Order! In terms of Resolutions and the Rules for Standing Committees adopted by the House of Assembly on Thursday, 20 April, Vote No. 17.—“Planning and the Environment” and Vote No. 18.—“Statistics” have been referred to this Standing Committee, and 30 members, whose names appear in the Minutes of Proceedings of the House of Assembly, have been appointed to serve on it.

†I should like to point out to hon. members that a Minister or a member of the House of Assembly who is not a member of a standing committee may attend the proceedings of such committee and may address the committee but may not move motions or vote.

*I wish to point out furthermore that if a division is called in the House of Assembly, the chairman of a standing committee shall suspend proceedings to enable the members of the committee to vote in the division. The time for the resumption of the proceedings of the standing committee will be announced by the Chairman at the same time. No bells will be rung.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to request the privilege of the half-hour. I should like to say at the outset, Sir, that I hope you will extend to me the indulgence that you normally extend to maiden speakers in view of the fact that this is my first speech in this Chamber!

Mr. Chairman, we are about to deal with the Votes of Planning and the Environment and Statistics which are the responsibility of the hon. Ministers sitting opposite us. I should like to begin by dealing generally with the Department of Planning and the Environment. I want to say that over the past few months I have taken the trouble to speak to a large number of people and organizations— local authorities, private organizations, academicians and others—all of whom take a very keen interest in the activities of the Department of Planning and the Environment and who have observed very critically the activities of this department and the progress that it either has or has not made.

Quite obviously there is recognition for the good things that the department has done and quite obviously there is pleasure in regard to some of the things the department has achieved. However, it is also true that I have found widespread disillusionment with this department. This disillusionment is based on the fact that when this department was first formed, when the environment became part of this department, when the policies and intentions of this department were first published, a great deal of enthusiasm was generated. People looked forward to progress in the field of the conservation of the environment and to better and more effective planning. However, as the years have progressed, there has been a certain measure of disillusionment. It is felt that things have not changed, that basically things are continuing in the way they always have. It is also felt that things are going wrong the way they have always gone wrong. There is still a great deal of confusion at various levels between the authorities and organizations. One still comes across short-sighted attitudes that are founded on false premises. There is still the inefficient use of land as far as the planning of local authorities and others is concerned. For example, on the Witwatersrand, we still have the unfortunate situation where the PWV road grid plan which, in the first instance, makes provision for the motor-car and pays scant attention to the interests of society and of man, still dominates all the planning of the entire area. In fact, in the National Physical Development Plan it is specified that that plan will in no way affect the PWV road grid plan. There is still the unchecked urban sprawl. There is still the development of the low-density housing township instead of a steady change to higher density, more effective and more positive township planning.

The planning of towns and cities is still aimed at creating separate uses—offices here, industries there, shopping centres in one place and residential areas somewhere else. We still have this separation of land use which results in so many sociological and planning problems. We still have the destruction of high potential agricultural land in a country in which we cannot afford to bury so much of our high potential agricultural land under tarmac and concrete. These are some of the things which environmentalists and people who take a keen interest in the activities of this department have observed and with regard to which they are very concerned.

I should like to mention a few specific examples of one of the biggest problems that is experienced in regard to this department and its activities. I refer to its relationship with other departments that have responsibilities in regard to the conservation of the environment and where there is a direct conflict of interest between the primary responsibility of the department on the one hand, which is of an economic and commercial nature, and what it considers to be its second responsibility which is the conservation of the environment. I should like to refer to a number of examples that have come to my attention which illustrate very clearly that one cannot allow a situation in which state departments have conflicting interests; where they have a primary responsibility of an economic nature which is in conflict with their responsibility to conserve the environment.

The first example I want to take is one which is very close to the heart of the hon. the Minister. I refer to the Langebaan lagoon. Many of us have had the opportunity to visit this area and to see the facilities that are available there. We have seen the delicate structure of the environment, the delicate ecological structure that exists there, and we have also seen what the plans are for the economic development of that area. It is a good thing that an Ecological Advisory Committee has been appointed by the Minister in order to study the ecological requirements of the area, to make recommendations, and to assist the department and other departments in the conservation of the environment of that area and in the intelligent development of that area. However, there are a number of things that have gone wrong. A number of things have happened in that area which indicate that this department and other departments have taken very scant notice, if any at all, of the advice of the ecologists in this regard. Unnecessary and unfortunate harm has been done to the ecology and the environment as a result. You will remember, Sir, the destruction of bird life which took place approximately a year ago as a result of the blasting operations that were carried out in that area. You will also remember that the zoning of the lagoon for recreational purposes was to be planned in terms of recommendations made by this committee. It was in fact found, however, that when those recommendations had to be put into effect, the prior requirements of local politicians were taken into consideration and the original recommendations had to be amended. This must adversely affect the ecology of the area. Recommendations were made that the Langebaan lagoon and the surrounding land area should be treated as an integrated unit as far as its ecological and environmental importance was concerned. However, the Government thought otherwise. The Government placed the lagoon under the control of the Division of Sea Fisheries but the land area is not under any similar control. One cannot separate a land area that abuts on a stretch of water from that stretch of water when one is seeking to protect the ecology as a whole. The two form an integrated concept and an integrated unit. Already we hear of plans for the development of a commercial harbour, already the Navy has taken over the Donkergat peninsula area and already there are indications that vast economic developments of that land area will take place. This will unfortunately have an adverse effect on the ecology of the lagoon and the area as a whole.

It is many years since the Ecological Advisory Committee asked that the Marcus Island area, which happens to be the habitat of the world’s largest jackass penguin breeding colony, be protected by an effective barrier against vermin and predators. It is many years since that request was made of the Government but to this day there is continual squabbling among the various departments as to which department’s responsibility it is to provide that barrier. The question is simply this: how long does the Minister and the other authorities who are responsible, intend waiting before they take action? Are they going to wait until irreparable damage and harm has been done to that colony before action is taken or will they heed the advice given by the experts whom the Minister himself has called in to advise him as far as that is concerned?

Mr. Chairman, there are many other examples of an unwillingness or an inability on the part of the department to react to the expert, well-intentioned and well-researched advice of experts in this field. Because there is no reaction one finds a growing feeling of disillusionment among the people who are making an attempt to contribute to the protection of the environment and the ecology in that area. That is one example of a conflict of interests, one example where the devolution of responsibility is such that no effective steps are being taken to meet the requirements of the ecology in that area. There are many such examples.

Let us look at the development of the strip coal mines in the Eastern Transvaal. These coal mines will be among the biggest in the world. The Department of Agriculture appointed a committee in order to study the effect of these coal mines on agriculture, and it is a good thing that that was done. But the terms of reference of that committee do not go far enough in that that committee will give no or scant attention to what the effect of those mines will be on the environment as a whole. The Department of Planning and the Environment has to this day not established a binding set of regulations for the protection of the environment in that area and for the eventual rehabilitation of the area in order to reduce to the minimum the effect on the environment. Here we have another example of a conflict of interests. It is the responsibility of the Department of Mines to exploit those coal deposits in the economic interests of South Africa, but at the same time they have been given the responsibility to protect the environment. It is inevitable that the environment will take second place as far as this is concerned. It is inevitable that the environment will not get the attention it should. This is most unfortunate.

Obviously, the mining companies have undertaken to repair the damage they do, but they undertook to repair this damage in good economic and financial times. The question I would like to ask is whether when all those coal deposits are fully exploited, if we are then experiencing very difficult economic times, they will still be prepared to spend the vast amounts of money that will be needed in order to repair the environment in that area. Will it not be a good thing—I would like to pose this question directly to the hon. the Minister—for a fund to be established now to which the mining companies concerned will contribute; a fund which the companies will not be allowed to touch but which will exist for the purpose of rehabilitating that area environmentally when the time comes. Let us not depend only on the goodwill and the good intentions of the Department of Mines or the people exploiting those areas. Let us make provision now to see to it that when the time comes the money is available to do the job.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to refer to another area of conflict, and that is one which exists within the Division of Sea Fisheries, which is a subsection of the Department of Industries and falls under the hon. the Minister of Economic Affairs. We had an example recently of something which has been subjected to a great deal of publicity and has given rise to a great deal of public reaction. I am referring to the culling of the seals at Seal Island. Here again we have a situation where the Division of Sea Fisheries is responsible for exploiting marine life for economic purposes. At the same time they are supposed to conserve that very same marine life, and what has happened here? The conservation of that marine life is not a consideration. It is not a consideration because they are killing year-old seals which give them the best pelts. They have decided to kill 1 000 female seals, and this will completely disrupt the breeding ability of that particular colony.

The argument that it is being done to protect the fishing industry at Kalk Bay has some validity.

It has got nothing to do with it.

The hon. member for Simonstown says it has got nothing to do with Kalk Bay; I am merely mentioning a reason given by the Government. But there is another way to protect the fishing industry at Kalk Bay. The entire False Bay area should be protected from the intrusion of large west coast trawlers. I am told that there are buoys placed at various points which are supposed to restrict these trawlers to various areas of False Bay. But these buoys cannot be seen from the shore and therefore these trawlers often transgress the boundaries demarcated by these buoys. It would be realistic to keep these trawlers out of the False Bay area as a whole and in that way fishing in the area would be sufficiently protected and Seal Island would also be protected.

It is often said that it is necessary to cull the seals. The process applied there is a commercial process and not a culling process. A culling process is designed to remove the infirm and older seals but this is not what is happening there. There it is a purely commercial process motivated by commercial considerations and a process which poses a great threat to the continued existence of the sizeable seal colony in that area.

One can go on in this way. I should also like to mention the Department of Forestry. Here again there is a conflict of interests. I might just say that of all the departments this department has probably given more attention to the conservation of the environment than any other department. But there are many examples where even this department finds that there is a conflict of interest between the conservation of the environment on the one hand and the need to contribute to the economy on the other. When this happens the conservation of the environment must in fact suffer.

There are two examples as far as this department is concerned which are worth mentioning. In the first place, between the Groot River and the Bloukrantz River there is an on-going planting of pine forests and plantations in areas where South Africa’s best fynbos bionic systems are to be found. The result is that these fynbos systems are being destroyed and this will be a tremendous loss to South Africa. But the department, in consequence of its need to make money to benefit the economy of the country, obviously pays scant attention to the interests of these fynbos systems in that area.

There is another example: Some time ago the National Roads Commission gave permission for the clearing of a 100 m by 3 km area of South Africa’s best indigenous forest land for roadbuilding purposes. I might just mention that that was done without the permission of both Houses of Parliament, which is a provision laid down in the Forestry Act. But because the Department of Forestry together with the Roads Department and other departments is faced here with economic targets and economic priorities, the maintaining of that part of our indigenous forests was a secondary consideration and many hundreds of hectares were cleared of indigenous forest. It so happened that the Department of Forestry then had a large quantity of indigenous wood to dispose of. That area has now become infested with Australian black wattle which immediately established itself in the scar that was created there. I do not know how long it will take but it will take a very long time and a tremendous effort to repair the harm that has been done there, if it can ever be repaired. Once again this is an example of a conflict of interests between the economic requirements on the one hand and the requirements for the conservation of the environment on the other.

It is these unfortunate examples, and many hundreds more throughout South Africa, which have given rise to the disillusionment on the part of those people who take a keen interest in this department’s activities. They are disillusioned about this department’s work, particularly the department’s patent failure to attend to the conservation of the environment. There are many fundamental reasons for this, Mr. Chairman. It is not all the department’s fault; it is certainly not solely the fault of the two Ministers. There are many good reasons for this and there are many bad reasons for this. But the important point, Sir, is that there are also remedies. And if the two Ministers concerned are prepared to listen sympathetically to what I would like to say about the remedies that are available to avoid this, I think we can make progress towards avoiding these problems in the future.

In the first place, the Department of Planning and the Environment is an exceptionally important department, with an exceptionally important job of work to do, work which will determine the very future of this nation and the very future of this country, work which will determine the survival of life and of man in this part of the world. It should not be a minor department; it is a minor department; it is considered to be a minor department and all other departments look upon it as being a minor department. That, Mr. Chairman, is entirely wrong. It should be a major department; it should be considered to be a major department and all the other departments should know and understand that it is a major department with a major role to play in the government of South Africa.

The first thing we have to understand is what is really meant by the environment; what is meant by the concept of the environment; what it is all about. It is not just an activity of environmental freaks; it is not just an activity of people who just want clean air, people who want to stop littering or who want to save the lives of a few thousand seals. As a concept, Sir, it is holistic; it is all-embracing; it is a discipline which embraces all other disciplines. As a science it is fundamental, Mr. Chairman; it is the fundamental science of the existence of life on earth and it is the fundamental science of the preservation of life on earth. It is an intricate and comprehensive composite of all the life-support systems on which we depend. It controls and is involved with all our resources and the conservation of those resources. In fact, it affects all the activities of man. It is not just a question of the biological environment; it also includes our social and economic environment. When that is understood, I think the vastness and the comprehensive nature of the responsibilities of this department may be more clearly understood.

What is the principal function or what should the principal function of this department be? The principal function of this department should be the co-ordination of the planning of the activities of all departments, agencies and organizations which in any way have environmental implications. That is not the case at the moment. All the other State departments, in the pursuit of their activities, in the pursuit of their responsibilities, attempt to look after the environmental responsibilities that are affected by the pursuit of those activities. This brings about the conflict of interests to which I referred a moment ago. What we should have is a Department of Planning and the Environment which has the major, umbrella responsibility of protecting the environment in respect of the activities of all departments, and to co-ordinate the activities of all departments, in order to see to it that there is reconciliation between the economic, social and environmental requirements that occur wherever activities of this nature are promoted. That is the primary and should be the primary and the principal function of this department. This department should be in a position to insist on and prescribe the parameters of environmental impact studies with regard to any activities of any department or organization in South Africa. If any department is not in a position to do an effective and acceptable environmental impact study, then it should be this department’s responsibility to do so.

It should also be this Department’s responsibility to do the final assessment and evaluation of such impact studies. This Department should be the referee in order to determine what the full and comprehensive impact of any development will be on the environment. This Department should have the responsibility to report to Parliament and to the Government what their findings are in terms of that environmental impact. This Department should also have the responsibility of prescribing regulations and steps— any requirements which have to be met by any developer, whether State or private, in the activity which they want to pursue. In the final analysis this department should have full controlling power over any activity, any development which takes place in our country and which can affect the environment in any way. Only in that way will we have an effective Department of Planning and the Environment, a department which in fact will be able to reconcile the requirements of development, the economic requirements of the country, with the very real and what I believe to be as important if not more important requirements of the conservation of the environment as far as that development is concerned. It cannot be done by a large number of departments acting independently of one another. It cannot be done by other departments where there is a conflict of interest between their economic responsibilities on the one hand and the superimposed, less important responsibility of the conservation of the environment on the other hand. It can only be done effectively by a single major, powerful department that is responsible for the full spectrum of activities that involve the conservation of the environment and having the power to require certain conduct on the part of the other departments, having the power to require the departments to carry out impact studies and having the power to set up procedures and codes of conduct for departments or organizations carrying out their activities. Obviously, that cannot be done unless the Department of Planning and the Environment is in the first place given the status it deserves and, in the second place, is provided with the staff, the number of staff it requires with the necessary training. If one looks at the staff structure of the department at the moment I would say that in terms of the mandates and responsibilities which I have set out that staff structure would be hopelessly inadequate to meet those requirements. This department needs a very much larger staff, a very much better trained staff in order to meet those requirements. One must understand that they need a inter-disciplinary staff, a staff which consists of biologists, ecologists, geographers, environmentalists, economists and others. Obviously, if other departments of State pass their responsibilities for the conservation of the environment on to this department, their staff will also be moved to this department. Tremendous advantages will flow from this in that we will then have in that one department a large, well-balanced staff, a situation where there will be a cross-fertilization of ideas and an effective and impressive staff in order to meet these requirements.

I would like to say to the hon. the Minister that if he wants to make this Department really work and really work effectively, if he wants to achieve the results which he has to achieve in the interests of this country and in the interests of the people of this country, in the interests of the survival of life in this part of the world, then he has to insist that the Government give him that sort of department with those sort of powers.

Just before I sit down I would like to touch on certain other matters very briefly. The first is the Council for the Environment. The Council for the Environment is a vague body. Nobody really knows what it is, where it is or what it does. It does not produce an annual report. In the first place I think it is important that it should produce an annual report. I think that it should be a far more active body, a far more powerful body than it is at the moment. I do not think that it should consist almost exclusively of State officials. I think that it should be far more representative of the very large number of very effective organizations in the private sector that take an interest in the field of the environment. I believe there again the hon. the Minister has a responsibility to make the Council for the Environment work, to make it an effective body and to remove it from its present ineffectual situation.

The last matter on which I would like to put a question to the hon. the Minister at this stage, is with regard to the future of the provinces in South Africa in terms of the planning requirements of our country.

The hon. the Prime Minister answered a large number of questions the other day with regard to the constitutional proposals for the future of South Africa. In the Press we have seen an anonymous letter from a Government member of Parliament who said that the provinces will have to go. I think that one of the Cabinet Ministers who was present in this Chamber a few minutes ago, indicated on another occasion that the provinces will have to go provided they agree to their own disappearance. Mr. Chairman, what we have to know and what the hon. the Minister will have to tell us at this early stage is: What is the thinking of the Government in regard to the future of the provinces. What is the thinking of the Government in regard to the future of the planning responsibilities and the planning functions now being carried out by the provinces? What is the Government’s idea in respect of regional planning? Will regional planning authorities be established in order to carry out the planning responsibilities currently carried out by the provinces? [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I have always cherished the ideal that I would one day, in the wisdom of age, be able to take my place in this beautiful Senate Chamber. The new constitutional framework which is envisaged for South Africa has, however, destroyed this ideal of mine. It is therefore a very great privilege for me, and indeed for all of us as members of the House of Assembly, to take our places in this venerable Senate Chamber on this historic occasion.

The hon. member for Bryanston has said that the Department of Planning is not an important department; that there are those who look down on this department. He alleges that other State departments are of the opinion that this department is not what it ought to be. But the fact that the Department of Planning and the Environment is the department which has been chosen to share in this historic occasion in the Senate Chamber today, with its Vote being dealt with here, is in my opinion the very proof of the importance of this department.

Mr. Chairman, I agree with the hon. member for Bryanston that planning in respect of agricultural land should be of such a nature that we do not cover fertile agricultural land with tar roads and other development, but that we should in fact let development take place where the agricultural land is not of great value.

As regards the question of the Langebaan Lagoon and Markus Island, to which the hon. member referred, I believe that my colleague, the hon. member for Moorreesburg, will deal with him.

The hon. member for Bryanston also referred to a conflict of interests between the Departments of Planning and the Environment and Economic Affairs on the one side, and the Departments of Planning and the Environment and of Forestry on the other side. I find it strange that the hon. member did not also object to the conflict of interests between the House of Assembly and the Senate which is taking place here today.

In my opinion the Department of Planning is one of the most important departments in our whole national economy. The hon. member for Bryanston adopted this attitude last year as well, and I want to ask him not to try to create the impression that the Department of Planning and the Environment is a department of lesser importance every time this Vote is discussed. We are proud of the department and the work it has done thus far, and I want to thank Dr. the Hon. Schalk van der Merwe, our Minister, Mr. Janson, the Deputy Minister, and Mr. Fred Otto and his secretariat for the fine things they have done in the interests of the protection of the environment of South Africa. I want to say to the hon. member for Bryanston that just as he is concerned about the interests of the environment in South Africa—and I am pleased that that attitude was adopted on that side of the Committee—this side is just as concerned about the conservation and development of the environment of South Africa.

Although the hon. member for Bryanston referred only to the conservation of the environment, it is so that this department also has to see to the energy requirements of South Africa as well as the questions of scientific research and the distribution of the population. I should today like to refer to a few matters which I regard as very important.

Mr. Chairman, in the report of the department I read that the Planning Advisory Council of the Prime Minister has devoted its attention, inter alia, to the problems of the smaller country towns.

These are the places which are represented for the most part by hon. members on this side of the House. There are many of these smaller country towns which do not have the potential to develop further or to grow. These are towns which originated as centres of the church, of education and of business, generally for thinly-spread farming communities. When such a farming community suffers as a result of droughts, low prices for agricultural produce and increases in production costs, the whole community suffers. This goes for everybody providing services, like the businessman, the school and the church as well as Coloured or Black labourers. Next to each country town one usually finds a larger Coloured or Black township. These smaller country towns today provide a very necessary service to the communities of which they are the nuclei. In that way they also provide a very necessary service to South Africa. Therefore it is the task and the obligation of the authorities to see to it that these very important nuclei of these spread-out communities do not bleed to death and are not destroyed. There was a time in the history of our country when Stellenbosch, Paarl, Wellington, Oudtshoorn, Graaff-Reinet, Potchefstroom and Grahamstown were tiny and remote villages which formed the nuclei of their surrounding farming communities, and provided them with services. Today we have to admire the vision of the leaders of that time because they converted these tiny country villages into centres of education which did not only lead to dynamic growth and the creation of better service centres for the surrounding communities, but also increased the contribution of these sectors to South Africa and its development. The products, namely young boys and girls, came from all over South Africa and, together with the teaching staff, led to an influx of new blood into these smaller country towns. Secondly, on completion of their studies they went to all parts of the country, where they were able to serve the whole of South Africa. Mr. Chairman, the question now arises: Why should new educational centres in fact be situated in and around large urban centres? Why should new universities, training colleges, technical colleges and other training institutions in fact be placed in and around urban centres? I want to plead with the hon. the Minister of Planning and the Environment today to recommend to Government and provincial bodies that they should turn their eyes away from large urban complexes and look with new eyes at the smaller country towns when it comes to the establishment of educational and training centres. Throughout South Africa there are today beautiful small country towns which, although they have no growth potential, lend themselves to this type of use by young people who can then use their training to serve South Africa.

Mr. Chairman, I make this plea for the smaller country towns because I believe that, through the decentralization of these educational facilities from the large urban centres to the smaller country villages, we will be able to achieve a more uniform spread of population throughout South Africa. I do so also so that these small country nuclei, which provide such necessary services to their local communities and to South Africa, can remain strong and vigorous in the interests of South Africa.

I should also like to express a few ideas in respect of the spread of population in South Africa. This is something which, in my opinion, we have to look at with great urgency. Population projections indicate that by the year 2000 the population will have doubled. The question may well be asked where this rapidly growing population of Southern Africa is going to live, work and play. Where are the expected 50 million people of Southern Africa going to find a refuge in the year 2000? Is South Africa going to allow this development to take place in and around existing metropolitan areas, coupled with the inevitable doubling of the PWV area, the metropolitan area of Port Elizabeth and Uitenhage, the metropolitan area of Cape Town and the Durban-Pinetown area? By far the largest portion of South Africa’s population today lives and works in these areas.

Bearing these things in mind, when we look at the natural growth of the various population groups in South Africa, we find that the natural rate of growth of the White population is 0,91%, that of the Coloureds 1,48%, that of the Asians 1,86% and that of the Bantu 2,80%. If we look at these statistics and accept that growth and development are going to take place around existing metropolitan areas, it is inevitable that the Sowetos, the Langas and the Nyangas will more than double over the next 22 years, accompanied by political, social and spatial problems. [Time expired.]

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

Mr. Chairman, I thank the hon. Whip of the Opposition for that concession.

Let us have a look at the applications for rezoning of land for industrial purposes as reflected in the annual report of the Department of Planning and the Environment, because in the end result industrial development has to take place in order to provide work opportunities to a growing population. Therefore, the location of industrial development will determine where the future population of South Africa will have to live. On page 30 of the report there is a table which relates to applications for the zoning of land for industrial purposes. There one sees that in the PWV area a surface area of 210,6346 ha was approved for industrial purposes, while only 227,5119 ha was approved in the rest of the Transvaal. In the Western Cape, which includes the metropolitan area of Cape Town, Atlantis and the rest of the Western Cape, a surface area of 554,3933 ha was approved. In the Northern Cape only 35 ha has been set aside and approved for industrial development. In the Durban-Pinetown complex 653 ha has been approved for industrial purposes, while in the rest of Natal only 124 ha has been approved.

If I am reading these statistics correctly— and I hope I am wrong—I see in them the ominous prediction that the pattern of development of South Africa is heading towards the fact that a few metropolitan areas will be more than doubled. This, as I have already said, will cause us very great political, social and spatial problems in the future. I should like to ask the hon. the Minister of Planning and the Environment and his department to look at this developing situation with the greatest urgency. I want to ask them, as the department responsible for the orderly development of areas in South Africa, to put on the brakes in this regard and look with new vision at other areas to which this development and therefore the growing population of South Africa can be decentralized.

