Mr. Chairman, at the outset I should like to congratulate the Secretary for Community Development and his officials and thank them for the attractive and full report we have received from the department on its activities during the past year. Sir, if you look at this report, I think you will agree with me that it is a reflection of the thoroughness and purposefulness of the Department of Community Development. What is more, I think the thoroughness and purposefulness of the department in the performance of its task, have taken the wind out of the Opposition’s sails. We have been discussing this Vote for two hours, and we have not had any criticism whatsoever from that side of the House.

Sir, the Department of Community Development has a proud record as far as the provision of housing is concerned, whether by means of the development of areas by the department itself or by means of making funds available to local authorities as well as individuals. I believe that as far as housing is concerned, this proud record relates to Whites, Coloureds and Indians. However, I should like to confine myself to housing for Whites.

Sir, if we take a look at the statistics for the past ten years, as far as the provision of dwelling units out of Government funds through the agency of this department is concerned, we see that they are truly amazing. During the past ten years 49 100 dwelling units were provided at a cost of R320 million. It is rather interesting to note that 22 000 dwelling units were erected at a cost of R53 million during the period 1920 to 1948, whilst 82 700 dwelling units were erected at a cost of R449 million from 1948 to 1973. This means that more than three times as many dwelling units were erected during the past 25 years as in the preceding period of 28 years.

When one considers the economic housing schemes in which this department has participated to a very large extent, one may ask oneself where else in the world a married person with an income of R320 per month or a couple with four for more children and an income of R460 per month is able to buy a house with R200 as a deposit. I think it is indeed an achievement to be able to offer such neat houses on such reasonable terms. Small wonder the low costs at which dwelling units are provided in South Africa are regarded as an achievement throughout the world. Even a world expert on lowcost housing, like Prof. Cowan of Australia, wrote a letter to the U.N. in this regard in which he paid tribute to South Africa. As far as housing for the lower income groups is concerned, I think the Government has done more than its duty, but my sympathy lies with that very group of people who cannot be assisted through the National Housing Fund and who would also like to own a house. For this reason I should like to thank the hon. the Minister for and congratulate him on the appointment of the commission, as announced by him yesterday afternoon, to investigate the provision of housing for the higher income groups. I want to say, however, that to a large extent the blame should be laid at the door of private bodies and persons. In the first place, I think blame attaches to our township developers and local authorities in this regard, those people who are only interested in prestige residential areas with large plots, and who make it impossible for the average man to acquire a piece of land. It is estimated that the costs of services such as water, sewerage, electricity and roads for a stand of approximately 900 square metres, represent approximately 40% of the eventual selling price, while the costs of the same services for a site of 750 square metres represent only approximately 25% of the selling price. Then the local authorities complain that they can no longer make the grade and that owners can no longer keep up with the rates and taxes. But this is small wonder, for with, larger plots for which the services are more expensive, rates and taxes must inevitably be pushed up. But more important still, how much of our valuable agricultural land is not lost as a result of the establishment of prestige residential areas? I think South Africa can no longer afford this luxury and I also think the time has arrived for the Government to step in so as to put an end to this uneconomic wastage of our land.

We know that loans are not easily obtainable at the building societies at the moment. However, I know, of numerous cases of loans having been made available by some building societies, but of the people making use of them being horribly exploited. The loans are made available by the building societies on terms which make it impossible for the man in the street to accept the loan. In addition to the House-owner’s policy which has to be taken out, as one can well understand, the loans are granted on condition that the people concerned take out a house occupant’s policy, life insurance and, in addition, take up certain subscription shares for a certain period.

The man in the street, however, is not free from blame either as regards the existing tendency to build larger and more luxurious homes. It is shocking to learn from the report on the investigation conducted by the Bureau for Economic Research of the University of Stellenbosch, that half the increase in building costs in 1974 was attributable to the luxury items built into houses. I do not believe that the economy of South Africa can afford such extravagant luxuries. In most cases these luxuries are used by speculation builders as bait to attract buyers.

If the average man of the future wants the joys of owning a private home, he will have to be satisfied with fewer of those luxuries. One asks oneself whether two bathrooms and two garages are really necessary. Have they not simply become status symbols? I am referring specifically to our young people who buy a house for the first time. Surely some of these luxuries can wait until such time as they can afford them. As an example I can mention the economic scheme in Boksburg under which people were provided with a solid house with all the necessary commodities. Those people themselves gradually made the extra additions and installed the extra luxuries, as they are called. I should like to appeal to our young people to keep their feet firmly on the ground and not try to fly too high. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I cannot agree with the statement of the hon. member who has just spoken that we have a proud record in regard to housing and that this is to the credit of the Department of Community Development. In the short time available to me I hope to examine the record of the department so far as the acquisition of land and the provision of housing is concerned because, as far as I can judge, this department has become one of the largest landowners and property developers in the country. Because it is so its activities warrant, to my mind, a closer look.

Firstly, the Department of Community Development is the principal agent of the Government in the implementation of its group areas schemes. Land was acquired from non-White owners, principally Asiatic and Coloured, either by purchase, that is a free purchase and sale, or by compulsory purchase, in the sense that people were told that they were obliged to sell, or by expropriation. In the first instance one should look at some of the prices paid at that level for the properties that were purchased. I say that because subsequent figures reveal, at least prima facie, that there was something wrong right from the beginning. I have a list here of properties which were purchased in the borough of Queensburgh which lies within my constituency, over a period of years mainly from 1964 to 1968. On this list you will find, for example, a property purchased in 1967 for R250 with a municipal valuation, seven years later, of R120 000, and a property purchased in 1966 for R300 with a municipal valuation, seven years later, of R36 000. A property purchased in 1968 for R650 had a municipal valuation six years later of R5 500. One could go on quoting similar figures to show an enormous discrepancy between the price that was originally paid by the department and the municipal valuation which, as most of us know, is below the true value, which was placed on it a short period later. Where the importance of the department’s activities come into play is where there are municipalities —Cape Town is one and Queensburgh is another—in which very substantial areas of the municipality are owned by the Department of Community Development. One has only to look at the area of District Six to see an example of this close at hand. In the borough of Queensburgh which is a large middle-class borough on the fringe of Durban, more than one-third of the entire municipal area is owned by the hon. the Minister’s department. An area in excess of 33% of the entire borough is owned by the hon. the Minister’s department. Unless enormous tracts of land of that kind are dealt with expeditiously in a business like and a proper manner they are a tremendous burden indeed to the council and the ratepayers of that type of municipality. I am going to give some examples here to show to what extent the Department of Community Development has fallen down in its job so far as this municipality is concerned.

Let me deal firstly with a large industrial area, viz. that of Queensburgh West, which is owned by the hon. the Minister’s department and in respect of which there has been endless delay, year after year, in its development. This is an area of over 100 acres, some 57 ha in extent, which was purchased during the period I mentioned for something like R175 000 to R200 000. When one hears a figure of that order, one would think that this is not anything to get hot under the collar about, but when one realizes that today that area has a municipal valuation in excess of R3 million, which in itself is well below what these properties would realize were they to be placed on the open market, one realizes what we are dealing with. By its delay in doing anything at all, not only is a State department making enormous profits with the appreciation of the land which it controls, but it is imposing an insupportable burden on the ratepayers of that particular municipality. The loss in rates per annum to the Queensburgh municipality in respect of this industrial area alone is in excess of R90 000. In other words, this municipality largely inhabited by middle-class people is losing R90 000 per year.

What are the housing schemes worth?

Yes, let me deal with the housing schemes. This particular municipality was asked by the Department of Community Development to sell to it at cost a residential township known as the Ridley Park township. The municipality itself proposed to develop this township, but it was asked by the department to sell this area at cost, which it did on the specific understanding that the scheme would be expedited. It was felt that a large Government department would be able to put the scheme through more quickly than the municipality itself could. What has happened, however in this instance? Not only was the local authority asked and expected to bear some of the costs of development in respect of roads, but here again there was endless delay in the development of this housing scheme. I agree that we have reached the stage where this scheme has virtually been completed, but here again, over the years, some R30 000 per year has been lost in rates to the municipality purely because of the delay in the department, not in developing an industrial area in this instance, but in the development of housing. This is pre-eminently an area requiring housing because it is a dormitory municipality to a large extent, for working middle-class people who work in the city of Durban. There are other properties similarly situated in this municipality, under the control of the department, in respect of which there is an estimated rates loss of about R20 000 per year. The burden of having the hon. the Minister’s department operating in a municipality—and his department does not pay rates—can be appreciated in this particular case when the total figure of lost rates through delay in development, i.e. about R300 000 per annum, conservatively estimated, is taken into consideration. These are the losses in the face of a total ratable roll for the municipality of under R1 million.

Those figures are not correct.

Had the hon. member, who is now prompting the hon. the Minister, done something about this during the time he represented this area—

He might not have been chucked out.

Precisely; the words have been taken out of my mouth by the hon. member for Durban Point.

That is a lot of nonsense.

Not only would he not have been chucked out, as the phrase goes, but neither would the municipality of Queensburgh have suffered this enormous rates loss which it is having to bear the burden of at the present time.

That is a lot of nonsense you are talking.

I know—and the hon. the Minister will no doubt refer to this when he comes to reply—that there have been negotiations in regard to large-scale sewerage schemes which are required for the industrial areas to which I have referred. No doubt the hon. the Minister will reply that other municipalities are involved, the municipality of Pinetown, for example, and privately owned industrial townships as well. I am aware of all that, and I am grateful for the steps which have recently been taken by the hon. the Minister’s department in this regard. Why wait so long, however, before such development takes place? That is my point. I do not believe that any private township developer could carry on business operating the way the hon. the Minister’s department is operating in such large areas of the municipal areas of South Africa. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Umhlatuzana will excuse me if I do not pursue his argument any further. He dwelt on local conditions, and that makes two of us, because I should like to make use of the opportunity of drawing the hon. the Minister’s attention to a certain matter. This is a matter of urgent importance in my constituency, and I hope and trust that he will react favourably to my request. If he wants to do so for no other reason, I want to ask him in all kindness to bear in mind that this side of the House had been in office for 26 years yesterday. Therefore I do not believe that the hon. the Minister will give me an answer which will not satisfy me.

Twenty-seven years.

Twenty-seven years; I made a mistake. We could well make it more. I should like to refer on this occasion, as instructed by my constituents, to the Valleisig Housing Scheme at Uitenhage. Since 1966, 388 dwellings, 60 of which are under construction, have been erected by the local city council, by means of advances which have been made from the National Housing Fund, at a cost of more than R2 million. These dwellings are being sold to my constituents at prices ranging from R10 000 to R12 000 per dwelling. The period of redemption of the loans—i.e. the purchase price plus interest —is 30 years, from the date on which the deed of sale is finalized between the buyer and the seller—in this case the local city council. The fact that the city council has always tried, in consultation with the Department of Community Development, to provide adequate housing for all the inhabitants of Uitenhage who qualify for it, is, of course, appreciated by everybody.

If we take the present inflationary conditions into consideration and the unavoidable increase in the cost of living which accompanies it, owners of the dwellings in Valleisig—I say this with respect—are being doubly afflicted. Circumstances which are beyond the control of anybody, have caused the monthly payments on these houses to rise repeatedly over the past number of years. With the necessary ability to adjust themselves my constituents could absorb this condition to a certain extent but the inhabitants of Valleisig have now been struck by a disaster. When I call it a disaster, this is really an understatement. It has now become apparent that some of the dwellings erected by the local city council, show certain deficiencies which are undoubtedly the result of poor construction work and everything that goes with it. If we take into consideration the fact that the scheme, which is still in operation, was begun about nine years ago, it is my unpleasant task to inform the hon. the Minister that the vast majority of dwellings in Valleisig will not remain standing for another nine years, let alone 30 years.

The deficiencies which I shall analyse shortly, are of such a nature that I now want to make a friendly yet urgent request to the hon. the Minister, on behalf of the inhabitants of Valleisig, to appoint a commission of inquiry. If it is possible, it should be done immediately and it should consist of experts who can go into this matter. In all fairness towards the local city council, I must mention that they decided on 1 May this year to refer all complaints emanating from the inhabitants of Valleisig to the National Building Research Institute of the C.S.I.R. This decision of the city council is welcomed, but unfortunately, it does not satisfy my constituents or me.

I ask the hon. the Minister to be so kind as to appoint the commission for which I have asked as quickly as possible, and to see, and I say this with respect, that at least the head of the Building Services Division of his department serves on that committee, or any other experts, as the hon. the Minister sees fit. However, I leave it in his competent hands. The disturbing factor of the whole affair is the fact that the houses were not built on foundations which meet with the requirements of the department, before advances have been allocated from the National Housing Fund through the years. The local city council does not dispute this statement and the Minister’s departmental office in Port Elizabeth does not dispute it either. I have written proofs here, which I can present to the hon. the Minister.

As far as the foundations are concerned, I should like to substantiate my allegation by mentioning that I have here in my hand the names and addresses of 12 constituents and owners in Valleisig who took the trouble of having the foundations of their houses excavated at their own initiative and own expense. It was found that the thickness of the foundations varied from two inches, while the specifications explicitly stipulate the minimum thickness of the foundations as five inches. The specifications which are followed here were laid down by the local city council in consultation with the Department of Community Development. I want to say immediately that I consulted various experts in the building industry, including three civil engineers.

