laid upon the Table:

Mr Speaker, I give notice that I shall move tomorrow, pursuant to Standing Order No 21:

[Interjections.]

You are saboteurs! [Interjections.]

Order! Any further notices of motion?

You are saboteurs! You are sabotaging the future of this country! [Interjections.]

Mr Speaker, on a point of order: Does the hon member for Durban Central have the right to accuse the Government side of this House of being saboteurs?

But it is true! [Interjections.]

Order!

Mr Speaker, there another hon member of the PFP is confirming it.

Order! Did the hon member for Durban Central say that?

Either that, or you are insane!

Mr Speaker, I said the Government were saboteurs because they were sabotaging the future of this country.

Order! The hon member will withdraw those words immediately!

Mr Speaker, I am afraid I cannot withdraw those words.

Order! Then the hon member is disregarding the authority of the Chair. He must withdraw from the Chamber for the remainder of the day’s sitting.

[Whereupon the hon member withdrew.]

Mr Speaker, on a further point of order: The hon member for Green Point repeated the same words.

He alleged it was even worse!

Order! Did the hon member for Green Point use those words?

Mr Speaker, I said I agreed with the hon member for Durban Central. If the Government are not saboteurs, they are insane.

Order! The hon member will withdraw those words as well.

Mr Speaker, I am sorry, but I am not prepared to withdraw them.

Order! Then that hon member, too, must withdraw immediately from the Chamber!

[Whereupon the hon member withdrew.]

Mr Speaker, may I address you in relation to this matter?

Yes, the hon Chief Whip may now address me.

Mr Speaker, it is not my intention to question your ruling. Allow me, however, to point out the following. About a forthnight ago in this House—you were not in the Chair, but the Chairman of the House, I believe, was presiding—a ruling was given in connection with the use of the word “saboteur”. It was not a considered ruling from the Chair, but the Chairman of the House ruled that the use of the words “sabotage” and “saboteur” was not unparliamentary. I should like to indicate that that may be the basis on which the two hon gentlemen you have just ordered out of the House reasoned when using those words.

Order! I may just point out to the hon the Chief Whip of the Official Opposition that I am well aware of that incident as I was, in fact, following the proceedings on closed circuit television in my office. I have discussed this matter, but as far as I am concerned it is unparliamentary, and I rule accordingly.

Mr Chairman, I request the privilege of the half-hour.

This is the second year in which we are discussing this hon Minister’s Budget Vote under own affairs. This is, of course, part of the arrangement under the tricameral system. Last year the hon the Minister was at a disadvantage because the department had just been established, and there was therefore no annual report available. I am pleased to say now that the hon the Minister has honoured the promise he made us last year and has produced an annual report. I have it here and I would like to congratulate the hon the Minister and Mr Gerber and his seven regional directors on their assuming office and on the task they have undertaken in this Department of Local Government, Housing and Works. I would like to refer particularly to the very fine exposition of the Development and Housing Act of 1985—it is referred to rather extensively in this annual report—which was the only own affairs Act passed last year and is one that is important for the complete administration of this department.

There is, however, a narrow line of division between the functions of this department and the functions of local government affecting the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning, and also the housing and works functions of this department and the functions of the hon the Minister of Public Works in the Cabinet. The important functions of this ministry are of course local government—that is White local authorities throughout South Africa— and housing for Whites.

At a glance, Programme 1 of the Vote in regard to the estimates of revenue and expenditure shows that the department has grown substantially. The figure reflecting current expenditure has increased from R17,4 million to R47,42 million—that is an increase of R29,9 million or 58%. Capital expenditure has increased from R15 million to R178 million, and that is an increase of R163 million. The capital expenditure has therefore increased 11 times or by some 1100%. The increase is reflected in both current and capital expenditure mostly on the provision of buildings, structures and equipment. It would seem that this is now growing into a very large empire and bureaucracy.

I mentioned that there was a narrow line of distinction between own affairs and general affairs in these departments, and the hon the Minister was obliged to state his policy concerning the duties of his department. This appears in col 4537 of the Hansard of 30 April 1985.

In the very next column the hon the Minister in discussing his responsibility for local government, housing and works, said that the State President had entrusted to him responsibilities for the White population group in terms of a general law and that the responsibilities had to be implemented within an area which had been declared to be for the use of the White group.

This is the difficulty I have and I will refer to it later on. However, the hon the Minister is responsible for the following: The Prevention of Illegal Squatting Act, 1951; the State Land Disposal Act, 1961; the Housing Act of 1966, with the exclusion of certain sections; the Expropriation Act; the Rent Control Act to which some of our speakers will refer, as I will later; the Slums Act; and section 23 of the Finance and Financial Adjustments Acts Consolidation Act. There are a variety of laws affecting White settlements.

It is agreed that housing remains one of the top priorities. There is the promotion of home-ownership and there is a difficulty where this is concerned. When we discuss the question of housing and home-ownership under own affairs we have to do so in terms of the policy laid down by the hon the Minister. This also appears in the Hansard of 30 April 1985 at col 4541, and I quote:

Hence my statement that there is a very fine distinction between own affairs and general affairs and their control by the various hon Ministers to whom I have referred.

What I have to say is of course no reflection on this hon Minister. I have had the pleasure of working with him for several years particularly on commissions of inquiry. We know that he is a devoted and a hardworking Minister and that he is tackling his new job as best he can. It is not his fault that he has to administer own affairs and make certain distinctions in a department which should be a department for all South Africans of all groups to cover all local authorities in South Africa, to cover housing for all population groups and to administer the laws for all the groups in South Africa.

It seems from the increase in the figures I have quoted from the Budget that we are entrenching the concept of own affairs. I want to warn that this will make it more difficult to unravel the tricameral system. In view of the fact that we have been told that no law is a holy cow and even that the tricameral system—if I recollect what the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning said—will not be here forever and will be changed one day, I do not think that we should be building upon these large bureaucracies. We should rather be breaking them down and working towards only having general affairs covering all the activities of one parliament for all.

In the circumstances and for the purposes of debate, however, we are confined in this Vote to a discussion of local government, housing and works and the administration of rent control which is an important aspect of this department’s task.

Firstly, I want to refer more specifically to local authorities. We have to see local authorities—I can now only refer to White local authorities—in relation to the establishment of regional services councils and the demise of the system of provincial councils. Whereas local government bodies were under the control of the provincial administrations they are now to be subject to direct Government control in the persons of the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning and the hon the Ministers responsible for the local authorities of each of the three population groups in the three Houses. In addition, there is the establishment of regional services councils which will now directly affect local authorities including the White local authorities controlled by this hon Minister.

I should like to try to paint a picture of the White local authorities now under this new umbrella. I shall also try to show what their remaining functions will be and what financial resources will be available to them in the future. The figures I am about to quote from the official South African Municipal Year Book for 1985 are the latest available.

There are 185 local authorities in the Cape, 51 in Natal, 67 in the Orange Free State and 88 in the Transvaal. That means that we are dealing with 391 local authorities.

I would like to give a breakdown of these figures. In the Cape there are six city councils, 166 town councils and 63 village councils. Natal has two city councils, 30 town councils, 15 village councils and 37 health committees. The Transvaal has four city councils, 57 town councils, 29 village councils and 10 health committees. The Free State has two city councils, 68 town councils, six village councils and two local boards. This is rather a large mouthful that this hon Minister and his department are biting off!

Obviously, a local authority can only provide the necessary services if it has the money; in other words, it must be financially viable. Its main source of revenue is usually the ratepayers, but ratepayers cannot be expected to go on footing the bill for the local authority’s expenses indefinitely.

The history of requests for additional sources of revenue for local authorities is practically old hat and goes back to the 12 years during which the Borckenhagen Committee sat. The hon member for Umbilo will remember that nothing came of this. Driessen, Browne and Croeser also dealt with this matter. The only one which had any effect was the Driessen Committee because it recommended some small subsidies for local authorities and transport. However, these recommendations were never implemented and brought very little relief to local authorities. So, they battled on, increasing their tariffs on rates, electricity and water, and owners and ratepayers were soaked.

A local authority must provide amenities, but these amenities are not financially viable. Parks, swimming pools, libraries, museums and civic theatres are not run as viable entities and have to be subsidized as amenities. That is what ratepayers expect and that is what ratepayers should get. The local authority of a city like Johannesburg suffers very substantial deficits because it has to run a transport system based on apartheid. It incurs a loss of between R12 million and R15 million a year because it has to run separate transport services for separate race group.

Traffic in the cities is getting denser. New roads and motorways have to be built. In Johannesburg the Ml and the M2 are becoming saturated and the stage will be reached when traffic lights will have to be erected at entrances to the Ml and the M2 to control the number of cars because the traffic is becoming so dense. When it comes to the provision of new motorways similar to the Ml and the M2, where is the money going to come from? There is no provincial administration, and will this hon Minister be able to grant funds to the local authority?

Johannesburg will probably need an underground railway system. I am now talking about something like R10 million per km. There is no way that that city or any other can afford to do this. Where will this money come from if such an undertaking becomes essential? I had a look at the BART, the Bay Area Rapid Transit scheme in San Fransisco, which it was estimated would cost $7 billion when it was started and five years later had cost $14 billion to complete. It is impossible to undertake an underground transport system unless it is done on a national basis, and the regional services councils cannot assist on a national basis because they do not have the funds.

A glance at Schedule 2 of the Regional Services Councils Act will show that there are 22 functions which will be handed over to regional services councils and therefore will be taken away from the local authorities. Two of the main ones—these are Nos 1 and 2 in the Schedule—are the bulk supply of water and the bulk supply of electricity. These are substantial revenue-producing services to local authorities, and they rely upon this revenue. The charge for sewage purification is also a source of revenue. These sources of revenue will now be lost to the local authorities. I mention them because they will now be lost to the local authorities because in terms of that Schedule they will be taken over by the regional services councils. I also want to point out that there is no provision in the Regional Services Councils Act to allow regional services councils to make direct payments to local authorities to assist them in their administration, but merely a provision to compensate a local authority for expenses it incurs in providing the services it is obliged to carry out if in a core city connected to the regional services council.

There may well be some of the items in the Schedule which are run at a loss and which could be taken over by a regional services council. I can concede that the local authority would benefit in that situation by not having to bear the loss on that particular service. However, I cannot see that additional sources of revenue will be forthcoming to that authority from the change that is coming about.

