Order! The State President asked me to call a Joint Sitting to enable him to make certain important statements. I now call upon the State President to speak.

Mr Speaker, I thank you for this opportunity you are affording me to deal briefly with the two important matters on the occasion of this Joint Sitting.

†The first matter I want to raise concerns the UN Security Council’s Resolution 435 in relation to South West Africa/Namibia. Just about eight years ago the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 435 which was intended to provide the definite programme for the independence of South West Africa/Namibia.

Those who know the history of this matter also know that the fact that the territory has not yet attained independence cannot be laid at South Africa’s door. The last remaining obstacle to the execution of the international settlement plan is the continuing threat posed to South West Africa and to our region by the presence of the Cubans in Angola. Despite the progress which has been made in bilateral discussions since October 1984, when Angola agreed in principle to the withdrawal of the Cubans in conjunction with the execution of the settlement plan, the Angolan Government has yet to agree to a satisfactory timetable for the Cuban withdrawal.

The people of South West Africa/Namibia have waited long enough for their independence. In a serious attempt to facilitate a resolution of this difficult problem I propose that 1 August 1986 be set as the date for commencement of the implementation of the settlement plan based on United Nations Security Council Resolution 435 provided that a firm and satisfactory agreement can be reached before that date on the withdrawal of the Cubans.

*The second matter on which I should like to make a short statement is the state of emergency declared during 1985 in approximately 13% of the country’s magisterial districts. The conditions of violence and lawlessness under which the Government was compelled to proclaim a state of emergency in certain magisterial districts, are known to all hon members. Sporadic and isolated cases of violence are, however, still being instigated in various parts of the country. Nevertheless the situation has improved sufficiently for me to announce that a proclamation will be issued in the near future, most probably next Friday, which will lift the state of emergency in the remaining magisterial districts in which it still applies. [Interjections.]

To enable the authorities to deal with continuing cases of unrest without subjecting the population to the inconvenience of a state of emergency in terms of our internal security legislation, existing legislation will be revised during the present parliamentary session and possible new proposals will be made or amendments moved to give the authorities the statutory powers necessary to protect lives and possessions effectively. In the meantime the security forces will preserve order and safeguard communities in terms of existing legislation.

I am taking this step in the sincere hope that all South Africans will resolve their differences peacefully and display mutual understanding. The violence which is borne in among peaceful communities, leads to nothing constructive and merely creates unnecessary suffering.

On its part the Government is giving attention to legitimate grievances with the purpose of eliminating them. In addition I have also announced a clear basis on which all South Africans who reject violence can come to the conference table to negotiate jointly a new constitutional dispensation for our country.

I am asking all South Africans to react positively to this appeal. I believe that we owe this to ourselves and to the peaceful process of positive political development in South Africa. Mr Speaker, I thank you for this opportunity.

The Joint Sitting rose at 14h23.

The House met at 14h34.

Order! I have to announce that at a Joint Meeting of the Committees on Standing Rules and Orders of the three Houses the Committees have adopted the following resolutions:

1. A. The Committee on Standing Rules and Orders of the House of Representatives: That—
   1. (1) the existing coffee lounge of the House of Representatives be suitably converted into a caucus room and a reading room;
   2. (2) the existing reading room be converted into a coffee lounge; and
   3. (3) the existing caucus room be used as a room in which the furniture and portraits which are in the reading room at present, can be placed.
2. B. The Committee on Standing Rules and Orders of the House of Assembly: That—
   1. (1) the coffee lounge of the House of Assembly be opened for use by members of all Houses, with due regard to existing practices; and
   2. (2) the coffee lounge of the House of Assembly be closed for guests.
3. C. The Committees on Standing Rules and Orders of the House of Representatives and the House of Delegates:
   That the Committees on Standing Rules and Orders of the House of Representatives and the House of Delegates decide officially on the utilization of facilities and rooms falling under their control, with due regard to the catering needs of the President’s Council.
4. D. The Committees on Standing Rules and Orders of all three Houses:
   That Mr Speaker exercise authority over all buildings or parts of buildings allotted to the use of Parliament, which shall be regarded as the precincts of Parliament.

Order! I have been notified that the Government of Lebowa has applied to the Supreme Court to have Proclamation 227 of 1985 declared null and void. I accordingly rule that, as proclamation 227 is now going to be adjudicated upon by a court of law, the matter is sub judice, and the hon member for Houghton’s Notices of Motion, No 2 for Monday, 3 March and No 1 for Thursday, 6 March which appeared on yesterday’s Order Paper cannot be considered by Parliament before the court has pronounced judgment.

Mr Speaker, may I address you on the first statement you made?

No, I am not prepared to allow any discussion on this matter now. If the hon member wants any clarification on the matter, he can see me in my Chambers.

laid upon the Table:

QUESTIONS (see “QUESTIONS AND REPLIES”)

Mr Speaker, I move without notice:

Agreed to.

Mr Speaker, I move without notice:

Agreed to.

Mr Chairman, at the outset I want to react to some of the things that happened during the Second Reading debate. I also wish to respond specifically to the announcement of a reduced petrol price and the action of the hon the Minister in not bringing about a reduction in the SATS tariffs and, in fact, allowing increases to continue. The hon the Minister of Mineral and Energy Affairs has called on the private sector to pass the benefits on, but how can he expect that to happen if the SATS does not do a darn thing about it? I want to quote from a news release by the SATS dated 4 February 1985. The hon the Minister of Transport Affairs is quoted as saying:

Can the hon the Minister explain why this happened—that when there is a reduction in the fuel price he immediately announces that he will not reduce the SATS tariffs? He went on to say: “Fuel costs represent 43% of total road transport running costs”. I just do not understand how the hon the Minister can look at himself in his shaving mirror in the morning without wondering where on earth this extra money is going.

The hon the Minister is practising the double standards so often favoured by his Government. The private sector has to have one set of standards while the SATS has another. That is very wrong.

I want to react briefly to the speech of the hon member for Kroonstad who is not in the House although I asked him to be here. I wish to assert that the hon member has totally misrepresented me in this House, and I believe that he owes me an apology. I quote from his speech of 27 February 1986 as recorded in Hansard. He said:

That is not true. Hansard will prove that. The hon member then said the following:

That is also not true, and I challenge the hon member to bring me proof that he was not misleading this House in his speech in the Second Reading debate.

I now want to deal with the part of our motion that concerns regulations. I shall quote what the hon the Minister’s own Director-General of Transport has said about the SATS. I think the hon the Minister should get his act together. My quotation is taken from the PCA Brief of February 1986 in which the Director-General of Transport says:

That is what the Director-General of Transport says about the SATS. He goes on to say:

Now, does the hon the Minister want to repudiate his Director-General of Transport or does he acknowledge that he is telling the truth in this PCA Brief? I think he should respond to this, because it is serious when two of the hon the Minister’s senior departmental heads can say things in public and in writing about one another. It shows that there is something desperately wrong with the system.

Finally I want to refer to the Artisan Staff Association. As a result of my speech during the Second Reading debate they wrote me a letter and informed me that in fact the artisans do not get notch increases. According to the letter they get one increment after three years and no further increases except a salary increase; in other words they are on a different basis to that of the ordinary SATS worker. I want to ask the hon the Minister of Transport Affairs whether he thinks that is correct, because I believe I owe these people an apology under those circumstances. I was fully convinced of the fact that they got their notch increases like everybody else. If they do not, I think that should be investigated.

Furthermore I want to ask the hon the Minister whether the SATS Police have been bugging the committee meetings of the trade unionists within the SATS? Have they secretly been recording the happenings at those committee meetings? Can the hon the Minister answer me across the floor? There is no response, and it would appear that the artisans are justified in claiming that they are being bugged. The hon the Minister’s Transport Services Police are obviously taking a leaf out of the State President’s book.

However, I want to get on to the SAA. Let me say that we as South Africans are all very, very proud of the South African Airways and their achievements in the spheres of safety and reliability. I think one owes these pilots and crews of the SAA aircraft as well as the maintenance staff a big debt of gratitude for their wonderful record over the years. I want also, though, to say that I think the prices being charged by the SAA nowadays are quite frankly beyond belief. I want to quote what one of their spokesmen has said according to The Argus of 13 February 1986:

This cannot be correct. It must be total misinformation given out by the SAA. Let me quote further:

These two statements just do not agree with each other. He also said:

According to Mr Gert van der Veer the fuel bill accounted for 40% of total costs, yet this hon the Minister, with a 10% reduction in costs—I should guess it is more than that because of the improvement in the rand/dollar exchange rate-does not reduce SAA fares. I believe that the SAA should be reducing their fares. I think the fares charged by the SAA with effect from 1 March are an absolute and total disgrace. Let me compare them with other countries in the world. The airfare between New York and Los Angeles, a distance of 4 000 kilometres or three times the distance between Cape Town and Johannesburg, is $99. An Economy Class air ticket between Cape Town and Johannesburg costs no less than R460. This is totally ridiculous. I think that if one wants to stop this, one has to privatise. The head of the British Airways said that he believed that South Africa in fact had to privatise its airline. Mr Marshall said:

He then went on to say:

At the same time, what is happening to South African Airways? They are suffering enormous losses. Privatisation is without doubt the answer, and the hon the Minister should appoint a committee to investigate that.

Order! I regret the hon member’s time has expired.

Mr Chairman, I rise merely to afford the hon member the opportunity to complete his speech.

I thank the hon member; I only need another five minutes.

I want to talk to the hon the Minister about the service of the SAA in some respects. The number of flights is inadequate; the service today is very costly and it is inadequate. I travelled from Cape Town to Port Elizabeth on Friday at midday, and there were no less than 12 passengers standing by. This, on a midday flight which the businessmen predominantly do not use, is bad. Furthermore, one finds that one can book one way but cannot get back. Alternatively, one is forced to travel Business Class.

I want now to talk about the Business Class because I want to recommend to the hon the Minister across the floor of this House that Business Class be discontinued immediately. It is a rip-off! First of all—even though this is a minor subject—it brings smokers right up into the front of the aircraft but, furthermore, the SAA are using this movable curtain of theirs as a rip-off mechanism. More people are travelling Business Class because they are forced to—because there are no other seats available or because the Government pays for them to do so—than there are genuine paying customers. I have taken the trouble, when travelling Business Class because I had no option myself but to pay the extra fare, of asking people in Business Class whether they were there because they wanted to be there or because they could get no other seats. More than 50% of the people said that it was because they could get no other seats.

I believe that what the SAA is doing is that when they get an Economy Class flight that is filling up, instead of having that curtain two seats from the front, they move it back so that it is five rows from the front. That gives them 30 Business Class seats. Then they tell people who are trying to book Economy Class: “Sorry, Economy is full.” People then have to travel Business Class and they have to pay the extra fare. [Interjections.] I believe that this is in very poor taste. It is reminiscent of the spiv-type business that has no place in the South African Airways’ scheme of things. I think that this idea of a movable curtain is very bad. It is ripping off the public, and I challenge the hon the Minister across the floor of this House to tell me that they are not doing this because it is quite apparent that they are. [Interjections.]

The other way in which the SAA are giving bad service is that they now tell one, when one books through an SAA or SATS tourist bureau, that one has to pay for one’s ticket 48 hours in advance. This is ridiculous, Sir. A private travel agent will allow one to have an account and he will deliver one’s ticket to the airport—in short, he will provide a service. The SAA do not provide that service. Just ask them to deliver a ticket to the airport and see what they do. Ask them to run an account for you, Sir, and see what they do. No, I do not believe that they are putting the principle of service to the customer first.

As regards the catering of the SAA, we know that Marriots is disinvesting and, quite frankly, the quality of their food will not be missed. However, I appeal to the hon the Minister to keep the catering private. Do not let the SAA go back to doing it themselves. I suggest that he gets a South African company—which will not start disinvesting—to tender for the catering for the SAA. Let us not go backwards; let us keep privatising.

Finally, I want to refer to the racialism that still exists on SAA. Unlike the situation on the railways, the service to the customer is not racial, and this is good. We welcome this and wish it were the same with the railways. I might say that I believe the same things apply, and I approve of this. However, in their employment practices the situation is not good; it is bad. May I ask the hon the Minister, are there ever any air hostesses on international flights who are not White? In response to a question, last year there were 4 689 applications from Whites to be air hostesses, 10 from Coloureds, 66 from Indians and 311 from Blacks. 219 Whites were appointed, three Coloureds were appointed, but not a single Indian or Black was appointed as an air hostess.

Out of how many applications?

Out of thousands of applications, 4 689 Whites and 311 Blacks; out of 311 Blacks not a single successful applicant. In the whole of the SAA there is not a single Black air or ground hostess. [Interjections.] There are only eight Coloured air hostesses, and 13 Coloured ground hostesses, seven Asian air hostesses and two Asian ground hostesses. This is bad. Imagine what that person thinks, getting on to the SAA in Frankfurt, and finding that it is White and that their staff services are White throughout. Immediately they realise that they are in a racialist society.

