Mr. Chairman, there are still a few matters to which I just want to reply briefly. Four of the hon. members who spoke on Friday, spoke about environmental matters. The hon. member for Bloemfontein North spoke about the question of noise and combating noise. I think it was fitting that he did so in a subdued way! As far as the question of noise is concerned, a few aspects can be mentioned. The first of these is the research aspect, in which the C.S.I.R. is very actively engaged by means of its National Physical Laboratory. It has also fitted out a mobile unit, which is visiting different cities of the Republic at the moment, and stays in a city for about 15 weeks. There the unit makes recordings of street noises, the noise made by pneumatic drills at construction works, etc. The unit will be in Port Elizabeth soon. It will make recordings of the noise intensity in the various cities of our country. It is engaged in conducting the most modern research in the world in co-operation with international organizations in this field.

Apart from the question of research, there is also the question of noise at the construction sites of buildings. In this regard, too, the Building Research Institute of the C.S.I.R. is very actively engaged in conducting research and experiments, for example, into the manner of construction of a factory, a school, and so on. Then of course, there is the question of planning. The matter of combating noise is also a question of planning, of how one plans a town or a city. By means of sound planning, which is included in the guide plans we discussed on Friday, one can plan in such a way that one eliminates noise in certain parts of one’s environment, for example, where hospitals, residential areas, etc., are situated. So the question of noise is enjoying proper attention. I think the hon. member made a fine contribution by just reminding us of that once more.

The hon. member for Umhlanga also spoke about the environment. He pointed out the importance of educating our people, especially our young people. The hon. member for Springs associated himself with that. It is really an excellent code which the Boy Scouts have and which the hon. member mentioned to us. It is something exceptional. The hon. member for Springs also advocated that we should cultivate our youth organizations, our young people, in particular, so as to make them more aware of their environment. We shall take cognizance of these suggestions. We shall also consider the suggestions made by the hon. member for Springs, viz. that a lapel button be designed which, in co-operation with school principals, can be given to pupils or groups of pupils, who have possibly shown through their actions at school or in extra-mural activities that they deserve them. We can give attention to that. As far as the question of plastic containers and other sorts of containers which are thrown away and which can be replaced, is concerned, I just want to say that we received a very thorough report about these. We received this report very recently, a few months ago. I was under the impression that we had sent it to hon. members. However, I shall go into this. Arising from that report, we shall consider how we should act in this connection with reference to a second report. We shall not take precipitant action in this matter. We shall proceed with great circumspection. Therefore, I can tell the hon. members that we are giving careful attention to this matter.

As far as the hon. member for Benoni is concerned, I can say that we shall take the power, in a Bill which will come before this House soon, to reserve certain areas, such as those for which the hon. member delivered a plea. We want to reserve these areas as nature reserves. In this connection, I may announce that the Transvaal Provincial Administration, through its Division of Nature Conservation is giving consideration at the moment to buying the summit areas of the Magaliesberg range between Pretoria and Rustenburg over a period of time. Once the Bill has been passed by Parliament, and until those purchases can be made, we shall be able to reserve that series of summits of the Magaliesberg range as a nature reserve of this kind. Then the Provincial Administration of the Transvaal will be able to buy it in the course of time. The hon. member also raised the question of coastal areas. He spoke, inter alia, of Bokbaai and Ganzekraal. I just want to say that I agree whole-heartedly with the hon. member in respect of the preservation of Bokbaai. I just want to make this point here, because it is part of our approach. A plea has been delivered here for space for our Brown people. Then one goes and buys a farm such as Ganzekraal to help to provide that space. Then there are other interests who object to that, because that action is not reconcilable with another facet which they envisage.

Although I cannot go into this thoroughly today, nevertheless, I owe the hon. member an answer in connection with High Noon. I have already said that we in South Africa now have a committee which is studying all our mountain areas. When the committee’s report has been completed, all of us who are involved in this, will act according to the recommendations. Rightly or wrongly, permission was given for a certain development to take place at High Noon. It was approved in principle. I do not want to go into all the details now. I am prepared to make all the fact available to the hon. member. However, I just want to tell the hon. member that there are a very limited number of sites which may be sold. Extensions will never be possible. There will be no business rights at all. The owners will have to erect more than that number of chalets for people who spend the night there, because this is an exceptionally good game reserve within easy reach of the people of the Peninsula. There are hardly any foreign tourists who come to the Cape who are not taken to High Noon. I have been there, and it is worth paying it a visit. These chalets will cater for overnight visitors. A limited number of sites have been approved for sale but, as I have said, there will be no business rights at all. I am convinced that nobody but a nature lover will try to buy one of those sites. Rightly or wrongly, we gave our approval, but we are engaged at present in making a survey of the whole country’s mountain regions, and we are going to lay down guidelines for the future in accordance with this survey. We shall not be able to preserve everything. We shall have to find a way of making it possible in some way for the public at large to enjoy the natural beauty of our mountains without any harm being done to nature. If the hon. member is interested, I shall let him have the long list of conditions attached to that approval.

The hon. member for Carletonville said, as I understood him, that all planning must take place within the framework of the body politic. I agree whole-heartedly with that. Physical planning can only take place, in any country, within the framework of political planning, in other words, within the framework of Government policy. In a communistic state, for example, planning will take a certain form. We in South Africa, just to mention one practical example, have a method in terms of which we live separately in a certain way, and we effect this by means of a Group Areas Act; that is the country’s policy and we deal with that aspect of physical planning in terms of the country’s policy. I think it is quite simple. I agree with the statement which the hon. member made here, and I leave his speech at that.

In connection with the needs of our Coloureds, about which the hon. member also spoke, I just want to say in conclusion that this is a matter which weighs heavily with us and with me. We know what the figures are at the moment for South Africa, for the Cape Province and for the Western Cape. We know what figures we can expect by the end of the century, and consequently we cannot proceed with our eyes closed. We are trying to look into the question of whether we can perhaps bring about favourable economic development at places such as Worcester, Beaufort West, De Aar and Upington, just to mention a few examples, so that all Coloureds do not need to migrate to the city. Sir, we are under no illusions. The Coloureds in South Africa have freedom of movement; they may go wherever they want. Just as the Whites have been migrating to the cities over the past decades, so it virtually goes without saying that the Coloureds will also migrate to the cities, and for that reason we shall try to create work opportunities and a future for them as far as is possible, at these places which I have mentioned and also at others which I have not mentioned. We are also trying to create space for them here in the Western Cape. We have tried to do so here on the Cape Flats in the Peninsula; we are trying to do so by means of the Dassenberg/Mamre/Darling development as well as the development at Saldanha Bay, which can become very extensive, much bigger than we have been planning it up to now, and which has great possibilities. As far as I am concerned, I feel that we have actually reached a stage when we must plan space for the Coloureds. In the past we planned residential areas for them. The latest approach of my department and I is still to plan residential areas for them, but we want to plan these in such a way that these areas can develop into attractive towns.

But I feel that we should now begin planning space for the Coloureds and this is the first manifestation thereof which we have now, in this fine and large area which we have already proclaimed and can proclaim still further and also in the Saldanha Bay area, in that vicinity. I think we should still look at what we can do in Namaqualand. In the past few days I read the first White Papers on the Orange River project, the White Papers which were tabled in Parliament. Under one of the phases, there were 5 000 morgen which would come under irrigation in Namaqualand for Coloured farmers. I am looking into that because I think our department would like to try to include that in the planning which we want to promote there.

Then one of the hon. members asked why the copper refinery was coming to Faure. I think it was the hon. member for Kuruman who asked that. I have done my best to have that refinery next to the Orange River, at Upington, for example, because it is not only the copper from one place which comes to the refinery. They produce copper at O’Kiep and Nababeep and at Tsumeb in South West Africa and at Copperton in Prieska and they are now going to produce it on a fairly large scale in the Aggeneis vicinity. Then we looked for a possible place for joining all these points. We could do this at the Orange River. Theoretically we would have been able to plan a very large complex there on the grounds! of Coloured labour, another large-growth point in the interior of South Africa. But it is not for us to dictate to companies. They decided themselves that they did not want to go there. Nor did they want to be at another place, and we have no authority or power to tell a company it may not go to Faure. The only power I have is in terms of section 3 of the Physical Planning Act and that only relates to Bantu labour, but if a firm employs Coloured labour it may go wherever it pleases, I am just mentioning this. In Namaqualand I hope we shall be able to have a further large growth point and space for Coloureds, somewhere along the Orange River, and we shall not lose sight of this idea.

Sir, with that I want to conclude. I should just like to thank hon. members very much once more for their contributions to the debate.

May I ask a question? I should like to hear what the hon. the Minister’s approach is towards the protected landscapes about which I spoke, and whether he takes any principles into consideration as far as that matter is concerned.

Protected landscapes?

For example, the Boland rural landscape and the Eastern Free State and the Eastern Province, about which I spoke.

If it is agricultural land to which the hon. member is referring, I should like to repeat that the Cabinet took a decision that agricultural land was a matter of the highest national importance to us. This department must identify agricultural land in its planning and reserve it for agriculture.

May I just point out that I mean the type of thing which is done in Holland and also in Britain, where the character of the landscape is preserved with its houses and its cultural background.

My department has no legislative power in that regard at the moment. The Department of National Education is the proper body which can preserve that sort of natural monument for posterity.

I should like to thank hon. members once again for a fruitful discussion. It showed once again that the Department of Planning is playing a very important role and will have to fulfil it to an even greater extent in the future. Before resuming my seat, I want to avail myself of this opportunity to convey my sincere thanks to both my departments and all their officials for the good work they are doing.

Mr. Chairman, this afternoon this Committee is to be asked, in the space of 1½ to two short hours, to deal with the responsibilities of the Department of Public Works. I am sure I do not need to tell the hon. the Minister, but I am sure that there are members of this House who require reminding of the responsibilities which this Minister and his department have. His first responsibility is the determination of accommodation requirements for all the Government departments, and perhaps more important than that even is the determination of the priorities for the provision of this accommodation, after the departments have indicated to him what their requirements are. Then, of course, there is the provision and assignment of accommodation for these departments. The hon. the Minister also has control over the efficient and optimum use of the accommodation which is available. And last, but by no means least, he has the responsibility for the adequate maintenance and repair of all State buildings. This is a mighty task, and when we look at the Votes which you have just put, Mr. Chairman, we find that it involves the expenditure of over R1 000 million on works which have already been approved. When we look at the report of the department—and I must congratulate the officials of the department on this report, which becomes more and more comprehensive and more readable every year—we find that works in the planning stage of the order of another R400 million are in the pipeline. In respect of the South West Africa Revenue Vote, we find another R100 million. So, what we are dealing with here this afternoon is an amount of R1 500 million of State money, of public funds, if you want to look at it that way. This, I believe, places a tremendous onus not only on us as members of the Opposition, but on every member of this House, to see that that R1 500 million is spent wisely, that the work is done efficiently, and that there is no wastage of State funds.

Sir, we told you and this Committee last year how we felt this department should be run. We felt that it should become an expert planning and supervision department only, and that it should be separated from the Public Service Commission in order that the hon. the Minister would be able to obtain the highly qualified professional personnel required to run this department. We felt that he should have a small staff of professionals, with his own Tender Board, and that he should make more and more use of the private sector to do the donkey work. In addition, Sir, every member of this House has a personal interest in this matter because of constituency requirements. I do not believe that there is one member of this House who at one time or another has not been to the Minister or the department to ask for a police station, a post office or some other office which may be required in his constituency. In the short time which we have available to discuss this Vote, it is impossible to make these requests. That is why we suggested to the predecessor of the hon. the Minister that he should establish a permanent Select Committee, a standing Select Committee where members of this House would be able to put their case and where they would be able to discuss with the officials of his department the requirements of their particular constituencies, as well as matters of wider importance to the Republic as a whole. Do you know, Sir, that his predecessor, the late Mr. Blaar Coetzee, accepted this as an interesting proposal which he was going to consider. He went so far as to say that he found no fault with it at all. But unfortunately nothing has come of that. I want to suggest to the hon. the Minister this afternoon that he should apply his mind to this question and consider whether it would not be possible to establish such a Select Committee, which I believe would be to the benefit of the country as a whole. It would be of benefit not only to us in the Opposition benches, but to the Minister himself and to all members of this House. I believe that this has become an urgent necessity for various other reasons as well. The hon. the Minister knows that we have repeatedly asked him for a list of priorities. Questions have been asked about this. We want to know what the backlog is in spending. We want to know whether there has been any wastage of money. We want to know whether contracts have been awarded without tenders and we want to know about the efficiency and performance of this department. In an endeavour to ascertain these matters, we have been forced and compelled to ask questions in the past and during this session as well, but unfortunately we have come to a point where the replies given to these questions are now being made suspect and that we have to look deeper than the replies which are given. I refer to written question 305 by the hon. member for Walmer and answered by the hon. the Minister. The hon. member asked whether any works had been held back in the past two years for a lack of funds. The hon. the Minister said “No”. There were various supplementary questions which followed on this, but when the hon. the Minister answered “No” on that occasion the other supplementary questions fell away. But what do we find when we look at the report of the Secretary for Public Works for the financial year 1973-’74? The very first sentence reads as follows:

But the hon. the Minister says that none have been held back because of a lack of funds. This is another reason why I believe that we should have a Select Committee where we can question the hon. the Minister and officials of his department in an effort to get to the bottom of what is happening. I want to say that these matters I have just mentioned as ancillary to my plea for a Select Committee and why a Select Committee should be instituted, will be dealt with at greater length by other hon. members on this side of the House later on in the debate. At this stage I want to demand of the hon. the Minister that he should at least give attention to this matter. In fact, I go so far as to say that we in the Opposition demand the establishment of such a Select Committee.

In the two minutes that are left to me I want to make a plea to the hon. the Minister. He is the person who is concerned with the building industry. He, through his department, controls the building industry in this country. More and more builders and architects are becoming more and more frustrated every day with the morass of red tape and restrictive regulations with which they have to deal when they are trying to get plans approved. The first point is that there are regulations, one can almost say of a frivolous nature, which have been instituted simply to make things difficult. Then there is the difference which applies between one control area and another control area, whether they are local authorities which are controlling, provincial authorities who are controlling or even Government departments which control development. The sort of thing you get is that a set of plans is returned to an architect and he is asked to rename a room which has been marked “reception” to “waiting-room”. Plans are returned to him to rename a room which is marked “laundry” to “store-room” in order to comply with local regulations. I do not for one moment plead for central control, because it will be* totally fatal to the building industry in this country if, say, the hon. the Minister’s department or the department of the hon. the Minister of Planning and the Environment was to become the one controlling body. This would be utterly fatal, I believe that the hon. the Minister should take it upon himself, through the bodies which he has at his disposal, through the Architects’ Association, the Master Builders and all these bodies which liaise through his department, to see that some sort of standardization of requirements is brought about. Hundreds of man-hours are being wasted on these “trivia”, as it was put by one of the architects who I do not think I should name. In this way I think the hon. the Minister will do a service to the country as a whole. The big thing is, of course, the difference between different areas.

The last thing I want to deal with is the question of the wage gap. The hon. the Minister knows that our policy on this side of the House is that the rate for the job must be paid to all workers. I asked the hon. the Minister a question a little while ago regarding the wages paid to employees in his department. I now refer to written question 299. The hon. the Minister told me that 432 White persons and 43 Coloured persons are employed by his department as artisans. He then told me that the wage scale for Whites was R2 850 x R150 —R3 300 x R180—R4 380. The wage scale for Coloured painters was R2 700 with no increments and the wage scale for Coloureds employed in other trades was R2 850 with no increments. Why no increments? Why should these people not receive an increment in pay the same as the Whites do? At least the hon. the Minister grants other artisans the same commencing salaries as he grants his White artisans, i.e. R2 850, but why are they not given an increment? Why should their salaries not be increased as they stay on in the department? I wonder if this is why we only have 34 Coloured artisans employed in his department? I do not blame the Coloured workmen for not staying to work in his department.