The main source of revenue for the regional services councils are the turnover and payroll taxes. The core city will be obliged to act as agent and will have to collect these levies from the region. This is a most unwelcome and unpopular chore that the core city will have to undertake. These levies have been criticised by all who are going to be involved and who will have to pay them, and that means most people.

There is a considerable amount of exercise for the local authority involved in this. I should like to take Johannesburg as an example again, should it become a core city. It was calculated in Johannesburg that, to the best of my knowledge, depending on the size of the region itself, they will probably have something in the region of 150 000 accounts, and in order to handle this they will need the staff of at least 20 persons who will have to be paid an annual amount of something like R300 000. A computer as well as cash registers and terminals will have to be purchased at an estimated cost of approximately R500 000, that is half a million rand. Office space will have to be obtained and such items as stationery, postage, electricity, water, telephone, microfilms and legal expenses will cost a further R200 000. All in all, the toal annual cost will be in the region of R610 000. It is a considerable expense to the core city to collect this most unwelcome tax and although they will be compensated by the regional services council, who will in fact be paying for it in the end? Cities and town councils that are in the region, but not in the core city, will receive no additional resources and no help other than that for the region. In fact, the local authorities themselves will have to pay a payroll tax and a turnover tax. In other words, all the local authorities will have to pay these two taxes as well. In this regard, all local authorities are eagerly awaiting the regulations which still have to be framed in terms of this Act, to see what the details are concerning the payment of these taxes and how they will be administered.

I should like to ask, for example, whether the receiver of revenue of that city will make his records available to the local authority in order to establish whether the two taxes are being correctly paid. Moreover, if the taxes are not paid, who will take action; and if action is taken, how will relief be obtained? These are a number of unanswered questions which the regulations will have to resolve.

Electricity and water are administered by Escom and the water boards. If they are to act on an agency basis, will they be administering these services? How then will there be additional sources of revenue to the local authority? Will there be just a small local authority whose services have been diminished by the services detailed in Schedule 2 and which is merely providing housing for its population, having its own health inspectors and running its own traffic department? Alternatively, is it the intention of the Government to diminish the functions of the local authorities so that they will not require any additional sources of revenue? If that is so, then I have a big problem.

I do not quarrel with the fact that there are a number of local authorities—particularly small ones—that do not even provide basic services, and that the regional services councils will assist them in providing the basic services such as sewerage and water, for example, which are essential. I also concede that the Government’s point that they wish the Coloureds, Indians, Blacks and Whites to sit together on one regional services council, constitutes a step in the direction of getting people to talk together. However, the local authorities will have to send their representatives to serve on this body. I ask the hon the Minister what will happen if some White or Black local authorities refuse to participate in or to send delegates to serve on the regional services council. Will the whole system then not collapse? Would it not suffice merely to give a subsidy to those small local authorities which are unable to provide the basic services so as to improve the quality of life in their regions?

Another problem I foresee concerns town planning. In terms of most existing town-planning schemes, as far as rezoning, the layout of townships and appeals against consent uses are concerned, the approval of the director of local government in the specific province is required. Now that the provincial councils will no longer exist, will this hon Minister be directly responsible for the approval of town-planning schemes? When the hon the Minister is stationed in Cape Town or in Pretoria for half a year, how will he be in a position to decide what local town-planning scheme a local authority in any one of the towns in South Africa should implement? Surely the time has come for the hon the Minister to agree that decisions with regard to town-planning schemes should be left entirely in the hands of the local authorities themselves. They should have full autonomy to deal with them.

I think the hon the Minister is fully aware of the Venter Commission’s recommendations as far as the registration and layout of townships is concerned. The Venter Commission recommended that there should be short-cuts with regard to the registration of townships. We should like to hear from the hon the Minister what the future holds in this regard.

Under the circumstances I want to request the hon the Minister to spell out for us, during the discussion of this Vote, what the White local authorities will look like after the provincial councils have ceased to exist and the regional services councils have been established in relation to, firstly, their financial resources and, secondly, their functions. This must be spelt out in view of the fact that the businessmen in Johannesburg and the core city, for example, will have to pay more because of the levying of the two new forms of taxation but will receive less in terms of amenities and facilities in a diminished council with diminished functions. The bottom line to which I want to refer is that the cities will be paying for the infrastructure and services of the poorer local authorities which should merely receive subsidies. Perhaps that is why large areas are being suggested as regional areas for this very purpose.

I do not believe from reports that I have read that Black local authorities will be very interested in serving the regional services councils, and I am not sure that the Coloureds or the Indians are either in perpetuating the own affairs concepts in the tricameral system. It is true that the Government will be contributing a substantial percentage of revenue because it will also be paying the turnover and payroll tax, suggested at something like 50%. In the long run, however, is it not the taxpayer who has to pay for this, because in the end he has to pay the additional money to the Government, the Government having to pay the payroll and the turnover tax? It boils down to the same thing in the end and again it is John Citizen, the taxpayer, who has to bear the brunt of this whole scheme. It is true, I admit, that the levies can be deducted for tax purposes, but that does not defeat the argument I have just advanced.

As far as welfare organisations are concerned, religious and educational bodies are excluded, but perhaps the hon the Minister can help me in regard to the two taxes I have referred to by telling me whether private and Government educational establishments are included, because they have staff and they pay them, so there is a payroll tax involved.

I still have my doubts about the whole new system when I think back on Soweto before the establishment of the administration boards. Members with experience of the City Council of Johannesburg sitting here will recall that there was a wonderful relationship between all the citizens of Soweto and the Johannesburg City Council when it provided amenities such as sports amenities and subsidised and built houses, etcetera, despite Government policy trying to obstruct it from time to time. That relationship disappeared with the establishment of the administration boards and we have the situation that we have today because of Government policy.

I must therefore warn that there is the distinct danger in this system that the quality of life of the White local authorities as well as the other groups of local authorities may well deteriorate and that the whole object is going to be defeated.

We are only entrenching apartheid, not getting away from it. The Rev Hendrickse, an hon member of this Cabinet, on behalf of the House of Representatives said that he was giving this tricameral system only two years to make the necessary changes. In the circumstances I therefore imagine the NPP will support him. I ask, in conclusion, whether it is really worthwhile for a period of two years embarking upon this road that the Government it taking us on insofar as local authorities are concerned. I therefore call for a halt to regional services councils while there is still time.

Mr Chairman, before I react to the speech made by the hon member for Hillbrow, I merely want to refer to certain departmental matters. This Committee is reviewing this department’s first year of activities in today’s debate. We who have worked very closely with the hon the Minister can attest to his exceptional dedication as Minister of Local Government, Housing and Works. In the difficult first years of establishing this department, the hon the Minister has left his mark on the department, on its organisations as well as the nature of its public image. We therefore want to put it to the hon the Minister that it is a pleasure for those of us on this side of the House to help him deal with housing, reorganising and reconstructing local government affairs.

We also convey our sincere thanks to the hon the Minister for the tour he so kindly arranged for us. I believe I am talking on behalf of all interested parties who went on the tour.

Then, Mr Chairman, I believe it is also appropriate on this occasion to refer to the Director-General of the department, Mr Andre Cornelissen, as well as to the head of department, Mr Frank Gerber, and his two senior men, Messrs Jan Koekemoer and Neville Karsen, who have performed their task with complete dedication throughout. When we review the exceptional results of the department as described in the annual report, we see proof of their dedicated labour, for which this Committee has very great appreciation. The same applies to the head office staff, the staff of the seven regional offices and the 450 members of the staff in service of the Department of Local Government, Housing and Works.

I want to come to the hon member for Hillbrow. He devoted his speech mainly to the position of the department under the new constitutional dispensation. It is a fact that the Official Opposition—we know their standpoint—declare themselves against the view that local government, housing and works is an own affair. I do not want to debate that matter any further this afternoon.

The hon member referred to regional services councils and their operation. To my knowledge this is a subject which falls under the Vote of the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning at present, and therefore I shall not elaborate on that matter.

I want to go on to debate another matter, viz the question of rent control which the hon member broached. The standpoint of this side of the Committee with regard to rent control is the following: This side of the Committee has a great deal of sympathy for the pensioners and those who are living on a fixed income, and the fact that rent increases are constantly eroding their incomes. When dealing with rent control, however, one is actually in a no-win situation as a legislator, because if, for example, one puts one’s left foot forward and gives greater protection to those who need it, the developers are angry with one. If, on the other hand, one leaves too much room for the free market system, in which supply and demand determine the rent to be applied, the tenants are angry with one. It is a situation in which one cannot win.

In the present economic circumstances, the standpoint of the NP is that the historic course of the Rent Control Act has made certain concessions to the entrepreneur or the developer possible during the past three years, and that the position of the protected tenant should be left unchanged at present because the following steps were taken in accordance with rent control protection to the advantage of the free market mechanism during the past three years…

In the first place, rent control was phased out over three periods. Rent control was phased out for buildings erected in the period 28 October 1949 to 31 May 1966, apart from those who qualify on the basis of their income. This led to lessors’ being able to increase their rent in accordance with supply and demand, except in certain cases in which there were protected tenants in buildings erected during the period 1949 to 1966. This was to the great advantage of the developers.

Secondly, section 4(b) of the Sectional Titles Act was amended two years ago, making it possible for developers to convert units under the sectional title legislation, regardless of whether there were protected tenants in the building or not, but on condition that the protected tenant’s right to occupation was guaranteed.

The Government took all these steps to normalise the very delicate position of rent control. On the one hand it wanted to give the developers room to develop and on the other it wanted to retain the protection of rent control for those whose income was being eroded in the very difficult economic conditions of today.

The hon the Minister will elaborate upon this, but the Government’s standpoint is that the recommendations of the select committee, in which inter alia the hon member for Hillbrow and I had the privilege of serving, should be brought to the attention of the department. Each case of application for exemption from rent control is dealt with ad hoc by the hon the Minister. A thorough enquiry is being made into the circumstances of the tenants in the particular building to ensure that pensioners and tenants whose income is under R400, are not inconvenienced. It is true that in the present economic situation these people eventually have no other refuge.

That is the position of rent control in brief. I think the opposition parties will react to it for the purposes of this debate, and then the hon the Minister can reply to their arguments.

I want to refer to another matter in the departmental set-up. First I want to make the statement that there are two functions that no state can neglect. One is the defence function and the other is the housing function. The defence function concerns the integrity of a country’s borders.

Order! I regret to inform the hon member that his time has expired.

Mr Chairman, I rise to enable the hon member to complete his speech.