Finally, I want to ask the hon the Minister the truth about a newspaper report that appeared within the past few days which is headed “irate hostesses slam racial intelligence tests.” Apparently the Coloured and Indian air and ground hostesses are being asked to undergo certain tests which Whites are not being asked to undertake. I now ask the hon the Minister to respond to this over the floor of the House and let us know whether that is a true story or whether it is not.

Mr Chairman, as usual the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central, to very little effect, kicked up a great deal of dust. As chief spokesman of the Official Opposition, I must honestly say, he put a few little matters here to the hon the Minister, and he surely does not expect me to furnish him with the answers.

There are certain other matters I want to discuss with the hon the Minister, but on one aspect I agree with the hon member, and that is the question of privatisation. I shall also be referring to that. Since we have obtained the services of private caterers, I think it is important to proceed with that private initiative, because this principle has already been applied in other sections of the Airways. I think it is a good thing, and we should continue along those lines.

In order to be able to meet South Africa’s needs, the Transport Services is continually engaged in a process of renewal, change and improvement. In the process it is inevitable for old systems to change and even disappear. We in Uitenhage are, at present, experiencing the end of such an era, ie that of repairs to steam locomotives in our workshops, an activity which is now coming to an end after 110 years. This decision relates to the removal of the workshops to Cuyler Manor, but the tradition of repair shops and facilities at Uitenhage is being continued. We are merely witnessing a change-over from the old to the new. Steam is being replaced by electricity. The tradition of good workmanship, the strong presence of the SA Transport Services at Uitenhage, continues, but now with beautiful, brandnew workshops.

I think the hon the Minister deserves our thanks for having kept his word in regard to the financing of this gigantic move. We can now tackle this move in phases, as he proposed. Last year R13,9 million was spent, and the amount budgeted for this year is R11,6 million. The fact that this move is now taking place according to plan enables the town council to do some proper long-term planning for this area where the workshops are located at present, in the midst of the commercial centre which will, of course, be vacated in the course of time.

The long ties existing, since 1875, between the SA Transport Services and the community of Uitenhage have, to a great extent, been mutually beneficial. On the one hand the artisans of the SA Transport Services maintained the rolling stock of the Railways, whilst on the other hand the community had a large and stable supplier of work which also continually trained artisans and, from time to time, made them available to the other heavy industries. The presence of the Transport Services over such a long period in a town’s history is also reflected in this. There are numerous spheres of public and community life in which the staff of the Transport Services have, over the years, played a large and even decisive role. At times the value of this aspect is neglected by superficial observers.

Another such asset in the Cape Midlands is, of course, the Port Elizabeth harbour which, in the present serious financial climate, will, it is hoped, be able to play a key role in the economic recovery there, particularly because any lasting economic recovery will inevitably have to be shaped by exports. A trend of increasing exports and decreasing imports is already manifesting itself, and there is also a general tendency of setting the sights on exports. Thus we have seen, for example, how the Citrus Exchange has refurbished an existing cooling facility there at a cost of R8,8 million, with a view to providing for their long-term needs. Approximately 17% of the Republic’s citrus exports will be handled there, a clear indication that the citrus farmers quite definitely have a completely positive attitude towards Port Elizabeth, their product and their market.

One particular aspect of the harbour complex that bothers me, however, is that at present it does not form part of Port Elizabeth’s community life. There is a separation, an estrangement, the harbour being something quite apart from the rest of the city. And it is regarded by the public as such. The reasons for this are historical ones, and the separation has taken place over the years. Consequently we have lost the old fish-market there. Fishing from the pier has disappeared and passenger ships no longer call there either. I should therefore like to see the harbour complex again becoming part of Port Elizabeth’s community life and the inhabitants, visitors and tourists being made to feel welcome again. A group of Port Elizabeth businessmen felt as I did, and they have…

Then you must first make your beaches White again!

I could unfortunately not hear what the hon member for Rissik was saying.

I am saying that you must first get your beaches sorted out!

If only the CP would stay away, we would have a much easier job of sorting out our beaches. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, a certain group of Port Elizabeth businessmen feel as I do. They want to initiate development there similar to that at Hout Bay. Unfortunately their application has been refused, the question of security being the reason given. As far as I am concerned, that is a reason that does not hold any water at all. I think it is just not good enough, and I request the hon the Minister to take another serious look at this matter. I do not think it is impossible to make the necessary security arrangements there. The transport industry itself should, I believe, form part and parcel of the recovery of our entire financial infrastructure in the Port Elizabeth-Uitenhage area. I seriously ask the hon the Minister to reconsider this matter. The reasons put forward at present to indicate why this cannot happen are, in my view, simply not good enough.

I do want to add, however, that another envisaged development in the harbour area—the fish-processing installation—was indeed a success as far as the initial negotiations were concerned. An indication has been given that premises will be made available for this installation. I do believe, however, that this is also a matter to which the hon the Minister should give his attention.

The word that is in vogue at present is, of course, “privatisation”. Several speakers have referred to this, particularly the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central and the hon member for Primrose. I should like to link up with what the hon member for Primrose said. He also advocated caution, and I strongly want to support him in that. It is also true, however, that the opportunities for consideration and evaluation for the purposes of privatisation in such a gigantic industry as the Transport Services are, in fact, legion. Many of the sectors could certainly be examined; perhaps even successfully as far as certain aspects are concerned, for example that of catering and all its concomitant aspects, as the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central also said.

I also want to suggest to the hon the Minister that he take a brief look at his property section. The figures in the 1985 annual report emphasise this statement of mine. The gigantic scope of housing schemes and the tremendous concomitant benefits for all employees of the SA Transport Services are sometimes overlooked. Hon members merely need to look at pages 20 and 22 of the said report to gain an impression of the true extent of the amounts involved, and also the number of dwellings being purchased in terms of the respective schemes. In the same section there is also an expropriation sector which is also assuming considerable proportions.

As hon members can deduce, a large portion of the activities of this specific section falls within the ambit of one of our professions. I am not looking for work for those people, but I think the hon the Minister should consider the possibility of their taking over the services of conveyancing, bond registration and expropriation, because I think they would very definitely be able to deal with this more cheaply and effectively than is the case at present. If we are indeed serious about investigating the matter of privatisation, let me respectfully say that this is one of the spheres we can have a look at. In recent times the Government has begun to realise that as far as its legal work is concerned, it can very definitely get better service from the profession than from its own officials. I am seriously asking the hon the Minister to investigate the matter further.

Mr Chairman, SATS’s total turnover amounts to R17 260 million at present. The estimate of expenditure is R9 420 million. SATS has approximately 200 000 employees who receive salaries and wages. Two possibilities are given for the financing of the establishment of regional services councils as multiracial local authorities.

In the first place there is a turnover tax or levy of a certain percentage of the total turnover of an undertaking. The second possibility is a levy or tax on the wages and salaries paid by the employers. According to my information an amount of R23 million is being voted in the present appropriation to be used as turnover and employer’s levies which are to be granted to regional services councils. This R23 million is the SATS’s contribution to the creation and functioning of an additional local government system which is now going to be established by legislation. This R23 million is the contribution of the SATS for the establishment of a multiracial local authority which will render only services which are presently rendered by existing local authorities. In addition the existing local authorities will be retained. This appropriation therefore contains R23 million which has to be contributed by SATS for the establishment of power-sharing among Whites, Coloureds, Indians and Blacks on the local government level. This is the starting price SATS has to pay for political integration. If the hon the Minister were to use this R23 million to supplement the meagre 10% salary increase he has approved for SATS employees, or if the hon the Minister were to tell his employees that they could get this R23 million for the improvement of their living conditions, the CP would be able to support him wholeheartedly in this respect.

That is 0,6% of their salaries.

Right, it is 0,6%. If the hon the Minister were to use the R23 million to retain White employees in particular who are forced by the poor economic conditions to leave the service of SATS—people who are actually dismissed—the CP would gladly support the allocation of this R23 million. The R23 million is the starting price SATS has to pay for political integration. My information is that this is the amount fixed upon to make up part of the appropriation. I want to ask the hon the Minister now, if the onslaught becomes greater for SATS, whether next year he will have to come and ask for the money that is needed in an additional appropriation? The R23 million is approximately 0,002% of SATS’s total turnover. It has been mentioned that the turnover levy can be approximately 0,5%. If a levy of only 0,2% is requested for regional services councils during this financial year, the hon the Minister could have used the money which is to be utilised for a multiracial local authority, to increase the salaries of railway officials by 20%.

There are people who say separate development is an expensive policy. This is excellent proof that integration is a much more expensive policy.

Nonsense!

Hon members of the PFP come to the hon the Minister’s rescue by saying “nonsense”, but I have just given the proof. The SATS consumers will have to pay—this includes the hon member who is making a noise here—towards the R23 million for the creation of a multiracial local government which is being instituted by the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning and the NP. That is enough reason for the CP to vote against this Bill. The SATS consumer will have to pay for it, while a multiracial local authority of this kind will not be able to provide anything additional to the services being rendered in South Africa today. [Interjections.]

In 1970 I made my maiden speech about the building of the Sishen-Saldanha railway line with the request that the railway line be lengthened from Sishen over Kuruman to link up with the existing railway connections in the Vryburg area. This was to have been a very important development line, from Saldanha Bay as a West Coast harbour right up to the PWV area. It would have been a development line which would have formed a very important vital artery, running through South Africa’s richest mineral areas, and would have led to development there. It would have created unheard-of development possibilities away from the existing metropolitan areas of the PWV area.

Since then I have pleaded for this in this House year after year. The Regional Development Association and other local bodies have campaigned for this railway line, which could have created immense development possibilities in Kuruman and Mothibistad in Bophuthatswana in particular. Eventually the Government realised the necessity of this railway line, especially as far as its future possibilities were concerned, and decided that the railway line was to be built. In the same year the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning and the hon the Minister of Transport Affairs visited Kuruman with me. Each of them in turn announced to great acclaim …

I did not!

You visited Kuruman with me.

Yes.

You visited Kuruman with me and you made an announcement there about the railway line. The hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning was so excited that he announced it there later too. [Interjections.] This happened to great acclaim.

I want to tell the hon the Minister today that Kuruman’s people and I owe him the greatest thanks for taking this decision. It says in writing that the building of this railway line would commence in 1985. Then the economic conditions collapsed as a result of the Government’s new policy of power-sharing and the associated conflict situations. I received notice that as a result of the economic conditions the building of the railway line could not begin in 1985.

Now we find a shocking revelation in the hon the Minister’s letter to the NP’s MPC for Kuruman. I quote:

He did not write to the MP.

The hon the Minister did not write to the MP, and did not inform him, but he wrote to the MPC of Kuruman. [Interjections.] In terms of a Cabinet resolution this project was previously part of the present five-year financing plan, and it appears that the project has now been summarily scrapped in the present five-year plan.

I plead today on behalf of all the inhabitants of Kuruman and also on behalf of the few remaining members of the NP, to make this project part of the present five-year plan again. I make an urgent appeal to the hon the Minister to do this. The hon the Minister himself wrote to Mr Poggenpoel saying that over the next 20 years this project would show a total expected loss of approximately R271 million. This represents an expected loss of R13,5 million per annum. Last year, however, this Parliament had to guarantee a loss of R20 million per annum—on a railway line which will transport mainly illegal squatters from Khayelitsha to Cape Town! That could be done, Sir. This Parliament had to guarantee a loss of R20 million.

We now ask the hon the Minister to support this initial loss of R13 million for a new development—a development which can even create marvellously important development possibilities for the North Western Cape, the Northern Cape and the neighbouring Bophuthatswana next to the Western Transvaal. We ask the hon the Minister to consider this anew. We ask him not to take a short-sighted decision, but to take his decision with a view to the future. [Time expired.]

Oh, Mr Chairman, we do feel sorry for the people of Kuruman! Can we not send them a train full of sympathy telegrams? [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, I do not know who controls the volume of the microphones in this House, nor do I know whether the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central gives those people chocolates or cigarettes to turn up the volume of his microphone, but if his can be that loud, I want mine to be just as loud. [Interjections.]

†Mr Chairman, it is amazing how East London has grown and prospered over the past eight years with the help of the Government’s decentralisation policies and railway rebates. As a matter of fact, the turning point from one of economic stagnation to one of economic prosperity can be traced directly to two specific events. One is the election of NP representatives for East London; and the other is the removal of the previous member for East London North, who is now the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central. [Interjections.]

It is funny that you go back only eight years. Eight years ago I was still the MP there.