I also consulted the two chief inspectors, and everyone tells me that this is the first time they have heard of that type of dwelling being built on a foundation of 18 inches by 2 inches. If we take into consideration that the specification was 18 in. X 5 in., I want to tell the hon. the Minister that the first 100 houses in Valleisig were built with a foundation specification of 27 inches by 9 inches. I went through all these houses personally, and there one finds a minimum of cracks and deficiencies. The city council of Uitenhage’s defence—this is a very important point—amounts to their having deviated from the specifications on which they and the hon. the Minister’s department had agreed on the grounds of the fact that they used the Boardman method for the reinforcement of houses.

The experts whom I have consulted tell me that this is the first time in their lives that they have heard of such a thing as a Boardman method. It is also the first time that I have heard of it. I have a report on the Boardman method, and I have made a study of it. I now want to quote from the report to show that the city council of Uitenhage could have followed anybody else’s system but the Boardman method. I understand Mr. Boardman is the head of the Civil Engineering Division of the National Building Research Institute. I am not a building industry expert, but I can give the hon. the Minister the assurance that if the Boardman method was used for the erection of houses on that type of foundation with the necessary reinforcement in Uitenhage, while it is well known that the soil in Uitenhage consists largely of clay, the use of that method in Uitenhage—it might have been successful in other parts of the Republic—has undoubtedly failed.

What I find very illuminating, is that the Boardman method, of which I have made a study, nowhere provides for any specifications in connection with the foundations. Although the Valleisig scheme was erected departmentally by the city council, as the Minister’s department told me repeatedly and as I accept it as well, the funds for the scheme come from the State. Therefore, it cannot be allowed that the city council of Uitenhage continues in this way. There is now irrefutable proof that the council’s own specifications in respect of the dwellings in Valleisig are doomed to failure.

Therefore, I want to ask very urgently that, should a satisfactory solution not be found, all advances which are made to the city council of Uitenhage in the future should have the condition that the erection of houses in Valleisig be given out on tender because I do not believe that the city council will ever succeed in erecting more houses to the satisfaction of my constituents in Valleisig, and especially not with the Boardman method. If the hon. the Minister concedes this, it is imperative that the commission of inquiry will try to find a method in terms of which the inhabitants of Valleisig who have been affected will be compensated for any financial losses which they have suffered as a result of the poor construction work of their houses.

I want to tell the hon. the Minister that I am now becoming tired of the struggle between my constituents and the city council of Uitenhage. I shall stand no more nonsense from the city council, and therefore, I ask the hon. the Minister to give urgent attention to this matter. It is clear that the Uitenhage city council tried to build in the cheapest way—I want to emphasize this—without taking into consideration any consequences for my constituents. Consequently, the constituents of Uitenhage have to pay the price now, and I think that this is extremely unfair. Therefore, I ask the hon. the Minister to give consideration, to this matter.

I want to conclude by quoting an authority, viz. A. R. Wilcox. I refer to page 15 of his book, So You Want A House, where he says:

The city council ought to have realized that.

All the architects tell me that the foundations can be constructed in such a way that those houses will not crack. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I do not intend reacting to the hon. member’s speech. He obviously has a problem with his voters, the town council, the Minister and his department.

The whole world is against him.

But I have no doubt that in due course his problem will be solved.

The more problems I have, the happier I am.

Before I raise those matters to which I want to refer, I want to say that I think this is the first occasion that the hon. member for Uitenhage has participated in a debate since his illness. From our side of the House we welcome him back and we are glad to see that he is fully restored to health.

I want to raise another matter with the hon. the Minister. I want to make a very special appeal to the Minister this afternoon to give this House an assurance that in future there will be no further resettlement of disqualified persons in terms of the Group Areas Act. We want this assurance to be unequivocal. He must tell us that, until the backlog in housing has been made good, no more people will be moved merely to comply with the regulations of the Group Areas Act. There is a tremendous backlog in housing and the overcoming of this backlog is the responsibility of this hon. Minister. One way in which he can surely assist himself in overcoming this backlog, is to leave those people who are presently living in reasonable houses where they are until he sees his way clear to making up the backlog. I am not referring to cases where it is imperative to move people in connection with the Slums Act or to cases where roads and railway lines have to be built. I am talking about people who are living under reasonable and normal conditions, but who have become disqualified as a result of the Group Areas legislation of this Government. I believe that this hon. the Minister owes it to this House and to the Coloured people to give that assurance in order to eliminate in many cases a great deal of uncertainty. The position, as I understand it and as the hon. the Minister told me in reply to a question in 1973, is that he had on his books 24 289 families that were due to be moved in terms of the Group Areas Act for resettlement. I am quite sure that the hon. the Minister will agree with me that this figure could well have grown to somewhere in the region of 30 000 families that may have to be moved in order to comply with that Act. If that is the figure, the hon. the Minister can easily calculate how many houses would have to be used in terms of resettlement, that could be used alternatively for people who have no roof over their heads at all at the present time. I believe that this is a matter of absolute urgency and I hope that the hon. the Minister will tell us what he intends to do in this regard.

In saying this, nobody is more aware than I am of the achievements of the department of this hon. Minister, because I have been placed in the happy position to see it all. I have seen every prominent housing scheme throughout the country and I am aware of the fact that a good deal of progress has been made. In seeing the progress that has been made in respect of housing, I have also had the opportunity of seeing the very many instances where people are living in hopelessly inadequate situations and are urgently in need of housing. This hon. Minister and his department, in co-operation with town councils, city councils and divisional councils, have a building programme here in the Cape of something like 10 000 to 11000 houses per annum for the next five years. I believe that the figure in Port Elizabeth is 1 000 houses per annum for the next five years. When all that is done, there are still going to be thousands of people who will not have a roof over their heads. Under these circumstances I believe that the resettling of people merely to fulfil the terms of the Group Areas Act, is entirely unnecessary. It is in the light of this position that one welcomes the announcement by the hon. the Minister of Planning that the balance of the area known as District Six, namely the Walmer Estate and Trafalgar Square areas, is to be proclaimed as an area for occupation by Coloured persons. This is obviously going to relieve the hon. the Minister of having to provide houses for people who, as far as I can make out, are fairly well settled and well housed. I believe that this decision has been too long delayed, because in the process of the uncertainty that has been created, the people who are living in the Walmer Estate area have allowed their houses to deteriorate. I believe that if the hon. the Minister had taken the decision long ago, these people would have been improving and building up their townships. I hope that we are not going to encounter any more uncertainty of this kind in the future. There has been quite a lot of misunderstanding about this question of District Six and the area that has now been proclaimed. It must be pointed out that the area which is now being proclaimed for Coloureds, was never in fact really part of the area traditionally known as District Six. It is incorrect to argue that District Six is now being given back to the Coloured people. The area that is now being given to the Coloured people is the area in which they have been living for a very long time and it is just the uncertainty in respect of that area that is now being eliminated. Sir, we on this side of the House welcome the decision of the hon. the Minister of Planning in this regard, but I do hope that in clearing up the uncertainty the hon. the Minister will also tell us what the position is going to be of the 150 Malay and Indian families who are presently resident in the Walmer Estate area. Sir, while the hon. the Minister is taking a good look at the question of the resettlement of people, is it asking too much to ask him to try to persuade his colleagues, the hon. the Minister of Coloured Affairs and the hon. the Minister of Planning, not to take any further decisions about certain areas until effect has been given to the Prime Minister’s undertaking that Coloured representatives will be appointed to represent their people on the Group Areas Board? I am quite sure that if this Minister could persuade his colleagues to wait and to take another good look at this area of District Six that has now been set aside for White occupation, they will find that it would be very wise to re-proclaim a portion of District Six as an area for occupation by Coloured persons.

Order! I hope the hon. member will not take that point too far, because we are actually not dealing with that matter at the moment.

Mr. Chairman, I ask the Minister to discuss this with his colleagues because we have a very difficult situation. When it comes to the building of housing, we are sitting with three departments that have to take a decision. This is one of the reasons why we have such tremendous delay. We have this delay because of lack of inter-departmental co-ordination, and I am asking this hon. Minister to take a lead in this matter with his colleagues so that this kind of delay can be eliminated in future. This hon. Minister in the end has to provide the housing. I realize that the money comes from the National Housing Commission and that the hon. the Minister of Planning has to decide where the houses are to be built, but the responsibility to see that the houses are built rests very largely on the shoulders of this Minister. The Minister must be aware of the fact that living in the area adjoining Walmer Estate, there are very many Coloured families living very happily in the Bloemhof flats and in the Canterbury Square flats. There are some 371 families living there under very good conditions, and if they have to be moved, this hon. Minister will have to find alternative housing for them.

Sir, the hon. member who has just resumed his seat, put certain questions to the Minister, to which the Minister will no doubt reply himself. However, it is encouraging to learn that the hon. member has found a point which he can concede to the Government and that is its handling of District Six.

Sir, I want to come back to a remark made by the hon. member for Umhlatuzana. The hon. member said that the record of this department is anything but favourable. I think that is an absolutely unfair statement. If one wants to discuss this department, then it is a good idea to consider the primary functions of the department. We see, in short, that its functions are more or less the following: In the first place, the provision of housing whether through the development of areas undertaken by the department itself, or the making available of funds to utility companies, to local authorities and to individuals; in the second place, the clearing and renovation of slum and other depressed areas and in the third place, the establishment of proper community facilities. If, as well as this, we bear in mind the announcement made by the hon. the Minister yesterday, that a commission is to be appointed to inquire into housing affairs, then I think this is further proof that this department wants to do everything in its power to promote housing in South Africa and to attempt to provide everybody with a house in the cheapest possible way. I think that if there is one field in which the commission will be able to carry out useful work, it is the field of expensive plots, because it happens that areas are bought up and the individual is eventually obliged, if he wants to obtain a plot, to pay a high price.

I want to repeat that if we are to judge this department according to what it has achieved, we must then differ radically from the hon. member for Umhlatuzana. I say he is being unfair. His attack is not an attack on the Government; it does not affect the Government, but a department which works day and night to carry out a gigantic task. I say that if we evaluate this work, we only have the highest praise for that which has already been achieved. In the report, reference is also made to the fact that there is virtually no shortage in White housing, and that the department is not aware of any serious shortages. That is really an achievement.

The hon. the Minister of Community Development recently made the remark that it is the task of the head of the family, in the first place, to see that there is a house for his family. Therefore, it is important to note that a large percentage of White heads of family, who did qualify for housing under this scheme, preferred to meet their own needs out of a sense of duty and for other praiseworthy reasons. Unfortunately, that only applies in respect of the Whites. However, we must also appreciate that as a result of rising building costs and interest rates, it will become still more difficult for the individual to finance his own house in future. Added to this is the fact that loans are becoming more difficult to obtain. Now the department has issued a timely warning to local authorities to take note of this, because these factors will necessarily lead to a greater demand for White housing in the near future, and that shortages will arise. Local authorities will do well if they see to this in good time, with the help of funds which are made available by the National Housing Fund, that adequate accommodation is erected before bottle-necks arise.

I feel it is also extremely necessary to draw the attention of the public more pertinently to the State-supported house-ownership saving scheme, because although participation in this scheme has shown an increase from 1973 to 1974, from 866 to 1 026 participation is not yet as desired. The total investment does already exceed R1 million. In a recent Press statement, the hon. the Minister also announced that the existing limits in respect of this and other schemes have been raised. At the moment an investor with an income of R7 200, which is a considerable income, qualifies. The total saving per year has been increased to R6 000. The maximum building value of the dwelling is increased to R25 000 and the maximum loan available at a building society to R18 000. The State contributes a further interest subsidy of 2%, and the investment then earns a total tax-free interest of 11%. Therefore, it is a very advantageous scheme and future house-builders will undoubtedly gain by joining this scheme. Unfortunately we find, however, that building societies do not give the necessary publicity to this scheme. It is not clear why. I want to appeal to building societies to give greater publicity to this scheme. If they do not do so, the Department of Community Development must consider bringing this to the attention of the public, because our young people, in particular, will take part in it in greater numbers, once it has been drawn to their attention.

There are also other schemes to which I can refer, for example, individual loans for persons who want to build houses according to their own plans. In the case of this scheme as well, a maximum income of R7 200 per year applies. The maximum loan is R11 250 and the maximum building cost is R14 500. There is also the joint Housing Commission/building society loan, in terms of which the commission contributes 30% and the building society 60%.

If we look at this report, it is clear that local authorities, as a result of their responsibility for and involvement with those in their jurisdiction, remain the largest supplier of accommodation. On page 21 of the report, many interesting statistics appear, inter alia that local authorities have been responsible for the erection of more than 603 000 dwellings since 1920, at a cost of R816,8 million. Of course, this took place with the help of the authorities. This will continue to be the position in future, since 87% of our people live in cities and towns. They are people who are controlled by local authorities from the cradle to the grave, and whose lives are controlled by local authorities. Every local authority plans according to its own need, the need of the community and the demand for housing which exists there. We have a diversity and variety, because each one plans according to its own needs and its own nature.