Forty-three.

I wonder if the hon. the Minister can tell us why there should be no increments for Coloured artisans? [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg South raised an interesting idea in connection with a Select Committee on Public Works.

His ideas are always interesting.

Oh, make your own speech, Uncle Sergeant! Naturally, I cannot react to it at this stage. I presume that the hon. the Minister will react to it because not everybody will realize what its implications may be. The hon. member for Pietermaritzburg South referred to an answer given by the hon. the Minister to a question about the decrease in building activities. He wanted to know whether there were any curtailments. He read the first sentence of a paragraph to support his argument that there was in fact a decrease in building activities and a curtailment. However, if he had read on, for instance the part which deals with architects’ services, it would have been obvious that the decrease in services can be attributed to a curtailment of the department’s building programme in the financial year 1972-’73, while the hon. member’s question specifically dealt with the past two years. It is understandable that for this department to submit a list of priorities to Parliament is practically impossible, because the department provides housing for consumer departments purely according to their own priorities. Therefore, if the Department of Police should decide that Bishop Lavis should get a police station as a matter of priority, the department would simply have to place it on its priority list. However, if the Department of Police should change its internal priorities tomorrow, it would disrupt the priority list of this department completely. In practice, therefore, we can hardly expect this department, which has to deal with all the requirements of these consumer departments, to draw up a priority list. So much as far as the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg South is concerned.

I want to avail myself of this opportunity to make special mention of the fine contribution that this department made during the Cape Town Festival. I am referring in particular to the impressive way in which this Parliament building was lit up during the Cape Town Festival. I do not think we as members always realize what a beautiful building this is. I think we actually only realized it when we saw it brightly lit up in the evening. Architecturally speaking, this beautiful building of ours is completely dominated by the Marks Building across the street. This building is seen as being totally cramped for space because of that old building across the street.

Nonsense!

To my knowledge, that building has no historical value. I know the hon. member for Benoni prides himself on being a conservationist as far as this subject is concerned, but he will have to prove to me that the Marks Building has any architectural or historical value. Our Parliament building really has a great lack of space in which to accommodate its staff and the library. Some members of Parliament are accommodated on the fifth floor of the Marks Building and our library which probably has one of the largest Africana collections, has to hide this collection in small rooms and passages underneath the building. In other words, what should be available to the whole nation has to be hidden in the building because we really do not have the space for it. What I consider to be the largest problem concerning our building complex is that there is no suitable hall in the true sense of the word in which the official opening of Parliament can be held. Every year furniture has to be moved out of the Senate hall and be replaced by chairs to make provisions for the opening. One hates to think of the damage caused to the furniture and the panels when the furniture is moved about every year. In addition, this hall has become completely unsuitable and inadequate for us, as a result of our large number of members of Parliament. When I speak of a large number, I am not referring to the Opposition, because they only form a small number. This is the reason why such an absolute limitation is imposed upon the number of guests and visitors when that truly memorable occasion, the opening of Parliament, takes place. In spite of the fact …

Order! I want to request the hon. member not to go into the matter too deeply because this matter concerns our internal affairs of Parliament which are irrelevant in the discussion of this Vote.

Mr. Chairman, you must just allow me to say one more sentence before I end my discussion of this matter. I simply want to say that the limitations which are imposed still do not prevent us from sitting there packed like sardines, which must be quite a safety risk in itself.

The question I want to ask after this long preamble which you, Mr. Chairman, did not like, is whether the Marks Building can meet the existing and urgent needs. I want to say at once that it certainly cannot. According to all norms the Marks Buildings is an uneconomic and an unsuitable building.

Who said that?

In other words, it is designed in such a way that not 50% of its total floor-space can be utilized. It is almost like the hon. member for Umlazi, who has an enormous volume, half of which he does not need. In other words, nearly half of the floor-space of that building is not used effectively and is wasted. In addition, the site of the Marks Building cannot be fully utilized and incorporated into the Parliamentary complex without having that building demolished. I understand that the area on the one side of Plein Street has already been expropriated and that the buildings will be demolished to make provision for a block of offices. What I want to ask is whether we should not consider the possibility or the desirability of demolishing the Marks Building. If this is done, this site and the Parliamentary grounds will form a whole where we can erect a podium building in which provision can be made for a presidential hall in which the opening of Parliament and presidential functions can take place. If this is done, there will also be more space in front of the Houses of Parliament for the processions, etc., which precede the opening ceremony.

You are propagating inflation.

The hon. member for Benoni is so endlessly troublesome. We have made him a gift of ten minutes in which to make a speech and I wish he would rather make use of these ten minutes. Now one foresees that it will be possible to close Parliament Street with ornamental gates on the eastern side and that this Parliamentary building, together with the new complex on the site of the Marks Building, the Hendrik Verwoerd Building, the Tuynhuys and Stal Square will form a unit which can be closed with ornamental gates on the Stal Square side as well. These are not new ideas which I am raising here today and it may not be the last time either that these ideas are raised. But the fact remains that as far as Stal Square is concerned, a very strong feeling has existed over the years that it should be developed for an underground parking garage and a garden on top, so that the whole complex, but especially the Tuynhuys, the Presidential’s residence, will be displayed to its best advantage. We believe that South Africa will be destined to play an increasingly important role in Southern Africa and that the more the tension in the world and especially in Africa is relaxed, the more important diplomats and other people will visit us here. For this reason I think it is vitally important that the complex in which the legislature of South Africa is accommodated should be impressive, a proud example of our own achievements. We really owe it to South Africa.

On a shorter term I want to urge the hon. Minister to try and persuade the Cabinet to purchase the St. George’s Grammar School, which is situated behind the Houses of Parliament and is not being used any more, to provide in the specific needs of Parliament in the meantime. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, when one considers a Vote such as Public Works, it is of considerable interest to look at what sort of buildings the department is building. In a way an analysis of the expenditure under this Vote, reflects the priorities of our Government when it comes to spending money on public buildings. I think it is quite salutary for us to look at where this money is going, and if one does so, one comes up with some very interesting answers. One can look, for example, at the building of Police stations, prisons, law-courts and buildings for defence purposes. Under these four heads we see that from a total budget under Loan Vote B of nearly R116 million, nearly R12 million or 10% is spent on prisons, R31 million on defence buildings, R6 750 000 on Police buildings and R2 250 000 on buildings for the Department of Justice. In other words, the department is spending R52 million or 44% of its total expenditure under this Loan Vote on buildings which fall in these four categories. I find it very interesting indeed that we should be spending 44% of our public works budget on what can be termed security buildings. That is when I begin to start wondering about our priorities. It has always been my belief that in any State a contented, happy and well-educated population will get us more security than all the prisons, Police stations and defence buildings one can possibly build. Although nobody can deny the necessity for such buildings, I think it is an indictment of the policies of our Government that so much money has to be spent in this connection. I know that the hon. member for Umlazi, for instance, has strong opinion on the quality of accommodation provided for our Police Force, but I believe that when it comes to priorities, expenditure on schools, for example, is far more important than virtually anything else. I know that this is not the responsibility of this hon. Minister, but we are discussing Loan Vote B and when one compares how much this department is expending on the building of Coloured schools, Indian schools and White educational establishments, those that fall under the Minister of National Education, and what is being spent on security buildings, one sees that in respect of schools the figure is just over R27 million, approximately half of what is being spent on buildings connected with matters of security. I also found that we are spending R1 350 000 on industrial training centres for Africans. I think that this figure far more than any other indicates just how wrong our priorities are, because we can afford to spend only R1 350 000 on industrial training centres for Africans while we spend 30 times as much, money on security buildings. Therefore, we are just not spending our money in the right way at all. I should like to say that we just cannot afford it to spend only such a small part of our budget on matters of vital importance to the future of South Africa. There is simply no use at all in building up a huge superstructure of security, unless one can expend an equivalent amount or more on the uplifting and education of our underprivileged Black and Brown South Africans. If we do not uplift them and if we do not spend this amount of money, all our expenditure will go for nothing ire the long run. However powerful our defence force is, however strong and well-housed our Police Force, however palatial our law courts, however huge our prisons are, we will not be able to save South Africa in this way. The social upliftment of the inhabitants of South Africa is vitally important and this Vote, more than any other, indicates just how we are falling down in this direction. I do not believe that we can go on like this. Let us take a look at Coloured schooling as an example. In Coloured schools the enrolment increases by something like 30 000 pupils every year. To deal with this new enrolment only, one would need an additional 30 primary schools a year. If one takes a school as costing—this is a very arbitrary figure—R¼ million, it would then cost us R7½ million a year and this is a very conservative guess. To provide the necessary secondary schools, in the ratio of three secondary schools to every ten primary schools, which I believe is an optimum figure, we need to build nine secondary schools per annum at a cost of R4½ million and again it is a conservative guess. Therefore, to cater for the annual increase only we need R12 million to be spent every year. Approximately 80 000 Coloured school children are already on double shifts which is highly unsatisfactory. If one takes it that there are 1 000 children per school, already we are behind to the extent of 80 primary schools at a total cost—again conservatively estimated—of R20 million. Secondary schools are also tremendously overcrowded and there is an obvious shortage.

Order! I must say that the hon. member is dealing with matters with which the hon. the Minister has nothing to do.

With respect, Sir, we are discussing Loan Vote B which is the only time when matters like the expenditure on Coloured schools are discussed in this House, because it falls under this heading. However, I will respect your ruling and come back to the matter.

Order! The hon. member is dealing with a question of policy with which this hon. Minister has nothing to do.

I will obey your ruling, Sir, but may I say only one more sentence to follow up this argument? [Interjections.] All I wanted to say was that at present we need to spend R40 million on Coloured schooling and that we are not, because this year we are spending something like R18 million. I am quoting these figures under this Vote because they do not appear under the Coloured Affairs departmental estimates. I know that the amount spent on Coloured education is not the responsibility of this hon. Minister, but I do think that it is a very good example of how we should be spending our money. I think it is a very clear indication that our priorities are wrong and that it is very necessary for us to take a long look at this. I think that this hon. Minister and his colleagues in the Cabinet must have a re-think, because Loan Vote B is an indication of failure in that we are not spending enough money for the real needs of this country: we are building monuments to the futility and failure of Government policy.

Mr. Chairman, the predecessor of the hon. member for Orange Grove was Mr. Etienne Malan. We often had our differences but I do think that Orange Grove had a representative in him who at least interpreted the feelings of the voters in that constituency. The hon. member was harping on the same old string once more and referred to the security of the country which has nothing to do with this. I believe that if that hon. member and his party could have their way, there would be no Police Force or Defence Force in South Africa. I may perhaps just tell the hon. member that the security forces are also there for the protection of the non-Whites.

I should like to tell the Department of Public Works that we are of the opinion —and I think the hon. members on the opposite side will agree with me—that it is one of the departments we may be proud of, in view of the extensive and important task it has to perform. Sir, we see the extensiveness and the importance of the department in its task, viz. the erection and maintenance of all Government buildings, as well as renting and letting of buildings where necessary. The buildings erected by this department, or to the erection of which the department contributed or which it caused to be erected, are to be found in every town and city in our country and they serve as a criterion on the basis of which the department and its people may be judged by present and future generations. We see examples of these fine buildings or projects in the attractive buildings at our airports; we see an example of it in the Strijdom Tower; we see an example of it in the H. F. Verwoerd Building here in Cape Town, and we even see examples of them in our smallest towns in the rural areas.

Sir, we also see the gigantic task of this department in the fact that the department has jurisdiction over nearly 7 000 buildings, excluding the almost 1 400 buildings rented from private bodies or persons. In addition to these things, there is the landscaping as well as the maintenance of the beautiful gardens such as those we find at the Union Buildings and our President’s residences. Sir, since this department is also responsible for the provision and the maintenance of buildings for our ambassadors and consuls abroad, as well as for the provision of furniture for all our Government buildings, I think the Department of Public Works is deserving of a compliment as far as productivity is concerned, when one has regard to the fact that its establishment remained virtually unchanged over the past three years.

With all its activities, the department also is the biggest single client in the building industry today, and it stands to reason that this department has a tremendous influence on our economy, not only as far as the erection of Government buildings is concerned, but also as far as investments in buildings by the private sector are concerned. Sir, in this regard I should like to refer to the Building and Construction Advisory Council, the function of which is to advise the Government in regard to the promotion and effective utilization of the building and constructing capacity of the country and the way in which this may best be co-ordinated with the needs of the country.

Sir, when one consults page 7 of the report of the department, one gains an impression of the valuable and good work done by this council. I should like to refer here to the Agrément Board and its activities in recent years. The object of the Agrément Board is to approve building systems, components, materials and techniques which are not adequately covered by acceptable, existing building regulations. Sir, components and materials and techniques are submitted to the board for evaluation and then these are examined and tested by the National Building Research Institute and the South African Bureau of Standards. The materials and building techniques which are approved and given a certificate by the Building Research Institute, can contribute a great deal towards keeping down the ever-rising building costs. But it is of no avail if the Building Research Institute and the South African Bureau of Standards approve things and these are not accepted and recognized by some of our local authorities.

I think it is in this very regard that we have a major shortcoming, viz. the lack of uniform building regulations for all our local authorities throughout the Republic. There is no point in good work being done by the advisory council and the South African Bureau of Standards which is not utilized in that every local authority has its own building regulations. I know that model building regulations were drawn up by the Bureau of Standards a few years ago, but I wonder whether the time has not arrived for those uniform building regulations as well as those the Bureau of Standards is drawing up at present, to be made enforceable, particularly on the local authorities. I believe that the ever-rising building costs may be checked to some extent by means of standardization and uniform building regulations.

At the moment the Building and Construction Advisory Council in its functioning employs officials from the Department of Public Works, officials who are in fact in charge of other work and who are not experts in the field of the building industry. In view of the good work done by the advisory council, I have been wondering whether the hon. the Minister would not give consideration to the question as-to whether the time has not arrived for the council to have a permanent secretariat, consisting of experts in the economic field as well as in the field of the building industry, for advising the hon. the Minister.

Another aspect of the activities of the advisory council under sub-head F, which I find rather interesting, is the agreement with the Bureau for Economic Research of the University of Stellenbosch, in terms of which the Bureau is to conduct an investigation into the cyclic fluctuations in the building industry. We know that the building industry probably would be the most sensitive industry if there were to be anything in the nature of an economic recession, and to eliminate these fluctuations in the building industry, would probably not be easy in view of the fact that the Department of Public Works is the biggest client of the building industry and that the department plans its activities five years ahead and that it will not always be easy to see what the economic climate will be in two or three years’ time. But I believe that with the good work which has already been done by this bureau of the University of Stellenbosch with the expertise it has, it will certainly succeed in giving us an indication as to how we may effect more stability in our building industry. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Boksburg made a very interesting speech, but he will pardon me if I do not follow up on what he said. However, I want to come back to the hon. member for Orange Grove for a moment. He said, inter alia, that it is a tragic thing that 44% of the expenditure of this department is in respect of buildings for our security services. The hon. member did not inform me that he was going to discuss this point, otherwise I would have made sure of this fact, but I think it was his leader who put a question to the hon. the Minister of Police and of Justice recently in connection with the assaults and murders in Constantia. Among other things, he wanted to know what the department intended doing in this regard to afford the people greater safety there. It might also have been the hon. member for Rondebosch who put the question, but it was definitely someone from that quarters who put the question. I do not think it is fair when one levels such inconsistent criticism at a department when one asks with the one hand while trying to bite with the other.