The absconding of that hon member from East London to Port Elizabeth was a great contributory factor to East London’s prosperity on the one hand and to the economic stagnation of Port Elizabeth on the other. [Interjections.]

You are making a great contribution to the national debate!

In respect of high tariff transport, East London and environment are enjoying special tariffs from and to the Rand’s competitive area at present, so as to be in more or less the same position as Durban. Of course Durban is much closer to the Rand. These tariffs, which are known as rail-harbour tariffs, result in the tariff in rand per ton/kilometre being considerably lower than the tariff between Durban and the Rand for example. The reason for this is that the tariff is not based on real distance, but on the Durban tariff plus a small levy per tariff class.

The result of the rail-harbour tariff is that establishment of industries in the East London area is stimulated and better use is made of the harbour facilities. The Princess Elizabeth dry dock at East London is out of action at present because of repairs, but will be in full use within the next year.

As far as the East London harbour is concerned, its handling of container transport increased by 14,4% from 1984 to 1985.

A new foghorn—it is a bit louder than even the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central—was installed at the southern breakwater at the East London harbour. This foghorn is so powerful that even the passing Greek tankers can hear it.

The Government gives the Transkei, the Ciskei and the East London area a 60% rebate on the rail tariff for all products which are railed out of the East London area from decentralised industries registered with the decentralisation board. Special container tariffs have been applicable on the container traffic between East London and Johannesburg for some time. These tariffs are on a lower level than the countrywide container tariffs. East London has also been included in the rationalisation programme for the goods shed for small consignments as far as mini-containers are concerned. The running time for trains from East London to Johannesburg is approximately 35 hours, and 34 hours back.

Dimbaza in the Ciskei is showing steady industrial development. When the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central was still East London’s representative, he spoke of Dimbaza as a cemetery. He described it as a cemetery. [Interjections.] Today I describe Dimbaza as a lively, pulsating, growing and flourishing industrial town. A station has been opened to supply the transport requirements of the growing number of industrialists in that area.

The co-operation between the SA Transport Services and the Transkei is very good. That is where the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central should travel by train—from East London to Umtata. All the stations and offices in the Transkei are manned by Transkeians themselves. Butterworth and Umtata are the only two stations controlled by White stationmasters. The trains are also driven by Black Transkeians. At present there are 537 Black members of staff in the service of the SA Transport Services in the Transkei.

The road transport services, as well as the cartage service at Umtata, are run on behalf of the SA Transport Services by Transkei Freight Services, a semi-government organisation. Good relations with public service departments—the Transkei Industries Board and the Transkei Road Transportation Board in particular—are maintained constantly.

As I said, the co-operation between the SA Transport Services and Transkei as well as Ciskei in the East London area are very good. Nowhere else in the world can one get the investment benefits available in the East London-Ciskei-Transkei area. The informed industrialists are all there already and they are flourishing. The industrialist who is still elsewhere, is either not interested in further growth or expansion or is uninformed about the potential and the wonderful benefits the Government and the SA Transport Services can offer in the Ciskei-Transkei-East London area.

I also want to say that the Western Way traffic interchange, which I asked for a long time ago, and which effects a direct route from the through road right into East London’s city centre, was eventually completed to my great joy at a cost of R3,2 million. I understand it will be opened on Monday, 10 March. At last, instead of accidentally driving past East London, strangers will now be able to reach East London’s city centre easily. One can merely clap hands and say thank you very much.

Mr Chairman, there is an old saying to the effect that people who live in glass houses should not throw stones. [Interjections.] I remember the time when the hon member for East London represented King William’s Town. That was before he became a fugitive from his own constituency. [Interjections.] Let us leave it at that, however.

In the few minutes at my disposal, I should like to deal firstly with a few matters which I raised at Second Reading and in respect of which the hon the Minister’s versions disagreed with mine. Unfortunately for the hon the Minister, I have a fairly long memory and I decided to check on whether I was wrong in my impressions about the topheaviness which I felt was creeping in. I give him full marks, however, although I did not have the figures then. I only received them afterwards. I still have not received answers to all the questions I asked. There are still two answers outstanding after twelve working days. However, I do not have time to waste on that now. I now have the figures, however, and he is right. The General Manager’s office did increase by only a fraction less than 10%. However, out of interest I took a look at the very first Railway Budget debate I ever attended and I drew some comparisons between the situation at that time and now. In 1956 there were 224 232 staff members, and now there are 221 984 people on the staff. That figure is very close to the one for 1956. At that time there was a General Manager and nine people in top positions who were in charge of the airways, operating, road transport etc. Another interesting point is that the then Minister of Transport, Mr Ben Schoeman, earned £2 800 per year. This hon Minister gets paid a little more than that. That is probably because he said: “Watch me now!” when he took over that portfolio.

In 1956 there were nine people in top positions in the whole of the General Manager’s department, in charge of all sections including airways, research planning, finance etc. The personnel consisted of 1 517 people, which included typists, messengers and everybody else. Today there are 4 058 people in that office, of whom 185 people earn more than R42 000, whereas in those days there were about 15 people who earned more than a member of Parliament. Perhaps a little bit of streamlining is necessary in order to return things to the way they were when this hon the Minister took over from his predecessor.

Tell us about the turnover.

Yes, the turnover is greater.

Let us look at the other statement I made which he disputed. The hon the Minister said that in the catering department of the SATS the ratio of managerial staff to ordinary staff was 1:99. In 1956 there was one catering manager, one understudy, only four people in senior positions and five district managers. There were 71 barmen, 158 chefs and cooks, 58 refreshment room managers and manageresses, and 287 stewards, who coped with the catering requirements on 100 dining cars and about 50 refreshment rooms. Today there are 11 refreshment rooms and 49 dining saloons, but in the catering manager’s office there are 13 senior people, and in other sections of the catering department there are 87 senior officials which means that there is a total of 100 people involved running a much smaller staff with for fewer responsibilities, while previously four people in top positions in the head office, five district managers, one catering inspector, various other inspectors and 25 refreshment room managers and assistant managers supervised a total of 2 530 staff members. There were, however, twice as many saloon cars and other facilities, but they did not need the vast administrative staff which is now provided. Therefore, whereas the hon the Minister may dispute my findings, he cannot dispute the fact that top management has become much larger than it was in those days.

The SATS made great play of the influence that the price of fuel and the rand/dollar exchange rate had on increased costs last year. When one looks at the explanatory notes concerning the increase in costs of R940 million, one finds that they give as explanation “mainly the increase in the fuel price, among other factors.” Another factor is financing costs, which is mainly attributed to an “increase in the loan portfolio as well as the weakening of the value of the rand.” When costs go up, the value of the rand and fuel prices become factors; when they go down, they are not factors. It seems that they would make a mere R106 million difference. What sort of example is this setting for commerce and industry? The SATS say it makes a minimal difference of R100 odd million to their costs, but the hon the Minister himself appealed to commerce and industry to reduce their prices to the public. The hon the Minister does not reduce prices but he expects other people to do so. The Post Office does not do so; they put their tariffs up. Setting such examples is as good as telling commerce and industry that 10c or 8c a litre is a negligible reduction in the fuel price which does not really mean anything. R106 million is a drop in the ocean to us.

R40 million.

The hon the Minister said R106 million in his reply. I have it in front of me.

That includes the rand/dollar situation; but the fuel is only R40 million. I said so.

I have to stop at this point as my time is up, but I shall come back to the hon the Minister later in this debate.

Mr Chairman, as one can expect, the hon member for Durban Point looked back nostalgically at the past. I think that should be a lesson to all of us. If one has been sitting here in the same capacity for 30 years, even if it is in the front benches, sometimes one has to grasp at the past.

One does not need an overseer for every worker.

I think the hon member for Durban Point can rest assured that all hon members in the House respect the way he pleads for his voters and those involved in transport affairs. He must not make the mistake, however, of comparing the department of 30 years ago and his responsibilities with the department of today and the responsibilities associated with running it. [Interjections.]

I should like to exchange a few words with the hon the Minister of Transport Affairs. The hon NP members of Pretoria have the opportunity to do so today. I want to tell the hon the Minister that basically we have only two things on our mind. That the hon the Minister can satisfy us to such an extent says a great deal. I am not speaking on behalf of the hon CP members of Pretoria now.

We are in the majority in Pretoria.

As far as the commuters of Bophuthatswana are concerned, we want to thank the hon the Minister and his department for the great relief on the Soutpan Road. The hon the Minister of Mineral and Energy Affairs says everything is going smoothly as far as the connection at the Poort in Pretoria North is concerned. The hon member for Gezina says Belle Ombre is also peaceful at the moment. I think that is a mouthful—after pleading for years for the implementation of that service—that it is running smoothly today. I think that is a feather in the cap of the SATS.

Concerning kwaNdebele, the influx of workers and workseekers from there to Pretoria leaves a lot to be desired. I wonder if the hon the Minister will see his way clear today to giving us an indication of what Pretoria can expect, and when we can expect possible rail transport for commuters from kwaNdebele to Pretoria to be established.

When the CP comes into power.

The slump in the economy affected the whole of South Africa, Pretoria too, but the number of taxis, microbuses and buses of these workers and workseekers from kwaNdebele has not decreased, because as the hon the Minister knows, the feeder roads to Pretoria are not capable of carrying this traffic. The eastern and central parts of Pretoria therefore request the hon the Minister to give us an indication of what is being done in this connection.

During a recent information session, Dr Bart Grové and his senior officials told us South Africa’s railway system is the sixth largest in the world at present. I took that with a pinch of salt, but went to the department to make sure, and it appears that it is probably true. Only the USA, Britain, West Germany, France and Canada have larger railway systems than South Africa. I wonder if hon members realise that countries with a much greater surface than South Africa, such as Communist China, Brazil, Argentina, Australia and India, do not have nearly the same railway activities at their disposal as South Africa has. I want to tell the hon member for Durban Point that the hon the Minister of Transport Affairs is running an enormous organisation.

What strikes me when we receive this information and listen to the hon the Minister year after year, is the fact that right up to today little, if any, real change has taken place in rail transport since the appearance of the first train. That is true. The steam locomotives were replaced by diesel and electric locomotives; the railway lines were extended; we have developed a new bogie system; perhaps we are moving faster and drawing longer trains as a result of stronger locomotives, but these things have only refined the method of rail transport, not changed it fundamentally. As far as urban transport is concerned, there have been fundamental changes, however. We know the underground, the single track train and the suspension railway in other parts of the world, but not in South Africa as yet.

That is not relevant to this debate, however, because the real lack we are experiencing is the lack of an almost radical change in long-distance transport. That does not exist yet. I have often wondered if something of the kind will not take place during this hon Minister’s term of office, because he is dynamic. I am sure the hon the Minister also watches TV now and again and sometimes watches the programme Outoman. I am sure hon members of the CP also know about this programme. Would it not be wonderful if the hon the Minister could solve South Africa’s transport problems with the help of an “outoman”-formula by means of controlled molecule displacement? I do not think it is impossible. The possibility of that kind of solution to our transport problems may lie in the future.

I wonder what kind of research is being done in this connection. [Interjections.] Perhaps it is not “outoman”-research, but have hon members asked themselves whether South Africa can really afford the luxury of a railway line and a national road next to each other?

Let us consider for a moment whether we can afford it—what is more, on a competitive basis. Is it a far-fetched idea for the railway line to be utilised for other types of vehicles as well, vehicles which make use of the road at present? Can that be a possibility?

How long can we afford to duplicate bridges next to each other—a railway bridge and a road bridge? How long can we afford to cut up valuable agricultural land so that one side can be used for a railway line and its reserve and the other side for a road and its reserve? These are questions which must receive attention, or is my querying this creating one large problem where at present there are two small ones?

Nevertheless, intensive research is being done by the department from day to day. I merely want to refer to one aspect of the research, of which the result is already manifesting itself in a productive unit in the service of the department, viz the mini-container. The mini-container was designed by the department because the department believes it has to remain the market leader in the transport field. Where the Railways formerly transported more than 60% of all goods in South Africa, the figure has dropped to approximately 42% at the moment. The Railways is determined, however, to retain that market, and it can only retain that section of the market if it renders the best service within that specific area of the market. This means that as far as tariffs are concerned, it should not only be competitive, but the best. It has to be the leading figure in that sphere. What makes this smaller container even more acceptable, is that by means of today’s technology—in the form of the computer—one can know at almost all times where one’s parcel is, the number of the mini-container in which it is and when it will end up where. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Roodeplaat spoke parochially about Pretoria and also about competition between road and rail. I will leave it at that because I think the hon the Minister will answer him.

A short while ago the Standing Committee on Transport Affairs was given a seminar by the administration of the SATS. There was an information session by the General Manager, Dr Grové, and the three Deputy General Managers dealt respectively with operating, commercial, financial and passenger service particulars; technical, training and harbour facilities; and, lastly, personnel information.

