White relationships, decisions are perhaps being made in the caucus room in Bellville South which are as important in relation to Coloured and White relationship as those which will be made in this House. The hon. the Deputy Minister says that he senses a new atmosphere. I presume an atmosphere of co-operation with the Government and its policy. If this Government is going to build its future strategy on such a superficial observation, it is going to prove disastrous both for the Coloured and the White people in South Africa. It is all very well when one has played cat-and-mouse with the political situation to say that there is a new atmosphere, but I believe what has happened is that the Government has, through its own stratagem, warded off temporarily a crisis or confrontation between itself and the ruling party in the CRC. It has gained a short reprieve, but nevertheless it is still caught up in the process of crisis. Coloured politics is a crisis area in South Africa today. I believe that however much we would wish the opposite, it is going to grow to crisis proportions. There is going to be more and more conflict until this Government abandons its policy of “baasskap” towards the Coloured people, until it abandons its policy and says to the Coloured people that because it cannot give them a separate homeland and separate freedoms, it is going to face up to the inevitable, i.e. equal opportunity, shared political rights and full citizenship in a shared South Africa. It may be difficult for the hon. members to accept this, but this is the logic and the morality around which the Government is building its arguments for the Bantustans and the homelands. Whether the hon. member for Waterberg and others like it or not, they know that this Government is going to be forced to abandon its separate development policy in favour of a policy of accepting Coloureds as full citizens.

You are talking nonsense.

The Government is basing its assessment on a false premise. I believe that what has happened today— the lack of confrontation between the Government and the Labour Party at this moment—is far from being something about which the Government should be proud or something about which it should feel relieved. There should, in fact, be no measure of relief or pride in what has happened, because it lays bare the unsavoury truth of South African politics which at the moment is dominance in the power structure of South African politics of the all-White National Party Government. That is the truth and a very unwholesome and unsavoury truth. The hon. the Deputy Minister may smile and smirk, but he knows that it is going to be changed because already things are happening in South Africa which are moving the National Party away from its policy. That policy is starting to erode and one of these days the National Party is going to surrender. [interjections.] There is nothing to be proud of in a dominant group such as the other side of the House trying to outmanoeuvre the representatives of an under-privileged group—a group which rejected apartheid in an open election, which rejected the CRC, but which under the coercive pressures of this present Government have temporarily been forced to co-operate with the system. There is nothing to be proud of in that situation. There is no need for a sense of relief because by accepting the CRC temporarily as an instrument, the Coloured people do not say that they agree with the CRC or with the whole system which the CRC represents. The CRC is going to be used not as an instrument to develop Government policy but by a political party as the lever of power to destroy Government policy, as indeed the whole history of South Africa is going to combine to destroy Government policy. I think that one can accept this, and I believe that it is necessary to give some advice to the hon. the Minister and his Deputy Minister. Instead of sensing a new atmosphere, instead of saying that we have resolved all our problems, I would have liked him to have stood up and said that there was a new sense of urgency, almost a sense of danger in the situation which is developing. Instead of his saying that there is a new era of co-operation, let him recognize that there is a new tide of rising anger among the Coloured people about the way they have been treated socially, economically and politically in South Africa. Let him realize, whether he likes it or not, that the Government’s policy has failed. The Government has no policy with which it can face Africa, the Western world and the Coloured people when it comes to the future of the Coloured people in South Africa. [Interjections.] Whatever the arguments may be in relation to the homelands, as far as the Coloured people are concerned, the Government has no policy, and it knows it. It was the hon. the Prime Minister who was much more forthright than the hon. the Deputy Minister on the other side because he admitted the following in this House the other day—

He said they must have meaningful rights to co-responsibility. But at the same time the Coloured people reject apartheid; they reject politicial separation. The hon. the Prime Minister has said by implication: “Whatever we believed in in the past, the future course is one of a drawing together and sharing of political power between the Coloured people and the Whites.” What is more, unlike other hon. members on the other side, the Prime Minister said he recognized the dilemma. The Prime Minister used these words: “I have identified the dilemma; we shall have to find a solution for that dilemma.”

That is right.

An hon. member on that side says “That is right.” But what is the Prime Minister’s solution for this dilemma? Let us read what he said—

What impertinence for the Prime Minister to say that he has identified the dilemma and that he has placed it in the lap of the Coloured people! It is a dilemma of his making because he and the Nationalist Party took the Coloured people out of this House. He does not place the dilemma in the lap of the Nationalist Party, but in the lap of the Coloured people! Yet the Prime Minister can say to the people of Rhodesia that they must sort out their franchise qualifications and to the people of South West Africa that they must hold a constitutional conference and that all options are open. It is this Prime Minister and this Government who say that they can resolve the relationships between White South Africa and 200 million Blacks on the African continent while they cannot even solve the problems of the relationship between White South Africa and 2 million Brown South Africans. This is the dilemma; this is what he says.

We in these benches recognize that the relationship between the Coloured people on the one hand and the Whites on the other, a relationship which has existed for some time and which was forced to an extent by the Government, is going to change radically in the years to come. We believe that separate development, apartheid, parallel development or “aanpassings-beleid”—call it what you will—is going to disappear. Whether the hon. members on that side of the House like it or not, there is going to be social, economic, educational and political equality between Blacks and Whites in South Africa. The issue is no longer whether apartheid is going to survive but, when apartheid goes, what kind of society we will have and what the quality of life will be.

What distresses me is that the Government is not tackling the problem of socio-economic uplift to see that, when apartheid goes, the old divisions which were based on race, are not replaced by new divisions based on class between White and Coloured in South Africa. This is what we should be doing, and that is why it distresses me to look at this budget and to see how neutral it is in respect of the whole field of socio-economic uplift for the Coloured people. As the hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central mentioned, the CRC budget is R21 750 000 more than it was last year. This represents an increase of only 15,28% whereas the increase in the total budget for the country according to the hon. the Minister of Finance is over 16%. In other words, the CRC budget falls behind the overall increase in the National budget. In respect of national housing, which includes Coloured housing, there is a rise of only 15% whereas the building cost index has risen by 16%. In the field of loan funds for community development there is a decrease of 1,7% and in the field of public works, which includes Coloured schools and universities, there is an increase of only 7,5%. In other words, although there is an advance, the advance is not keeping pace with either the cost of living or the increase in building costs in South Africa. As a consequence the effect of this budget is really to enable the Government to mark time. Instead of being fired by a tremendous sense of urgency that, as apartheid and discrimination against Coloureds is disappearing, we have to replace it with a more equitable society measured in socio-economic terms, this Government is marking time and the hon. members’ best contribution to the debate is to say; “We sense a new atmosphere developing in South Africa.” [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I do not know whether the Opposition consists of one, two or three parties at the moment; we shall see that later. In any event, the hon. speakers on the opposite side asked the Minister to reply to certain questions. I am convinced they will receive their replies in the course of this debate. I want to ask hon. members, however, why they do not ask the questions with regard to the policy of the United Party as well. I am sure, and I have no hesitation in saying this and saying it with conviction, that this National Party Government, the hon. the Minister and the White people of South Africa have done everything possible in the interests of the promotion and progress of the Coloured community of the Republic of South Africa. Everything which it is humanly possible to do this Government has tried to do and it should be remembered that we cannot do everything in one day. But the policy is there and the principle has been laid down. Our diligence and concern as regards the progress of the Coloureds, prove that we have their interests at heart. We should like to see conditions improving for them. I want to tell the hon. the Opposition that I have known them for the past 40 years. What did they do in the course of those 40 years in the interests of the progress and promotion of the Coloured community? Not a thing. All the hon. members did, was to create expectations amongst the Coloureds which could never be fulfilled. They are misleading our Coloureds as far as those expectations are concerned, viz. the creation of a new future for South Africa. Not only have they been obstructing our way, but in addition they have been fighting us throughout the years. Throughout the years they have been seeking their political advantage in the vote of the Coloured community. For the 1 % advantage they gained in this way they ploughed under 99% of the interests of the Coloured people in South Africa. I think the time has arrived for the United Party, if they want to have a part in the history which will be written about the self-determination of the Coloureds in South Africa, something which will still come into its own, to change very quickly if they do want to have such a part. We have had the experience in recent years that the smaller a party they become, the larger the bid they are making for the favour of the Coloureds. They are doing this for one particular reason only and that is to disturb the relations between White and non-White, between the Government and the Coloureds. By doing this they are not acting in the interests of anybody. In doing this they have had only one objective, to break the National Party. Today hon. members may go to all parts in which one finds educated Coloureds and the vast majority of them will confirm that the Government is doing everything in its power to bring about the progress of the Coloured people. They also say—lately I have come into contact with them very often—that they have no fear in saying this.

I want to say a few things in the interests of the Coloured people. I regard the housing shortage of the Coloureds as the most urgent need which exists at the moment. To prove that the Government and the hon. the Minister are doing everything they possibly can, I want to tell you that from 1948 to 1972 the Government built more than 115 000 houses. During the past five years alone, it built half as many houses as were built in the previous 24 years. Over the past five years an average of 11651 houses was built for the Coloured group at a cost of R24 031 943. Hon. members may take the Whites, the Asians or any group, and they will see that the Coloured population has received preferential treatment in every respect and that the Government has been doing what it possibly can so as to provide better housing for the Coloureds. Of the Coloured population, who numbers approximately 2 million, it has already accommodated approximately 1 million in good housing, and it has done this with Government funds. For the financial year 1975-’76. an amount of R40 million has been allocated for the Coloureds, which amount will be used to build between 14 000 and 15 000 dwelling units, which will provide housing for approximately 100 000 Coloureds. At Elsies River alone 3 000 Coloured houses are under construction at the moment. Sir, the Cape Divisional Council is going to build 12 000 houses for Coloureds in the Peninsula in 1975-’76, and under the crash programme 1 500 and 2 500 houses will be built in Durban and Johannesburg, respectively, this year for Coloureds. The Coloureds are experiencing a housing shortage but the Government is doing everything it can to make up the leeway and to provide them with good accommodation. The hon. the Minister of Agriculture announced a few weeks ago that the farmers would be assisted by means of low rates of interest so as to enable them to provide proper accommodation for their labourers. Sir, this is being done not only to assist the farmers, but to assure that our Coloured and Bantu labourers throughout the Republic of South Africa will have good accommodation. I can tell you, Sir, that the houses which are planned for these people, are far better than the houses many of our Whites occupied during the last World War. Sir, nobody realizes better than the Government that the Coloureds have a large leeway to make up. Whose fault is this? Is it the fault of this side of the House, or is it also the fault of that side? During the years when they were in power, they did nothing for the betterment of the future of the Coloureds. Even if one were to give 60 or 100 Coloureds membership of this Parliament today, such representation would be meaningless as regards their future and their prosperity and well-being, if their needs were not to be seen to. Therefore I say that we should proceed with our policy of uplifting the Coloureds and of giving them self-determination so that they may help themselves through their own actions. I want to address an appeal here today to the Coloureds to take steps themselves for combating the work-shyness one finds in the ranks of the Coloured community. Sir, no people can make progress, no people can become a nation and no people can exist if it is not prepared to work and to rid itself of such workshyness. In my own community, Coloureds who are big employers complain of the hundreds of Coloureds who are idlers and who are not prepared to work; of their working only one or two days a week and loafing for the rest of the week. We know that there are Coloureds who are an example to their community and who make their full contribution to the economy of South Africa, but this work-shyness to which I have referred and which one sometimes finds in the ranks of the Whites as well, is to be found in the ranks of the Coloured community to a large extent today, and the Coloureds themselves will have to assist us to rehabilitate these people and to uplift them.

Are you going to abolish job reservation?