Sir, in the few minutes at my disposal I should like to deal with two matters in my constituency. In the first place I want to refer to the post office in the Strand. We have an excellent, modern post office with large glass windows there. I presume this building was actually built during the winter or was planned for winter purposes, because it is very pleasant in that post office during the winter. During summer time it is, however, terribly hot in that building. We have many old people in the Strand, and they complain about its being so hot inside this building. Especially during the summer months, when our town is overcrowded by visitors, there is necessarily some delay in serving the public and then people have to queue up. This makes it very difficult for old people, and the officials cannot do their best either. On account of this we made representations last year for some solution or other to be devised to make the place a little cooler during the summer months. I understand that it was decided to have sun shades fitted outside certain windows. I should like to ask the hon. the Minister whether it would be possible to have these shades fitted before the next summer, because the prevailing position makes it very unpleasant in that building during the summer months.

The second matter I want to raise in connection with my constituency today, relates to a certain plot which is the property of the State. It is plot No. 1063 which is situated between Fagan and Munnik Streets. Many years ago the local branch of the ACVV in the Strand applied for this property for the erection of a créche for children. There was a great deal of negotiations and correspondence on this matter but as far as I know, finality has not yet been reached. At the moment the plot is not being used for any purpose. It has not been used for anything for approximately two years now. In fact, I know there have been a number of problems in connection with that plot. It is sometimes used by loafers and I know of two occasions when the Police had to remove them. I know a problem presents itself during the summer months on account of the dry grass which constitutes a fire hazard. The plot is situated in the residential area and is surrounded by occupied houses.

Since the plot is not being used for any State purposes at the moment, and since it is difficult to keep it tidy, I want to ask whether it would be possible to alienate the plot at this stage. Another argument which is important in this regard, is the lay-out of the town in question. The old city fathers thought it fit to keep some open space in the middle of the town for which all the State buildings have been erected. Therefore, we find that the station, the new police office, the magistrate’s office, the post office, the municipal building and the library are situated in the centre of the town, practically on the same terrain. These are very conveniently and centrally situated for all the inhabitants of the town. This plot which I am referring to now, is situated a considerable distance away. I concede that it is not inaccessible, but it does in no way form part of this other complex where the State buildings are situated at the moment.

In order further to motivate the need for this crèche for the children, I may tell you that the present crèche which the ACVV has there, is nothing more than an ordinary dwelling which they adapted and converted a little. It is too small and not suitable for its purpose. The crèche was started seven years ago, when there were only six children. The numbers increased until it reached 63 pre-school children. There was a long waiting list as well. At the moment the figures show a slight decrease. The tariffs have been increased considerably, and as a result of this the numbers have dropped somewhat. At the moment the créche is being attended by 40 pre-school-going children and children whose being cared for there after normal school hours. One of the reasons why parents do not send their children there at the moment, is because they cannot offer the same services as those which are offered in a decent crèche. They would like to have a larger plot so that they will be able to erect a suitable building. This particular plot which belongs to the State and which falls under the jurisdiction of this department, is ideally situated for this purpose. It is large enough and the town clerk of the Strand municipality assured me that should the plot be developed for this purpose, there would be no problems on the part of the town council.

I can further motivate my plea by saying that the Strand is a growing town. As the town is growing so the need for a créche is growing too. At the moment there are approximately 3 000 White school-going children in the municipal area of the Strand. Last year there were considerably more than 8 000 parliamentary voters, and there are approximately 200 births per year. Last year building plans of more than R3 million were approved. [Interjections.]

It seems to me the hon. member for Kimberley North is jealous of the way in which the Strand is growing. He can buy himself a house in which to retire in this popular resort if he so wishes.

An interesting fact in this regard is the town council’s finding that 51% of the economically active population of the Strand are employed outside the municipal boundaries. We ascribe this for the most part to the fine road we have between Cape Town and the Strand, as well as the excellent and regular train service. Therefore many people do not mind working in Cape Town’s polluted air during the day but would like to enjoy some fresh air out there during the night. They live in the Strand and work in Cape Town. These are the people who need a good crèche for their children. The White population there increases by approximately 7% per year, in other words the need for a decent and a fully-fledged créche for children in the Strand is a growing need. The solution is obvious. While this plot is not well situated as far as the State is concerned and since it creates somewhat of a problem, it would be very wise if the hon. the Minister could announce even this afternoon that he had decided that the ACVV may acquire this plot to perform the work it wants to perform there. It would be a fine contribution to render a service to that particular community.

Mr. Chairman. I shall not react to the speech of the hon. member for False Bay, because he did not really talk about policy, but only about a local matter in his own constituency. In doing so he confirmed the point which was made by the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg South, i.e. that hon. members do not have sufficient time in this debate to discuss all the matters in their own constituencies. The behaviour of the Government through this department is such that it proves the fact that this Government has become quite obsolete, inefficient and incompetent.

†I want to tell the hon. the Minister that we are most disappointed with the manner in which he is administering this particular department. This department is being administered by him on a hit-and-miss basis. In the first place we have been unable to ascertain the backlog of work and to evaluate the capital works programme intelligently. I want to tell the hon. the Minister why. When one looks at the capital works programmes one finds that the year in which a particular capital work was approved is not given. If the year in which a particular capital work was approved is not given, members of Parliament and the public are unable to ascertain the backlog. I think this is a most devious manner of biding a very large backlog running into thousands of millions of rands. The one thing that is essential, is that we should be able to ascertain the year of the approval of any project. The hon. the Minister can take a leaf out of the book of the Works Department of the Cape Provincial Administration because they mention before every capital scheme the year of approval. If they can do it, I cannot see why the hon. the Minister’s department cannot do it. The one thing that is essential is a priority list that must be available to public representatives and to the public. The test of planning is the fact that there are priorities. These priorities may have to be regulated from time to time. The hon. the Minister, in answer to a question on the Order Paper, said that his department had a priority list, but that he was not prepared to make it available to members of Parliament or to lay it on the Table of the House.

Why not?

I shall come to the question of why not. The priority list is a form of building accountancy programming, and there is no reason, except a lack of planning, for refusing to account to Parliament and to the country. This is an absolutely chaotic state of affairs, and the hon. the Minister must accept full responsibility for it. I hope that in the budget debate next year he will place his priority list on the Table so that we can see what pre-planning has or has not been done. There is absolutely no need to create a secret service out of the Department of Public Works. Here again I want to point out to the hon. the Minister that the works department of the Cape Provincial Administration has no objection to laying its priority list on the table of the provincial council. In fact, they do so. They did so, however, after persuasion by the United Party.

The other matter I should like to deal with concerns the lack of planning which, leads to contracts being given out without tenders being called for. The planning has collapsed to such an extent, in the hon. the Minister’s department, that R32 million worth of contracts was given out in the year 1974-’75 without tenders being called for. One must bear in mind that in the year 1973-’74 the amount involved was just over R4 million. In my view this reflects an absolutely reckless attitude in regard to public funds. This R32 million worth of contracts, given out without calling for tenders, requires a very full explanation from the hon. the Minister. I think he has to account to us in this debate for that particular expenditure. We would like to know from the hon. the Minister to what extent contracts were given out by way of variations from tenders already accepted. Those figures cannot be found anywhere in the report. One can only assume that those contracts also involve millions upon millions of rand. We are absolutely astonished to see that even when tenders are called for, the tenders are awarded to any Dick, Dave and Harry. This has happened to such an extent that 16 tenderers have gone insolvent over the past three years. [Interjections.] The total amount involved in these insolvencies was just over R4 million. The losses, to get these contracts completed, are estimated at approximately R175 000. I want to tell the hon. the Minister that I am normally an optimist, but it is going to cost him a great deal more then R175 000 to get those contracts completed. I would like to know from the hon. the Minister what checks he undertook before awarding those particular tenders. In how many of those cases were bank reports, balance sheets, credit reports of insurance guarantees called for before awarding the specific contracts which led to the contractors going insolvent? We are dealing with public money, and one would like to see the utmost caution in the awarding of contracts involving public money. I am convinced of the fact that if the hon. the Minister had taken the preliminary precautions before awarding these contracts, there would have been no difficulties. I know that the hon. the Minister is going to say to me that certain checks were, in fact, carried out two or three years ago. Those checks, however, have to be carried out every year prior to awarding a tender, because a tenderer’s position changes from year to year. I put a question to the hon. the Minister in which I asked whether anybody advises him on the capacity of the building industry and the amount of work it can absorb in a particular year. The hon. the Minister said “No” in reply. The hon. the Minister, however, did indicate, in answer to a question on the Order Paper, that over the next five years his department intends spending approximately R859 million. We cannot see where or on what projects this R859 million will be spent in the next five years. Again this is the hit-and-miss type of attitude that is adopted in this department. The problem in the building industry is caused by the fact that the hon. the Minister is not taking advice from the building industry and the professions which are associated with the building industry. At the same time detailed research has to be done and the building industry must get some indication of intended Government expenditure over the next five years. This is the point which was also mentioned by the hon. member for Boksburg. If the building industry knew what the capital expenditure would be for the next five years in each particular area, they could gear themselves to give a far more efficient service and they could train enough labour to handle any capacity of work which the hon. the Minister might require at a specific time. The problem is that there is no coordination between the public sector, which calls for tenders at the same time as the private sector calls for tenders. We find that both of them expand flat out at the same time. This creates a complete imbalance in the building industry and puts them under extreme pressure at times whilst they are also under pressure when they are experiencing lean times. At the moment the state of affairs in the building industry in Port Elizabeth is most depressing; this is a matter which I shall deal with later on. They are making representations to the hon. the Minister’s colleague, the hon. the Minister of Finance, to try and sort matters out because they just do not have enough work to carry on with at the moment. The hon. the Minister should see to it that when private capital investment is slack, the department tenders in full force so that they can get the best possible tender prices and at the same time keep the building industry and the associated industries on an even keel and working at full capacity. It is in the interests of the economy that we ensure that we do not have the downturns in the building industry which we are experiencing through a lack of pre-planning on the part of the hon. the Minister. I want to say to the hon. the Minister that he can again take a leaf out of the book of the Cape Provincial Administration, which consulted with the Stellenbosch Bureau for Economic Research. They were told that the province could put out work to the amount of R55 million in 1973, R60 million in 1974 and R70 million in 1975. The only reason why they could not proceed with that programme was that the Central Government did not give them enough money to go out to tender to that extent. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Walmer who has just resumed his seat began his speech by saying that the Government was completely worn out and had had its day. I just want to warn the hon. member that he should not underestimate the political intelligence and judgment of the voters of South Africa. His opinion and judgment does not accord in any way with the opinion of the vast majority of voters who returned the Government to this House on 24 April last year. The hon. member would very much like to see balance sheets in advance in order to make provision in advance for bankruptcy. In my opinion that hon. member would do well to reveal a little more clearly to the voters of South Africa the balance sheets of his own party’s bankruptcy.

I should like to raise a few ideas today in regard to the conservation of old cultural historical buildings for ourselves and for posterity. Many of these buildings are the responsibility of the Department of Public Works today. I raise this matter on this particular occasion because we often find that there are eight, ten or more departments and bodies concerned with such matter, of which the Department of Public Works is often one, since it has to supervise the buildings. I should like to follow up on the statements I am making …

Order! The hon. member for Yeoville is not allowed to break the line. [Interjections.]

Actually, I find it striking that one suffering from political blindness should have poor vision in other respects as well.

I should like to make an appeal today in respect of a specific building, namely the old magistrate’s offices at Krugersdorp. Although this is a local matter, my plea in regard to this building applies just as much to many other buildings in this country as well. Because I am discussing historical buildings falling under the Department of Public Works, you will permit me, Sir, to go back in history for a moment, to 18 September 1890, when President Paul Kruger personally laid the foundation stone of those magistrate’s offices. This is a fine sandstone building which is typical of those towns and which is situated directly opposite the outstanding Krugersdorp city hall. It is situated in the heart of the town. In 1959, in the more recent past—I think learned cultural experts call it “contemporary history”—a deputation from the city council of Krugersdorp was addressed by the then Minister of Public Works, the hon. P. O. Sauer, and the then Minister of Justice, the hon. C. R. Swart. Hon. members who know these two people will know that they were immediately very enthusiastic, because the issue was the building of new magistrate’s offices on the one hand, and the taking over of the old building by the city council of Krugersdorp for a nominal sum on the other. I want to point out that at that stage, viz. the year 1959, five bodies were already concerned with this matter; the City Council, the provincial council—because there were financial implications involved— the Department of Justice, of course, which had been using the building, the Department of Public Works and the Department of Internal Revenue because there was a possibility that the revenue offices would be expanded. To continue with the history of the matter, f might mention that since then, discussions have taken place regularly and there has also been an exchange of correspondence, etc., which I do not want to go into now. In 1970 the new building was completed, after which the old building was vacated.

In the meantime, the sixth body became involved in the matter, namely the Department of Agricultural Credit and Land Tenure, because they controlled the land that was involved. Then, in March 1972, it was decided that the land and the building itself would be sold to the city council for R178 550. Viewed superficially, this would in fact have been a very reasonable price if the city council had wanted to use this land for development or business purposes, but since there is not a single cultural historical museum on the West Rand the city council wanted to use the building for that specific purpose. In view of this the city council was of course unable to pay the R178 550, since a museum is not a profitable undertaking. After the building had been vacated, it began to deteriorate, as buildings do when they are not used. In the meantime, much valuable Africana was lost, but I do not want to go into that either, since it does not affect this department. The point I want to make is that the city council wanted to acquire this building in the national interest and not merely in the interests of the local community. The city council then approached the eighth body, viz. the National Monuments Council, and the latter, of course, falls under the ninth body, the Department of National Education. This Council was very well-disposed towards this matter, and in 1973 the decision was taken to allow the city council to acquire this building free of charge and to declare it a national monument as well. It sounds as if the problem was then solved, but that is not the case, since at the time it would have cost the city council about R25 000 to renovate the building and render it suitable to house a museum. However, a condition was set that the building was to be restored to its original form This would have cost R200 000 then and if done now would already cost R300 000. What is more, if the building is restored to its original form in view of the number of rooms it will no longer be suitable as a museum. The position at the moment is that everyone is waiting for the report of the Commission of Inquiry into the Co-ordination of Museums on a National Level. As I say, in the meantime the building is deteriorating, much Africana is being lost and, of course, renovation and building costs are mounting. In addition, as I have already indicated, what applies to this specific building, which falls under the Department of Public Works, applies similarly to other old buildings in the country which fall under the same department.