For that reason it is of so much real importance that fully-fledged Coloured towns with fully-fledged Coloured municipalities be established. This must take place, so that the fully-fledged Coloured municipalities can undertake the task of providing for the needs of their own people. They must carry out the planning according to their own nature and according to their own needs. It is a tremendous task which awaits the Coloured leaders, but so far we find they are reluctant to begin with it. I think hon. members, especially those of the Progressive Party, who are so fond of making a fuss about housing, could well bring it to the attention of the Coloured leaders, when they meet socially, that they must start building the pyramid at the bottom. They must build the base for the pyramid first, and not begin at the top. They should not look with envy at a seat in this House, but they should do what their hand finds to do and they should consider the needs of their own people. When we think of the long road that lies ahead but which many of these people and our own people are not aware of, it is a fine task which awaits the Coloured leaders. For every local authority it is a major task first to acquire a piece of land and then to undertake the lay-out of that land and to provide all community facilities, such as schools, and so on. It must be a convenient layout, which suits the nature and way of life of the specific community. Eventually it has to be submitted to the town council and then tenders for the establishment of services such as drainage, water, lights, communications, telephone services, and so on have to be invited. Eventually, there is the sale of the plots, the erection of buildings and the allocation thereof to people. It is a major task and the Coloured leaders will do their own people a great service if they help in this way to wipe out the backlog of 50 000 units.

The next point which I should like to mention, is ownership for our Coloureds. We must try to do away with the leasing schemes, and we should encourage our Coloureds to accept ownership. Ownership brings responsibility and pride. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, it is not my intention to follow the hon. member for Omaruru, but he made the point that home ownership brings pride. I think he ought to apply that to the Black urban people as well. The balance of his speech was a good repeat of the report, but I think we have all read the report and there is no need to repeat it to us.

In the few minutes available to me, I would like to discuss the implementation of the Group Areas Act. There are three fundamental differences between us in these benches and the Government in respect of the Group Areas Act. The first fundamental difference is one of principle, viz. that we do not believe that it is right in principle to forbid people to live together just because of the colour of their skin. Our second difference is that of morality. We do not believe that this House is morally justified in prescribing and deciding the limitations within which other race groups must find their residential and commercial livelihood, especially if those people are not represented in this House. The third aspect on which we fundamentally disagree is on the implementation of the Group Areas Act. We believe that the facts show that through the implementation of this Act much human tragedy, personal tragedy, much disruption of family and community life, etc., is caused. Of all the apartheid measures this particular Act has done more to destroy race relations between White and Brown people and White and Black people than perhaps any other Act.

Hon. members opposite might say that as far as our first two objections are concerned, namely the questions of principle and morality, these are subjective matters. I agree that we could argue this across the floor of the House ad infinitum and that we would probably not come to an agreement on it, but I think that in respect of the third aspect, viz. the disruption which is caused as a result of these movements of people, it is common cause that much can be done in order to improve the lot of these people. Examples of the personal tragedies, of the disruptions and of the destruction of race relations abound all over the place. In this debate last year I mentioned the plight of the Page View community. One just has to look at the newspaper every day to see fresh examples of new disruptions and new personal tragedies in this respect. We would be very insensitive as a House if we did not do everything in our power to minimize this disruption and personal tragedy where it occurs. Secondly, I think we would be blind if we were not aware of the destruction of race relations which the implementation of this Act is bringing about. Here again, in the interests of all of us in South Africa, we would be very stupid if we were not concerned and did not do everything within our power to do something about it. Even in today’s press, when one looks at this morning’s Cape Times, one will see reaction to the proclamation of Walmer Estate as a Coloured area. This proclamation has been welcomed and we all feel it is a benevolent attitude for the Government to adopt. Yet, on the same page of the newspaper we find the following two articles. The one says:

The following is said in the other article:

Quite clearly there is misunderstanding and confusion and what I would like to do, is to try to analyse it and see what we can do about it. The problem is that the raison d’être of the Government for the Group Areas Act is to implement the policy of separate development and parallel development, which they see will enable each community to develop in its own way and will avoid friction between the various race groups. Unfortunately the Black and Brown people see this matter in a totally different light. They see the raison d’être as being one of legal means of discrimination, designed by the White people to entrench their own position of privilege at the cost of Black opportunity. They see it as a measure whereby the White people can exclude Black and Brown people from the most desirable commercial and residential areas of our land. They see it as a measure which will enable the Whites to deprive the Black and the Brown people of that little bit which they have traditionally enjoyed because the White man wants it. Quite clearly the attitudes of the Government and those of the Black and Brown people at the present moment are totally irreconcilable. We must accept that under the Government’s policy of separate and parallel development we are going to live with the situation of group areas for many years to come, for ever if the Government stays in power for ever. This is something we are going to have to come to grips with because we cannot allow this deterioration of race relations to continue, and neither can we allow the disruption and personal tragedies to continue. For this reason, in order to endeavour to find a way within the bounds of Government policy which could minimize the problems I have discussed, I should like to put forward a suggestion to the Government for its consideration. I would like the Government to consider initiating a charter for people who suffer under the Group Areas Act. I believe that the Government should endeavour to create a Bill of Rights, embodied in some form of legislation which would protect people who fall victim to a group areas proclamation. This Bill of Rights or charter would then be something they could use if they felt their rights were being prejudiced in the circumstances. I am saying that the Government should initiate this, because I believe it would be fatal if the Government were to decide to do this on its own, in other words if it were to decide unilaterally upon the charter and the rights it considers the Black and Brown people are entitled to and were to legislate accordingly. I think the Government should use the machinery which has been created as a result of separate and parallel development in order to create the necessary charter. The Government should make sure that in the committee deciding upon the charter all the various people affected by group areas are represented, i.e. people from the Coloured Persons’ Representative Council, the Indian Persons’ Representative Council and all the other people involved. Once the charter has been worked out, I then believe that it should go through all the various houses concerned. It should be put to the Indian Persons’ Representative Council, the Coloured Persons’ Representative Council, and finally, together with all the comments of the other houses it shall be put to this House. It would then be made law as a consensus measure. If the Government would take this initiative, I think much would be achieved in alleviating the problem and in promoting good race relations in South Africa. I believe firstly that Black and Brown South Africans, and Africa and the world at large, will then see that within the framework of separate development the Government is prepared to live up to the promise of ambassador Botha at the United Nations to the effect that we are working way from discrimination. Secondly, I think that the Government would achieve a political success because it could prove that despite differences in principle on something as basic as group areas, people are in a position to work together to find a solution to minimize the hardships which is caused as a result of it. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member who has just sat down actually objects to the Group Areas Act, which, he regards as a tragedy because it entails so much disruption. Once again it seems to us that this party to which the hon. member belongs simply wants to cause the greatest possible tragedy by creating a uniform mass of people without any difference in the areas where they live, without any difference in culture and even without any difference in colour. To my mind this would be the greatest tragedy one could imagine.

For the sake of the record I want to give a few comparative figures in connection with housing. In the first place I refer to the period 1 August 1920 to 30 September 1974. During that period the State supplied 106 528 dwelling units for Whites, 152 537 for Coloureds, 45 583 for Asians and 355 117 for Bantu, amounting to a total of 659 765. During the ten years from 1964 to 1974, 49 107 housing units were supplied for Whites, 91 872 for Coloureds, 33 561 for Asians and 114 418 for Bantu, which gives us a total of 228 958 dwelling units. During these ten years, therefore, nearly half as many houses were supplied as during the preceding 44 years. The average annual amount spent on housing during the past 10 years is R66 017 692. When we look at these figures, I feel that there is not much we can complain about. Although the times in which we are living are very difficult, we should stress the fact that every breadwinner should take the responsibility upon himself to provide for his own housing needs as far as possible. Some years ago, when I and the people of my age, and perhaps even older, wanted to acquire homes, we postponed buying cars and motor-bikes until we had first saved enough, and had progressed far enough, in whatever work we were doing, to provide for the housing needs of our families. Much criticism is expressed against the times which are supposed to be so difficult, but if we look around us and we see the young people driving expensive cars and we see how they handle these cars, it actually hurts when we reflect that these young people could do much more to make housing more easily available for themselves.

There is the additional problem that expensive and unnecessarily large structures are acquired by people. I want to say that houses need not be so expensive. Nor need they be excessively large. One should see what one could do without, rather than to see what one would like to have. Any house which is fairly well designed, however simple and however small it may be, can be very attractive once the garden has been laid out. This aspect should receive more and more attention. Our people should take a greater interest in the gardens they can lay out at their homes. I am very glad that the Secretary to the department also mentioned this in the annual report. Our people are very fond of sport. We play golf, tennis, etc.—something with which I have no fault to find—but I think that if we wish to practise some more productive sport, we should also create prettier and more attractive homes for ourselves, homes which will make us happier, where the appearance of our properties will be improved by an attractive garden we have tended ourselves.

I also want to refer to the State-sponsored home-ownership savings scheme, to which an hon. member has already referred. I appreciate the fact that the limits have raised again and I think the radio and the Press can also be of great assistance in supplying information to prospective house-owners on how exactly this scheme works, what it entails and what its advantages are.

Finally there is a local matter I should like to mention, and after all these years it is still Lady Selborne, i.e. the township from which the Bantu were removed and which, I think, was completed seven or eight years ago. On the strength of certain promises or certain speculations I told some people that they would be able to buy a plot there this year or even last year. Consequently I am pleased to hear that the department regards development there as an absolute necessity, as an urgent matter. I am pleased that the Director of Local Government has also undertaken to expedite the application for the establishment of a township. I am grateful to learn that people will be able to obtain plots there in 1976. My request here is just that this matter should continue to receive attention and that it should be finalized as soon as possible. [Time expired.]

Where are the Chinese going to live?

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Hercules moved from the general to the particular in connection with housing. He referred to the general housing situation in South Africa and dealt with his own constituency at the end of his speech. There is not much wrong with what the hon. member said. It is, of course, a virtue to work hard in order to be able to own one’s own home eventually.

However, I want to come back to a subject which was referred to by, among others, the hon. member for Walmer and the hon. member for Durbanville, i.e. Coloured housing in the Western Cape. When referring to the Western Cape I, for the purposes of my speech, refer to the area from the central city area as far as Malmesbury and Piketberg and from there back again to Paarl, Stellenbosch and Somerset West.

Leave Piketberg out of it.

In other words, the area includes the Western Cape and the Boland. In the report of the department it is said that, as far as the problem in connection with Coloured housing is concerned, the department is convinced that “the vigorous effort which is now being made will not only eliminate the shortage of housing, but also the squatters evil”. I think this is a very bold statement. This most probably testifies to the earnest of the department and the fact that it is actively trying to cope with the housing problem. Mention is also made that the department is at present providing three Coloured houses for every house it provides for Whites, and reference is made to the fact that it was possible for the first time in 1974 to cope with the increase in the Coloured population in terms of the provision of housing. It is said that the provision of housing exceeds the population growth by 1 000 units. I should like to ask the hon. Minister how one calculates such a figure. If one says that the increase in the Coloured population is being exceeded by 1 000 housing units, then I take it that this calculation relates to a particular area, that it bears in mind the population influx, and so on.

An intelligent reader can quite understand it.

But we should like to have that information. I am not trying to be a nuisance. The hon. member for Piketberg can calm down a little; I am only asking for information. That is what the hon. Minister is sitting over there for. It is also said that an amount of R93 million was voted during the period September 1973 to December 1974 for Coloured housing alone and that this amount is to be used to undertake projects. This was approved. I want to ask when the money is going to be made available and whether the 30 000 housing units which are being planned include the squatter camps. Does it, for instance, include a place like Mitchells Plain? These are questions one wants to put in the light of the department’s optimism regarding the possibility of eliminating the housing shortage. However, the departmental report lays down two qualifications in respect of the wiping out of the housing shortage. The hon. member for Durbanville referred to this last night. The department says: “We shall be able to wipe it out, provided we obtain the necessary funds and provided we receive the cooperation of local authorities. From the nature of the case one cannot build without funds. I want to go even further and say that it is not only a question of funds and the co-operation of local authorities. There are also other considerations involved. I should like to mention a few figures which emanate from the Department of Planning and the Environment itself. These figures also emanate from the research carried out by Prof. Jan Sadie and appear in the report of the department which was tabled. On the strength of the figures which were made available there and if we were to make a projection up to the year 2000, we shall find that the availability of accommodation does not only depend on the availability of funds, but also upon the ratio between the available land, funds and the increase in the Coloured population. Prof. Sadie calculated that there are at present more or less 98 000 Coloureds in the Western Cape area to which I referred. According to his projection there will be more or less 2 million in this area alone by the year 2000. If we look at the reports of the department and see what is being envisaged for Dassenberg, Mitchells Plain and the group areas which exist here, and we consider the removals which are taking place as well as the squatter communities, we see that if we add up all these things it will only be possible to provide housing for 1½ million Coloureds by the year 2000 in terms of existing projections of available land which, the Department of Community Development obtains from the Department of Planning and the Environment. This means that by the year 2000 there will be half a million people for whom it will be impossible to provide accommodation. This is in terms of the available land that exists and that which is being envisaged by the Department of Community Development itself. Therefore I want to ask the hon. the Minister where this land is going to come from. I also want to ask the hon. member for Omaruru, who is not here at the moment, where that land is going to come from because he said that the Coloureds should establish a place for themselves somewhere. I also want to ask the hon. the Minister how much more land is going to be released south of Mamre. Why south of Mamre? For the simple reason that in order to cope with them, more or less 400 000 employment opportunities should be available for those one million additional Coloureds who will be here by the year 2000. Surely, those employment opportunities are not going to come from nowhere. They must come from the established industrial growth points here. I know we speak of decentralization, and so on. I do not want to doubt it for one moment that serious efforts are not being made at present. One should, however, keep in mind that schemes such as Mitchells Plain and Dassenberg in terms of problems which are being experienced with new services, the escalation of building costs, the availability of contractors, transport, and so on, demand it that one should plan such schemes ten years ahead before one can build a single housing unit in which people can live. One can then appreciate that when one refers to the year 2000, which is only another 25 years from now this is something one should very seriously keep in mind if one wants clarity as to where one is really going to house the increase in the Coloured population. Therefore I repeat that it does not only concern the availability of funds; it also concerns the place where the gound will be released, how many contractors will be available, the migration of the Coloured population, and so on. I do not want to say that the department does not take this into consideration; I do not want to say they do not have this information at their disposal, but this is not revealed in the report. Therefore when the department says in its report that they are going to solve the Coloured housing problem one wants slightly more information than what appears in the report at the moment to be able to believe it. This we have to have in order to share in the optimism without detracting in any way from the earnest of the department in regard to their building programmes. I think the hon. the Minister can furnish us with this information and then one would be far more confident about the possibility that the department will be able to wipe out this housing shortage. But in the meantime we still have, according to the report, a shortage of 40 000 housing units for Coloureds in the Western Cape. At the moment there is a shortage of 40 000 housing units. I should like to ask the hon. the Minister whether this figure of 40 000 also includes the squatters. Are the squatters also taken into consideration, or is this only the number of people on waiting lists? Does this also include the expected influx of Coloureds to the cities? Because this is going to happen all the time. Thirdly, does this also include people who are removed under the Group Areas Act? In 1974 alone, as is stated by the report itself, 2 112 Coloureds were removed in Cape Town under the Group Areas Act. Does this shortage of 40 000 housing units include these various groups? One should like to have clarity on how that figure has been arrived at.