I am one of those who has on various occasions expressed concern at the enormous influx of Black people to the White areas and especially the White metropolitan areas. I should like to give an example of this. In 1976 there were 62 000 Blacks in Kimberley, of whom 90% were Tswanas. Kimberley is approximately 100 km from the independent State of Bophuthatswana, and has already been designated as a growth point for Coloureds. In 1978, less than two years later, the Black population of Kimberley is 71 000. We see therefore that the population of this city, which has been designated as a growth point for Coloureds, has within two years been increased by approximately 10 000. There is also an influx of Blacks to the Cape Peninsula, which is traditionally an area for Coloured labour. I believe that my colleague, the hon. member for Moorreesburg, will refer to this. One notes with concern the situation which has developed on the Cape Flats. The only solution to cope with this situation is to initiate large-scale development, no matter what it costs, in the Black homelands as well as in areas bordering on the homelands, in order to make work opportunities within the reach of citizens of the homelands so attractive that they will not yearn for the bright lights of Cape Town, Kimberley or Johannesburg. Babalegi, Rosslyn, Butterworth and other townships are wonderful examples, and one must praise the Department of Planning for the work done by them there and for the imaginative efforts undertaken by them. The result of their efforts is that the Black man can live in his own country, in his own home and with his family, and can sell his labour without disruption and trouble.

When one looks at Kimberley, which has been allocated as a growth point for Coloured people, and one sees that in less than two years the number of Blacks has increased by 10 000, one realizes that the time has come for urgent attention to be given to the creation of a growth point inside or adjoining the borders of Bophuthatswana. In this regard I wish to quote from a report of Benbo, as follows—

The report continues—

In the national physical development plan provision is made for the planning of a metropolitan area at Saldanha, and this has resulted mainly from the mineral exports from the Northern Cape. This is the area to which I referred a short while ago. Secondly we find that the national physical development plan provides for the development of a growth pole in Namaqualand on the border between areas 1 and 17. I want to say that I have no fault to find with the creation of a future growth pole in the area of my hon. colleague, the member for Namaqualand. I think it is necessary because it fits in with this pattern, and I hope that use will be made of Coloured labour there.

The NPDP provides for a growth pole at Kimberley, and I have already referred to the influx of Blacks to that area, but the NPDP does not provide for a growth point for area 18, bordering on Bophuthatswana, which can today be labelled as the mineral treasure trove of South Africa. This area does not only deserve to be developed as a nuclear area in terms of the future development plan of South Africa, but is also ideally placed to halt the influx of Blacks to White metropolitan areas. If the Jews of Israel were able to bring about such wonderful development in a desert, the beautiful area of the Northern Cape with its mineral riches is even more suited to the type of planning which can make provision for the growing White population in the future. I want to assure you, Mr. Chairman, that once one has drunk the water of “Die Oog” and has heard the silence in the wide open spaces of the Kalahari, one no longer longs to be in any other part of South Africa.

This will also mean that the rapidly growing Black population of Bophuthatswana will be able to be housed within the borders of their own fatherland, in their own homes, with their families and near to their job opportunities.

Mr. Chairman, I believe that these thoughts are the correct recipe to prevent individual metropolitan areas bursting out of their skins in the future, and a massive stream of Black people creating social, political and spatial problems in White areas.

Mr. Chairman, as the first speaker for the NRP in this debate here today, may I start by saying how conscious we are of the importance of this change in the system, and we hope that it will lead to a more effective working of the system in which we are involved.

May I also say—and I am sure you will not rule me out of order, Mr. Chairman—that we are grateful to our colleagues in this, the Other Place, for making their Chamber available to us to conduct our business.

I do not want to deal too closely with the comments made by the hon. member for Kuruman, but I did take note of his reference to the very rapid escalation in the numbers of our population as it is forecast for the years ahead of us and of his comment that there is a good chance of its doubling by the year 2000, because I wish today to speak around a theme which I propose to call the better quality of life. I think we should be looking in this country for a better quality of life as opposed to the quantity of life. I should like to develop a few thoughts around that theme because I am not one of those who believes that big is necessarily beautiful; I believe that small can be beautiful too and I think we should be looking for a way of improving the quality of life of all our citizens in this country.

Obviously, Mr. Chairman, the environment in which we live influences the whole way of life of all our citizens. Where the environment itself is polluted, where smog replaces sunny skies, where muddy, stinking sewers replace sparkling streams and where paper, plastic containers, empty bottles and cans litter the highways, the byways, the parks and the playing areas, this atmosphere of pollution will pervade our whole way of life and pull it down. It is said today by some cynics that we are today an “effluent society” and it is also said by other cynics that the only silent majority one finds is in the cemetery! I believe, Sir, that we have to prove these cynics wrong. There is certainly a lot to be said for the fact that we are an affluent society. I think we must show that as a people we value our surroundings and their beauty. We are aware of the fact that this heritage is irreplaceable and we must speak up as the majority. We must not remain silent on these issues. We must look constantly and strive always in all fields for a better quality of life.

When one mentions this word “quality” one naturally thinks of the word “control” because the two words go hand in hand— quality and control. Obviously, if we are going to work towards a better way of life, we are going to have controls, and this is an important factor. I think an equally important factor is education. We live in times when communications have improved greatly and can play a very important part in educating people towards their responsibilities in life. The problems and challenges of environmental protection, I believe, could and should be woven into the whole pattern of education, starting with our children in the lower standards at school so that they are made even more aware of how they can help.

You know, Sir, if one looks at the projects of environmental clean-up that take place, one finds very often that the majority of people involved in these projects are young people. I suppose this should be so because they realize that the world they are cleaning up today is the world in which they will be living out their lives tomorrow. If a greater sense of awareness were created through education, as I have said, coming generations would be very much more aware of the challenges and I think they would be better equipped to cope with those challenges.

When we talk about education, do not let us stop at the education of our young people. We should also be looking at the education of adults who grew up in a different age and before times started to change as rapidly as they are now. Very often one finds that the older generation is very much in need of education when it comes to pollution and the environment in which we live. Our planning for the changes that must inevitably come must include ways in which our education will slot in to the changing scheme of things.

When we look at the question of how the environment can and will be affected by our use of our natural resources, we realize that these natural resources are naturally limited, some more so than others. I would like us to consider for a few minutes the commodity of water which is one of the crucial factors in the future of our world. Prevention of the pollution of our fresh water resources and of our seas will have a tremendous influence on the lives of future generations. Conservation and its future application will be very important. But if the dumping of wastes into our fresh and sea waters continues, the scope that these waters offer for relaxation, for enjoyment, for fishing and for sport of all kinds, will be very limited and will, in fact, probably reach the stage where it will disappear completely. We can, of course, purify waters that have become polluted. However, how much better would it not be to take preventive measures which are very often less expensive than waiting for the pollution to occur and then remedying it. Public awareness of careless pollution must be heightened, wastage of water reserves must be prevented and reclamation and recycling must be increased.

The question of recycling itself is a chapter all on its own and it has wide implications in the overall scheme of things. Let us take, for example, the question of garbage—its collection, its removal and its disposal. These are all functions which cost a tremendous amount of money and require a lot of manpower. And yet, this garbage which we throw away—and all of us are guilty of throwing it away— contains materials which can be put to great good use. I refer to the obvious materials such as glass, plastics, paper, cloth, cardboard and, of course, metal in the form very often of metal cans. All of these are costly materials to produce and all of them come from raw materials, which are themselves a wasting asset. Like land, they are not increasing, and we should be looking for ways and means to make the most of them because, when they become scarce, as they are becoming—and they will continue to become more so—the life we enjoy will suffer. It is therefore in our own interests to look carefully at how we can prolong the availability of these resources in our daily lives and how we can make optimum use of our resources and employ them to the full.

I should like at this stage to make a few suggestions as to where we could be looking in the future. We are aware of experiments that have been conducted in certain suburbs in certain countries involving the selective collection of garbage so that the materials I mentioned earlier can be recycled and thus effect a great saving in costs and raw materials, and I believe that we should be looking at that in this country. Not only will we be able to reclaim these materials and protect our valuable resources but we will overcome the problem of forever looking for land to be used for dumping purposes. Vast tracts of land on which we dump this garbage and where it is compacted have, of course, a limited use. One cannot build on them and very often their development is restricted to sporting facilities or something of that nature. We cannot afford that our land be consumed and to continue to be consumed in this way.

Another spin-off of the selective collection of garbage and its recycling is that there will be less material to blow around in the wind, fewer plastic items to collect on fences and less cardboard rubbish to block up our stormwater drains. All these are problems that are related overall in this field.

Secondly, the organic matter that is derived from our garbage can be dealt with very effectively. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, before I deal with the hon. member who has just sat down, will you allow me the privilege to refer briefly to this occasion here today which I deem to be not only a historic one but also a very auspicious one. One feels that the process of the severing of the ties is on its way; one feels like a person who is meeting an old friend after many years or coming to say goodbye to a friend who is leaving. Now that the call for change is heard from all directions I think it also behoves us to look at our heritage and at our history for a while. I think it was Socrates who said that those nations who ignore the lessons of history are doomed to repeat their tragedies. So often the negative things are accentuated and the good forgotten.

When I heard about this gathering, when this gathering was anticipated I remembered that it has only been about 31 or 32 years since the King of England, our then head of State, opened Parliament in this very Chamber. Although all that pomp and splendour, grandeur and gracious living now belong to the past one can still feel the high regard for authority and the personal discipline of those times. To my mind these things will always be remembered.

I can recollect one afternoon about 20 years ago when I was first elected to Parliament. I had the privilege of showing one of my constituents around. I took him into the gallery up there and explained to him that this was the Upper House. But he said to me: “I know all about this place; I was a youngster sitting up there when my grandfather was knighted in this place.” Sir, you will forgive me if I state, as a staunch Republican, that to my way of thinking, if ever there was such a thing as beneficial colonialism—and I say “if’—it was the British model in Southern Africa. Of course, I am speaking only on my own behalf. I think it will be remembered not only for the law and order it brought and, on the negative side, for the heavy hand of the Statute Book, but also for the freedom it brought, even if it was only freedom from poverty, ignorance, superstition, fear and oppression. And at the time when all the abominations in the book are being committed in the name of freedom, the old order that is changing does not look as abominable and as abhorrent as it is often made out to be. But, Sir: “Sceptre and scythe must tumble down and in the dust be equal made to the poor sickle and silent spade.”

*There is nothing in the hon. member for Berea’s speech with which I can differ and I want to compliment him on it. Nowadays we no longer have “seven ages of man” as we did before; today we have three stages of manhood.

†The first one is “My dad can beat your dad”. The second one is “The old man knows nothing”, and the third is “My father always used to say”.

*I am fond of uttering popular quips because my fighting days are past. I think I shall be speaking on behalf of the whole Committee in saying that 20 years ago I fought against the hon. member’s former Leader; he made many promises, and later it was said of him that “he is a promising young man”, but he too is “a promising young man” in the better sense of the word. As a certain old chap said, what with all your nonsense my pipe has gone out now.

Mr. Chairman, I want to talk about my part of the world, the last mention of which may in fact have been made here many years ago, and that is the Overberg area here at the southern point of the continent. This area extends from Swellendam in the east, which was only proclaimed a town round about 1754. This was where Baron Van Imhoff stationed the first dragoons to protect the erstwhile colonists and, at the same time, to prevent them trekking away unnecessarily far. The area to which I am referring, extends westwards as far as Sir Lowry’s Pass, which used to be known originally as Hottentotskloof, later as the Gantouw Pass and still later as Elandskloof Pass, and the wagon-wheel tracks are still visible today where the burghers of that time journeyed to and fro. In addition, this area extends from the Hottentots Holland and Riviersonderend Mountains up to the southernmost point of the continent, where we find Cape Agulhas, Quinn Point and Danger Point with all the romanticism associated with those areas. There are no mineral resources here. The entire economy in this region is based on agriculture, viz. fruit, grain and sheep farming, and at one stage many of these farming activities came very near to stagnation because of the resources being virtually exhausted. This area is inhabited by Whites and by Brown people; it is an area in which the Brown people arrived as far back as 1737, a century before the Great Trek. The first and oldest Coloured settlement in the country, viz. Genadendal—it is pronounced as “Genaal”—was founded at that time. Over the past two decades the total population of this area has shown a steady growth with a negative growth rate in the case of the Whites and the small number of Asians. In 1970 the Whites in this area constituted only 25,75% of the total population and the Coloureds 66,52%. From 1960 to 1970 the total White population of the area decreased from 29 328 to 28 115. Even so, this decrease was considerably smaller than that of the previous decade. There is only one town, viz. the one I have the honour of representing, which could maintain a steady White population rate. In the period 1960 to 1970 the Coloured population rate increased from 54 000 to 72 000, which amounts to a growth rate of almost 3% per annum for 10 years. From 1951 to 1960 the Black population doubled; from 1960 to 1970 it remained unchanged and there was no increase. From 1970 to 1977 the growth rate amounted to 0,06%. I mention this to—as the old man said—show what can be done. The non-urban Black population has increased slightly while the urban Black population has decreased. The non-urban Blacks constitute 80% of the total. The sex composition is 85,69% males as against the females, which shows that this population group is mainly dependent on contract work.

In the divisional council area which represents the western part of this area, the number of female Blacks in the urban group showed a decrease, and an improvement of one to one—males as against females—was effected in 1974 … [Time expired.]

Order! Hon. members must appreciate that because we are witnessing an historic event today, I have been allowing them a great deal of latitude in the debate which on other days would not be tolerated.

Mr. Chairman, reference has repeatedly been made to the atmosphere prevailing in this place where we are today assembled. Because I knew beforehand where we would meet today, I have prepared a somewhat more comprehensive speech about Planning. The speech of the hon. member for Bryanston opposite dealt mainly with my constituency. He evidently spent a weekend there and was impressed by the importance and beauty of that part of the world as a result of which he devoted his speech to it this afternoon. I therefore have to alter my speech somewhat and refer to his speech because some of the facts he mentioned here this afternoon are not entirely correct. Concerning much of what he said I am in accord with him. It is true that the environs of the Langebaan Lagoon have today developed into an important focal point in the Western Cape. That came about as a result of the completion of the West Coast road and as a result of the development of the Sishen-Saldanha Bay project. This part of the world has newly made its appearance on the map of South Africa and it is this truth that has led to this particular lagoon area appearing anew on the map of South Africa. I want to agree with the hon. member on one basic fact, namely that, apart from the ordinary functioning of the Department of Planning and the Environment, there are always in the ordering of our open spaces certain focal points which the department simply cannot ignore. With reference to what the hon. member has said, I want to give a few examples of this.

In the first instance there are our Cape beaches which, with all their rich diversity, will increasingly have to be carefully developed to meet the requirements of the thousands of members of the different racial groups who will in ever-increasing numbers be heading for our beaches. We cannot order things simply by means of apartheid signs. We shall have to apply thorough advance planning to this matter. In recent times we have actually shifted this function to our local authorities, divisional councils and provincial administrations. However, if we look at the overall picture as regards the development of our beaches, I maintain that the Department of Planning and the Environment will in this connection never be able to free itself from its supervisory function.

I also want to refer to Table Mountain, which has become a world-famous landmark. It is a landmark which over the past season attracted 232 000 people through its cableway alone, operating when weather permitted. Also when we consider this focal point with regard to the Boland as a whole, I think that the Department of Planning and the Environment with its general control cannot divorce itself from this.

I want to mention a further example. There is the compilation of guide plans to ensure that through thorough advance planning we will never again plan an oil refinery for Milnerton or a De Beers complex on the False Bay coast, as we have done. Yesterday afternoon I drove past the refinery at Milnerton and I can tell you that it was not pleasant to drive past there. This refinery is an absolutely outstanding example of the lack of planning on our part in the past. Such a position must in future never again be allowed to develop. That brings me to the point raised by the hon. member, viz. the future of the Langebaan Lagoon.

As I said at the outset, the Langebaan Lagoon is an important focal point as far as I am concerned, not because it is in my constituency, but because it is today one of the most beautiful playgrounds in the Boland. We cannot allow the development of activities in and around the lagoon to be left to circumstance in the future. We shall have to approach the matter with thorough advance planning. As my time is very limited, I can only refer to the broad details in this connection. I want to mention a few factors which at present affect the situation.

There is the Department of Defence’s intended project near Donkergat and Salamander Point. It has been announced that the Department of Defence envisages a complex there, but I do not yet know what it will consist of. Then there is the question of Riet Bay in respect of which an industrialist is negotiating with several State departments for the cultivation of seaweed. Then there is the Oudepos syndicate which has established a beautiful nature reserve in that area, a nature reserve which, against all expectations, has already proved a great success. There is furthermore the attractive community of Churchhaven which we were able to see on television a few nights ago. We can never allow that community to go to rack and ruin or be destroyed.

I want to talk more generally, because I do not have much time left. There are also the activities on the lagoon as such. In the first instance there is the boating which is today widely enjoyed on the lagoon. Then there are specifically the yachting activities which have increased spectacularly. That is a colourful spectacle and I would not want these yachtsmen simply to be chased off. We just cannot do that. In recent years boathouses have appeared around the lagoon. Sooner or later we will have to restrict the number of boats of this kind on the lagoon because we cannot allow that activity to continue uncontrolled. We shall have to decide how to meet that situation. The Division of Sea Fisheries is at present engaged in cultivating oysters in these waters. Scientists have also recently raised the possibility of connecting Schaapen Island to the mainland by means of a retaining wall in order to prevent pollution by the Sishen-Saldanha Bay project. There is also the report to be issued by Dr. Hey. In this regard I am at odds with the hon. member for Bryanston. The fact is that at this stage the department is still waiting for Dr. Hey’s report which has not become available yet. As regards the ordering of our open spaces, these are all matters which are at present playing a role in respect of this delightful area which is a new focal point in the Western Cape.

I want to go so far this afternoon as to put two suggestions to the hon. the Minister. In a certain measure I agree with the hon. member for Bryanston that the present state of affairs cannot be allowed to continue uncontrolled. Because I do not have the time, I shall, without motivating them, put forward two possible solutions to the problem of properly controlling and co-ordinating the activities in this beautiful area in the future. In the first instance I want to ask whether the control of this whole area cannot be transferred to the National Parks Board. That is today the one body in South Africa which has learned to achieve a balance between development and tourism on the one hand and conservation on the other. The National Parks Board has the experience to do this. The one possibility is therefore to transfer the control of this area to the National Parks Board. If my first suggestion is not regarded as a solution, I want to suggest in the second instance that this whole area be incorporated in the area of jurisdiction of the town council of Langebaan. Why can that not be done? We have already incorporated Saldanha with Vredenburg and have drawn entirely new boundaries with regard to the guide plan compiled by the Department of Planning and the Environment. Why can we then not transfer the control over this entire lagoon area, which includes the peninsula, and all the activities in and around the lagoon, to the town council of Langebaan? I want to suggest that we will have an interesting town council functioning in the Western Cape if this is done.

Mr. Chairman, it is always a pleasure to listen to the hon. member for Moorreesburg, because his suggestions are always eminently practical. I am grateful that he and the hon. member for Bryanston have been able to achieve some points of concensus, because it is not often that the hon. member for Moorreesburg and the hon. member for Bryanston do that. Perhaps it is the somewhat tranquil atmosphere of the place in which we are sitting today which has caused this to happen. To add to the voices of many others so far in this debate, let me say that one appreciates very much participating in such an historic occasion, and to say especially, with the hon. member for Berea, that I think we owe this hon. House a great debt of gratitude for allowing us to come here.

The hon. member for Moorreesburg has made certain proposals regarding the Langebaan lagoon. They both sound very practical and sensible to me but I certainly do not know the needs which exist as intimately as he does. But I must agree with him overall, particularly in regard to the earlier part of his speech where he referred to the consequences of bad planning, or lack of planning. This is something we simply cannot afford any longer and I would support that plea very strongly.

In the very short time at my disposal I want to return more to the line of thought in the speech made by the hon. member for Kuruman. It is always difficult to know how to avoid contentious matters in any debate.

At 15h50, proceedings suspended until 16h05 to enable members to attend a division.

Mr. Chairman, when I was so rudely interrupted, I had said that the hon. member for Kuruman had some very interesting comments about the whole field of planning, not only of the physical resources of our land but also of its human resources. I should just like to come back to that, perhaps from a different point of view but nevertheless one which I think is equally important and valid.

As one looks at South Africa today against the background of large-scale unemployment, one has to raise the question once more of the benefits and the disadvantages of a both capital-intensive and labour-intensive economy. This whole question of deciding on priorities regarding capital-intensive and labour-intensive economies is a very complex one and, inevitably, any development from one to another will take a considerable amount of time, energy and planning. Sir, I would put it to the hon. the Minister that there are at least four reasons why South Africa must move away as swiftly as possible from its present emphasis on a capital-intensive to a labour-intensive economy.

Firstly, and very briefly, there is obviously our concern with foreign exchange, our determination to cut down on our imports and reduce the very high cost of sophisticated machinery. This point could be developed on its own but I do not have the time in this debate to do so.

Secondly, there is the obvious drop in immigration to South Africa and we have no way of determining whether this is going to continue or whether the position is going to remain static. We have depended over many years on highly skilled people coming here almost, as it were, with the machinery we have purchased.

Thirdly, there is the very uncomfortable probability or possibility of boycotts. This means that if we are dependent on sophisticated machinery and parts that have to be replaced, we can become even more vulnerable than we are. So, in the whole area of planning it seems to me that these three points must be taken into account. But I believe we have to move swiftly from a capital-intensive economy to a labour-intensive economy chiefly because of the high rate of unemployment in South Africa today. Under normal circumstances—if one can ever speak of normal circumstances these days— unemployment is cyclical. But events over the past few years give us no cause to believe that unemployment is simply going to be phased out. I believe therefore that it is very, very important that under the portfolio of Planning and the Environment and, naturally, in direct liaison with the Minister of Economic Affairs and other departments—Labour for example—there ought to be a very strong emphasis placed upon the need and the planning required to move from a capital-intensive economy to a labour-intensive economy.

When we put a question to the hon. the Minister of Economic Affairs last year, he mentioned then his own concern in this area. I want to quote now from Hansard, col. 4643. The hon. the Minister said then—

Mr. Chairman, the hon. the Minister then went on to say that he was considering the appointment of a study group to look into ways and means of moving from one kind of economy to another. I would like to put it to the hon. the Minister that this surely should be under the direct purview of his own department. It may be that we will be told when either he or the hon. the Deputy Minister replies that such a study group is already in existence and has given time and thought to this and, hopefully, will bring forward some recommendations. We would like to hear from either of the hon. the Ministers in this connection.

If one looks at the whole question of capital—intensive planning vis-à-vis labour— intensive planning in terms of the best possible use of our available resources, and one looks again at the Environment Planning Act which was based on the original Physical Planning Act, then one has to come back to a debate which took place in the House of Assembly last year which was piloted, if I recall rightly, by the hon. the Deputy Minister.

I want to refer to a question put by the hon. member for Berea to the hon. the Minister of Plural Relations and Development. He asked the hon. the Minister this year whether that particular department was planning any relief work programmes for unemployed Bantu. The hon. the Minister of Plural Relations and Development responded in the following way. Among other things he said—

This to my mind is a direct admission in respect of a point which we made as strongly as we could last year, to no avail, that that section and that that Act actually had a direct inhibiting effect on employment in the vast metropolitan complex of the Witwatersrand. We tried to distinguish then—and that is why I come back to the hon. member for Kuruman—that decentralization which flows from a natural development in the urban area and the desire to give more employment to the unemployed or underemployed in rural development, is one thing. However, when it is based purely on an ideological basis—and it seems to me that this is exactly what the hon. member for Kuruman was stressing again— then to my mind it makes no sense at all. If one is going to plan, one must plan according to the economy, according to the available resources that are here for the asking in this country, and make the very best use of them. I submit that changes must be made in this Act which is under the direct control of the hon. the Ministers sitting in front of me here; otherwise why in this time of high unemployment does the hon. the Minister for Plural Relations and Development say that he has now authorized quotas over and above those stipulated in that Act to be employed in the metropolitan area of the Witwatersrand? It is an admission that the Act as it stands right now definitely inhibits employment. And the reason why? One finds factories that are closed down. They have asked for permits when they have moved their establishments and this has been turned down. Over the years the hon. the Deputy Minister has himself given figures of the large number of people who have not been employed. We are not going to counter the whole problem of unemployment unless we start moving away from our emphasis on capital-intensive in the large city complexes and labour-intensive in the rural areas. This has to be done simultaneously.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to reply shortly to a few of the points that have been raised in the debate so far. To begin with the hon. member for Pinelands, I want to thank him for his positive contribution which was made in a good spirit and which in my opinion also contained positive suggestions. Let me hasten to say that the impression he is under that section 3 of the Physical Planning Act is the cause of unemployment is a totally erroneous impression. The real state of affairs is being taken entirely out of context and I do not think the hon. member should be a party to that.