Consequently it is clear to me that one can be sure that there is still a great demand for cultural historical museums at many places. Linked to this is the actual conservation of the buildings themselves as well. One can now bring the two together and house the museum specifically in such a building. The other problem which, I think, is clear from what I have said, is that eight or ten departments, bodies or boards have been involved in this one negotiation that has lasted from as far back as 1959 to the present time, and so many departments do of course tend to delay negotiations in cases of this kind—not necessarily, of course. I therefore want to state that sound co-operation and co-ordination among all concerned is essential. I want to contend that a definite policy on this whole matter, a policy with which all the bodies must be acquainted beforehand and which they can abide by, would perhaps assist in eliminating these delays. I do not want to discuss the commission now, because it does not fall under this department. We hope that they will come up with a proposal for a policy of this kind. Because certain of these buildings are the responsibility of the Department of Public Works, I again want to appeal to the Minister, with backbench modesty, to use his influence, which I know is not inconsiderable, to further and expedite this matter of conservation, co-ordination, co-operation and a definite policy. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Krugersdorp dealt mostly with minor matters and I do not intend to reply to him in that regard. If I may, I should like to come back to the hon. the Minister. In answer to Question No. 305 on the Question Paper for written reply the hon. the Minister told us that no projects had been held back because of lack of funds over the past two years. The past two years would be 1973-’74 and 1974-’75. The hon. member for Tygervallei tried to defend the hon. the Minister but he failed miserably in that defence. Just to put this matter beyond any dispute I want to read the question to the hon. the Minister. The question was—

Mr. Chairman, this sort of reply is totally incorrect and I was absolutely astonished at the failure of the hon. the Minister to know what was happening in his own department.

Read the first paragraph of the Report.

I say it is a shocking state of affairs because if one looks at the report for 1973-’74 one finds that in the first three lines …

Read the whole paragraph.

… This is what is said—

One can carry on to page 4 of the 1973-’74 report.

No, just read the first full paragraph.

One finds on page 4 of the report that it is stated—

This is what is stated in the report that the hon. the Minister has in his possession. Therefore, either the reply to the question on the Question Paper was incorrect or the report of the department is incorrect, or else the hon. the Minister does not know what is happening in his own department. One of these three must apply. To compound this state of affairs, the hon. the Minister, in reply to a further question in regard to the backlog of capital works expressed in money that could not be commenced due to a shortage of funds or labour, said that the information was not readily available and that separate statistics were not kept.

This is an absolutely chaotic state of affairs. The Government is hiding a backlog running into thousands of millions of rands. When one looks at page 4 of the estimates of expenditure from Loan Account, one finds that it amounts to approximately R1 000 million. After deducting the expenditure up to 31 March 1975 and the 1975-’76 expenditure, there is still an estimated expenditure of R644 million to be defrayed from Loan Account. We all know from past experience that this figure is not worth a tinker’s hoot. Sir, judging by past experience, this figure will run into thousands of millions of rands and not R644 million. The hon. the Minister need only look at RP3. I will refer him to just one or two examples. If he looks at page 10, for example, he will find that the original estimates of cost have escalated 400%, 500%, 600%, 700%, and 800%. I want to quote just two examples. The original estimate for the new Barberton prison farm and quarters was R625 000. The present estimate is R3,1 million. In other words, the costs have escalated five times. The original estimate for the new Brandvlei prison farm and quarters was R450 000 and the present estimate is R3,2 million, an increase of nearly 800%. Sir, what are these estimates worth? As I have said, they are not worth a tinker’s hoot, and this figure of R644 million will run into hundreds of thousands of millions extra.

Draw it mild!

Sir, I believe that the hon. the Minister has a duty to the country to make the fullest possible disclosure in depth about the running of this particular department. The government so far has adopted a cloak and dagger attitude in relation to this department. I would like to tell him that the public are entitled to be told exactly where they stand. At the moment none of the members of Parliament, either on the Nationalist side or on the United Party side, and most members of the Cabinet do not know what is happening in relation to this department. The hon. the Minister must accept full responsibility for the plight of the Port Elizabeth building industry, to which I referred in my first 10 minutes. The Port Elizabeth Master Builders’ Association is to see the hon. the Minister of Finance to ask for more State work immediately to be made available to bolster the struggling Eastern Cape industry, which is now facing a grim short-term future. Only R3 million worth of work is available up to the end of June. The industry needs at least R12 million worth of work up to the end of June to be able to keep going and to keep all its people in employment. One of the main causes of the decision was the cut-back in State, provincial and municipal expenditure. Sir, R60 million worth of work in our part of the world has been shelved, and of this R60 million worth of work, approximately 60% represented a cut-back by the State, the province or the municipality. The stage has been reached where builders are having to lay off staff. I want to tell the hon. the Minister straightaway that the staff and the labour that they are laying off are finding work elsewhere. That presents us with a problem, because it is often very well trained staff that it has taken the building firms years to train. The result of this will be that when the hon. the Minister wakes up and calls for tenders, he will find that these builders have not got the staff to tender for work for which they would like to tender because there will then be a drastic shortage of labour in the building industry and the hon. the Minister will be directly responsible for this state of affairs. Sir, the hon. the Minister has a responsibility in this matter, and the Government surely cannot allow this shambolic state of affairs to continue in this manner. Sir, we would like to see a blueprint of proper pre-planning, a priority list, that is made public. The public, and particularly the building industry, must be aware of the long-term and the short-term intentions of the Public Works Department. It is essential that they know both the short-term and the long-term requirements of the Public Works Department. The hon. the Minister has administered this department in such a manner that everything is in a state of collapse. I have spoken only about the Port Elizabeth area, but I am convinced that the same thing applies in other areas where the builders find themselves in this predicament through the way in which the hon. the Minister has administered this department. We believe that this is a shocking state of affairs, and that this matter must be remedied as a matter of urgency. The Government, through its lack of planning, will bring the building industry to its knees, and I hope that the hon. the Minister is going to stand up today and tell us that he is going to support the Port Elizabeth Master Builders’ Association when they make representations to the hon. the Minister of Finance for extra work to be given out immediately. I hope that the hon. the Minister will, even before the evening is out, see the Minister of Finance to ensure that the work is increased to the extent of the R12 million that the Master Builders’ Association requires in Port Elizabeth. Sir, it is pointless to build up a building industry, to gear up labour and train professional people and then to have a state of affairs where the State cuts back to the extent that professional people are out of work and people who are properly trained have to leave the building industry, because all that will happen is that sooner or later the Minister will need them and when he sends out tenders he will find that the labour will just not be there. I just want to say in passing that the hon. the Minister must go very carefully into the position of the shortage of schools, more particularly Coloured schools, because I am told that to eliminate double sessions, we will need to build at least another 88 schools. I should like to know from the hon. the Minister what his plans are in this regard. Or rather let me tell him that he has no plans in this regard, because if he had plans he would be only too happy to submit his priority list. He would stand up in this House and proudly show us his priority list. That would show that the hon. the Minister had given this matter sufficient thought. [Time expired.]

It is a long time since I have heard such a young backbencher being as presumptuous as was the hon. member for Walmer. Sir, I find it very strange that the official Opposition should let a backbencher speak twice in this short debate. Now, I wonder whether it is with a view to the newly married couple who are now on their honeymoon that they are seeking for the empty vessel which can make the most noise, because it seems to me that they want to compete with these political honeymooners, and are therefore seeking the person who can talk the most nonsense. Sir, let me give you a few examples. The hon. member quoted from the report of the department. If there is one thing one should not do when one is quoting, it is to quote half of a sentence and negate the rest. The hon. member said that there was a terrible backlog and that the hon. the Minister and his department had done nothing about it, but if he were to read the first paragraph on page 1, he would surely have seen that the department made special representations to the Cabinet Committee for Finance and that they have in fact obtained a large extra sum for the specific purpose of attempting to alleviate the existing backlog. I take exception to this hon. member’s standpoint. A short time ago, a few days ago, he kicked up a tremendous fuss about excessive State spending, but today, again, we heard him complaining about the cutback. Sir, one should be consistent. I do not know whether it is merely for political expediency that he says one thing one day and another thing the next. He said, inter alia. “The Government does not realize the real need of South Africa,” and he spoke about “chaotic conditions”, about a “cloak and dagger attitude”. Sir, all I can say about the hon. member is that in my opinion he still has a great deal to learn in life, and that a young backbencher should not be so presumptuous. He is really an empty vessel and he only makes a noise.

I deal with the facts.

Looking at this department, one sees that it is not one which puts on a dramatic display in public, but when we consider its mandate, I wonder whether the hon. member for Walmer knows exactly what its mandate is. We could divide them into two parts. The first is that the department must meet the Government’s building requirements in the most economic way. Secondly, it must ensure that the existing accommodation is utilized to best effect. When we consider the department’s staff shortage problems and the restrictions imposed on expenditure on capital works for very good reasons …

It is the hon. the Minister’s fault.

That young man must be quiet; he has moaned and complained twice already and he must be quiet now. When we consider the mounting costs, we know that in years past the department, bearing in mind its vast programme of works, has acquitted itself very well of its task. Not only must the department try to implement its terms of reference, but in the process—and now I am speaking as a layman—it must always bear two things in mind. The first is that in its planning and construction of buildings it must attempt to do justice to the character of the residential and commercial environment in which it is operating, viz. where a building is constructed, the department tries to ensure that the building fits in well with its environment and that it does not detract from the character of the environment. Secondly, the department attempts to give the public buildings it constructs status, because surely it is true that the State, too, has a status which it must maintain.

I should like to say a few words about the extracts from the Appropriation Account of the previous financial year. I think that here I must pay tribute to the department for their achievements. The Department of Public Works receives its assignments from 17 other Government departments. I note that in the Appropriation Account there are assignments to construct buildings at an estimated cost of R640 million. In other words, at the moment the department is engaged in capital expenditure in regard to about 600 assignments from the various departments at a total estimated cost of R640 million. According to the Appropriation Account of 1973-’74, about R63 million was awarded to the department by way of parliamentary appropriation, R61½ million of which was spent. It often happens that owing to circumstances, more money is spent under one head and less under another. Not only has this department performed its task well, it has also spent about R6½ million more than the amount voted for 143 projects during the financial year. In the same financial year there were also 400 projects on which the department spent R8 million less than the amount voted. I mention this because in my opinion, there are important considerations to be taken into account in this regard. The first is that the saving means that the department only had to redeposit R1½ million in the Treasury and this is very important for the hon. the Minister of Finance in his planning of an overall Budget for South Africa. It is therefore important that departments should not budget in such a way as to have to redeposit a large amount at the end of the financial year which could not be spent, or vice versa, viz. a department exceeding its quota by a very large amount.

I say, therefore, that the Budget proposals submitted to the Treasury by the Department of Public Works are very rational. Secondly, I should say that the department is very rational as regards the implementation of its programme for the year, as well. This is proved by the fact that in the past financial year only a small amount had to be redeposited. I therefore pay tribute to this department for assisting the hon. the Minister of Finance, who has the enormous task of compiling the overall Budget for the country, in this way. Actually there are three groups of persons or bodies who keep an eye on this department, or any department. The first, of course, is the Controller and Auditor-General, who has to ensure that departments, statutory bodies and control boards spend their money correctly.

The second group of people who keep a close eye on the departments, are the departmental heads. The secretaries of departments and their staff seek accommodation, whether for the members of their staff, for patients in hospitals, prisoners or pupils at school, and they are anxious that the assignments they give the Department of Public Works are carried out and completed. It is important that patients, for example, should be well accommodated in accordance with medical standards. It is important, too, that pupils at school should be well accommodated and should not have to attend school in a tent, as I had to do in my day when the United Party Government was still in power. It is important, too, for prisoners to be well accommodated so that they may be rehabilitated there. It is important, too, that the members of staff be properly and thoroughly equipped as far as office facilities are concerned to enable them to do the maximum amount of work every day.

These departments’ assignments vary from a chancery overseas—at the moment the department is engaged in 13 such projects—to prisons, for which 58 projects are in progress at the moment. They vary from a school or hostel to colleges for Coloureds or Indians. At the moment the department is engaged in about 200 such projects. Its assignment may also be to build a maximum security section for an institution like Weskoppies, or a bridge over the Vaal River, which the department has to broaden at a place like Kaaldraai. The department is therefore engaged in a wide spectrum of activities. The departments which have given this department assignments to carry out are anxious that the work be completed. However, there is a third group, too, which keeps a close eye on the activities of this department, viz. we who are sitting here. It is just one of those things that a member of the House of Assembly tries very hard to convince the authorities of the need for accommodation in his constituency. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I should like to begin by conveying my appreciation to those hon. members on both sides of the House who took part in the discussion, for the ideas expressed here. The hon. member for Pietermaritzburg South, opened the debate and mentioned the importance of and the high degree of efficiency shown by the Department of Public Works. Quite rightly, he, as a member of the Opposition, said that this was how it ought to be.

I want to say at once that when one considers the general drift of the discussion and the real criticism advanced, such as that levelled by the hon. member for Walmer, one comes to the conclusion that there is not much wrong with the Department of Public Works. I as the Minister do not claim the credit for that. I claim it for one of the oldest departments in our Public Service which, with years of experience and efficiency and years of discipline behind it, something which the hon. member for Walmer did not refer to, has done outstanding work. The hon. member for Pietermaritzburg South said that he had put it to my predecessor that this department should be separated entirely from the Public Service Commission and should follow its own pattern entirely.

I do not want to reject this idea out of hand. However, I do think that it would be a risky step. What is the alternative? Something along the lines of a State corporation would have to be established in order to bring about separation from the Public Service Commission in that way, viz. separation from the machinery which the Public Service Commission, in any event, can and does put at the disposal of this department. Very probably this would be a risky step. Precedents may be created, because the problems which the Department of Public Works has to deal with— including the problems in regard to staff— are not peculiar to the Department of Public Works. There are other departments which are saddled with similar problems and for which one could not attempt to seek a solution of this kind. He asked me for a permanent Select Committee. It is not clear to me from his argument how he envisages that Select Committee will perform the function ordinarily performed by this Parliament. If more light could be cast on that aspect in the future, I should be prepared to look at the matter.

The hon. member for Pietermaritzburg South referred to question 306 and stated that I supplied the wrong information. I have the question before me, but I do not want to refer to it again. Other hon. members have already referred to it. I think that this is purely a case in which we may have been talking at cross purposes. If the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg South reads the first paragraph in full, he will find in it the reply he was seeking. He will see that steps were in fact taken and that relief was obtained. That is what the reply to that question is about. It is not so easy to state without qualification that there is a backlog, not even when one has a five-year programme. Is the backlog really determined by the fact that a building is scheduled for this year, say, but cannot be built this year? Is the backlog, in the true sense of the word, ascertained in that way? Not necessarily. It can simply be a question of priorities which, in certain given circumstances, could be given to other more urgent and, perhaps, more important projects.

The hon. member for Pietermaritzburg South also referred to the wage gap. This is not determined by the Department of Public Works, but by the Public Service Commission. The hon. member for Tygervallei referred with appreciation to the contribution to the Cape Festival of the Department of Public Works. He dwelt for some time on the position of the Marks Building. I want to give the hon. member the assurance that the position of the Marks Building is being considered.

The position of the St. George’s Grammar School, which is close to Parliament, is also being considered. We are trying to determine in what way these buildings may be utilized to afford the relief which may be necessary here.

This has been going on for more than ten years.

Yes, I know, but we have difficulties as far as the Marks Building is concerned. There are going to be objections if the Marks Building is demolished I am quite sure of that. There will undoubtedly be objections.

We have a further difficulty as far as the Marks Building is concerned and that is that it is so designed as to be very difficult to alter extensively and adapt from within without causing a collapse. This is one of the technical problems we are faced with. The building was not constructed in accordance with modern methods of construction; the walls of the building are thick and the one rests on the other, with the result that we should incur serious risks were we to make extensive alterations to the building. However, this is being attended to and we hope to have an answer in this regard as soon as possible. I want to give the hon. member for Tygervallei the assurance that we are looking into this matter.