Sir, a greater sense of responsibility has to be instilled in these people. They must be prepared to take their own people with them, however weak they may be. A prominent Coloured person told me recently that there were certain places at which he did not want to be seen with his own people as many of them were so backward. Sir, the Whites had to travel that same road. We, too, had our less privileged, poorer people, but the Whites realized their responsibility. They realized they had to take their own people along with them on the road they wanted to take. It is only when one realizes this that one can do one’s duty. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Prieska in the course of his speech raised the question as to whose fault it was, that of the Government or that of the Opposition, in regard to what has gone wrong with the Coloured people. Sir, if it is anybody’s fault in South Africa, then it is collectively the fault of the people of South Africa. But I do not believe that this is a matter which is going to benefit from petty party-political squabbles. The question that has to be asked is: Who can actually speak for the Coloured people in this Parliament? Is this a debate in which people are going to speak for the Coloured people, or is this merely a debate about the Coloured people? Sir, if South Africa had a multi-racial electorate, then the people could choose any person of any race to represent them. The people would choose those in whom they have confidence and thus a White man could be chosen by Coloured and White voters to speak for them. But this is a White legislature. We represent White voters, and this legislature is part of the apartheid structure of South Africa. [Interjections.] We, therefore, consult in order to ascertain the views of the Coloured people, but obviously our thinking is influenced by our responsibility to a White electorate. Sir, the hon. the Minister of Coloured Relations is a White member of Parliament representing a White constituency, appointed by a White Prime Minister as a member of a White Cabinet. How can he possibly reflect the aspirations and the emotions of the Coloured people? If the Government persists in its refusal to permit the Coloured people to vote for representatives in this Parliament and to permit Coloureds to take their seats in this House if elected, then the very least it can do is to appoint a Coloured man or a Coloured woman as Minister of Coloured Affairs, and I would ask that the Government should see that the hon. the Minister makes room for a Coloured man or a Coloured woman to take his place to participate in the debates in this House as a Cabinet Minister, as a Senator may presently do. We do not believe that there is for the Government a logical alternative to Coloured representation in Parliament, and we believe that eventually the Government will agree to it. We only hope that it will not be too late for South Africa when they do agree to it, but if they intend to persist with a policy which they call parallel development, then they must be prepared to put flesh on the skeleton of this policy and allow the immediate appointment of a Cabinet Council and of a Minister of Coloured Affairs. This is essential. Sir, there are other matters which should form part of this plan for change if the policy is to be that of parallel development, and there still are five other points. Secondly, there should be a Select Committee of Parliament to sit with a similar committee of the CRC to consider all the legislation affecting the Coloured people before its introduction into this Parliament. Thirdly, there should be representation for the Coloured people in the Senate and, fourthly, there should be a rapid transfer of powers to a fully elected Coloured Representative Council. [Interjections.]

Graaff suggested that two years ago.

There are things in the United Party policy which are good, and I have been trying long enough to convince you of that. Sir, there should be a rapid transfer of powers to a fully elected Coloured Representative Council, because the frustration of the CRC as legislators is one of the dangers to the relationship between the Coloureds and the White people of South Africa. Fifthly, there should be a complete review of the system of local government, giving full local government status to those Coloured authorities that are viable, and integrating Coloured and White local government where this is not possible and creating multi-racial metropolitan local government for regions where this is appropriate.

These are constitutional changes, and even though they fall short of the desires of the Coloured people and short of what we would do if we had the power to do so, it would at least demonstrate a seriousness and sincerity in the application of parallel development. If this were combined with meaningful changes in other directions, the goodwill which still exists in considerable measure among the Coloured people would flourish. Let me suggest some. They are not new because they have been suggested by others before. There is, firstly, group areas removals that should cease; secondly, the return of the Coloured people to traditional residential areas in which they lived before; thirdly, the acceptance of Coloured businesses in recognized central business areas in cities and towns of South Africa; fourthly, the closing of the gap between the expenditure on the training and education of Coloureds and Whites; fifthly, the closing of the pay gap for equal work and responsibility; sixthly, the review of legislation and practices in order to eliminate discrimination; and, seventhly, meaningful expenditure in order to solve the housing problem.

One of the tragedies in this regard is that we talk about sovereignty being exercised by every on of the peoples of South Africa. Is the Government going to allow the Coloured people to exercise that sovereignty? Under present Government policy it is clear that the White Parliament will always have a veto, and that phrase sounds somewhat familiar. The CRC, being the creature of this Parliament, can always have its powers changed. It can, in fact, be abolished by this Parliament. There are many unanswered questions, to which perhaps the hon. the Minister will give some answers. If sovereignty is to be exercised by the Coloured people, who is to issue passports for Coloured people? Who is to decide that? Secondly, if sovereignty is to be exercised by the Coloured people, are they to have ambassadors to represent them overseas, or is foreign affairs for ever going to be the prerogative of Whites only in their relationship with the Coloured people? Thirdly, are the Coloureds going to have a say in respect of railways, airways, and national roads? Are the Coloureds going to have a say as to whether there should be an opportunity for White and Coloured to travel together in a train in South Africa? Fourthly, is Escom going to be a White entity? Is it only going to be for Whites to control, or are the Coloureds going to have a share in it? This applies also to many other similar Government institutions. What is to be the position in respect of local government? Who is going to be responsible for the services? Are the Coloured people going to be given responsibilities in this connection? Who is going to control road transport? Let me go further. Who is going to control nature conservation? Let me put this question to the hon. the Minister: Is Table Mountain for the Whites or is it for all people in South Africa? Who does it belong to? What is Table Mountain? What do these things mean in the situation which the hon. the Minister wants to create? Let us talk about the army. Is there going to be only one army for South Africa in which the Coloured and the White people can serve together in terms of so-called parallel development? If so, will it be a completely multi-racial army? May a Coloured man be at the head of it in terms of Government policy? Who is going to decide whether there should be war or whether there should be peace? Are the Coloured people going to be able to decide, when the White people decide to engage in a war, that the Coloured people will opt out of it and be neutral in such a war? What of the group areas, Sir? Who finally decides group areas? Is it the Whites only who determine the boundaries, or is it all the people of South Africa? Let me ask a final question. If in fact the Whites of South Africa refuse to share with the Coloured people, what if the Coloured people decide that they would prefer to share with the Black people? Would this Government then decide to prevent the Coloured people from embarking upon a course of such a nature? These are some of the unanswered questions to which the hon. the Minister should give a reply if he is going to deal with the policy of parallel development and its eventual outcome in South Africa as he sees it.

There are also many illogicalities in the policy of parallel development regarding the treatment of Coloured people. There are dozens of them. Let us mention a few of them that are at our doorstep. A Coloured man drives a taxi which has a sign on it saying “Whites only”, and a Coloured man may not be a passenger in that taxi, either alone or together with another Coloured or a White person. Let us take a bus. You may find an elderly Coloured woman not being able to get on a bus because in certain instances the downstairs part of the bus is for Whites only. She can, however, get on the bus to travel to the airport. Are these things logical? [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, we have had a strange performance here from the hon. member for Yeoville and the hon. member for Sea Point. Since it is Women’s Year. I gain the impression that they have decided, with this marriage of theirs, which of the two, the man or the woman, is going to be the boss and who is going to make the most noise. I do not want to try to reply to every individual question that was put by the hon. members, because it will take me a whole day to do so. Besides, those questions have repeatedly been replied to in this House, on the level of the hon. the Minister and on the level of the hon. the Prime Minister, and every time it was explained to them what the policy of the Government is. I shall now try to tell them in very simple language that the Government and all the parties in this House, also that party which is still on honeymoon, believe in the emancipation of the Black people and the Brown people eventually. That is quite clear. I do not think there is one person in this House who does not accept that we are experiencing the time now when the Black people, the Brown people and all other people in Africa, and in South Africa in particular, should be emancipated. But the essential difference between the Government and all the Opposition parties—I include the official Opposition—lies in the basis of the emancipation, the way in which that emancipation should take place in South Africa. The Government believes that the Coloureds should be emancipated to be a worthy and let me add, an appreciated neighbour in South Africa. [Interjections.] Yes, to be an equal neighbour. Does that satisfy the hon. member now? We want to emancipate him on his terrain to be an appreciated neighbour with whom we will be able to live in harmony. I want to say immediately that we have experience of it to feel unhappy in our own country. I am now referring to the Afrikaner nation. Before we reached an agreement in this country with the other language group, we were unhappy. Why would we then be so foolish today to try and keep another nation in a state if subservience forever? Surely, this would be impossible and childish. Our idea is to emancipate them to be worthy —and if hon. members want to put it that way—equal neighbours in South Africa.

Where do they have to live?

I am coming to that. The joint Opposition believes in integration at all levels, but we do not believe in it because we have found out that integration has never succeeded in any country in the whole world, America included. Do hon. members deny that or do they accept that? Therefore we have decided in South Africa, with our population which consists of different groups, that we are going to look for another solution for our problem: We are going to bring about separation. I am using the word “separation” and not the word apartheid, which that Opposition turned into a term of abuse and approbrium. [Interjections.] It is these Opposition parties who turned apartheid into a term of abuse overseas. It is not every one who knows what the word means, but nevertheless it became a terror-inspiring word to them. Therefore I am not going to argue about a word. I would rather argue about a basic principle. We want to emancipate the Brown people of South Africa in such a way that they will be treated in a manner worthy of a human being and that they can sit with us, as peonies, at the conference table and discuss matters. That is the basis of our policy. The White man places a very high premium on his identity and therefore he also places a high premium on the identity of other peoples. I want to say to the Opposition that I know the Coloureds very well and that I am in contact with them. Many of those people have already told me that they are afraid of disappearing into the Black mass of Africa. The Coloured people do not want to disappear in the Black mass, but they want to survive, or want to become “White” one of the two. The Coloured people should also understand and appreciate the premium the White man places on his own identity. However, I want to say to the Coloured people that if separate development were to disappear in South Africa, they will be the first group to disappear into this Black mass of Africa, Thank God there are still peoples who place a premium on their own identity, on their national identity. The Bantu place a high premium on their identity as Xhosa, as Zulu, or on whatever it may be. This is the salvation of all of us and it will also be the salvation of the identity of the Coloured people in South Africa. They do not want to disappear into the Black mass of Africa. Talk to the Coloured leaders and they will tell you this every time. Therefore it is in their own salvation that the policy of separate development should continue to exist in South Africa …

Parallel development.

… that the policy of parallel development should continue to exist in South Africa.

In the few minutes left to me I would like to refer to the extremely irresponsible role all Opposition parties are playing in connection with the Coloured people in South Africa. The problem is that, instead of trying to establish sound relations, things are being said and done to create certain expectations among the Coloured people, expectations they have no intention whatsoever of fullfilling. This is regrettable.

Mention a few things.

Must I mention a few things, must I point out some of the irresponsibilites? Recently we had the debate on the amending Bill on the CRC and I should like to read out to you one quotation from the speech of the hon. member for Bezuidenhout. In Hansard of 25 March, column 3357, the hon. member had the following to say—

Is this not a terrible … Mr. Chairman. I shall have to be very careful now or else you will rule my language as being unparliamentary and rule me out of order. However, I think it is the most irresponsible language a person can use in this House, i.e. to tell the Coloured people that this Government has only followed a policy of confrontation during the past 25 or 26 years. This statement exceeds all limits of responsibility. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, six months ago, the hon. the Prime Minister personally addressed the Coloured Persons Representative Council and there he made certain statements of policy which deserve our attention and which provides the answer to certain of the points made by the hon. member who has just resumed his seat. The Government likes to describe its policy in respect of the political position of the Coloured as one of “parallel development”. The hon. the Minister of the Interior, who is the Transvaal leader of the National Party, once gave a very graphic explanation of what that meant. He said that the White and Coloured communities would remain separate for all time like two tram-lines running parallel to each other and never meeting anywhere. In his speech to the CRC, the hon. the Prime Minister also used the term “parallel self-determination”; yet the whole direction of his speech was a rejection of this. In the first place, he said that the factual situation in South Africa was such—and by this he meant that the interests of the Whites and the Coloureds were so intertwined over a wide field—that there could not be two sovereign Parliaments viz. one for the Whites and a separate one for the Coloureds governing “the same territory”. In other words, he admitted that the Whites and the Coloureds could not each have their own parliament of equal status functioning parallel to and alongside each other in the territory of the same State. This admission implies another important admission, viz. that if parallel Parliaments of equal value cannot exist for the two groups, surely there can be no question of full separate or parallel self-determination for the two groups either. We know, indeed, we have been saying this for a long time, that two (or more) peoples whose destinies are so closely interwoven as ours and the Coloureds’ are, and who live in the same state, cannot both be sovereign and have full self-determination for themselves alone what is in a joint state. We are glad that the hon. the Prime Minister also realizes this now. To emphasize the reality of the situation, the hon. the Prime Minister went further and said there was a field in which Coloured interests could be separated and in respect of which one could speak of “purely Coloured interests”, in respect of which the Coloureds could decide separately. In other words, there is a field of limited self-determination for the Coloureds. In the same way (he said) there was also a field in which White interests could be separated and in respect of which one could talk of “purely White interests”, in respect of which the Whites could decide for themselves. In other words, the Whites, too, in relation to the Coloureds, have a field of limited self-determination. But then, the hon. the Prime Minister continued, there was a field of “joint interests”. These joint interests, he said, and I quote his words [translation]—

In this connection, the hon. the Prime Minister went so far as to use the term “joint participation”, which we regard as particularly significant. The hon. the Prime Minister did not demarcate the limited field of purely White interests and the limited field of purely Coloured interests. Perhaps the hon. the Minister can be so kind as to do that for us. There is, however, one thing which we all know, and that is that the field of joint interests is infinitely larger than the limited field of separate interests. As I said on a previous occasion in this House, one need only look at the list of Ministries on the inside cover of Hansard to realize how minimal the field of separate interest is. Let me mention a few examples. There can only be one joint Prime Minister, and, therefore, only one central or joint Government. There can only be one joint Minister of Defence, and, therefore, only one joint Defence Force; in fact, the Coloureds have already been integrated into the Defence Force. There can also only be one joint Minister of Foreign Affairs, and therefore, only one effective foreign service. In this connection, too, it has already been announced that the Coloureds are to be intreerated into this service. Then there is the control over Posts and Telecommunications, where a distinction between the two groups cannot be drawn either. In the same way, Transport, with its control over different matters, falls completely within the field of joint interests. The same applies to the Department of the Interior, with its control over passports and population registration. There can also only be one joint Police Force, and only one Security Service. In fact, the Coloureds have already been integrated into these services too. The same applies to the activities of the Departments of Finance, Economic Affairs and Immigration and to imports and exports, to radio and television services and, of course, to the administration of justice. There cannot be a separate system for the administration of justice for the Coloureds and the Whites operating in the same territory. Therefore, the realities of the situation in South Africa point overwhelmingly to the fact that the concepts “purely White interests” and “purely Coloured interests” do not go much further than the administration of education and related cultural matters, and that these are in fact so limited that a body such as the Coloured Persons Representative Council will never be able to develop much beyond what it is at the moment and will definitely never be able to become a self-governing body of any significance. The Coloured leaders know that just as well as we do. Consequently, it is inevitable that all future political emphasis will fall on the dominating field of joint interests and on the implementation of the promise which the hon. the Prime Minister made, the promise of joint consultation and joint decision-taking—in other words, joint particpation—in matters of common interest.