It was the great wealth of human talent that the SATS possess that fascinated me. Some 226 000 persons work for this vast organisation and it reflects the multicoloured and multicultural picture of a South African nation woven together to keep the wheels of communication going. It is incredible that, at the end of December 1985, the SATS had 103 000 Whites, 18 000 Coloureds, 1 800 Asians and 103 000 Blacks in its employ.

The SATS stated the following in their code for personal practice:

They offer all their employees many benefits, for example the opportunity of job satisfaction and self-development, job security and protection against summary dismissal, a competitive remuneration in accordance with the requirements of a post and the needs to maintain a dignified existence. To this end, the SATS says it undertakes, inter alia, to establish and maintain healthy labour relations—and I want the hon the Minister to remember what I have said in this regard—to protect their employees against unfair work practices, to permit employees to share in the prosperity of their organisation and to respect their right to negotiate for better conditions of service on a collective basis.

These are all fine-sounding tenets and under the circumstances one should find a quiet, contented work force who appreciate the kindness meted out by the administration under the beneficent eye of their godfather, the hon the Minister of Transport Affairs, the jovial, hail-fellow-well-met, Hendrik Schoeman. It is indeed a strange combination that one of South Africa’s eminent farmers, who privately controls large agricultural assets, should have control of the destiny of this great transport organisation, the SA Transport Services.

However, what is the reality of this benevolent organisation? I have found, over the short while I have been on the standing committee, an organisation with tremendous discontent among its personnel. In 1929, I want to remind the hon the Minister, when South Africa was in the depths of a depression, the SA Agricultural Union held a meeting of farmers at De Aar. Some 1 500 farmers from all over attended. They were seething with discontent and they passed a motion of no-confidence in the NP Government of the day.

In 1985 history has repeated itself. A meeting of the SATS employees, representatives of the vast work force employed, met in the Transvaal two weeks ago to discuss the basic problem of pay. They were informed that there was to be an increase of 10% in their pay, and that the State President and his Cabinet had decided that the SATS, the State Administration and Posts and Telecommunications would all get the same increase of 10%, despite an inflation rate of over 20%. The meeting took the unprecedented step again of passing a motion of no confidence in the NP Government.

It will not be my function to discuss actual salary and wage increases, and I believe it is not becoming that these details are discussed in this House, but it does show that there is a revolt in the personnel of the SATS and I will do my best to analyse the situation and suggest some remedies.

What differentiates the SATS from State Administration and Posts and Telecommunications, three vast organisations under parliamentary control, is that the SATS has recognised trade unions registered under the Labour Relations Act of 1956. However, they are governed by a different Act.

Under the Conditions of Employment (South African Transport Services) Act, No 16 of 1983, “‘trade union’ means an organisation representative of employees, which in terms of the regulations is officially recognised by the Minister as a trade union.” For example, in appeals against disciplinary punishment, a disciplinary appeal board shall consist of one employee nominated by the General Manager and one employee nominated by the appellant’s trade union. This shows how important the trade union is.

Under this Act at section 26 it deals with the prohibition of strikes. No employee shall instigate a strike or incite any employee to take part in a strike. In the definitions to the Act, a strike is defined as “the refusal or failure of any number of employees to continue work and the breach or unlawful termination by them of their conditions of employment” under certain conditions.

However, section 27 allows the appointment of a conciliation board by the Minister on representation by the trade unions on matters dealing with the conditions of service when agreement cannot be reached. On this board there will be equal representation of trade unions and the administration. Only if a majority of members agree is the Minister compelled to give effect to the recommendations of the conciliation board. The hon the Minister and everybody knows that this is usually unlikely to happen. Therefore the conciliation board is of no account.

If it is not possible to reach an agreement by means of a conciliation board on any dispute, the Minister may appoint a one man commission consisting of a judge of the Supreme Court and the Minister shall give effect as soon as reasonably possible to every recommendation of the commission. That means a long time has to be spent in explaining to a judge what happens, and in people giving evidence before it, and that is the reason why it is hardly ever utilised. That is the rub.

The trade unions are registered in terms of the Labour Relations Act and participate in discussions on conditions of service under another Act of this Parliament. That is the problem. Why are they not given the right to operate in terms of the labour relations procedure by way of the establishment of an industrial conciliation council for the SA Transport Services on which there will be continuous representation of the administration and the trade unions on an equal basis in order that disputes can finally be settled in the industrial court, if need be? More about that, however, at a later stage.

There are at present eleven trade unions of which four represent White members only and three represent members of all racial groups, while the Coloureds have two trade unions, and the Blacks and Indians one each. Let me deal briefly with the question of the existing trade unions. The SA Railways and Harbours’ Salaried Staff Association is White, has some 29 500 members and consists principally of administrative salaried staff. The General Manager and all the gentlemen sitting in the Private Secretaries’ Bay in this house are entitled to become members of that trade union. It is pro-administration and it is not really effective in the real trade union sense because it is part and parcel of the establishment.

The SA Footplate Staff Association is multiracial, with 8 800 members and consists mainly of supervisors and engine drivers, and is experiencing some problems with discipline. The Running and Operating Staff Association is all White. Signalmen, guards, ticket examiners and others belong to this organisation of 7 000 members.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: Is the hon member allowed to read his whole speech? [Interjections.]

Order!

Hon members should not be allowed to read their speeches here.

I am not reading. I am quoting from my speech. [Interjections.]

Order!

The hon member should rather be asked to table his speech. [Interjections.]

Order! The hon the Minister asked me for a ruling. He should therefore give me an opportunity of giving such a ruling. I must point out that hon members are not allowed to read their speeches in this House. Whether an hon member is in fact reading his speech or not is, however, a matter for the Chair to decide, and I therefore request the hon member for Bezuidenhout to endeavour not to read his speech.

I shall try, Mr Chairman.

Just consult your notes!

White shunters constituted a considerable force in days gone by …

Order! I am sorry to inform the hon member that his time has now expired.

Mr Chairman, I merely rise to give the hon member the opportunity to continue reading his speech. Interjections.]

Order! The hon member for Bezuidenhout may proceed.

Mr Chairman, White shunters constituted a considerable force in days gone by but as Blacks—now called train marshallers—have taken over, this trade union is dwindling.

The Artisan Staff Association is a multiracial trade union. It is in effect the traditional trade union of old. It opened its ranks in 1982 to all races. It has some 23 700 members and consists of 14 000 qualified artisans, 6 000 semi-skilled workers or operators of machines who do not require apprenticeship, and also some 3 000 apprentices.

Not all apprentices, however, fall under this trade union since the SA Transport Services engage about 7 500 apprentices in a total of some 39 different trades annually. There are some 2 000 to 3 000 Blacks who are qualified to belong to this trade union but are affiliated to the Black trade union. This is a problem which the trade unions themselves will have to sort out.

Then we have the SA Transport Services’ Employers’ Union of 11 000 Whites only, consisting mainly of checkers, carriage and wagon examiners—a very euphonious name for the chaps who tap the wheels—and the catering department’s staff. Even here there is a problem because some 1 000 employees who should really be members of the Artisan Staff Association, for which they are qualified, are precluded by the General Manager from stop order facilities for trade union dues.

Disgraceful!

The Spoorbond represents White labourers, for example road motor transport drivers, plate layers and others. It is slowly diminishing in numbers and counts about 6 520 members. The SA Railway Police Staff Association is multiracial, and has a membership of some 6 400.

The Black trade union of the SATS was established in 1980 to combat the attempt of the outside General Workers’ Union, supported by the International Federation of Transport Workers to gain control of the SATS Black workers. Management played an important role in its being constituted. There are two trade unions for the Coloureds and one for the Indians. Of the total labour force, 74,6% of employees belong to trade unions. The percentage of Whites belonging to trade unions is 84,5%, while for the other population groups the figures are: Coloureds, 68,4%, Indians, 84,6% and Blacks, 65,3%. All these trade unions, excepting the SA Railway Police and the Coloured trade unions belong to the Federal Council of Staff Associations of the SATS. This council meets at least once a year with management and the Minister to discuss matters of conditions of service.

However, the whole structure of trade union representation will one day have to be reconsidered because persons of the same trades belong to different unions. Under staff regulations, there is an identity of interest agreement which will require looking into because freedom of association has always been the keyword of open trade unions. The closed shop principle has not yet reached the SATS.

The SAA strangely enough have no recognised trade unions. The Artisan Engineering Union, for example, is affiliated to the Artisan Staff Association.

It is a vital principle that trade unions should have the opportunities to discuss their problems among themselves. If the Whites of South Africa believe that the creation of a police state by the Nationalist Government is to keep the people of colour in South Africa under control, they are in for a rude awakening. Security Police have moved into the White trade union movement. Meetings of Artisan Staff Association members, gathering freely to discuss their labour problems, are being hounded by the security police. On Thursday, 27 February, a shop steward at Germiston workshops had organised a meeting. He was instructed to see a security police officer who demanded to know what they were going to discuss at their meeting. It is perfectly true that the Artisan Staff Association is considering a strike, but a strike is illegal in terms of the Act. No strike has been called, so there is no illegality. Yet the security police are now bugging meetings of branches of the trade unions. I have in my possession a sworn affidavit and I would not be surprised if the hon the Minister has one too because I believe the same affidavit was given to the hon the Minister. I would like to read it.

I have got the same one. You need not read it.

Yes, but I want to read it to the people of South Africa. [Interjections.]

[Tussenwerpsels.]

[Tussenwerpsels.] This is a sworn affidavit, sworn before a policeman, and this shows what we have come to when White trade unions in South Africa are spied on. It is absolutely disgraceful! This is a disgraceful allegation. [Interjections.] I say to the trade unions of South Africa: It is true that Big Brother is also watching you. You are not free to discuss your problems among yourselves. The White voters of South Africa must take note that the security police are not only organised to watch out for Black dissidents, or so-called Black dissidents, but White legitimate dissidents, who do not toe the line, and are also being watched.

I don’t know you like that.

The hon the Minister’s party must go and be replaced by people who respect other people’s privacy. [Interjections.]

What we want is an industrial conciliation council for the SATS consisting of an equal number of employer representatives and trade union representatives fully registered under the Labour Relations Act such as applies to all private business concerns.

Mr Chairman, may I ask the hon member why he thinks I asked for a meeting to be bugged when the Press was present? I know nothing about the bugging. If the Press is present, why should I ask for it to be done? [Interjections.]

What reply did I get from the hon the Minister? He said: “That will be the day!” Just let him wait till the elections take place and see whether the people of Sentrarand vote for him. That will be the day! [Interjections.] The hon the Minister does not know what problems he is creating among his own staff.

The hon the Minister asks me why I asked for Prof Nic Wiehahn. He was chairman of the Commission of Enquiry into Labour Legislation in 1981. It is his background that is important. His father was a railway guard. In order to go to school and subsequently to university he worked on the SA Railways in order to earn money for his secondary and tertiary education. He was an engine cleaner/labourer. While he was in standard 7 at Kimberley he was the labourer of Mr Toy Vermeulen, a nominated member of this House. Nic Wiehahn was also a messenger in the system manager’s office in Kimberley. His roots are in the SATS.

This report is urgently required and I believe that a time limit of two months only is necessary for a decision to be taken. The conciliation board system is cumbersome and useless and will not work because it does not provide the effective machinery of the Labour Relations Act.

If the hon the Minister wishes to diffuse the situation of despair and dissatisfaction among the employees of the SATS let him appoint an industrial conciliation council now.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Bezuidenhout made a speech here—he was a bit dramatic towards the end—about staff problems and staff matters in the SATS. I want to give him the assurance that over the years the management and the Ministry of this department have taken good care of their staff and have taken care of their problems.

Those of us who are familiar with the large SATS centres are aware of the staff problems because the people exchange ideas with us. There is no bitterness and people work with positive enthusiasm. They strive for better remuneration, however, having their trade unions and so on, but there is no bitterness. I want to tell the hon member that we do not much appreciate his contribution today.

I want to come back to the hon member for Sunnyside’s speech in the Second Reading debate a day or two ago. I find it ironic that the hon member represents a constituency with such a lovely name like “Sunny-side”. It should rather have been “Dark-side” or something like that, because the hon member is truly a pessimist. The hon member referred to the speech of the hon member for Rosettenville who said that Railway employees wanted to revert to the old uniform of which they are so proud. He has every right to do so. Then along came the hon member for Sunnyside, saying that the NP, this Government, had taken the Afrikaner’s pride away from him. The hon member was supported by a chorus of hon members sitting behind him.

Mr Chairman, what I am saying here is directly related to the Transport Services Appropriation Bill and I shall be coming to that.

Order! I would be glad if the hon member could give me some indication of that.

Yes, Mr Chairman.