Sir, I want to come back once again to the squatter community. The report states that this evil of squattering should be eradicated. In which way should it be eradicated according to the report? I quote—

That is logical. Just be a little patient.

Yes, Sir, but we are back precisely where we were and that is why I posed these questions. If the provision of adequate housing is the only solution and if we consider the problems in connection with the provision of adequate housing during the next 25 years, we should like to have some more information on how we are going to provide adequate and proper housing. The hon. member for Standerton said we should exercise some patience. I just want to tell him that a 35-year-old Brown man, who has six children, is working in this building. He has been living in a shack for the past three years and his name has been on a waiting list for four years. Let that hon. member tell him that he should simply be patient. [Interjections.] I tried to help him. It is very difficult and I appreciate all the problems, but the name of that man will be on a waiting list of the Cape Town City Council for another four years before he will get a house. Sir, if the only solution is the provision of proper housing, and if we consider at all the problems I have mentioned, we are still faced with the hard reality that, according to departmental estimation which I regard as a conservative estimation, there are at the moment 21 700 squatters in the Western Cape area. If we take it that a family consists of more or less four and multiply that number by four there are just under 100 000 people who are living in the bushes here, and this is where the problem lies. I am aware of the fact that there are different forms of housing. I am aware of the fact that there is house ownership and that there is economic housing. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I shall simply try to begin all over again from the beginning and then, probably at some subsequent opportunity, come to the speech made by the hon. member for Rondebosch, who has just resumed his seat. All I can tell him at this stage is that his viewpoint is probably a very idealistic one, and for that reason I do not want to pick a quarrel with him, but I am not so sure that his viewpoint is a very realistic one; we shall be able to discuss this again on a subsequent occasion. At this stage perhaps I could just give the hon. member this tip: I take it he knows the Cape Peninsula. In fact he ought to know it better than I do. If he has a look at what has been happening during the past three to four years in Mitchell’s Plain, Belhar and those areas, he will get an idea of what is happening when my department speaks of a problem which we do in fact believe we can cope with and solve. When I think back to my first participation in this debate during the discussion of this Vote approximately two years ago, and I think of the turn the debate took that year, and I see the turn the debate is taking this year, I arrive at the conclusion that we have come face to face with realities for which hon. members on the opposite side are beginning to display a greater understanding, seen from my point of view as the Minister responsible for this department. I am thinking for example of the speech made here yesterday by the hon. member for Green Point, when he introduced this debate. It was a calm and tranquil speech, and he made suggestions, suggestions of which one could take notice, and to which one could give attention, ideas to which one tries to look for answers, and has to find answers. To me this was an entirely different approach to the one I experienced for the first time two years ago in this House as Minister of Community Development. In this situation today, which centres mainly around housing, a roof over a person’s head, we have reached the point—which I want to indicate again and to which reference was made by the hon. member for Omaruru—that the responsibility for a roof over a family’s head is in the first place the responsibility of the head of the household; in my opinion it only becomes the responsibility of the State in the third place. That is where we come into the picture. The hon. member for Durbanville sounded a very sober note here yesterday in regard to the questions which he put, and the pleas which he advanced for funds for this department. I cannot agree with him more. Through local authorities, in conjunction with my department, more can be done on the part of the Government if the country’s economy is such that the necessary finances can be provided. If I were now, as Minister, to ask myself whether my department should receive more money and the amount which the hon. the Minister of Finance, with the best will in the world and with all the means at his disposal, is able to make available, and I ask myself whether, if my department is to receive more funds, at the expense of which other department this should happen, then I am not in a position to be able to say that I think this or that Government department can manage with so many fewer millions of rands so that I can have as many millions of rands more per year for my department. I stated yesterday that seen as a whole—there are exceptions—one could describe the position of White housing in South Africa as being under control. The position in respect of Indian housing is less favourable, and the position in respect of Coloured housing is what I would describe as being very undesirable. There is a considerable backlog, and I am thinking here at once of those three centres which hon. members on the opposite side also know about, which I have also discussed here in the past, and which we could discuss here again now. When I consider what funds it is estimated are being made available for the National Housing Fund, it appears that in aggregate it amounts to a total of R84,5 million which the National Housing Commission is able to apply. This is what is being appropriated in the estimate, plus the amounts which recur in the revolving fund. That is where I get this classification from, and this is the procedure we plan to adopt for the present year: For all the aspects of White housing we have, in round figures, R30½ million, for the Coloureds R36,75 million, for Asiatics R12 million and approximately R5½ million for application by the Bantu Housing Board. One thing which one has to take into consideration when one compares the position of the Whites and the Coloureds, for example, is that the White house naturally—because of our way of life—costs considerably more than the Coloured house. There is a convergence in the economic class, I readily concede that, but the Coloured percentage in the sub-economic class is high, probably in the region of 60%, while the White group comprises only a few per cent. If one were now to observe that amounts of R36,75 million as against R30,50 million, respectively, are being given for these two groups, then I think that any reasonable person has to accept that comparatively far more is being done in respect of housing for the Coloureds. For example, we now have this position in the Cape. Here I am referring in particular to the Cape Peninsula and this is where the hon. member for Rondebosch also comes into the picture. I concerned myself, and my department concerned itself, with finding a basis in terms of which we would be able, within a reasonable time, to move in the direction of a solution in the Cape Peninsula. Now, how does one move in the direction of a solution? One can do it in only one way, which is that one must try, in respect of those people for whom one accepts responsibility, to establish more dwelling units for them per annum than their natural increase requires of you. The calculations for the Cape Peninsula and for the Cape indicate that the natural increase requires 5 000 dwelling units per year. In other words, we are not heading for any solution before we construct more than 5 000 dwelling units per annum in the three local authority areas involved. This has never been achieved before. But it has been achieved now, and we are in that phase, and here I have the statistics. This year we are moving in the direction of completing approximately 8 000 dwelling units, and this rate is being further accelerated, depending—I must say—upon funds, i.e. upon whether it is possible to make the necessary funds available. In other words, we are already entering the phase in which we are eliminating the backlog at a rate of 4 000 dwelling units per year, in round figures. Now, hon. members may say that there is a backlog of 40 000 houses. That is true, but may the State reasonably be expected to accelerate its pace in this respect to such an extent, by providing the necessary funds, that it is possible to build more rapidly than at present? If the answer to this question is in the negative, as I think it ought to be, i.e. that the State cannot reasonably be expected to do this, surely hon. members have to accept that progress is in fact being made and we are gaining the upper hand. The same understanding has been reached with the city council of Johannesburg, and the rate is being reasonably maintained there. The same agreement has been reached in Durban, and I expect that it will be possible for the rate to be maintained there, too. The hon. member for Berea pointed out yesterday, perhaps quite correctly, that the suppositions to which the mayor of Durban and I had virtually committed ourselves in a statement were not being realized. I have received a full explanation from my department here, which I do not want to quote now. The hon. member for Berea is not here at the moment, but I shall gladly place it at his disposal. Problems are being experienced which could not, at that stage, have been foreseen precisely, but here is an elucidation of how we can get on to that course, and how close we already are to it, in order to maintain what was envisaged for Durban as well. No one told this House or anyone else for that matter, two years ago, that we would arrive at a solution overnight. Last year I told this House that I foresaw a solution, and that we would be able, subject to a necessary reservation, to present a completely different picture after a period of five years in the Cape Peninsula, in Johannesburg and in Durban, which present the most serious problems. I think this as much as may reasonably be expected under the circumstances. I trust that that rate will be maintained, and that the backlog will be eliminated in that way.

I want to pause briefly at what the hon. member for Green Point said. He referred to policy adjustments which have been made, and I do not begrudge the hon. member any pleasure whatsoever that he might derive from this. Since I became involved with this department in 1972 I have been working according to one pattern only, and I am still working according to that pattern, namely to attempt to render the best services I am capable of to the people of South Africa. Here and there one ascertains that something could be done differently or that more satisfaction could be given in some other way, and if the hon. member sees this as policy reversals now, or as my accepting his party’s policy, I do not begrudge him the pleasure he is able to derive from that. The hon. member referred to co-ordination, and I can assure him that co-ordination does in fact exist. I have no doubt in my mind about this. The hon. the Minister of Planning and the Environment and I, as well as other colleagues of mine, have walked the road of District Six together. There was co-ordination from the beginning to the end. I can mention other examples as well. Obviously we cannot sit on one another’s laps all day and tell one another what we are doing. However, the co-ordination which ought to exist between Government departments is something which I have no doubt at all about in my mind.

In my opinion the hon. member for Durbanville set out the Bothasig position correctly. I, too, gave up almost two pages in reply to a question put by the hon. member for Green Point, to give him all the information. Yesterday the hon. member had misgivings here. The C.S.I.R. would not have been guilty of such incorrect specifications. No one alleged that. Nor did I allege it in that reply to him. What I did in fact concede to him in that reply …

[Inaudible.]

… was that those cement blocks were used in order to economize and yet make livable and attractive dwellings available to people for R5 000. I think that it was a commendable aim. There should have been supervision at all times over the execution of the specifications. I indicated that something had possibly gone wrong with the manufacture of those blocks. That was my reply. My information is that more than 1 000 houses have at present been made available there in that price category. There were only about 40 houses in regard to which problems arose and complaints were received.

I thought he said the world had come to an end.

The department tried to accommodate these people, as I also indicated to the hon. member in my reply. I still think it was an achievement on the part of the department to have established that extension there at that price.

Are you not prepared at least to help those 40 families to repair their houses? After all, the faults which occurred there were not caused by them.

Surely I have indicated how we are prepared to help those people. If further problems crop up, and it appears that the assistance is not being offered in the correct manner, my door will always remain open. We can consider the problem further to see whether we cannot find other means of accommodating these people. Were that the only little problem! I concede that some people there have major problems. However, if this were the only little problem my department had to cope with, it would have been a very easy department to manage.

The hon. member also referred to the squatter problem. This problem does exist. However, there is an entirely new approach as far as this squatter situation is concerned. The latest figure which I have is that from August to March more than 1 100 squatter families have already been accommodated in houses. Our schemes are therefore getting under way. We have now a new dispensation in my department—this in reply to certain other points which were also raised by hon. members. For resettlement purposes my department now takes 25% of the revenue of the houses erected with funds made available by the Department of Community Development. The reason for our doing so is that our own schemes must also be proceeded with. The department also has obligations on which it pays interest at an economic interest rate. The department cannot simply absorb losses. Seventy-five per cent of the dwellings go to the local authorities, which at the present juncture, make a 50/5/ division of their dwellings They, too, have people on their waiting lists who have to be assisted, and they are also saddled with the problem of overcrowding, which gives rise to extremely undesirable conditions. The local authorities are also required to be of assistance in that sphere, and consequently they take 50% of the dwellings to meet the housing need and 50% of the dwellings to deal with the squatter problem. I think that this approach is a fair one.

The hon. member for Tygervallei referred to building costs. I have already reacted to that. The hon. member for Pinetown sketched the position in Durban and said that a crisis was prevailing. I have already furnished a survey of the position in Durban. I see the hon. member for Berea has now returned to this House. I just want to reiterate that my department has given me a detailed exposition of 2½ pages on the problems which are being experienced, problems which we could simply call “teething troubles”.

†We are going to overcome these problems and we are going to achieve our aim in the Durban area. The mayor of Durban and myself have practically pledged ourselves to a certain number of houses which will have to be erected in order to alleviate the position in Durban.

By when?

We work according to our programme.

Mr. Chairman, may I ask the hon. the Minister a question? Is the hon. the Minister quite certain that sufficient funds will be available to supply in the needs in view of the rising inflation and the ever-increasing building costs?

I have explained on many occasions in the past that I am not in the position to give such an assurance. The undertaking which was given by the mayor of Durban and myself was given on the condition that funds could be made available. I do not have control over that situation; it is not in my hands. Nevertheless, I am hopeful …

Mr. Chairman, may I ask another question? Is the hon. the Minister aware that 0,43% of the gross national product was devoted to Coloured housing in 1974? Does he consider that to be an adequate percentage in view of the need which exists?

If the hon. member would only look at what I said a few minutes before he came into this House, he would find all the details. The situation may then become clearer to him. I am quite prepared to make this information available to him.