To mention just one thing, the number of unemployed who became unemployed as a result of section 3, if there should be any such—and this we cannot deny—is so minimal compared with the large number of unemployed on the Witwatersrand, as was proved during the recent unrest, that I am definitely convinced that we are actually dragging arguments in by the hair while we can absolutely not prove our case. In the first instance I want to admit that unemployment —and it is not a problem that is exclusive to South Africa—has become an extremely serious problem to which we shall have to give undivided attention. We hope to have the information that was obtained through sample tests last year, fed into the computer within the next few months at which stage we shall also be able to obtain information regarding unemployment under the Blacks on a continuous basis. In any event, at present that information points to a levelling off in the sharp graphic curve of the increasing unemployment. This is the trend, particularly in respect of the Whites and the Coloureds, but it seems that the same result has been achieved in respect of the Blacks.

The factories that closed on the Witwatersrand—again, I say this with great respect towards the hon. member—did not close because of an inability to obtain labour. There were other reasons. That is why I think we can move on to the other suggestions put forward by the hon. member, for example that factories should aim at a more labour intensive organization. Let us consider this. As a result of the prosperity experienced in South Africa over the last few years, every living soul wanted to install at the earliest opportunity the largest and best machinery which would enable the greatest possible level of production. The result is that in many instances we have in South Africa too much machinery we cannot use. It is not a question of there not being sufficient labour available. In the first place the buyers are not available, and there is no point in producing goods if there is no market for those goods. I shall take the matter no further.

†I would like to reply to the hon. member for Bryanston who was today in a much happier mood than when last we discussed section 3 of the Act and made a contribution to this debate for which I am thankful. I am only sorry that he did not have the time to pay tribute to what the Department’s officials are doing under very difficult circumstances. When I say very difficult circumstances, I must add that they are working under very happy conditions, but he did raise the point in regard to the shortage of staff and the difficulty of obtaining properly trained staff. However, I think he could have found the time to pay tribute to what the department’s officials are doing and have done over the past year.

To think of this department as an umbrella department that can almost dictate to other departments is something which on the South African scene and in respect of the whole history of South Africa the way things have been going over the past decades, is simply impossible. I regret to say that we did not always have the close co-operation of some local authorities and provincial authorities. That was the case years ago. However, I can assure the hon. member that the co-operation that we are now getting on a voluntary basis from the different departments is something for which I think not only the department but the Government and all people can be truly thankful.

*In this connection I should like to say to the hon. member that in respect of the planning relating to the PWV road network to which he referred, a matter which has created numerous problems for many people, we at least recently obtained so much co-operation that the proclamation of the area around Marlborough as an Indian area—this matter caused lengthy delays—will probably appear in the Government Gazette towards the end of the week. Then we must bear in mind that the PWV road network played a very important role in that area and could have created problems which could also have led to further declarations having to be made. It is of course, especially with the proclamation of group areas, at all times a very sensitive matter for the department and we must at all times get co-operation from all quarters to ensure the smooth working of the Act.

Sir, it is not necessary to condemn everything, but at the same time I do not wish to condone the last letter of the law. Laws can always be improved. The Group Areas Act can be applied in such a way as to be of benefit to areas and communities. With the co-operation of the various departments and of the provinces several matters were finalized in the past year in a way that satisfied the race groups and the various Government bodies. I refer in the first instance to the question of the Marlborough area which will be finalized shortly. With the assistance of the representatives it was possible to set aside the Claudius area in Pretoria. Hon. members will be aware of the fact that the co-operation of the Indian and Coloured representatives on the Group Areas Board was also obtained and that it was furthermore possible to finalize the position in respect of Witbank, a matter which has dragged on for many, many years. In Cape Town, too, we have hopefully reached the point where with regard to group areas here we will be able in the coming year to report great progress which will satisfy all the race groups.

The hon. member for Moorreesburg this afternoon made a telling speech about environmental conservation, and in regard to that, too, we have made progress. However, I want to remind hon. members that it was through the voluntary co-operation of departments that the Magaliesberg range could be proclaimed a conservation area. We also enjoy the co-operation of other departments in getting decisions in that regard honoured. I might just mention incidentally, Sir, that, as was recently reported in newspapers, the investigation into the protection of Table Mountain and other mountains in the Peninsula has been completed. Dr. Hey of the Cape Provincial Administration has published a magnificent report, but so far I have only been able to go through it cursorily. It will however be tabled shortly and hopefully it will in large measure conclude a business that has taken many years to finalize.

With reference to what the hon. member for Kuruman said, the hon. member for Berea also spoke about certain matters concerning which I just want to put his mind at rest. The first is the depopulation of the platteland which is connected with the population explosion being experienced in the cities. This matter is being investigated at present, but I am told that the investigation is of so comprehensive a nature that it will take a long time to cover all that appears in the report. It has been written by Prof. Fourie and concerns the depopulation of the platteland. With all due respect, I want to say that in my opinion it is not a practical solution to establish educational institutions in the smaller towns since the teaching staff required for such institutions of higher education will definitely not be prepared to go along with that. Of that we have recently had proof, i.e. the question of the branch of the University of Stellenbosch which has been or will be established at Durbanville. It will however be difficult to use institutions of higher education to stimulate growth in the smaller towns. A comprehensive report is in any event being prepared at the moment, essentially dealing with the depopulation of the platteland and ways in which the total depopulation of the platteland can be prevented.

The hon. member for Kuruman also said here that the development of growth points at these smaller towns on a regional basis should be encouraged. I could not agree more. For that reason I want to express my regard for all the people here and also outside who use their influence actively to assist the regional development associations. We have had a striking example of this in West Transvaal’s Westraplan and Northern Transvaal’s Noordtraplan in which the local communities are co-operating in the identification and stimulation of growth points.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to avail myself of this opportunity to bring some aspects of my constituency, Namaqualand, to the attention of this hon. Committee, from a planning point of view. It is true that during the past few years significant development has taken place in the Namaqualand territory. Here for instance I am thinking of the considerable extensions made by Escom. Furthermore I am thinking of the Sishen-Saldanha railway project that runs through the Namaqualand constituency for 400 km. Both these enterprises are definitely stimulants for development. But if one looks at the planning of a territory, it is of course important for one to go into both the present and the future potential of that territory.

Namaqualand has been associated with minerals from the earliest times. For many years copper and diamonds were by far the most important minerals mined in Namaqualand. Lead, zinc and silver, the mining of which has never been developed in Namaqualand so far before, will in future overshadow the base and precious minerals found there, as soon as the newly-established mines at Aggeneys and Gamsberg are in full production. According to the present calculations the reserves of lead, zinc and silver are seven times the amount of the known reserves of copper, plus all the copper produced in the past 155 years. Even after the price of copper dropped from £1 200 (British) per ton of metal to £680, geologists still consider the value of metal deposits at Aggeneys and Gamsberg to be astronomical.

Mr. Chairman, this makes South Africa self-sufficient as regards zinc and lead and what is more, it also makes the Republic an important exporter of zinc.

Then I refer to the pegmatite minerals that have not yet been prospected properly, including tantalite, berillium and mica, of which a great deal is definitely expected in the future.

Large deposits of gypsum were revealed in the area surrounding the Sishen-Saldanha railway line, and within a few years this gypsum will be the chief source of this mineral for all the cement factories in the Republic of South Africa.

Mr. Chairman, the mineral potential to which I have just referred, together with development to which I did not refer, will demand certain planned development in the future. I am now asking that the interests of the local population be given the highest possible priority in the future planning of mineral development.

The large-scale development of minerals has another very important facet, viz. the question of labour. Namaqualand is traditionally the home of Whites and Coloureds. During the present session 1¼ million morgen of land was transferred to the Coloured Persons Representative Council. I submit, Sir, that the inhabitants of a specific territory should receive priority when it comes to employment opportunities within that territory. Sir, I ask that plans should be made in good time and efficiently in order to attain this ideal as quickly as possible. I also ask that, in determining priorities for future planning, the strategic potential and importance of Namaqualand as regards its situation, area and defensibility, should be taken into consideration very thoroughly. In the question of strategy, I specifically include Walvis Bay, which the hon. member mentioned too.

The National Physical Development Plan that was drawn up in 1975, makes specific mention of the fact that the lack of water is the cause of the poor agricultural potential of Namaqualand. This is true in spite of the fact that the Orange River constitutes the northern border of this constituency. According to the Third Supplementary Report on the First Phase of the Orange River Project, this river has a steady annual yield of 6 000 million cubic metres of water. The present annual consumption is approximately 1 100 million cubic metres. This means in effect that almost 80% of the water of the Orange River is still not being utilized.

Mr. Chairman, it is calculated that by the turn of the century, this country will have 40 million people who will have to be fed. In order to increase food production, it will be essential in future for water to be pumped to the closest suitable areas of production. In Namaqualand there are many of these. This brings me to the question of energy. Experts are of the opinion that the Orange River still has extraordinarily great possibilities for the generation of hydro-electricity. Although the capital outlay for this is relatively high, it contains certain important advantages of which I want to mention only two. The generation costs are consistently low. What is most important, however, is that it makes no demands on our valuable natural energy resources. I am therefore asking that the Orange River should be planned and developed to its full potential as regards energy production. I am also asking for that power to be linked up with the national network of the country during peak load if necessary and used during base load for pumping water for production purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I know I am not saying anything new, because who will understand this better than the hon. the Minister of Planning and the Environment, who represents the neighbouring constituency in this Parliament? It can also be said that I am speaking in the future. However, it must be remembered that time has accelerated its rate in Africa. What was a quarter of a century or even perhaps a half century in the past, has become a decade. Thank you, Sir.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Namaqualand has given a very interesting exposition of the potential of his constituency. He will forgive me if I do not deal with that. However, I do want to tell him that I am not aware of those facts. What I do know, is that when one gets tired of all the hustle and bustle of life in the city and goes and spends a weekend in one’s constituency, as I often do, one finds peace of mind there and comes back a new person. He should therefore forgive me if I do not pursue the matter.

You should go once again; then you might come back a Nationalist.

No, I go there quite often. I have a lot of Nationalist relatives who live there, but they do not succeed in winning me over.

†Mr. Chairman, several members have pleaded for the preservation of the environment today. They raised some very interesting points, such as those mentioned by the hon. member for Berea. I want to congratulate him because I think he raised a very important point, i.e. the recycling of domestic refuse. I can also stress the need for planning, investigation and research—ultimately for planning—in as far as the recycling of domestic refuse is concerned. I know that there are great possibilities in its use for the manufacture of gas. I think it is in the East that they are casting it in blocks nowadays and using it for reclamation purposes. They are certainly putting it to very good use. I agree that the day will come when there will be a tremendous problem to know what to do with it.

In regard to the environment, the hon. member for Moorreesburg became very excited about the recreational potential of his area. In this respect I want to tell him I can also boast about the potential of the area I represent. However, Mr. Chairman, I am not going to deal with that today. I think it is more important at this stage and in this particular debate to talk about the viability of an area because the success of one’s recreational facilities will depend on how successfully the area itself is developed. In my case it is the City of Port Elizabeth.

We know when a law is passed in Parliament, it is intended to serve a useful purpose. I feel that when one finds that such a law affects an area or certain people adversely, the implementation of that law should be looked into. One should do something in that regard without doing away with the Act as such. The necessary adjustments should be effected. I will certainly be failing in my duty if I, like others before me, do not make reference to the effects of section 3 of the Environment Planning Act on Port Elizabeth as an industrial area. I want to assure the hon. the Minister that I am not going to blame section 3 for unemployment in that area. For the sake of my argument I want briefly to mention the effect that section 3 has had on the Port Elizabeth and Uitenhage area since the promulgation of the Act in 1968.

As we all know, nobody shall without the approval of the Minister, establish certain factories. We also know that the Minister may in his discretion, withhold or grant and may impose certain conditions, for instance in regard to the use of labour, housing, water and other relevant matters. As far as the Port Elizabeth-Uitenhage area is concerned, the most important part of this section refers to the extension of factories. Extension actually means any increase in the number of Bantu employees in that factory. When one looks at certain areas one can see the need for this Act. This holds good particularly for areas where decentralization is necessary. I think specifically of the Pretoria-Witwatersrand-Vaal triangle area where there may perhaps be justification for this Act. But then we fail to see why it should retard an industrial area such as Port Elizabeth-Uitenhage. In the Transvaal it also had the effect of concentrating a major part of our economically active population and our industry in a comparatively small area. Mr. Chairman, I maintain that to a certain extent this is a dangerous policy from a strategic and sociological point of view.

This applies especially to us in South Africa as we are surrounded by enemies and may in due course even have potential enemies in our midst. Although decentralization may in certain respects be a healthy policy, we fail to see how the Port Elizabeth-Uitenhage complex can be regarded as being over-industrialized or in need of decentralization. On the contrary, this area is languishing economically as it does not attract new industry. This is common knowledge. Long established industries, even these days, are thinking of moving elsewhere.

Because of section 3?

Yes. As I have said, I am not suggesting that section 3 causes unemployment, but if the provisions of section 3 are not so strictly applied in certain areas, it can relieve unemployment problems and hardship, especially amongst the Blacks. Port Elizabeth has a large Black population and it can be of great assistance in solving the problems we have there. There is a very good case to be made out for incentives to industries to establish themselves in that complex. I want to make it quite clear and put it beyond doubt today here that we in the Eastern Cape are more than grateful to the motor vehicle manufacturers and ancillary industries for the part they have played in the development of the Eastern Cape and for the service they are rendering to this country in general. I do not even want to refer to other aspects of community life which benefit through the motor industry, especially if one thinks of the sponsorship as far as sport is concerned. There is little doubt that it is very unhealthy for any area to be almost entirely dependent on an economically sensitive industry like the motor industry. It therefore goes without saying that there is an urgent need for this area to diversify its industrial structure, and it is generally felt that industries not related to the motor industry should also be encouraged to establish themselves there. I am afraid that this cannot be done at the present moment. However reasonable the Department of Planning and the Environment acted in the past in applying section 3 of the Environment Planning Act, it still remains the sword hanging over the heads of industrialists, and this is where the hon. the Deputy Minister’s question comes in. Prospective industrialists who may have been tempted to establish themselves in Port Elizabeth feel, with justification of course, that it would be to their advantage to go elsewhere in the country where the restrictions of section 3 will not apply when they think in terms of expansion. When an industrialist decides on an area to establish himself, the first requirement he considers is the availability of labour. If there is any problem or reason for him to believe that in due course, when he wants to expand his industry, he will have problems with additional labour, he will think twice.

What worsens the position of this area is the fact that even before the Environment Planning Act was promulgated the Minister of Planning and the Environment declared this area a Coloured labour preferential area. In effect this means that when Coloured labour is available Bantu labour cannot be employed on a permanent basis. Although the Department of Planning and the Environment has been very reasonable in its requirements, and I say this with emphasis, this requirement still remains a hindrance which affects the area adversely and does not serve to encourage development. There is little justification for the protection of Coloured labour which is, in any event, most of the time in short supply. This Act and the Coloured labour preference regulation tend to place Coloured labour in a monopolistic position and certainly does not improve efficiency. One does not want to see this position as discrimination, but there seems to be some justification for this opinion if, for instance, the position of Durban is compared to this. The Indian population in Durban is far in excess of the Coloured population of Port Elizabeth, but Durban has never been declared an Indian labour preference area. I am certainly not pleading for Durban to be declared an Indian labour preference area, but I am certainly pleading for equal treatment. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central alleged that many of the problems in that area are due to the implementation of the provisions of section 3, but I do not think that this is the main reason. I think the economic recession that we are experiencing plays a much greater role in this matter than the hon. member wants to admit. I also doubt whether Port Elizabeth can afford a larger concentration of Black labour at this stage. At this stage the problems in connection with accommodation and other problems in connection with Black labour are of such an extent that Port Elizabeth should rather continue at a slower rate.

I also want to talk about decentralization, but I want to approach it from the point of view of the rural areas. We believe that decentralization is essential throughout the world. It is propagated everywhere and there is an attempt to enforce it by means of legislation. In South Africa the main objective of decentralization has been to bring the employment opportunity to the worker and it has been the policy to create additional growth points so that our existing cities will not exceed the limits of their normal growth. In spite of that we have discovered, and it is still happening, that urbanization is still on the increase.

If we look at the population predictions for the year 2000, we see that the Whites will number approximately 6 million, the Coloureds 4,7 million, the Indians 1,3 million and the Bantu 34,7 million. Estimates indicate that 90% of the Coloureds and Indians will be urbanized, whilst 75% of the Bantu will live in the cities. We know that the largest percentage of the Whites will also be living in the cities. It is unavoidable that new cities will be established in the Bantu homelands. Assistance is being granted as regards the development of growth points and border industries, as well as to the Bantu homelands by means of the development corporations. In spite of the assistance which is being granted to these sectors, we find that the rural areas are still becoming depopulated. My plea to the Minister today is that the advantages being granted to growth points today, should also be given to the rural areas. If possible, he should give even more assistance to the rural areas than to the growth points. I now want to try and prove that it is really essential.

Just like the hon. member for Kuruman, I have noticed that the Planning Advisory Board of the Prime Minister has given attention to the depopulation of the rural areas and small towns. I am pleased to hear that they hope to give a decision on this before the end of this year.

I am aware of the fact that in the present economic climate it is not really the right thing to advocate economic growth, but I believe that we must rectify this matter before the economic revival which must come, is at hand.

In the report of the Committee of Inquiry into Rural Reform which was published last year, some very positive recommendations were made and I just want to mention a few of them. Firstly, there is the upliftment of rural communities by education and guidance. Secondly, there must be co-ordinated action by the central Government and the provincial administrations for the development and maintenance of towns in order to make them more attractive places for living and working. Thirdly, mention is made of a five point plan for the development and maintenance of businesses in smaller towns. I do not know whether hon. members have had the opportunity to study this report. It is a very bulky report and deals with all aspects of life in the rural areas. This committee also made the recommendation that a statutory council for rural reform should be established in the place of the permanent committee. I should like to hear from the Minister how he feels about this recommendation of the committee. What I have in mind for the rural areas, is not to create more growth points, Sir, but to utilize the natural resources of every community to the full. For instance, by encouraging small industries in our towns and protecting the small industries that already exist, the potential of every rural town can be developed to the full.

With our foreign problems we must think seriously of export replacement and I think it is a suitable occasion to think of the rural areas in this regard too. The main objective for those small towns must be to make what is required locally and to make use of the natural resources found locally. The potential is there; labour is available; electricity is expensive and we should like to see it being cheaper, but the greatest emphasis must be laid on labour-intensive industries. Water is usually adequate; accommodation is very often plentiful especially where depopulation has taken place; capital should not be a problem and it is only individual initiative and the necessary stimulus from the Government which is required to put these things in motion.

Many farmers are investing money in more and more farms today and in this way the depopulation is being assisted. I am sure that if the necessary initiative and stimulus is there, those people will be prepared to invest their money in industries, either on their own or on a co-operative basis.

I want to make two statements, Mr. Chairman. Firstly, the present favouring of border areas and growth points is discriminating against the rural areas. The rural areas are becoming empty and the people are not going to the desired growth points, but are gathering in the existing cities, which results in undesirable conditions, like squatting and over-population.

The second statement is this: If the advantages that are being granted to border and growth points today are also given to the rural areas, it will result in a better utilization of capital and human material. We must not throw up our hands and write off the rural areas.

This Minister of ours is a country boy, Mr. Chairman, and as Minister of Planning he is in a position today to co-ordinate the work of all the commissions and committees and boards, all the investigations and reports. I have in my possession the report of the first committee on the White depopulation of the rural areas of 1932. It began as long ago as that. This Minister can now take positive action.

I want to allege that the future of the rural areas is going to determine the future of our country. Prof. Fourie, who has just been referred to, says the following in connection with the potential of the platteland—

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Humansdorp will excuse me if I do not follow him. He made a very interesting contribution and I think the hon. the Minister will want to react to it.

I am very pleased that I have the opportunity to change the view a little from here, south of the Hottentots Holland mountains, to the Transvaal where we also have problems. I want to put in a word this afternoon for a White group area in my constituency called Nancefield. Sir, you know that physical planning, which also includes proclamation of group areas, can mean that problems may sometimes arise by coincidence. There really is a problem here which I should like to bring to the attention of the Committee and the hon. the Minister and the department.

Originally there was a town that had been proclaimed in earlier years as a White town called Nancefield. In time a large portion of it was taken over for Coloured housing and it was then proclaimed as a Coloured group area. A part of it to the south of the Potchefstroom road unfortunately remained a White group area in terms of the proclamation of that time. This portion consists chiefly of dairy farmers who try to make a living there. During 1974 they addressed representations to the guide plan committee of the department in order to obtain industrial rights. The guide plan committee agreed that they could apply for industrial rights on those farms.

Apart from that there was a joint Press statement on 25 June 1976 by the Secretary of Planning and the Environment, and the Secretary for Community Development, which directed attention to Proclamation 112. That statement also appeared in the Government Gazette on the same day, as a result of which portions of the White group area at Klip River Estate, as well as the White group area of Nancefield, were deproclaimed and left controlled. Nancefield made place for Eldorado Park. Olifantsvlei, or that portion of it which we call the White portion of Nancefield, the portion which remained, remained a White group area. This territory is surrounded by Eldorado Park on the one hand, by Lenasia, an Indian area, on the other, and is situated to the south east of Soweto. The territory is also surrounded by the sewage farms of the Johannesburg City Council. It is a very small territory, Mr. Chairman; there are a limited number of stands and together with many others, these people tried to make a living there in the old days. Unfortunately, due to its situation and the fact that the territory is surrounded by other group areas, these people can no longer make a proper living. Stock thefts take place and their stock, which they are forced to herd across the main road to pasturage provided by the municipality of Johannesburg, are knocked down and killed. It is not possible for these people to carry on. I want to make a request today that since a portion of the land which belonged to the Department of Community Development and the Johannesburg City Council was included in the Coloured group area south of the Potchefstroom road, this portion to which I have just referred, the White group area of Nancefield, also be included in the Coloured group area. Those people will then be able to make a living elsewhere where they can continue their enterprise.

I actually want to ask for it to be incorporated in Eldorado Park for use by the Coloured group area and if the whole area there cannot be used for housing then it can be used for recreational purposes. I have already addressed written requests in this regard to the Departments of Community Development and Planning and the Environment during March this year, and I now want to ask very urgently that this should be looked at in order to see whether a way cannot be found to help these people.

Mr. Chairman, this has really been a historical day. We have experienced quite a number of historic effects and adventures, not the least of which is the fact that we are gathered in this very dignified Senate Chamber to discuss matters affecting people rather than goods. I think it is in accordance with the spirit prevailing here today that we should thrash out human affairs with one another. I also want to refer to a historic event that took place in the House earlier this afternoon which I would never have thought we would see during this session, namely, when the hon. member for Houghton went and sat next to the Minister of Police and voted against us with the Government. This to our mind was really interesting, and I am sure, Mr. Chairman, that the hon. the Leader of the Opposition, who has just left the Chamber, will make sure that this does not happen too often.

It is also interesting to note how history repeats itself. Before we entered this Senate Chamber, my hon. deputy, unpaid Whip told me to sit in this bench. I had only been here for a few minutes when I saw a certain name in front of me. Then I realized once again that history often repeats itself because I saw written before me “Senator Winchester”. I find it striking that it is actually the second time within six months that his seat has been given to me. I just want to thank him; it is a very convenient seat, and the situation is altogether fitting.