The hon member for Bellville may proceed.

Mr Chairman, I thank the hon member for Pietermaritzburg North.

These Progs stand together.

A state’s housing function has the quality of life of its country’s people as its concern. Both these aspects are necessary for an orderly national economy so that everyone in the country can live normally, in an orderly way and in peace. That is why the housing branch of the department is a matter of very great priority, and why the hon the Minister announced the country-wide housing survey and also the establishment of a housing data bank at the department this year, because the operational basis of every body, institution and department involved with housing requires that it must have knowledge of the housing need.

The determination of South Africa’s housing requirements is a matter of the greatest priority, therefore. That is why it is important for this Committee to consider the objectives of the housing survey once again.

In the first place it is the objective of the housing survey to record the name of every person who is inadequately housed. Secondly, the registered requirements must be quantified and a reliable picture of the housing conditions must be obtained. Thirdly, a scientific data basis must be maintained. Eventually it is very important for the local authorities as agents of the department to do everything possible to quantify these housing details and the need for housing, to reflect this on the necessary forms and to send this information back to the department as quickly as possible.

I also want to refer to another matter that is in the news and which, in my opinion, the Committee should consider seriously, viz the question of retirement villages or villages for the aged. Retirement villages for the aged are a popular field of investment for the private sector, especially in recent times. The percentage of senior citizens, age 60 and higher, is increasing constantly. The demand for retirement village housing is increasing, but in a certain sense this category of prospective house-buyer is an easy target for developers, because in the first place bond financing is not as necessary for this type of housing, and emphasis is laid on the security that will be provided to these people as well as the question of health care.

Retirement villages per se are a healthy phenomenon, because everyone reaches a time in his life when the domestic responsibilities become too much for him and a need for a smaller housing unit arises. The houses left by these people are brought back into circulation in this way, and the infrastructure in that area, for example schools, transport systems and churches, is stimulated. That is why the idea of a housing or retirement village for senior citizens is a sound principle, but there are basic requirements for the development of a successful retirement village.

In the first place, provision must be made in each scheme for security and health care. The developers must also make provision for remaining involved in the scheme in some way or another because this form of housing is an easy target market, and, particularly since hard-earned life savings are involved in the purchase of such a unit, there is a measure of concern about the vulnerability of the aged and their possible exploitation.

The department is considering the matter and an inquiry is in progress, but until such time as the inquiry has been concluded, I want to make use of the opportunity to tell all prospective buyers to make very sure of the following aspects: In the first place there must be adequate security and health care. Secondly, they must find out about the position regarding the resale of the units. Thirdly, they must ask what form of title is being acquired. In the fourth place, they must inquire about the full and final purchase-price to be paid only on final occupation. If these guidelines are kept in mind, there are fewer possibilities of exploiting senior citizens when they buy a unit in a retirement village.

In the last place there is the matter I have often discussed with members of the department and the hon the Minister, viz the matter of leasehold. The hon member for Langlaagte and I have spoken about it in the past. Leasehold can be used to decrease the cost of housing. Page 40 of the department’s report refers to this. There are many advantages to using leasehold to lower the cost of houses. I have discussed the matter with the department and the Director of Housing on a number of occasions.

The registration of a leasehold on the land in favour of the developer involves the possibility of decreasing the prices of houses by up to 30%. It works as follows: Traditionally, housing is regarded as consisting of the improvements as well as the property. This need not necessarily be the case, however. The property component can be separated from the improvement component. The house can be sold, while the land can be rented by the next house-owner. This system has definite advantages in that the cost of the house is immediately decreased by the cost of the property.

Suppose the land costs R25 000 and the so-called improvements cost R40 000. If the land components are excluded from the total cost, the house is bought for R40 000, and the property is rented from the developer by the next owner. Indeed, there must be a preemptive right with this kind of development, but it has the advantage that the deposit payable by young house purchasers is much lower, and in the case of the developer it eliminates the awkward question in connection with income tax complications. This form of housing has exciting possibilities. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I request the privilege of the second half-hour.

At the end of his speech the hon member for Bellville touched upon a matter on which I should like to agree with him, that of retirement towns for the aged, and I should like to add to that people who are, for some or other reason, medically unfit or can no longer practise a profession.

In supporting him in his plea, I want to ask the hon the Minister and his department to turn their gaze to the rural areas when investigating retirement towns for the aged. There are many towns that are emptying out because of the depopulation of the rural areas.

I should like to ask the hon the Minister to give very serious attention to the possibility of such a development in the small town of Sishen, which the hon the Minister knows well. Sishen is a beautiful little town way out there in the Northern Cape with its wonderful fresh air and lovely camel-thorn trees. It has a healthy climate, but it is now a ghost town as a result of the resettlement of Iscor’s employees in the large town of Kathu, which is closer to the job opportunities available to them. So a beautiful little town has turned into a ghost town, a town with a school and a church, a clinic, public swimming baths and sports facilities and beautiful recreation halls. I want to lodge a plea with the hon the Minister requesting him to contact Iscor as quickly as possible with a view to making Sishen a possible starting point for a retirement town for the aged and for people who are medically unfit. I am advocating an investigation into the possibility of making use of Sishen for that purpose.

The hon member for Bellville did not reply to the questions the hon member for Hillbrow put to him. He inquired about the tasks remaining to local authorities after regional services councils had been established and provincial councils had disappeared. Unfortunately the hon member for Bellville did not reply to that at all, except to say that regional services councils fell under the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning. These are questions to which we would very much like to have answers today. I shall be going into that matter at greater length.

The hon member for Hillbrow said there was a very narrow gap separating the department of this hon Minister from that of the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning. That is indeed the case, and today I want to appeal to the hon the Minister not to carry out this task as a Minister who feels he has to oblige the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning. I want to ask the hon the Minister not to be a public relations officer for the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning when it comes to own local authorites, particularly in the case of the Whites. Let me tell the hon the Minister that he will have to know what he is about if he does not intend to be one, but we in the CP will lend support to this Minister if he takes a strong stand in protecting the Whites when it comes to own local authorities. [Interjections.] He need not be afraid; we shall give him our support when the time comes.

You will also harness the AWB.

No, we will not harness the AWB. All we want is an election. Then we will do a reasonable job of reducing the numerical strength of that hon member’s party and see to it that these things come into their own. [Interjections.]

In terms of Schedule 1 of the 1983 Constitution, local government is an own affair. When it comes to local government bodies, at present provincial authorities are the controlling bodies. It is already a known fact that shortly provincial councils, as democratically elected second-tier government bodies, are to disappear. It is also known that when provincial councils disappear, they will be replaced by multi-racial executive committees whose members are appointed by the State President. The executive committees, to which Black, White, Coloured and Asian members can be appointed, will then, under the chairmanship of an appointed administrator, take over the functions of the present provincial councils as far as general affairs at the second tier of government are concerned.

The own affairs functions, dealt with by provincial councils, will therefore have to be transferred to the own affairs administrations as quickly as possible. Local government, as an own affair for Whites, will therefore have to be transferred as quickly as possible to the Department of Local Government, Housing and Works in the Administration: House of Assembly.

I should like to quote from this lovely report of the department. Let me tell hon members that I have already had the privilege of an interview with the Director-General of this Administration. We find him a very pleasant, friendly and helpful person and we want to congratulate him on his report. I quote from chapter 3 of the report— Local Government, subheading “Establishment of a new Directorate: Local Government”:

In this connection I want to ask what matters the hon the Minister regards as being of fundamental importance to the own affairs administration, matters that have to be transferred to the hon the Minister’s department. I also want to ask him if the transfer has already been effected. I want to quote further:

The hon the Minister’s department has been consulted about the identification of those own affairs and their method of implementation. I now want to ask the hon the Minister whether the identification of own affairs— that portion which is at present vested in the province and which has to be transferred to his department—has already taken place and whether the relevant powers that the provinces have have been finalised and have already been transferred to the hon the Minister.

Since provincial councils are now disappearing, to be replaced by multi-racial executive committees, I want to ask whether all own affairs have been identified and transferred to the Department of Local Government, Housing and Works. Has local government control of White local authorities already been transferred to the hon the Minister? If that is not the case, is it going to take place before the provincial councils shortly disappear? I think it is very important for these matters to be finalised before the provincial councils disappear.

A further matter on which I should like to obtain clarity is the following:

I want to ask the hon the Minister whether the unnecessary administrative measures that have to be done away with have also been identified and, if so, whether he can give us an indication of which measures, in regard to the control of local authorities, are regarded as being unnecessary. I also want to know whether he has already done away with such measures. Is the hon the Minister—perhaps even during this session—going to introduce legislation to get rid of such measures?

I read the following in the report:

There is one investigation I should like to single out, and that is an investigation into the future of divisional councils in the Cape. I want to ask the hon the Minister what this investigation has yielded and whether the results of the investigation are what the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning already has in mind, and that is that divisional councils in the Cape, which are White, democratically elected local authorities, are going to disappear and be replaced by regional services councils. I should like the hon the Minister to clarify this matter for us in unequivocal terms.

I quote further from the report:

Here we are dealing with local authorities which are going to fall under this Hon Minister and which are going to co-operate with, and be a very important component of, regional services councils, the projected multiracial local authorities falling under the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning.

There are two bosses.

Yes, two bosses. Regional services councils are a multiracial form of local government which is now being created and which will not be furnishing any new services, because the services which are to be furnished by the regional services councils are services which are at present furnished in the Cape by local authorities such as municipalities and divisional councils. I want to make the statement that regional services councils are going to prove the strongest obstacle to the continued existence of own local authorities. I should like to quote, from schedule 2 of the Regional Services Councils Act, what the functions, referred to in section 3(1)(b), of the regional services councils are going to be. They are going to be responsible for:

1. 1 Bulk supply of water
2. 2 Bulk supply of electricity
3. 3 Sewerage purification works and main sewarage disposal pipelines
4. 4 Land usage and transport planning in the region
5. 5 Roads and stormwater drainage
6. 6 Passenger transport services
7. 7 Traffic matters
8. 8 Abbattoirs
9. 9 Fresh produce markets
10. 10 Refuse dumps
11. 11 Cemetries and crematoriums
12. 12 Ambulance and fire-brigade services
13. 13 Health services
14. 14 Airports
15. 15 Civil defence
16. 16 Libraries
17. 17 Museums
18. 18 Recreation facilities
19. 19 Environment conservation
20. 20 Promotion of tourism …

and other regional functions. At present these functions are all carried out by White local authorities. If all these functions are now to be transferred to the regional services councils, I should like to know from the hon the Minister what would be left for White local authorities. This is a very important question, a very important question indeed …

It is self-determination.