*The hon. member for Green Point specifically asked whether the Department of Community Development, in my opinion, ought to disappear. What the position will be when one of the most important functions of the department, namely the implementation of the Group Areas Act, has been disposed of, I cannot now say. At the present juncture the Cabinet is still satisfied that the Department of Community Development is fulfilling an important function, and that it has to remain; in fact, not very long ago pleas were still being made from that side of the House that this ministry should not be the Ministry of Community Development, but the Ministry of Housing. That is how important that side of the House regards this matter. My reply to the hon. member for Pinetown, who discussed a special housing corporation for Durban, is that we will get no further with it if the necessary funds are not available. In my opinion the funds can only be made available in the way in which they are being made available today, and as long as that is being done there must continue to be control by a Government department.

The hon. member for Sea Point even went so far as to blame the Government for the situation which developed and in regard to which I announced a commission of inquiry yesterday. I think that that is a bit far-fetched. If the hon. member were to look at the terms of reference of the commission, he would see that to a large extent they revolve around developments in the private sector, developments which we decided should be examined thoroughly by the Government. The hon. member cannot simply blame the Government for them. He also went into the question of the concern among the public at the decontrolling of flats. When the legislation concerned was being dealt with here, I made it very clear what I was watching for. I cannot improve on the answer I gave at that stage.

The hon. member also referred to Dassenberg and said that the lay-out should be attractive. I can tell him that, together with the allocation of the contract for the first 600 houses, permission was granted for the establishment of community facilities. In other words they are beginning simultaneously. We are building decent houses in Dassenberg. This is how my department began with the implementation of that scheme.

The hon. member also suggested that building societies should be able to act freely. I am very concerned about that, and I have reservations. This question is partly included in the terms of reference of the commission which I announced yesterday. I am concerned about White entrepreneurs going into the Coloured group areas with the purpose of making profit. If this is a Coloured company, there are no problems whatsoever, but I am concerned about the White entrepreneurs. As I have said, the commission will partly consider that.

Mr. Chairman, may I put a question to the hon. the Minister? Is the Minister prepared to inform this House of precisely what alternative land will be made available for the expropriated owners of land in Sparks Estate? The people are very worried about this.

I am under the impression that the land which is being made available adjoins Sparks Estate, or is in any event situated very close at hand. Land can be made available which is not as suitable for flat purposes as the land in Sparks Estate, which is required to provide approximately 1 200 dwelling units.

I am not disputing the expropriation; it is only the alternative land which is going to be made available in which I am interested.

The undertaking has, in any event, been given that those people need not leave before alternative land is available.

The hon. member for Krugersdorp discussed a local problem. I want to tell him that the National Housing Commission recently adopted further resolutions in this regard. The problem which his town council is apparently experiencing is, however, not a general problem. It seems to me that it is more of a localized problem. Therefore I want to suggest that the town council takes this matter up with my department. We can then establish precisely where the snags are. Relief measures were decided on recently, and we can therefore see in what way we are able to iron out those problems. I feel convinced that the town council, in consultation with my department, will in fact be able to solve those problems.

The hon. member for Berea made a plea for Cato Manor. In this regard I want to say that an investigation has again been instituted, by way of a directive from the Government, into the position of the Indians as well as of the Coloureds in Cato Manor. I am expecting the report in question soon; it has not reached me yet but as soon as I have received it, this problem will be re-examined.

I must now make haste, and then finish my reply to give hon. members another chance to discuss the activities of my department. I shall enter the debate again at a later stage. I just want to express my appreciation to the hon. member for Boksburg for the way in which he referred to the activities of the department.

The hon. member for Umhlatuzana expressed a rather strong opinion aimed at my department as allegedly being the biggest landowner and the biggest property developer in South Africa. If one thinks in terms of the activities of the Community Development Board and one takes the overall picture for South Africa, or a city like Durban, and one sees that the board has to tackle and do there in respect, for example of urban renewal or slum clearance, then one understands that these are projects involving millions of rands. We also have the situation that the value of the land which, at the present juncture, is owned by this board, is probably more than R130 million. However, when the standpoint is adopted that profits are being made here, that big profits are being made, this is not true. Land is bought up by the board for its objects. Later on that land is worth far more, far more than the purchase price the board paid and which was agreed to or which was decided upon by arbitration. If the board ends up with a profit after it has done the clearance, incurred all the costs in respect of development and after it has paid a depreciation contribution to the original owners in all the cases where this has to be paid, it is lucky. I think that all of us ought to be happy, because what becomes of that profit? That profit is used once again to cover urban renewal, slum clearance, the provision of buildings which may be necessary, business premises which may be needed and even housing for the groups for which the National Housing Commission does not accept responsibility. I want to refer the hon. member to the annual report of the Secretary for Community Development for the period ending 31 December 1970. On page 14 of that report we find the following—

The Secretary went on to say—

This deals with the payment of municipal rates—

So he continues. When the Community Development Board releases these properties again for private development, that local authority collects twice what it lost in municipal rates and taxes as a result of the activities of this board. If this board has to pay rates on land from which it is not receiving any income, where should the funds come from? They can only come from one source, and that is the Exchequer. The board will then have to pay tax while it has no income. But as soon as there is income and as soon as rates may be collected, this board retires from the scene. It is then only too prepared to retire from the scene and receive its money back so that it can begin elsewhere with this function entrusted to it by the Act. Sir, if the hon. member were to go through the records he would find cases where the board made a profit, perhaps sometimes a considerable profit, but he will also find cases where the board suffered a loss, and some times considerable losses. It is expected that the losses for the Community Development Board in District Six, in which it spent more than R20 million, are going to be considerable. We shall see how it works out when private initiative moves in and takes over. Sir, these are the realities with which we are dealing here.

As regards the matter mentioned by the hon. member for Uitenhage, I have the correspondence here which was conducted with him. The hon. member is aware that this is not a scheme of my department; it is a scheme of the local authority. My department was not involved to any great extent in that scheme. The information which my department is able to furnish in this regard has already been furnished to the hon. member and consequently I do not want to dwell on this any further. Sir, I think I should at this stage interrupt my contribution, and enter the debate again at a later stage.

Sir, the hon. the Minister today gave a truly thorough explanation in this House of the housing position. I think that this House should be grateful to the Minister who, in this calm and composed manner, has, together with his department, done so much for housing. Sir, the speech of the hon. member for Rondebosch reminded me of a poet describing a garden. You know how beautifully a poet can describe a garden, but when a poet lays out a garden himself, he also writes afterwards about the thorns and about the labour it took to lay out that garden. I do not blame the hon. member for being very idealistic with regard to the provision of housing, but I think we should be realistic about this matter. Sir, I am very grateful that we heard from the hon. the Minister’s speech today that a commission of investigation will be appointed to investigate the high land prices. In contrast to what other people think, I am delighted that the commission will be appointed because it will enable township developers to submit memoranda to the commission in which they will be able to indicate what the reasons for these high land prices are. Sir, since many people make unjustifiable attacks on township developers, frequently without having the necessary knowledge, I should like to tell them that if it were not for an old town founder like Simon van der Stel, there would be no oak trees in Stellenbosch today. Stellenbosch, which today is one of South Africa’s treasures, was established by our first town founder, namely Simon van der Stel. He planted the oak trees there and bequeathed this heritage to the Cape. Cape Town, in which we find ourselves at the moment, is his creation. The foundations of cities like Pretoria and Johannesburg were laid by men like Rissik and others. Sir, in all parts of the community one always finds people who want to take advantage of others. We hear about doctors who err and farmers who water their milk. One finds all these things, but as far as the township developer is concerned, he has a tremendous problem, Sir, because people sometimes come to one and ask for assistance in regard to township development, I drew up a small plan. A township developer has to see 36 departments.

The Minister says there is co-ordination.

No, please do not digress now. This has nothing to do with the Minister. These are local authorities and other bodies. When a man wants to establish a township, he has to see 36 departments. If an official should perhaps forget about the particular township development file, or if somebody should mislay the file it could happen that the file would arrive at the next department three months later, and if the date of that department has passed, it could happen that it arrives at the next department six months later. Because we do not have proper overall planning in this country and because the water-supply and things like that are not the same throughout as is the case with Escom electricity, it could take up to seven years to establish a township. I should like to tell the hon. Minister today that there are cases —and I think the hon. the Minister’s department has had experience of this—where the local authority comes forward every month or every few months with a new road which has to run through such a township. You are then, as developer or entrepreneur, in the position where your hands are tied; you invested a capital outlay of R2 of R3 million, and now you are back to square one for three or four years. [Interjections.] I just want to tell the Minister that the local authorities unfortunately make the mistake that they do not work according to a rule in this country. No rule is laid down that a road in a township has to be 22 feet wide. It has happened to me in one city, with one local authority, that I was asked to build a road 34 feet wide and then there were only nine houses on both sides of that street. For what reason would they not rather require the building line to be 25 feet? Why does one have to build a road which will never carry more than 18 cars? It is unnecessary expenditure. The cost of a luxurious house can be recovered by a purchaser who can afford it, but a road which is made wider than is necessary, could lead to as much as R20 000 per km being spent unnecessarily. I should like to tell the local authorities the story of the madman. One day the madman met a professor. The professor did not come from Rondebosch! [Interjections.] The professor said: “I have a madman with me. Come with me and I shall show you”. The professor would then take out R1 and R5 and the madman would laugh and say: “Give me the rand.” It went on like that for six years. The professor travelled all over the country and one day the madman said to him: “Listen, professor, I am tired of you. Go away”. The professor then asked the madman: “Why? Are you stupid?” The madman replied: “You think I am stupid? If I had taken the R5 the first day, I would only have had R5, but now I have R250 000, for you took me from door to door and from place to place. All of you had a good laugh, but I made the money”. Local authorities like the local authority of Cape Town, insist on services which are of such a nature that one simply goes away. They take the R5 just once. Take a look at Bellville. Take a look at Parow and those local authorities. That is where the development is taking place. They do not kill you before you are born. They give you a chance. A city engineer who insists on services which are unnecessary, harms his city. To the hon. member who speaks about the “boroughs”, I want to say this. He spoke about Queensburgh and other “boroughs”. The only problem with Natal is its “boroughs”. It is their one biggest problem. If the Department of Community Development does not develop that place, it will be a “borough for jackals and dogs”. Nothing is happening there; one cannot establish a town there because of the problems they have. The problems of township developers are major ones. Most major township developers visited me last month because some time or other we undertook development together. They submitted reports. I am sure this committee which was appointed will, like the Niemand Committee, indicate that developers have a standing in South Africa. It is not a disgrace today to make profits. The communists have driven all of us into a corner. We all say that we have capitalistic system, but we do not want to be called capitalists. It is a disgrace for anybody to admit today that he is a capitalist or that he believes in the capitalistic principle. We all ran away from it. A man who pays income tax, makes a profit. He is, in fact, a capitalist. A labourer who shows some profit from his earnings is a capitalist. We should not be afraid of that. The ordinary State machinery is wonderful. This department is doing what no other department in the world is doing. The officials of this department are of exceptional quality. Hon. members can go and take a look in the offices of these people tomorrow morning at 6 o’clock—they will be there, They are performing miracles for the people of South Africa. The young people of Johannesburg, a group which also includes teachers, wish to ask the hon. the Minister to make a little more land available to us, more land like Suideroord. Give the Johannesburg City Council the opportunity to make a start with the southern part of Johannesburg which is lying fallow. Make money available to our people so that they can become land-owners. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, before I proceed to make my speech, I should like to refer to the comment which the hon. member for Pinetown made yesterday. I cannot allow this comment or remark to go unanswered. The hon. member said that we need not apologize for the granite policy of Dr. Verwoerd. But who has ever apologized for the policy of the National Party? Only those people who are not patriots apologize for the policy of the National Party or the policy of any Prime Minister on this side of the House. If I had to belong to a bankrupt party, a party without a policy, such as the one to which the hon. member for Pinetown belongs, I would be the last person to stand up in this House to criticize the policy of the National Party or the policy of any other party.