Now, the hon. the Prime Minister announced certain preliminary steps. He said that he would bring the Coloured Community into, or give them joint participation in, the Group Areas Board, the Wage Board, the Public Service Commission, the Planning Advisory Council, the Industrial Conciliation Board, and other political bodies as well. I can only say that these steps alone are enough to show that the Minister of the Interior’s “tramline policy” the policy of parallel lines never flowing into each other, has been shelved effectively and for all times. The hon. the Prime Minister also proposed, in the second place, a sort of Cabinet Council, consisting of an equal number of Cabinet representatives and members of the Executive of the Coloured Persons Representative Council to take joint decisions about common interest. The hon. the Prime Minister added that he was considering giving statutory recognition to this so-called Cabinet Council, so that—and I use my own words now— something like a third chamber in our parliamentary system would come into existence. We do not think that these steps are adequate or that there is the least chance of the Coloureds regarding them as a recognition of full citizenship, because this would not, in fact, be the case. What is important, however, is that the Government has been compelled by necessity to move away from full parallelism as far as the Coloureds are concerned, and is giving more and more recognition in practice to the principle of joint development, which to our minds, is the only practical policy for the future. Once the Government has carried out its announced plans, we shall at least have progressed far enough for no single logical argument to remain as to why the Coloureds should not be given direct representation in this Parliament.

Mr. Chairman, allow me to say at once that one is thankful to learn that the hon. member for Bezuidenhout has made a thorough study of the speeches of the hon. the Prime Minister. I should like to say to the hon. member that I think he proceeds on too many presumptions. He argues too easily about all the things which it would supposedly be impossible to do. As a newcomer to this House, I want to say to the hon. member that he makes politics too complicated and too difficult. Politics are not so complicated and difficult. If they were to consider these matters somewhat more carefully, I think they, too, would readily find a solution to these problems.

The presence of two population groups, each with its own institutions, within the boundaries of the same country, does not necessarily constitute an insurmountable problem to my mind. It is my conviction that, if this matter is handled correctly, it is the very thing which may serve as a very effective demonstration to the world of peaceful co-existence. On the other hand, if it were to be handled incorrectly, as the hon. member for Sea Point and his party would handle it, its results could be very detrimental to this country indeed. The co-existence of White and Brown in South Africa in terms of our White-Brown relations, can be developed into a grand example in the world.

Now I know that different standpoints are adopted towards this matter of White-Brown relations. There are, in the first place, the prophets of doom among whom the hon. member for Sea Point and his party are the most important. These are people who refuse to see the developing relations between White and Brown. These are people who prophesy every day that this fine relationship which is developing will come to nothing whatsoever.

They do not want to be like an ostrich hiding its head in the sand.

There are also the wilful people who want to disrupt and cloud this fine relationship in our country. There are politicians and also a section of the Press who are doing this. Let us be honest. They are doing this to get at the National Party and to break the National Party. They are doing this to the detriment of South Africa and specifically to the detriment of the Brown population group and the White population group in South Africa. There are also people who look at this relationship in honesty and sincerity. They admit that bridges have to be built and that everything in this relationship is possibly not one hundred per cent as it should be. They are the people who look at these relations and see these things and do not blame the policy of the National Party for them. They are the people who see yet other factors why this relationship is not as we should like it to be. I believe we can give a new dimension to this relationship. In the first instance I want to say that to give that dimension to this relationship, the CRC has a very important part to play, and I believe that it is going to play that part. They are going to play that role by acting positively as we have already experienced after the election. I believe that many hon. members in this House may possibly be disappointed about that. I believe we shall have less disparagement in the CRC than we had in the past, and that what we are going to have is strong, positive action. I also believe that what we are going to have in that council is realism instead of the bitterness and the extremism of the past. I also believe that the council is going to take into account the interests of South Africa, with its population composition, with the position of South Africa in the world and with the negotiations in which South Africa is engaged at present. That is why I believe and why it is my conviction that when the history of South Africa is written one day and there is mention of White-Brown relations, the CRC will be highly commended. We should not look back over the past five years only. There was a process of growth; there were growing pains and there was development. I am confident that that council will do its full share as far as these relations are concerned,

An enormous responsibility rests upon this Government. It should be clear to everybody in South Africa that this Government is prepared to make its full contribution to co-operation. Could it have been put in a better way than when the hon. the Prime Minister opened the session of the CRC at the beginning of November and offered the hand of friendship? It was done in complete sincerity and in complete honesty to help those people and to improve relations. There is the willingness on the part of the Government to give the Coloured the opportunity to realize his ideals in a peaceful manner. We are aware of the fact that these people have ideals and that they want to develop certain things and want to achieve certain things. This Government is prepared to go even further, viz. to find the means and to offer these people the channels through which they can develop those ideals.

Basic to the policy of the National Party is the approach that we do not want to place these two communities, White and Brown, in pressure groups opposite each other. That is what would happen if the United Party or the Progressive Party were to come into power. Immediately we would have these two groups as pressure groups opposite each other. These would be pressure groups that would be completely out of touch with each other, out of touch with each other’s interests, out of touch with each, other’s thinking and out of touch with each other’s aspirations. As we have it under this Government, however, in term as of the development which it advocates, we shall find that these two groups will be able to find each other on South Africa’s road ahead, will be able to understand each other and help each other. That is why we have this basic principle on the part of this Government, viz. liaison on all levels and also, as was mentioned by the hon. member for Bezuidenhout, liaison on the level of a Cabinet Council. But, Sir, this Government also wants to make it possible for sensible communication to exist between these two groups. It does not follow a laissez-faire policy; it wants to make it possible for these two groups to be able to communicate with each other, to be able to complement each other and to be able to help each other. I believe, Sir, that the report of the Theron Commission, will, when it appears, make a very big contribution to White-Brown relations. It is imperative that the bottlenecks in the development of the Coloureds be identified and be given urgent attention. This relationship can be furthered by us as politicians if we would only realize that the Coloureds have their own leaders; that they have their own political leaders, that they have their own leaders in all spheres, who are capable of speaking on their behalf and that we should not at every opportunity when something happens in the Coloured Persons Council or when something happens in the Coloured community rush in from all sides in on attempt to make political capital from the situation and in so doing try to create confusion in the ranks of the Coloureds. Sir, I want to say this afternoon that the Press, too, can play a very big part in White-Brown relations. I should like to quote to you what Mr. Adam Small wrote in Die Vaderland of 5 May, with reference to an interview he had with a reporter in which he informed him, “This I say and this I do not say”. Mr. Small said (translation)—

He concluded by saying—

Sir, if a leader from the Coloured community says this, then I believe the time has arrived for our Press, and a part of our Press, particularly, to pay attention to this. But, Sir, the general public, too, has a very big role to play in White-Brown relations. We should see to it that incidents are eliminated. I believe we should develop a pride in everybody in that which is his own and that we should acknowledge the right of existence of other groups. I believe in particular, Sir,—I may say this with some hesitation, but I nevertheless want to say it—that people behind counters who actually implement the policy of this Government, should implement it with great discretion and should realize at all times that the person who has to be served, irrespective of his colour, is a human being and that he is entitled to equal treatment.

Sir, I want to conclude by making this statement. This relationship can be given more content by means of social upliftment. I want to put this as priority No. 1 in the maintenance of good relations between the Whites and the Coloureds. A Coloured leader speaks of, inter alia, the large under-layer of Brown people, of the mass, and a well-known minister of the D.R. Mission Church, speaks of the underdeveloped Coloureds who form the overwhelming mass of this community. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, Government speakers, including the hon. member for Oudtshoorn, have proved one thing in this debate very pertinently to us, and that is that over the last 27 years the Government has not solved a single major Coloured issue in this country. Sir, if you look at the housing problems, you find that they have become intensified. If you look at the educational problems, you find that they have magnified themselves, and you find that the political rights of the Coloured people have retrogressed over the years. Sir. Government political bankruptcy was reflected at its very worst in this debate. Over 27 years of Government rule there has been neglect. It is only over the last few years that there has been a bit of movement. Sir, the hon. the Minister has a most important portfolio. Race relations in South Africa can be cemented by the hon. the Minister if he lays the foundations with the Coloured people. These are the golden years of the South African economy and we can afford to declare war on poverty, on insecurity and on discriminatory practices. I would like to know from the hon. the Minister this afternoon what his philosophy is, and I would like to know what his policy is in relation to the Nico Malan theatre. Does the hon. the Minister regard the admission of Coloured people to the Nico Malan theatre as temporary or permanent? A positive reply from him in this regard will end the irresponsible statements that have come from Nationalist Party members of Parliament in regard to the Nico Malan theatre. Nationalist Party members of Parliament like the hon. members for Waterberg and Namakwaland—I am sorry they are not here at the moment—have said that Coloureds will only be allowed in the Nico Malan theatre until such time as they have their own Nico Malan theatre in their own area. Now, that is impractical nonsense. The Nico Malan theatre cost approximately R11,7 million when it was built some years ago. To build another Nico Malan theatre would cost in the vicinity of R20 million today. South Africa very badly needs millions and millions, in fact billions of rands, to develop our infrastructure, our Bantu homelands, Bantu education, Bantu housing, Coloured housing and Coloured education, and I say quite unequivocally that we cannot afford the luxury of more Nico Malans. The Nico Malan theatre is there to be shared for all time by all races. In any case, what do we want another Nico Malan theatre for in the Coloured area? So that we can preserve the exclusivity of a few super verkramptes on the Nationalist Party side? That would be the only reason. Sir, the opening of the Nico Malan theatre to all races was the correct decision by the Government and was fully justified. However, this fine act is spoilt by the flights of fancy of members like the hon. members for Waterberg and Namakwaland, and I think the hon. the Minister should take them to tasks. I think it is about time that those two hon. members led their electorate; they must not follow their electorate. They must adopt a position of leadership.

I am going to ask the hon. the Minister whether he will solve some problems that I want to put to him today. I want to ask the hon. the Minister, in relation to his policy, to take up matters where the interests of the Coloured people are adversely affected. Firstly, I would like to ask the hon. the Minister to make contact with the Administrator of the Cape Province and to ask him to call Capab together urgently and ask them to make an application to the Department of Community Development to open the Opera House in Port Elizabeth to Coloureds and people of other races. I want to say that this application should have been considered at the April meeting, but because formal details were available it was postponed to the November meeting. I want to tell the hon. the Minister that there is not a single member of Parliament in the Port Elizabeth area, including the Nationalist members, who would not support this action on his part. The reason why we believe it should be done urgently is because if this situation is left until November, dust will be kicked up. We fed that the hon. the Minister would be fully justified in taking that course of action now. It is better to make this particular concession, which is fully justified, now rather than to wait until November and then to give the impression that perhaps it was done under pressure. I should like to appeal to the hon. the Minister to take a positive stand in this matter because it affects the Coloured people culturally more than all the other races.