It is a very important question about the self-determination of the Whites at local government level, that of what is left for White local authorities. [Interjections.] Since the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning is here, I asked the hon the Minister of Local Government, Housing and Works please not to be a Minister bent on having to please that hon Minister. We shall back the hon the Minister of Local Government, Housing and Works if, in regard to White self-determination at local government level, he does not give the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning his way in everything he wishes to do in future. [Interjections.]

I again ask the hon the Minister to spell out for us what is left for White municipalities. It would appear as if the hon the Minister and his department will have much less authority in regard to local authorities than the present provincial councils have over local authorites. I am saying that that is what will happen, and if that is not to be the case, and the hon the Minister is going to have more power over White local authorities than the present provincial councils do, I should like the hon the Minister to prove to me today that I am wrong.

In the Regional Services Councils Act— and in local authorities too—there is control of recreational functions, recreational facilities. I now want to ask the hon the Minister also to protect the interests of the Whites in cases where recreational facilities fall within the jurisdiction of White local authorities and therefore under his jurisdiction. I have here Die Burger of today in which Mr Jannie Momberg of Stellenbosch says “meng of gee pad”. He says that those who do not want mixed sport should get out of the way.

When sports clubs and recreational facilities fall within the hon the Minister’s area of jurisdiction, he must please not take any notice of liberalists such as Mr Jannie Momberg who until recently was a chairman of the NP, who advocated at an NP congress that the Group Areas Act should go and who says here that such people should get out of the way. And in regard to recreational facilities within the area of jurisdiction of the local authorities for which he is the Minister, the hon the Minister should also ensure that White self-determination is not destroyed by liberalists like Mr Momberg and other liberal sports administrators.

*Mr A F FOUCHÉ: Mr Chairman, I listened attentively to the speech made by the hon member for Kuruman, and today, more than ever, it became clear to me why the hon member is on that side of the Committee and I am on this side. [Interjections.]

The hon member concentrated on local Government and the regional services councils, and I think that is what is relevant in this discussion today. The hon member for Kuruman must really make some time to have a cup of tea with the hon the Minister of Local Government, Housing and Works so that the hon the Minister can give him an indication of exactly what everything in our country is about, because the hon member has no understanding of these matters.

That hon member will remember that when he and I were still in the same party, I referred time without number in this House to the tariffs being levied by local authorities, made the point that many of those services are rendered on a regional basis and said we should have to break down certain empires in the process.

The hon member referred to sewerage works. Does he expect every local authority to have sewerage works? Does he, with the high cost of road building equipment, expect each local authority to have a full set of road building equipment? [Interjections.] The hon member also referred to abattoirs. Surely it is no strange phenomenon for regional abattoirs to have existed through the years. He referred to fresh produce markets.

When I think of the road ahead, I say one can get excited about the course the Government is taking to ensure that services in our towns and our cities are rendered at the lowest possible tariffs. As far as this matter is concerned, that will suffice.

When we take note of urbanisation in South Africa as well as in the rest of the world today, it serves as proof that local government will play an important part in future, in South Africa as well as in the rest of the world. Urbanisation is a world-wide phenomenon, and is occurring with increasing speed and intensity. The twentieth century has been characterised as the century of urbanisation. The city has rightly become the strongest socioeconomic power in modern society. The concentration of the population in four metropolitan areas—and I am referring specifically to the PWV area, the Durban-Pinetown area, the Port Elizabeth-Uitenhage area and the Greater Cape Town area—showed as early as 1980 that 53% of the total population, and approximately 80% of the urban population of the Republic of South Africa, were living in four metropolitan complexes. These four complexes house 67% of the total White population, more than 50% of the Coloured population, and more than 85% of the Asian population.

A considerable percentage of the total Black population outside the national states and the TBVC countries lives within these four metropolises. 60% of the urban Blacks live in these four metropolitan complexes.

What is the position in other countries? In a country like Sweden, for example, an area in which residential houses are situated 200 metres from one another, and which has more than 200 residents, is officially regarded as an urban area. In Japan an area must house at least 30 000 inhabitants to qualify as a local government. In Australia an area with at least 1 000 inhabitants is regarded as a local government. In the USA this figure is 2 500. In Spain a residential area with 10 000 inhabitants qualifies as a local government.

In 1950, 28,95% of the total world population lived in cities and towns. It is envisaged that in the year 2000, 51,29% of the total world population will be living in cities and towns. It is expected that the position in South Africa will be such by the year 2050 that 95% of the total population of all the population groups will be living within the boundaries of towns and cities. This shows us what the extent of local governments will be in future.

The hon member for Kuruman referred to the functions of local governments. I want to tell the hon member it is of the utmost importance that we take cognisance that local governments will have to render a service to their people, also in their immediate environment, regardless of the race or colour of those people. The hon members of the Conservative Party are not interested in healthy neighbourliness, however.

We are not interested in so-called healthy power-sharing!

I should like to tell the hon member for Kuruman and his party that they must consult the Scripture once again. I should like to give them a text from the Bible this afternoon, which they are welcome to go and read.

[Inaudible.]

Order!

[Inaudible.]

Order!

When they get home tonight, those hon members can read Proverbs 27 verse 10. There they will find that a neighbour …

[Inaudible.]

Order! The hon member for Langlaagte must contain himself! The Chairman has called for order repeatedly. The hon member is transgressing this ruling, however, even while he is asking for order. The hon member for Witbank may proceed.

Mr Chairman, Proverbs 27 verse 10 reads as follows:

The new translation of the Bible makes it very clear, and those hon members can go and read it themselves.

When we take cognisance of the present unrest in the country, and note how many homes of members of Black local authorities are being burnt down and destroyed, I believe that since local government is an own affair, and we are reviewing the question of local government for Whites this afternoon, we must also accept that we must practise and maintain healthy neighbourliness with the members of other population groups who live adjacent to the local government areas of the Whites.

Who has any doubt on that score?

I should like to come to a further aspect, viz housing, which is another branch of the department. I should like to make use of the opportunity this afternoon to express my particular appreciation to employers who go out of their way to make their contribution to making provision for housing for their employees.

This afternoon I should like to refer to housing for the infirm aged. Along with that I want to refer to the question of welfare housing, because the question of housing for the infirm aged forms a part of this. In this debate this afternoon I want to appeal to the bigger employers to become actively involved in providing housing to our needy people, in other words, to make provision for welfare housing.

During the past six years, up to and including December 1985, the Government has spent an amount of R243 million on welfare housing. Let us look at the prospects in this connection: A total amount of R64,9 million was provided by the authorities for welfare housing for the 1985-86 financial year. During that period R52,1 million was spent on housing for the aged alone. Despite the great amounts that are being spent, the demand for welfare housing at this stage is more than 16 000. Hon members can understand, therefore, that there is a great need which must be fulfilled.

We recently went to look at a retirement village for the aged, SASAR; and I should like to express my special appreciation to SATS this afternoon. SATS, as a big employer, sets a fine example to other employers. SATS is also prepared to make provision for retirement villages for the aged. In referring to SASAR, it is encouraging to note the total amount involved in building that retirement village.

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

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

The hon member for Witbank may proceed.

Mr Chairman, the building costs of that retirement village amounted to R6,5 million. What I find very encouraging, however, is the fact that the South African Railways Association themselves collected an amount of R1,5 million for the care of the aged. Provision has been made for 52 beds for infirm aged people and 283 aged people are housed there alone. I therefore think with SASAR—this is only one of five retirement villages to which SATS contributes—SATS has set a fine example, and one worthy of emulation, to our other bigger employers.

Subsequently I should like to come to the Year of the Disabled. The year 1986 is known as the Year of the Disabled. The theme for the Year of the Disabled is the involvement of the disabled person in the community. Certain targets have been set in this connection, but I am going to single out a few which I believe are really applicable to the Department of Local Government, Housing and Works. That is the main issue today. The Year of the Disabled, 1986, is actually part of the Decade of the Disabled. Let us look at the aims, for example. One of the aims is to promote the independent functioning of the disabled person within the community. A second aim is to cultivate a sound and correct attitude in the community towards the disabled person. I think local government can play a very important part in this connection. A third aim is to reconcile the physical environment with the disabled person’s need to be meaningfully involved in the community.

I am convinced that local government plus the necessary housing can definitely improve the living conditions of disabled people within the community considerably. In this connection I am thinking of our educational institutions for the disabled and all the places where disabled people are trained. Once they have completed their training, however, they truly become part of the community and then we who are involved in local government and housing have a responsibility to all of them.

With reference to the theme of the Year of the Disabled, involvement of the disabled in the community, I should like to address a request to the hon the Minister today. I want to ask him to consider appointing a commission of inquiry into housing of the disabled in South Africa as well as all the other associated facilities, in order to bring about the ideal as contained in the theme of the Year of the Disabled.

I think the Development and Housing Board can play a very important part in this. It would be a mistake not to involve the associations which are so directly involved in our responsibilities in respect of the disabled in such a committee of inquiry. It is also very important to involve our local authorities in this committee.

I am very grateful that the Department of Trade and Industry made special provision in their announcement regarding the standard building regulations in the Gazette of 18 April 1986. I therefore want to ask the hon the Minister for his sympathetic consideration of the request I am addressing this afternoon.

It is important to note that the so-called “big housing complexes” outside the community, are no longer acceptable, but that smaller units for eight to 10 residents or single housing units within the existing residential areas, are regarded as the most acceptable housing alternative for the more independent disabled people at present. The idea here is that the disabled person should be treated just like any member of the community who is not disabled.

It is important to have an own home in which he can function independently, and in which his possibilities can be developed, in keeping house and decorating his own home for example. An own home often provides the necessary motivation to develop one’s abilities and in this way to function independently within the community. In order to meet these needs of the disabled, there should also be housing alternatives in which one can function independently, or independently as far as possible, and if necessary can still receive certain services. In practice, however, there is not a great variety of housing alternatives for disabled people. A disabled person is often forced to choose an alternative which does not meet his expectations or his requirements.

There was a programme on the radio one Sunday afternoon a week or two ago and a 14-year-old disabled girl telephoned to take part in that programme. She asked specifically whether there was still a future for a disabled person in our country. She pointed out that she and both her parents had to move around in wheelchairs and that they had had to move house three times within a year because there was no suitable housing for disabled people. I therefore want to make the point that a serious need for the provision of housing to disabled people does exist in our country.