We are tremendously proud of the engineers of the SATS. I just want to tell the hon CP members, in passing, that I hope that they will, some time or other, escape from the hermitic philosophy of their party. I hope they will be proud of a South African—regardless of skin colour—who is in the vanguard fighting for this country.

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

Order! Is the hon member prepared to reply to a question?

No, Mr Chairman.

Order! The hon member is not prepared to reply to a question. The hon member may proceed.

Never mind, Mr Chairman, I will handle it myself. [Interjections.] I am proud of the fact that Dr Reddy, a Minister in the House of Delegates, fought for our country abroad on the question of disinvestment. [Interjections.] Even as an Afrikaans-speaking individual I am equally proud of the contribution of the hon member for Umhlanga who fought for our interests out there. I am proud of the fact that Chief Buthelezi fought for this country’s interests abroad. What is wrong with that? It is right for us to stand unified against countries abroad who are vitriolic in their opposition to all of us in this country. [Interjections.]

That is why I am saying that we have a major task awaiting us in the new world we are entering upon with this Government. We are proud of the engineers in the service of the SATS. I have here the data reflecting direct costs, amongst other things the costs involved in the construction of the second line, ie the doubling of the railway line to Newcastle. The total cost involved is R305,8 million. Those of us who are familiar with that section of line know what has gone into the building of that area. We know of the jobs generated by the project. We know how many people were employed and we know of the challenges presented to young entrepreneurs. In conjunction, we also look at the service furnished to its employees by the SATS, ie the provision of housing. The provision of housing, in regard to which the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning lodged a plea with the private sector today, is an old familiar characteristic of the SATS. The SATS does not embark upon any task anywhere unless its employees are provided with proper accommodation, even if only in the form of temporary structures. At a specific residential area in Standerton temporary structures have been erected for employees. They were nevertheless amongst the best and neatest structures I have ever seen.

So offering the private sector certain initiatives, as we do, specifically for the creation of job opportunities at enormous cost, and specifically for the provision of housing, let me ask the State not to look with a jaundiced eye at overspending or at certain shortfalls in the SATS’s statement of accounts. We should do so with great understanding and then actually support the SATS for that enormous degree of service to the South African economy.

Now I come to the question of staff training. The SATS’s system of staff training is one of the best that is available, but during the boom period in the economy there was a plundering of trained people and the SATS had to suffer the losses. Now, with the economy having levelled off, there is an oversupply of labour. We ask for understanding in regard to the statement of accounts and the appropriation of the SATS.

There is one other aspect I want to refer to, and here I am asking the hon the Minister and the SATS management to pay close attention. Along the railway lines we find the service roads, amongst other the service road on the section of line from Johannesburg to Durban. The gates of those service roads are left open and they are used by certain people whom we would be keen to stop at roadblocks. We would want to waylay them, but they make use of those service roads, and in my view that is evasion. We have known those service roads to be closed and therefore under control. We should like to see them under control and remaining closed to access once again.

We trust that the upswing in the country’s economy, which is coming, will also result in the financial situation of this fine organisation recovering once more.

Mr Chairman, this afternoon I experienced something that I did not think I would readily experience in this House. It involves an hon member who, like me—even before my time—was a teacher, a teacher who, in Marble Hall said certain things about Indians to his children, things that I still regard as being wrong today, and he was also one who was so serious about his mother tongue that English-speaking children were not even permitted to play in the same teams with Afrikaans-speaking children. Today, however, he speaks of “Afrikaners of whatever colour”. [Interjections.]

I do not know what has got into that hon member. Do hon members know what the problem is?

I just want to mention that the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs spoke about a Black State President. Other people do not all want a White State President, for example the hon member for Randburg and other hon members. Now the hon member for Roodeplaat is trying for an “Outoman”. They now want an “Outoman” to be President in this House. [Interjections.] There is so much dissension and so many problems—one does not want a Black President and the other does not want a White one—that they are now asking “Outoman” to be State President. They are clutching at straws. [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member for Langlaagte must really deal more specifically with the Bill.

Mr Chairman, one of the problems in connection with the Transport Services as a whole is the hon the Minister. This is the first time in the annals of history that a department’s employees have been bugged. It is the first time a Minister has walked into a meeting and said: “I know you are CP sympathisers.” I am therefore asking the hon the Minister: Why is he threatening people who belong to my party? [Interjections.] Why does he threaten them with his so-called jokes? Those people complain to me. They write letters to me. They ask me why the hon the Minister does that.

Show me those letters.

Let me tell the hon the Minister that I do not trust him as far as that door, because he persecutes those people. He bugs the conversations of his own people. [Interjections.] The hon the Minister told Connie Mulder to take responsibility for what happened in his department at the time. The hon the Minister himself must now assume responsibility for the bugging. Does he now want to tell me that those 18 people did not come along to discuss the question of bugging with him?

The hon the Minister has completely written off the workers—particularly the White workers. [Interjections.]

Oh, nonsense, man!

That hon member for Winburg is so heavily influenced by Winnie Mandela that he replies to everything one says. [Interjections.] What I am telling the hon the Minister is that we have a large railway system, a large transport system, which is being destroyed by pettinesses. When it comes to privatisation, one cannot simply rush in and have it established. We must first review the whole picture of the Transport Services. [Interjections.] There are only two or three large companies—for example that of the Oppenheimers and a few others—which could purchase such an organisation. One cannot allow a few profitable sections in the Transport Services to be privatised.

As things are these days, the road transport services encroached on our Transport Services. I would like to see the constitutional provisions relating to the Railways’ actual task being implemented. We have a great problem in getting the budget to balance. The Railway workers, the Transport Services officials, are today performing a superhuman task without any concomitant remuneration. [Interjections.] All one hears from members on that side of the House are jokes and snide remarks. I cannot understand how hon members on that side of the House can make jokes when a problem such as people’s salaries is being discussed. If we could afford to do something about that, that would be one thing, but if that is not the case, hon members could at least express their sympathy with these people.

It is said that we go to the people and complain. That is not the case. In my constituency I have, in the past, entered houses in which only the wife was home, her husband already having been absent from home for a day and not yet having returned, owing to the fact that he has had to go and work. Hon members must go and have a look, in Langlaagte, at some of the parlous conditions in which those people live. When they ask for an improvement in their living conditions, they are told there is not enough money.

Nonsense, man!

There again we have a snide remark from an hon member who says I am talking nonsense. These people have become weird as far as I am concerned. [Interjections.] They can no longer take part in debates. [Interjections.] I was not speaking about those hon members. Those hon members no longer have any answers to our questions. They shout people down, to such an extent that they could just as well be blowing a trumpet.

A shout commando.

They are becoming a shout commando. [Interjections.]

I want to ask the hon the Minister why he asks my people, CP Railway workers, what they are doing at various places. Why does he ask them what they want and then add: “We know about you”? The hon the Minister must tell hon members of this House whether it is an offence for someone to be a member of the CP. [Interjections.]

[Inaudible.]

The hon the Minister knows as well as I do that he said it. When one receives letters of complaint from people and one mentions the fact in this House, telephone calls are made to ascertain who wrote the letters.

You do not have a single letter there.

Oh, of course I have them here. It is easy for the hon the Minister to say I do not have a single letter.

Of course you don’t!

Of course I do! The hon the Minister says we do not have a single letter. The hon the Minister probably wants to see the letter so that he can persecute the people. After all, I know the Schoemans from way back. [Interjections.] I am now speaking about what happened years ago when the farmers were persecuted. [Interjections.]

There is one thing I want to make clear today, and that is that it worries me that an aircraft has been purchased, as indicated under head no 6—Airways. In what year was this aircraft purchased? Is the aircraft already in the country, and from whom was it purchased? I am asking the hon the Minister for an answer.

What head are you speaking about now?

I am speaking about the purchasing of the aircraft as indicated under head no 6—Airways. The purchase price was R50 million, with an estimated total cost of R54,92 million. Could the hon the Minister please tell us when that aircraft was purchased and whether leaseback facilities were granted to us for aircraft we sold. Have we sold some of our aircraft and do we make use of lease-backs? The Afrikaans word for “lease-back” is “terugverhuring”.

[Inaudible.]

Yes, I want to know whether we are still doing lease-backs.

Today I want to ask the hon the Minister of Transport Affairs whether he thinks it is right to spend R21 million on a Railway hostel in the Delmas constituency. Bapsfontein is, after all, in the Delmas constituency. Was that money spent on hostels for non-Whites, at R16 000 per person, whilst my people in Louw Geldenhuys are living in the most parlous of circumstances? The hon the Minister should inspect those premises. They have an old steel cabinet there in which nothing can be kept, and next to it a bed with—let me assure hon members—a coir mattress.

I have not spent a cent in Delmas.

Not a cent? I am speaking of previous years. Does the hon the Minister deny that Bapsfontein hostel story?

Man, Bapsfontein is in the Geduld constituency! [Interjections.]

Surely the hon the Minister is not trying to tell me that that R21 million, the R16 000 per person for Black hostels, was spent in the Geduld constituency? He is, after all, the Minister!

Why are you making all kinds of insinuations against me?

Why does the hon the Minister talk about Geduld? What stands here is the name Bapsfontein.

[Inaudible.]

In whatever constituency it may be, the hon the Minister’s department is responsible for it, not so? I know who the people are who are living in the Louw Geldenhuys hostel! They are my workers. I have asked the hon the Minister so many times when he is going to bring about improvements to that hostel. He does not do so! [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Langlaagte put me in mind of the speaker who made a marginal entry in his notes: “Weak case—shout like hell!”

[Inaudible.]

The vociferous way in which the hon member carried on here about a subject in connection with which he had a very poor case makes it very apparent that he has no proof to back up what he says. He tried to intimate, for example, that officials who are supporters of other political parties are discriminated against. I want to contend that the hon member listens to clandestine gossip. I am saying that his accusation has no foundation, and I know what I am talking about, because in my constituency I have loyal and trusted officials who are supporters and members of White political parties covering the entire spectrum. As long as he furnishes a responsible service, there is no discrimination of any nature against any Railway official, regardless of what political party he supports. I therefore want to ask the hon member to stop listening to stories that are malicious and untrue.

Mr Chairman, may I ask the hon member whether he is aware that a former hon Minister of this House of Assembly told a staff member that if he did not resign from the CP he would be dismissed?

Was that Mr Louwrens Muller?

No, that does not matter.

I should like to broach a few small matters here. Some SATS employees receive training with which they cannot easily obtain work in the private sector. I am referring specifically to drivers, whose training and service requirements are and have to be very strict because they have a tremendous responsibility. If disciplinary action is perhaps taken against them, in many cases it is very difficult for them to obtain other posts. I want to lodge a plea for an investigation into the possibility of employing them in other sectors of the SATS if the nature of the offence permits.

Although I do not like the way in which the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central spoke, I do nevertheless agree with him that the introduction of the business class on SAA at a 15% levy is not always justified. My request is that it be reconsidered. When more than 50% of the seats are taken, that specific flight can normally be regarded as profitable. So it ought not to be necessary virtually to compel people to buy business class tickets in order to get a seat on a certain flight at all. I want to leave the matter at that.

The actual matter I want to touch upon is that of the economy of the Transport Services. I am of the opinion that although the Transport Services initially had to furnish a social service to society as a whole and all services could not be profitable, today there is no longer that much of a necessity to operate on that basis. That is why the Transport Services, particularly in the areas where it competes strongly with the private sector, should be placed in an economically competitive position.

SATS furnishes many services at uneconomic tariffs because there are few undertakings in the private sector that would themselves be prepared to furnish those services on a competitive basis. Let me refer to one aspect in regard to which the principle has already been established that the Transport Services be especially compensated for furnishing services at a subsidised tariff. I am referring specifically to rail freight subsidies in regard to the location of industries in decentralised areas where railage concessions of up to 50% apply. The losses incurred by the Transport Services in those cases are directly made good by the Department of Trade and Industry because the service furnished specifically benefits another sector. If the Railways furnishes a service that benefits another sector, it is only right for the other sector to contribute towards offsetting the losses incurred.

The truth of the matter is that the SATS furnishes a considerable number of services at low tariffs—these include both passenger services and railage services to a sector such as agriculture. I want to quote a few figures. Only 76% of the costs for the transportation of fertilizers for agriculture are covered—entailing an annual loss of R13,5 million. That is only one item. There are other items in the same sector entailing a total annual loss of approximately R25 million. I do not want to ask the Transport Services to increase the tariffs, because the furnishing of subsidised services is justified. I do want to request, however, that the applicable subsidy should not be paid by the SATS from its other services, but should rather be recovered from the relevant sector. In this case the taxpayers ought to make a contribution to the Department of Agriculture as a subsidy, because it is a subsidy, the payment of which is justified.