During last year the hon. the Minister indicated to us that there was a backlog in housing of 62 400 dwellings and that the cost of erecting this housing would be approximately R218,5 million. I want to tell the hon. the Minister in all fairness that I think the backlog far exceeds 62 000. With the increase in the cost of land and the cost of building, I think the Minister will concede that the amount needed for Coloured housing will probably be in the vicinity of R517 million, double the figure that he gave us. There has to be a concerted effort on the part of local authorities to provide the necessary residential sites, and if they fail to provide these sites the hon. the Minister may have to wield the big stick, because we know that in certain cases they have failed to provide the necessary residential sites. We also believe that the Government may have to help them extensively financially because local authorities are having problems in relation to finance. Now, I want to say to the hon. the Minister that there are two ways of providing housing. The one way is through the public sector, in other words, through the Department of Community Development and making money available to the municipalities for economic and sub-economic housing, but I want to tell him that in that regard he has to persuade the Cabinet to allocate far greater funds to Coloured housing because the backlog is growing and growing. In relation to private Coloured housing, I should like to make an anneal to the hon. the Minister. There are Coloured entrepreneurs and Coloured builders who would like to build more houses, but their problem is that the Bethelsdorp Settlement Act, Act No. 34 of 1921, precludes a person from holding more than two plots. I should like the hon. the Minister to consult with the CRC executive which will be elected tomorrow in this regard. If they agree with me in this connection, I believe that during this very session the hon. the Minister should amend that particular Act. Mr. Chairman, my time has expired.

Mr. Chairman, since our time is limited, I am not going to spend much time discussing the speech made by the hon. member for Walmer. I just want to say that his story about the Nico Malan Theatre was exactly like a gramophone record with the needle stuck in a groove. He has been talking about this for years, even before either of us came to this House. We hear the same story over and over again.

Sir, all the other members of the Opposition basically emphasized the same point, viz. that the millennium will come for the Coloureds with political rights and greater political powers. We on this side of the House also acknowledge the value of political rights. That is why we are giving them to the Coloureds, and that is why we are helping them to make better use of what they have. But the contrast, in my opinion, is that we are trying to maintain an equilibrium. Recently, during the Coloured elections, we had the case where the Coloureds demonstrated to us unambiguously that they do not regard political rights as priority No. 1. That explains the low polling percentages. The Coloureds themselves acknowledge today that priority No. 1 to them lies on another level, viz. on the socio-economic and educational level. This is the level on which the human dignity of the individual is really determined. That is why we are pleased that the Coloureds themselves accept this identification of their need. That is why I think it is important that the new CRC and, together with that body the Department of Coloureds Relations, should accept this tremendous task in the sphere of socio-economic as well as educational demands as a challenge.

Mr. Chairman, I am not very concerned about the Government’s long-term policy in respect of the Coloureds. As far as the long term is concerned, I think that we have been set on a course along which the problems will be overcome, the solutions found and victory achieved. But from the nature of the case there is, in the short term, a great task for both the CRC and this department. I want to mention a few figures and furnish a few particulars to illustrate my point. In spite of all the wonderful achievements which we read about in this annual report, and in spite of the very fine work which is being done and planned on a long-term basis, and the splendid prospects which exists, thousands of Coloureds are still living under desperate conditions.

Approximately a year ago the Divisional Council of Stellenbosch published certain facts in the Press. Therefore these are no secrets we are disclosing here. They said their greatest problem was the approximately 12 000 illegal squatters in their area and the shocking conditions prevailing in most of the 38 known squatter camps under their control. For many of these people liquor, dagga smuggling and theft had become a way of life. This is information which was obtained from the report of the Divisional Council of Stellenbosch. Tuberculosis is by far the major health problem among the squatters. Between 70 and 80 injections are being administered per day in order to combat it. In 1973 342 new cases of tuberculosis sufferers were reported, while the number of known cases in that year stood at 3 017. Contagious jaundice was fairly general, a few cases of gastric fever occurred, and in that same year, viz, 1973, 371 cases of venereal disease were treated.

Similarly the Cape Town City Council revealed at the end of last year that their surveys had indicated that there were more than 6 000 squatters’ huts in the municipal area. This represented 36 000 people, at least, who were without housing. The estimates of the Department of Community Development indicate that in the areas of the Cape Town Municipality, the Cape Divisional Council and the Stellenbosch Divisional Council, there is a shortage of approximately 60 000 houses. This represents approximately 360 000 people who do not have proper housing. I am not even mentioning the remainder of the country now. These conditions revealed by the Stellenbosch Divisional Council exist in all squatter areas.

What is also of particular importance and significance to us is that these conditions do not exist only in the squatter areas, but also in residential schemes where people who had previously lived under such conditions have been settled or resettled. The best evidence of this I find in certain publications. The first piece of evidence I want to mention is that the Distrikspos, the local newspaper in the Hottentots Holland basin, reported last year that—

This is the one piece of evidence indicating that these malpractices continue to exist in already established Coloured residential areas. A second piece of evidence is that decent Coloured people complain to us almost from day to day about the skolly element in those housing areas. There are people who terrorize, blackmail and molest them. We find the third piece of evidence of what I am trying to say here in the annual report of the department. We read there that 24 000 problematical cases were dealt with by the seven regional welfare officers during the year under review. The serious social problems involved here are intemperance, work-shyness and child neglect.

We are making excellent progress as far as our long-term policy, solutions and prospects are concerned, but in the short term there is work for the CRC as well as for this department. In this regard I should like to make a suggestion this afternoon. I should like to see the department launching an intensive programme of adult education among these people. I should like to see the department taking the initiative in getting together a team of people consisting of ministers, teachers, welfare workers and even sportsmen, even if they have to be bought out of the posts which they occupy at present, and organizing them to form a rehabilitation nucleus, something in the nature of a modern Reddingsdaadbond, something which they can undertake on a full-time basis. They must work by themselfs and through Coloured organizations and bodies, inter alia, through the consultative and administrative committees of the Coloureds. Even Whites could be involved in local committees, particularly in smaller centres in the rural areas. In my opinion this nuclear group should organize, influence people and iniate matters. They must start an upliftment programme in every Coloured community, because we do not have time to waste as far as these problems are concerned.

The department could provide facilities, even television, and the Government could do many things, but there are certain things which have to come from the people themselves, and which cannot be given to them extraneously. It is no use our providing water, for one cannot make a horse drink. These Coloureds themselves should be utilized for the purpose of getting their people so far as to create those facilities and persuading their people to make use of them.

Qualities such as human dignity, self-respect and self-confidence must come from within, and cannot be pasted on from the outside. If I were to tell the public of the Strand form a platform that I am their MP and that they should respect me for that reason, I would be making a great fool of myself. It depends on the individual whether he compels respect and whether he is accepted by the community in which he serves. Since there is, then, such a general aspiration for human dignity and for acceptance as equal people, I think it should come from themselves.

The hon. member for Johannesburg West said last year that it is easy to remove a person from a slum, but that it is difficult to remove the slum from that person, and yet that is what has to be done with this effort. These people have to be motivated, and this can only be done by the Coloureds themselves. Dr. Van der Ross said at a symposium last year that poverty is the main problem among the Coloureds. That may be the case, but when I think of the squatters in my constituency and elsewhere, I can say that they are not always a group of poor people who live there. Living there are artisans who earn good salaries. One finds smart motor cars in those squatter towns. We have even seen Mercedes Benz motor cars there. These are people who prefer to live there, and not necessarily because they are poor. Nor shall man live by bread alone.

Why are these people poor? There is in fact a small percentage who do not work at all. But one of the major reasons for this poverty is that there is an enormous percentage of Coloureds whose economic activity is too limited. They work for two or three days a week and then try to live for seven days on what they have earned during that period. A good friend of mine, a builder, states that absenteeism among his Coloured workers is as high as 22½%. That is why I say that an organization should be created among the Coloureds themselves. I think this should be done by way of adult education to generate self-activity. This should be expanded and increased and given added momentum so that these people may also learn that labour ennobles.

In his inauguration address the State President called upon us all to rely less on and make fewer demands in respect of so-called rights, and to accept that each of us has a duty to fulfil. The hon. Opposition states that the Coloured millenium will come with political rights and powers, but they omit to state that the Coloureds will be a victim of those same political rights the day their policy has to be implemented. We on our part tell the Coloureds that they should use the political rights which have been placed at their disposal, and should, together with us, uplift their people in the socio-economic sphere, free them from their frustrations and help them to acquire a human dignity, for we believe in helping the Coloureds so that they are able to help themselves. Only they will they become a greater asset to South Africa and to Western civilization.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for False Bay manifests a strange kind of logic. He provided us with valuable information about the squatter community, but the logic which he manifests is, in the first place, that there is a distinction between a man’s political life and his economic life. In other words, that means that in some or other miraculous way the Coloureds can uplift themselves and develop virtues overnight which, would enable them to leave the squatters’ camps. We must not, he says, speak to them about political rights, because politics actually has nothing to do with their socio-economic situation.

But one has to maintain a balance.

It is about this very balance that I want to speak. There are hon. members on the opposite side who find their support in principle thinking and who believe that they always argue according to principles, also in relation to the Coloureds. We are facing this problem that the hon. the Prime Minister admits, as the hon. member for Sea Point said, that we have a dilemma in the Coloured population as far as their political and constitutional future is concerned. The hon. the Prime Minister also spelt out this problem very clearly during the no-confidence debate. He identified the dilemma and said that it concerned meaningful political rights, and that the Coloureds should get meaningful political rights. The hon. the Prime Minister went further and tried to illustrate that the Opposition are actually in a certain sense privileged, but powerless spectators in the political scene in South Africa. He referred to the Opposition in this Parliament. Even if Coloureds were here, they would not be able to change the circumstances of their own group from these benches. The hon. the Prime Minister then argued that we have to find an answer to this problem and he then came up with the idea of a Cabinet Council. What does such a Cabinet Council mean? The hon. the Prime Minister said that there would be no voting. Decisions would be reached by consensus. Members could have a say and criticize. But no one has any clarity as yet about what the constitutional status of such a Cabinet Council is going to be. I should appreciate it if the hon. the Minister could furnish us with an explanation. Here we have an interesting political and constitutional development which can take place, if we can only know what the constitutional status of such a council is. How many people will sit on it? What statutory rights do they have? What enforceable authority do they have? How can they influence the Budget on behalf of the Coloured population in a realistic way? But what is clear, is that this solution—if I can call it that—does illustrate that political bottlenecks cannot be solved in South Africa by a constitutional set-up based on the Westminister structure such as we have. It is illustrated quite clearly here, because alternative possibilities must be sought now which, according to the Government, it is hoped will be able to solve the problems of the Coloured people. We in these benches have been arguing for some time that the Westminister model cannot work and that is why we suggest a federal model. I know that the Government reject this, but then the Government should indicate to us what road we are going to follow if we are to go further with Cabinet Councils of this nature.

The second thing which it illustrates is that there is complete interdependence on all levels—on political, economic and social levels—between the Whites and the Coloureds. In other words, it is not possible for this Parliament to take significant decisions which affect the lives of the Whites, without affecting those of the Coloureds. That applies to all levels. At the same time, it is not possible either to create an institution for the Coloureds which can function in such a way that it can take decisions which do not affect the Whites. Here we have the situation which the hon. the Prime Minister is trying to solve with the Cabinet Councils. In the third place, it also means that this attempt, this constitutional experiment with Cabinet Councils, is an illustration of the fact that the CRC, as a final political arrangement for the Coloureds, has come to a dead-end. In other words, the system did not work as the Government hoped it would work, and now we have to find a way to solve it. I think that this change in the future, political set-up of the Coloured people is important, but it only serves to illustrate that the CRC does not work.

What, in the final instance, is at issue here? The point which the hon. the Prime Minister made, is that meaningful political power is at issue, and the test here is surely a simple one. What is the test which, has to be applied to determine whether any political institution has meaningful political power? In the first place: Is it autonomous or not? One must establish what autonomous powers such an institution has and whether there are any other political bodies which have jurisdiction over that institution. That is the one test for meaningful political power which has to be applied. In the second place, meaningful political power means that an institution is able to take effective decisions. One might well have an autonomous institution, but if it cannot take any effective decision which can actively change the lives of the people to whom the hon. member for False Bay referred, it is only another political institution which has no meaningful political power. Therefore the choice facing the Whites is a choice between permanent political guardianship over the Coloureds or the granting of meaningful political power to the Coloureds, in other words, the sharing of power. I know that this is a concept which, makes hon. members opposite feel somewhat unhappy. But sharing of power can take place on different levels and if it happens, or whenever it might happen, that this Parliament or this Government gives jurisdiction to an institution for a Black population group, jurisdiction which entails meaningful decision-making for them, then they ran only do it by so forfeiting, in the first place, some of the powers of Parliament as they exist at the moment, or, in the second place, diminishing the monopoly of the Whites on effective decision-making. It can take place in no other way. That is what sharing of power means. In reality, it means that this Parliament cannot establish institutions and then take decisions which can be forced upon those institutions and then say that those institutions have meaningful political power. I say that this cannot be done in terms of what the hon. the Prime Minister has suggested. Yet. I think that the onus of at least indicating the guide-lines of the kind of institution which is to be created, the kind of institution which is going to emerge from this system of Cabinet Councils, rests especially on the hon. the Prime Minister. He must tell us what the statutory power of such a Cabinet Council will be and over which areas such an institution will have jurisdiction and in respect of which only they will be able to decide. We have all the Votes here, and the hon. the Minister should tell us on which of them they will be able to decide. In the second place, we want to know to what extent they are going to be autonomous. For example, would they be able to take decisions in such a way that we shall have no say in the matter? He must also tell us whether the opposite cannot be true i.e. that we can say that there are areas in South Africa over which this Parliament does not have sovereign power. When I speak of an area in respect of the Coloured population, I do not mean a geographic area, but I am speaking about a political concept. The hon. the Prime Minister went much further than merely referring to a say, to discussions and to criticism. I should like to quote his words from Hansard. Unfortunately I do not have the Afrikaans text. In reply to an interjection made by the hon. member for Griqualand East that “It took you a long time to arrive at this pointy of view”, the hon. the Prime Minister said (Hansard, 7 February 1975, Col. 392):

In other words, by that the hon. the Prime Minister suggests that in view of the common ground which is supposedly shared by the Coloureds and the Whites, we should not establish an institution or get into a situation where one makes laws. This Cabinet Council, therefore, may lead to the situation where the Coloureds may even have a share in legislation which, originates from this Parliament, because this legislation, after all, is going to affect the Whites and the Coloureds.