In the first place, I should like to make use of this opportunity to thank the officials of the Department of Community Development for the tour they enabled us to undertake round about 20 March 1975. I am referring to the parliamentary tour of the Peninsula by means of which the department offered us a glimpse of what they are doing in regard to White, Coloured and Asian housing. It repeatedly emphasized the tremendous task which awaits the department. Only by means of co-ordinated effort by all persons and bodies, and only by having the will to solve this problem as soon as possible, can we solve the tremendous housing problem which affects the less privileged in a thorough and quick manner. The hon. member for Sea Point yesterday said that he was grateful and delighted to hear the hon. the Minister admitting for the first time that a housing problem existed. Neither the National Party nor this department have ever denied that there was a housing problem in regard to the less privileged, including Coloureds, Asians and Whites in this country. Surely that is why the department exists. But I can understand it, for the hon. member is not sitting in his bench and looking straight ahead of him any more; he keeps on looking around, because Harry is sitting behind him. He now comes with all kinds of fallacious arguments. I see that the hon. member is not here at the moment. He is probably bidding Mr. Friedlander, a former United Party MPC, and a former mayor of Cape Town, welcome to his party. They probably partook of a champagne breakfast this morning. In any case, what we saw here, affects only the Cape Peninsula and not the rest of the country. What particularly struck me on this tour was the contrast which exists between some houses, some streets and some areas. One house is perfectly clean and well taken care of, with a beautiful garden with plants, shrubs and trees. It is a real pleasure to look at and it has a contagious effect on the houses in the vicinity. Thus one finds then that quite a few adjoining houses in one street, are well cared for. One gets the impression that these owners or occupants have developed an owner’s pride, or “house pride”. Then again, one comes to an absolutely slovenly house, street or place which immediately creates the impression of poverty and shabbiness. There is no grass, shrubs, plants, flowers or trees. That is what struck me most during the tour we undertook. We do not find this phenomenon among the Coloureds and the Asians only, but among the Whites as well. I am grateful, however, to learn that the department did not sit still but that they are very much aware of the circumstances and have been organizing gardening competitions for quite a number of years now to encourage people to beautify their homes, gardens and vicinities and to make them more attractive. Prizes of up to R200 have been offered to the owners of the neatest gardens. Although the department finds that there is very little interest in these gardening competitions, I should like to ask them not to lose heart because of that, but that it should rather be an encouragement for the department to develop these competitions even further. The Department should also not only think about flower gardens only, but also in terms of competitions for vegetable gardens. In this regard the hon. Minister of Agriculture, in particular, will be delighted if the department should create a competition for these people in order to encourage them to establish vegetable gardens and at the same time to grow their own vegetables. It is, however, not only the task of the house owner or occupant. In the first place it is also the task of the department to set an example when the environment has to be beautified. The Department of Public Works is prepared to provide free plants, shrubs and trees, to provide free information and even to assist with the landscaping and maintenance of gardens. I want to ask that the department should do everything it can to plant trees, especially indigenous trees, in the various residential areas. Nothing is more tranquil than trees when one enters a residential area. A beautiful example of this is the city of Kimberley itself. Everywhere on the sidewalks there are literally hundreds, if not thousands of fruit trees— orange trees, tangerine trees, lemon trees, lime trees and even peach trees. They are pruned and sprayed by the local city council. I think this custom can be instituted with great success by this department.

I want to conclude with a word of congratulation to the department for the gold medal it was awarded with for its exhibition during the 1975 Rand Show. The individual pavilion award went to the Department of Community Development. This is truly an exceptional achievement for the department. I should just like to say: Continue in this way.

Mr. Chairman, I am sure the hon. member for Kimberley South will forgive me if I prefer to react directly to what was said by the hon. the Minister and the hon. member for Langlaagte. I must honestly say that I was somewhat taken aback by their description of my remarks as being idealistic. In actual fact, my whole argument was that I was rather sceptical of the statement made in the departmental report to the effect that the housing shortage is going to be wiped out. Arising from that scepticism, I asked the hon. the Minister a few very simple questions. I asked where the land was going to come from, how the population increase was going to be taken into consideration and where the expansion was going to take place. I also asked what the possibility of funds was. In other words, I tried quite seriously to give the hon. the Minister a brief indication of how I saw the housing position in the Western Cape. Like the hon. the Minister, I am aware of the fact that there are different categories of housing. There are luxury housing, house ownership, economic housing, sub-economic housing and, of course, squatting. There is a gap between sub-economic housing, which is also planned by the State, and the whole phenomenon of squatting. We know that there are various categories of people who can utilize these various forms of housing. It would obviously be no use providing economic housing for everyone if there are many people in the sub-economic and squatters’ categories who would not be able to afford it. For this reason my whole argument is really aimed at the problem of squatting. The phenomenon of squatting is a universal one, particularly in the so-called Third World. A comparative study of cities such as Mexico, Ankara, Lusaka and Manila has shown that so-called illegal squatting has increased by 20% in ten years. The point I want to make is that it is a phenomenon which deserves the attention of the Department of Community Development as well. This is not a phenomenon which can be combated by means of conventional building programmes alone. I have often advocated a plot and service scheme for squatting, in public and in this House. I know it is not an ideal solution. I know that it is not the form of housing one would like to make available to people of that kind. In the absence of any housing, however, and because there is already a shortage, something must be done. The report also says that the evil of squatting must be wiped! out and that no “rash and instant solutions” must be advocated as a solution. Plot and service schemes are mentioned as an example. I was very interested to read this in the report. The question was asked why one should not give serious consideration to something in the nature of a plot and service scheme. Four reasons were given for this. It was said that it would lead to wasted expenditure. How much is the department spending on those squatters at the moment? I should like the hon. the Minister to tell me that. Would it be a waste of money to provide basic facilities for them there? In some cases the divisional council, the local town council and even the Department of Bantu Administration and Development are doing it already. Another reason why the department says that it would be a rash and instant solution is that it would create new slums. Surely that squatters’ camp is a slum at the moment, and are we not going to try to improve those slum conditions? One cannot drive the people away like guinea fowls to the divisional council, which will pass them on to the town council, which in turn will pass the people on to the Department of Community Development. The people are there and slum conditions prevail there and the question is how that area is going to be handled. Another reason which is given is that it will lead to the cancellation of new schemes. This I do not understand at all. There may be a good reason and perhaps the hon. the Minister could tell me why elementary plot and service schemes should lead to the cancellation of new schemes, if these things are planned in advance. Finally, it is said that it would lead to a delay in the provision of proper housing. Why would it lead to a delay in the provision of housing, particularly since we have seen what the real reasons are? The real reasons are the lack of funds, the lack of land and the lack of ancillary services to assist in the building of townships. For that reason I can say quite honestly that I am prepared to accept it if the department has other ways of combating the problems. However, the reasons I have been given make no sense to me and I see no reason why there cannot be basic plot and service schemes for the squatters. It is no use saying that the Government would then have to accept the responsibility, because it bears the responsibility in any case.

The department states in its report that a community, i.e. a full-fledged community of the kind which the department wants to create, cannot be developed without essential community facilities. Here we have a category of people, namely squatters, which it will probably not be possible to eliminate, even according to the most optimistic estimates of the department in cooperation with the Department of Planning. It seems quite unlikely that we shall get rid of this problem, and for that reason we know that we are going to find it difficult to provide essential facilities. The question of essential facilities raises the question of what a full-fledged community is. According to the department’s report, it took part last year in a low-cost housing symposium in Montreal, Canada, and the report contains a quotation from a very gratifying letter from Prof. Cowan of Australia in which he says that South Africa has a particularly commendable programme for low-cost housing.

Here we are concerned with a different category of housing, and that is emergency housing. The hon. the Minister probably knows that the International Institute of Architects held a competition in Madrid this year in which a small group of students from the faculty of architecture of the University of Cape Town took part. They won the third prize for their emergency housing project. The students who took part in the competition were Anne Olivier, Brian Slogrove, Douglas Inglis and Helen Floyd. They won the third prize in a competition in which they competed, inter alia, against Latin-American countries where there is a tremendous need for emergency housing. What was the subject of their ideas and their contributions? They dealt specifically with the category of emergency housing. They produced concrete proposals which would in fact not run counter to the plans of the Department of Community Development, but would supplement them, because the underlying assumption is that if one is unable to provide full-fledged communities for people, one should try to create the basic structure so that the social abilities those people possess can be used for building their own community. This is in fact what the squatters are doing.

I am sure that the hon. the Minister of Community Development knows just as well as any of us that it is no use merely building houses and then hoping that a community will develop. The community spirit in any community is an interaction between the physical structure of that community and the social abilities, the initiative of the people who are going to live in that physical structure. For that reason there are various forms of housing. Flat housing tends to produce different social patterns from those produced by a township. It is possible that a Public Service Department which takes housing very seriously indeed may draw up its plans in such a way that it ends up creating ghettos, in spite of the fact that its planning was done systematically and very carefully. Conditions of this kind, rather than living communities, may eventually develop in situations such as these.

I concede that the Minister has undertaken many building programmes, that they are being tackled in real earnest and that they are going about it as scientifically as possible, but I am trying to show that we are going to have a squatting problem in spite of this. At the moment the squatting problem on the Cape Flats affects 100 000 people. I am not talking now about squatting elsewhere. I really believe that at a minimal cost, the Department of Community Development could introduce a certain degree stability into these communities and could create an elementary physical structure which would enable those people to develop their own community until such time as they are in a position to obtain sub-economic housing or even eventually to obtain economic housing or to own their own homes. As an hon. member said earlier on, it is no use always wanting to start at the top of the pyramid; one has to start at the bottom as well, and to be able to start at the bottom, one must make use of the abilities and initiative of people who are prepared to create their own communities and their own homes. What else does a squatter do? After all, he builds himself a shanty which will provide him with accommodation. He does it himself at minimal cost to the State. The State knows that this is a real problem, and for this reason I want to plead with the hon. the Minister to reconsider the position and not to take up such an unyielding attitude in respect of squatting. I also want to ask them rather to see whether they cannot utilize the phenomenon of squatting for new housing programmes, even though this might be unconventional.

Mr. Chairman, I have listened attentively to the hon. member for Rondebosch, who expressed his concern about squatters and squatting. His concern about squatting does not surprise me, for a political party of squatters is sitting behind him. I wonder how he is going to accommodate them. I shall leave the hon. member at that.

Housing is a very delicate matter which affects the population of the whole country. The property developer plays a very important part in the provision of housing, as was also pointed out by the hon. member for Langlaagte. On the part of the public, those who provide housing as well as those who need housing, there is great respect for the House of Assembly and for this Committee. There is great appreciation on the part of the public for what is being done in this House to provide for the needs of the community. I have said that the hon. members of the House of Assembly are held in high, esteem, but the public also expects the things that are said in this House to be fair and just and to be founded on facts. I have certain newspaper cuttings and letters in my possession, and the hon. member for whom my remarks are intended will soon realize that I am referring to him. On 28 February this year, an hon. member of this House said—

The hon. member then mentioned the names of three persons. One in particular he dragged into the debate by the head and shoulders. In consequence of that speech made by the hon. member whose constituency I shall mention in a little while, considerable publicity has been given to the matter by the Press in Johannesburg, and particularly by the Rand Daily Mail, in which this report appeared. Because of this, the person concerned wrote to the hon. member. I am referring to the person who was dragged in by the head and shoulders and who was accused quite unjustly and falsely—Mr. Chairman, I withdraw that if it is unparliamentary—of having done certain things. This person wrote to the hon. member who had made those allegations. This is his reply to the allegations which appeared in the Rand Daily Mail and which I have just quoted. He says—

This newspaper report almost gives the impression that this hon. member is shielding the less well-to-do people. These are luxury flats in the luxury areas of Illovo and Killarney and they are all rent-controlled. He goes on to say—

The hon. member went on to say—

To this the person against whom the hon. member made the allegation replies as follows—

The hon. member also accused him by saying—

To this the person replies as follows—

The hon. member also accused him by saying—

To this the person replies as follows—

He goes on in this way. The hon. member —he is the hon. member for Johannesburg North—went on to say—

They advocated imprisonment. I could go on quoting from this letter. This letter was written as a result of unfair and unjustified accusations made by the hon. member for Johannesburg North against a person whose business he knows nothing about, a person he does not know …

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

The hon. member will have an opportunity to do so later. I just want to say in passing that the person against whom the accusations were made used to be in the steel trade and that he became a property developer. I wonder whether, in attacking this person, the hon. member for Johannesburg North was thinking of the days when this person was an opponent of his diamond-coated and gold-plated father-in-law. This person wrote a letter to the hon. member for Johannesburg North at the beginning of March this year. Therefore the hon. member has had an opportunity to apologize, but he has not done so. This debate is almost over. I have waited for him to take part in the debate, but he has not been prepared to do so. In all fairness to that person, I feel that the hon. member for Johannesburg North owes him an apology. The hon. member for Johannesburg North made his allegations under absolute privilege. If the things he said in this House had been said outside, he would have been sued for libel and it might have cost him millions. I say to him: Please repeat it outside. Be a man!

Will the hon. member answer a question now?

No, not now. What did this person do then? He sent the leader of the Progressive Party a copy of the letter he had written to the hon. member for Johannesburg North. He asked him as leader of the party to give him an explanation. On 1 April the hon. member for Sea Point acknowledged receipt of the letter and said that he had referred it to the hon. member for Johannesburg North. Up to last Friday the hon. member for Johannesburg North had not had the decency to tell that person: “I am very sorry; I made a mistake because my information was wrong.” This alarming thought occurs to me: Here a party of squatters is sitting which calls itself the Progressive Party.

Order! The hon. member must not use that description.

I withdraw it, Sir. Here the party is sitting which wants to give out that it is able to govern our country, but if its members attack a citizen of our country in such an unfair and unjust manner because they enjoy the privilege of Parliament here, then I ask the voters of South Africa to reject them with, the contempt they deserve in the next election.