The same applies to suburban passenger services. At the moment there is an unrecovered loss of approximately R500 million for the 1986-87 financial year which is being carried by cross-subsidisation. Of course, if the relevant service were not furnished by the SATS, it would be replaced by bus services and then the bus transport companies would be subsidised. That is why I am advocating a re-examination of the entire principle of cross-subsidisation so that these subsidies are recovered from those departments who benefit from these services. I think the principle of subsidisation is correct, and there is justification for instituting an investigation into that matter.

You are making a good speech!

I just want to make a final point. In the past few years the quality of the service furnished by the SATS has very definitely improved. I think these loyal officials are furnishing a quality service that one can justifiably be proud of.

Mr Chairman, I want to deal with various matters which are not connected. Firstly, I want to ask the hon the Minister to have an in-depth inquiry made into the Transmed Medical Scheme. I am not surprised that the hon member for Park-town did not talk about this. These are not my “skinderstories”; I am going to quote examples from the hon the Minister’s own Artisan Staff Association Journal of January this year. In this journal it is claimed that there are tremendous irregularities in the way in which this scheme is being ripped off.

I shall quote some examples. Antibiotics and medicines which were not used and costing R450 were charged to the account of a doctor who underwent surgery. One patient found that his account included 600 shampoos at the cost of R600. A patient with a superficial bum was charged for 36 injections of cardiac resuscitative at R720. A ward patient was overcharged 400% for analgesics. A sterilisation was put through as a D and C to get it paid for by Transmed. A gynaecologist who complained that his patients were being ripped off was denied future facilities at a specific hospital. So I could go on. I also understand that the medical boarding of SATS personnel runs at up to 250 staff per month which is far above what it used to be.

These are not my allegations but one feels concerned when one hears this sort of allegation and when one finds that the cost of Transmed has gone up nearly 50% in two years. There must be something wrong and, therefore, I ask that the matter be investigated.

On quite another tack, I asked a question about a telephone exchange which was removed from Uitenhage. I wanted to know why, and was told that the old exchange was obsolete. A new one had been fitted to replace the obsolete telephone exchange. I then asked an unrelated question about a telephone exchange that was installed in Durban and inquired in what condition it was. The reply was that the 400 line exchange was transferred to Durban from Uitenhage and that the equipment was in good condition. In Uitenhage the exchange was obsolete but, when installed in Bayhead, Durban, it was suddenly in good condition! [Interjections.] It is a typical example of Durban getting the short end of the stick. [Interjections.] The hon member for Uitenhage seems to think so too.

Now I really must quote the Minister to the Minister. I wrote and suggested to him that they should install a public telephone at the Pretoria Airways’ terminal. It took him four months to reply to my letter, looking for a reason. The reason I wrote to him was that it might have been an overseas visitor who went through the nightmare that I went through, and not a tolerant and patient MP like myself. One has to go down some stairs, walk along a dark passage and, eventually under a staircase, one finds a public telephone for which one has to queue. When I eventually got to it, the money container was full and, Airways buses do not wait for one if one is late. The hon the Minister wrote back that they were not going to install a public telephone at the terminal because the public might come and use the public telephones. That would apparently inconvenience the clients of the Airways. So instead they send their clients downstairs into a dark “hokkie” in case a member of the public uses a public telephone installed for the use of passengers on Airways. I do not think that is a very good example to set on how to treat one’s customers.

I would like to touch on a point the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central touched on. The hon the Minister told me that non-White air hostesses would be treated in future the same way as any other hostesses. In fact, when I told him it was not so he was surprised and he said he was told that this had all been fixed up. I found on Sunday that it still had not been rectified and either the hon the Minister had been misinformed or had misunderstood what he had been told because he told me months ago that this whole problem of the Indian ground hostesses not being able to get promotion, not being able to get on, had been sorted out. I hope now that it is in the light of day that he will deal with it.

My time is unfortunately up and I cannot deal with this now, but I ask the hon the Minister to look at the SADCC timetable and see how many South African flights are reflected in it.

Mr Chairman, there are a few matters I should like to bring to the attention of the hon the Minister and his department. Here I am referring to the cherished ideals which the SA Transport Services can play a very important role in realising—actually being in a key position to realise them. These relate to a few conservation projects, one here in the mother city and the other in Pretoria. I should like to appeal to the hon the Minister and his department to take an interest in these matters and to furnish the necessary co-operation to realise the ideals. In every single one of the cases the Railways is in a position to play a very important role and even to make a decisive contribution.

Let me first deal with the case in the mother city. The question here involves the ideal of having a maritime museum for Cape Town. A well-equipped maritime museum has already been identified by the National Monuments Council as an important ideal and, as I have said, in this connection the SA Transport Services can play an important role. It goes without saying that such a museum must be established on the coast. The truth of the matter is that the SA Transport Services owns and controls the whole of the Cape Town harbour, also being in the position of having buildings there which will be pre-eminently suitable for the establishment of such a maritime museum. The buildings involved in the negotiations are the old Harbour Captain’s Building and the old Union Castle Building.

I should like to take this opportunity of taking up the cudgels with the hon the Minister for the National Monuments Council and the Cultural History Museum which are negotiating with the Department on this matter. For a long time now it has been the subject of negotiation. A definite affirmative response has not yet been received, but fortunately not a negative one either. I think there is hope that the National Monuments Council will, in fact, reach agreement with the Department, but I nevertheless also think it is a good thing for me to try to engage the hon the Minister’s interest in the matter.

Presumably any of the two aforementioned buildings can serve the purpose that is envisaged, but we specifically have in mind the Harbour Captain’s Building. The benefits of this building are, for example, that there is sufficient space in and around the building, that there is sufficient parking space, that the harbour restaurant is within 50 metres of the jetty, that there is regular shipping activity on three sides of the building and that there is easy access for members of the public who would wish to visit such a museum. I also believe that it is a good thing just to point out the benefits this would embody for a city like Cape Town. Firstly there is the presence of three archaeological departments, ie at the Universities of Cape Town, Stellenbosch and the Western Cape, which is a very important consideration. Then there are also two national museums here in Cape Town, the South African Museum and the South African Cultural History Museum. This makes Cape Town an extremely suitable venue for the establishment of a division of maritime archaeology attached to a museum.

An important consideration is also the SA Navy’s training centre for divers at Simonstown. This centre has the best diving apparatus and trained divers in South Africa, which could all play a role in maritime archaeology and the salvaging of historic wrecks. I hope we shall find the negotiations between the relevant bodies on this matter running a little more smoothly after my plea to the hon the Minister here today.

Nearer home, as far as the hon the Minister is concerned, let me broach a matter which is of historic importance to Pretoria—and here I am referring to the preservation of what is known as the “NZASM Hoffie—Nederlands-Zuid-Afrikaanse Spoorwegmaatskappy Hoffie—at Salvokop, outside Pretoria. I myself have not yet seen the complex. The hon the Minister, however, probably has some knowledge of it. Here it is a case of obtaining the necessary permission from the SA Transport Services to have the group of houses there declared national monuments. This is therefore a very simple request, Mr Chairman. In the case of Cape Town what is involved is a request for something to be done, for something to be relinquished, perhaps even sacrificed. In the case of the relevant houses at Salvokop it is, however, merely a matter of co-operation with regard to the approval that is necessary to have them proclaimed national monuments.

We are, of course, very grateful for what the SA Transport Services has already done with regard to that building complex. It is historically important in the sense that it was probably the first case, in the history of South Africa, of a group of houses specifically having been built for Railway officials. The SA Transport Services has already given proof of how important they regard that complex to be by having restored it properly—apparently, as I understand it, at considerable cost. In conservation circles there has already been the utmost praise for the quality and the results achieved in that conservation endeavour. From what has already been done there, one must deduce that the SA Transport Services regards them as being meant for permanent occupation. So at the moment there does not seem to be any idea of ever demolishing the complex. That is why it is a bit of a puzzle why the SATS does not want to endorse the preservation of that complex by granting permission for it to be declared a national monument. So it is my belief that there is probably not any difficulty involved in my request to the hon the Minister. The National Monuments Council is, of course, empowered to declare a national monument without the permission of the owner, though we understand, of course, that that is something a body of that nature would rather not do; of course for the sake of good relations and co-operation with the body concerned, particularly when, as in this case, it actually boils down to one department coming up against another.

If time permits I also want to thank—not only ask—the hon the Minister and his department and record the fact that I acknowledge what they have already done in this particular context. The SATS has a very fine list of achievements as regards its interest in, and contribution to, the conservation of our historico-cultural heritage. The SATS is a large business undertaking, and one can understand a large business undertaking not being in a position to pay too much attention to sentiment. At the same time we are, however, grateful for the fact that the SATS has proved that it is not always materialistically orientated to the exclusion of everything else, that it does, at least, also have some empathy for the fine and more elevated things in life, and that the SATS also has a love for the historico-cultural heritage of our country and our people.

I realise, of course, that one cannot always expect only success stories. Frequently a body would perhaps very much like to do something which is simply impossible. At times there are circumstances in which a building simply cannot be saved. There is one very unfortunate case with which we are all familiar, and that is the old Customs Building in the Port Elizabeth harbour which has unfortunately come to grief. In conservation circles that fact will always be lamented, but we also have an understanding of the relevant problems the SATS has experienced. We concentrate on the good things, the positive things, the SATS does and are grateful for them.

If time permits, I should like to attest to the fine record the SATS has in the field of conservation. We can think of the restoration of the old Railway terminal building in Port Elizabeth, and we are very grateful to the SATS for having restored that fine building so beautifully. A great deal of love went into that. There is also the old station building at Uitenhage, the so-called Dolls House, which is today one of the most interesting museums in the Cape. That was also made possible by the positive attitude and the interest shown by the SATS. There are also the stations at Muizenberg and Port Alfred and the station complex in Johannesburg which we had the privilege of visiting a year or so ago and which has been fashioned as a Railway museum. So there are numerous instances … [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, as I have little time at my disposal, I shall not reply to the speech of the hon member for Sundays River.

In his second reading speech the hon the Minister said we should explain how to go about privatisation. I should like to put a few points which I regard as a basis for the practice of privatisation. During the second reading debate I said SATS should concentrate on those facets of the transport system which they can do best, but which cannot be done just as well by the private sector. This should be one point of departure. With this statement I contend that there are things SATS can do better than anyone else.

What are they?

I shall refer to them in due course. Secondly, I also say that this would fit in with the whole philosophy of privatisation. In addition one should accept that the whole idea of privatisation is based on the principle that the profit motive linked to competition leads to an optimal utilisation of resources. It is the old principle of free enterprise. Let us look now at the elements the SATS should concentrate on.

The first case is that in which the infrastructure requires the expenditure of an immensely great sum. This cannot be done easily by the private sector. Where the recovery of the necessary compensation extends over a very long period, one would say once again that such a service should rather be rendered by the public sector. One can also say that when a transport element of this kind is in the public interest and the economic benefit cannot be realised easily, the public sector should be responsible for it. One realises, after all, that the business horizon of the private sector is much narrower than that of the public sector. If one were to leave something completely to the private sector, they could sometimes take the wrong decisions because they do not have a long-term objective in mind.

The hon member for South Coast also mentioned a very important aspect yesterday. He said people sometimes make the wrong economic decisions in respect of the choice of transport mode. The true economic benefit to the economy as a whole cannot be realised if people make the wrong choice. Of course, this is particularly true with reference to commuter traffic where people should travel by train or by bus, but perhaps decide to make use of another method of transport. If one takes purely economic factors into account when one decides on one’s conveyance or method of transport, naturally it is cheapest to walk. It is a bit cheaper than using roller skates; roller skates in turn, are a bit cheaper than a bicycle; a bicycle is a bit cheaper than a motorbike; a motorbike is cheaper than a bus; a bus is cheaper than a train; a train is cheaper than travelling with one’s neighbour and it is cheaper to travel with one’s neighbour than to use one’s own car.

What about a donkey?

Yes, a donkey comes into it somewhere too. The transport economists know that one almost has to pay a commuter to make the correct choice of conveyance. The subsidising of train and bus services is a way in which the benefits of mass transport can be realised for the community as a whole. One must accept that subsidising is necessary. In the second reading debate I referred to the benefits of subsidising as against a situation in which everyone uses his own car. Such benefits include better capital utilisation, the elimination of pollution and better utilisation of land.

Commuter traffic, particularly in the large cities, is no candidate in the search for elements for privatisation. The reason is that it has to be subsidised and it stands to reason that the private sector cannot handle subsidies. Nor can one speak of economic tariffs. It would be possible for employers to issue drivers’ licences to their employees, but they would have to recoup those costs directly from the consumer. One could also suggest that employees negotiate for higher salaries so that they can pay economic tariffs, but once again those higher salaries would be passed on to the consumer. Another possibility—I think it is more dangerous—is that someone who gets a large salary will quickly forget that the amount was meant for his commuter transport, and will use the money for a more expensive method of transport.