I think these indications we had from the hon. the Prime Minister are important, and it would be to the advantage of everyone in South Africa if the hon. the Minister could spell out to us, with greater clarity, how we are going to deal in future with these principial problems, which I have touched upon, if we are to accept what the hon. the Prime Minister said.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Rondebosch made a stimulating speech. He put certain very important questions to the hon. the Minister. Of course, we have a political recipe as far as the Natives are concerned. With that we satisfy the need for self-determination so that they can assume their full and rightful place. The hon. member spoke of a dilemma, and I can give him the assurance that, just as we got out of the dilemma in respect of the Bantu, we shall also get out of the dilemma as far as the Coloureds are concerned.

When?

Much sooner than you think. All we must do is handle the matter very carefully. The hon. member who has now interrupted me said we should make a study of the history of the Coloureds, but as we page through, that history we see that there is nothing which has had such a degrading and destructive effect on the Coloured population as the ruinous integration process into which they were absorbed and compelled. There are virtually only two spheres in which progress was made, viz. education and religion. It is interesting and significant to know that the progress which was made in the sphere of education and religion was made according to the pattern of distinctive development. I have here the reports which prove this, but I do not have the time now to quote from them. However, there is indisputable proof that that progress was in fact made according to the pattern of parallel development.

Our official policy of parallel development is in fact aimed at the Coloureds having to find themselves. The hon. member for Port Elizabeth. Central said that we were talking at cross purposes, but it is in fact under the policy of the National Party Government that the Coloureds are now finding themselves. As the Coloureds find themselves the Whites and Coloureds will also find one another in the interests of the progress and development of both the Coloured as well as the White community, and in that way also in the interests of South Africa.

How many Coloureds are there who are going to Canada and Australia?

That does not matter; one need not calculate this in finite terms. There are many expatriates from your own party who do not return to you, but who come to this side of the House. Therefore the hon. member need not concern himself about that. To me it is very clear that the Coloureds have at last realized now that they belong to a distinctive, distinguishable community. Slowly but surely they are ridding themselves of what I call a very pathetic, or should I say, tragic and terrible inner conflict into which they were plunged. On the one hand there was the attempt to escape from their own Colouredhood, and on the other hand the refusal of the Whites to absorb them into the White community. In that conflict they had to deal with a kind of escapism, and a negative mental attitude but, fortunately, under the new dispensation one sees everywhere that there is a positive attitude among the Coloureds today, not so? The Coloureds are discovering themselves; they are finding their own path, and what is more, they are realizing that they belong to a Coloured community and because this is so, they are refusing to continue to be a kind of poor replica or an inferior appendage of the White man. They no longer want to be that. Slowly but surely we can see that under this new dispensation, that the Coloureds are developing a Coloured consciousness of their own specific interests. One discerns a Coloured-interest consciousness, and this in turn stimulates Coloured-interest progress. This in itself brings to the fore that essential unity of action or that feeling of solidarity which is so necessary among the Coloured population to stimulate them to co-operation and to managing their own affairs in their own way. I say these are the fine things which the Coloureds are doing, which we should perceive. It is in this sphere that we are doing our Coloureds in general a great service—their managing of their own interests. To me it is, as it were, as if the entire Coloured community is beginning to move. Leaders are emerging in all spheres. It is as if the new dispensation is a breeding ground for a leaders’ corps, leaders in the sphere of education, of politics of economy and of cultural life. In all the spheres of national life we see today the natural leaders of the Coloured community in action.

Why did they refrain from voting in the election?

Do not ask so many questions. Please give me a chance. I want to point out that the Coloureds are concentrating on their own community. From that flows their Coloured pride and their Coloured honour. They are moving towards Colouredhood and towards Coloured nationhood. In their own Coloured community they have a spiritual home in which they can strive to attain their ideals and achieve their desires, and can pool their strength in order to move towards a better and purer future.

Where is their homeland?

What about the homeland? They have the same homeland as we have. They are quite close to us because they speak our language, they have our established way of life, and they are occupying the same fatherland. Along the road of parallel development they will ultimately adopt the course of South Africa in the interests of South Africa. What is wrong with that?

What happened in the old United Party days? I think it is high time we went to the old political cupboards and dragged a few political skeletons across the floor of this House. In 1943 we had a policy statement from the United Party. This was in regard to housing, which the hon. member became so excited about today. What did they promise the Coloureds at the time? They said [translation]—

That is what they said to the advisory council. They then seized upon this and that was why the chairman of the Coloured Advisory Council said in his speech: “No segregation and no department of Coloured affairs.” In a statement which they subsequently issued, they said [translation]—

The United Party must tell us what their policy is. I have presented their policy here and what happened under that policy? What became of that wonderful promise? Large numbers of Coloureds were herded, as it were, into slum areas. Those slum areas were the nests of iniquity where those less well-to-do persons, and the undeveloped Coloureds, were subjected, as it were, to scandalously inhuman and crude conditions. Those same distressing evils in turn developed an exposure in which the Coloureds were as it were delivered over to a pernicious process of spiritual decay and inner mouldering. I have here before me the report of the Commission of Inquiry into the Cape Coloured Population of the Union, which is known as the Wilcocky report. If one reads this report, and reads about the moral decay of the Coloureds and of the increasing crime rate among the Coloureds, one is moved to the core by this. No wonder these circumstances ran counter to our Christian conscience as a Christian nation. Thank God there was a change of Government, a Government which came forward with the concept of parallel development, and that we are now leading these people along the right road towards finding themselves, together with the Whites, on the basis of mutual respect and esteem, so that there may be goodwill and mutual affection. Sir, hon. members on that side may laugh, but what did that strong United Party do while they were governing? Sir, the United Party is far better in opposition than it was on the Government benches. When they were sitting on the Government benches, they did harmful things, but now they are only saying harmful things. Under the United Party the Coloured population was doomed to ethnic collapse, impoverishment and degeneration. The slums which then existed, were not the homes and the workshops of the Coloureds; they were the graveyard of the Coloureds in this country. The United Party Government did nothing towards the socio-economic upliftment of those people. What did they do to restrict that degeneration and destruction? I shall tell you, Sir, what they did. They simply camoutflaged it under the cloak of “the vote on the common roll”. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, if the hon. member for Brits has based his concept and his conclusion on his own personal discussions with the Coloured people in South Africa, all I can say to him is that he has had discussions with an entirely different group of Coloured people from the group with which we in the United Party have continued to have in-depth discussions.

But, Sir, I want to refer to one particular section of the Coloured people. I believe that they represent the key personnel of the Coloureds in South Africa. I refer here to the Coloured teachers, who in many respects are regarded as the leaders in their community. They share the frustrations of the Coloured people. They share the difficulties of group areas, the difficulties of inadequate transport, inadequate postal and telephone facilities, but they also have to bear the many indignities of apartheid…

Who is to blame for that?

… such as post office apartheid and bus apartheid. These they have to bear with their people. The task that they have in the interests of South Africa and in the interest of their own people is to mould the thoughts and character of the future Coloured people in South Africa, but they operate under a depressing mantle of salary discrimination. Sir, I would like to quote just one example. To my knowledge, the Coloured teachers earn salaries which are approximately 80% of those of their White counterparts. I want to quote a specific example to illustrate my point. Take the case of a school vice-principal in a primary school. The salary earned by a White vice-principal in a primary school is R7 740 a year, and the salary of his Coloured counterpart is R5 820. In other words, there is a difference of R1 900 per annum between their salaries. But the Coloured vice-principal shares with all of us the problem of inflation. He carries an equal burden of responsibility and he experiences a greater share of frustration because he has to carry the burden of double sessions with the ripple effect which double sessions have both on the teachers and on the pupils concerned. This double session means that a teacher has to teach two sessions a day, and in addition to that, the pupil-teacher ratio in his class is higher than the pupil-teacher ratio in the class of the White teacher who has to teach only one session a day. The task of the Coloured teachers is therefore more demanding and places a greater strain on them. These teachers are working with pupils many of whom are tired and hungry because they leave home, sometimes with their elder brothers and sisters, if they have them, at just after 6 a.m. They have to go to school and have to wait almost until midday to be taken into the second session of the day’s classes. Can one wonder that under those circumstances the Coloured Representative Council in 1973 passed a resolution asking the executive committee of the council to consider the principle of introducing feeding schemes at Coloured schools, or to encourage the issue of free vitamin tablets? I know that the hon. the Minister will say that he is doing his best with the finances available. The CRC has little or no control over those finances, as my colleague, the hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central has indicated, and the funds granted are not adequate to meet the needs. What hope is there of major improvement when the latest figures available indicate that the very low percentage of 0,43% of the gross national product in 1974 was allocated to Coloured education? In figures it represents a mere R82 million out of a gross national product of over R19 000 million. So what we need is radical Government re-thinking on this matter because the position will deteriorate unless steps are taken. I think it is apposite to quote a specific example, an example which concerns the Wentworth complex in Natal, in Durban. I would say that the Wentworth Coloured village and the complex surrounding it represent one of the largest concentrations of Coloured people in the whole of Natal. We are very glad to say that there has been major development in regard to the provision of flats and houses for these people. What follows the advent of major housing development? It means that already at this stage more than 1 000 pupils are undergoing their education under the double-session system, in 24 double-shift classes. A conservative estimate by someone who should know, someone with considerable experience, indicates that with the advent of people to occupy the new housing schemes and blocks of flats which are being built, there will be an influx for the first school term in January of at least 500 new pupils. But if one takes into consideration the natural growth and the possibility of an inflow of students from other areas surrounding Wentworth, that figure could well be about 2 000. I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether he can indicate what plans there are to overcome this very obvious problem, the problem which there is now and which will only become worse as the months go by. Under the present Loan Vote I see no mention of the building of schools in the Wentworth area, or in the Durban area for that matter, apart from the completion or further development of a secondary school in Sparks Estate, which is a long way away from Wentworth. I also ask the hon. the Minister whether he can give some hope to the Coloured people in Wentworth in regard to recreational facilities where they do not exist at some schools at present. The Minister saw it. I know he is aware of the sad position which exists there, but it seems to me that the position might even deteriorate further because I understand that in the plans—although at present no money has been voted for those plans—there is proposal that the schools be extended. This means that the ground on which playing facilities could be developed, will now be used to extend the accommodation of the schools. Sir, my time is restricted and I cannot raise other matters which I would have liked to raise.

Mr. Chairman, it is alleged that while the conservative realist will throw out a ten-foot rope to a drowning man, and hold on to the end of the rope, the liberal thinker will throw out a 20-foot rope to a drowning man, then run to the next to throw out a 30-foot rope, and then on to the next to throw out a 50-foot rope, without holding on to the end of the rope. From the discussions in this debate this afternoon it appeared very clearly that this is the fundamental difference between hon. members on this side and the hon. members on that side of the House. Those hon. members are creating unrealistic expectations among a population group, while on this side of the House we have a department and a Minister which are, with positive efforts, helping people, and while they are helping people they are holding on to the end of the rope. It is a fact, Sir, that the development of a people is in direct proportion to the development and growth of its education.

Hear, hear!

I am pleased there is an hon. member on the opposite side who has heard this. If we adopt this as a criterion, then I want to allege that through the development of its education and as a result of the doors which have in that way been opened to it during the past ten years, more development has taken place for the Coloured population of South Africa than during the preceding 300 years.