†Mr. Chairman, the item I wish to discuss with the hon. the Minister this afternoon is in keeping with the theme of the discussion we have had here. I trust the hon. member for Moorreesburg will forgive me if I do not follow him in terms of the context of the Group Areas Act although I would still like to refer to the people factor—that very important asset we have in South Africa. I trust the hon. the Minister will forgive me if I actually refer him to his Vote. I refer specifically to page 17-11, subhead “Research contributions and grants” to various organizations of which the most important one to which I should like to refer in the limited time at my disposal, is the grant made to the CSIR—the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research. Although we in this Chamber have made history today, I think it will be common knowledge among all the members present here and people throughout South Africa that a lot of history is made in a less dramatic fashion through the institutions which have been established in this wonderful country of ours, the Republic of South Africa. One such organization which does not get much publicity but which forms part of the portfolio of the hon. the Minister of Planning and the Environment, is the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research. We think of the pioneering work that has been done in South Africa at Groote Schuur Hospital here in Cape Town in the field of medicine but I should like to tell you that the CSIR and its subsidiary institutions are also making significant pioneering advances which the world, and in particular Africa, should take note of.

I refer to the amount of R2 268 700 budgeted for the CSIR. The heading next to that item reads “Research bursaries and grants to universities”. In this instance I do not want to refer specifically to the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research itself but to one of its subsidiary organizations, namely the National Institute for Personnel Research. I hope that the hon. the Minister will mentally change caps when I give him the motivation for what I have to discuss with him today and that you, Mr. Chairman, will allow him briefly to wear his cap as Minister of Health.

Will you please repeat the name of that Institute?

The National Institute for Personnel Research, the NIPR. I am assuming that out of that figure of approximately R2,268 million an allocation will be made to the Institute for Personnel Research which is a subsidiary of the CSIR.

The hon. the Minister may remember that some time ago we referred to Act 56 of 1974, the Medical, Dental and Supplementary Health Services Act. That brought about a momentous historical occasion in South Africa as well, namely the professionalization of psychologists. The point I want to make with the hon. the Minister today is that the effect of that Act is that the training requirements for individuals who wish to be called psychologists in South Africa, allows them to register without the necessary qualifications for a certain period of time. After the elapse of that time, however, it will be necessary for any individual wishing to be a psychologist to obtain an M.A. degree and to undertake a one-year internship. Those were the conditions laid down in the legislation passed under the hand and seal of the hon. the Minister namely, that these individuals had to do a Master’s degree and a one-year internship.

Having created those conditions in terms of legislation, for which the profession is extremely grateful, it is now incumbent upon us to see that the facilities are in fact made available for those individuals who wish to become psychologists. The unfortunate situation in South Africa today is that we find that the facilities for psychologists in all four categories, i.e. clinical, industrial, counselling and research, are extremely limited. I should like to refer this afternoon, because of the limited time at my disposal, to the category of industrial psychologists only. Unfortunately I do not have the time to talk about the other categories.

What has happened in this respect, Sir, is that having established the legal requirements for psychologists—quite correctly, registration of these psychologists with an M.A. degree and internship—we now find that there are very few internship facilities actually available to these people. They are coming out of the universities enthusiastic and keen. They are keener now than they have ever been before because they now have professional standing in the field of psychology. They leave university only to find that after they have completed their M.A. degree there are no facilities available to them to do their internship. There are approximately 15 of these graduates every year who are qualified in the field of industrial psychology. I have been approached by a considerable number of these for advice as to where they could go. Naturally I turned to the National Institute for Personnel Research which is really the greatest institute of its kind in Africa. In fact, it has few peers throughout the world. The essence of the problem is—my deputy Whip is making signs at me—that the National Institute for Personnel Research is not in a position to offer internships to M.A. students because it does not have the funds or facilities to do so. Only the Anglo-American Corporation and the Railways have thus far taken interns. I do not think it is fair that we should rely on private enterprise to provide internship training for industrial psychologists and I think provision should be made for this. I think a portion of the funds allocated to the National Institute for Personnel Research, or even additional funds, should be made available so that they can take in these interns. I do not expect them to take in the full 15 per year, but perhaps the hon. the Minister will consider this possibility and discuss it with the relevant authorities. They may be able to increase their establishment so that at least five or six industrial psychology trainees can be taken in per year. [Time expired.]

Order! Before I call upon the hon. member for Schweizer-Reneke, I just want to point out to hon. members that we are meeting here today as a Committee of the House of Assembly. It is therefore incorrect to refer to the proceedings in the House of Assembly as taking place in “the Other Place”. The Standing Rules and Orders refer to the proceedings in the House of Assembly as the proceedings of the House and to these as the proceedings of the Committee.

Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased that you have now explained the position to us. I felt as if I were here as a member of the Senate.

I want to make a second remark. I want to say that hon. members must not think that because this chamber is being used now, matters should be conducted in quite such a subdued manner as in the Senate. We would do well to debate this Vote a little. I feel things are much too calm.

I want to raise two matters to begin with. As hon. members know, I have asked on several occasions for a conference of regional development associations throughout South Africa to be held. I want to state today that such a conference was arranged and took place in November last year in the capital of the Free State, Bloemfontein, on a boiling hot day. I think we must ask the Secretary for Planning and Mr. Pretorius, the Chairman of the Planning Advisory Board of the Prime Minister, that if they plan such a conference again, they must bear in mind that Bloemfontein can really get very hot. We should rather find another place for such a conference.

Is it necessary for the hon. member to make the debate so heated?

I want to express my thanks to the department and the Planning Advisory Board of the Prime Minister for that conference. I want to say a few words about that conference, but I should also like to mention something else which I should like to place on record. Do you know, Mr. Chairman, it is probably true to say that the entire planning action in South Africa was born when the regional development associations were established. These people were responsible for the entire idea of planning. Over a number of years we progressed well with establishing regional development associations.

A certain person in the Department of Planning, Mr. Karel Reinecke, played a very big role in the functioning and establishment of regional development associations. We in this House are indebted to Mr. Reinecke for the tireless dedication that he showed, especially from the date when the national physical development plan was laid on the Table. When we express our thanks to Mr. Reinecke, we must ask the hon. the Minister and the department at the same time not to regard the position which Mr. Reinecke held and the contact that he made with regional development associations as something of the past now. I think the position must be filled and the same work must continue. We thank Mr. Reinecke for the change that he made.

If I may refer briefly to the conference that took place last year, for which we have expressed our thanks, there is one thing which stood out head and shoulders above everything else at that conference, and that is that there is not yet a correct attitude towards planning in South Africa. Our people in South Africa do not yet know what planning means. When I say our people in South Africa, I do not simply want to cast reflections on people who know what planning is. However, since planning is actually something which is done for the people of the relevant area, I say that the people in South Africa do not yet know what planning is. We shall have to continue to work very hard in order to implant the idea of planning amongst our people. With the establishment of the regional development associations in 1927, we saw how the first regional development association was established in the Eastern Cape, and how, as the idea of planning took hold within those regional development associations, another regional development association was established, bordering on that territory. It expanded in this way until after a while a large network of regional development associations came into being. These were the people who saw to it that regard was had to the natural resources of South Africa at the beginning of the forties. In 1944 these people saw to it that we took the first step in regard to planning in South Africa, viz. when the Social and Economic Planning Board was appointed to investigate the needs of planning and came to the conclusion that planning had become essential. It was also as a result of the attempts of these people that we had the Natural Resources Act in 1947, and the Natural Resources Development Council was established as a result of the Natural Resources Act. We can continue in this vein. The Natural Resources Development Council continued, stimulated by the ideas of the people for whom the planning was being done, until ultimately, at the beginning of the sixties, viz. in 1964, the Department of Planning was established.

If we look at these things now, we see that certain things happened in the process. Once again today we have been speaking of decentralization and I want to associate myself 100% with those who ask for decentralization. If we made mistakes in the past, we must admit them. We decentralized and denoted places as growth points in a decentralization process, merely by making use of certain norms at that stage. One of the norms which we used—other hon. members mentioned it here today—was merely the colour factor. I am mentioning the colour factor in particular now and not necessarily the labour factor. The concept of decentralization is an economic one. If one decentralizes in any country of the world, including South Africa, one is not simply decentralizing merely because one has labour in certain places and other things in other places. One decentralizes because one wants to establish an orderly programme of development for one’s country. We in South Africa must be careful that we do not pass beyond the point where we can still decentralize. In connection with the development of the metropolitan area as it is, hon. members mentioned figures of how many morgen of industrial land are still being brought in. We could mention examples of where an infrastructure was created at great expense at some of these large growth points and where that infrastructure is stagnant today and no further development is taking place. Decentralization in South Africa means more than simply looking at where business must be done in this country. There are many things that can be incorporated here. The most important thing that must be incorporated here, however, is the need amongst our people for decentralization.

I refer once again to where these ideas of planning arose. The idea of planning did not arise in a metropolitan area where the local government or the town council or whatever established a type of planning situation. The need arose amongst other bodies. We must take note of this. We were responsible for this, and I get very excited when I think of it. We had the National Physical Development Plan. We divided the country into 38 areas for development over and above the metropolitan areas. Granted, economic problems may arise at this stage. We did all these things as a result of our enthusiasm to achieve them, but what do we do now, having indicated 38 regions with 38 growth points, which must be developed within those regions? Whereas we had ideas of decentralization in the past, in terms of which people could decentralize to certain areas, it will eliminate 80% of our problems today, if not more, if we make a proper effort to create stimulants for these growth points in 38 regions. That is decentralization! We have already pointed out an inherent growth point in each particular area by pointing out these 38 growth poles, and these are power points which have a certain percentage of growth in themselves. It will be good money that we are using then. We will not be stimulating growth and development in a barren world which has not provided anything itself. We have a growth point here. We already have a source of power which just has to be supplemented further. I want to ask today that we should bear in mind that with this wave of enthusiasm that has carried us towards the establishment of these 38 regions, we should really take a look at what incentives we can give in order to develop these growth points.

Mr. Chairman, everyone undoubtedly felt as I did today at the commencement of this historic debate; there was something that struck me immediately when I entered the Other Place this afternoon which is not the Other Place today. The peaceful atmosphere which generally prevails here is something that strikes one immediately. I also want to express at the outset my thanks to the President of the Senate, if that is in order. I want to express my gratitude to the President of the Senate and hon. Senators for agreeing to our entering also this sanctuary to say the things we sometimes say and which are sometimes considered unparliamentary. It is a House with a special atmosphere and in a certain sense we are honoured to be able to hold a meeting here.

Mr. Chairman, I have listened to a number of speakers and we have already conducted a fairly lengthy debate. I wanted to enter the debate earlier on already, but I suppose that that is not relevant now. I felt that hon. members should rather have their say in full, and I was pleasantly surprised by the variety of matters that were raised here this afternoon.

†In the first instance, Mr. Chairman, I want to refer to the hon. member for Bryanston. The hon. the Deputy Minister replied to him to a certain extent, but nevertheless there are certain matters that he raised that I feel I too should refer to. In my opinion it was a somewhat disappointing introduction. He started off very well and raised some good points, but then he became negative in his criticism. I know it is very easy to criticize, but as he continued with his speech I came to the conclusion that he did not realize what a vast area of activity this department has to cover. This is a department that is gradually making progress but at the same time it is also accumulating certain functions which do not seem to fall within the ambit of other departments. Therefore, as we progress we will have to try to rectify these matters. I can however assure him that with the expert knowledge we have and the plans we have in mind, we will be able to solve many of these problems within the next few years. As planners we also have to plan and make provision for deficiencies that are usually inherent in planning departments all over the world.

The hon. member started off by advocating central planning action. He was not really planning co-ordination as he said later in his speech; he was planning a super department. If that is so, one cannot speak about coordination as this actually means that one must not coerce people but rather coax them. When one speaks about co-ordination one cannot at the same time speak about a super department which has to have coercive powers. In an instance such as this it is actually only the Prime Minister who can really make his power felt.

The hon. member spoke about agricultural land. It is true that we are perturbed about the fact that a substantial part of our agricultural land may slowly be going by the board because of the effect that various projects and developments have on the environment; for instance, the effect that roads sometimes have and even the coal mines which he referred to. But in our Act provision is made to enable us to co-ordinate with the Department of Transport. We are really perturbed about this matter. We also have a constant liaison with the Department of Agricultural Technical Services as far as the preservation of agricultural land is concerned. Of that I can assure the hon. member. Last year the Ministry of Planning and the Environment and the Administrators got together and had a nice long discussion on this matter, and we decided on a procedure to follow in an effort to prevent the rape of the land because of the lack of co-ordination. We have come to an understanding in regard to a procedure to be followed, but these things do not happen overnight. They sometimes take considerable time.

As far as the coal mines are concerned we have come to an understanding with the owners of these mines and they are doing excellent work. I have visited these open-cast mines. I had a look at the conservation measures and was impressed by their efforts to try, right from the start, to rectify some of the bad effects of this type of coal mining. I was really pleasantly surprised to see how they co-operate on these mines. These people are doing a magnificent job in healing the environmental trauma that they have caused. Of that I can assure the hon. member. I would suggest that he visit these mines in the Eastern Transvaal and see for himself what is being done.

As far as the provinces and the new dispensation are concerned, I do not think that my department can reply at this moment. We consider ourselves, from a service point of view, as a department that can perhaps respond after a policy has finally been laid down. But at the present moment we are not in a position to say what the future set-up should be. There was some criticism of lack of direction directed at our address. As I said at the start, it is easy to criticize but hon. members should refer to the annual reports of the department for the past few years. Perhaps then they will realize how we have had our functions increased over the past few years. The hon. member will also realize that what he will find in those reports belies the accusations he made against us. I do however appreciate his concern about many matters and in fact do not completely disagree with him. Indeed, I do not want to be negative at all.

*Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Kuruman as well as the hon. member for Humansdorp referred to the rural areas and paid particular attention to the depopulation of those areas. I want to refer them, however, to the National Physical Development Plan about which I shall speak later this afternoon or this evening when I shall again refer to the depopulation of the rural areas. We are not at all opposed to investigating the possibility of establishing industries in smaller towns because some industries can be established in smaller towns with good results. This is only feasible, however, in certain circumstances because one cannot of course simply establish industries indiscriminately. It is, naturally, true that any local authority worth its salt will do everything in its power to draw industries to its region and to encourage development. But as a Government department that must take a broad overall view, we can of course not accept that as general policy. On the other hand we are fully aware of the importance of that specific region and we do in fact have a guide plan for that region. Indeed, I foresee good prospects for that region—of that I can assure the hon. member—although I cannot give particulars now.

†The hon. member for Berea spoke about the environment. He spoke most appreciatively of what is being done and had a good understanding of the problems in regard to the environment that confront us. Perhaps he was worried about certain steps which, in his view, could be taken but which at the moment are not getting the necessary attention. I just want to make one remark in that regard as I think the hon. the Deputy Minister will reply to it if he has not already done so. I can assure the hon. member that I am just as concerned as he is about this matter. At the moment we are investigating all the possibilities of recycling, the bio-mass proportions, and the question of producing energy from refuse. All these matters are being investigated at the moment by the energy sub-division of my department.

*The hon. member for Caledon spoke about the Overberg. Unfortunately the hon. member could not say much about it, but let me say now what I feel he would have said. I feel that he should try even harder to sell the Overberg* for us, because it is a special region with special people. I think that even the figures he mentioned prove that things are not going too badly in the Overberg. I do not know whether he intended making a further request, but I think that for an agricultural region things are not going too badly there. Nor do I think we should try to accelerate or change processes unduly if things are going well in a region. We must see what happens there in the future, and we take note of what he said. As far as I am concerned, he spoke of a region of which I am very fond.

The hon. member for Moorreesburg replied to the remarks of the hon. member for Bryanston about the Langebaan lagoon. I also have a soft spot for the Langebaan lagoon and the surrounding area. It is a region which I know from my childhood. As the hon. member correctly said, it is a distinct asset for the Western Cape. One can consider it from a tourist point of view and from the point of view of natural resources, recreational facilities, sports facilities and, if one wants to put it that way, weather conditions at a certain time of the year. I nevertheless want to tell the hon. member—I think he is aware of the fact because he put the matter in the right light—that we have been involved with that type of investigation since 1974. As regards the Langebaan lagoon, there is more than one committee involved in investigations. Dr. Hey’s ecological committee has since 1975 been involved in a comprehensive investigation of the potential of the Langebaan lagoon. That committee is particularly concerned about the lagoon itself and the control exercised over it. A very good committee report was published at the end of 1976. I met some of the people who served on it. We spoke about that matter. All of them were concerned about how the land around the lagoon should be utilized, land which belongs to various bodies like the State, the Department of Agricultural Credit and Land Tenure, private owners, the Defence Force and the Railways. One must not complain that everyone is doing just as he pleases there; it is not true. The hon. the Minister of Economic Affairs did in fact announce that he intended declaring it a marine reserve. From a legal point of view, however, he has rights over the surface area of the sea, and as such he was merely acting within his rights. In any event, he has not yet taken that step. In cooperation with industry—this is where the question of co-ordination comes in and perhaps the hon. member does not realize it— there is continual co-ordination and they are now engaged in planning with regard to the sea area. We give them advice on how that area will be used. Plans are made together with regard to the area of the sea and how it will be utilized, as well as to the ecology and the measures to be taken to protect it. In this regard other bodies are in turn drawn in. Furthermore, the use to which the land is to be put is also planned. This indicates that there is co-operation. The Defence Force has certain requirements. Their needs have been met and this is not going to be such a disadvantage to the Langebaan lagoon that it cannot remain the asset which it is at the moment. Investigations so far indicate that there is very little pollution. We are very much up on the problems at the Langebaan lagoon and I can assure the hon. member that there is good co-ordination here. I myself quietly spent two days there in order to inspect everything. Consequently the hon. member does not have to be worried about the matter.

I do not want to reply to all the other criticism of the hon. member with regard to conflicting interests. It is true. One will find conflicting interests when it comes to the Department of Planning, which is not a super department. Seven years ago we had no laws; today we already have at least two or three laws that we can apply. Some of the laws are criticized and others are in turn approved of. In this way one gets ahead. One must try to coax the public to one’s side; one cannot do it by coercion. These are Government departments which have determined their own actions, functions and policy for many years. We are very successful in that regard.

†The hon. member for Pinelands referred to the fact that section 3 of the Planning Act was responsible for a certain amount of unemployment. He specifically referred to unemployment and that was the main point he made. I can only say that the hon. the Deputy Minister did reply to him. Last year we had 41 000 requests for additional Bantu in terms of this Act. 35 000 of these requests were acceded to. I think it amounts to a very high percentage. Many of those that were not acceded to was not because we did not want those people there. It was not even because of influx control in most cases. In many cases it was because those people were not needed. Some of them that could decentralize, did not want to do so. We have been in contact with the industrialists and the Garment Workers Union, etc. Since 1976 when we all realized that we were in a position of economic decline and that we should at least pay very careful attention to the effect of an Act of this sort—even though it may be minimal—and that we should not be harsh on these people, I have since last year stopped all legal prosecutions against them. We come together from time to time. It is however not for these people to abuse our tendency to be lenient and this will serve to convince the hon. member that we realize the problems we are confronted with at the moment. I can only say that as far as the Bantu worker and the general labour problems are concerned, Dr. Rickert of the Prime Minister’s office is conducting a research into this at the moment. I shall consequently not prejudge the issue in this instance.

*The hon. member for Namaqualand spoke about Namaqualand. That is my part of the world too. That region has a great mineral potential. Last year I struggled at least to get the Aggeneis road on the books. The potential the hon. member sketched for us here this afternoon proves the tremendous riches present in South Africa. I could possibly say more but at the moment it would not be wise on my part to say how great this potential is considered to be in actual fact. Perhaps he, as an attorney, is more knowledgeable than I. Mr. Chairman, I want to assure him that the inhabitants’ right of employment will always be taken into account. The strategic potential of Namaqualand as well as the resources that the hon. member mentioned are aspects which are always being considered by us. He will also see in the National Physical Development Plan that we actually consider Namaqualand as a potential growth pole. Consequently he does not have to foresee any problems as regards our interest in this region.

The hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central also made much of the fact that section 3 may cause unemployment. The hon. member should first have looked at the figures. The hon. member specifically referred to the extension of factories. Last year we received 68 applications for extensions to factories and 64 of them were granted. This affected only 247 Bantu in a region that is known as a Coloured preference labour area. I do not think my calculation is completely correct, but there were approximately 4 000 Bantu. It may be far fewer. Let us assume there are 60 Bantu per factory. Since 64 factories were approved, it meant that we admitted almost 4 000 Bantu. It could have also been 3 000.

The hon. member for Schweizer-Reneke was the last member to speak. He made a particularly informative and interesting speech. Is the hon. member still here? I see the hon. member is still here. The hon. member is one of the people who worked hard to have regional development in South Africa come into its own. He is a leader in his area and was one of the first men to really show understanding for the way in which we were able to give substance to regional development, fitting the economic regional development programme in with the National Physical Development Plan. The first Regional Development Advisory Committee was also established there and the hon. member plays a special role in it.

†I did not forget about the speech made by the hon. member for Durban North; I did not refer to it because some of my notes got lost. The hon. member referred to the National Institute for Personnel Research. I cannot find any information about this Institute in the Annual Report of the CSIR or in any of my documents. I can therefore not tell the hon. member anything about this body except what I know from my knowledge of another department. The National Institute for Personnel Research is involved with various departments. It may be that the Medical Research Council is responsible for it, whereas in respect of other matters the responsible body may be the CSIR. I was very happy to hear the kind remarks made by the hon. member about the CSIR and I will go into the matters raised by him. He did not have an opportunity of completing his speech, but I think he was a little perturbed about the fact that there are no facilities for research by industrial psychologists …

Internees!

Yes, the internees. An internee may sometimes mean somebody who is under detention. I would not want psychologists to be under detention unless they are some other kind of psychologists.

*Mr. Chairman, I think I have now replied to all the matters raised by hon. members excepting for a matter put forward by the hon. member for Maraisburg. He raised a question to which I must give attention. Unfortunately I cannot at this stage give him a direct answer to it. The Grassmere-Lawley-Mansfield complex, to which the hon. member referred, has already been proclaimed as far as group areas are concerned. I took note of the problems of the number of Whites living in that region who feel surrounded. This is a matter we shall have to look at with understanding, but I cannot tell the hon. member now what we are going to do in that regard. There are many details involved here, but now that I have referred to that, I am obliged, both morally and otherwise in view of my duties towards this Committee, to supply him with an answer to that. I think, however, it is a matter that can be discussed further in order to determine what we can do about it. We are all trying to bring about harmony in that region which has become a large Coloured and Indian area. I content myself for the meantime with the few remarks I have made.

Mr. Chairman, we are all agreed in this Committee that the new procedure we are adopting is auspicious of an improvement in our system. I think it would be wrong to allow such an occasion to pass and such a debate as we are now having without devoting serious attention to the question of energy, a question which I believe has been largely neglected in this debate. I believe it is time that we devoted some attention to it.

The Minister of Planning and the Environment made a statement through a press correspondent some time ago, which appeared in The Citizen of 10 January, in which he said that a new energy policy for South Africa is well advanced. He said he would release more details on the whole matter within weeks. He said that his ministry was co-ordinating the efforts of several departments and other organizations to formulate the policy. He was asked by the Press correspondent whether he would agree to the proposals which have been made for the creation of a department of energy. The Minister said that he thought a department of energy was necessary but that there was no urgent need for it. The departments working together in the drafting of the energy policy are those of Planning and the Environment, as the co-ordinator, and the Departments of Mining, Industry, Transport and Finance.

I believe this report might be deficient in certain respects and I do not necessarily hold the Minister responsible, but I do want to say at the outset that I should be very surprised if the hon. the Minister had said that the need for a co-ordinated energy policy, and even the creation of a department to handle that coordinated energy policy, was not an urgent matter. I shall come back a little later in my speech to the reasons why it is urgent and why members of his own department are on record as indicating the urgency of that matter. I also believe that when he talks about the Departments of Mining, Industry, Transport and Finance as being those departments who should be co-ordinated in energy policy, there is obviously a serious omission in the case of the Department of Economic Affairs, because the Minister of Economic Affairs is in fact charged with the greater part of the control of oil and our oil resources in South Africa, the control of the measures which are taken to conserve oil and to reduce our dependence on oil. I am quite sure that in the statement the hon. the Minister was incorrectly reported.

He omitted to mention it.

Yes, I believe that is so. I would like to go further and I hope the hon. the Minister will continue to agree with me. On an occasion like this where we have to deal with the co-ordination of policy emanating from various departments, we should really have taken advantage of the occasion by ensuring that the Ministers of Mining and Economic Affairs are present at this debate. There is no occasion in Parliament where the various elements of our energy policy can be discussed simultaneously. There is no system whereby we can bring the whole of this complex and important subject together in one place for debate. I believe that this innovation which we are enjoying for the first time today, would in fact provide such an opportunity. I must personally express my disappointment that advantage was not taken of this opportunity to bring together the Ministers of the departments concerned. If we are serious about co-ordinating our energy policy then there must surely be some occasion within the Parliamentary spectrum when we can all get together and discuss energy and where the various Ministers, who are directly involved and carry separately responsibilities in this important field, will in fact participate in the debate and allow members to question them about various aspects during the debate.