We must accept, therefore, that subsidies are necessary, especially where there is only one large operator for the transport of large groups of people in cities for example. In that respect I agree wholeheartedly with the hon member for Klip River. There should be subsidising from the greater economy, not cross-subsidising.

This brings me to another principle. Monopolies are just as contentious as the State’s interfering in or competing with the private sector in a free economy, because the principle of competition is lacking. One can say that an indication for privatisation is that where a specific transport element has to be operated as a monopoly because of its nature because other entries to that market are not possible, it is once again not good material for privatisation.

A harbour with its “captive market” is an example in this category. I know, for example, that pople say the Richards Bay Coal Terminal keeps other undertakings out of the industry because it is privatised. An oil pipeline falls in this category too, because other companies cannot participate. Possibly even the SA Airways falls in this category because it is the largest conveyor of people. It would be a good thing, however, if one could give the SAA competition on its more important routes, for example the non-peak traffic and even the traffic in super peak periods, such as holidays or business traffic on a Monday. That would create good competition because the prices would then be moderated and the SAA would be more efficient.

Which elements of the transport system would be most suitable for privatisation? These should be elements in which a large number of entries to the market can be, absorbed easily and in which the small entrepreneur can take part. The important things, therefore, should be enterprise, changeableness and adaptability, rather than endurance, great order and stability. These should be elements of the transport industry in which the entrepeneur can make the most of his talents. Most forms of road transport can be used as examples of this, for example multi-origin and multi-terminal traffic, as well as connecting passengers using vehicles such as the taxi, the minibus and even small aeroplanes. Another element is luxury bus transport such as tourist and interurban passenger traffic. Examples of other elements which have nothing to do with transport elements as such, are the reparation and overhauling of equipment, the provision and maintenance thereof, the design and building of rolling stock, civil, mechanical and electrical works and provision of structures, housing etc. Those tasks can be handled just as well by the private sector.

†To sum up, Sir, I would say that when one wants to decide on those elements of the transport system which should be left to SATS, one would have to consider those instances where State interference would be better than a monopoly. In other words, those tasks which of their very nature lend themselves to monopolies, should not be privatised. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I should not like to cross swords with the hon member for Greytown. In any case I do not think that the Committee Stage of the Budget is a convenient occasion to debate properly so complex a subject as privatisation. Nevertheless, I think the hon member for Greytown mentioned a few very stimulating ideas here which most certainly warrant further investigation.

For example, he laid down a few criteria here in respect of the kind of enterprises that can, for the sake of convenience, be undertaken by the public sector as opposed to the private sector. The hon member then mentioned examples of the type of enterprise in which infrastructure is reasonably expensive and where the recovery of capital investment would take a relatively long time. It is unfortunately also the case that this type of enterprise often has to be subsidised by those that are relatively cheaper and in respect of which recovery has to take place more quickly. This is simply another facet of the problem that has to be faced very squarely in a debate on this matter.

Where I do agree with the hon member is in regard to his statement that any comparison of the benefit of public operation as against private operation can be profitable only if the optimum possible operating procedures on both sides are compared. Here I have in mind specifically the hon the Minister’s reference to the fact that the SATS handles only 42% of South Africa’s total transport market. In his Budget Speech the hon the Minister said that the SATS was tackling various tasks to bring about growth in this market share. He mentioned, inter alia, intensive research into transport requirements and the adjustment of services in order to fulfil those requirements.

I think the attention the SATS is giving to research is one of the most praiseworthy aspects of this very large State enterprise. If we look at research in the latest annual report we shall see that mention is made of no fewer than nine areas in which intensive research by the SATS has been undertaken over the past number of years. I want to refer briefly, too, to a further one, namely the experiment being carried out at the moment on the Ermelo-Richards Bay section to introduce automatic wagon identification. The SATS is trying to control the movement of their own rolling stock and that of the neighbouring states on the SATS lines. At the moment a computerised system on this section, which employs approximately 6 000 wagons and a number of locomotives, is being tested by way of an experiment.

The system comprises four main components. The first of these is the wagon number which is stored under the wagon in a transponder. Secondly, an aerial is placed between the two lines over which the wagon’s transponder moves. The third element is a reader unit which is installed next to the line against the aerial. The fourth component is a central computer which processes the data.

The transponder has no energy source, except when it moves over the aerial. The wagon number which is stored in the transponder is conveyed through the aerial to the reader unit next to the line. This reader unit adds the time and the location of the moving rolling stock and sends this information to the central computer.

This experiment proves that it is now becoming possible to monitor the movements of wagons and locomotives at any given time. Tests already carried out show that factors such as weather conditions, lightning, mud on the aerial and so on, have no significant effect on the efficacy of this system. If this experiment succeeds it may in time enable the SA Transport Services to monitor the movements of all 180 000 of its wagons, as well as the movements of its locomotives and of approximately 1 000 wagons from the neighbouring states at any time.

In his Budget Speech the hon the Minister mentioned the fact that newly acquired and recovered traffic, such as steel, sugar, timber and foodstuffs, had already amounted to more than R125 million over the past two years. If a customer of the SA Transport Services that is transporting cargo can find out from the SATS at any time where his cargo is at that stage, it is evident that this would be of great benefit to the consumer. It would be possible to obviate long delays. It would also enable the SA Transport Services to increase its competitive position in the transport market and thus attract a growing percentage of that market. In this way the relative competitiveness of this great enterprise, of which South Africans have every reason to be proud, can be continually improved.

Mr Chairman, I am not going to react to the speech by the hon member for Umlazi now. I would rather come back to what the hon member said a little later.

There are probably few, if any, institutions in South Africa that would continue, despite heavy losses, to render essential services in our country as the SATS is doing. [Interjections.] Nevertheless, in the speeches made earlier today very little gratitude was expressed towards to the SA Transport Services. Instead there were complaints regarding tariffs and greater demands for more and better services.

Hon opposition members also argued that there were reserves that should be drawn upon and that consequently tariffs should not be increased. Such reserves do indeed exist. There is a replacement reserve of R2 594,5 million as well as a capital reserve of R753,9 million. We all know that it is a sound business principle that reserves should be used for fixed assets and not used to subsidise normal running costs. When we look at the Railways’ economy measures we see that a number of these measures have been most profitably introduced. We can look, for example, at the smaller and more efficient staff complement. I should actually like to express a few thoughts in respect of the economy measures of the SA Airways.

Before I do this I should like to express, on behalf of the people in my constituency, our special thanks to the hon the Minister for maintaining the SAA flights over Upington. As a result of low bookings, flights over Upington were reduced from 16 to eight. There are many good Nationalists in Gordonia who sympathise with the problems of the SATS and particularly with those of the Airways.

The hon member for Port Elizabeth Central says that he begrudges us those flights to Upington. We in the Northwest had much respect for the Malcomess name, because Malcomess are windmills and they brought life to the Northwest. The hon member for Port Elizabeth Central became so excited when he discussed the air service to Upington that he almost reached a “Climax”. [Interjections.] The hon member for Port Elizabeth Central went on to say that the hon the Minister had cancelled the flights, but after local representatives had approached him with representations, and because the NP is scared of the CP, the hon the Minister re-introduced the services. In Gordonia we are not at all scared of the CPs. Nor are the CPs a factor in Gordonia. [Interjections.]

I should very much have liked to discuss shipping with the hon members of the CP today because, after all, their other old friend, the leader of the AWB, wants to build an ark. [Interjections.] He wants to put people on that ark, but he will probably want to put a group of animals onto it first. I am sure he will also want to put a few pseudo-politicians onto it. The hon member for Sunnyside will then certainly be among the people to receive a ticket to board the ark. [Interjections.] There will certainly still be other hon members that will be able to travel on this ark to represent an unyielding opinion. [Interjections.]

If we look at the economy measures of the SAA we see that up to December 1985, as a result of the use of smaller aircraft for external flights, it effected a saving of R12,1 million. There was a saving of R38,9 million in respect of the cancellation of flights. The result of the savings of the past few years shows that a deficit of R98,2 million in 1982-83 was turned into a surplus of 2,3 million in 1984-85. However, we notice that a further deficit developed from April to November 1985 as a result of extra expenses and the rand-dollar relationship, which had a substantial influence on the cost structure of the SAA.

If we look at further economy measures for the future we shall find that we cannot meet cost increases simply by increasing tariffs, because excessive increases will make using the SAA impossible. A drastic curtailment of services is not acceptable either, because it would also cause further disruption and loss of revenue. We talk so much about productivity and efficiency, but there are also limits regarding the utilisation of our personnel and improved flight techniques.

I should now like to say something in connection with possible savings in other areas, in the first place in respect of refreshments. I cannot understand why on shorter flights, which are sometimes shorter than an hour, such as from Cape Town to Upington, we have to serve food. It is not always necessary for us to fly “vreet-saam”. From here to Upington we would be satisfied with something like tea or coffee; full meals are not necessary. If we want to establish what the demand is, I think that for a little while we should sell the food on aeroplanes. We would then soon be able to determine how many people buy this food and for how many people it is a genuine need. Many people simply eat the plate of food because it is put in front of them.

Another point I want to make concerns the possible use of medium-sized jets, which are smaller than the 737s. Such an aeroplane is available, namely the Fokker F28.

What?

The hon member heard me correctly. The Fokker F28 carries 65 passengers. Then there is the British Aerospacer 146, which transports approximately 80 passengers. These aircraft can be purchased at a lower price—for example, R15 million for the F28. It is unfortunately not the R50 000 that the hon member for Langlaagte was talking about—for that one could buy only a little Piper aeroplane. It is impossible to buy an aeroplane for the Airways at that price. These aeroplanes therefore have a lower purchase price, lower fuel consumption, lower maintenance costs and better bookings, which entail a lower unit cost per passenger. Consequently, we would then be able to introduce more domestic flights—for example, on routes such as the one to Upington. I believe this demands thorough investigation.

While I am talking about aeroplanes now—although this does not fall directly under the SATS—I should just like to express my thanks to the air-traffic controllers. We as private pilots have experienced certain problems with these people, but I can attest that recently we have been receiving much better service from them. On 22 February I had a good experience with them when they had to guide me into Cape Town through bad weather. I think these people also deserve a word of thanks.

I just want to make a last request. As a result of the curtailed service to Upington we are obliged to make far more use of private aircraft, but we are now discovering that when we want to land in the evening, we first have to pay a visit to the hon the Minister’s office to have that airport opened. All I am asking is that full powers be given to the local manager of the airport so that he is empowered to open the airport if we want to land at night.

Mr Chairman, although the ark which the hon member for Gordonia referred to does not form part of the Transport Services’ budget, I should nevertheless like to associate myself to some extent with what he said. I just want to mention two things to the hon member. In the same way the hon member from Potgietersrus got the fright of his life, so shocks also await other hon members of the House. The hon member must not comfort himself with the thought that he won’t receive that shock.

It sounds as if you are suffering from shell shock.

I want to tell those hon members that the CP is the only party in this country that is growing—and growing dramatically. [Interjections.]

Secondly, I want to tell the hon member for Gordonia that the leader of that ark he was talking about, and the people he said would enter it would, thank heaven, all be Whites. That makes a world of difference. [Interjections.]

Disgraceful!

I want to turn now to matters that concern my constituency but I want to tell the hon member for Potgietersrus what he can do with his “disgraceful”. I have now become rather tired of the senseless remarks from the hon member here behind me. He never rises to his feet in this House to make a speech; he just sits there and makes remarks and so one never has an opportunity to react to his speeches. [Interjections.]

I want to come back to a very important matter in my constituency, which I have discussed before. When I discussed this matter on a previous occasion the hon member for Standerton spoke after me. He did something that day which I consider, to this very moment, to be unforgivably stupid. He differed with me about the plea I had made in this House concerning that particular matter. It concerns the site and the large workshop complex in my constituency, Koedoespoort. [Interjections.] On that site there are six large workshop blocks. We have the engine-, boiler-, assembly-, truck repair-, vehicle repair- and the casting workshop block. Those six blocks are divided into 18 smaller workshop groups and further complexes have been added for which provision has in the mean time been made in the estimates. It is very important to note that this whole complex takes up a very large area, but what has been there is worth millions, no billions of rand. If it had to be built from scratch today then I doubt whether SATS would have been able to do it. It would be impossible for them to expend from scratch all the billions of rand which have been invested in those shops and machinery. I am not playing those workshop complexes off against any other complexes of the SA Transport Services. I am merely referring to the importance that that single workshop has for the SA Transport Services.