The hon. member for Orange Grove complained that 40% of the amount spent by this department is spent on security services. He states that our priorities are wrong and that we spend far too little on the construction of schools. You, Mr. Chairman, pointed out to the hon. member that he was discussing the policy of other departments. My department is the department which has to carry out the priorities worked out among themselves by the departments. Each department has its own requirements and my department builds according to the priorities laid down. Consequently I shall not dwell on this any longer because the hon. member was referring to the activities of another department.

I want to thank the hon. member for Boksburg for his friendly words concerning my department. I agree with him particularly in respect of his reference to the bodies which assist my department, bodies such as the Agrément Board, the National Building Research Institute and the Building and Construction Advisory Council. These bodies provide my department with a great deal of valuable assistance and advice, and their recommendations could result in savings of millions of rand in regard to building methods which had to be adopted.

The hon. member for False Bay made inquiries about the Post Office in the Strand. I just want to tell the hon. member that that kind of work is undertaken by the Department of Posts and Telecommunications. My department constructed the building and the Department of Posts and Telecommunications has to look after it. I am unfortunately unable to say at the moment how far they have progressed in that regard. As regards the other plot to which the hon. member referred, erf 1063, I can say that it is true that the ACVV applied to be able to use the plot in 1970. At the time the position was that the plot was reserved for a police station and a magistrate’s office. In time, those requirements were met in another way and I want to advise the hon. member to suggest to the ACVV, if they are still interested—I inferred from the hon. member’s speech that they were—to write again to the Department of Public Works. My department will have to ascertain whether other departments are interested, and if it is clear that that is not the case, we could take a sympathetic view of such an application.

I want to refer to what the hon. member for Walmer had to say. Having been in this field somewhat longer than the hon. member for Walmer, I can tell him that what he tried to do here, anyone could do before breakfast, while still lying down. [Interjections.] It is the easiest thing in the world to come and make such statements and accusations in the House.

They are facts.

It is not a case of facts, but rather one of statements which do not accord entirely with the facts. I do not want to deal with everything, but consider, for example, the fuss he made about the reply I gave him in this House. Only consider the criticism he advanced in regard to the Barberton prison, for example, in respect of which there was an increase in expenditure of R65 000 to R3 100 000. He could have had the reply I am going to give him now by asking a simple question, without having cast aspersions on my department—it is not I on whom he is casting aspersions.

The hon. the Minister did not even understand the argument.

This service is undertaken jointly by the Departments of Prisons and Public Works. I am now referring to Barberton.

But I have no objection to that service.

The original estimate was only in regard to a section of the work carried out by the Department of Prisons with its own building team, as a part of a rehabilitation programme. It is in accordance with the procedure as approved by the Treasury that only the expected expenditure on this project over the next five years is indicated in the Budget, and that the estimated total cost of the scheme, if available, should be indicated by way of a footnote. Since the time when the original figure was included in the Budget, it has been increased to cover the expected expenditure up to 1980. That is the position as far as Barberton is concerned.

Mr. Chairman, where can members of this House obtain those details?

I am coming to your question. It is linked to the question asked here about the five-year programmes. The hon. member kicked up such a fuss about the increase of R450 000 to R3 200 000 for Brandvlei. This service is undertaken jointly by the Departments of Prisons and Public Works. This is, therefore, the same story. The same principles apply in this instance, too. Since the original amount was included in the Budget, it has been increased to cover the expected expenditure to 1978. This is in accordance with Treasury directives and therefore irregularities or malpractices are out of the question. The amounts requested are indicated.

We know nothing about that.

That just goes to show how wrong a person can be without realizing it.

I raised no objection to the project or the amount concerned; I only referred to the backlog.

The hon. member was making a case out of the way costs were escalating as a result of the failure of my department to eliminate the backlog. In other words, he was trying to tell the House that these were additional costs with which the taxpayer was being burdened as a result of neglect on our part.

I said that the estimate of the backlog was wrong.

The hon. member referred to the R34 million spent without tender. If the hon. member had asked this in a friendly way, he would have received the friendly reply he is going to get in any event. This amount is in respect of a project about which senior hon. members in this House do not inquire when they see it in the Budget. In this instance, it was not possibly to comply fully with the conditions of tender and special measures and to be taken, measures ensuring that all necessary control would be imposed. That is where the amount of R34 million comes into the picture. Surely the hon. member could have asked that in a friendly way. I can understand his not knowing why the amount was requested, but surely he could just as well have put it to me differently, without casting aspersions.

The hon. member for Krugersdorp spoke about old cultural historical buildings. I want to tell him that I do not know what the exact position is as regards that particular building in Krugersdorp at the present moment, but I am prepared to consider the matter as sympathetically as possible.

The hon. member also referred quite rightly to the Niemand Commission and said that we should wait and see what it came up with.

The hon. member for Walmer made a second speech, and in it he reverted to a matter I had already dealt with. The matter raised by the hon. member for Barberton, too, has already been dealt with.

In conclusion I want to convey my thanks to hon. members on both sides of the House. I also want to thank the hon. member for Worcester, who ended the debate, for a very lucid description of the activities of this department.

Mr. Chairman, may I have the privilege of the half hour? In recent months there has been some evidence of a significant change or should I say adaptation as far as the approach of the Government to community development in its full concept is concerned, not merely in relation to the provision of housing for persons separated into different residential areas by force of law. During this session Parliament has approved basic amendments to the Housing Act which recognized that housing cannot be dealt with in isolation and that the provision of amenities is necessary for the development of a community character in connection with any housing that is provided. The aggravation caused in the past by the necessity for group area permits for mixed functions and for the open use of amenities has been ameliorated by several welcome adaptations as far as the approach by Government departments is concerned. Many of these changes have been advocated by ourselves in the United Party over the years but we believe that many of those steps that have been taken are still not bold enough. Nevertheless, what has been done is welcomed. The steps taken are an indication of new thinking and they do assist in lessening race tensions and frustrations. I should like to refer to some of the matters in regard to which it would have been necessary to obtain permits in the past. I believe that these have particular relevance to community development. There was the opening of the Nico Malan Opera House to all races, the recognition of the necessity to amend laws relating to licensed restaurants and hotels which, has still to be dealt with by this House, and the acceptance, with some exceptions, of multiracial sporting events referred to somewhat euphemistically as multi-national sporting events. There was also the announcement last Friday of the provision of a residential area for Coloured people adjacent to District Six in Cape Town. This is not as much as we would have expected and we hope that this will not be the final decision in regard to that particular area. However, it is the acceptance of an entirely new principle as far as the housing of Coloured people in the urban areas of South Africa is concerned. There has been the recognition by this House through statements by the hon. the Minister that business areas be opened to all races. This was announced by the hon. the Minister of Planning on Friday. There is also the recognition on the part of the hon. the Minister of Bantu Administration and Development of the right of the permanently settled urban Bantu population to be given residential rights and business opportunities. There is also the recognition of the growing urgency for community development—residential, economic and recreational—in the homelands. There is also the question of the acceptance of the need for amenities for all races in areas that might under the laws of this Government be set aside for occupation by one particular race group. It has taken 27 years for these chips to be knocked off the granite policies of this Government. However, these steps must now be followed up by vigorous action so as to bring relief to thousands of families and businessmen who are still threatened by removals under the Group Areas Act. Action must be taken to ease the plight of pensioners and persons with fixed incomes in the lower echelons of our economic life. However, it must be abundantly clear to the hon. the Minister that several Ministries are now involved in community development. There is the Department of Community Development itself and the Departments of Planning and the Environment, Indian Affairs, Coloured, Rehoboth and Nama Relations, Sport and Recreation and Bantu Administration and Development. Because I believe that the responsibility rests on this hon. Minister to arrange the co-ordination and to get on with the job of community development, I intend to make an urgent appeal to him this afternoon for certain re-thinking. I also want to outline the direction which we believe that re-thinking should take. But before dealing with that, I want to deal briefly with the question of Bothasig. The hon. the Minister will know that in 1971 great hopes and expectations were raised by the then Minister when a start was made with a low-cost housing scheme in Bothasig and when 1 026 houses were built under the first two contracts. Unfortunately, Sir, even while these houses were under construction, there were queries and doubts as to the quality of the workmanship and the adequacy of the design of these buildings. Sir, at the request of members of the Bothasig ratepayers’ association, I went out there to inspect these properties and, quite frankly, I was shocked by what I saw there. I accept, Sir, that this was a low-cost scheme. I accept that the cement blocks that were used conformed to SABS standards, but, Sir, the deterioration in these houses is such that they are now becoming health hazards. The department was forewarned. When this scheme was still in its infancy, the Bothasig ratepayers made representations through their municipality, the Milnerton municipality, but they got the brush-off from the department. I want to quote the report of the municipality to the Bothasig owners—

Sir, what were the reports received by the department from medical officers of health? The one medical officer says—

Another says—

Sir, I raise this matter because the purchasers of those houses are people of limited means and in my opinion they have been shabbily treated by the department. The Bothasig ratepayers’ association adopted the proper approach; they went to their local authority; they approached their member of Parliament, the hon. member for Durbanville, and asked him to try to assist them, but what have they got? They have been told that they bought the houses “voetstoots”, that they can get back the money they have paid, or that they can get a loan to repair the houses themselves. Sir, I cannot accept that these properties were built according to the standards of the National Building Research Institute when there are no air-bricks in the rooms and no fan-lights or air-bricks in the bathrooms. It is an insult to the C.S.I.R. to say that these properties were built according to building standards laid down by them. Sir, I believe that it is verging on fraudulent action for the department to patch over defects with a bit of plaster and then to sell these houses to people under a sale agreement with a “voetstoots” clause. How were these people to know that there were any defects? The department says that they did not complain within the three-months’ retention period. They did not complain because the plaster had not yet fallen out between the blocks. Sir, I believe that the hon. the Minister owes it to these people not to treat them in this way, but to see that these houses are repaired. I would like an assurance from him in this debate that that is what will be done at the cost of the department. As I say, to try to hide behind a “voetstoots” clause when the department was fully aware of these defects and did not disclose them to the purchasers at the time of the purchase is, I believe, verging in fraudulent conduct.

Sir, I want to return to policy directions which I believe require urgent attention. As I have said, I believe that certain changes have been accepted. What is now required is new co-ordinated action. Sir, a contented man requires adequate housing with an assured family life reasonably close to his place of employment. He requires job opportunities and he requires recreational and other communal amenities. Sir, the need for new cities to be developed in the Republic is too obvious for me to argue. It is an indisputable fact, as has been pointed out over and over again in this House, that there are two increasing pressures demanding new action in this matter of community development. The first, which is common to most countries but of varying intensity, is the population explosion. We in South Africa have some 25 years in which to double the housing which exists in this country today.

The second, which is more intense in South Africa than in other countries, is the need to provide economic and industrial opportunities for our non-White people, to provide increasingly improved standards of housing to meet their needs and to provide opportunities for improved living standards and to stimulate home ownership for them. These pressures demand new cities, and many new cities will have to be located and developed within the next three decades in this country. The proposed towns at Mitchell’s Plain, which is the responsibility of the Cape Town City Council, and at Dassenberg, in which the Divisional Council of the Cape is involved, are only the beginnings, but they are the acceptance of the principle that new towns are necessary, which will have to be the forerunners of many more throughout South Africa. Without new towns the considerable movement of Whites and non-Whites from the platteland to the existing industrial areas will only aggravate our urban housing problems and employment problems and fail to provide opportunities for productive employment. Squatter problems will just become worse and worse. Sir, I believe that the Dassenberg development is both wise and timely. I believe it is wise because we need new towns surrounded by open spaces. We must put a stop to the urban sprawl around our large cities, which has no character whatever. This urban sprawl, without planning, without self-sufficiency these dormitory areas, without a soul, create transport problems and require workers to travel long distances at great cost. We must in these new towns create opportunities for industrial and business enterprise, and we must create opportunities for the Black and the Brown to enter into the mainstream of the economic life and development of the Republic. It seemed strange to me when I read, because I was not in the House, that the hon. member for Sea Point had opposed this scheme at Dassenberg. He professes to stand for the creation of conditions in which equality of opportunity can be exercised. This is in fact what is being done at Dassenberg. I believe that is the type of development we need in this country. In the United Kingdom new towns have had a striking success; 33 have been built in a short period of time, 2 000 industries have moved into these new towns and job opportunities have been created. I also want to say that the House is aware that with the R8 million we advanced, Malawi started the development of a new city. Within five years they were moving in and occupying it. It was first thought of in 1968; it was being occupied in 1973, and last year private building plans to the value of R30 million were approved within that city. Sir, this was done because both in the U.K. and in Malawi the development of towns is taken away from the multitude of Government bodies and placed in the hands of a development corporation constituted solely for the purpose of the development of those new towns. Time does not permit me to go into all the details, but I am sure the hon. the Minister is aware of the procedure which is adopted in that connection. The State, through the responsible department, is required to consider, and after consultation with the local authorities, to approve of the master plan which is prepared by the development corporation. Upon approval the corporation then acts; it is empowered to acquire property through purchase or expropriation; it can manage and dispose of land, it can erect public buildings and do what is necessary generally to get that town off the ground and make it habitable, occupied and developing in the least possible time. As I say, there is no time to elaborate on the details, but I believe that we cannot face this challenge in South Africa in so far as community development is concerned by carrying on in the old way in which we are carrying on now in Government circles. I believe it is necessary that the whole question of co-ordination of the departments and Ministries to which I have referred needs urgent attention. I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether he will not take steps to see that either a Select Committee of this House or a commission is appointed to go into this question of the co-ordination which is necessary to provide for what I call community development in a wider sense to comply with the needs and requirements of all our people in this country. By its very recommendations in its last report, the Public Service Commission has indicated the need for a new approach. In the report of the Commission tabled this session, reference is made to its recommendation for adjustments to the functions of the departments of Community Development, Public Works, Planning and the Environment. Unfortunately full details were not made public, except that the disappearance of the Department of Community Development was envisaged. Obviously, Sir, we do not hope it will lead to the disappearance of the hon. the Minister. What is meant is that this department and the subject of community development is not now an isolated one restricted to housing, but that it will have a far wider relevance, and that the concept and relevance of community development will be far more attached to physical planning and economic planning in this country in the years that lie ahead. The Commission believes that in terms of its recommendations, efficiency will be increased and that there will be considerable savings in man-power and expense to the State. The Minister of the Interior, when I raised this matter under his Vote, said that this recommendation had been turned down by the Cabinet as not being in the interests of the State. The hon. the Minister of Community Development is aware of the division of decision-making and the difficulties, for instance in relation to the proclamation of group areas. It leads to delays, frustration and reconsideration. I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether he will not inform the Committee this afternoon of more of the details of what the Public Service Commission’s recommendations were and give his views on these recommendations. While the hon. the Minister is dealing with this matter, I also want to ask him to indicate his attitude towards what I believe is an urgent necessity, and that is to have centralized control of all aspects of community development for all races—Whites, Coloureds, Indians and Blacks—outside the homelands. In my opinion, this can only be effective under one governmental authority. I believe that only in this way can the true concepts of community development be assured in the future for all our people. I believe that we have reached in this year a time when community development is no longer a matter of merely providing roofs over people’s heads; it is more important to provide a better way of life for all the people in South Africa and more opportunities for their economic and personal advance in the years that lie ahead.