I believe that we are studying improvements to the system and the manner in which we are conducting Parliamentary affairs. Energy is a new dimension which the country has to take very seriously. If it is not yet possible to create a department of energy or a ministry of energy, the various parts must somehow be brought together not only in the Executive, but also in the Legislature, so that we may discuss policy matters with the people responsible for formulating it. It is hardly necessary to emphasize the importance of energy, not only as a major aspect of this department’s responsibilities, but also as a major aspect of policy making for South Africa as a whole. I refer, for example, to an article which appeared in Scientiae, a journal of the CSIR, an article largely compiled by Dr. D. J. Kotzé, director of Energy in the Department of Planning and the Environment, to whom I must refer with some praise for the work which he is doing and the clarity of whose writings are of great assistance to all those who are involved or interested in the energy problem in South Africa. He says the following—

*He then refers to uranium and to our uranium deposits, in regard to which one does perhaps not agree with him altogether, except where he does make the point that also in respect of uranium as a fuel we shall not be able to meet our own needs for a very long time.

Continuing, he ends with these words—

However, he lays down the following conditions—

That is to say, the first task of the Department of Planning is to see to it that energy wastage is stopped. He goes on to say—

These are three major tasks. It is gratifying to learn that the hon. the Minister regards the energy side of his department as being very important. He has promised to come forward with a new policy this year. We are looking forward to that; we trust that the policy as announced will be adequate to meet all these requirements that I have read out. But I want to tell the hon. the Minister now—and I think that in his heart he will agree with me—that if we want to meet these requirements, the present co-ordinating function of the department is not sufficient. More should be done; not only should there be a department which will act in a co-ordinating capacity in respect of other departments and their interests, but a new department should be created. A new structural change should be brought about so that energy, which is acknowledged to be a matter of life and death for the future of South Africa, may receive the attention it deserves.

†Mr. Chairman, I believe that it is hardly necessary and hardly possible to overemphasize the significance of this subject. I believe that anyone who looks seriously at the resources of South Africa and at the needs of South Africa, and looks at the kind of predictions that are made about the exhaustion of our reserves and the essential dependence on energy to assist mankind, to prevent over-pollution, to prevent the exhaustion of its material resources, knows that none of these things can be done without the employment of energy and the abundant creation of energy. I believe that energy is therefore a key to our continued existence as a nation in Southern Africa, as it is to other people in other parts of the world. I believe that to underestimate this thing would be a grave disservice to South Africa. I believe that the structural changes which are necessary, the powers that need to be taken, are not, as this newspaper article suggests, a matter of nonurgency. I believe if we do not start now we may well be too late. I could go on to plead with endless examples how in fact the present structure is inadequate to our purpose. I have many quotations here to show what is happening to our coal resources, and the planning that needs to be done. That falls under the Minister of Mines, and this hon. Minister, though he may be a co-ordinator, is not the Minister of Mines. I believe the time has come to bring all these things together in order that we may have a single policy which is both intelligent and effective.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Constantia asked certain questions and discussed certain matters in connection with energy. I am convinced that the hon. the Minister will answer him on that.

Sir, I should very much like to use the time at my disposal to speak about planning in the region which I want to call the greater Western Cape, and which is called the territory west of the Humansdorp-Colesberg line in the Theron Report. If we look at this area, there are a few things that strike us immediately. Firstly, it is the oldest part of our South African civilization; it undoubtedly boasts some of the finest scenery in South Africa; it is the territory which the Coloured people can rightfully consider the place of their origin and the source of their being. Historically, it is the area which belongs to White and Coloured, and to which the Black peoples in South Africa have no claim whatsoever. It is therefore in the nature of things the area where White and Coloured complement one another and where they arost closely allied. I believe, too, that this alliance cannot be denied. Agriculture provides a good example of this and I believe that it applies to practically all facets of the labour market and of the community.

Under the National Government we have had fine development in this region over the past 30 years, especially in regard to the residential areas for Coloureds and Whites. I believe we can point to the double-town system with pride, but we can also point to the creation of urban complexes like Atlantis and Mitchell’s Plain. In the industrial sphere, too, projects have been completed in this region. I refer to the Saldanha project in particular, which offered our Coloured people a great opportunity to hold their own in the industrial sector. At the moment there are only approximately 42 Black people employed at the Saldanha project. In this region, the greater Western Cape west of the Humansdorp-Colesberg line, we find that the centre of education for the Coloureds has been established at the University of the Western Cape. We find the centre of their legislation here in the Coloured Persons’ Representative Council. We find that the largest portion of the 2 million ha of agricultural land which belongs to them falls within this region, and we also find here the centre of their military training, viz. the Coloured Corps. The Government has never concealed its policy with regard to the Western Cape, viz. that it is a priority area for Coloured labour. In other words, it is essentially the labour area of Whites and Coloureds.

A geographic analysis of the Coloured people indicates that 87,3% of them are resident in the Cape Province, and that more than half of the Coloured people, namely 51,6%, are housed in the area known as the South-Western Cape. Thirty per cent of the total Coloured population is resident in Cape Town and the surrounding area. I think I have now given enough proof in support of my earlier statement, viz. that this region belongs to the White and Coloured population groups, both historically and traditionally.

There are, however, some disconcerting facts, the most important of which is probably the increase of Black people in this region. Census data indicates that the number of Black people in Cape Town and surroundings increased by 43,5% from 1960 to 1970. In 1970 there were 108 000 Black people in Cape Town. In the Western Cape as a whole the rate of increase was 6,3% and the number present was approximately 200 000 in 1970. Witnesses appearing before the Theron Commission emphasized the illegal employment of Black workers. A large portion of them are either unemployed, or make a living by occasional work on farms, in the building industry, in trade on a small scale or by engaging in other sub-marginal or illegal activities in the informal sector. In 1966 there were 35 000 migrant labourers in this area, and in January 1975 there were 120 000. I think the reason for this is that Bantu labour in this area is relatively cheap.

We are therefore faced with a real problem here, viz. that in the region under discussion the Coloured population is in danger of being supplanted by cheap Black labour and that the large number of Black men in this area has had disadvantageous social consequences for Coloured people, particularly those with a low standard of living.

The image of this region, of the Western Cape, is being damaged by Black squatter camps which do not belong here and which are erected by people who do not belong here. When these squatter camps have to be demolished, there is criticism from the Opposition. I want to say this afternoon that it damages the image of the Western Cape. The most important consequence to my mind is that it disadvantageously effects the good relationship between White and Coloured. I say this with trepidation, but I believe it is true. It makes certain Coloured leaders wonder whether the Whites, in spite of what is being done and said, are sincere in their approach. The question is being raised by some of those leaders whether their interests are being protected and whether they are not being sold down the river.

I know that many departments are involved in this matter, but since the Department of Planning and the Environment has a coordinating function—and I accept that it is not the top department—I want to ask for three things this afternoon. First of all, the territory west of the Humansdorp-Colesberg line must be accepted as a nucleus for Whites and Coloureds and the Government’s policy as regards preferential labour must be implemented.

And the rest of the country for the Blacks.

I am not asking for the disruption of our economy. I am only asking that the historic and traditional state of affairs be restored in this region. In the greater Western Cape, this region west of the Humansdorp-Colesberg line, we are not obliged to provide foreign Blacks with work. We do, however, have that obligation towards the Coloured people of this area. That is the first thing I want to ask for. It must be the nucleus, the growth-point for White and Coloured, where foreign Blacks have no right at all.

The second thing I want to ask is that this Humansdorp-Colesberg line be firmly drawn in view of the policy that lease-hold is to be granted to Black people in urban areas. The number of foreigners in this region must be drastically reduced. I am convinced that, if we do this, we shall be able to create growth-points in this specific region for both White and Coloured, but especially for our Coloured people, by means of proper planning.

Thirdly, I want to ask that a master plan be developed for this region. It must encompass the creation of a new growth-point in South Africa where Whites and Coloureds will be able to complement one another and where our new constitutional dispensation can be implemented successfully. It will be put into effect there. As I have indicated, the vast majority of our Coloured people in the Cape Province live in this area in particular. We shall be able to implement the new constitutional dispensation successfully there. It is not a question of the Western Cape wanting its own way as regards the Blacks. It is a question of orderly planning, it is a question of the interests of South Africa and the interests of the Coloured population group, as well as of the White people in this region.

Mr. Chairman, I want to congratulate the hon. member for Oudtshoorn on his speech. I want to talk about a new chapter which is dawning in South Africa’s history, namely the civilization of the sea. I want to talk about this most important resource which covers some 97,3% of the earths surface. Because this Department acts as the co-ordinating body for all matters of the inter-governmental oceanographic commission relating to South Africa and because the Oceanographic Research unit falls under the CSIR, which is part of this Department, and because the Department of Planning and the Environment is a department with much experience in multi-disciplinary activities and acts as a co-ordinating authority, I raise the subject here. We have one of the longest coastlines in the world and when we increased the limit of our territorial waters to 200 miles we increased the area over which we have jurisdiction by some 50%. This area includes important fishing grounds, manganese deposits, and so on. As we had a land rush in the 1850s, we now see that internationally there is a scramble for the sea. We will have to take account of that. We have a trust over these very important marine resources and we will have to develop, in my view, a total marine policy and national strategy in respect of marine affairs.

I want to mention very briefly in the short time available to me some of the challenges which lie ahead for this kind of marine activity, i.e. the scramble for the sea. There will be a demand for marine management. The new ocean technology is creating vast opportunities but it is also making grave assaults upon the sea and creating difficulties. These problems are worldwide and we have seen them manifested here in the dramatic case of the Venpet and Venoil collision.

We have to ascertain what training is required in respect of the marine future which faces South Africa. As new technologies develop the relevant institutions will have to gear themselves to meet those challenges. Many of them, like the J. L. B. Smith Institute of Ichthyology at Rhodes has the expertise to start training in the more practical and applied fields, and without having to expand too much, it can go into the field of fisheries science, and so on. These are sciences which badly need to be developed.

We have to look at sources and the management of capital for marine projects. These will have to be identified, and the resources that we have will have to be rationalized. I just want to mention this briefly in passing. I know, for example, that the Fisheries Division of the Department of Industries does not have enough money and cannot obtain funds for a boat which it needs, among other things, to monitor the ocean, whereas the Navy Hydrographic Department, of course, does have ships at sea all the time which might be able to assist. Then, of course, there are competing demands, conflicts both national and international, which are occurring and will increasingly occur as we move away from traditional fish collecting as an activity on the sea. We see the Law of the Seas now grappling with the situation. I know that this Department is being assisted by the Department of Foreign Affairs which is holding a watching brief for us at the Law of the Seas conference.

Fish farming will however become more and more important. The present system of fish collecting that we are following is actually archaic. We cast our nets upon the waters like they did in Gallilee at the time of Christ. This is inefficient in so far as we are interrupting the food cycle at the third, fourth or seventh level. It is a most inefficient way of converting to protein. We know for example that 10 000 tons of algae are required to be consumed to produce one ton of tuna meat whereas a cow can convert protein at a ratio of 10 to one. There is an enormous difference in the efficiency.

In the article Koeberg Prawns by H. F. B. Champion in the January edition of the South African Atomic Energy Board publication a few figures are quoted. In encouraging the use of thermal energy for aquaculture he quotes the following figures which are an eye-opener. The one is that cattle grazing on pastureland have a yield of between 6 and 308 kg per ha; fish on the continental shelf, 25 to 75 kg per ha. When one looks at oyster culture, one finds that in Japan it is 57 500 kg/ha (flesh only), conversion rate. When one looks at mussel culture in Spain one finds it is 240 000 kg per ha, which is an amazing difference and I think should be brought to the attention of the House. When we look at the worldwide position of aquaculture between 1973 and 1975 we find that the yield increased by one million tons, from 5 million to 6 million tons. When we look internationally at the old traditional capture fisheries, we see that from 1971 to 1975 it remained static at the 1971 figure. By means of new technology, the catching of new varieties of fish, new fishing fields and so on fishing countries were able to keep production static in spite of the fact that Jacques Cousteau tells us that the cod catch decreased by 22%, the haddock catch by 42% and the herring catch by 64%, and we know that the whale population now is 10% of what it was at the turn of the century. It is therefore obvious that we need to reform and we need new initiatives to save and maintain our traditional fish resources. Then we have the mining of nickel, copper, cobalt and manganese nodules at a depth of 4 800 metres under the sea south-west of San Diego in the Horn belt. These minerals have been formed either by extrusion from the earth’s crust or by precipitation caused by the ionization of particles.

These minerals are being formed faster than we can mine them. We find that 15% of the world’s petroleum comes from the continental shelf. In South West Africa we ourselves are mining diamonds. We have gold and platinum being mined off the Alaskan coast. We have tin being dredged off the shelves of Malaysia, Indonesia and Thailand. We can talk of making the deserts bloom. We know that 85% of all farming on earth depends only on 0,001% of the water which is stored in the clouds. Most of this precipitates and falls over the sea.

The population of the world is rapidly increasing, and the stable element in the world population is only 4%. The world population doubles every 25 or 30 years. When one looks at Japan, for instance, where 90% to 95% of the land is irrigated, one finds that their rice production is between 6 and 7 tons per ha, whereas in the rest of Asia where only 15% to 20% of the land is irrigated, the production is only 1 to 2 tons per ha. Here again the sea will have to play its role. There is the possibility of harnessing the tides which is already being done in parts of France. There is also the possibility that the heat which is absorbed by the sea may be harnessed, where the sea currents and layers of water act as a great natural concentrators of solar energy. Indeed, successful experiments have already been carried out in that regard since 1929.

We have problems of pollution, acid precipitation, DDT accumulation, and so forth. In that regard, in the conservation field, mankind appears curiously unaware of how he is threatened by marine degradation. We shall have to wake up and begin to monitor the changes that are taking place at sea, conditions which are changing rapidly for the worse.

That brings me to my final argument and plea to the hon. the Minister. I want to say to him that I believe we need a total marine policy and strategy, and I want to suggest that the Department investigate the possibility of creating a permanent council on marine affairs, similar to the Council for the Environment. I think we should establish or investigate the possibility of establishing a Council for Marine Affairs. Such a council could develop a total marine policy, a total marine strategy for South Africa’s future. The people who could serve on such a council would be marine biologists, marine geologists, specialists in the science of fisheries, sea law specialists, officials of the Marine Parks Board and the Natal Marine Park Board, of the Department of Transport, of the Division of Fisheries of the Department of Industries etc—in other words, people who have experience in regard to marine affairs. Such a council could co-ordinate the various disciplines and also marine activities in the various departments. It could also correlate centralized experience and build up a library of marine information. This would enable us to develop skills to explore the new South Africa, to exploit the sea and to conserve our wonderful marine resources for future generations.

Mr. Chairman, before I address a few comments to the hon. member for Maitland, I wish to associate my party with the remarks of the hon. the Minister of Planning and the Environment in his tribute to the President of the Senate and to hon. Senators who have seen fit to permit us the use of this Chamber. This, we in the NRP believe, will go a long way towards streamlining the work of Parliament. We welcome the establishment of these Standing Committees and we look forward to the work continuing in this Chamber until Monday, 5 June.

I have always enjoyed listening to the thoughts of the hon. member for Maitland. I compliment him on his speech here today. He made an excellent contribution. I enjoyed working with the hon. member while we were in the same party, and I know that he is a dedicated environmentalist. I think that his thinking on the environment transcends all party political thought, and this is as it should be. I believe that the environment and our concern for the environment should not in any way be encumbered by party political thought.

Sir, the hon. member for Maitland spoke of fish and fishing. I want to speak more of man and his environment on the land. It is a well-known fact that we South Africans are lovers of the outdoors. What do we love most on a Saturday and a Sunday but to get outside into sunny South Africa. We have a country and we have an environment that we are entitled to be proud of. In fact, visitors to our country all express their envy of our natural habitat. This country of ours is one of natural and unspoilt beauty; it is one that we can show off at all times. But Sir, unfortunately, it is being spoilt by the gradual encroachment of a person that, I regret to say, belongs to the species homo sapiens, i.e. the litterbug. Regretably, the litterbug is becoming one of the scourges of this country. He, that human animal, is something that we must make every effort to eliminate. My personal awareness of this everincreasing problem has been sharpened by the facts that were brought to light in evidence placed before the Select Committee on Disposable Containers on which I had the privilege to serve.

The Committee has now been turned into a Commission of Inquiry, and there is a lot of work yet to do. I naturally do not wish to deal, and will not deal, with what is going on in that Commission. But, Sir, I believe that 90% of the effort to eliminate the litterbug should be focused on education; in parental education, in school education and in adult education. And when I say adult education, I ask members of this Committee: How often have you and I travelled behind a motor-car and watched sweet wrappers fluttering from every window? How often have we not seen cigarette butts—cigarette ends as we call them—being flicked out of the window of the car travelling in front of us. This, as we all know, could cause a fire.

It is old Punt’s car.

I do not think that we should take the hon. the Deputy Minister to task on that; I have not seen him do it yet. Motorists should be warned of the dire consequences that could follow actions such as this and heavy fines should be introduced.

Mr. Chairman, we humans are strange animals; we have an anti-litter campaign at rugby matches. I remember that last year we had bags for our naartjie peels. These bags were handed out and everybody spoke of the wonderful effect that they had and how clean the stadiums looked after matches. But I am a racegoer and I would ask any hon. member of this Committee to visit any race course in South Africa on a Wednesday or a Saturday afternoon and to look at the state of the grounds during and after a race meeting. It is a strange thing, Sir, but during a race meeting, for some reason which I can never understand, people take it as a matter of course that losing tickets are dropped on the ground. The place is left in an absolute shambles; there is no other way to describe it; it is an utter mess. There should be some sort of control. Here we are virtually saying to people: “Very well, throw your tickets on the ground”. The racing clubs should be encouraged through the provinces to stop this sort of littering because this is setting a bad example to people. As I have said earlier, people then go away and think that they can throw anything wherever they want to. We turn a blind eye to the most appalling littering that takes place; we allow it on a race course. How on earth then can we then legislate against it anywhere else?

The international symbol that depicts the place where litter should be deposited should be more prominently displayed. I think people should be made more aware of its meaning. We all know it; it is the little man leaning over the litterbin dropping a piece of paper into it. I believe there should be a general mobilization of service organizations also sporting bodies and particularly our youth through their schools and clubs, church youth groups, the Voortrekkers and the Boy Scouts. This mobilization should take on a national character and could be brought into being by means of the most powerful medium that we have, i.e. the television service.

I suggest that the hon. the Minister should liaise with the hon. the Minister of National Education and that jointly they should embark on a hard hitting concentrated television spot commercial, such as those that are currently being underwritten by large supermarket chain, and this to their everlasting credit. I believe Mr. Raymond Ackermann of Pick ’n Pay deserves mention in this Committee of the wonderful service he is rendering to South Africa. I know that hon. members may say that this is an advertisement, but this little anti-litter spot that he puts on television is something we want more of and it must be something that is universal. It must not be something that is done by one service organization, or just by the Voortrekkers, or just by a certain sporting body. This must become a national movement, a national anti-litter movement. It must be a programme of which the whole of South Africa, all its people, must be part and parcel. The whole essence of this programme should be aimed at one thing. It should be aimed at putting litter where it belongs, that is in the litter bin. There is no reason why we cannot do something in order to embark on a national programme such as the one that I envisage here. I do believe that if we do so, we are really going to get the message home. We are going to get the message across to South Africa and we are going to achieve what we need so vitally. We need to have cleanliness which is, after all, as the saying goes, next to godliness. We need to have cleanliness, not only in our homes but in our environment. We need cleanliness on our roads, we need to have it in our streets, we need to have it in our cities, we need to have it when we go out into the bush on hiking trails. It is a terrible sight when one goes to the Kruger National Park and sees what litterbugs can do to an area such as that… [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I have no doubt that we are all in complete agreement with everything the hon. member for Umhlanga has said. I am sure that we all regret the unfortunate, unpleasant occurrences that we are all only too familiar with and which the hon. member sketched for us. We also know that many people have already been working for years on a possible solution to this problem and we can but trust that the hon. the Minister, his Deputy and his department, together with the other bodies and departments that are involved, will in time provide us with a solution to it.

Before I come to the subject which I should like to deal with briefly in the Committee, I want to raise a matter of a more domestic nature. Last year a tour was arranged by the planning group to, inter alia, the Eastern Cape and the Southern Cape. This tour fell through as a result of the unexpected election that was held. I hope that those plans will be proceded with and that the tour will be undertaken later on, hopefully later this year. I just want to mention here that at the time we had completed all the arrangements. The then mayor of Port Elizabeth was kind enough to offer us his hospitality. He is present here today in another capacity, namely as the hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central, and I hope that if the tour takes place he will have sufficient influence with his successor to have the friendly offer made at the time renewed.

The matter I want to deal with briefly is actually a facet of the more general question raised here by the hon. member for Constantia. It is one aspect of the wide field of energy. On 24 February we had a very full debate in the House on the whole energy question. I think it was a very useful debate which was held in pursuance of a motion by the hon. member for Pretoria East. Many useful ideas were exchanged on that occasion and an interesting discussion followed. I think that the most important message flowing from that discussion was that the world is actually heading for an energy crisis and that it is something that is facing us too. Two aspects in particular were emphasized there, the first one being the economic and responsible utilization of the available resources. It is very important that these should be protected and conserved as far as possible and that they should be utilized in a better way. The other aspect was that there should be an investigation into the development of new alternative resources.

I should like to dwell on the aspect of new resources, and more specifically on the power of the waves of the sea as a potential new source of energy. In the debate of 24 February particularly little was said about this potential source. It was indeed remarked that the energy from tide and wind in our country unfortunately shows less promise than in other parts of the world. I am not in agreement with that point of view and ask that we ascertain today whether that really is the case. In this regard I want to refer in particular to an important recent development in our country in connection with which a very interesting and important announcement was made by the rector of the University of Stellenbosch on 11 November last year. At the time there was not as much publicity given to it as I feel it deserved. The announcement concerned the creation of a chair of research in oceanographic engineering within the engineering faculty of the University of Stellenbosch. How it came about that it was decided that the University of Stellenbosch should have such a chair, is a good story in itself, but I do not want to enlarge on that now. What we must take into account here are the important factors that Stellenbosch lies near the sea and that the engineering faculty is particularly well-equipped for such a project.

In his press release, the rector mentioned that contributions were made by various local enterprises and also that important financial assistance was made available by sources outside South Africa. He also made the important observation that these are people who have very great faith in the future of South Africa and have demonstrated that in this way. The fact is that at the moment people expect much in the way of positive results from this research. Really exciting possibilities are being held out. This accidentally coincided with the extension of our territorial waters to 12 nautical miles and our fishing waters to 200 nautical miles. I think these facts also endorse the need for research in this specific sphere.

It can be asked whether these expectations are justified if we take the realities into consideration. The fact of the matter is that in many countries wave power is today considered an extremely important alternative source of energy which can be practically utilized. There is one factor of particular importance, namely that it is everlasting; it can never be used up. It can never even be decreased. At the moment there are indications in Britain that they are on the threshold of an important breakthrough as regards this matter. British researchers calculate that with a coast-line of 1 000 km sufficient energy can be obtained from the waves to supply 50% of Britain’s present total energy requirements. Tremendous progress has also been made in various countries of the world where experiments have been conducted in this sphere. If time permits, I should like to indicate to the Committee what has already been done, but I should first like to refer to South Africa’s position. I want to discuss the question of the justification for the establishment of this chair at the University of Stellenbosch.

Scientists tell us that South Africa’s coastline lends itself very well for the conversion of wave power into electricity. It is said that the waves along the South African coast are in fact much better suited for this than is the case in Britain and Europe.

Business suspended at 18h30 and resumed at 20h00.

Evening Sitting

Mr. Chairman, before the interruption of business I was saying how well, according to the experts, the South African coast-line lends itself for the conversion of wave power into electricity. They say that our waves are in fact much better suited for the purpose than is the case in Britain and Europe. The extensive investigations that have already been carried out on tides and currents, have produced very satisfactory results as regards South Africa and our coast-line. Particularly the uniformity of our waves and their length and the regular winds that blow from the south, the “roaring forties”, ensure that we have ideal conditions here. Experts even consider the conditions along the South African coast as unique and they are all on fire with the idea that an attempt be made as soon as possible to utilize that power.