A few thousand people work there and it is situated in the middle of residential areas; it is surrounded by residential areas. In 1982, after having made an appeal in this House, the management heeded my plea for the construction of a better security fence. In 1984 my plea was for the work on it to be speeded up. Last year I said that what had been done was absolutely unsatisfactory. In the capital budget on page 12, item 247, provision is again being made for additional security fences.

Today I want to make a very urgent appeal to the management that this matter be considered a priority and that a highly effective security fence be erected which will be quite impenetrable. People do not realise that that workshop complex is situated in a very important part of eastern Pretoria. Even people from Pretoria are not always aware of the geographical lay-out of the area. In the immediate vicinity is Silverton where the terrorists triggered off a bomb explosion in the Volkskas building. It is not far from there. The Meyerspark post office, where a bomb explosion recently took place, is also not far from there. What most people do not realise is that Wierda park, where a bomb explosion also occurred is also adjacent to this complex. The name Wierda park is unfamiliar to many people but it is situated right next to the factories. I put it to hon members that I am worried about terrorists who fool around with their bombs in the vicinity of that place.

Oh dear!

My constituency is affected. [Interjections.] Just listen to the stupidity of the hon members. Just listen to the stupidity! [Interjections.] Can one believe it! Here I am talking about the safeguarding of billions of rands, all of which is vital for our country. I am talking about thousands of people that are employed there and thousands of people that live nearby and when I make a plea for it to be safeguarded, hon members say “Oh dear!” Can one believe it! [Interjections.] It is the kind of flippancy which one encounters in the NP members of the House. This kind of flippancy one encounters in people who, as far as I am concerned, do not belong in this House. [Interjections.] The hon members can shout as much as they like but I shall continue with my pleas for that area be made secure. I shall go there and have a look to see what has been done and next year I shall return and ask for better security until I am convinced that the security is good enough. I repeat that those bomb explosions are coming closer and closer to that place. Truly we cannot wait for the day when a bomb goes off there and we can say: “Oh dear! Oh dear! The member for Koedoespoort did indeed make a plea for that place to be safeguarded.” I just want to make it clear that it is of vital importance to the CP, even if it is not of vital importance to the NP members.

I should now like to refer to another matter for which I thank the management of SATS because they listened to a matter which I raised in the House last year. Last year I said that it was a good thing to plan for the reduction in railway personnel if such a reduction were necessary and if productivity could still be maintained; in that way people knew where they stood. I then said we had to keep in mind, though, that should there be an upswing in the economy SATS had to be ready to utilise and exploit that important major project in our country. I therefore asked that SATS staff be kept in reserve so that they would not be caught napping when the opportunities which an economic upswing offers, arose.

I therefore found it gratifying to read in the SATS annual report. “However, care was taken to maintain a nucleus of trained workers to meet any upsurge in the economy.” I think this is a sound policy and sound planning and I want to express my gratitude to the manager of SATS. I am convinced that this has been stated here for nothing but that they listened to a very serious plea which I made in this House last year.

In connection with this I want to ask the hon the Minister this afternoon what exactly his policy in regard to this matter is. The hon the Minister represents a constituency and I believe that his door is open to all voters so that they may come to him with their problems. In my constituency there are a few thousand railway officials, people who are in the service of SATS. Those people come to me as well with their problems and I try to help them and lead them to the channels which SATS has created for them. When a man comes to me I do not merely take his problem and run off with it to the management of SATS. I try to guide him so that he himself follows the correct channels.

If that voter comes to me, however, and says that he is getting nowhere then I would like to know today whether the hon the Minister and his management consider it fit and proper that I, as an MP, should act on their behalf and see their interests?

I have a problem in this regard. In the few cases where I have tried to help it has all been to no avail. There is simply nothing one can accomplish.

Order! The hon member … [Interjections.] Order! When the Chairman calls for order he expects hon members at least to take note.

Mr Chairman, the hon the Minister … [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I would rather not react to the tirade of the hon member for Koedoespoort, except to ask him what in fact he meant when he said that the ark “would, thank heaven, be white”. I should like to know what he meant by that. [Interjections.] May I ask the hon member what he is going to do if something brown should be born on that ark?

I would throw it out. [Interjections.]

Oh, the hon member would throw it out. Last year during this same debate the question of the viability of the Port Elizabeth-Avontuur narrow-gauge line as well as other branch lines, was investigated rather thoroughly by myself and other officials. We also studied the accompanying importance of these lines for that area. The situation is such that we all have to consider the considerable losses which the SATS suffers in regard to these branch lines. The hon Minister must excuse me for touching on this matter again but the importance of this railway line for my area necessitates my having to give attention to it again.

It is unthinkable that we can arbitrarily close this line. On behalf of the community I should like to express my thanks and appreciation to the hon the Minister and his senior officials—specifically Dr Coetzee who was charged with this investigation—for the discussions which have already taken place, and also for future discussions.

The hon the Minister said in his reply to the Second Reading debate that temptations are there in order to keep oneself in check. It is clear to me now that the temptation for the hon the Minister to close branch lines is very strong. I would very much like to ask him to keep himself in check as far as this is concerned. [Interjections.]

Possible developments—which are already in the process of becoming reality—predict that the traffic in this area has a potential to increase considerably. I should like to prove this to hon members. The latest figures at our disposal already indicate a positive increase compared with the freight which was conveyed by rail last year. During the period April to December 1985, 107 000 tons of fruit, timber and other goods were conveyed. Compared to the 81 000 tons conveyed during the same period the previous year it represents an increase of 31% in freight. I am convinced that without the drought and the unfavourable economic situation other commodities would also have shown a similar increase. In this regard I want to refer to limestone, fertiliser, wheat etc. Unfortunately a small drop was shown, but we have nevertheless had a net increase in transport during that period. I almost want to say to the hon the Minister: “Watch us go next year”. I also believe that with an intensive marketing strategy on the part of the SATS, this total freight can be increased considerably.

As I have said the hon the Minister promised me last year that the railway line would not be closed before extensive discussions had been held with the organisations concerned. This promise has been kept and interesting facts have resulted from the discussions.

A memorandum with instructive information on the area’s growth potential and transport needs has already been submitted to SATS. Two important aspects become clearly apparent. Firstly there is the negative aspect that the present narrow-gauge line has become obsolete and can no longer meet present norms and standards especially as far as the conveyance of deciduous fruit, other agricultural produce, passengers, building material and transmission poles are concerned. The positive aspect is that there is the prospect of considerable expansion of various activities in this area.

The conclusion that is drawn is that intensive attention must be given to the widening of the line to the standard width so that it is uniform with the rest of our rail transport system. The hon the Minister will immediately tell me that innumerable investigations in the past have shown that such a railway line will not be viable, but once again I want to stress that development in the fields of agricultural, forestry, the building industry, energy supply—such as the gas installation at Mossel Bay—the development of beach areas and the possible erection of a nuclear power station in the Humansdorp area, compel us to think very seriously before we remove the rail transport from this area. Already the existing road network cannot carry the heavy traffic and should additional freight have to be transported by road, it could cause a catastrophe. In order to carry the freight by road which is at present being conveyed by rail, 70 additional 20 ton loads per day would have to be conveyed. A few examples of existing and future development which would generate freight, are clearly apparent from the submitted memorandum and I should like to refer the hon the Minister to it. The total transport needs of the area served by this branchline are at present estimated at one and three quarter million tons per year. Only one quarter of this freight is at present being conveyed by SATS. This merely confirms the inadequacy of the present rail transport facilities. The total citrus production in 1985 was 29 500 tons. It is expected that in 1994 this production will be 75 000 tons as a result of expansion. This production has already exceeded that of wheat. Agricultural development in the high rainfall areas of the Tsitsikamma is expanding on a phenomenal scale.

As a result of the poor facilities, less than half of the wool production of Humansdorp and Joubertina is being conveyed by rail. Two-way traffic to Cape Town from these areas to Cape Town could never be developed because it is a branch line and because of the inconvenience caused by loading problems. It is estimated that the Cape Town-Port Elizabeth section could be shortened by approximately 160 kilometres if this line were to be built through the Langkloof area. It is therefore clear that the standardisation of the railway line for the area as well as for the country as a whole would be very advantageous and therefore I make an urgent appeal to the hon the Minister for this matter to be given very serious consideration.

Mr Chairman, I think the hon member for Humansdorp has presented his case very well and I believe that his representations will be given favourable consideration by the hon the Minister.

The total rail network of SATS is 36 000 kilometres. Approximately 5 000 locomotives pull 180 000 goods trucks and 10 000 passenger coaches along these lines. These occur in the form of 100 000 vehicular movements and 5 000 train movements per day; 2 300 road transportation vehicles traverse the country into the remotest corners. The South African Airways operates a fleet of 40 aircraft over routes covering 202 000 kilometres. So what we have here is truly one of the most important undertakings in South Africa, and for that reason the exchange rate is one of the most important single factors that influence SATS and the South African Airways. If the expected average exchange rate for 1985-86 of $0,43 is compared with that of $0,62 for 1984-85, there was a deterioration of more than 30%.

In the past SATS has made a fair amount of use of overseas loans in order to finance its loan requirements. The drop in value of the rand against the dollar and other currencies has had an unfavourable effect on finance charges. This decline of the rand has contributed to losses because the redemption of loans as well as interest payments for the financial year 1985-86 have increased. During this year the average SATS fuel price index was 61,7% higher than the average price index for the previous year. This price increase meant a further expenditure of approximately R180 million.

Costs have increased by 15,4% over the last year and a large part can be attributed mainly to finance charges as well to material requirements which rose by R131 million and R126 million respectively, as a result of the weaker rand. This increase in SATS’ costs is mainly attributable to the lower exchange rate of the rand against other currencies, which has influenced overseas payments; the detrimental effect of the strong American dollar on the aviation fuel bill; the increase in maintenance and renovation costs as well as the cost increases related to the replacement of aircraft components.

As far as aviation fuel and other airways’ expenses are concerned which are affected by the exchange rate, the effect of the weaker rand has been more or less R238 million for this year. Only a few aspects of the Airways’ activities are not affected by the exchange rate. Fuel costs, which at present account for 30% of the Airways’ total expenditure, are in fact completely and utterly influenced by the exchange rate. Furthermore the salaries of overseas personnel, capital interest rates, which are subject to exchange rate fluctuations as well as landing costs and fly-over rights, etc are all influenced by the rand/dollar rates.

Taken at an exchange rate of 0,46%, approximately 46% of South African Airways’ expenditure during the year had to be incurred in foreign currencies, while only 25% of the airlines’ revenue during this period took the form of foreign currency. The exchange rate not only had an effect on the above-mentioned activities of the airline but also caused a decline in the traffic from South Africa. This was an additional consequence which could be attributed to the effect of the exchange rate.

Therefore special measures have been taken to counter the effect of the exchange rate. The hon member for Gordonia has already indicated in ways in which South African Airways has already tried to solve this problem. I want to continue where he left off by saying that one of the most important measures that have been adopted has been the rationalisation of the flight schedules on a supply and demand basis.

Steps have also been taken to curb expenditures. Attention has been given to better flight techniques, such as quicker turns after take-off, the lifting of wing-flaps after a shorter flying time and the computerised determination of flight plans, altitudes, speed and the charting of the most economical routes which can be flown. Aircraft engines have also been modified.

I think the hon member for Gordonia, being a pilot, will be able to expand on this much more and will be able to speak about this far more authoritatively. All that I can say is that a very close link exists between business cycle movements in the economy on the one hand and the SATS on the other. There is no doubt about this—that is why I have tried to illustrate it in such a way to the hon members—that changes in the economy cause SATS to continually adjust its approach and in some cases indeed to change its emphasis. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I want first of all to tell the hon the Minister that his Airways Business Class has a special name. It is called the “SS-class” for Schoeman Suckers, because only suckers would pay 15% extra for nothing. Mr Chairman, I also want to support your appeal when you were wearing a different hat, and also the appeal of the hon the member of Port Elizabeth Central. This Business Class is a rip-off and I think it is disgraceful that we should be told that we can travel provided we use the Business Class. [Interjections.] That is why the curtain just has to be moved forward so as to accommodate more people in Economy Class.

Hon members have been dealing with the question of privatisation and I want to suggest to the hon the Minister that he seriously considers privatising the travel service of the SATS. We get very good service from the booking office here, but I had occasion during the recess to book a trip overseas. I did not travel first class like the hon the Minister; I travelled simply on an Apex fare—the minimum cost—but the service I received from the travel bureau was extremely poor. The bookings were not done in advance—a family of five were booked all over the aircraft, not together, and it was a full aircraft. The kind of service I received in terms of my itinerary etc was simply not good enough when I saw what other people were getting from free enterprise commercial travel agents.

Business interrupted in accordance with Standing Order No 19.

House Resumed:

Progress reported and leave granted to sit again.