Mr. Chairman, I do not intend to devote very much time to the speech made by the hon. member for Green Point. The fact is that we have witnessed the strange spectacle today in that the chief spokesman of the Opposition discussed the philosophy of community development for almost half an hour and did not say a single word about housing as such. This really indicates to us the improvement there has been in the situation in respect of housing. The hon. member devoted a large part of his speech to the position of Bothasig, which I do not want to discuss now. The hon. member for Durbanville, in whose constituency this falls, will most certainly reply to his remarks in that respect, because our representatives are in the habit of keeping very close contact with our people. I am glad that the hon. member regards Dassenberg as a wise move and I hope that the hon. member for Sea Point, too, will see it in this light. I shall come back to the question of the permit for the Nico Malan Theatre.

It is really not surprising that the hon. member did not want to say much about housing, especially if one looks at the phenomenal progress which has been made in this field over the past five years. Hon. members on this side of the House will go into greater detail and I just want to mention a few overall figures in passing. For Whites, for example, 25 324 dwelling units have been build over the past five years at a total cost of R198 million, but because we have so often been criticized in respect of Coloured housing in the past and especially because the hon. member for Orange Grove made some disparaging remarks only last Friday about the Government’s record in connection with Coloured housing, I want to mention a few figures in this regard as well. Over the past five years, R 120,2 million has been spent on 58 164 dwelling units. Last year alone, more than R30 million was spent on Coloured housing, or three times a total budget of an independent country such as Lesotho, which is often loud in its criticism of us. Of our total Coloured population of just over two million today, one million has already been provided with good accommodation financed by State funds. In other words, approximately 50% of the total Coloured population has already been settled in good houses provided from State funds. In order to demonstrate the extent of such a tremendous housing effort, I want to say that the entire population of a country such as Lesotho would have been housed after such an effort and that sufficient housing would have been left over for Tonga as well. I may take another country as an example. Jamaica has just acted as host to the latest Commonwealth conference, and I just want to quote from a report which appeared in The Argus of 8 May 1975—

This is the country which acted as host to the Commonwealth conference. With this project which the National Party Government undertook in respect of Coloured housing alone, we would have been able to house half Jamaica’s population. I could go on in this way. Air travellers bound for D. F. Malan must often have looked down with critical eyes when the aircraft was descending over Elsies River, because the most terrible slums were to be seen there. At the moment a redevelopment scheme is under way there and 3 000 houses are being built. The Government is going to spend an estimated amount of R66 million on redevelopment there. On just one project the Government is going to spend an amount equal to the total budgets of Swaziland and Botswana and double the budget of Lesotho. President Idi Amin solved his Indian housing problem at little expense, and just as little criticism was levelled against him for the measures he took. This Government, on the other hand, has built 14 554 dwelling units for Indians over the last five years at a cost of R59 500 000, and has received little credit for it. With the things that have already been achieved and all the schemes which have already been approved and which are now in the pipeline, the chances are good that we shall be able to get the housing situation in South Africa under control for good. Now it is only a question of the necessary finance, and for that reason I want to make a serious plea today that some of these schemes which have been approved and which are under construction today should not be delayed or discontinued in the immediate future as a result of a lack of funds. The hon. the Minister should urge the Government to enable these schemes to proceed.

With reference to a paragraph on building costs in the report of the department, I want to point out that in its latest report of 1974 on the construction industry, the Bureau for Economic Research indicated that the cost of building a house increased by 25% in 1974. Only 12,9% of this can be attributed to a real increase in building costs, while the rest, i.e. 12,1%, is to be attributed to the fact that houses have become bigger and more luxurious. The increase in building costs is assuming such proportions that one really fears that private house ownership may eventually become a privilege enjoyed by very few people. If a large percentage of that increase can be attributed to luxury, surely we should investigate this whole matter urgently, particularly if luxurious houses are being built by means of loans from the National Housing Commission or from building societies which have to receive indirect assistance. I know that the department, too, is concerned about this tendency, and for that reason I want to ask today whether the time has not come for a comprehensive investigation to be instituted into the total extent of the increase in building costs. It would not get us anywhere to switch over blindly to a lower standard if we have not identified the cause of the problem.

The hon. member for Green Point referred in passing to a gradually changing social pattern, as he called it. He referred specifically to the granting of permits and in particular to the granting of a permit for the Nico Malan Theatre. I am glad the hon. member did not elaborate on that at any length. The fact is that this is one of those delicate matters which we should really not drag through the political arena. By doing that, we should really not be serving the interests of the people we pretend to be serving here. Even that young priest who is laughing so uproariously about this will not be able to serve them.

You are the people who dragged this into politics.

The hon. member for Green Point has been guilty before of dragging this matter into politics. In 1964, when he was the leader of the United Party in the Cape Provincial Council, he dragged this matter into politics. Subsequently his deputy leader, the later United Party Senator Bamford who is now a Reformist Senator, initiated his famous boycott. It now appears that this hon. Senator was not nearly as original as he pretended to be, that is if one is to give credit to the story told by former Judge President Andrew Beyers. To suggest that the Government has no policy in this respect, that its policy has failed and that we are groping in the dark, is simply not in accordance with the facts. It is not true. As far as this situation is concerned, I think one should spell out to the hon. member the policy which is followed in respect of the granting of permits. A different colour group will be allowed to attend a presentation in a theatre, hall or place on occasion. This has always been the policy of this Government. The method according to which this will be done will be determined in consultation with the management of the theatre, hall or place concerned. Hon. members must now accept that there are two essential concepts in respect of this matter.

Order! The hon. member’s time has expired.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to give the hon. member an opportunity to finish his speech.

I thank the hon. member for Mooi River for the opportunity. There are two essential concepts we have to consider in granting permits. The first is that attendance will be controlled by permit, as is the case in respect of the Nico Malan as well. In the second place, attendance will take place on the recommendation of the management concerned and with the permission of the Minister concerned. Surely it is obvious that the Minister who controls these permits will do so in accordance with certain principles. Firstly, where separation will promote peace and order and will eliminate more racial friction than it will cause, he will obviously have to maintain separation. When separation in a particular field no longer serves its original purpose of good relations and causes more friction that it was intended to prevent, separation can be lifted with wisdom and circumspection, as was in fact done in the case of the Nico Malan. A third principle is whether one would endanger the White man’s identity or his survival by admitting other colour groups. The fourth consideration is whether equal alternative facilities are available to people of other colour groups. It is against this background that the Nico Malan does not create a compelling precedent for us in respect of other situations. From the nature of the case, other situations will all have to be judged on their own merits.

I now want to refer to the administration. Surely the position is not that an ordinary clerk issues a permit and then the performance simply goes ahead. Because this is a delicate matter, because its implications can be so far-reaching and because its effect can so easily be the opposite of what was foreseen, i.e. the racial situation may be bedevilled instead of facilities being created in an orderly manner, these applications have to be considered with great circumspection. For this reason it should be the responsibility of the Cabinet, whether hon. members like it or not.

The constant agitation of hon. members about this, that and the other which still have to be opened up shows us quite clearly that one cannot entrust orderly government to the Opposition and that they will throw everything open left, right and centre, without considering the implications. When they fail, they will throw up their hands in despair. It is for this particular reason that the electorate cannot trust the Opposition party, and then I am not even speaking of the two political illegitimate children of the United Party. When one analyses their behaviour, they seem like deviate juveniles who break windows just to attract attention. The Progressive Party in particular cannot lay claim to political credibility. The hon. member for Pinelands proved that with the letters he secretly wrote to the Pinelands town council. I think that Pinelands and the other Progressive constituencies will gradually have to start paying the price for modern slogans. Where were the hon. members of the Progressive Party me other night when the Eoan Group performed in the Nico Malan Theatre, or do they think that Mr. Sonny Leon would not be there? There is no reason to boycott the Nico Malan, after all. I put this question specifically to the hon. member for Rondebosch, because he has no specific reason, after all, for boycotting the Nico Malan.

I did not boycott it.

The Nationalists were there, the United Party members were there, but where were the Progs? It is characteristic of the Progressive Party’s philosophy that they agitate, but when they have to practise what they preach, they are just not there. The hon. members on the other side of the House can do a great deal to help in this field, not by always sowing suspicion and shouting “Open up this! Open up that!”, but by impressing upon many people of other race groups the fact that they too have a contribution to make in respect of good race relations. Let us take the Nico Malan as an example. When there is a queue in the ladies cloakroom during interval, then surely the Coloured women are also supposed to stand in this queue. The Whites are not the only ones who should prevent incidents and the Whites are not the only ones who should contribute towards the creation of good relationships; it is just as much the responsibility of people of other races, because they are sharing a facility which used to be exclusive to the Whites, of whom a greater adjustment is naturally required.

As far as cinemas are concerned, the situation is naturally not comparable with that of the Nico Malan. The hon. member for Newton Park referred to rural cinemas by way of interjection the other day. Surely that practical situation need not be changed, for in those cases a facility is being shared because Coloured people do not have a similar facility in their own areas. The custom in those cinemas has been confirmed by tradition, and in trying to tamper with it with political hands, we can only pollute it. The tradition is that the Coloured people sit on the gallery and have their own facilities, but heaven protect them if they throw down papers from above. Even in Sea Point, no agreement can be reached about facilities for people of other races. Surely the Progressive Party could have illustrated the principles of its policy there and could have given a demonstration of how one should endeavour to create facilities for people of other races. There is no case to be made out for shared or mixed cinemas in our urban areas. The Coloured people have these facilities in their own areas, and if they do not have them, it is our duty to create these facilities for them. I hope that in the course of this debate we shall get the standpoint of the official Opposition as well in this regard. The hon. members should not only criticize us, they should also tell us what their standpoint in this connection is.

The hon. member for Green Point made a very casual reference to District Six and I take it that hon. members on that side of the House will have more to say about District Six. I want to begin by saying that District Six in its old form was not something which the United Party could be proud of. The old District Six was really an indictment of an old United Party régime and of the Cape Town City Council which went out of its way to raise a hue and cry about the matter while it was applicable to District Six, but only in 1938 did the City Council buy a small portion with housing funds at an interest rate of ¾%. Apart from this small piece of land they bought, they did nothing further. Only in 1962, just before the proclamation, did the City Council apply for a small pilot scheme to be started there. In spite of this, it is being asserted even now that District Six was traditionally owned by the Coloured people. I should like hon. members to read the editorial in this morning’s Burger in this connection. The fact is, of course, that of the 2 085 properties in District Six which were affected by the proclamation, 1 083 belonged to Whites and only 585 to Coloured people. As far as occupation is concerned, the position was that 6 135 Coloured families, 241 Indian families and 800 Whites lived in the area. The greater part of District Six was one of the worst slum areas. This was proved in 1966 by an investigation by experts which revealed that 70% of the area was bad. In other words, the Government was faced with an enormous task in clearing that area, which is still a controlled area, and approximately R21 million has already been spent on this project. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Tygervallei discussed District Six, and I shall leave it to my Cape colleagues te react to the hon. member’s speech, for they know more about this than I do. However, the speech made by the hon. member was an example of two approaches of the Government supporter opposite, approaches which, as we see it, are quite wrong. The first approach is to take amounts of money and to spend these on a particular project and then to say, “How nice of us”, and to boast about it. It is no use drawing a comparison between what we are spending and what Lesotho, Botswana and Swaziland are spending. This is typical of the half truths we are constantly getting from the Department of Information. Our gross national product is R190 000 million as indicated in reply to a question put by the hon. member for Berea. Can this be compared with that of Botswana, Lesotho and Swaziland? Nevertheless, we are continually hearing this kind of argument from that side of the House This is a fallacious argument and it impressed no one, particularly not those members sitting on this side of the House and who are trying to make a study of what is going on in this country. Why should we always be compared with impoverished Africa? Surely we are the wealthiest country in Africa and we therefore have to make the best housing and other facilities available. Not only is it so much nonsense to keep on comparing our country with these impoverished countries, I think it is also irresponsible.

The hon. member for Tygervallei also dealt with the policy in respect of permits. Over the years the local authorities have decided which people would use which halls, and it has never created any problems. Why should the Cabinet suddenly decide about it? In this case we see again that the hon. member for Tygervallei and the Government are trying to get away from this hard, monolithic Verwoerdian dogma. They need not be ashamed of it. The whole of South Africa is so very glad to be able to get away from this ideology, which has had such a restrictive and oppressive effect on South Africa and we are grateful for it. There is no need for them to apologize. Nor do we want any apologies; we want to congratulate them on it.

†Mr. Chairman, I believe that housing is an issue that ought to be dealt with non-politically if possible. The hon. the Deputy Minister of Bantu Administration and Education has also mentioned this fact. We are going to be faced with increasing industrialization and urbanization which is going to result in a tremendous population as well as housing explosion. In 1970. 33% of our Black population were in the urban areas. By 1990 the number of Blacks in the urban areas will have doubled and I venture to suggest that by the year 2000 this number will have doubled again. We know that by the turn of the century out of a total population of some estimated 50 million people it has been conservatively estimated that 40 million will be Blacks. At least half of them will be living in our cities.

Durban is a critical area. Many people have estimated what the housing needs of greater Durban are, but nobody has been able to this accurately. I believe that we are heading for a crisis in Black housing in Durban. In fact, it is almost upon us. As, far as housing is concerned, Durban has tended to move from crisis to crisis. We went from Cato Manor to Clermont. Cato Manor produced KwaMashu. As a result of a tremendous campaign in the Press and by various Members of Parliament the crisis of Coloured housing at Wentworth is now being dealt with steadily. However, in the greater Durban area, we are always moving from crisis to crisis. If we estimate reasonably what our housing requirements are going to be now in order to clear the backlog, it will not be unreasonable to suggest that we need at least 20 000 houses for Blacks and close on 10 000 houses for Indians and Coloureds. This is without taking into account the fact that there is going to be a huge increase in these figures because of the urbanization of the Black community over the next 25 years.

I believe that in order to meet this great need we will have to get away from the idea that the Port Natal Bantu Affairs Board has to deal with certain aspects of housing, that the KwaZulu Government has to build certain houses, that the Durban Corporation has to make provision for certain housing and that the Department of Community Development has to see to other housing again. We should have one housing corporation to meet the housing situation in Durban. This is what the hon. member for Green Point suggested should be planned. Hon. members opposite, particularly the hon. member for Tygervallei, will be delighted to hear that we do not have any political problems in Durban. The reason for this is that in Durban we are a White island in a Black homeland. Therefore, the question of housing for Blacks is not affected by the hon. the Deputy Minister of Bantu Administration and Education’s semi-permanent temporary residents in urban areas who happen to be Black. All the people in Durban can live permanently in that area.

In view of the drastic situation that is developing in Durban, it seems to me that the Department of Housing should get away from the ridiculous situation where the Department of Bantu Administration and Development is a government within a government which in White areas and in other areas is planning activities which quite honestly it need not plan and which the Department of Community Development is perfectly competent to plan. I also believe that to do this effectively, we need a new approach to housing.

I think that we have all been very encouraged by the fact that this department now appears to have had some winds of change blowing through it. It seems as if this is what is happening in the Nationalist Party. For example, we have had a Bill passed this session providing for new community development facilities. It is very encouraging to see the circular minute which the Secretary of the Department has been sending out to the local authorities. For example, we have seen a flexibility on the part of this department in allowing the Cape Town Chamber of Commerce to develop the Belhar housing scheme. We have just seen recently too that the department has permitted the Garden Cities Public Utility Housing Company to operate in Coloured areas as well. This is a very welcome development. This is a sensible situation; this is using all our people to provide housing for all our people instead of having rigid political yes-men all the time.