They say the source is definitely present; it is just a question of utilizing it. With the chair that has been established at the University of Stellenbosch, research will possibly also be undertaken into other subjects, like for instance the construction of retaining walls in river mouths in order to prevent fresh water becoming salinated; the removal of silt or sediment; the mechanics of the sea-bed; pipes and cables and deep-water mooring problems in harbours; mobile breakwaters and the handling of bunkering; drilling operations at sea; getting rid of waste products; the exploitation of minerals in the sea-bed; and even the use of hovercraft for coastal transport. Let me just say that a professor has already been appointed to the chair and that research work will be commenced with shortly.

I now want to refer briefly to what is being done elsewhere in the world. There are four patented discoveries in particular which are already fairly well known and further experiments are being conducted with them in various parts of the world. For instance, there is the so-called Salter “Duck” weather-vane. This is a type of weather-vane that rotates around a static axis or needle. Then there are the so-called contour floats. Thirdly, there are the air pressure ring buoys concerning which Japan in particular has taken the lead. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I was not able to complete the speech I made earlier this afternoon and I am taking a few minutes to try to do that so I hope the hon. member who has just sat down will forgive me if I do not follow him.

I want to take the opportunity just to respond to the hon. the Minister and the hon. the Deputy Minister with regard to the consequences which flow from section 3 of the Act under debate and to reiterate something I said earlier on and to which I do not think the hon. the Minister has had an opportunity to reply. Let me come to that first. I talked about the statement made by the hon. the Minister of Economic Affairs and his concern about the tendency for our economy to develop more on a capital-intensive basis rather than a labour-intensive basis. I should like to know from the hon. the Minister whether or not the Department of Planning and the Environment is directly involved in a study group or investigation of to ways and means whereby we can make this move when it is feasible—whether we can move from a capital-intensive economy to a labour-intensive economy for the reasons that I outlined earlier on. I shall be glad if the hon. the Minister could reply to that point as well.

The hon. the Minister mentioned that I was quite wrong about the number of people who were directly involved under section 3 of the specific Act. In 1976, according to Hansard— this is information given by the hon. the Minister himself—7 879 Africans were not employed as a result of refusals compared with 11 495 in 1975. Since the introduction of the Act, 2 002 applications for extensions have been refused involving a total of 101 557 jobs for African workers. This information can be found in column 4709 of Hansard No. 10. As at 1976, 19 applications for new factories and three extensions had been refused in the Port Elizabeth area since the inception of the Act. I think we must take this matter seriously; we must realize that in all our planning we have to consider the needs of the economy of the country. Let me say to the hon. member for Oudtshoorn that I find it incredible to listen to the kind of dream world that that hon. member lives in. There was a time in the history of South Africa when we were always drawing the line as we moved eastward. [Interjections.] It is a nightmare. They are in power and they have these great big dreams which can never be realized. The hon. member says the line must be firmly drawn at Humansdorp. We also have the position that the Post Office cannot get staff, the S.A. Railways cannot get staff and they employ Black workers. This is happening more and more.

In reply to questions put to those two hon. Ministers we have been told that they are employing more and more Black workers in the Western Cape. Then we have the absurd situation where the hon. the Minister of Plural Relations and Development says that there will be no 99 year lease for Blacks living in the Western Cape area. That is an absolute disgrace, Sir. If we are going to employ people when our economy demands it, it is only right and fitting that the same facilities that are given to all of us who are legally working and living here should be given to those people as well. It is ridiculous to try to draw a line and to say: “Thus far and no further.” It is like King Canute trying to hold back the sea; it cannot work. That is why I say that in our planning we must be dictated to by definite economic needs and not by ideologies that are going to be found to be wrong once again.

Mr. Chairman, I said I just wanted to conclude my remarks. I felt I had to respond to the speech by the hon. member for Oudtshoorn because if he goes on like this, he will be confined to his cave!

Mr. Chairman, in support of what was said by both the hon. member for Pinelands and the hon. member for Pretoria Central in referring to the Environment Planning Act, and in reply to what was said by the hon. the Minister, who tried to create the impression that in actual fact not much unemployment had been caused as a result of this legislation, I just want to pass a few ideas on to the hon. the Minister and mention a few facts to him.

Firstly, I want to tell him that it was Prof. P. J. Nieuwenhuizen, the chairman of the Department of Economy at the Rand Afrikaans University, who recently commented on this Act by raising certain standpoints as well as making certain suggestions. He said it was urgent that this legislation be reviewed. For instance, he mentioned that this legislation was directly responsible for development in South African industry being curbed, and that as a result unemployment occurred in South Africa. In order to support this, Sir, I just want to mention that in 1976, for example, a study of 52 motor-spares factories was undertaken. It was established that directly as a result of this legislation, whereas there had been employment opportunities for 18 000 Black people in those industries, 8 000 additional employment opportunities which could have been created, had not been created. In other words, there were no economic considerations, no economic causes, but this legislation was directly responsible for 8 000 people not obtaining employment that could have been created for them.

In 1976 this legislation once again resulted in six clothing factories being closed down on the Witwatersrand, which had the effect that more than 1 000 workers became unemployed. Once again, this happened not for any economic reasons, but purely and solely as a result of this legislation.

It is also true that growth in the clothing industry in the Transvaal amounted to only 2% between 1966 and 1975. In the Western Cape it was 98,4% and in Pinetown, Durban, it was 112,5%. Once again, this is due to the effect of this legislation and not to economic considerations. Prof. Nieuwenhuizen also said that unemployment was being created as a result of this legislation and that very expensive capital machinery had to be imported in order to bring about mechanization in factories, whereas cheap labour could otherwise have been used. This has a detrimental effect on our foreign exchange. It has a detrimental effect in respect of unnecessary cost increases. It makes for inflation. It also prevents diversification taking place in our industries.

These are standpoints that were raised by one of South Africa’s leading economists. On the ground of these standpoints the ground of the evidence and facts that have been brought to the attention of the hon. the Minister in this Committee by various speakers today, is it not high time—and I should like to state the view that it is unnecessary in the light of the facts that an inquiry be ordered—that the hon. the Minister may do well to take steps to remove this provision, which has had these results, entirely from the legislation? I therefore want to propose that this be done.

Mr. Chairman, I have often listened, today in particular, with satisfaction to a discussion of this Vote, because, and I say this without any fear of contradiction, excellent work is being done in this department. I should have liked to see the debate being concluded in the same spirit. I cannot, however, leave unanswered the categorical statements that have been made, especially when they are not in accordance with the facts, and especially when certain things have been said which are absolutely in conflict with the facts.

I want to deny emphatically the allegations concerning the closing down of clothing factories as a result of section 3. In fact, I want to extend the invitation, if there are any cases of people being destroyed as a result of section 3, that such cases kindly be brought to the attention of the department. I am prepared to report on every individual case on behalf of the Ministry and on behalf of the department. I said, and I repeat, that economic and other factors had contributed to unemployment. I am not wedded, nor is the Government, to any section of any Act if it is proved to be wrong. In fact, it has been said today that adjustments have been made in connection with section 3. It is an open secret that section 3 is being applied in as flexible a manner as possible, as the hon. the Minister has indicated, especially in these circumstances. This evidence is obtainable from the industrialists who have been prepared to bring their problems to our attention.

I shall give you the names of three factories.

If those names are given to me, not across the floor of the Committee, or in the course of the debate, which renders meaningful discussion impossible, then I promise, as I have done in all cases, that I shall go into the matter on behalf of the department.

For the rest I shall have to give the type of reply which was called “angelsfood” in the old days, to what was said here. I shall make haste to do so and I shall not necessarily reply in the order in which hon. members spoke, but just to give hon. members the answers they require in each case.

May I ask the hon. the Deputy Minister a question? The hon. the Deputy Minister mentioned in his first speech the township of Marlborough. I wonder if he was referring to the establishment of an Indian area or a township in Sandton. If so, would he please elucidate his Department’s decision on that matter?

Since the question has been put, I will answer it straight away. It does refer to the Indian area. I can mention for general information that we hope to have this published in the Government Gazette on Friday. However, this matter has already been approved therefore it is no secret that an Indian area has been proclaimed for what I hope will be a very fine Indian township in the Marlborough area. The final boundaries have not yet been defined as there are certain smaller areas on which discussion will still take place. I want to place on record my appreciation for the attitude taken by the Sandton municipality and also by the Johannesburg municipality and their officials, as well as for the co-operation of the Indians and others who facilitated the work in this regard. I hope that this matter will now be finally decided on and that everybody will be satisfied with the development of this Indian township in the northern suburbs of Johannesburg. More details of this can be discussed at a later stage.

It was mentioned by a number of speakers that we are worried about the Containers Bill, and what certain people—I think the hon. member for Umhlanga mentioned it—call the “litterbug”. I am just as worried about it.

*Our former State President, Mr. Jim Fouché, mentioned it once and it bothered me. He said that he was in Malawi, and some time later I myself was in Malawi and I saw for myself a sports stadium attended by approximately 20 000 young Blacks, and after they had left that stadium there was not a single piece of paper lying around. I saw this in Vendaland. It is unbelievable how education can rectify these things amongst our young people. And if our young people can improve, things can improve further. But I am afraid that we in the highest chambers are unaware at times of what is being attempted. Legislation cannot rectify these things. I just want to say that the Council for the Environment has nine working groups and some of these working groups, in addition to the voluntary organizations, interest themselves in keeping South Africa clean.

A game has been designed specially for young people—I sent it to the hon. member for Berea this afternoon—called Polludo in order to generate an awareness of the beauty of the environment amongst our children. There are voluntary organizations and I want to pay tribute to them this evening, organizations that work for the conservation of the environment and for the recycling of refuse and all attendant problems. Metal Box South Africa Limited—and I am not propagating anyone—is launching a recycling scheme for metal containers. They call it “Collect a Can” which is called “Pik-’n-Blik Beperk” in Afrikaans. It is a non-profitmaking organization. There is a fine organization, the “Keep South Africa tidy” group. There is the Consolidated Glass Works Limited which recycles used bottles. Rand Waste Papers Recycling Industries, recycle used cardboard, brown paper, etc. South African Plastic Recycling Association recycles mainly plastic bags and containers. The Wild Life Society of Southern Africa works as a non-official organization for nature conservation. This is being done from all quarters. The Municipality of Randburg set an example of how we can propagate keeping our country clean on a voluntary basis. But if we do not already know it, I have to make it known this evening that the Council for the Habitat, which seriously concerns itself with this matter, publishes a monthly magazine for environmental conservation and all the things that go with it, which has a circulation of almost 22 000. We shall be doing well to propogate this magazine. We have the co-operation of the SABC with its television services, and in future we shall undoubtedly have to make more use of this service. I shall be pleased, however, if hon. members will make use of their opportunities in season and out of season to bring to the attention of the public everything that can be done to keep our country clean and neat.

†It was also mentioned by the hon. member for Berea that the pollution of water was a problem of main concern. I fully agree with him, but we are investigating the matter and we also have a different group, co-operating with other departments, to see what can be done to solve these problems.

*In this department, with its limited staff, attention has also been given over the past few years to the establishment of holiday townships. Matters in this regard have not been going right in the past and a report has now been called for which will at least deal with the problems in connection with holiday townships. Some hon. members on this side of the House in particular are concerned about lagging areas, i.e. ghost towns which are created as a result of the establishment of new towns. A report will be produced on this matter as well, and with the assistance of provincial administrations and other bodies we shall endeavour to counteract illegitimate and ill-considered growth. It serves no purpose if there is a town with the necessary infrastructure and facilities and a capitalist establishes a town next to it which originally begins as a holiday township, but later replaces the existing town. It is completely undesirable to develop our country in such a way.

Mr. Chairman, questions have also been asked about the Langebaan lagoon. By way of supplementing what the hon. the Minister has said, I just want to say to the hon. member that I hope that it will be possible to plan proper control of our natural assets on the basis of the investigation into the Table Mountain area and the mountain areas of the Peninsula. Control will differ from case to case. In some cases the local authority can take over the control, but in the meantime finances are still involved in all cases. Table Mountain has been irrevocably defaced in some respects, because of the absence of people wanting to take the responsibility for the finances to resist the mountain being defaced in this way. Finance is involved in the first and last instance as regards all our beautiful areas and their conservation. It does not get us anywhere to follow a policy of passing the buck.

We shall have to have serious discussions on these matters, and I sincerely hope and trust that the investigation into the Table Mountain area will assist us in this regard.

As regards littering, I want to remind hon. members that a Select Committee was appointed which has now been converted into a commission of inquiry on littering. Consequently I want to address an appeal to the public through hon. members to assist us by giving evidence to this commission, because it will assist us to combat littering also by means of legislation in South Africa.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. the Deputy Minister referred to the violation of Table Mountain, but one of the greatest problems with regard to Table Mountain is actually the fact that too many bodies were involved. Therefore I hope that the commission under the chairmanship of Dr. Hey will definitely comment on this and put matters right.

†Sir, in passing I want to deal with the hon. member for Constantia’s speech on the sea.

The hon. member for Maitland.

I am sorry, he lives in Constantia but he represents Maitland. I would like to say on behalf of all of us in this House, I am sure, that it was a pleasure to listen to someone who knows something about what I would call the most neglected topic in public affairs in South Africa namely the sea. Nevertheless, it is a most vital topic, a topic that in future is going to play an ever-increasing role in the future of the Republic. It will play a major role in those fields to which the hon. member referred and in other fields as well, for example the provision of food from the sea, the exploitation of minerals and as a source of energy. In my opinion it is also an area upon which we will have to depend very largely for our own survival and our own protection.

Under this particular Vote I want to deal with the question of group area proclamations and some of the problems that have arisen from that. The hon. the Minister’s department has been responsible for group area proclamations. These have been easy throughout the Republic where we have had homogeneous populations to deal with. But obviously difficulties arose where there were mixed populations, and I am one of those who think that the Government on occasion went too far and moved communities when perhaps they should not have been moved. There are instances where those communities could have been accommodated within a larger group area of another racial group. One of the problems that has arisen as a result of communities being moved, has been that these newly settled communities have very often been settled without manmade facilities to serve the areas where they are living and without any natural facilities of their own. These new communities obviously want to have manmade facilities and that is why we make representations on their behalf in this House, but they also want to use natural recreational facilities, and usually those in someone else’s group area. That is where the problem arises. And here I want to deal with the question of the seaside.

We have old established White areas which are today being overrun, particularly in the Cape Province, by the Coloured people. The local communities are up in arms, i.e. in the case of Sea Point, where there is a constant agitation for something to be done about a thoroughly unsatisfactory state of affairs.

And Pinelands.

I am going to deal with that. And, Sir, in the case of Sea Point, for example, there is the problem not only of the Coloured people particularly and Black people who visit the seaside areas but there is also the problem of the domestic servants.

*I fully agree with the hon. member for Moorreesburg who said, quite rightly, that one cannot put up apartheid notices willynilly for this does not solve the problem.

†So what in fact must be done? Sir, I would suggest to you that what should be done is that all of us who are involved in public life, in one capacity or another, must try to play a constructive role in dealing with this very complicated problem. I would suggest that it should start with the member of Parliament for the area, the member of the Provincial Council and with the city councillors in places where there are city councillors. These people should give a lead to the public on this difficult problem.

Sea Point and Simonstown share the largest stretch of coastline in the Peninsula. Therefore I am in a position to talk tonight and to suggest how, in my opinion, this matter should be dealt with. And then I expect the hon. Leader of the Opposition and MP for Sea Point to whom I gave notice that I would be dealing with this matter tonight, also to say exactly what he feels about the position in his particular area.

The member of the Provincial Council for Sea Point who is also the leader of the PRP in the Provincial Council, moved a motion and is on record as having said publicly that all public facilities should be thrown open to all races. When asked specifically about the case of Sea Point, he said that all the swimming pools and all the beaches should be thrown open for use by all the races. Now I would like to ask the hon. member for Sea Point (Mr. Eglin) what he thinks, for example, about the proposals that have recently been made by the Cape Town City Council, which have been considered by that Council, and which will ultimately go in some form or another to the Administrator. What does he say, for example, about the three problem beaches in Sea Point? What does he say about Sunset Beach, Queen’s Beach and Saunders’ Rocks where year after year one has the problem of the overflow of Coloured people from Sunset Beach going onto Queen’s Beach and Saunders’ Rocks? What does he say about the proposals of the Council contained in this paper, which I can let him see, to establish a large resort—they do not refer to it as a Coloured resort; they might even refer to it as a Black resort; nevertheless, it is a proposal for a resort—for non-White people from Bachelors’ Cove to Glen Beach? I want to know how he feels about that proposal by the Cape Town City Council.

What do you suggest?

I am coming to that in a minute. Mr. Chairman, as far as I am concerned I think it was wrong of the Government at one stage to try to demarcate beaches. It has always been my view that the ultimate authority in a province, the Administrator, should have the final say in the demarcation of beaches. But the people most intimately concerned with the demarcation of beaches are the local communities, and I think therefore that the local authorities, and, in the case of a big local authority like Cape Town, then the local communities within that local authority, should have a very substantial say in the demarcation of beaches for use by the various races. If the local authorities refuse, as has been the case here in Cape Town over the years, with the multiplicity of problems that have subsequently arisen, then the Administrator, and not the Minister, I would suggest, should step in and should have an overall supervisory and executive power to deal with these problems on a sort of regional basis, as, for example, here in the Peninsula. Everybody today says “do away with discrimination”—discrimination must be abolished. I say “yes, do away with discrimination, but then define discrimination”. When I talk about discrimination, I talk about hurtful, harmful and unnecessary discrimination. One cannot throw all public facilities open to all races in South Africa. If we do that, we will be following the policy of the PFP and that will result in chaos. What one can say, is that there are de facto separate facilities, i.e. there are some residential areas which have grown up around a natural facility. There one has de facto a local facility use by a local community. That is what I would call a local community facility. In my opinion it would be wholly unfair to throw all beach facilities open to all people, whether they be Whites or non-Whites.

Many of them are small and cramped; they have no additional facilities whatsoever. But there are some public beaches where the position is quite different. There one can provide facilities for all and one can have properly policed facilities by local beach constables. Therefore the hon. the Minister does come into the picture in a way, because he is responsible for the proclamation of Group Areas. In many ways, as a result of what is happening to the matters to which I have referred, the good that is being done by a group area proclamation is being undone by the influx of another race into the facilities used primarily by an existing race group. My proposals therefore are the following. In the case of local community beaches, small beaches surrounded by a permanently resident local community, the people who have lived there for years should have some form of season ticket admission to that area. But other members of the public, be they White or non-White, should pay admission fees. Such local facilities should be fenced and admission fees should be charged and control exercised. The local community itself should decide whether it is going to be a mixed facility or an exclusive facility because they live there and would be more affected.

Sir, in conclusion I want to tell you how I see the position of public facilities. Since I am talking about beaches, public facilities are large and spacious beaches. There could be access for all people; facilities could be provided for all people. There does not have to be an admission charge. It would not be possible because one could not fence those beaches. One will have to provide camping areas, picnic areas and toilet facilities of one kind or another. But with that sort of beach facility, one can either have, in accordance with the wishes of the local authority, separate demarcated facilities or open facilities. It is large enough to accommodate the tastes of all the people who live in that local area. But, Sir, my plea to the hon. the Minister is this. He should keep an overall supervision in consultation with the administrator over this position because of the harm that results to the proclamations originally made by his Department. But the administrator and the local authority should have primarily responsibility for the demarcation of separate or joint facilities.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Simonstown will understand if I do not follow him because I should like to mention a few other aspects.

This period in world history is characterized by energy crises, boycotts, shortages and sanctions. As far as South Africa is concerned, as we all know, we are living in a time of survival. Never before in the history of mankind has the planning, utilization and conservation of every element in the world of nature been such an extremely delicate responsibility. Furthermore, the transformation and control of nature by man is a directive of creation that is laden with responsibility. Man is the only creature that has been entrusted with a cultural directive. Fill and subjugate the earth!

That is why it is pleasing to note that inquiries about minerals and geologically related aspects have been received during the year under discussion from the private sector as well as from Government and semiGovernment bodies. This testifies to responsible action. It is essential for the department to be consulted concerning the extent to which mineral deposits will be affected by development. The purpose of departmental comment or consultations of this nature is to prevent the mining of minerals being unnecessarily and disadvantageously affected by for example, the establishment of towns, roads, industries and pipe-lines.

We quite rightly give a great deal of attention to the development and optimal utilization of those natural resources that make large contributions towards our economic progress, our trade balance and the provision of employment for our people. Our gold, diamonds, uranium and other minerals are still in the public eye due to the important role that they play, and they enjoy a great deal of attention and publicity.

Nevertheless there are other natural resources that receive little publicity and attention owing to their unpretentiousness and everyday nature. These unassuming everyday natural resources make indispensable contributions towards the basic development of our country. Without these, the other assets that I have mentioned could never be developed and utilized. That is why it is comforting and important to note that the Department of Planning and the Environment has been paying particular attention in recent times to these everyday, unassuming natural resources so that they will not be treated irresponsibly.

I want to mention a few examples of the indispensable function and basic essentiality of these everyday, humble natural resources. The impressive buildings in our cities are constructed with masses of sand and stone that must be of an acceptable basic composition and quality. Our tarred roads and others are constructed with sand and stone that has to have particular physical properties. The bricks of which most of our dwelling-houses and buildings are built, are manufactured from clay which has also to be of the necessary quality. Glass products which allow light into our houses and buildings and which act as containers for our food and drink, are manufactured from sand that has to comply with strict requirements. Because these natural resources are of a humble, everyday nature and fortunately still occur in large quantities in nature, we are inclined to take them for granted and to accept them as such. On the other hand, when we think of the enormous quantities that are required and of the fact that they are large and heavy and cannot easily be transported long distances, we understand immediately how essential it is to ensure that deposits of these basic natural resources that occur strategically close to our large urban complexes, are not smothered by other developments. We must treat these basic resources responsibly. It has already happened that valuable sand, stone and clay deposits have become unexploitable due to towns, factories and roads being built on top of them. Sand close to large cities is already becoming scarce and expensive and this pushes building costs up tremendously. We must remember that the transport element is the deciding factor here. This holds good for transport costs in particular. The transport element is real and the construction materials as such are not as important if the price of petroleum products is also taken into account. In other words, the planned situation of these construction materials must also be taken into account at all times.

The Department of Planning and the Environment began paying attention to the matter years ago and took steps to conserve this type of natural resource for future generations. This is evidence of responsible action. This department has also ensured that powers are given to the Minister by means of legislation when necessary in order to reserve particularly valuable deposits and consequently retain them specifically for that purpose. We therefore welcome the investigations into the incidence of natural resources for the building industry. This takes place according to a priority list and is an on-going programme in which the department is assisted by the Geological Survey of the Department of Mines and the Building Research Institute of the CSIR.

Certain crisis areas have come to the attention of the department where, for instance, the availability of building sand has become a real problem. There is not the slightest doubt that all these steps will ultimately ensure the optimal utilization of the minerals of our country. This is responsible planning.

We should like to suggest that these deposits around our urban areas be not only reserved but that they be also included in the guide-plans so that they can be easily identified. We know that a basic principle in planning in general is that the participation of the public must be recognized and ensured in planning. It is recognized practice for the public to be consulted more and more and that is why the guide-plans are published in order to receive the necessary comment on them.

In this regard we should like to hear what prescriptions are followed in the reservation of areas so that everyone can take note of this fact and so that unnecessary and unhealthy speculation can be eliminated.

Another question is when such investigations and recommendations will be made in respect of the Free State and for Bloemfontein and its environs in particular.

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, we have all taken note of the fact that the guide-plan for greater Bloemfontein was printed during the year covered by the report and, in terms of the procedure followed in the past, has been released as an approved non-statutory document. I should like to know whether the hon. Minister can give us an indication as to whether he does in fact intend to continue at some stage or other with the statutory plan as laid down by the Environment Planning Act.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to address the hon. the Minister in his capacity as Minister of Statistics and I propose to speak purely on the question of statistics this evening.

Firstly, I should like to pay a tribute to the department because I think this is possibly one of the most under-estimated departments in the Public Service. I think I am probably one of the few members who not only receives the bulletins, but actually studies them and pays attention to them, and seeks to draw some kind of lessons from them. I would like to express my appreciation to the department for the service which they provide and for the information which we get on which we can, I think, draw very many valuable conclusions.