Sir, I should like to emphasize what is happening for the Coloureds in the sphere of education. The number of enrolments of pupils from Sub A to Std. 10 increased by more than 53% between 1964 and 1974, to a total of 591 850. That is growth. In other words, over the past ten years the number of enrolments in these standards have increased by 205 000. Now we hear the complaint that provision is not being made for accommodation. But, Mr. Chairman, if we bear in mind that a classroom has to be provided for approximately every 30 pupils, then it means that in these ten years, with the increase in the number of enrolments, 6 800 classrooms would have had to be built to have met this need. At present, however, there are 2 105 double sessions. In other words, there is a shortage of 2 105. If I were to make a little calculation now, we would find that there should have been 6 837 classrooms to have met the needs of these 205 000 additional pupils during the period 1964 to 1974. In other words, over that period of ten years a total of 4 600 classrooms should have been built, together with the other facilities. If this is not growth and development, then I do not know what growth and development in the vocabulary of the hon. members opposite mean.

I also want to refer to another sphere in which splendid progress has been made. I want to point out that the number of pupils who passed in Std. 10 increased by 44% in 1964 to 65% in 1974. There is still room for improvement. We admit that, but with the improved qualifications which have been introduced in respect of teacher training, we know that this percentage is soon going to be far higher.

I also want to point out another very encouraging sign in the development of our education. The number of pupils who went on from Std. 5 to std. 6 has also increased. In 1964 the percentage of Std. 5’s who went on to Std. 6 was 68%. In 1972 it was 82%. Surely that is progress. Surely that is rescue-work which is being carried out.

No one said that there was no progress.

Then why does the hon. member not appreciate it? This is simply another case of throwing out a 50-foot rope and allowing the man to drown. I want to point out that the average number of pupils per teacher in Coloured schools is 30, which is quite normal. We are grateful that Coloured teachers did not hold back, and that they come forward to meet the needs of their own people. This is very important, for it is only that person who belongs to a specific nation who can educate that specific nation and set them on the right course. I also want to point out that of a total of 18 922 teachers in March 1973, 97% were Coloureds, which means tremendous progress. There were only 478 Whites attached to these schools. Most of the Whites were attached to the training colleges and the high schools. We know and believe that these people will in due course be replaced by Coloured teachers and Coloured principals. Another matter which is of the utmost importance is that in 1964 there were only two Coloured inspectors of education, while at present there are 22. This is good progress; these are the highest posts Coloured teachers can occupy. In this regard I want, from this House, to pay tribute this afternoon to those White inspectors who have from 1964 attended to the work to be done at Coloured schools. The appointment of those White inspectors in Coloured education meant a tremendous loss for White education. We must have no illusions about that. These are sacrifices which White education made for the sake of Coloured education. I think they have plucked the fruits of that because, indeed, what was a loss for White education was a gain for Coloured education. I want to suggest that those people performed a task and are today still performing a task, the value of which cannot be determined. They have, through sympathetic guidance and inspiration, really performed an enormous task in guiding these Coloureds in schools and in Coloured education towards independence and their own development. I should like to conclude with the idea that we are aware that the day will arrive when the White inspectors in Coloured education will be replaced, but on this occasion we want to pay tribute and express thanks for the great work which they have done in building bridges and giving direction to Coloured education.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Kimberley North referred to the great progress already made in the sphere of Coloured education and he will excuse me if I do not follow up on what he said. Various hon. members have already pointed out this afternoon that poverty is one of the most important, if not the most important, problem among the Coloureds. Last year, when this Vote was being discussed, I expressed a few ideas about Coloured poverty, among other things, and this afternoon I should like to elaborate further on this subject.

Last year I pointed out that among the broad lower strata of the Coloured population, poverty has become a life-style or sub-culture not necessarily related to income. It has become a life-style in which deviant behaviour—deviant in terms of the criteria we apply—such as drunkenness, workshyness, immorality and so on, are regarded as normal and usual. I also pointed out that poverty was self-perpetuating, to the extent that those people who were trapped by it were eventually unable or, still worse, unwilling to escape from it. There is insufficient time to deal fully with the vast psychological and social consequences of the poverty culture. It is disturbing enough to state that more than half of the Coloured population in South Africa are trapped in the poverty culture either directly, as far as the broad lower strata which, according to the hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central, comprise about 30%, are concerned, or indirectly, as far as the broader Coloured middle-class is concerned. The crippling and depressing effect of this sub-culture on the will and the spirit of people is not always adequately understood. The vicious circle of poverty is perpetuated by a number of factors. One of the most important is probably the poverty-stricken child. The inadequate foodstuffs, clothing and accommodation, and in addition the mentally disruptive effect on a child of over-crowding, drunkenness and violence, all contribute towards the poverty-stricken child being mentally stunted. Furthermore, the adult world of moral licence, violence and drunkenness is forced on his consciousness early in life. In this way the child grows up in a world of shadows, a world in which the way of life of poverty is established in his mind, with the result that it is with difficulty that he escapes from it, if he ever does. In this way he himself becomes the bearer of a culture, a culture or sub-culture of poverty, and in this way poverty fosters poverty. It serves no purpose to condemn this situation morally. On the contrary, we shall have to tackle in a sympathetic way a comprehensive programme of education and social reform. The success of such a programme depends to a large extent on whether Coloured leaders willing to take upon themselves the leadership and the responsibility of such a programme come to the fore.

Comparisons are often drawn between the poor Whites of the thirties and the poverty prevailing at present among broad strata of the Coloured population. Without taking this comparison any further, there is one point I should like to point to, viz. that the poor Whites in those difficult years of their existence had a larger number of leaders in the various spheres than the Coloureds have had in years gone by. However, today the position is different. In all spheres a trained, able and sophisticated Coloured leader corps is coming to the fore. It is to them in particular that I want to address an appeal to co-operate courageously so that a programme of social reform can be brought into being. Various aspects would have to be seen to in a programme of this nature. The hon. member for False Bay referred to one important aspect this afternoon, viz. adult education. I believe that a further important aspect is the pre-school child. It is of vital importance that the poverty-stricken child be saved from the poverty syndrome during the most impressionable years of his life. In this regard, serious consideration will have to be given to a major programme of pre-school institutions in which the child can be exposed to positive influences in the most critical formative years of his life. These preschool institutions can attempt to counteract the mental wearing-down process caused by poverty through a positive education programme, and they can attempt to cultivate a new sensitivity to life and a sense of values among these children. Another matter to which attention would have to be given in a programme of this nature is the income and expenditure patterns among Coloureds. I am grateful to read in the department’s annual report that research is in fact being carried out in this regard. The Market Research Bureau of the University of South Africa is undertaking an investigation of income and spending patterns among Coloureds on a house-to-house basis. In addition, a study of income and consumer patterns among Coloureds is being carried out by Professors Nel and Stadler of the University of Pretoria. The fact is that the poverty-stricken person is not in a position to offer resistenace to the high-pressure sales techniques of these modern times we are living in. The poverty-stricken person is not oriented to the future and consequently is unable to take the future into account sufficiently in his actions of the present. He operates with a different time horizon, and to him the pleasure of the moment weighs more heavily than the future. That is why the spending pattern of the poor person, of the poverty-stricken person, displays such irrational characteristics. Often, expensive articles are purchased when there is insufficient money to purchase essentials. It is these people in particular who fall prey to hire-purchase transactions. Luxury articles are brought within their reach by this means and are forced on them by modern sales techniques without their being sufficiently oriented to the future to realize that at the moment they neither need nor are able to afford these items.

This leads to misspending of the often meagre and irregular income, which simply perpetuates the process of poverty even further. In view of the large numbers of people who do business in this unsophisticated market, I believe that serious consideration should be given to doing away with hire-purchase as far as certain luxury articles are concerned. It would be preferable for people to be educated to save until they can afford the article they wish to acquire. It will of course be argued that hire-purchase at least brings a specific article within the reach of the lesser-privilaged persons. That is true—hire-purchase does place the article within their reach, but at a premium that is ultimately too high for the poor person.

Socio-economic upliftment cannot be discussed without reference to housing. The hon. member for Prieska pointed out that the Department of Community Development has already tackled a gigantic programme in this sphere and that this programme has not been lacking in success and results. I want to state as a plain fact that as long as there is overcrowding and inadequate accommodation, it will be difficult to break the cycle of poverty. Among other things, overcrowding leads to large families. On 2 June 1974, in his regular column in Rapport. Gus Adams wrote the following in this regard (translation)—

In conclusion I want to say that I am convinced that the Government is getting a good grip on the widespread problems of the Coloured community and that, seen as a whole, we are on the threshold of a period in which the Coloureds will be able to take their rightful place in various fields in South Africa.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Johannesburg West has said many things with which I agree.

It was a good speech.

Yes, it was a good speech I agree very much with his arguments and in certain respects I wish to continue the arguments which he has advanced. The hon. member has pointed out that there is what he calls a poverty syndrome, a state of paralysis into which one may be driven through constant poverty, a kind of trap from which there is no escape. This is what poverty has, in fact, done to a large section of the Coloured community of South Africa. The problems are further compounded, as the hon. member has suggested, by the dire shortage of housing accommodation. As with some other people, there exists amongst the! Coloured people a situation where no movement is possible, where there is no flexibility and no activity in the housing market. This is so simply because the shortage is so dire, so severe and so restrictive that people are not even able to make the internal adjustment between large familites and small ones and between families with children and families without children. The whole market is caught in a rigid situation of under-supply and over-demand. Until we can break this deadlock, I believe we shall not break the deadlock of poverty either.

I have made some inquiries into the situation in our main cities. It seems that, for example in Johannesburg, which is not the city with the largest Coloured population in South Africa, there is a backlog of 10 000 housing units. In other words. 10 000 family units are desperately searching for somewhere to live. In the Cape there are approximately 8 000 people seeking homes on an economic basis; another 12 000 are seeking sub-economic homes; and another 6 000 are seeking homes simply because they are not allowed to live in their “pondokkies” or shacks any longer. These are large numbers and they create a situation of hardship, misery and poverty. They create a new generation of hobos and tramps, people who have no education and who virtually escape those benefits of society which are being made available to the Coloured people of South Africa. They are escaping from the very benefits that have been put at their disposal because of the shortage of housing which creates conditions in which they simply cannot escape poverty, benefit from schooling or participate in any kind of beneficial services which are provided for their rehabitation. This is a dire problem. One might almost call it a national emergency. These people cannot be allowed to continue on this basis.

I want to put one or two suggestions to the hon. the Minister. I know that there are certain problems which are very difficult to resolve. However, one proposal I should like him to give further attention to, is the one I want to outline now. There are Coloured people who are in receipt of moderate salaries; indeed, some of these people possess strong economic resources. It would relieve some of the pressure on housing if these people were allowed to build houses for themselves. In certain places in the Cape, for example, I believe there is some land available for those Coloured people who have the means to take out bonds from the National Housing Commission or from building societies and to build their own houses. It may not be much, but at least there are some sites available for this purpose. In Johannesburg a fair proportion of the 10 000 family units that need houses are in fact willing to buy or build their own houses. However, no land has been made available to them. If the hon. the Minister and I were rich or well-to-do Coloured people in Johannesburg today and we went along to seek pieces of land on which to build houses for ourselves, we would not be able to find them. This is the actual position. Surely, a Coloured man who is economically active and who is in receipt of a decent income, should be in a position to build a house for himself if money is available—and money is available through the National Housing Commission. However, because of delays in planning and in organization, because of the enormous proliferation of departmental approvals which are required and because of the inter-departmental conflicts which need to be resolved, land has not been made available and year after year goes by while the Coloured people who could help themselves and, in so doing, the Coloured people generally because they would relieve the pressure on the housing situation, cannot go ahead because there is not enough building land available. This is something we could do a great deal about without more ado. It is most essential that those Coloured people who can help themselves, should be put in a position to do so. By helping themselves, they would relieve some of the pressure which traps the Coloured community in this absolute poverty syndrome to which the hon. member for Johannesburg West referred.

I should like to conclude by making one further plea in the brief time available to me. Since we have in Cape Town a large area—I am referring now to District 6— which already has an infrastructure and which is suitable for rebuilding or redeveloping as a residential area, I believe it is most essential that the Government should reconsider this whole matter. There are Coloured people who are rising above the poverty level of many of their fellows. They seek to escape from the environment of poverty and they seek this escape for their children as well. In many of these group areas even though a Coloured man may have raised himself to a certain level, if he is unable to escape the environment his children are also unable to escape that environment. There is no continued uplift for those who are able to rise above the ruck. As it is in White society or in any other society, it is most essential that those people who are able to create a better life for themselves, better conditions for themselves, should have the means to remove themselves physically from the environment of squalor and the environment of poverty. I believe that District Six is a place that can be used for this purpose. I believe it is a place where the skilled artisans, the technicians, the skilled tradesmen, cabinetmakers, painters and those people whom the Coloured community has produced those who possess special talents which they have developed and which are a necessary part of our Cape society, our Cape culture, can live. They cannot practise these talents in the impoverished surroundings in which they find themselves at the moment. Bring them into town; let them have a prestige area where they may associate with each other, where they may be close to the markets where they can sell their advanced skills and trades and where they will have a dose association with the suppliers of the commodities and materials they need; where they would stay in feeling with the whole of this kind of cultural development of which they are an integral part. One could create communities which could be the pride of South Africa. District Six could be a prestige area of Cape Town. We would show the Coloured people what they themselves can do. We would set an example for the impoverished Coloured people to look at with pride and to emulate. We would set them an ideal to be followed. I believe that this would have a major influence upon the development and growth of a proud and better Coloured community in South Africa.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member who has just resumed his seat, pleaded that District Six should be returned to the Coloured people. I wonder whether the hon. member realizes that that land is probably some of the most expensive ground in the Cape Province. In addition, he wants it to be given to skilled labourers. What he said was completely absurd and therefore I do not even want to elaborate on it further. In any case, he spoke so softly that I could not quite follow the rest of his speech.