There are three things which I want to suggest we do in the urban areas. If we can get a corporation going, we must have better quality Black housing. Every Black house should have electricity, a decent bathroom and waterborne sewage. Secondly, I believe that we must try to understand that there can be different standards in building. Perhaps the hon. the Minister has seen the report on the plan to build a new capital for Tanzania, Didoma. This is going to take into account the situation that is developing in Black Africa. We do not necessarily have to build our houses in Durban as though we live in Danzig. We all seem to think that we have to build houses as they do in Europe. In Durban we have a climate which is mild and which leaves plenty of scope for a complete change in attitude towards building designs. I do appreciate that this is a very complicated matter but I know that the C.S.I.R., will be able to make a real contribution in this regard. Finally, I believe that we have to think in terms of a different system of zoning. Central business districts of our cities are all dead at night. In fact, this is most depressing. In Durban, however, in the Grey Street complex which is an Indian area there is a large number of flats. Where it is Government policy to move the people out of an area, that area dies at night. If people were allowed to live in the city centre one would experience a live city which contributes to the life of the whole community. If we want to create communities, I believe we should get away from the establishment of housing estates which are just dormitories or commuter camps where nothing happens during the day and to which at night the men and the working women return. We have to realize that we must change our whole concept of zoning and create real communities. For example, in Indian or Coloured areas we must allow the Indian or Coloured man to have his little transport business adjoining his property instead of having to park his vehicles next to an eight-storey block of flats. We must appreciate that we need to have a variation in our planning system. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Pinetown expressed certain ideas in respect of problems relating chiefly to his part of the world. I shall return in a moment to the question of housing in our part of the world, but before I do so, I should like to reply to the allegations made by the hon. member for Green Point with regard to Bothasig.

As far as Bothasig, Extension 2 in particular, is concerned—an extension which was established approximately three years ago—I want to say that there are houses which were built on large sites and which are situated a few kilometres from Cape Town. These are two and three bedroomed houses which were made available to buyers for amounts which were as low as R5 450. The present municipal valuation of the site alone is R5 000, and this indicates what value these people received. They also received 90 % or 95 % loans at economic rates. The houses in this scheme were built by a company on a cement block system. I shall be the first to concede that there are certain complaints in regard to these houses, and that these complaints are justified. It should also be borne in mind that the basis of these complaints were for the most part that the houses were damp and wet. It should also be borne in mind that the year in which these complaints were lodged, 1974, was the wettest year in the Cape Province for the past 70 years. I admit that that is no excuse. The problem still exists there. When I became a member for this constituency, I did not run away from the problems. I convened meetings there of all the house owners involved. We held two meetings. [Interjections.] The hon. member agrees. I just want to show you what happened, Sir. There were 300 people at the second meeting, and do you know what happened? These were people who came to complain about their houses. Do you know what the first question was which was asked at that meeting? The chairman of that meeting was the chairman of the taxpayers association. This question was put there: “I should like to ask whether our previous representative, the present hon. member for Maitland, was aware of this problem and, if so, whether he did anything about it?” The chairman’s reply was: “He was aware of the problem and he did absolutely nothing about it.” I then inherited the problem.

Now you are blaming me.

I am not blaming the hon. member for the faults which gave rise to these complaints, but I would at least like to indicate how much was done about it in his time. Nothing was done about it in his time, and now the hon. member for Green Point wants to mount this horse which has already been ridden to death. Sir, I want to say that I investigated this matter myself, comprehensively. I went to inspect the houses myself. I approached the department and the department instructed highly qualified professional officers to carry out an inspection. The department was very sympathetically disposed. After mature consideration the department said to these people: “We shall be fair. In the first place, those of you who feel that your houses require expensive repairs may return the houses to the department. We shall then pay back to you the price you paid for it, together with compensation for all improvements you have effected, at the present market value, and in addition we shall pay you interest on the capital from the time you purchased the houses.” In the second place, they were told: “To those of you who would like to repair your houses, we will make loans available at the present economic interest rate. You need not repair only the faults you have complained about, but if you have to repair a room, you may also have the house repainted and we shall lend you the money for that purpose.” Sir, when this particular concession was conveyed to the inhabitants of Bothasig at a meeting, quite a number of them felt that this would solve their problem. Many of them indicated that they would accept the offer, but most of these people realized that the market value of their house, for which they had paid R5 450 two and a half years ago, was today anything between R11 000 and R13 000. Sir, it is easy to say that the department should spend even more money on these houses, and that it should repair any cracks that may be found there, but if those cracks reappear owing to a different reason, then the department has to come back every second year with a repair team. Sir, this side of the House is certainly not unreasonable in respect of a problem of this nature. The meeting then decided to make further representations to the effect that the department should be accommodating in regard to repair costs in certain cases. They decided that a memorandum would be drawn up and would be submitted to me. This decision was taken at the meeting held on 13 February. On 25 March I wrote to them and said that I should like to have the memorandum. On 17 April I wrote again and asked them to send me the memorandum while Parliament was still in session, but, Sir, up to this stage I have not yet received any memorandum. In the meantime, however, they did write to the hon. the Leader of the Opposition. Sir, this department will consider any reasonable complaint on its merits, but then the necessary information must be made available. I have been waiting for all of four months for this information now, and when it reaches me their complaints will be investigated by the department and a decision will be taken.

Sir, in the few minutes at my disposal I should like to make a few remarks with regard to Coloured housing. I believe that there are three important tasks awaiting us. The first is that we should strive to obtain absolutely effective control over squatters. In the second place, in order to obtain this control, we shall have to construct thousands of houses. In the third place, to be able to construct these thousands of houses, we shall have to ensure that the necessary funds for that purpose are available. I believe that this department has, in recent times in particular, made tremendous progress with the construction of housing. I am referring for example to the 7 500 dwelling units which will be completed during the present year, in the three local authority areas here in the Cape, namely the divisional council area of Cape Town, the divisional council area of Stellenbosch and in the municipal area of Cape Town. Sir, the endeavour of this department is to raise this target every year. So I could refer you, for example, to the 1000 squatters who, within a period of seven months up to 28 February of this year were removed and accommodated. I also want to point out that three Coloured dwelling units are being constructed from Community Development funds for every White dwelling unit which is constructed. Sir, what is at issue here is not merely quantity; what is at issue is also quality, and I want to point out that this low cost housing is really housing of quality. In this regard, Sir, I should like to quote to you what was said by Prof. Cowan of Australia, a world expert in the field of low-cost housing. I quote to you what he wrote to the United Nations, with reference to South Africa—

And then he adds that other countries are not even able to do this at double our normal costs—

Sir, I feel however that there are certain disturbing factors in regard to this task which await us in regard to the construction of housing. In the first place I feel that that employers should be made increasingly aware of their responsibility to construct housing for their employees. In the second place I feel that local authorities should go farther out of their way to establish houses at economic rentals and for private ownership so that Coloureds, whose income has in the meantime risen to R350 or R400 per month, could be moved out of subeconomic houses which are at present being occupied by them, so that that subeconomic housing could be made available to the indigent squatter. These Coloureds with an income of R350 or R400 per month, can then be settled in economic houses in a better neighbourhood, where they can raise their standard of living. In the third place, Sir, I believe that the social economic backlog of the Coloured breadwinner is such that he does not always sufficiently appreciate that he has a duty to the State, and to his family in particular, to look after himself. I believe that the Coloured leaders should place more emphasis on this responsibility resting on their people, and that the local authorities also have a role to play in this regard. In the last place I believe that we may not allow the housing target to be detrimentally affected owing to a shortage of funds. I believe that we should never allow the situation which has been reached in America to be reached in this country, namely where there is insufficient money available for the construction of arrear houses. I realize that a tremendous task awaits us, but if we have the money for a second Sasol and a third Iscor and for a Richards Bay and other things, then the taxpayer of South Africa will also have to put his hand in his pocket to establish, the necessary housing so that our people be properly accommodated. [Time expired.]

Sir, I am just rising to afford the hon. member an opportunity to complete his speech.

Sir, unfortunately I had to curtail my speech considerably, and therefore I had to omit important particulars, but I should like to return to this very important aspect of the provision of housing, and the fear of a shortage of funds. In this regard I should just like to add that the chief health officer of Cape Town is of the opinion that we require 20 000 dwelling units immediately to cope with the most pressing immediate need. But, Sir, even this is not going to eliminate the backlog; it is only going to cope with the most pressing need, which is to provide accommodation for squatters who do not have a roof over their heads at the moment. I want to tell you, Sir, that the Cape Town City Council is engaged in an ambitious attempt, particularly in Mitchell’s Plain, where they are establishing a city with a population of a quarter million people. In this year’s budget, however, they were only able to make provision for R12 million for housing. They expressed the opinion that they saw their way clear, if funds were available, to applying R40 million per annum for the establishment of housing in Mitchell’s Plain and other schemes. Sir, this is an almost unbelievable target if one analyses the figures. This amount mentioned by the Cape Town municipality represents approximately 50% of the moneys which we are able to apply every year from the National Housing Fund for housing purposes if capital repayments are taken into consideration. We dare not allow ourselves to fall behind with the provision of housing. If we were to fall behind, or if we are unable to maintain the present rate with regard to the provision of housing, or even to accelerate it, a situation could develop which we would never be able to solve in our time. In the annual report of the Secretary for 1974 we read that certain approved schemes had to stand over due to the non-availability of funds. It is disturbing that we had to allow schemes to stand over because the money was not available, disturbing because of the magnitude of the housing emergency. Everyone is aware of the monetary problems! which all countries of the world experience from time to time, but I nevertheless want to repeat what I said earlier, that when we come to absolutely essential matters, such as economic projects which we are proceeding with and simply have to carry out in the national interests, then we dare not economize on something as important as Coloured housing, for here we are investing in dispositions, in the cultivating of sound relations, in the elimination of a situation of socio-economic backlog among the Coloured people of South Africa and in the establishment of an advanced social family life for the Brown people, something which is of the utmost importance in making of them useful, productive, positive and educated citizens. I realize that in these times in particular, when there is a relative lull in the building industry, when builders are looking for work and tenders may be obtained at relatively fair prices, and when the skilled workers are available, the time is ripe. Now we may not flinch from this. I realize very well that only a percentage of the national income can be utilized for housing, and that to exceed the maximum limit in this regard could have a detrimental effect on the expansion of the growth rate and also on the national economy. There is, however, the other side as well, which is that the need is great, and South Africa will have to realize this, and South Africa will have to be prepared to make a sacrifice, even though it has to thrust its hand deeply into its pocket. Therefore I should like to request the hon. the Minister to put this case to the Cabinet with absolute conviction, that we dare not economize in so far as this is feasible, for only by making funds available can we prevent our falling behind with the wonderful rate at which we are moving at present. In this way we will succeed in placing accommodated Coloured breadwinners on the most productive basis, and enable them to make their greatest productive contribution, and will it be possible to reduce the present high birth rate—namely 3,5%, a world record—in accordance with the higher socio-economic and social standard of living which they will themselves be able to maintain, and will it also be possible to exercise the best possible control over the squatters who are streaming in.

Mr. Chairman, I am rising at this early stage of the debate because I should like to furnish this hon. House with information which I feel could be of value to hon. members in the course of the debate. In fact, it has a bearing on certain aspects of the speech made by the hon. member for Pinetown, and on the point made very pertinently by the hon. member for Tygervallei.

I think it is accepted fairly generally in the Republic of South Africa, as well as in the rest of the world, that as far as the provision of housing for persons in the lower income groups is concerned, the Republic is still succeeding in providing relatively low-cost housing of an exceptionally high standard within the means of the inhabitants. Apart from that there is no real backlog, taking an overall view of the situation as far as the Whites are concerned, and the major housing backlog in regard to Coloureds and Indians is being made up at the present juncture, and the short age will be eliminated more rapidly as it is possible to provide my department with funds. This state of affairs is, as far as low cost housing prices are concerned, due of course to the years of joint study by my department and its organ, the National Housing Commission, local authorities and in particular the National Building Research Institute, whose constant concern it is to provide the best housing value for the smallest possible amount of money, and to limit luxury without sacrificing efficiency. Consequently it is still possible for my department and for local authorities, even today, to provide a reasonably attractive and spacious three-bedroomed house for as little as plus-minus R7 000, and to make the cheapest economical and sub-economical dwelling unit available at a building cost of as little as R2 500. The maximum building cost limits, land included, of the most expensive economic three-bedroomed house which can be erected with funds from my department, was set two months ago at R9 700. As far as low-cost housing is concerned, the position therefore presents no particular or insurmountable problems which are not already being dealt with by my department and the bodies I have mentioned. But as far as the provision of housing for persons in the higher income groups are concerned, the position is not such a fortunate one, and even as far as factors are concerned which are related to housing, such as the availability of building sites, land for the establishment of townships, to mention only a few, serious problems are being experienced. On my recommendation, therefore, the Government has found it necessary to appoint a commission of inquiry with the terms of reference to institute an investigation and publish a report on the following: (a) the prevailing high cost of housing and, if necessary, measures to impose more moderate standards for housing; (b) the possibility of the introduction by building societies of sliding scales for the repayment of instalments, more or less as are applicable in respect of loans from the National Housing Fund and the Community Development Fund; (c) the question of whether too much land is in the hands of township developers and, if so, measures to deal with such a situation; (d) (i) the desirability of the formation by building societies of more development companies and, if so (ii) according to what methods this should be done and (iii) whether or not those companies should be allowed to operate in non-White areas; (e) (i) the raising from time to time of the maximum loans limit allowed by building societies in respect of a percentage of loans granted by them, and (ii) the adjustment of the percentage referred to in (i) which such loans may represent; (f) the determination of realistic plot sizes by local authorities; (g) the still prevailing high land prices; (h) hire-purchase transactions in respect of plots and houses, particularly with reference to conditions in the contracts in regard to payments; (i) whether the Sectional Titles Act, 1971, is functioning satisfactorily and, if not, measures to make this Act more effective; and (j) any other matter which is considered to be of importance in promoting the provision of housing and in reducing the cost thereof. The provisions of the Commissions Act, Act No. 8 of 1947, have been made applicable to the commission concerned, and the members of the commission are as follows: Mr. L. Fouché, Secretary for Community Development, chairman; Prof. T. H. Louw, chairman of the National Housing Commission; Mr. J. L. S. Hefer, representative of the Association of South African Building Societies; Mr. J. W. Louw, Registrar of Financial Institutions; Dr. D. Franzsen, representative of the S.A. Reserve Bank; Mr. A. J. van Riet, representative of private initiative, as well as of the South African Property Owners’ Association Limited; Dr. T. L. Webb, Director of the National Building Research Institute; Mr. G. F. Cross, president of the United Municipal Executive of South Africa; Mr. G. de C. Malherbe, director of the Federation of Building Industries of South Africa; and Prof. J. L. Weyers, chairman of the South African Coordinating Consumer Council. You will note that the terms of reference are wide and comprehensive, and that they deal with quite a number of very real matters and problems. I am convinced that attention to and a study of these problems, with the appreciable solutions which are likely to result from this, could make an exceptional contribution to promoting the provision of housing in the Republic. I want to conclude by stating that the Association of Building Societies, and all the bodies I mentioned, support the idea of the appointment of this commission.

Mr. Chairman, it will be understandable that we should like to examine in closer detail the terms of reference of the commission which the Government has announced, but let me say immediately that we in these benches welcome the appointment of a commission which is going to study the subject and also that included in the members of the commission are people representing the private sectors which are concerned with the provision of housing and the building industry. We are pleased that this is happening because it is now the first time in years that the Government has admitted that there is a problem. In the past, even during the discussion of the Rents Amendment Bill earlier this year, the hon. the Minister and the Government seemed unable to grasp that there was a very real problem in this area. At last now they have admitted it in these words: “Daar is ’n ernstige probleem. In hierdie hoër-in-komstebehuisingsveld is die situasie nie so gelukkig nie.” I think the very frank admission by the Government that it has failed over the years to keep pace with the problem is at least a good start for the workings of the new commission. I hope that the commission will cut right through any preconceived notions which the Government may have in respect of housing for the middle and upper income groups.