If I may, I should also like to thank the hon. the Minister. When I conducted correspondence with him in regard to a matter which I should like to speak about this evening, i.e. statistics relating to unemployment, he responded to me in a most courteous manner and was quite willing to convey information to me. For this I should like to thank him. So, Sir, with the department as a department I have relatively little to quarrel about, because I think one gets both courtesy and a service from the department as well as from the hon. the Minister.

The reason why I believe that statistics should receive more attention in this Parliament is that not only can we base our future planning on statistics, but in fact we can, if we use these statistics in proper measure, indulge in quite a lot of very substantial and very important future planning, economic forecasting and matters of that sort. I think if anybody looks at the demographic figures available he must see in that a whole situation unfolding as to what the future of South Africa will be.

It is a pity that not more people in South Africa do in fact pay attention to that. But one of the interesting things which has arisen is that for a considerable period of time we did not have adequate statistics in regard to Black unemployment in South Africa. We were told some while back that a survey would be done and eventually, on 31 January 1978, the department published figures which were based on October 1977, which related to the unemployment of Black people in South Africa. I would like to examine those statistics; in some cases I should like to criticize them, but to do so constructively and to elicit some information from the hon. the Minister.

Firstly, I should like to approach the question of the survey methodology which was employed. Here in fact the sample of some 10 000 dwellings was taken, and, Sir, the cluster method of survey was employed. Now, Sir, I have had occasion to use the cluster method of survey in regard to other public opinion surveys and matters of that sort, and there is little doubt that the cluster method of survey is a method of survey which, while it is internationally recognized and used, because it is a relatively easy one to use, is in fact one that is full of problems and can result in very substantial inaccuracies. I must say at the outset, Sir, that I do not believe that we will ever have accurate statistics in respect of Black unemployment if, in fact, this is the method which is going to be used.

I think that the only way in which we can approach this is to have a far more scientific survey. The second point is that it deals with a particular stratification on geographic area, as well as on language groups, and in this case to a large extent obviously the two things are related in respect of Black people. There is an inter-play between these two. But the question is that you cannot in fact apply the cluster method if you do not apply the concept of where your concentrations of population are. In other words, you can get a completely wrong result if you apply the cluster method without in fact taking into account where the major centres of population are, and loading your survey accordingly. On the correspondence which has passed, and the information which is available, I am not satisfied that in fact that was adequately done. I would ask the hon. the Minister to respond to this and, if necessary, to point out where I am wrong in this respect.

Then, Sir, the important fact is that this whole survey was based on the distribution of the Black population, according to area, age and sex as determined in 1970. Now, I want to suggest to the hon. the Minister that in so far as these criteria are concerned, it is quite obvious that there have been very substantial changes. If we take the area position it is quite clear, and statistics are available, that the growth of the Black population since 1970 has not been consistent.

On the contrary, it has grown much faster in some areas than others. The hon. the Minister will be aware of the statistics far more readily than I am. But they are available, I have seen them, and the growth figures show a completely different pattern in this.

So by taking the 1970 figures, it is quite clear that you are on an incorrect premise in regard to the geographic areas in so far as growth in the Black population is concerned. Sir, I am surprised that the Government should do this, because the Government itself has had as its policy the fact that it wants to decentralize industry, it wants to attract people to border industries. The figures are available for example in regard to the jobs that have been created in the homeland government service which are new jobs that have attracted new people. This, Sir, is in addition to the ordinary population trends which have occurred. So, Sir, of all the people who should not have made this mistake, it is the Government which should never have made this mistake, because it is, in fact, a mistake contrary to their own policy. In those circumstances it is quite clear that the area distribution is an incorrect one.

Then to base the age distribution on 1970 is again utterly incorrect because it can be shown statistically—and the hon. the Minister knows this—that what in fact has happened is that the age group between 15 and 59, which is the age group in which most economically active persons in fact fall, has increased percentage wise in the Black population at the expense of the lower age group and the higher age group. It is a very important demographic fact, because what in fact has been the consistent pattern is that throughout we have accepted that in the Black community it is the lowest age group which is growing faster and therefore it has been the biggest problem in regard to population growth. In fact it has now been shown that by the year 2000 as against 1970 there will be a very substantial decrease in the numbers in the age group below 15. That is very important because the whole concept of the population explosion is relevant to this. Once Blacks reach a certain peak as regards their numbers those numbers will then start dropping again. This whole concept is being ignored and we base our arguments on statistics which are eight years old, statistics which, if one looks at the economic development programme, are wrong. So one bases this on wrong statistics which are not adjusted to present-day concepts.

As far as the question of sex is concerned, this too is based upon the sex situation as it was in 1970. The hon. the Minister knows as well as I do that more women are becoming economically active than before. He knows as well as I do that in fact the pattern of men to women is quite different in the White areas to that in the homeland areas, and that the removal of the two homelands from the overall picture of South Africa and from the statistics that are given in this survey, again changes that pattern. We consequently have the position that in regard to the basic premises relating to geographic area, age and sex, this survey is based on incorrect premises. If that is so, how can we take these figures as being accurate? That is why these figures do not tie up with the other statistics available in regard to unemployment. Let me give hon. members some other examples. If we look at the actual population figures we find that the Black population, in accordance with the information published by the Department, is 16 950 000. According to the bulletin, once we exclude Bophuthatswana, because the figures I have given include Bophuthatswana, the figure is 15 887 000. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Yeoville delivered an interesting speech. I feel that, in determining the statistics and the results that it gives us, the department goes about things in as scientific a manner as possible with what it has at its disposal. Of course, one can do a great deal with statistics. I do not want to cross swords with the hon. member for Yeoville, but it will be interesting if the hon. member were to check up on his own political statistics. Today the hon. member has been a member of the House of Assembly for exactly four years and in those specific four years the hon. member has been a member of four parties. In other words, tomorrow the hon. member is going to enter his fifth year here and then, according to statistical data, there is a good chance that there will be another change of political party shortly.

Is that your reply to what I said?

I say it jokingly. I do in fact agree with some of the hon. member’s statements, to which I shall try to reply during the course of my speech. In fact, my impression was that the hon. member said that more scientific methods should be used but in my humble opinion the hon. member did not indicate positive measures.

I have not yet had the chance to do so.

The hon. chief spokesman for the Official Opposition had half an hour and further chance to speak. He could very well have said what the hon. member wanted to. say. We actually deduced from that that there are no problems, as far as the Official Opposition is concerned, in regard to statistics.

Mr. Chairman, I want to hasten to say a few words about statistics and the functions of the department. The basic value of statistics lies in the fact that they reflect statistical facts concerning the state of our national economy in all its facets in the form of numerical values. That is why the decisionmaker, whether it is the Government or a private person or body, can consequently have a much more accurate knowledge of the scope of the matter under discussion and what the calculable results of the decision and actions are going to be, and can therefore take the necessary decisions in the certainty that the desired results will be achieved. The community has developed into such a complex organization, and industrial life has become so intensive, South Africa does not only have an unusual population composition but also such a characteristic, unique and complicated set-up, that today more than ever before scientific aids have become necessary for the effective management and proper functioning of the various social and economic aspects of our national economy. That is why statistics have become indispensable as a scientific and practical aid. Today the various authorities use statistics directly in the management of economic, financial, educational and social affairs. Private trade and industry cannot manage without statistics of production, sales, turnover, etc. for the management of their businesses. In fact, the demand and the need for it are increasing.

Planning is one of the most important management functions for which statistics are required. To everyone who deals with planning functions in connection with economic and social developments, the establishment of cities, housing and other large-scale provision for the future, it would be unthinkable to carry out such functions without the assistance of statistics because information, and relevant recent information about the present, is indispensable when planning for the future. The hon. member for Yeoville will do well to listen to this. It remains my humble concern that a population census be held every ten years. I realize that it will not be practical to hold an extensive population census at shorter intervals. But I am seriously convinced that interim population censuses should be held say every three or four years with a view to determining the movement, establishment and labour patterns of the people in South Africa. This data will definitely assist in adapting the population projections from time to time. I think this is a point the hon. member also made and it is indispensable for the orderly planning of our developing country. In this way decisions must be taken in the various spheres where the activities of the population take place in connection with management and administrative questions, and statistics are being called in as an aid to an increasing extent. It is meaningful to note that the demand for the use of statistics for this purpose has increased considerably over the past few decades and that the value of statistics is being realized more and more. Sir, I believe that our statisticians are also very grateful for this.

Then if I can refer to a few aspects of the functions of the department, the department is the central statistical organization which covers a large variety of matters from almost every sphere in the economic, socioeconomic and demographic life of our national economy. As regards the scope, the department handles approximately 4 million surveys per year. According to the planning programme of the department, no fewer than 68 short-term surveys and 24 periodic censuses will be undertaken this year. This is a considerable task which the department has taken upon itself.

Sir, I have the programme here. It may interest the hon. member for Yeoville to look at it. But because I have given time to the hon. member in my speech, I cannot refer to it now. A very important aspect of statistics is that they must be relevant and that they must be timely in particular. In other words, they must be published as early as possible and be made available as early as possible.

I should also like to mention with appreciation in this regard that the department has succeeded in publishing most of the most important statistics and statistical data considerably earlier than usual. This is an important achievement. But the success of the timeliness also depends on the co-operation of respondents and the collecting of surveys by means of repeated reminders remains a problem for the department. The department is busy at the moment with a census of the retail and wholesale trade, where there are approximately 108 000 respondents. It is a big job and I should like to ask the respondents to co-operate with the department by handing in the necessary information in good time because this determines the result. In 1977, 60 reports in connection with censuses were published. An average of 60 000 statistical newsletters are made available to interested parties every month. This is as far as the short term is concerned.

I just want to refer to another very important publication. It is the RSA Core Statistics which hon. members all received in pocketbook form. It is a very popular document both here and abroad, and one should actually carry it around in one’s pocket like a pocket-book because it contains information which one can often convey to someone else. Another important publication which appears once again this year, is the biennial publication, South African Statistics, which last appeared in 1976.

Careful and intensive preparation is required in order to comply with the divergent requirements of the large number of users of statistics, and this is also a particularly extensive enterprise. A country can only progress most effectively if reliable information is available for development and facet development, and that is why high priority must always be given to the Department of Statistics in our national economy.

At 21h00, proceedings suspended until 21hl5 to enable members to attend a division.

Mr. Chairman, with the development, expansion and improvement of a statistical service, particular note must be taken of the essentiality of mechanical aids, and that is why the putting into operation of another powerful computer by the department in August last year made a considerable improvement and also brought relief. The computer was developed and installed with a view to the need for processing large quantities of statistical data as well as accounting entries. To give you some examples: The salaries of approximately 60 000 officials of 32 Government departments, the deeds file of the Department of Justice, the Government bonds of the Treasury Department, the Defence Bonus Bonds and the foreign trade transactions of the Department of Customs and Excise are already being processed by the computers of the Department of Statistics. There is therefore a continual expansion of the department’s functions and the department will shortly also deal with the processing of the decennial population census of 1980, which will include approximately 25 million people.

Sir, this is a big job. The work of this department is done in silence; there is no glitter or glory for the department and its officials. My modest opinion is that it is an effective, neat, well-controlled and well-organized department and I should like to express appreciation to the Secretary, Dr. Du Plessis, Mr. Louw and the staff, as well as to the Under-Secretary (Parliamentary) Mr. Van Litsenborgh, for their assistance and cooperation.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Klerksdorp will forgive me if I do not follow him but my time is short. During the first part of the discussion this afternoon, I motivated what I thought was a reasonable case for putting to the hon. the Minister a suggestion which I would like him to consider. Since the concept of environment and planning tie up in so many ways, and since we are looking for a better life for the future—there are many different facets to bring together—I would like to ask the hon. the Minister to consider that, in view of the rate at which this country is growing, there should be more co-ordination in these fields. I would therefore like him also to give consideration to a proposal that some time in the future he appoints a quality-of-life director responsible to him in his department, to coordinate these matters and ensure that we go forward into the 1980s, aware of the challenges and well-equipped and ready to meet them. And that matter I would like to leave there for the moment.

Secondly, Mr. Chairman, I would like to raise the question of Cato Manor with the hon. the Minister, and in the five minutes that I have at my disposal I would like to put a proposition to him. His department is at present investigating the possibility of opening of certain parts of Cato Manor to the Indian community, and I understand that the Coloured community in Durban has also made claim to a portion of this land. The question has raised a number of problems amongst people in the surrounding suburbs, and understandably so because I think they feel that there is a chance that property values might diminish, that there might be further expropriation of their homes, and that the road network is not of sufficient capacity to cope with the extra traffic that would be generated by large-scale development in this area. I would like to put it to the hon. the Minister that if his department decides to go ahead and open up a certain area in Cato Manor for Indians and/or Coloureds, he will do so having regard to the factors surrounding the area as those of us from Durban know it. At present, as the hon. the Minister will know, most of this land is what one might call a green belt; it is largely undeveloped although there are certain road networks running through it which, of course, can be expanded. But I would suggest that whatever area the hon. the Minister and his department decide to allocate to the Coloureds and the Indians, they should leave a green belt around it because that is an area which could very well do with more park land, and a green belt encircling the area would fulfil this need. It would also provide a natural barrier between the people who live in that vicinity and who might not wish to be cheek by jowl with other race groups, for all the reasons which I have indicated. I would like to go further and ask the hon. the Minister to turn the area that they decide to use into a top class residential area, with decent sized plots, with a good infrastructure, and an adequate road system, although this is going to cost money. The reason why I ask this is because there is a very great need amongst Coloured and Indian professional people and people of standing in the community to have a suburb available to them where they feel that they are also living a better quality of life. And I think this ties up to a certain extent with what I have been asking for this afternoon.

If the hon. the Minister could consider these points and make it a low density housing area, and set minimum standards for building, I do believe that under those circumstances many of the problems and, doubts in people’s minds as to the future development of this area could be disposed of, and we could in fact end up with a model suburb in part of Cato Manor.

Mr. Chairman, in following upon the hon. member for Berea, I do not want to speak about the residential area for Indians tonight but about the residential area for Whites in Rosettenville. The inhabitants of the south of Johannesburg and the electorate of Rosettenville took note with deep concern of the fact that a depot of the Putco Bus Company is going to be sited in the heart of the constitutency.

In the newspapers one sees headings like “Putco bus depot dumped in the south”. This is how the people feel about it. The Wembley stadium is going to be used for this purpose. This stadium has been the mecca of a wide variety of sports for more than half a century. At the moment the position is as is stated in this newspaper report: “Wembley has gone to the dogs.” Dog races were held there initially and other kinds of sport were also played there later on. There are these fine opportunities in my constituency but now this is happening.

The question that I am asked every day by the voters of Rosettenville is the following: In what way is the intrusion of this industry going to affect my daily life? One can understand that the people are concerned. They ask whether property development and the value of land there is going to be affected by this step. What about the property rates in respect of which Johannesburg collects millions of rands from the south? How is an industry which has practically no time limit going to affect the environment? Those buses are going to run seven days a week. They are going to run from morning to night and throughout the night. What type of work is going to be carried out at that depot? Will it be repair work? Will it be administrative work? What effect is that going to have on the community because the south is continually the victim of this type of light industry? Are no restrictions placed on an industry of this nature?

That development is taking place in a part of my constituency and a question that is also asked is how the traffic is going to be affected by this step when there is already talk of 120 to 383 movements of buses daily. [Interjections.] I hope hon. members on the opposite side are taking note of this. Yes, those hon. members must take note of it. We fought some of them in Johannesburg and now the hon. members are very insolent. They did not want to take notice of the Government.

Sit down, Harry. It is not your constituency.

No, Sir, my time is too short. This is just the first trickle of a stream the flow of which we shall not be able to curb later on. This Putco bus depot started at Booysens. Then the place became too small. The second place was Faraday which also became too small. Now it is at Glenesh among the poorer Afrikaners and my poorer voters. What is going to become of these people?

The bus company will not be able to continue to operate there because later on they will need more space. Further expropriation will have to take place. Mr. Chairman, why was an alternative site not found for the company? It was suggested that they should establish themselves at Denver. Steeldale, Soweto and Putcon were mentioned as alternatives. Then there is also the Johannesburg refuse dump and the old mine dumps. There are various places that could be used. [Interjections.] In reply to those people who do not want to listen, I want to quote what appeared in a report in the Southern Courier. Now they can hear what the Southern Courier thinks of the situation. The report reads as follows—

[Interjections.]

Order! I appeal to hon. members to give the hon. member the opportunity to make his speech.

I quote further—

Why is it done in this part every time and never in the north? They owe us an answer to this question. Eventually there are going to be 300 buses there and there is going to be no limit to expansion. In Eloff Street Extension 1 315 vehicles already run from north to south between seven and eight o’clock every morning. These are the 1976 figures. These things are simply not going to be tolerated because the recreational facilities are also going to be adversely affected.

Public opposition to the proposed project was so strong that seven councillors received petitions. More than 2 300 people signed petitions against it. Advertisements against it were placed in newspapers. On various occasions the matter was taken to the Director of Local Government. A revised scheme was referred by the Director of Local Government to the Department of Planning and the Environment.

If my information is correct, the revised scheme was circulated among various departments. The Division of Physical Planning registered an objection. Comment was sent on behalf of the Secretary of the Department of Planning and the Environment to the Director of Local Government.

A committee of eight was also appointed in terms of the provisions of section 9 of the Environment Planning Act. This committee considered the revised scheme for changing the zoning of the land. They deliberated on the desirability of establishing the industry.

It is true that only the Minister can act in terms of section 6 of the Act. In terms of the Environment Planning Act, Act No. 88 of 1967, the Minister has to give written permission when there is an application for industrial zoning. That area where the bus depot is going to be established falls within the area represented by councillor Arthur Meets, a Nationalist, in the Johannesburg City Council. Why do the hon. members on the other side not co-operate? It is in my constituency that action must be taken. That is why I require an urgent investigation of the matter. It must take place in co-operation with the department, the local authority of the Transvaal, the Johannesburg City Council and all allied Government departments. I also want the co-operation of my provincial councillor here. He is a member of the NRP. He is Mr. Oberholzer who is the chairman of the management committee of the Johannesburg City Council, a member of the Provincial Council and who is the city councillor for the largest portion of Rosettenville. If he is sincere he should intervene and help with the expropriation of this site.

We simply cannot put up with this from hon. members on the other side. [Interjections.] Those hon. members can make as much fuss as they wish, but we struggled with them night after night in the Johannesburg City Council and they continually attacked the Government there because the Government eventually acted in opposition to their policy. Now that the hon. member for Bryanston is returning to the right path, he listens to what the hon. the Minister says. Why is everything dumped on the south? We can definitely not allow such things. [Interjections.] Mr. Chairman, it is very clear that those hon. members’ hearts are not with the people in the south but that they are only concerned about the people in the north. They are not at all concerned about the poor. [Interjections.] Let them then also plead the case of the poor tonight.

Order! I want to inform hon. members’ that owing to the fact that this Chamber is much smaller, I find it extremely difficult to hear the hon. member who is speaking whilst other hon. members are speaking to one another.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Rosettenville, a man who came from the north to win a seat in the south, is directing his appeal to the wrong quarter. In actual fact he should address his request to the coalition between the NRP and the NP in the Johannesburg City Council because they are the people who are responsible for what is happening in the south at the moment. It does not therefore really help him to address his request to us because he is directing it to the wrong quarter. The hon. member stated correctly that Mr. J. F. Oberholzer is a member of the provincial council, but this happened as a result of the support which NP voters gave him during the election in which the hon. member for Rosettenville was elected.

Unfortunately, the hon. member for Simonstown is not in the House at the moment but earlier this evening he made a certain remark about the beaches and the use of such beaches. Our time has practically expired but I feel it is necessary to raise a few points very briefly in reply to what he said. Firstly, I want to put it very clearly that it is definitely the policy of this party to remove all forms of discrimination based on race or colour, completely and entirely. After all, it is true that apartheid is collapsing completely in ruins at this stage. You, Mr. Chairman, are aware of it; everyone is aware of it. I think that one can take the liberty of predicting that within the next five or 10 years all forms of apartheid in South Africa will have been removed, if not by the present Government then by another Government. In fact, this is already being done. Apartheid is collapsing. The whole rotten system of apartheid is decaying and there will not be a speck of it left after the passage of the next 10 years.

I just want to mention that the hon. member for Simonstown apparently quoted from a confidential document of the Cape Town City Council. I wonder where he got hold of that document. One wonders what member of the city council would have supplied that document to him and I wonder why he quoted from that document in this House.

When we say that all forms of discrimination must be removed, when we say that all public facilities must be made available to all the citizens of South Africa regardless of race or colour, we are saying at the same time that it must take place on an orderly basis. I just want to mention that as far as beaches are concerned, in terms of the Act they have always traditionally been the property of the public. They have always been public property. That is traditional; it goes back hundreds of years and it was the Government that introduced legislation in order to change that situation and to obtain control over the beaches.

Allow me to mention a few steps that can be taken in order to maintain order, protect the health of the public and protect the enjoyment of these facilities by the public without resulting in any discrimination. For example, the following steps can be taken: The number of persons allowed on a small beach can be limited, not on the grounds of race but in order to prevent such a place becoming inundated. That can be done. [Interjections.] It is done in many parts of the world and it is even done in South Africa. This holds good for many facilities which local governments provide to the public. Provision can be made for additional facilities to be provided at beaches. Officials can be appointed to exercise control there in order to see that no racial friction occurs and that no problems arise among the races. Admission fees can even be charged, not to keep poor people away from these resorts but to collect money which can be used to keep these places clean and to provide services of a high quality to the public there.

Mr. Chairman, in the last part of his speech the hon. member for Bryanston actually repeated the speech of the hon. member for Simonstown. The hon. member and his colleagues are always shouting that apartheid is falling away and that it is disappearing but I think that this is just wishful thinking because the past election proved that they are wrong. They are the ones who are disappearing; they are becoming fewer and fewer. The hon. member for Yeoville is now leaving the Chamber and they are even fewer.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to devote myself briefly to a local matter in the few minutes at my disposal. A draft guide-plan has been practically completed for the northern component of the greater Pretoria guideplan except for perhaps three facets. When I speak of the northern component, I mean the area to which we refer in everyday language as the Wonderboom component. In referring to this I should like to avail myself of the opportunity to express our special appreciation to the department and its officials for the excellent way in which they have handled this matter on behalf of the people north of the Magaliesberg who are involved in this component of the greater Pretoria guide-plan. I think I know what I am talking about because I attended every committee meeting. Earlier this afternoon the hon. member for Bryanston referred to the divergent interests, and this is true. There are tremendously divergent interests among the various departments but tonight I want to say frankly here that one should actually pay tribute to them—although one should not put it exactly like that—for the way in which the Department of Planning and the Environment has succeeded in bringing together these divergent interests, these conflicting interests that have been referred to, in an absolutely imaginative and resourceful way in order to produce an acceptable draft plan in the end.

I think that we north of the Magaliesberg who have been very closely involved with this draft guide-plan, want to thank these people very much for the fine way in which they are doing this under very difficult circumstances. We asked for this draft guide-plan before the guide-plan committee was officially appointed, and the reason why we asked for it, was because we in that area are hemmed in between the Magaliesberg on the one hand and the Bophuthatswana homeland on the other. We have particular development problems and as a result of these particular problems of that area the hon. the Minister decided at the time, before the guide-plan committee was appointed, that a start should be made on a guide-plan for that area.

My representations tonight—and I do not expect to get an answer tonight—are that the hon. the Minister should not if at all possible wait to announce and advertise this guideplan until the guide-plan for greater Pretoria is finished. If we wait until the guide-plan for greater Pretoria is finished, we shall frustrate the whole reason why this guide-plan was started earlier and why it was drawn up sooner. The reason for this is also very obvious. There is no geographic link between this northern component and the other three components of Pretoria’s guide-plan because the Magaliesberg cuts it very sharply geographically. There are only six links of which four already exist. They are the Homsnek Road, the Wonderboom Gate, the Wonderboom Neck and the Daspoort Neck, and Frates Road and the P.W.V.9 Road. Our representations are that the Minister and the department will give attention to advertising this draft guide-plan for comment before the time if possible.

I should just like to conclude with this final thought. I was very closely involved in this guide-plan. It was found that much of the work was specialized work and that is why the ad hoc guide-plan committee appointed certain sub-committees. I want to suggest something tonight. I served on these subcommittees, but since they did not have legal status some of these committees struggled to conclude their negotiations with other Government departments and to reach a final decision. I should like to ask the hon. the Minister tonight whether he will not consider changing this legislation in such a way—I think it is in section 6A where the composition of the guide-plan committee is defined—so that provision can be made for statutory subcommittees which can be appointed by this guide-plan committee. That is the first point.