I want to express a few thoughts about the fact that there are today 183 approved welfare institutions for Coloured people in South Africa. This is in addition to the voluntary welfare organizations which exist among the Coloured people This gives us a total of approximately 232.

I want to deal with one of these institutions briefly. I am here referring to the training centre for Coloured cadets at Faure. This institution is the only one of its kind in South Africa. It is a training centre at which. Coloured men between the ages of 18 and 24 receive basic training for a period of plus-minus four months. After the basic training of four months, they are allocated to different employers in the private sector. For the remaining eight months of their training they are allocated to these occupations. In the first instance, the centre is there for those who, do not have a stable employment record, and at the moment there are plus-minus 350 such young men who complete their training at this centre every four months. The aim of this centre is in the first instance to teach the young Coloured people between the ages of 18 and 24 basic discipline. The lectures are also given on hygiene, family planning, group activities, leadership qualities and many other subjects. This training centre seems to be a tremendous success and that in spite of the initial opposition from all Opposition parties in this House. To my mind the time has now arrived for the Government to give serious consideration to further extending these facilities as far as these young Coloured men are concerned. For instance, I think it has become imperative that a Northern Cape, for instance in Kimberley. Such a training centre could also be established in the Port Elizabeth area. Such a centre could be established in the Transvaal; the need really exists. The success which the training centre at Faure has achieved, is sufficient proof that we can continue on this basis and even extend it further. This then as far as the young Coloured man is concerned.

On the other hand, we also have in South Africa young Coloured girls or young Coloured mothers, the young Coloured mother who forms part of this enormous population explosion among the Coloured people in South Africa. The mother is the binding force in a family. If there is a mother the child in that family stands a chance. However, in the family where the mother is not the binding force, the child eventually suffers on account of this, and that child becomes the responsibility of the State. Therefore I plead for similar centres to be established for Coloured girls or Coloured mothers between the same ages. These centres could possibly be modelled on the same lines as the centre for Coloured cadets at Faure. The possibilities for the training of Coloured girls on this level are simply unlimited. However, the initiative for this effort should not only come from this side of the House. This initiative must be a combined effort from that side of the House as well as the factions of “bits and pieces” on that side. The political leaders should rather stop using the Coloureds as a political football for their own gain. The political leaders on that side of the House should rather see to the future and the well-being of especially the Coloured youths in South Africa. When Dr. Hastings Banda became president of Malawi, he identified the three major enemies of his nation, i.e. illiteracy, poverty and lack of diligence. Because of that he established a youth movement in Malawi which is called the “Young Pioneers”. The “Young Pioneers” is today the basis upon which the new Malawi is being built. It is no longer a movement of young people only; it has become a national movement in Malawi. If we consider the illiteracy of the Coloured people, we find in this report that there were 99 649 pupils in Sub A during the first term and that there was a drop of more than 4 500 during the fourth term. We find the same picture every year in Sub A, Sub B. Std. 1, Std 2 and Std 3, Every year there is an enormous drop in the number of pupils from the first term to the last term, so much so that during the three years from 1970 to 1972 altogether 59 700 children left the school illegally. These children simply bunked the school. If we look at the thousands and thousands of squatters, to whom my hon. bench, mate and other hon. members referred to here, who are living on or just below the breadline, if we look at the literally thousands of Brown people in any town or city or residential area in South Africa—young men and young boys and young women and young girls—who are not working or who are won’t-works we realize that Whites and Brown people have an enormous joint task in this country. Instead of coming along here every day with demands for political rights for these people, the leaders on that side of the House and especially political leaders in other councils at other places outside this House, should rather learn from Dr. Hastings Banda in Malawi and look at what is being done there for the “Young Pioneers” and then come back to this House and to other councils and rather plead that we should encourage the same national movement here among the Brown people to create a better future for them in their country, South Africa.

Mr. Chairman, various speakers have referred this afternoon to the so-called failure of the Coloured Persons Representative Council. The hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central said inter alia that the Coloureds had rejected the CRC. The hon. member for Yeoville said that the CRC might as well be done away with. Sir, whatever anyone may say about the CRC, there are two incontrovertible facts. The first incontrovertible fact is that before the CRC was brought into being, there was little question of Coloured politics in the true sense of the word. There were only limited opportunities for the Coloured leaders to serve their own people effectively and to see to their interests. The second incontrovertible fact is that when the CRC was brought into being, a spectacular change occurred, in that the Coloured became politically aware and developed politically. Coloured politics became mobilized as never before; the disunited Brown people found each other and were drawn closer to each other and, in fact, became mobilized. Sir, whatever anyone may say about the CRC, the fact remains that when the CRC was brought into being, the Coloureds were given a platform from which the Coloured leader could make the voice of his people heard, from which he could negotiate with the Government about the Coloureds’ claims and from which the Coloured leader could spell out the all-important needs of his people, whether the White people agreed with them or not. Sir, these facts in themselves already show that the establishment of the CRC was a great success. If we go further, and analyse these all-important needs of the Coloureds, then we ask ourselves whether the Coloured leaders are utilizing to the full the opportunity offered them by the CRC to meet the all-important needs of their people. There are two ways in which one could operate in this regard. The first is the make or break method, in which everything motivated by Whites must be destroyed, in which everything must be boycotted, in which the hand of co-operation extended by the Prime Minister must be rejected, in which the exclusive aim is to have integration and to be able to sit in this House; in a nutshell, in which the sole aim of that particular leader is to do nothing but selfishly put himself in the limelight, and not take purposeful action to see to the needs of his own people. But, Sir, there is a second method as well, a more positive one, and that is the method of orderly dialogue; to negotiate the Coloured cause by means of negotiation; to seize on the Government’s offer of participation in statutory bodies, participation in a Cabinet Council, and utilize it in a positive way, because what is involved here is not a person who wants to place himself in the limelight, but the purposeful furtherance of the cause of the Coloureds. Sir, the question as to which of these methods is the most effective, is undoubtedly intimately bound up to the question: What are the most pressing needs of the Coloured population in South Africa and what are the Coloured leaders striving for in this regard? It is closely linked to the question whether the leaders want to use the CRC for the primary aim of meeting these essential requirements, or whether they want to use or abuse the CRC exclusively as a platform for political purposes in whatever form. Sir, in my opinion, the most important striving of more than 50% of the Coloured population is not to acquire more political rights or other rights. These are natural things that will automatically follow and will be arranged by way of negotiation in the course of time. More than 75% of the Coloured population are not really interested in politics as such. They are interested in politics for one reason only. They want to take part in politics in order to emphasize and stress one particular need or one particular situation or one particular backlog among the Coloured population, and that is the prevailing socio-economic situation in which the Coloured finds himself and to which various speakers have referred here this afternoon. It is this issue in particular, that of their socio-economic needs, that is facing the Coloureds and that has become urgent because it affects the everyday life of the Coloureds: These people have to eat; schools must be built for them; employment opportunities must be created for them and accommodation and welfare services must be provided for them. Then, too, there are other needs, which are perhaps not of immediate urgency, but which are nevertheless also urgently needed, e.g. the productivity of the Coloureds must be increased, workshyness among them must be reduced; the wage gap must be narrowed; White/Brown relationships must be improved, and such practices as do not take account of human dignity, which may exist in the relationships between White and Brown, must be eliminated. Along this path of upliftment, the most important task of the Coloured leader is to employ his leadership cahracteristics to further the true cause of the people he serves.

I therefore believe that if the Labour Party’s intentions in regard to the furtherance of the welfare and prosperity of the people it has to represent, are honest and sincere, it will test every action and every decision against one important yardstick, viz. what is the best for the Coloured people? Will this be achieved by bringing about contact and dialogue or by rejection of this method? Will it be achieved by participation in statutory bodies, or by withdrawal from those bodies? Will it be achieved by the discussion of offensive practices around a table in order to find a solution, or will it be achieved by confrontation? If you reject representation on statutory bodies, then you are turning your back on the opportunity being offered to you to participate directly and have a direct say in, the implementation of the law as such. If you turn your back on the opportunity being offered to you to participate in dialogue, how else will you have the opportunity to state your case and the case of your people? If you reject the institutions that are being offered to you, and if you refuse to accept the offer of friendly negotiation, how, then, will you establish more and better facilities for your people? Consequently there is one fact that is as plain as a pikestaff, viz. that the Coloureds must utilize every opportunity in the CRC to further their own cause and to do so against the background and in the knowledge that they are only one of the peoples sharing the same fatherland. I believe that the Labour Party can play an important role in this regard, too, by exchanging its attitude of no co-operation for the positive alternative of negotiation; by handling verbose statements, including statements made to the Press, with circumspection, and instead of these, preferring to act and achieve results for its people as the fruit of their labour; by protesting within the CRC, if that should be necessary, but to do so at all times in the realization that this must take place in a meaningful and orderly way because the Coloured people, too, form part of a country in which other peoples are also living; and, lastly, to surmount the patent differences in the ranks of the leaders of the Labour Party, by striving with dedication to achieve the great objective of furthering Coloured interests at all times. Brown people and White people have an equally important role to interpret in South Africa, and that is to maintain law and order in this country at all levels of society, and to offer each other opportunities, and consequently White and Brown recognize that they are different, but that this difference does not constitute a barrier to mutual peaceful coexistence in this country, but is a difference that sets both White and Brown the great challenge of extending a hand to each other, and, within the framework of meaningful and friendly dialogue, negotiating to obtain the best for the various national groups and in the way most conducive to human dignity—all this for the sake of peace and prosperity within South Africa,

Sir, I listened very attentively to the hon. member for Durbanville. Owing to the limited time, however, I cannot dwell on what the hon. member said, except to point out that as far as the CRC are concerned, there are a few basic defects which amount to the fact that the CRC can never really become or develop into a political instrument capable of satisfying the full political aspirations of the Coloured population—in the first instance because the Coloureds were not consulted in that regard and, in the second instance, because the powers of the CRC to see to the total needs of the Coloured people are hopelessly too limited and, in the third instance because the sovereignty lies in this Parliament and not there. But I shall come back to that, particularly in regard to the use of the term “nation” that was also used by the hon. member for Durbanville and sometimes by the hon. member for Brits, too.

I just want to associate myself with what the hon. member for Johannesburg West said here in regard to the culture of poverty, and I want to suggest that in my opinion, the matter is so serious that just as there was a national congress to discuss the poor Whites, I think the time has now come for a national congress to be held on the culture of poverty in South Africa as well, and to decide on the best means of changing and combating that culture. I also want to associate myself with the remarks made by the hon. member who has just been speaking about District Six. In my opinion it is essential, in the interests of good relations, that we should review the position in regard to District Six.