It is in this connection that I want to draw the attention of the hon. the Minister to certain problems which still exist and, indeed, which flow out of the amending legislation to the Rents Act. It was indicated during the course of the debate and by all the evidence before me, including questions put to me at a meeting of more than 500 landlords and tenants in the Sea Point area the other evening, that there is still serious concern about the intention of the hon. the Minister and certain of the procedures which he may follow especially in the field of the decontrol of controlled premises. This is entirely in the Minister’s discretion; there is no provision for any detailed procedure to be followed. Public concern has been heightened because the amending legislation makes it easier to decontrol since the Minister may now impose certain conditions. I must put it to the hon. the Minister that whatever his intentions are, the public is even more concerned since the passage of that legislation than it was before. I believe that the hon. the Minister can allay the fears of many, many thousands of people and especially older people living in rent-controlled premises if he will, without any further delay, make a public statement or see that regulations are gazetted in which he will lay down the procedures by which decontrol can take place.

One thing which is important is that every tenant should know by written formal notice from the department that a request for decontrol has been received and that it is being considered. I think it is vital that he should know. Just as he is told when there is an application for an increase in rental, there should be formal provision for every tenant to know that there is a request for the building of which he is a statutory tenant to be decontrolled. Secondly, I think it is vital that every tenant should know the date on which and the place at which objections can be lodged to this request. It should not just be confined to a notice that such a request has been received by the Minister; the date on which and the place at which objections should be lodged should be clearly notified to every tenant.

Thirdly I believe it is important that the Minister should make his decision after public hearings on this issue. At the moment if there is an application for an increase in rental, that is argued in public, but when there is an application for the removal of rent control altogether, which affects both the rental increase and the security of the tenant, there is no provision for a public hearing. It is within the Minister’s power to make a statement to make it clear to the public that he will in all cases ensure that formal notice is received by the tenant in which the date on which and the place at which objections can be lodged is made known, and that there should be public hearings on this issue before he makes up his mind.

The second area which is giving concern to tenants and is also creating uncertainty among certain sections of landlords, is that the hon. the Minister has not yet stated publicly what criteria he is going to apply when he considers applications for decontrol. It is tremendously important that the public, both landlords and tenants, should know what the criteria are going to be. They should know whether the criterion is going to be the type of building, viz. whether it is a luxury, semi-luxury or inexpensive type of building. They should know whether the criterion is going to be the type of tenant occupying the building, viz. whether it is someone in the upper income group or in the lower income group.

In particular, I think the hon. the Minister should make it quite clear that where people come to him and ask him to decontrol property because a number of flats are in private hands, and he finds out that those flats have been sold under the threat of decontrol, he should automatically refuse that decontrol. Where tenants are coerced into making down-payments because there is a threat that an application for decontrol might succeed, I believe the Minister should say that that will be one reason for not acceding to any request for decontrol. This is important, especially in view of the uncertainty which has arisen as a result of the recent legislation and its promulgation about a month ago.

The other subject which has aroused some discussion today is the question of Coloured housing. In this connection the hon. member for Green Point, skirting around some of the truths which I stated during the course of my address, raised the question of Dassenberg. Let me say quite clearly that I am in favour of decentralization and satellite towns. This, however does not mean that every site is suitable for decentralization or that every satellite town is going to succeed. Indeed, there have been many illustrations in Europe and elsewhere of satellite towns failing either because they were on the wrong site or because they did not take account of the harsh economic realities of that siting. In relation to Dassenberg the problem is almost out of the hands of the Department of Planning and the Environment and is now squarely in the hands of the Department of Community Development.

The cardinal feature of Dassenberg is that 60% of the people of Dassenberg— who it was suggested by the hon. member for Green Point would not have to commute to their work—are now going to be located 45 km from their place of work and will have to commute daily. Some 67 000 people are going to commute daily between Dassenberg and Cape Town when the Dassenberg scheme is completed. This hon. Minister is going to have to see if Dassenberg is going to succeed. He is going to have to see to it that Dassenberg is so attractive as a city, in terms of its total amenities, of its environment and of its housing, that it can attract people away from Cape Town to go and live there and to work in Cape Town.

I now want to ask the hon. the Minister of Community Development specifically whether he is satisfied with the type of house that is being built in Dassenberg. Is he satisfied that the same amount of thought, detail, care and attention is going into the early design of Dassenberg that is going into the design of Michell’s Plain? Mitchell’s Plain has been an exemplary study in lower income group housing. It has changed from a mere dormitory and is going to be a living and vital part of the metropolitan area of Cape Town. Tremendous thought has been given to the whole infrastructure of that town, to the quality of housing, to the use of the natural topography, to the landscaping and to the various forms of cluster housing associated one with the other. However, I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether he is satisfied that the same thought and attention is going into the planning of Dassenberg. Is he satisfied with this? Is he satisfied that the same care is being given to the whole question of amenities and the total structure of the life of that community? I say this because I am pleased to see what is taking place at Mitchell’s Plain. I do not believe that there is evidence at the moment that the same thought and investigation is taking place in relation to the planning of Dassenberg, a city which is going to be nearly twice the size of Mitchell’s Plain.

The next point I want to raise in regard to Coloured housing is that the Government, some time ago, restricted or limited public utility companies in their efforts in the field of Coloured housing. As the hon. member for Pinetown has pointed out, there has been the re-emergence lately of public utility corporations playing some role in Coloured housing. We want to know that the hon. the Minister is actively and positively encouraging this. We want to see that he passes legislation which will remove the very awkward problem of the transition of land from whomever is the original owner, through the development companies, to the Coloured people. Some amending legislation may have to be introduced to make it possible both for the utility companies, which are White companies in terms of the Act, and/or private corporations to play their full part. This can only be achieved if land is readily available to these people and if they are not blocked by group areas legislation which has thwarted them in the past. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member who has just resumed his seat will pardon me if I do not react to his argument. He has already received part of the answer on Dassenberg, and he will receive the rest of it, too. I should also like to express a few ideas on housing. This matter has already been raised frequently in this debate and elsewhere, but the matter which I want to touch upon specifically, relates to problems which town councils have with existing housing schemes. I do not want to go into what still has to be done. I want to refer specifically now to economic and sub-economic housing schemes. I want to elucidate the problem by mentioning a specific local case, but I know, of course, that the same formulae and principles apply throughout the entire country. I am aware that other town councils have similar problems. In my constituency, in Krugersdorp, there are housing schemes which range from the pre-war Apple Park scheme to the schemes which are under construction at the moment, with various other schemes which have been completed in the meantime. Here I do have to give the United Party a little credit. Although they did very little, at least they did do something, for this Apple Park scheme was commenced even before the war. The loan with which the houses were erected has already been discharged, but in spite of the fact that the loan and the loan cost, i.e. with interest included, has already been discharged, that scheme of 54 sub-economic houses and approximately 90 economic houses is still being operated at a loss by the town council, a loss which has amounted to R52 000 during the past six years. What is more, the loss is still increasing, and at present has to be redeemed from the tax funds of the town council. The renewal funds which are available and which the town councils have to use to maintain and to operate these places, increase at first, for a new house requires few repairs. As the houses become older, however, the cost increases, and then one finds, as in the case of Apple Park, that these funds become depleted, as has been the case here since 1967 and 1968. In the year 1967-’68 the actual expenditure on the maintenance of this specific scheme was R11 269. The amount allowed, in accordance with the current formulae, was R5 526. The deficit was therefore R5 743. In 1971-’72 the actual expenditure was R18 136, the amount allowed was R5 526 and the deficit was therefore R12 610. I must add that the renewal funds of the other schemes which are in operation at present show the same downward tendency. I have with me here the figures supporting this statement, but I do not want to bother this House with them. We will, in other words, again reach the point at which the renewal funds will also have been depleted. I could just add that the specific local authority at present has a deficit of R22 000 per annum on the schemes concerned.

The question which then occurs to one is why the specific deficit exists. The major question is really what can be done about it, and whether it can be justified that the town council should bear the cost and whether the town council will always be able to bear the cost. As regards the question of where the deficits come from, I want to refer to a memorandum compiled by the town council. I quote—

1. (i) the present rentals for the various schemes are quite inadequate to cover the expenditure;
2. (ii) the maintenance, particularly in the older schemes, is considerably more than the 1¼% allowed on the original construction costs of the renewal funds.

They go on to say that rentals will have to be adjusted, a matter to which I shall return subsequently. The question is simply who is going to pay for this. As I have said, the contribution to the renewal fund is made up of 1¼% of the total rentals, I mean 1¼% of the original construction costs. Hon. members will understand that 1¼% of the construction costs of the house which cost R600 before the war, is something like R7-50. An amount of R7-50 per annum is not sufficient to maintain these houses. We therefore want to request the hon. the Minister to consider calculating the 1¼% on the present value of the building and not on the original construction costs.

I do not want to go any further now into the rental loss reserve fund in regard to which the board is able to receive a contribution of a twelfth, or rather 8½% as well as the administrative costs of which the board may receive 5% with a minimum of R1 per person. I can only say that this specific town council has appointed a fulltime incumbent to the post, whom they term a senior housing superintendent. As a result of the work of the senior housing superintendent the rent losses of the board are so little that the town council feels that the rent loss reserve fund could be decreased, and that the 8⅓% is unnecessarily high. In other words, there is a positive approach, and they also feel that the minimum of R1 per person for administrative costs is entirely adequate for the costs of the town treasurer, the clerk of the board, the accountant’s costs, and so on. They therefore recommend a joint reduction, but then the third aspect, namely the cost attached to the post of senior housing superintendent, should be included in the administrative costs and should be regarded as a unit.

I should like to suggest that from what I have just said it appears that the town councils are in many cases not able to administer the matter according to the present formulae. The question one then asks is: What is the solution? As far as I was able to establish, and in the opinion of the town council there is no other solution but to increase the rentals. It appeared from further investigations that if 25% of a person’s income would be regarded as a maximum for housing, at least 30% of the inhabitants will have to pay more than 25% of their income in rentals if the rentals are placed on an economic level. This 36% consists for the most part, in fact, of social pensioners. In other words, the question then is who is going to bear this expense. I think it is Government policy that the town councils should not provide housing at a loss. Surely it is only logical that, when the lower income groups cannot bear the costs involved either, the State will simply have to bear them. Now the next problem of course is the availability of money. This is a problem the State, the town council and everyone has. Now I may be asked where the money should come from. I think the hon. the Minister made it very clear one day when he said that the State has, as it were, a cake which it has to distribute. That cake is limited of course, and the State cannot distribute more than it has. I am prepared to take a smaller crumb of that cake so that the social pensioners may receive a larger portion. I think all of us in this House who gladly advance pleas for these social pensioners who are suffering hardships, should be prepared to take a smaller portion, so that these people may receive a larger portion.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Krugersdorp dealt with matters concerning his constituency and I am sure the hon. the Minister will reply to him. I wish to raise certain matters which basically concern the question of the housing of Coloureds in Natal and in the Durban complex in particular. Before I do that, I should like to express my appreciation to the Secretary and his department for what I consider a very notable achievement of their’s this year. I refer to the fact that we had tabled simultaneously in April two reports which in effect brought the report of the department’s activities right up to December 1974; in other words, within four or five months of the present session of the House. My mind goes back, for example, to the time when members received the report of the Secretary for Community Development for 1965 as late as in June 1968. It must have been a colossal task to bring this matter up to date and I believe the Secretary and his staff deserve our thanks and appreciation.

I want to refer to the first of the two reports, the one dealing with 1973. I want to look specifically at the question of housing for Coloureds. Let me quote briefly from the report:

The report which is reasonably comprehensive, goes on to say that special attention was given during 1973 to the question of Coloured housing in the Durban complex. I refer to the fact that the hon. the Minister and the mayor of Durban issued a joint Press statement in 1973 in which they indicated that it was the intention to build 1 700 dwelling units before March 1975. The report further indicates that there will be a continuous programme of building of at least 1 500 dwelling units per annum and that this will be maintained until the backlog is wiped out. It is hoped to do this in four to five years. I quote again:

That is what the report states but what are the facts? We accept that the planning and construction of housing go hand in hand with resettlement. However, what happens when the building work lags behind the resettlement and planning? A figure of 1 700 houses to be provided before March 1975 was mentioned. What happened during the whole of 1974? A total number of 675 dwelling units were provided in the Durban complex in that year. That means that already there is a backlog and the target cannot be reached. When one looks at the overall situation and realizes from the latest report, the report for 1974, that there were 216 disqualified Coloured families who were resettled in their own group areas, it means that of the total number of dwelling units provided during the period mentioned, only about 460 could be used to cope with the influx, which still exists, from places like the Transkei and, I believe, Zululand, to cope with the natural increase in the Coloured population, with growing families and with married couples in the Coloured community and, above all this, to try to reduce the backlog which amounted to 4 000 houses in Natal in 1974 and which, in the Durban complex, stood at 2 300 houses in 1973.

I realize that there are many heart-rending cases in the lower income groups, but I believe that the group which is hit the hardest among the Coloured people are those in the middle income group, because they have adequate funds but no immediate prospects of being able to build their own homes as they wish to. They have no immediate prospects because the problem is that there is a lack of suitable sites. I believe that this can be illustrated and highlighted by the fact that in 1975, in terms of an answer given to me by the hon. the Minister of Community Development, only 25 dwelling units for Coloureds were built in the Durban complex by private enterprise. I want to make a very urgent appeal to the hon. the Minister to expedite the decision which I know is in the pipeline regarding the rezoning of a portion of Cato Manor. It may be rezoned for home-ownership for the middle income group of the Coloured people. I know, in terms of the Minister’s reply to my question earlier this session, that the matter is still under consideration, but I suggest that a rezoning, as suggested, would supply almost immediate short-term prospects for the Coloured people who fall into this particular category of homeowners. I want to urge the hon. the Minister to take heart. He must have judged the general approval which met the announcement that part of District Six would be allocated for residential purposes for the Coloured people. I want to point out to the hon. the Minister that as far as Cato Manor is concerned, which is a fairly vast area, I visualize no problems. I was told by an official in the local authority that in so far as housing for the Whites is concerned, it will take ten to 15 years before the development of Cato Manor is likely to be completed. According to Press reports, I understand that the Department of Community Development has been planning the housing of up to 52 000 people in a portion of that area. We have the situation which has existed for many years in my constituency in the Sparks Estate area, where we have had a White zone and a Coloured zone adjacent to it, separated in some instances only by a narrow street. There has not been any racial violence or discord and there has not been an increase in crime. We have a similar case in Westville in an area which used to fall in my constituency, where we have a middle and upper class group of Indians settled along the one side of the national road leading into Durban while on the other side one has White housing development. Also in the Westville area, in the Rhodes Avenue complex, Rhodes Avenue is a relatively narrow road with White housing on the one side and Indian housing on the other side. I believe that a live-and-let-live attitude has developed over the years. Then we have the question of Wyebank, which has been zoned for Indian occupation. It is adjacent to Kloof, but I know of no racial problems which have arisen from this. Therefore I make an earnest plea to the hon. the Minister to reconsider Cato Manor. I believe that the Coloureds are entitled to a choice of home-ownership houses in areas which are reasonably accessible to them and near to the city.