The second point is that the interest of community for which a guide-plan committee is appointed, are closely associated with it. I wonder whether the Minister will not consider amending the composition of the guide-plan committee in such a way that the community can also have representatives on it from its own ranks. This will expedite the drawing up of such a guide-plan considerably.

Mr. Chairman, I just want to reply briefly to what the hon. member for Wonderboom said. I want to thank him for the suggestions that he put toward. Earlier on in the evening the hon. member for Schweizer-Reneke also put forward a few suggestions in connection with the regional development associations and the concomitant guide-plan committees. We have various ideas in this regard in the department, and I will definitely take note of the suggestions that were put forward. Where it is at all possible, hon. members’ suggestions will be incorporated in the greater planning and development we are envisaging for these advisory committees, guide-plan committees and the various regional boards, in conjunction with the economic development programme.

As was pointed out earlier in the day, we must bear in mind that the department has only taken shape over the past few years. I think that we have now reached the stage where we can start building much more vigorously on the foundations that were laid. Every suggestion that is put forward will most certainly be given serious consideration by us.

The hon. the Minister will speak about policy matters, but I should like to avail myself of the opportunity, here towards the end of the debate, to convey our thanks to all the hon. members who participated in the debate. We are grateful to you, Mr. Chairman, and to the other chairmen who officiated here, and to the officials as well, for this memorable day and for the privilege that fell to our department be able to be here today.

Just to link up with what has been said by the previous speaker, I want to extend my thanks to all the officials of the Department of Planning and the Environment, the officials of the Department of Statistics, and all those who voluntarily assist in rendering the task of the departments possible. In this regard I refer to the members of the Habitat Council and other committees. I want to thank these people and congratulate them on the achievements that have been accomplished in the past year. The officials of both departments have a difficult year behind them, and I feel we have every reason to be proud of the work that was done.

Hon. members may know that a computer—that new clever machine—was installed at the Department of Statistics in the past year. The rent that we pay is tremendous, but I can assure hon. members and Parliament that it is money well spent. I should like to extend an invitation to all hon. members who are interested, on behalf of the head of the department and the officials, to pay a visit to the department in Pretoria in due course. Then they will see what is being done there, what has been done to date and what can be done with this machine once the information has been properly gathered and properly programmed.

This brings me to what the hon. member for Yeoville said earlier in the evening in connection with the statistics concerning unemployment. I want to say once again that no department, no person, no system, is perfect. I wonder, however, whether we do not sometimes refuse to notice the positive aspects too. “Two people looked through prison bars, the one saw mud, the other stars.” It was only last year that the Department of Statistics started determining unemployment amongst the Black people statistically. This required a tremendous amount of preparatory work, Sir. After an extra-budgetary amount had been voted for this purpose, the method to be followed was decided on in January. In October the first data that had been collected was processed. This had to be done by the human brain and not by the computer. It was only on that date that we could collect the most reliable data in connection with the unemployment rate amongst the Blacks. I am pleased that the hon. member for Yeoville is back in the Chamber. Imprecise terms are used here; terminology is being used which is strange to me; I understand little of it and I admit it. Reference is made here of cluster survey. This is in contrast to the type of survey where one does not do the survey in one block, but where the survey is spread over a township. [Interjections.] No, it is not a random sample; A random sample can also be valid in the case of a cluster survey.

To date these have been the most reliable figures which we were able to collect. Once this data has been fed into the computer, we will be able to furnish more reliable figures continuously. This, however, is not the only data which is required from us. The hon. member for Yeoville and other hon. members have also asked for data on the differentiations between the various population groups as regards the consumer price index. We have tried to comply with that. This department also does a tremendous amount of work for other departments.

I am always hesitant to speak about these things because people can so easily read into it insults to certain people. Is it really so easy to do a survey of employment amongst the Black people? I have appreciation for that ethnic group; I do not have to profess my appreciation for them as if I have a guilty conscience. But by that I do not mean to say that they are blameless nor that they do not have their own idiosyncracies. Traditionally, the Black man does not work in some of the homelands. If his wife can work, some of them do not work in the fields. When it is ploughing time, they are not unemployed. Unlike in the case of registered workers, it is not so easy to say in the case of those Black people whether they are unemployed or not. Here I am not insulting people; these are simply facts. Amongst some of our Black peoples it is an attitude to life for the woman to do the agricultural work. In fact, it is a disgrace for the man to do that type of work. These are facts; it is not discrimination or an insult. It is not an insult to say that it is absolutely impossible to force some Black peoples into a mine; on the other hand, the members of other races prefer to work on the mines. I am not insulting anyone. It is not so simple to determine when a person is unemployed or not. We shall follow up the suggestions that have been put forward in so far as it is at all possible.

May I ask the hon. the Deputy Minister whether it is correct to say that if a man is employed for five hours per week, he is not unemployed?

This too is a hypothetical question to which one cannot give a perfectly clear answer. I have valued Black workers on my farm. They are not unemployed, but sometimes two weeks go by without their doing a stroke of work for me. I do not mean anything in saying this. If hon. members want to take it up differently, then I am sorry; then we shall simply have to agree to differ.

I want to assure the hon. member that I agree with him that there has to be improvements. The position is not satisfactory yet; it is not perfect. The hon. member has special knowledge in this regard, and I invite him once again to come and look at that computer and give us some suggestions. We in the department do not presume to be all-knowing. We are always prepared to consider good positive suggestions.

I accept that.

I should like to reply what was said by the hon. member for Rosettenville—our good friend, Oom Sporie. I have now been caught in the cross-fire. If they had fired from this side and I had been seated where the hon. member for Moorreesburg is sitting, I would have blushed with shame. Unfortunately it is true that someone somewhere has to accept responsibility, and if the responsibility is not accepted by the Opposition and cannot be accepted by the hon. member, then, on behalf of my department, I must accept at least part of the responsibility. I do so, Sir, fully convinced that the objections which the department had to this depot were properly explained. However, there is a history to this. After my department had objected to the depot, the objections were eventually withdrawn. I do not want there to be any misunderstanding in this regard. The objections were withdrawn by the department because it was clear from the weight of evidence that there had to be a depot somewhere, and, in the opinion of the people who investigated the matter, that was the most suitable place. I should gladly listen to any further representations for possible further changes to be effected.

Mr. Chairman, before I forget the most important part of my reply to the debate, I want to settle it right now by associating myself with the hon. the Deputy Minister in thanking not only the speakers, but also our officials in particular, viz. the two Secretaries of the Department of Planning and the Environment and of Statistics, who are present here this evening. I also want to thank the Deputy Minister for his contributions. I want to thank the Planning Adviser, who is present—about which I am very pleased— and, in their absence, the Scientific Adviser, the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, and its President. A very wide field has been covered in this debate. I have already said so earlier this evening. It is true that whereas the time of members used to be limited, the time of the Minister is now limited in Committee. Consequently I shall have to make haste in the time at my disposal to reply to all the questions and possibly to add something more if time permits.

†In the first place the hon. member for Constantia was not satisfied about the fact that the Minister of Mines and the Minister of Economic Affairs were not present for this debate. I could have invited them to come here but I know that they had a lot of matters to attend to. After all, we have a co-ordinated body, a Cabinet Committee, where we sit together and where we can co-ordinate those matters of common interest as far as our specific functions are concerned. The hon. member also made a big issue of the fact that our efforts to formulate a definite energy policy were inadequate, and he advocated a Department of Energy. I shall reply to him in this regard a little later on when I speak on energy in general.

*The hon. member for Oudtshoorn made an interesting speech about the railway line running from Humansdorp to beyond Colesberg. When these other hon. members are ideological, they are very liberal in their view concerning the matter of anyone being able to live at any place in this country. However, it is a fact of life that people appropriate certain geographical areas to themselves and that people’s culture and their attachment to those geographical areas are things which one cannot ignore. In the South African situation, we cannot ignore those things. To ignore those things all along, and not to assist in making people understand that they are living with those things and that they have to recognize them, is, in my view, also the cause of a great deal of the friction we have in this country. As far as I am concerned, there must be greater recognition of the facts of life in regard to matters of this nature. I do not want to elaborate on the matter.

The hon. member advanced an argument here in connection with a matter which can be justified historically on a geographical basis. Whether one wants to enforce that bylaw, or whether one should achieve that by way of agreement, is another matter. We can talk about that. The fact remains that these are realities of life which we have to take into account.

The hon. member asked for a master-plan for this part of the country because he linked it to the new constitutional dispensation. It is of course not my responsibility to comment on that at this stage. That will depend on the decision taken in regard to the legal aspects of the new constitutional dispensation.

†The hon. member for Maitland made a very well documented speech. I very much appreciate the fact that he took great pains to have his facts right and to do his homework in respect of what he called the civilization of the sea. I do not want to delve too deeply into this matter, because, firstly, I do not know too much about it. Secondly, I think that if I were to delve too deeply into this matter, I would be wasting a lot of time at this late hour, although I have material available here. There may perhaps be a need for better coordination on marine matters. My Department, of course, cannot just take matters into its own hands and approach all these various bodies, especially those bodies concerned with research of the oceans, research of the various resources in the oceans, and research of the vast fields that lie waiting for us as far as food, energy and so on are concerned.

However, I can tell him that the CSIR has many scientists who are in a co-operative sense working together with universities as well as internationally in marine biology, in oceanographic research, Antarctic research, geology and all those matters pertaining to the huge resources of the Southern oceans starting from the southernmost tip of South Africa up to the Antarctic. They are continuously engaged in research in regard to these matters. I quite agree with him that one should look into the possibility of better co-ordination. However, as far as this Department is concerned we have a system by means of which we liaise with bodies such as the Division of Sea Fisheries, the Department of Transport, the universities, and the CSIR which is actually part of the Department of Planning and the Environment. This system has worked very well up to now. But if in future new machinery is warranted then, of course, one can look at the position again. I regret that I have to disappoint him in that I do not see the need for the establishment of a permanent council for marine affairs at this stage in the development of our activities in regard to gathering information in respect of the oceans. However, I do agree that there is a great deal to learn and there is a lot of research to be done. At the same time I must tell him that everything possible is being done. There is a good deal of co-ordination. We are in liaison with all those departments and institutions and we are looking at this matter with, let us say, a scientific and administrative eye. We will, of course, not forget what he has propounded here tonight. We can talk to the experts from time to time, but at this specific moment I think we should abide by what I have just said.

The hon. member for Algoa also mentioned matters relating to energy and I shall also reply to him at a later stage.

The hon. member for Umhlanga spoke about man and his environment. I can only say that I agree with everything the hon. member said. I do not think it is necessary for me even to comment on it any further because I agree wholeheartedly that education is necessary from the cradle to the grave to keep our people on their toes and to make them realize at all times that this world that they live in is their responsibility. We have so many good examples in this regard from the countries around us. We may regard these people as not being on a par with us and not having our standard of civilization, but these people set us a good example and sometimes I feel that we should even be ashamed of ourselves.

*The hon. member for Algoa spoke about the Marine Engineering Research Institute at Stellenbosch. I am aware of this institute, and I have already taken cognizance of what is being done there. The hon. member also spoke in particular about energy from the waves of the sea. The department, as well as the CSIR, which is doing research into energy from waves, is not unaware of the possibilities of such energy. I just want to tell the hon. member that while I have very high appreciation for both the universities of Cape Town and Stellenbosch, which are undertaking research in connection with energy, I do not believe that we shall have any great commercial energy value before approximately the years 1990 to 2000. The technology is simply not sufficiently advanced as yet. However, I do agree with him that our long coast-line, which is unprotected from large waves, affords us an ideal opportunity of harnessing wave energy to make a really important contribution towards the energy needs of South Africa.

I am very pleased that the hon. members dealt with the problem of energy, because I think it is an extremely important problem today. I am referring to this matter again, because the hon. member for Constantia touched on something in this regard, and although I do not agree with him on certain aspects, I do think that the urgency he revealed in his perception of the energy problem, is something one cannot simply ignore.

†The hon. member for Pinelands once again raised the matter of a labour-intensive economy vis-à-vis a capital-intensive economy. I can only tell him that we do not really have a say as far as a decision or policy-making in that regard is concerned, but we are consulted as a member of the Cabinet Committee and in that instance we usually take our lead from the expert department. But I think I can agree with the ideas mooted by the hon. member tonight. I can agree with them to a large extent. But we are faced with a problem at the moment. In view of the economic climate we have a great deal of capacity to spare. I think there is still time for this spare capacity to be filled by these heavy industries. Then, of course, I think the labour-intensive aspect will again escalate.

The hon. member for Bryanston and the hon. member for Pinelands have, in my view, been answered quite effectively by the hon. the Deputy Minister in regard to the effect of section 3 of the Environment Planning Act. I do not want to comment on the opinions of professors at universities as academics.

*If the professor has expressed certain views on the effect of the Act, I can point out to him that from an administrative point of view, and with the facts at our disposal—as they are at his disposal—it is not an inference for which only the opinion of an academic is necessary. And the inference is the following: There were applications for 548 000 jobs, and approximately 450 000 of those were filled. However, the fact that the applications of 100 000 people were turned down, does not mean that 100 000 employment opportunities were lost. The six factories in Johannesburg were not closed down for any other reasons than economic reasons. How do the hon. members know that there were no economic reasons? Incidentally, some of the factories succumbed as a result of the economic recession. What is more, many of those 100 000 people were counted twice. Some of them were tested, but they never started working, because of the factory closing down before they had commenced duty. One also has overlapping. As a result of the fact that 100 000 were turned down, 50 000 could most probably have gone to take up employment in the decentralized areas. I have not been furnished with those details but I can ask for them. Has that labour been lost?

Suppose it was only 10 000 and not 100 000, then it is still very serious.

And if it extends over a period of 15 years, is it still so terribly serious? The hon. member should have regard to his ratio figures as well, and he should also have regard to the effect of such an extraordinary influx on the unemployment figure about which he was so concerned a while ago. The movement of people is involved in this as well. There is a downward trend in this regard, and it proves that the economic recession has actually had a more marked effect on the employment of these people and on these figures than we can ever imagine.

†The hon. member for Simonstown spoke about beaches and the Group Areas Act. I think he was under a misapprehension because the Administrator actually allocates beaches. Perhaps the hon. member was not aware of this. The hon. member apologized for not being able to be present tonight, but he made a constructive speech. I certainly agree with him that one cannot allow everyone to go anywhere. The method that one adopts sometimes in effecting segregation or in differentiating between people, is something on which we can perhaps disagree. But sometimes it is perhaps better for people to be separated on some basis or another, as this is much more conducive to maintaining harmony between races and nations.

*I think the hon. member for Bloemfontein East was thinking of Bloemfontein in particular when he spoke about control, etc., over stone, sandstone and other minerals which are not rated so highly. I can just tell him that control is in fact being exercised over the minerals; in fact, we are doing so already, and this can be done through the guide plan. Bloemfontein is not very high on the priority list for the preservation or reservation of those minerals. In fact, Bloemfontein does not create much of a problem for us, just as it does not cause problems on many other aspects. As far as politics, too, is concerned, Bloemfontein causes no trouble. As a result of that, Bloemfontein is not so high on the priority list, and now it may happen that the hon. member may decide to advise Bloemfontein to put some pressure on the Government for a change. I can give him the assurance, however, that the pilot plan for Bloemfontein has already been prepared, and we intend making it statutory if problems were to arise. I do not know whether I have replied to every question asked by the hon. member, but this is what I had in mind.

†Perhaps I owe the hon. member for Yeoville some sort of explanation. He had some objections to the cluster method of determining the new statistics, or rather, determining the Bantu unemployment figures. This cluster method, so I have been told, is probably the best method that we have available at the moment. It is cheaper, in the first instance. Secondly, it is true that the 1970 figures were taken as basis. If there had been a great difference in the movement of populations then of course it could affect the figures. But if there had not been a very great movement, the large number of units involved here will definitely help in negating that effect.

As far as the age and the sex are concerned, I cannot quite agree with the hon. member because since 1970 I do not think there has been such a very great change.

I am relying on your statistics.

Yes, that is so, but the hon. member spoke about actual statistics. Now what are the actual statistics in 1978? The hon. member determined that in some way or another, but those are not actual statistics. He did not make a complete survey. I think that there could not have been such a marked effect as the hon. member visualized. Taking into account the weighting and the fact that since 1970 there has not been such a marked change in movement; taking into account that we have a large number of units, I have been told that the margin of error is not larger than 2%. That is what we regard it as at the moment. We may disagree, but that is my viewpoint according to the facts at my disposal.

*A few other members also spoke this evening, Mr. Chairman. The hon. member for Klerksdorp made a balanced speech and praised the Department of Statistics for the work that it was doing. I am pleased that he is interested in statistics, and in respect of that, I also agree with the hon. member for Yeoville. Not all of us have an aptitude for accounting problems or for statistics, but in view of the fact that we are an institution consisting of people with varied interests, some of us have to select fields for ourselves. This is an interesting subject, especially if one goes deeper into it. I am sorry that I cannot go deeper into it. At least I try to understand what is conveyed to me, and I find that extraordinarily interesting.

†I have listened to the hon. member for Berea when he spoke about the quality of life. He said that he was worried about the quality of life and the fact that it might deteriorate instead of improve. He suggested that we should appoint a quality of life director. Should such a person be appointed I think he would have quite a job on his hands. Nevertheless, I share the sentiments expressed by the hon. member, although I do not think my department is in a position to appoint such a person because every one of us should, in my opinion, regard himself as a quality of life director. If we are in a privileged position, every one of us should be a quality of life director.

As far as Cato Manor is concerned and the green belt which the hon. member has in mind, I think it is a very good idea. I have visited Cato Manor and looked around. It can undoubtedly boast of the most beautiful surroundings in South Africa, or even of the world. If the suggestions mooted by the hon. member were possible, I would wholeheartedly agree with him. I, however, have no knowledge of the internal development since this falls under the Department of Community Development and not under my department. The hon. member should therefore put these suggestions to the Minister of Community Development.

*The hon. member for Rosettenville raised a local matter, and received a very satisfactory reply from the Deputy Minister of Planning and the Environment. I am very grateful for this, because otherwise I might perhaps have had to furnish a reply which the hon. member might perhaps not have liked.

But I shall still proceed with the matter.

I am very pleased that the hon. member is satisfied with that reply.

Mr. Chairman, I need not reply to the hon. member for Bryanston again, because probably he only wanted to place on record what he wanted to say to the hon. member for Simonstown, and I can appreciate that.

The hon. member for Wonderboom spoke about the draft guide-plan for the northern area, or of greater Pretoria. As he knows, a meeting was held recently between the greater Pretoria area and his area which is included in that, and also in an area further south. I can appreciate that he does not want a delay, because they were the first to start with their guide-plan. I shall go into the matter, and if no problems arise, I shall afford it sympathetic consideration, but then there must be no conflicts, and no other problems must be created for us.

He asked whether section 6 of the Environment Planning Act also contained statutory provision for the sub-committee. That reminds me of years ago when I pleaded with the Minister of Planning of ten, twelve years ago for statutory status for regional development associations. I was told at the time that the time was not yet ripe. Well, perhaps I must furnish the same reply this evening. In principle, it is very seldom, however, that a subcommittee has statutory status, except where that is the case by virtue of the fact that it is an inseparable part of an existing statutory committee. Therefore, it is not impossible. The hon. member also asked that the community was to serve on such a committee. I think we already make provision for that to a certain extent, but if the hon. member will set out that aspect, too, more clearly for us, we can attend to it.

Mr. Chairman, I think I have replied to all members’ questions to the best of my ability and I think there is not much more for me to say. However, I have jotted down a few remarks here on which I want to elaborate. It flows, inter alia, from what the hon. member for Bryanston said earlier this evening. It is true that the allegation is often made that the Government has no concrete policy for physical planning; that we plan on an ad hoc basis. If a crisis were to arise, we would act in accordance with that; but when we act purposefully, what is the charge then? Then we encroach on the field of other authorities; then the autonomy of the provinces is brought into the picture, also from the side of the Opposition.

Since 1961, we have started acting positively, and hon. members will remember the Natural Resources Development Council. It is true that we did not have a definite planning policy, at the time; but the various bodies concerned in the matter have been coordinated gradually, and I can assure hon. members that in recent years we have been moving away from ad hoc planning. We find that in connection with the NPDP, the guide-plan system, and also in legislation drafted by us in the course of time, and which will gradually bring all these matters under control. I think the Central Government is acting at central government level with every justification, but I must mention something else here, because the hon. member said something I think I can agree with. The Prime Minister gives active guidance right at the top, at Cabinet level. If the Cabinet were to decide that physical action and physical planning which used to fall under another authority were to become a function of the Department of Planning and the Environment in certain circumstances and in certain cases, such other authority ought not to question that decision. All that is necessary, is that we must be able to prove, and, by means of co-operation and consultation, convince others that our decisive motive was the orderly development of the soil, the welfare of our population, and uniformity. In fact, that is what both the hon. member and I strive after. In my view, the Cabinet is our supreme policy-making planning body. Let it obtain information from the Department of Planning and the Environment; let it obtain advice from provinces, from local authorities, from the public and from regional development committees, but as soon as the Cabinet has taken a decision—and it is not unconstitutional—then other authorities must implement that decision, because I have to report to the Cabinet in that regard. Therefore it is important that I say it in this forum this evening, because I think it has not yet penetrated properly in all quarters. The idea is not to act autocratically in this regard. In our country where planning has not always gone as desired in the past, it is important that we introduce a better and more co-ordinated planning action.

The hon. member also charged us with not having any direction but in accordance with our guide-plan action, we first select the greater metropolitan areas and next the larger towns. Coupled therewith, we have the National Physical Development Plan, involving 38 regions with principal towns and smaller towns. In November last year, the Regional Economic Development Plan, in which projections were made for 38 regions, was given its finishing touches. Regional development advisory committees were established throughout the country, so as to enable the public as such, as part of the administrative machinery, to furnish us with advice and also assist with projections, so that the country may develop in a balanced manner. If hon. members want to satisfy themselves of that, it is indeed proof that during the past three years, we have been progressing systematically. I want you to differentiate between a department which is constantly in the news, and one which does its work. I think one should constantly try to draw this distinction. I am not drawing a comparison with any other department, but I just want to tell the Committee that this is not a department which seeks publicity. You will find the proof in the work which we do, and if you acquaint yourself of what takes place within the framework of these hardworking people. The staff consists of 250 people only, of whom by far the greater percentage are professional people.

The guide plans are progressing extremely well, and in respect of all the larger complexes, we already have either statutory or nonstatutory guide plans in operation. I have already initiated four statutory guide plans which can indeed be enforced—and that is what the hon. member is asking for—but their continuation still remains negotiation, and not enforcement. Ultimately they are enforced. Once a man has agreed to do something, he must be compelled to carry it out, or else the entire progress of orderly planning will be impeded. There are also many non-statutory plans—in fact, there are more than 20 of them mapped throughout the country, and I can show these maps to the hon. member. If he looks at those maps, he will see that not a single part of the country is being neglected. Hon. members will also see it if they look carefully—and I, personally, cannot see that it will change—that one can already see the image of South Africa in the year 2000. Within that plan, we shall accommodate all the peoples of South Africa, so that there will be place for everyone. In point of fact, in drawing up our regional development plan, we took into account the ten homelands, the four metropolitan areas and the 38 regions.

I think it is time for me to conclude, but I just want to say that I am very sorry for having been unable to say more on the energy aspects of the task of the Department of Planning. I just want to mention to you that as far as the non-conventional energy resources are concerned, the department is engaged in very interesting developments and research, and that quite a number of reports will be published later on. We are investigating the value of coal and its utilization, as well as the dangers as regards the fact that we may find ourselves in difficulties within the space of 15 years, and we are doing research in this regard. We shall publish reports about that. We are taking a close look at the entire aspect of nuclear energy. We are looking at all the pros and cons of that, and our small section within the department acts as a co-ordinating section. We are really developing something there which will eliminate the necessity to establish a Department of Energy in South Africa at this stage. The manner in which we undertake energy research, the manner in which we publish the reports, and the manner in which we advise the Government, are matters which one adjusts from time to time. It is not the way in which the clever Pres. Carter may have acted by putting a plan on paper and hoping that everybody will follow him. It is simply not like that; it is a matter which is being adjusted dynamically from day to day.

Mr. Chairman, I thank you. I think I have replied to all the hon. members and have said enough about the subject. I have nothing more to say.

Votes agreed to.