Disabled people were therefore seen as receivers who lived in institutions and not as unique people who could still make a valuable contribution within the community. The problem experienced in the past and still experienced now, is that physically handicapped people who have the ability to live independently if provided with the necessary services and adapted housing facilities, often were and still are dependent upon institutions or their parental homes. This problem resides in the fact that the community was and is not prepared to accommodate them inter alia by making sufficient housing alternatives available. Insufficient housing alternatives hinder the integration of the disabled person into the community and in this way also influence the rehabilitation of handicapped people in all spheres. By offering the disabled person a variety of housing alternatives, he can choose the alternative which will enable him to function independently according to his ability. In this way the disabled person will become part of the community, and will be accepted as one of its members.

A well-known person in the sphere of housing for the handicapped said on occasion:

Many projects were and are being undertaken to meet the housing requirements of the non-handicapped person. The same cannot be said for the housing requirements of the handicapped, however.

I should like to conclude my speech this afternoon by reading a little poem to the Committee. The writer of this poem is not known. It reads as follows:

Their precious charge, so meek and mild Is heaven’s very special child.

I request that we think of these people in our beautiful country. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I commend the hon member for Witbank on the tail-end of his speech. I too want to say a few words about that subject this afternoon but before doing so I want to touch on another matter.

The hon the Minister apologised to us last year for not being able to present an anuual report for obvious reasons as he did not really have anything to report upon. I think he has now more than made up for it and I think that Mr Gerber and the rest of the staff are to be complimented on an outstanding report. It is certainly one of the best that we have had this year and it will stay on my shelves for a long while. I believe it can be kept as a handbook if for no other reason than the comprehensive explanation that it gives of and the way it deals with the Development and Housing Act, 1985.

A number of speakers will no doubt during the course of this debate be talking about pensioners and their housing requirements. Some have already done so in fact. The hon member for Bellville spoke about retirement villages as did the hon member for Witbank. The hon member for Witbank has also just addressed us very eloquently on the handicapped and the disabled. The matter of pensioners and their housing requirements is a matter of ongonig concern to us all and I would not want anybody in this Committee to think that we on these benches do not share the desire to overcome this problem— we do.

Today, however, I would like to turn my attention towards the younger generation. I want to address the concern that I feel for the 25 to 35 year age group in our country. This is the age group where we find the newly-weds, the young couples intent on starting a family and the young, newly-qualified professionals who are embarking on a new career. This is the age group wherein lies the future of South Africa. This is the age group which at all costs has to be encouraged to stay in our country so that it can share in determining that future. These people must determine it, not only for themselves, but also for the generations to come. There is no shadow of doubt that it is in this age group that we find the greatest number of qualified people who are seeking a new life in other countries because of their fear of what the future holds for them in South Africa.

I should like to quote from an article by Jos Gerson, a lecturer at the UCT School of Economics, which appeared in the Financial Mail of 16 May 1986:

I hope the hon the Minister of Home Affairs is listening!—

That is exactly what is happening, but I believe that property ownership—home ownership—puts down roots more effectively and quickly than anything else. If we encourage home ownership, we will create permanence, and if we do so in this age group we will be helping to guarantee the future.

Let us look at the problems facing the young man on his own—or the young woman, for that matter—or the young married couple wanting to establish their own home. The problems can be summed up in one word, namely capital. That is what the young home owner requires to get going. He needs a certain amount of capital before he can start and, most importantly, he must work within the parameters of his income. I would like to ask whether we are giving him sufficient encouragement, help and motivation.

I think land prices answer the first part of my question. Land prices in this country today are inflated beyond all reasonable measure, largely due to our own actions. I am referring to legislation introduced at provincial and local level whereby certain standards and the provision of certain services are insisted upon before an area may be developed, subdivided and sold as plots. I think this is something that we should look at very closely.

Tax increases!

We should look at tax increases as well.

We must remember that the first-time home owner who has managed to acquire a piece of land is indeed encouraged and assisted in the construction of a house by a 33⅓% subsidy of his bond repayments on an amount of up to R40 000 during the first 5 years of repayment. This is definitely an encouragement, but considering the inflated price of land, I must ask if R40 000 is a realistic amount for the building.

We wish to encourage the individual who wants to acquire a home which is his own in the strict sense of the word. It has to be his own in the sense that he has chosen its location and designed it for himself. There are many such people.

While I do not for a moment want to decry the plans we may have for low-cost housing, I want also, as I said earlier, to address myself to the young professional who wants to “do his own thing” and live where he chooses to live. He wants to know that his home is his own in the sense that he has formulated his needs in his mind and wants to build accordingly. He does not necessarily want to build beyond a reasonable standard. Last year the hon member Dr Venter delivered an excellent speech in which she referred to young people who set their standards too high. The kind of person I am talking about does not necessarily fall into that category, but I believe that to build something which is acceptable to him he needs more than R40 000. I ask the hon the Minister today to address this matter seriously and urgently, and to see if there is any way that the maximum amount could be raised to at least R50 000 and preferably R60 000. It should be looked at on an annual basis. With between R50 000 and R60 000 a young person can construct a home in a chosen area within the limitations of the income of his particular age group, always with a view to expanding it in the future as his income advances with his age, his experience and his ambitions.

I should also like to suggest that the 33⅓% subsidy could be increased, but I think that then I may be asking too much. So, suffice it to say that the matter which I have raised here today should be looked at as a matter of urgency because of two issues; firstly, the retention and the permanence of the people and the qualifications we need most for the future of our country; and secondly, to meet the ever-growing requirements in respect of our housing stock in this country. I ask the hon the Minister to look at this issue seriously.

Mr Chairman, it is a pleasure to follow the hon member for Umhlanga. I am convinced that the hon member tried to make a contribution with regard to the needs that do in fact exist. I think that is what this particular department is for. It must specifically see where the problems and needs lie, and then has to try to provide for those needs. Only by making contributions from personal experience and by highlighting problems experienced in different constituencies, can we help to develop the department. That is why I think I am going to support the hon member, particularly in his remark that it is notably the age group 25—35 that we should look at.

But I also do want to say that the Venter Commission very thoroughly examined many of the arguments touched on by the hon member for Umhlanga, and that at that particular stage solutions to problems which had been identified by them were looked into. The hon member also says that the R40 000 limit should be raised, and I in turn want to tell the hon the Minister that we should possibly also consider raising the income limit of R800 by a fairly large amount in order to also accommodate people with a larger income in this particular respect, considering the escalation in costs.

I want to concentrate more on the housing aspect of the department and will begin by making the remark that the uninformed White voters, because here we are only dealing with White own affairs, sometimes reproach the Government by saying that not enough is being done for them. They would even be inclined to say that nothing is being done for them. The accusation is made for various reasons. One person will feel he pays too much tax and another will say fuel is too expensive. In this way various reasons are found for why nothing is supposedly being done for Whites. Also in the area of housing there will be accusations that the Government is not doing enough. That is why I want to exchange some ideas on housing with this Committee, and indicate to what extent a great deal can in fact be done by the authorities to house Whites.

To get to that, it is necessary for me to refer to the Development and Housing Board. After we accepted the Development and Housing Act here in the House of Assembly last year, the hon the Minister had the first board established on 1 January of this year. Under the chairmanship of Mr Willie Marais the board met on 16 January for the first time this year. On this occasion the hon the Minister laid down very clear guidelines for the board. The individual must, amongst other things, do everything he can to provide for his family’s housing needs himself. Also, the private sector must play an important part in the provision of housing, and this links up with the argument put forward by the hon member for Witbank.

Thirdly, the authorities should assist the private sector with the solution of bottlenecks and problems that prevent the build-up of an adequate housing supply. With the powers that have been entrusted to the board, and with the guidelines laid down by the hon the Minister, the board continues to do its job. Within the short period that is has been in existence, it has become clear by now that the housing problem amongst Whites in our country is being viewed with compassion.

This board will only determine policy and will meet approximately four times a year. An executive committee and regional committees will see to it that the board’s policy is applied on a day-to-day basis. I just want to express the hope that this board will not meet less than four times a year, because it is my considered opinion that the members of the board would lose touch with the job they have been given, and that their interest would then wane. This board would then later on be in the same position as the road boards in Transvaal, where road board members actually do not have to be there because the decisions they take are simply ignored and tremendous frustration is created amongst those involved. To prevent the Development and Housing Board from existing in name only, the hon the Minister must in my opinion give instructions that the board should meet at least four times a year.

The board is also responsible for the Development and Housing Fund. Money from all sources is poured into this fund, and all expenditure incurred is basically paid out of this fund. The assets of this fund consists mainly of the unpaid balances of loans to individuals and local authorities, as well as fixed property. At present there are 12 833 outstanding loans to individuals, amounting to just over R106 million, and 41 724 loans to local authorities, amounting to just over R3 641 million. That is a total of 54 557 loans, to the value of a little more than R3 747 million. On paper, most of these loans have already been allotted to the three administrations and the department concerned, but there are 2 107 loans amounting to R52,9 million which still have to be allotted to a department. Indications are that the Development and Housing Fund will administer approximately 23 000 loans, the amounts ranging from R710 million to R760 million.

The hon the Minister has also instructed the Development and Housing Board to carry out an investigation and, amongst other things, to advise the hon the Minister on the existing housing needs. It must make suggestions about providing for housing needs. A need has started arising in our general lifestyle for a second house on a property, as well as for residential parks, interest subsidy schemes for first-time home-owners and State-supported home owners saving schemes. From what I have said it becomes very clear that the hon the Minister, in the short period of time in which the board has existed, has created a wide field of work for the board. That is all the more reason for me to ask that the board should meet not less than four times a year.

But I want to return to the remark I made earlier that the Government, and this department in particular, is doing everything possible to house Whites. New homes—that is houses built after 1980—can be bought by paying a deposit of only 5% of the purchase price. The deposit can even be paid in addition to the instalment over a period of two years, if the purchaser does not have the money for the deposit. In special cases the regional committee can even reduce the deposit. The period of the loan is 30 years and differentiated interest rates are applicable. In this way someone who, for example, earns R300 per month and less, only pays 3% interest. Someone who earns between R350 and R450 per month only pays 7% interest, while the maximum interest rate of 11,25% applies to those in the income group of R650 to R800 per month. It is also policy that the monthly payment should not be more than 25% of the purchaser’s monthly income, although in exceptional cases this could in fact be increased to 30%.