But I should like to discuss the confusion often caused here by the use of terms. The concepts “nation”, “separate nation” and “separate identity” are often used in this House with reference to the Coloureds. It seems to me that we are really talking at cross-purposes because we are using a terminology here concerning which there is not the slightest agreement in this House. I find that among us Afrikaners there is a temptation to project our own view of what constitutes or ought to constitute a “nation” and our own experiences and history, on the Coloured population. In other words, we expect and assume that they will feel and react and see themselves precisely as the Afrikaner sees himself. Then, when we are confronted with the facts, and those facts do not fit into the pattern entirely, we escape this by referring to the Coloured as a “nascent nation”. In other words, we deal with the problem by way of a flight from reality. I want to suggest that there are six basic traits, six characteristics, which characterize people as a nation. In the first instance there must be a common historical past binding that group as a people, just as the Afrikaners’ history bound them together as a group. History bound them together as a group which could in fact be referred to as a “nation”. It is not necessary for me to tell you here what occurred in the history of the Afrikaner, but the fact is that that historical past made the Afrikaners a people. Thus there is that historical unity as a background to becoming a people, something that is entirely lacking in the case of the Coloureds. The Coloureds do not have that kind of history. The only history they know in South Africa is that of being workers for the Whites and being the subordinates of the Whites. They do not have the kind of historical past that the Afrikaner has. The second characteristic of nationhood is the possession by the group of a cultural identity of its own, usually characterized by the possession of its own language, its own religion and other similar characteristics. As far as that is concerned, too, the Coloureds do not constitute a separate nation. They do not have this trait of identity, that distinguishes a nation from other nations, either. In the third place there must be a feeling of unity. A nation feels itself to be a unit, and as such there is a consciousness of unity with a positive content. There is a feeling of belonging together. A nation feels itself to be a unit and wants to be seen as a unit, and act as a unit. In the fourth place, a nation wants to distinguish itself as a nation from all other nations, otherwise it is not a separate nation. In the fifth place, there is a common striving, there are common ideals—call it the ideal of liberation or the ideal of development to full realization—but there is a community of endeavour and ideals. Lastly: From this flows a feeling of co-responsibility for all members of a nation, a common sense of responsibility for other members of that nation. When we ask why it is that leading Coloureds do not accept the responsibility in regard to their lesser privileged brothers, the answer is that this is simply owing to the fact that the Coloureds are not a nation. In other words, there is not that self-evident sense of responsibility, that feeling of responsibility, of co-responsibility for what other members of the people do, because the concept of “a nation” does not apply to the Coloureds. The Coloureds constitute a minority group in South Africa which is distinguished from other groups in South Africa by certain elements of colour. But a nation as such is something that the Coloureds are not, nor can they become that, and the sooner we get away from this idea of seeing the Coloureds as a separate nation in terms of our political constellation, and the sooner we can get away from this temptation to project our own history and our own point of view on the Coloured people, the better it will be for us in our handling of the whole situation. Finally I want to say this: Even if the Coloureds were a separate nation—and they are not—they are inseparably united with the Whites of this country, and because they are inseparable and, as a result, it is not possible to meet all their needs by means of separable political institutions, we must seek common political structures.

Mr. Chairman, unfortunately the hon. member for Eden-vale and I will not be able to agree with regard to the argument he has just advanced. Quite probably that is the basic difference between us. Hon. members opposite have an approach to this whole matter entirely different to ours. I should like to know this: If the Coloureds are not a separate nation, why do they not say so openly to our people on the platteland? On the platteland and at political meetings, all kinds of fine proposals are made about the Coloured population. But, Sir, I do not want to allow myself to be side-tracked by continuing to discuss the arguments raised by the hon. member for Edenvale. Time is limited.

In 1948 the National Party inherited chaos in many spheres, and this was the case in respect of the Coloureds as well. At that stage the National Party had to make a choice. It had two alternatives. It could choose between the maintenance of the then status quo or it could adopt a policy of upliftment. In its election manifesto of 1948 the National Party committed itself to the principle of upliftment. It committed itself to that principle owing to the Christian principles on which this party is founded. Sir, what I ask is: Where in the world has one people done so much to uplift another people as the White people of this country have done to uplift the Coloured people? But, in addition, Sir, nowhere has any people had so much ingratitude and criticism in return for its efforts. I want to state today that it must be laid at the door of the United Party that the United Party has been responsible for the world’s ingratitude towards this party, because what has their role been in this process? Suspicion has continually been cast on the efforts made by the National Party. Negative criticism has been levelled at everything we have tried to do. Take, for example what occurred when we started to establish a separate university for the Coloureds. What was the reaction of that side of the House? They did not support it. I could mention innumerable examples of this kind. What would the United Party have done if they had stayed in power in 1948? They would have maintained the status quo of 1948. They would have given the Coloureds political rights, meaningless political rights like those they had. They would have made of the Coloureds a political football in South African politics. They had the opportunity to do upliftment work among the Coloureds when they were in power, but we inherited very little of that. The United Party attempted throughout to estrange the Coloured from the National Party by means of their propaganda. But not only that, Sir; the United Party and their later subsidiaries also consistently attempted to estrange the White voter from the National Party by proclaiming, particularly on the platteland, that they would keep the Coloured in his place. That is what they said.

In 1970 a political meeting was held at Malmesbury and a prominent member of Parliament of the United Party at the time mounted the platform and said: “Vote for the United Party. We shall keep the Coloured in his place.” That is what he said, Sir, but he did not use the word “Coloured”; he used another word. I move among my voters every day, and even today the United Party is waging a propaganda campaign on the platteland in which they are proclaiming that the Government is supposedly doing so much for the Coloureds. They are still doing so. [Interjections.] Sir, what is the motive behind the National Party’s policy of upliftment? If one were to analyse it, one would say that the National Party’s first motive is its Christian duty. It sees the Coloured as its fellow man who ought also to have a favourable dispensation in this country. In the second place, the National Party sees the Coloured as a minority group who must be protected against domination by numbers. From our own history and position we know what it means to be threatened by numbers. The National Party Government has followed a policy in accordance with which the Coloured is protected against the numerical superiority of the Bantu. When we look at the statistics, we see that the National Party made a start in 1962 with the elimination of Bantu labour where possible. The increase in the number of Coloureds employed in Government departments between 1962 and 1973 was 20 830. The number of Bantu increased by 804. In other words, we are succeeding in this aim. We are protecting the Coloured against competition by the large numbers of Bantu with whom he has to compete. The Government’s motive is that it wants to uplift the Coloured because it realizes that the Whites and the Coloureds will live together as two peoples in this country, that we shall share the same territory and that we shall develop alongside each other along parallel lines. We as Whites would prefer to live with developed people than with underdeveloped people. The Coloureds are people who are different to us in many respects. They are people who will have an understanding of the difference between us, but also of our common problems and aims. That is what we are striving for. In the fourth place it is our motive to uplift the Coloureds as a people for the benefit of South Africa and not to cause them to be of greater service to the Whites. We should then have followed an entirely different policy. We should then have followed a policy very close to that followed by the United Party before 1948. We are following a policy of enabling the Coloureds to be of service as individuals and as a people, to their own benefit and to the benefit of our country. We have never denied that we need the Coloured people in this country. We need them, and consequently they must be uplifted in order that they may join us in serving the interests of South Africa. With this motive in mind the Government has concentrated on all aspects of Coloured national life. There has been development in the sphere of education, at the professional, technical, university and all other levels. We have concentrated on socio-economic development, e.g. improved housing. The statistics speak volumes. In 1974 the Secretary for Community Development reported that for the first time, more housing was being provided than was required by the population increase. This means that we can now make up the backlog. Between September 1973 and December 1974 approval was granted for the construction of 30 000 dwelling units. We are making progress and we are certainly going to eliminate this backlog. We have also provided better wages, salaries and pensions. Improved employment opportunities have also been provided in many fields. In addition, we have seen to the development of entrepreneuring class. Here one cannot omit to mention the role of the Coloured Development Corporation. It is this which constitutes the surest proof that the motives of the National Government in uplifting the Coloureds are honest, viz. that it is prepared to lead them towards autonomy, towards assisting themselves to develop their own business enterprises and even to compete with White initiative. In the 12 years of its existence the Coloured Development Corporation has established 341 business enterprises with a capital of more than R9 million. 297 of these are in the hands of Coloureds. We have gone further, too, and told the Coloureds that we would give them a share in the defence of the country. In this regard I want to refer to the recent inauguration of the State President, when White and Brown soldiers lined both sides of the street. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I want to tell the hon. member for Malmesbury that I listened attentively to his speech, and in my opinion he covered a wide field. He can substantiate the statements he made and I want to thank him for a very fine contribution. I just want to come back briefly to the speech by the hon. member for Edenvale who made a few interesting statements here. I cannot find fault with the broad scientific facts he stated. In fact, I think he is quite right. However I want to tell him that in determining what is a nation, there are probably quite a number of things he could add to those he mentioned today. One could take into account the theories of Ruth Benedict, Martin Opler and various others, too. I think it would be interesting to follow up briefly this hon. member’s argument, particularly with regard to his view of the Coloureds in South Africa today. If he cannot identify the Coloured group of South Africa in any way—I just want to refer to this fleetingly—with the norms he himself laid down as those with which a group would have to comply in order to be a nation, then I should like to see how he sees the Coloured population of South Africa in terms of the present policy of the United Party, their federation policy. If he does not see this clearly within a federal system, then the hon. members must accept that according to their policy, the Coloureds will form an integrated whole in the greater White unity. If he argues from that premise, I shall concede the point to him, but within the federation policy, I think the hon. member ought to look at this again.

I actually want to come back to my own speech. I want to tell the United Party that I accept their bona fides, viz. that to them, the retention and continued existence of the White man with his identity, his aspirations, and so on, are inherent in the federal system. However I cannot see this in the policy of the two other parties in the House, those two parties which, at the end of the year, will be stepping out to the tune of Mendelssohn’s or some other wedding march. This debate on the Coloureds is taking place in a world in which there are very difficult circumstances. Not one of us on either side of the House fails to realize that the world is battling with major problems today with regard to population issues and ideological issues. We know that there are many peoples, leaders and political parties who are sincerely and honestly seeking a form of relations politics in the world in terms of which people will be able to live quietly and peacefully without war or the threat of wars. I think that this side of the House, although we follow a policy that appears to be despised and held in contempt by many people in the world, is also seeking a solution of South Africa’s population issue in that spirit. This afternoon we have listened here to three of the new leaders of the joint future Opposition, viz. the hon. member for Sea Point, who, probably owing to preparations for the wedding, is not present at the moment, the hon. member for Yeoville, who is busy with his bride’s outfit, his trousseau, and the hon. member for Rondebosch. [Interjections.] Listening to these three hon. members this afternoon, one is forced to analyse the liberalistic ideas here in South Africa and to come to the conclusion that the liberalist’s premises are to a large degree false ones. The point is that they have never really learned the reality of the situation in this country and that they argue from an entirely false premise. I want to tell the hon. member for Rondebosch that he made a very interesting analysis today of the hon. the Prime Minister’s point of view concerning our Coloured policy. I think that that, too, could form a very interesting debating point between him and his erstwhile academic colleagues in the country. It will be interesting to analyse these matters and to test them against existing norms and points of view on politics, autonomy, etc. Where the hon. member and his colleagues fail, is in that is very easy to criticize the National Party in regard to the policy it holds out as a solution to the relationships between the Coloureds and the Whites. The handling of the population issue in South Africa by the liberalists and the hon. members opposite is such that they do not have a place for the White man. It is very easy to find a solution to the South African population issue by simply reasoning away the White man. I want to tell the hon. member for Rondebosch that for an Afrikaner to sit where he is sitting, means writing off his own identity, because for him there is no meaning or significance in doing so. I accept that. In any living organism there can be cells that die, or the hon. member may tell himself that that does not interest him at all. I accept that one gets people like that and certain Afrikaners are used for that. The point I want to make is that according to the premise of this small liberalistic group in South Africa which has existed for centuries, and which is no new phenomenon …

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

The hon. member will understand that I only have ten minutes for my speech and therefore it will be a little difficult to answer a question. As far as that hon. member is concerned, I am in a cheerful mood today. According to their premise there is no room for the White man and his diversity. There is no place for the Afrikaner and his heritage; nor is there place for the English-speaking person with his heritage and diversity; nor is there place for another nationality. Last year we pointed out that in the approach adopted by those hon. members there was no place for the Coloured who really wanted to be a Coloured—there are those among them who are proud of it, nor is there any reason why they should not be proud of it. The point I want to make is that the small Opposition party lacks a solution to the problems of South Africa, because the White man has no place in their solution.

I want to come back to the hon. member for Yeoville. He spoke so loudly that no one could hear him. He stood up here and spoke very theatrically and melodramatically about what we had to do for the Coloureds. However, that hon. member was elected to this House with the support of the United Party. At this stage he cannot even be certain whether he will obtain a majority in his own constituency. The hon. member for Yeoville acts on the same kind of premise as do the hon. members of the Progressive Party. For example he, too, stated that there were no Coloureds present here and that consequently we could not talk about them. In the centuries and years ahead we shall have to discuss relations with the Coloureds in this House even when the policy of the National Party has reached its full and logical consequences. We shall also discuss relations with the Indians and with the various Bantu groups. There is one thing I want to say to hon. members opposite, and that is that for many centuries there was discussion of my people and my party when my people were not present. In the same way, there is discussion of our future in the Councils of the world today, and I want to say that if there were one-thousandth of the goodwill of the National Party and the Whites that support it in those councils that meet in Africa, the East, America or Europe, I should sleep far better this evening. There is discussion of my future, the future of my children and the future of my fellow countrymen.

That is an entirely different argument.

I left the hon. member for Hillbrow and his party out of my speech and confined myself to this small group of people sitting on the right hand of the hon. Opposition.

South Africans are being discussed.

We are discussing a period in the future of South Africa when South Africa will attain to full development. We are not talking as if all population problems have been solved. That is the very problem. I repeat that a great deal has been said about my future and that of my fellow countrymen. This was done in the time of the United Party as well. There was a period in the history of the United Party when decisions were taken in their caucuses and their council chambers concerning the future of my people without there being a place there for my people, for my language and my culture. [Time expired.]

Mr. Speaker, I move—