Mr. Chairman, I do not intend to follow up on the argument advanced by the hon. member who has just resumed his seat. I want to deal with the topic discussed by the hon. member for Rondebosch, who has unfortunately left the House. I just want to say that while the hon. member for Rondebosch referred to squatting and made an earnest appeal to the hon. the Minister and the department to adopt a less unapproachable attitude, as he put it, in regard to squatting, I should very much have liked to see him making a more positive suggestion in an attempt to assist the hon. the Minister. After all, the hon. member is a representative here of a constituency in the Peninsula and of people who have their ideas, too, concerning squatting and who even have objections and difficulties in that regard. Therefore I should have liked to see the hon. member making a sound suggestion to the hon. the Minister and his department. I also want to say that it is very easy to raise problems, but that it is more difficult to offer solutions. I am aware that this department has tremendous problems in this regard. If there are hon. members on this side of the House or that who are able to suggest an intelligent, reasonable and practicable solution, it would probably be very welcome to the hon. the Minister and his department. However I must point out that squatting creates a situation which could cause tremendous additional problems for our planning and development for the future, instead of solving problems. We must bear that in mind. Since the hon. the Minister and his department have to undertake planning of such a wide scope —as the hon. the Minister indicated here—and are engaged in its implementation to the extent that available funds permit, we can but offer them our whole-hearted support. To this I want to add that I have a suggestion to make to the hon. the Minister. He stated his problem here, viz. that his department and the Government could do more if the necessary funds were available. This problem which the hon. the Minister faces is, in fact, a very real one. Sir, the suggestion I want to make is that the hon. the Minister and his department should try to liaise to the greatest possible extent, not only with the Department of Coloured Relations, but also with, the executive of the Coloured Persons Representative Council. I am convinced that much is being done by the State—I almost want to say that enough is being done. It is essential for us to have the full co-operation of the Coloured population as regards assisting us to solve this problem, because in point of fact, the Government is today bearing an enormous burden as regards this problem, and you and I and others, as taxpayers, are bearing an enormous burden, whereas I am convinced, as I see the situation—and I think I have seen a great deal—that although there are a great many Coloureds who are making a contribution, who have saved money, and who have built themselves fine houses, either on their own or with the aid of the department, there is too great a percentage of the Coloured population which, I am tempted to say, lets matters drift and which simply takes it that it is the responsibility of the hon. the Minister, of the department and the State to ensure that they get houses. Sir, I could quote figures to you to indicate that these people are no longer as poor as it would seem. They may be poor if one considers what they have saved in the Post Office Savings Bank or at the Spes Bona Savings Bank, but the money they handle is no longer as little as it was before. In the Peninsula and the surrounding Boland towns there is a considerable number of Coloureds who earn R75 per week and who live in sub-economic houses. Sir, it is time for us to tell those people: “You must begin to save a substantial portion of your income; you cannot simply have a good time over the weekends. You must begin to make a contribution to this problem.” In my opinion, the executive of the Coloured Persons Representative Council, as leaders of the Coloured population, have a vital contribution to make. I do not want to tread on the toes of the hon. the Minister and his department, but I want to say that they will be attempting the impossible if we are unable, at least, to succeed in getting the Coloured population and its leaders to start acknowledging and realizing that this is not a White problem; that it is their own responsibility to a very large extent. Sir, our responsibility is to help these people to help themselves; to help them to create their own future and their own residential areas —pleasant residential areas. The housing provided in the past by way of subeconomic housing was to a large extent emergency housing, to which the hon. member for Rondebosch referred here. I think that the hon. member will concede to me that to a large extent, this was emergency housing. We are not very happy about it; we do not feel that it is the ideal. The ideal is that the Coloured population should contribute its savings, too, towards the provision of its own housing, just as the White population did as it progressed in the economic sphere. One thing that the State, in particular, can do is make land available, because this is one of the major problems of the Coloured population. Some of them tell you: “I have the money, but where can I get a plot to build on?” Sir. I regard this as a very important responsibility of the department and of the hon. the Minister, and I want to say that if he wants to do more, he should move along these lines, and then you and I, as members of this House and as citizens of South Africa and as friends of the Coloured population, must tell them, “People, come and work with us in order to create something better for yourselves; we ourselves are not very happy about existing circumstances and we want a better future for you.” Personally, therefore, I look forward to the development of Mitchell’s Plain and to the development of Dassenberg, but we can go much further. In the distant future, if we plan adequately now, full-fledged cities may be built of which these people could in fact be proud. It is unnecessary for the Coloured population to be satisfied to live in subeconomic houses which are appendages of White towns. Sir, I therefore want to support the hon. the Minister with this reservation and with this suggestion to his department.

Sir, if there are a few minutes left to me, then I should also like to mention with appreciation what is being done by the department in regard to White housing, in the city and on the platteland, particularly for the lower middle income group and for the low-paid people. Sir, it is not only Coloureds who are low-paid. There is still a considerable percentage of Whites who are low-paid. One finds them in the private sector, one finds them in the Railways and one finds them in the Public Service at various levels. I want to mention with a sense of gratitude that, owing to the guidance provided by local authorities, there are White subeconomic houses in many towns and in the cities today which one need not be ashamed of, which are occupied by the elderly parents of prominent people, parents who are still unwilling to live in old-age homes. One need not be in the slightest ashamed to call on them and have an enjoyable conversation with them over coffee. They usually have a world of valuable experience, and you and I as learned people can go and learn something from them. In addition, one can make some contact and make them feel, too, that we have not yet forgotten them. Sir, the hon. Minister and his department have not yet forgotten these people. Whereas the amounts of R30 million for Whites and R36 million for Coloureds have been mentioned here, I want to make a plea that the Minister should not allow this provision of housing for Whites in the lower middle income group and for low-paid Whites— there are still a great many of these people —to be stopped; that he will ensure that it does not fall behind, because with the constant rise in costs it is very difficult even for many of our young people, who have a good future ahead of them, to obtain a house or afford a flat at prevailing rates today.

Mr. Chairman, it makes a mockery of debate, of course, when I have to be the first official Opposition speaker since three o’clock after 10 other speakers on that side. It is quite impossible, therefore, and I am not even going to try to answer 10 speakers plus the Minister in the 10 minutes allowed to me.

That is your own choice.

Sir, I merely place this on record to show that it makes a mockery of debate.

That is your own choice.

It is not a question of our own choice. I am merely stating the fact that 10 speakers on that side have spoken since a member on this side last participated in this debate. Sir, I am not even going to try, therefore, to answer the 10 speakers who spoke before me. I want to deal with one or specific issues and then return to the general topic of housing which has been the subject of debate here.

*I may mention, Sir, for the information of the hon. member for Germiston District, that he need not be surprised. If he knows the members of the Progressive Party as we know them, he will learn that he should not take much notice of their so-called facts. Those facts must always be verified.

†Sir, I want to start firstly with the question of the means test which is applied for economic housing. This test is applied both if you wish to purchase a house or to rent it, or if you are a resident already in a building or a flat which you are leasing. This means test is adjusted from time to time. The last adjustment, as far as I know, was from R320 to R460. What happens, Sir, is that there is a period in between these regular adjustments of the means test, while salaries in commerce and in industry and in the public sector are increased irregularly and from time to time. The result is that a person can become disqualified because he has had a promotion or a salary increase which takes his income beyond the means test ceiling, when in point of fact that means test is going to be adjusted a very short time thereafter. Sir, I want to plead for regular adjustments at intervals of, say, six months, based upon the cost-of-living index so as to keep the means test ceiling in proportion to the cost of living as it increases and in proportion to wage levels as they rise. This would avoid the situation which you have from time to time when the Government damps down on the city councils, or when the city councils of their own volition decide that they have to start applying the means test. In practice, I admit, there is a lot of flexibility and leniency. Very often it is overlooked, but every now and again you get a blitz and people get notices saying that they are out of the income group which entitles them to lease property in terms of the means test. This could at least be more reasonable if there were a regular adjustment according to the cost-of-living index.

The next point I wish to deal with is in connection with the innumerable cases which cause problems for tenants under the Rents Act. I do not have the time to quote cases here. Many cases were quoted during the debate on the Rents Amendment Bill. The Minister is aware of the dozens of oases that I have raised with him and his department. It is common knowledge that there is a minority of landlords who take every opportunity to exploit tenants where they are able to do so. These tenants come to people like ourselves as members of Parliament, but usually they go first to the Rent Board, and as often as not the Rent Board has to tell them that this is a legal issue and they cannot advise them. I want to plead that the Department of Community Development attach to its major offices, or arrange at its major offices, a form of legal advice for tenants who cannot in the normal course of events afford to go to an attorney. I have myself, and other members have done it, telephoned a colleague, if we have a legally qualified colleague, and asked his advice pro Deo. We have gone as far as actually engaging an attorney to represent a pensioner, for instance, who is in trouble. These pensioners on R57 a month, probably paying R45 or R50 of that in rent and virtually living on charity, or perhaps with a little help from their families, cannot afford to go to an attorney and have a court case. When they receive a summons to appear in court, nine times out of ten they panic and they get out. It is these people who cannot afford to get proper advice; they cannot afford to pay for proper legal advice. They cannot always come to a member of Parliament and the member of Parliament cannot always assist them because he is here for five and a half months of the year. My plea is that the department should, possibly by contract with a civil lawyer or attorney who has made a study of these matters, make legal advice available to these people in cases where a person infringes the Rents Act or is protected by the Rents Act, or where there is a legal squabble between landlord and tenant. That advice should be available to them, advice on the legal aspects and, if necessary, assistance to enable them to defend themselves where there are unfair, unreasonable and unjust summonses or attempts to evict people.

Sir, we have debated at length, and I do not want to repeat any of those arguments, the problems which the fiat tenant has today. The position is getting absolutely desperate for the fixed income and the lower income tenants. The number of buildings available to them is decreasing year by year. The old buildings are being demolished and there is no alternative accommodation which those people can afford. If I had the time, I could quote case after case. I have a file here consisting of letters advising of an increase or an application for an increase in rental over a period of 18 months. I think there are something like 15 letters here, every one advising of an application or confirming an increase for water, for rates, for wages or for interest on bonds. There are three applications for increases because of the value of the building or general costs. Sir, can you imagine the ordinary old-age pensioner, aged perhaps 80 or 85, who gets these letters pumped at him at the rate of one or two a month? I just want to give an example. There are letters dated 3 March, 26 February, 20 January, 10 December, 27 November, 25 November, September, September, August and July. So it goes. This is the sort of thing tenants are living through today. There is almost a monthly increase for something or other. The Rents Act has now been amended. We will have to see what the effect is. I fear that it will lead to more increases. That will limit increases based on a normal application based on value. I believe that we should also do something to limit the number of occasions on which other increases can be asked for during the year. Perhaps we should consolidate them and have them once or twice a year instead of this perpetual demand for R1-00, 50 cents or 80 cents. There may a demand for some little item here or some little item there, and then suddenly there is one for R22 or for R26 or for R32. These are only three cases I have brought into the House. I have files of them, as every other hon. member must have—letters all dealing with escalating rentals and the problems of the poor people who cannot afford them. I believe we are missing this. We have talked about the non-Whites, the Coloureds, and that is a problem, but I want to plead for the White person who is suffering today. He has his difficulties which we must not forget in our sympathy for those who may be even worse off. For the White tenants I plead for compassion and assistance from the department.

Mr. Chairman, the doleful note on which the hon. member for Durban Point started his speech was rather weak. He came to moan here in the Committee because he did not have a turn to speak. This newly-concocted party had three or four turns to speak. The hon. member for Rondebosch rose to speak on two consecutive occasions.

I explained.

No, the hon. member must not talk to me. He had better take up the matter with his Whips and then we shall hear tomorrow what happened in their deliberations. To come back from Durban Point to Johannesburg, I should like to bring to the attention of the hon. the Minister a few matters concerning my constituency. In the western suburbs of Johannesburg, there is a suburb by the name of Triomf. Triomf rose out of the ashes of what had previously been Sophiatown. Triomf is built on the site where one of the biggest slums of Johannesburg used to stand. The hon. member for Jeppe is not present at the moment. Perhaps the hon. member for Rosettenville knows about it. Perhaps they remember what Sophiatown really looked like, and perhaps those hon. members still remember the role played by their kindred spirits at the time when we wanted to make something new out of Sophiatown.

Sir, I should like to tell the hon. the Minister that the neighbourhood is proud of Triomf. The people of Triomf are proud of their town. One has to go there and see those houses and those neat gardens and those neat streets, and one has to know the people there to know that they are proud of their town. I want to give the assurance that the community is proud of the Department of Community Development and the National Party Government which is responsible for what has been done there. However, there is one weak spot which I should just like to bring to the attention of the hon. the Minister, and I want to ask him whether anything could be done about this shortly. This is the shopping complex which needs to be further developed and for which, I believe, the department is still responsible to some extent. I have just told you what kind of people are living in Triomf. In my opinion the people of Triomf deserve a better and more pleasant shopping centre than the one they have at the moment.

I want to pass to another area in the north-western part of Johannesburg, namely, the suburb known as Albertville. Albertville, too, rose from the ruins of what had previously been an ugly Black spot. In fact, the Black spot was a small island in the heart of the White area. As far back as August 1953 that area was proclaimed a future White area, but owing to all the problems which inevitably arise in such an area, it was 1962 before the area was in fact proclaimed a White area. During that period a great deal of work has been done. Since 1962, more than 1200 families— Coloureds, Indians and Chinese—from that area have been resettled. More than 500 dwellings had to be demolished and slum conditions had to be cleared up. 1 187 properties had to be expropriated before the real development and replanning could be continued with. Owing to its situation, Albertville has the potential of being just as pleasant a suburb as Triomf. It borders on some of our most pleasant suburbs in Johannesburg. However, it would appear that development there is not taking place fast enough. The reason, inter alia, is that a considerable number of houses of varying quality have been built. The Community Development Board built those houses, and other units, too, were constructed, including a number of gas concrete houses. These gas concrete houses, of which, if I remember correctly, only 86 were built, were soon bought up at a reasonable price since there was a demand for them. Some of the people who bought them had previously been accommodated in buildings of poorer quality than these ones built from gas concrete. To be honest, I must say that those gas concrete houses are not at all pleasant. In my opinion it is not in the interests of what is to become a pleasant residential area, to have houses of that kind there. I have called on some of the families living in those houses. The families as such are happy, but one asks oneself whether, in the course of time, those houses will in fact withstand the test of time. However, those houses were built to provide for people who did not have accommodation. To me, however, what is important is the overall picture. The question arises whether it will be the department’s policy to build more of those houses in the future. If so, I want to express reservations on that score and ask that this be looked into again.