Dwellings which were built in 1980 or earlier, are at present being sold in a special sales campaign. The period of one year for the sales campaign has now been extended to June 1986. Certain rebates are being given to purchases of these houses, such as amongst other things, rebates of 25% for cash purchases, 5% discount if the tenant has rented the house for longer than five years, and a rebate of 5% if the purchaser buys the house within the special sales campaign period. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I wish to say a word or two about the hon member for Bellville. He said that if one primarily accepted leasehold, one could eliminate the cost of land. I must say I agree with him that the price of land contributes a great deal to the cost of housing, but I cannot follow his argument.

The hon member was trying to imply that in one way land had value, but that in another way it suddenly had no value. It is assumed that its value suddenly becomes less or much less under the leasehold system than would be the case if the land was sold. The difference between leasing and selling is in fact minimal if one considers it over a period of 20 years for example. At 15% interest the rental on R10 000 would amount to R125 per month. If one were to buy it however, and pay it off over 15 years, it would amount to R132 per month. There is therefore a difference of only R7 which one can save by paying a return of 15% on a lease. So it would not really solve the problem by changing the method of possession. [Interjections.]

The price of land is most certainly a very important factor, but one must also look what the cost element contributes. It is said that the value of land is the value which a willing buyer will pay to a willing seller. But there is also a free market and in that free market the scarcity value, over and above the intrinsic value, is of course of great importance. So for example one can buy 500 square metres of land in the middle of the Karoo for 7,5c per square metre while in a residential area in the middel of a town, it would cost approximately R7 500 per square metre. Value is therefore relative to supply and demand and does not depend on the arbitrary method of tenure. I think the hon member for Bellville must agree with me on this point.

We should take a look at what the department can do to ensure that the price of land remains as low as possible. As regards local authorities which fall under it, the department must prevent authorities causing artificials land shortages by hanging on to land which they own, so that they can subsequently sell it at auctions, etc, under the best market conditions in order to make the biggest profit. Local authorities can make land more readily available so that scarcity does not become a factor, if they were for example to agree more readily when the private sector feels that an opportunity for township development does in fact exist.

Another important cost factor in regard to land is of course interest. When one takes another look at the interest rate, which at present is 17%, and one takes into consideration that these days it takes approximately four years to get a township development project started, it means that the land at the end of the four years has to be sold for 60% more. Everything possible must therefore be done to ensure that the process of township development can go through the phases of red tape as quickly as possible.

Another way in which the department can make a contribution to prevent the scarcity of land being a factor, is by making land which it has taken over from the old Department of Community Development readily available so that it can moderate the prices charged by the private sector and local authorities when they try to create artificial shortages.

Another matter which I should like to deal with briefly, is the various auxiliary schemes in respect of the provision of housing which the department administers. There is for example the interest subsidy of one third which the State makes available to all first-time home owners. There are also other schemes which the department can make available in terms of the Development and Housing Act, mainly to people who earn less than R800 per month.

If one makes a few calculations and also considers the schemes which we examined on our visit, and what advantage the respective schemes hold for someone with an income of, say, a limit of R400 per month up to an including an income ceiling of R1 500 per month, one will see that they do not form a uniform graph.

Government auxiliary schemes are after all aimed at causing a redistribution of wealth. That is why I think one should ensure that the respective schemes do not clash with one another. For example if one considers the scheme in which interest rates are linked to salaries, then one sees that someone with an income of R700 per month who bought a house for R32 000, receives a sub-sidiy of R293 per month. Under the one third auxiliary scheme a person who earns R1 500 per month and who has a bond of R40 000 is subsidised by an amount of R188 per month. Those who can only afford a loan of R20 000, receive subsidy of only R80 per month from the State. Consequently there is no logic in the various assistance schemes which the State offers people in the various income categories.

I wish to suggest that one should try to consolidate these schemes and then proceed from a basic premise so that on a bond of R20 000 for example, a subsidy of R200 per month is granted. The amount can decrease gradually so that on a bond of R40 000 for example, a subsidy of R50 per month is granted.

If the hon the Minister were to make a few such calculations he would see that they produce very interesting results. When a concession of R200 per month is made on a bond of R20 000, it means that a person who earns a salary of only R350 per month can afford to take out a bond of R20 000. A person with an income of R1 320 can therefore afford a bond of R30 000, and in order to afford a bond of R40 000, the income must be R2 000 per month. I think that assistance which decreases as someone’s salary increases, will have a better effect than the various schemes at present in operation in the hon the Minister’s department.

Another matter I want to point out—we also noticed it when we examined the various schemes—is that as far as the lower income groups are concerned, the Government grants loans out of the old Housing Fund, which is now going to be added to the hon the Minister’s own departmental fund. That money is frozen for 20 to 30 years in a scheme. People then borrow directly from the Government. I think many people can in fact afford a loan and a monthly payment, but as young people they simply cannot save up the 20% deposit. For young people especially it is not the payments, but the 20% deposit, which prevents them from affording a house. The State must therefore make it possible for people to gain access to money. One could take a look at section 40 of the Building Societies Act, and make it possible for building societies to grant 100% loans to people who are becoming home owners for the first time. Certain provisos could be inserted, for example a maximum loan, etc. I think the Government will go much further with its money if it does not invest its money in long-term projects but makes this possible by means of subsidies on the one hand and the abolition of 20% deposits on the other. The Government will then be able to do far more with its money, and money from the private sector will then be involved on a much larger scale. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I do not want to cross swords with the hon member for Greytown, but I want to tell him that it really is not only supply and demand that determines the price of land. An important factor is the zoning of that land or its potential zoning.

I want to start off by referring to the hon member for Bellville who is also the chairman of our study group. I should like to tell hon members that there are few people in this House who know more about housing for the aged than the hon member for Bellville. [Interjections.] The hon member took the initiative in the Northern urban areas, and with a utility company, called Utilitas, he is meeting a very important need in our residential areas. I want to thank him most sincerely for that. I know this is accompanied by tremendous personal sacrifices, but we are grateful that he is prepared to make his relevant strengths and talents available to us. Thank you very much.

Someone once said, “If we do not help the man in trouble, it is as if we cause that trouble”. It is a fact that at the moment we are living in times of recession, unemployment, rising costs and inflation. As a result of these conditions there are Whites in need of assistance, because in my opinion, they are, in trouble as far as housing is concerned. Rentals are particularly high. People are at present battling to meet the arrears payment on housing instalments. The cost of new housing has become excessively high.

As a result of this I want to lodge an appeal with the hon the Minister to try and help our people. It is also important that we do not help someone from the frying pan into the fire when we assist them. But I shall return to this point later on. I think we must accept that there is a category of Whites in this country—and will be for the foreseeable future—who we shall have to provide with subsidised housing. My argument is therefore that—when we make calculations in connection with the rent or the cost connected to it—we should not try to recover our total capital investment, but that we should accept that a part of the capital will remain vested in those projects.

Let me also say today that in the Northern urban areas of Cape Town—Parow, Bellville and environs—an urgent need for really cheap housing for Whites exists. I am now speaking of low cost housing. I therefore want to call upon the hon the Minister to launch an investigation as soon as possible into the availability of a premises on which housing of this nature can be made available.

The second point that I should like to raise, relates to the housing project in Parow. It consists of 521 flats. Before I go any further, I want to call upon the hon the Minister to please see to it that we never do something like that again. I urgently ask that we never do anything like that again. I am not here to apportion blame. The hon the Minister was in any case not there at the time. We can therefore now talk about someone who is no longer amongst us.

In the social, clerical and political domains it is simply humanly impossible to handle such a complex. Particularly where we have intitiated economic projects such as that one, we find a concentration of social problems. In regard to the Parow Park project something very important happened on 14 October 1985, when the community of Parow became involved in that project. A meeting was called, which was attended by representatives of church agencies, school principals, city councils members, politicians, the Police, residents of Parow Park, the CMR, the departments responsible— amongst others the Department of National Health and Welfare—and also the hon the Minister’s Department of Local Government, Housing and Works. At the meeting the whole situation concerning the social problems of Parow Park was discussed in depth. A policy committee was established, as well as a selection committee, a residents’ code committee, a complaints committee and a welfare committee. Something unique is happening there now. That is that a partnership between the community and the department has come into existence regarding the control of that housing project. I think this is the first time that the community itself has obtained a say on precisely what happens in that project, which plays such an important role in our society I therefore want to make use of this opportunity to thank the hon the Minister for his foresight in giving the green light for this so that matters there can continue on this basis. We extend our thanks to the hon the Minister.

I also want to mention that we enjoy the full co-operation of the department’s regional representative, Mr Ebersohn. Furthermore, I also want to pay tribute to the community leaders of Parow, who took the lead in this respect, particularly Rev Basson, minister of one of the local congregations. While I am extending my thanks, Mr Chairman, let me also thank the hon the Minister for the finances he has made available to renovate Parow Park. The period is perhaps a little on the long side. If we could get hold of a little bit more money to reduce the period, it would help a great deal.

Mr Chairman, I said earlier on that we should not help people from the frying pan into the fire. I have problems in connection with the rent that has to be paid in Parow Park. A bachelor flat—there are various scales—costs R101 per month in rent for someone with a monthly income of between R151 and R280. Someone in the same income group pays R137,90 per month for a one bedroom flat. That therefore leaves him—if his income is exactly R151 per month—with a meagre little sum of R13,10 to provide for the rest of his needs. No one can manage that. It is simply impossible. Someone who earns the maximum of R280 per month … [Interjections.] There are such people, Mr Chairman. It will not help us to try and deny it. There are in fact people who earn such incomes. Someone who earns the maximum of R280 per month, has—after he has paid his rent—only R42,10 left every month. I want to ask the hon the Minister please to help us. Could he not please help as to try and meet these people halfway?

Time has unfortunately caught up with me. I should also have liked to refer to the whole issue of urbanisation. But I want to conclude by pointing out that the hon the Minister and his department are privileged. Someone once said that the greatest benefit one could bestow upon someone, was to give him the opportunity to live a decent life. The hon the Minister and his department now have that opportunity here. Part of one’s human dignity is precisely that one should be able to live in a house. I thank the hon the Minister very much for the assistance he and his department have given. On behalf of this side of the House I also want to wish the hon the Minister everything of the best on the development and unfolding of his department. We need him and his department very, very much indeed in our lives.

Mr Chairman, I want to associate myself with something the hon member for Parow said at the very beginning of his speech when he acknowledged, to my amazement, that the Whites in particular are the group that is in trouble—I now mention the examples he mentioned—in respect of housing, high rentals and high cost of living in these present times. But the hon member said nothing about the one main reason for that situation, namely this Government. [Interjections.]

The hon member mentioned the examples of people who had only R13 left to live on after they had paid their rent. The present hon the Minister of Communications and Public Works said a while ago that they only needed R20. That is just about the only category of people that will be able to subsist under the present Government. [Interjections.]

I also wish to refer to what the hon member for Witbank said when he quoted from Proverbs and referred to this side of the House. He also spoke about good neighbourliness, and in that regard he quoted from Proverbs. Let me tell that hon member that good neighbourliness is in fact the policy of this party. [Interjections.] We know, however, that when people haunt one another’s doorsteps, or when one demands a say over one’s neighbour’s land, his house or his farm, one is looking for trouble. Good neighbourliness, as I said is in fact the policy of this side of the House.

During the discussion of the Vote of the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning I put quite a number of specific questions to that hon Minister, which he has not replied to. I concede that perhaps he did not reply to my questions which concerned local authority matters, which is in fact an own affairs matter, because they fell under this hon Minister. I therefore hope that we are now going to receive clear replies, because they are of major importance to local authorities in particular.

Firstly I should like to mention the matter of free trade areas. As regards free trade areas the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning gave the impression in the debate—it was held on 17 February—on a private member’s motion concerning constitutional reform on the third tier of government, that the initiative lay with local authorities when it came to the declaration of free trade areas in their respective areas of jurisdiction. On that occasion the hon the Minister mentioned the Pietersburg town council as an example of a CP controlled town council that had made an application of its own accord. It left the impression that they were in favour of free trade areas, which is not in fact the case. The town council’s minutes of 27 February, which I have quoted here, prove the opposite in fact.

Furthermore, pursuant to the hon the Minister’s statement in this regard on 8 February 1985, I said that according to my assessment the real right to decide lay with the administrator and with the Minister himself, rather than with local authorities. I am now asking this hon Minister whether or not this is the case. I would be pleased if the hon the Minister would furnish a clear reply in this regard. If my interpretation is correct, I repeat my accusation against the Government, namely that they are forcing open business districts on local authorities, and in doing so are forcing integration on the Whites of this country.

Furthermore I should like to ascertain from the hon the Minister whether Coloureds and Asians and Blacks, who are going to acquire property rights in these areas, will pay property tax to the White local authority. Besides that I also wish to know whether the value of their properties have a qualifying value in respect of franchise for their own local authorities. These are important matters, and we are entitled to know the facts.

Furthermore I wish to ask the hon the Minister whether the owner and his family will be able to live on such business premises where such premises also makes provision for residential amenities, or will they still be permitted to live there by means of a permit only. Would it therefore be possible for a situation to arise in which the owner of premises, of a property, could be prohibited from living on his own premises? I think it is an important question.

I also wish to ask the hon the Minister to ascertain from his colleague the hon the Minister of Education and Culture where the children of such people would attend school. The hon the Minister of Education and Culture has already encountered the situation in the Free State of Asian families having gone to live in White group areas. Could the hon the Minister of Education and Culture now perhaps set the example in the Free State of how such a problem would be dealt with in the rest of the country if it were perhaps to occur in these free trade areas?

Although regional services councils fall as a general affair under the control of the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning, one’s own local authority is intimately involved in these matters. Could the hon the Minister perhaps help to clarify these matters for local authorities as participants in the regional services councils, and for the ratepayers, as the financers of the regional services councils, who are going to be the main taxpayers of the local authorities. The whole question of regional services councils, which is in fact a third tier of government, is so interwoven under the jurisdiction of the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning and the hon the Minister of Local Government, Housing and Works that it is at times very difficult to distinguish clearly between the various spheres.

About one thing there is no doubt. There is widespread dissatisfaction about various aspects of the regional services councils, and about how they are going to affect the local authorities, whether by demarcation—in this regard we hear voices of protest even from the Cape; from places such as Stellenbosch and Paarl—or as regards other aspects of the regional services councils which are going to be brought into existence. We have even heard about problems from Bloemfontein in the Free State, and of course there are many local authorities in the Transvaal that are really not very keen on this matter.

Even a columnist of a Government newspaper such as Rapport wrote as follows about this matter, inter alia, yesterday:

Of course the most important objection for many local authorities remains the principle of mixed government on the third tier of government, in which the respective local authorities are going to be participants. We say the Government has no mandate for mixed government, which in this case is going to include Blacks as well. How can the Government introduce mixed government on local level at this stage already, while it says that it will subsequently request a mandate from the people for mixed government at central level by means of a referendum or an election? That is of course totally illogical.

Our standpoint is therefore that the hon the Minister cannot introduce regional services councils and although he has no control over the matter, he must tell the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning, who in fact exercises control over everything, on behalf of the local authorities that he cannot introduce mixed regional services councils without having a mandate from the people, and without having their permission to involve Blacks on the local tier of government as well.

The question is whether the local authorities will be able to stay out of such a regional services council. My interpretation of section 5 is that the Act provides for their obligatory participation. A mixed third tier government is therefore being forced onto our voters, and a specific local authority cannot withdraw unilaterally from the jurisdiction of the regional services councils. It therefore places a serious query against whether a local authority will still be able, under such circumstances, to reserve recreational facilities, sports fields, libraries, swimming pools and so on for its own community. I should very much like to hear what the reply of the hon the Minister is to these questions. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I am not going to attempt to react fully to what the hon member for Pietersburg has said. That would be very difficult, because there are no good fish to be caught in such shallow waters. The way in which the hon member for Pietersburg reacted to the hon members for Parow and Witbank merely illustrated once again how that party time and again tries to make the cheapest possible kind of politics out of every situation. [Interjections.] The issue of a mandate has now become very hackneyed, because no one has less right to speak of a mandate than the very hon members on the other side. I am rather going to try to make a constructive contribution to the debate, and will not react to them any further.

I should like to talk about a vogue-word which is doing the rounds at the moment.

Conciliation!

Vogue-words come and go, and so do the needs and circumstances on which they are normally based. But it is significant that when vogue-words appear on the scene, they are usually little more than convenient descriptions of something which already exists. These vogue-words are often elevated to slogans to propagate specific solutions to specific needs and/or circumstances. To crown it all, suggestions of lasting value are often still linked to them as well, just to be replaced tomorrow or the next day by another so-called eternal value.

One of the latest examples of such a vogue-word on the South African scene is privatisation. Each and everyone has a great deal to say about privatisation these days, and many people want to have traditional governmental services dealt out from all quarters to the private sector.

The practice of having the private sector furnish services on behalf of the public sector—this has only fairly recently been elevated to the status of a vogue-word—has for a long time been common practice to local authorities in South Africa. The circumstances and needs that are fundamental to privitisation, have been present in local authorities for a long time by now. For economic reasons, reasons of specialisation, and even reasons of convenience, privatisation has to a great extent taken place in local authorities, and it continues to spread. The process of privatisation is most easily and also most clearly observable in most of the engineering services. But it also takes place as far as the so-called “soft services” are concerned. This includes collection, legal advice, and in some cases even meter-reading.

In some areas the privatisation of traditional municipal services has become well established by now, amongst others the removal and processing of garbage in particular. [Interjections.] The privatisation by local authorities is also particularly established in regard to specific projects …

Who wrote his speech?

Wimpie writes all his speeches!

Order!

… on behalf of local authorities …

For the SABC!

Order!

… which is dealt with in the private sector.

Order! I want to point out to the hon member for Langlaagte that he has wilfully interjected for the second time now, after the Chair had ordered him to behave himself.

One does not just go off like that!

Order! The hon member for Langlaagte must contain himself!

Mr Chairman, I am outside the House now.

Disgraceful!

Give him five strokes with a heavy sjambok!

Order! I very seriously want to point out to the hon member for Langlaagte that when the Chair gives orders in this House, every hon member must obey them. It does not befit the hon member for Langlaagte to act in this way. The hon member for Springs may proceed.

You are the father of children!

You should apologise to the Chair! [Interjections.]

Are you the Chairman?

Order!

As is all too often the case with vogue-words, there are real dangers of over-simplification and even misconception inherent in the concept of privatisation. In this way some people are under the impression that privatisation is essentially economical, or even that it relieves taxpayers of a financial burden. The fact is of course that the matter cannot be stated so simply. The same people still have to pay for the service, ie the taxpayers. It does not matter who provides the service. Neither is it true that a service can be provided more cheaply and/or more effectively by the private sector.

S J Verrier recently wrote this in the Solid Waste Bulletin.

In the final analysis the only test should be the quality and cost of a service to the public. Privatisation can never be an aim in itself.

There are also a variety of considerations which should be taken into account when making decisions about privatisation. The question should first of all be asked whether a private contractor can be replaced. In other words, how great is the danger of monopolies forming once private contractors are appointed?

Secondly, we should ask what precautions are being taken to ensure in the long term that the privatised service does indeed remain the cheapest and most effective service possible.

The third question is whether one can ensure that the sequence of responsibility, down to the voters on the third tier of government, remains satisfactory.

Lastly, it is also important that adequate precautions are taken against possible corrupt and undesirable practices when privatisation is discussed. There can be little doubt that the risk of some practices increases in the case of privatisation.

It is also true that the purposeful costing of privatisation of municipal services is not quite so simple a matter. In this way, for example, concessions are made and/or compensatory measures are adapted by the State for the training of staff by private undertakings, other than is the case with Government institutions. On the other hand some costs of the local authority, accommodation for example, remain hidden.

Although it is clear that we are dealing here with a complex matter, I am convinced that the local government level probably offers one of the best possible areas for privatisation of public services and functions.

Against the background that I have tried to sketch here, I should like to raise two ideas for consideration by the hon the Minister. Firstly I should like to ask whether there is not a need for a specialised section within the department which could give continuous attention to privatisation. It would be the function of such a division to monitor the process of privatisation, to give expert advice to local authorities in that area, to build up a data bank and to advance meaningful privatisation actively.

I want to present my second idea for consideration, amongst other things, with a view to the risks involved in the process of privatisation. The question is whether it would not be sensible to introduce an ombudsman function into local government. Rumours, wild allegations and suspicions which arise from time to time concerning malpractices at the local government level, undermine faith and confidence in the whole system.