There were also a few houses that had, in fact, to be demolished, but subsequently it was decided that they would not be demolished, but that they would have to be sold by tender if a tenderer could be found who was prepared to renovate and restore those houses. Subsequently, tenders for the houses were invited, and a certain developer did buy them by tender. However, disturbing rumours, which are upsetting the community, are doing the rounds. Owing to these rumours, the community is under the impression that the developer is now trying to sell those houses that have not yet been renovated in terms of the agreement, in their unrenovated state. These are rumours, but nevertheless there are examples of cases where the developer has offered the houses to certain occupants at specific prices. The developer tendered for those houses and if he is now able to sell them at a profit, it is certainly to his advantage to do so. However, we want to know, for the sake of the community, too, whether the conditions of the contract of sale in terms of which the developer acquired the houses, have been complied with in full, because if he were to sell the houses in their present condition, he would surely not have complied with the conditions. The occupants of the houses are unhappy, because if the conditions of the contract of sale have not been complied with they feel that they could just as well have purchased those houses at the tender price or the price asked by the Department of Community Development. Basically, however, the nub of the matter is whether the developer did in fact discharge the responsibilities imposed on him by the contract of sale. It is also being said that some of those houses are being rented at a higher rate than that charged by the department. In one case I came across by chance yesterday afternoon, the departmental rent was R27-50 per month. This, of course, is very little, but it represents the extent to which the department assisted those people. I should like to have the assurance that if those people have to pay a higher rent, they pay it for a house that has been restored and for which a reasonable rent is imposed within the framework of the provisions of the Rent Board. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman. I should like to associate myself with the plea made by the hon. member for Westdene. I can point out that he obligingly inherited both the section of Triomf to which he referred and Albertville from my constituency. I almost want to say, with the psalmist, “The lines are fallen unto him in pleasant places; yea, he has a goodly heritage.” That is why he praises these two areas so much. Like the hon. member for Westdene, I, too, want to refer to the issue of urban renewal with special reference to the constituency which I represent. There is a sub-economic White housing scheme called Montclare which was built in this constituency during the fifties. This scheme no longer meets the requirements of our times, nor is it really a credit to us. The scheme was built by the City Council of Johannesburg with National Housing funds. I should be obliged if the hon. the Minister could state whether anything could be done to renew the Montclare housing scheme, which is situated in a complex of sound residential areas, so as to give it a better appearance.

The hon. member for Westdene also referred to the period when the clearance of Sophiatown and its replacement by Triomf, a White residential area, was carried out. When a start was made with the clearance of Sophiatown in the fifties and sixties, it occurred for the first time that group areas were proclaimed in that region. White urban areas were declared White for the first time, Coloured areas as Coloured group areas, and so on. The renewal of certain of the Coloured areas in that region was a task which was entrusted to the City Council of Johannesburg. I have in mind specifically Newclare, which falls within my constituency, Western Native Township and Kliptown, situated in the south of my constituency. Coloureds are living there, and although the City Council of Johannesburg must have made a start with urban renewal at one time or another, slum conditions still prevail there. I must admit that in the department’s annual report something is said about the renewal of the city centre of Newclare. This is in regard to the shopping complex, of course, but as far as the dwellings are concerned, they are really in a very poor condition. I think it is necessary that attention be given to that. I have great appreciation for the work done by the hon. the Minister and his department and I know that they have a wide-ranging task. Consequently I regret to tell them that I believe that the actions of the City Council of Johannesburg as regards housing for the various population groups in my part of Johannesburg will have to be looked at more carefully. This matter must definitely be attended to. I just want to point out that as far back as 1949, when I was still a young member of the Provincial Council, I referred to the conditions in Kliptown. Today, 30 years later, the conditions are still exactly the same. Nothing whatsoever has been done. Thousands of Coloured families are living there in the worst possible slum conditions. Something must be done there. This area falls under the jurisdiction of the City Council of Johannesburg as far as urban renewal is concerned.

I am grateful that there has been an announcement in the annual report of the department concerning the provision of community facilities in the various housing schemes. On pages 5 and 6 of the annual report a committee that was appointed, the recommendations made by the committee and the funds that are now available, are reported on extensively. Hon. members can read this themselves; I do not want to go into it now. I am pleased about this state of affairs, because there is really a pressing need for community facilities, particularly for Coloureds and Indians in my constituency. I mention this because we as Whites are starting to experience difficulties with the other population groups who do not have the necessary facilities. On 20 May the hon. member for Rondebosch put a question in this House concerning community facilities being made available. He asked how many local managements had applied. It was clear from the hon. the Minister’s reply to that question that at present there are ten local authorities in the country that have already applied for funds for community facilities. This is encouraging, but I am also told by the department that as yet, Johannesburg has made no formal application. It is thought however, that community facilities, a community centre, for example, are envisaged at Eldorado Park. It is also said that there are already eight sports fields, on which rugby and soccer are played at Eldorado Park. Evidently there are adequate community facilities at other Coloured centres in Johannesburg. The City Council also envisages a swimming bath for the Indians at Lenasia.

I should now like to refer to another matter. If I am entering the domain of another department here, I want to request the hon. Minister concerned to take the lead and establish pleasure resorts for Coloureds and Indians in the neighbourhood of Johannesburg. There are places where there are no pleasure resorts. Just like the Whites, these people, too, seek relaxation outside the city on Sundays and holidays. About 45 miles to the north west of Johannesburg there is a pleasure resort called Die Olienhoutboom. There are a swimming bath and other facilities there. As occurred last New Year’s Day, the Coloureds go to a piece of land about a mile from there. It is common grazing land belonging to the farmers there. They park their trucks along the Magalies River and camp there. They swim in that bilharzia-infested water. There are no ablution facilities for them. It is merely an open piece of veld. They disport themselves there and later, when it gets hot and they feel like cooldrink and refreshments, they stream into the White pleasure resort to buy refreshments there. Then they want to swim there, and this causes friction. I think something should be done for those non-Whites. The Coloureds often make use of the Whites’ facilities illegally because there are no facilities for them. Provision must be made for them so as to prevent friction between the various population groups. I think this falls within the jurisdiction of the hon. the Minister and his department. Recently there was talk of a White pleasure resort at Vanwyksrus, to which I referred the other day under the Planning Vote, being allocated to the Coloureds. In my opinion, adequate provision must be made for these people in their own areas.

I want to refer to another matter. It concerns an area in my constituency about which there has been a great deal of controversy in the Press recently. The area is Claremont and the hon. the Minister is fully acquainted with this. I want to point out that Claremont is a housing scheme for Whites built in three phases. The final phase has just been completed, and according to my information, large blocks of flats have been constructed for White occupation. Altogether there are about 400 units, but evidently Whites are not sufficiently interested in renting them. Consequently the management committee of the City Council of Johannesburg approached the hon. the Minister and the Minister of Planning to investigate whether they could be allocated to Coloureds. I just want to say that the fact that Whites are not interested in them at the moment is apparently owing to the very high rent charged for the flat units. I am told that the flat rent compares very well with the flat rent in the better suburbs of Johannesburg. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, this debate has almost come to an end, and m these closing stages I want to refer to a few points which I consider to be fundamental. South Africa faces an enormous task as regards the provision of housing for the next 25 years. We are not satisfied that the Government has grasped the enormity of this problem or is prepared to adopt the new methods which will have to be adopted in order to overcome the problem. May I remind the House what the problem is? We will have to build up to 10 million homes in the next two or three decades. It is not my estimate, but the estimate given by the hon. the Minister in a speech which he delivered before a building congress of some sort and of which I do not have the details in front of me at the moment. What does the building of 10 million homes in 20 to 30 years mean? It means that if 20 years is being taken as the limit, every year from now on 500 000 homes will have to be built. If we take it over a period of 30 years, it means that 333 333 homes will have to be built. If we take it in round figures, 350 000 homes will have to be built per year over a period of 30 years. At the moment we are not building at a rate which is anywhere near that limit. Let us take the year 1973 as an example. The combined effort of the department and the local authorities as far as White, Coloured and Indian housing is concerned gave us a total number of 22 318 homes for the year 1973. Whilst the effort of the department is certainly creditable and while I do not wish to belittle it, it is nowhere near enough if we have to provide near enough housing on the basis which I have mentioned. I wish to say again that the figures I have used are figures given by the hon. the Minister himself. What should be done? I believe it is essential for the Government to give thought to new methods altogether of financing housing and to give thought to the building of homes, even of economic homes, through private enterprise. This is done overseas. There are various ways in which it can be done. Unless private enterprise is brought in, the hon. the Minister does not have the slightest hope of building at the rate that is going to be necessary.

In this context I should like to have a look at the proposed commission which the Minister announced yesterday. Clearly, this is a step in the right direction, but I wonder whether this is going to be another damp squib such as the commission on the Rents Act was. That commission was also comprised of top-level people who gave up a lot of their time to consider the implications of the Rents Act and, whilst we do not know what was in the report, if the evidence of the Rents Amendments Act which was introduced in the House this year, was an indication of the results of their deliberations, it can only be described as a damp squib. It did not deal with the problem adequately in any way. We had, for example, the Niemand Commission on the same type of theme as the commission announced yesterday. What was the result of that commission? It was so unsatisfactorily in many respects that one of the topics of discussion at the annual congress of the S.A. Property Owners’ Association was entitled: “Whatever happened to the Niemand Commission?” I do hope that in a year or two we are not going to have bodies of that sort saying: “Whatever happened to the Fouché commission?” I am disappointed to find that there is no indication from the heads of reference that there is to be any in-depth discussion in new methods of financing, new ways of providing the enormous number of houses that are necessary and perhaps new ways in which private enterprise could be brought in. For instance, the first head of reference is the following—

These have been considered in the past. Whilst it is a good thing that they should be further considered, the answer to the high cost of housing is not only a reduction in the standards. One cannot go beyond providing one bathroom. Once one has come down to one bathroom, for example, one cannot go beyond that. One cannot leave out bathrooms altogether. Similarly, once one has reduced the size of rooms to a minimum, they cannot be reduced any further.

Who said so?

The problem that is facing us in the sphere of housing in South Africa is no different to the problem that has faced other countries. Escalating costs of building and escalating wages of workmen make it essential that housing be financed in a different way. The hon. the Minister, when answering some of the speakers here, referred to the methods that are being adopted today as though they were the be-all and the end-all end as though the only method of providing cheaper housing, i.e. economic and sub-economic housing, was by way of the present methods through the National Housing Commission. I do not need to elaborate. The hon. the Minister knows very well that there are a number of variations which have been adopted overseas, because they have the same problem of escalating land costs, escalating costs of material and escalating costs of wages. It is impossible to reconcile the two even by lowering the standards. One cannot lower the standards below a certain point so one has to find other ways of providing housing because housing is essential for the good of the community. If we do not face up to this situation and look ahead, the position is going to give rise to very serious social problems in South Africa. Moreover, we have a racial problem as well and this is something which the Government cannot afford to be lax about. The hon. the Minister has said in answer to some of the speakers that he and his department have looked ahead for five years. He has given the House the assurance that in that period the Government will have overcome the backlog. As he put it, the Government is about to win as far as the question of housing is concerned. I am sorry to say to the hon. the Minister that he has not convinced us that the Government will achieve this object; he has not told us how he is going to do it. Apart from that, looking five years ahead is far too little. As has already been pointed out by speakers here, to bring a township from raw land to the stage where the first house is occupied can take almost 10 years. To provide the sort of housing and the number of houses that I have just referred to, looking only five years ahead is totally inadequate. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Musgrave quoted the 1973 figures to us and based his argument on that, viz. that the hon. the Minister and his department would not succeed in providing sufficient housing. The hon. member should rather have listened to what the hon. the Minister said when he took part in the debate. The hon. the Minister said that a fixed determination had been made of the annual demand in respect of growth and that the department had already concluded the necessary agreements and made arrangements so that more houses than were required by the normal increase could be built. In this way the backlog must surely be eliminated. However, I do want to give the hon. member credit for having tried, at least, to make positive suggestions as to how the problem could be solved. This was in contrast to the hon. member for Rondebosch—I am sorry he is not present—who, typically of the Progressive Party, simply threw up his hands and asked innumerable questions which amounted, in particular, to this: Where are all the thousands going to… the hon. member shakes his head; I think that is one of the few things they can do. The hon. member put a host of questions: Where are these poor people going to get houses to live in by the year 2000. There is not enough land for them. But did the Dutch not ask, 30 or 50 years ago, where the Dutch, the Germans and the Italians would find a place to live? These problems are solved as they crop up. A few years ago I heard a very good sermon in the course of which the clergyman said that we should be a little less aware of problems and a little more aware of God and we would then all fare better and would be able to see the clouds’ silver lining.

I should like to avail myself of this opportunity today to thank the hon. the Minister for the commission of inquiry appointed to inquire into White housing which he announced here yesterday. In my opinion this is a very good thing. If we consider the vast scope of the terms of reference of the commission and the calibre of the members of the commission, then I am sure that we shall have a very good report from them. I want to express the hope that whereas the Fouché Commission, which preceded the Housing Act, and whose terms of reference were almost as comprehensive, published a report within a year, this commission will publish a report within as short a space of time and that it will be just as thorough a piece of work and just as speedily executed.

Business interrupted in accordance with Standing Order No. 23.

House Resumed:

Progress reported and leave granted to sit again.