A lack of time prevents me from going into this in detail, but lastly I just want to say I think such an ombudsman function should not merely be a postbox for complaints, but should preferably actively launch investigations and keep up to date.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Springs has discussed a number of topics this afternoon, including expressing his views about privatisation and some of the risks involved as well as the possibility of the role an ombudsman can play, and I think all those matters are worthy of attention. However, this afternoon I wish to address myself to other aspects of the hon the Minister’s portfolio.

The hon the Minister will know, I think, that there are aspects of rent control that remain quite unsatisfactory and that it is about time something was done about them. I make no apology for the fact that I have raised these matters previously in this House, but nothing has happened and I wish to draw attention to them once again. I wish to focus on two particular aspects which I consider unsatisfactory and which I believe the hon the Minister and the Government can easily remedy.

The first is the definition of monthly income of persons over the age of 70. As far as social and military pensions are concerned the salaries, wages or other remuneration earned by men over 70 and women over 65 are not taken into account for the purposes of the means test. However, they are included when monthly incomes are calculated in terms of the Rent Control Act. This is an anomaly and leads to a great deal of insecurity and unhappiness. Elderly people are discouraged from supplementing their incomes—something which is often essential if they are to live reasonably comfortably in familiar surroundings.

The second issue, which also has a bearing on the first is the question of the statutory monthly income limits themselves. The current limits became effective on 1 July 1983. They are R450 per month for a tenant without dependants and R850 per month for a lessee with dependants who is the head of the family. Since then the cost of living has increased by 47% and the housing components of the consumer price index has increased by 54%. The income limits for these protected tenants should be increased substantially. Limits of R693 per month as opposed to R450 per month for single persons and R1 308 per month as opposed to R850 per month for the heads of families would restore the position to what it was in July 1983.

It is a nightmare for many tenants as they battle to make ends meet and then have to face the possibility of eviction from their homes as well. No new law or amendment is required to rectify this situation—simply a proclamation by the hon the Minister. However, he refuses to take action in this regard. I cannot understand why he is so indifferent to the suffering of these people.

Both the issues I have raised deserve urgent attention and action. I have been pressing the hon the Minister since late 1984 to do something about these issues, but I am repeatedly fobbed off with the excuse that they are being investigated. In a letter dated 14 February 1985 the hon the Minister stated that it was his intention to table a draft Bill proposing amendments to the Rent Control Act during the 1985 session of Parliament. This did not happen. In reply to the debate on this Vote on 1 May last year the hon the Minister said (Hansard: Assembly, col 4680):

That has not yet happened. We are not at the end of this session yet, so it can still happen, but it has not happened so far. That is a disappointment to me. In reply to a question on 6 May this year the hon the Minister said he would deal fully with all aspects pertaining to rent control during the discussion of this Vote. I plan to hold him to that, and I am sure that he, being the man that he is, will do so. However, I hope that he will specifically ensure that whatever else he wishes to comment on, he will comment in detail on the aspects I have raised here today as well as previously.

I hope the hon the Minister will be granting some relief. The present situation is unfair and intolerable. If the Government is planning to squeeze out protected tenants over time by not raising the income limits, then let the hon the Minister say so. People may not like it, but at least they will know where they stand.

I appeal to the hon the Minister not to continue to procrastinate. There are still tens of thousands of people, particularly senior citizens, who fear the future because of deficiencies in the Rent Control Act. Give them the protection that they need and desire.

Mr Chairman, may I ask the hon member a question? If the income limits of protected tenants are increased, obviously other tenants will fall within this particular income group. Must the Government then create a new category and thereby expand rent control over new tenants?

Mr Chairman, in most matters relating to housing, I would defer to the hon member for Bellville who knows more about it than I do. On this particular occasion, however, I think he is wrong. As I understand the law, for somebody to qualify as a protected tenant, he has to have remained within the prevailing limit over the years. Somebody who did not qualify now, would also not qualify if the limit were raised. I think the hon member for Bellville will agree with that. Therefore the question does not arise.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Cape Town Gardens has dealt with certain aspects relating to rent control. In reply I would briefly state that to my mind the present system is certainly not satisfactory. As the hon member knows, it has been the subject of discussion by various committees of inquiry. I think we have to accept that there will always be people who will require assistance to be housed, as the hon member for Parow pointed out. To my mind, however, it is not the private sector that should provide that housing. One should rather investigate the possibility of a State subsidy to private individuals in order that the free market system can apply in respect of accommodation provided by the private sector. The sooner we can achieve this, the sooner we can provide security of tenure to the tenants as well as assuring the present as well as the potential property developers of a proper income in providing housing.

*I want to pay special attention to certain aspects of housing, something various hon members in the Committee have referred to.

Cognisance was taken of the fact that the department is still purposefully proceeding with and promoting the Government’s national house selling campaign. The importance of house ownership as a stabilising factor in any community cannot be overestimated. During the course of his speech, the hon member for Umhlanga mentioned this too, and one must agree with him. In fact, private right of ownership forms the essence of any free enterprise system.

This campaign which was launched by the Government on 1 July 1983, can indeed be regarded as one of the most important inputs by the Government to promoting the free enterprise system. Its objective is the sale of approximately 500 000 existing rental units for all the population groups to their tenants. On 3 March 1983, 10 825 residential units were available for sale to Whites in accordance with this campaign. The policy is that many new residences are sold at cost price, while dwellings of older than two years are offered at a selling price based on the average between the building costs and the replacement value of the property. Further steps were also taken to stimulate the sale of these residences by granting a discount on their selling price. The position is that when a dwelling of older than two years is sold, the following discount will apply: 25% discount if the dwelling is bought for cash; 5% discount to a purchaser who has rented the dwelling for five years or longer, and a further 5% discount to purchasers who buy while the selling campaign is in progress.

To accommodate purchasers who are not capable of buying for cash, a deposit of only R300 or 5% of the purchase price can be paid. The balance is then obtained from the National Housing Fund by means of a loan, and can be paid off over a period of 30 years. Transfer takes place once 10% of the purchase price has been paid.

From the implementation of the scheme until 31 March 1986, 2 916 houses—or 26,94% of the houses—have been sold. To put this in perspective, one must look at the total number of saleable dwellings which have been built with the National Housing Fund’s money since 1920, however. Since that date, 139 346 saleable residential units have been built, of which 131 275, or almost 94%, have been sold.

An inquiry which was instituted into the desirability of a long-term rent system for the utilisation of land for housing is a related campaign launched by the department. The main advantage of such a system would be that the initial capital outlay in a customary sale in payment of the deposit, transfer costs etc, would be much smaller because the cost of the land would not be included. This system of leasehold was used in Europe, and also inter alia in Durban. The conclusion which was drawn was that although it would be technically possible to let land on a long-term basis and then sell only the improvements on it to the tenant of the land, the purpose envisaged with long-term leases— viz permanent fixed property ownership by the resident so that he can have a real interest in it—could probably be achieved just as well, if not even better, by concluding a long-term contract of sale. The latter would probably also provide the parties involved with more security.

With this in mind, and in view of the fact that the official selling campaign was initially to have ended on 1 July 1985, I want to conclude with a few requests to the hon the Minister. In the first place I want to ask for the period of the selling campaign to be lengthened and for a further advertising campaign to be launched purposefully among the present tenants of unsold dwellings.

Secondly I want to ask for consideration to be given to ways in which prospective purchasers can be accommodated in respect of the deposit and transfer costs of property to ensure that these aspects are eliminated as a possible obstacle to their purchasing those properties.

In the third place, urgent attention must be given, in the case of someone who has been renting a dwelling for a long time, if the rent he has paid exceeds the building costs of the residence together with fair interest on such cost, to granting him a considerable further discount on the purchase price, or perhaps even charging him only a nominal purchase price, on condition that he wants to buy the property.

In conclusion I want to ask for in-depth consultation with all bodies, especially local authorities which also have such housing, to ensure that they also launch an own selling campaign, or if they are conducting one already, that they extend it. Although it is true that provision will definitely have to be made for residential units which can be let, since there will always be people—as the hon member for Parow rightly indicated— who are not capable of buying a home of their own as a result of a too low income and other reasons, these cases must be restricted to the minimum. Where this is in any way applicable, possession of private property must be encouraged and made possible.

I want to conclude by thanking the hon Minister and the department for the amount of R1 million which was made available in-this scheme for a specific housing project in East London.

Mr Chairman, it is a pleasure for me to pick up where the hon member for East London North left off. He made a very good point when he said that the cost of a rented house in which someone has been living for 20 to 30 years, must be kept low when it is sold to that person.

In Crown Gardens the houses which were originally built there cost approximately R2 000 to R3 000 each. People have been living in those houses for 20 to 30 years. Today one pays R10 000, R12 000 and more for a house there.

As long ago as 1976 it was I who obtained permission from the then Minister for those houses to be sold to these people. I refer hon members to Hansard, 23 June 1976, col 10257 in which I requested permission from the then Minister of Community Development, Mr Marais Steyn, for the people in Crown Gardens to have the right to buy those houses. The Government subsequently accepted this principle. Hon members themselves know to what extent houses are being sold to people today.

I have a problem however. I wrote a letter in this regard to the hon the Minister of Local Government, Housing and Works, to which I did in fact receive a reply. The problem is that some of my voters who live in Crown Gardens, paid cash for the houses. Some paid R10 000, and others smaller or larger amounts, according to the prices of the houses, but the houses have still not been registered in their names. Some people bought as long ago as two years. We understand that problems are being experienced with transfer, but I think it is really taking a bit too long. The State should set the example when it comes to sectional titles; it must not lag behind in this way!

There is one important aspect which we must take into account. For two years now no tax has been paid on services. What it amounts to is that a buyer will subsequently have to pay tax in one lump sum. According to the letter which I received from the hon the Minister he will not have to pay it all at once, although he will have to pay it. But these people have already invested R10 000, and at an interest rate of 25% surely the hon the Minister should make a repayment to them.

Surely the interest on that amount is only 10%.

Surely, the interest which they have earned on their money, is far more than the tax which they will have to pay. I am merely asking that the interest which they have earned on the money which they have invested there, be calculated at a decent rate of interest, and if any money is left over after the tax has been deducted, it then be paid out to them. They must not be held liable for it any further.

That is fair enough. [Interjections.]

Another very important matter to which I would like to refer, is that housing falls under own affairs. It therefore means that the White group areas fall under this hon Minister. In Johannesburg—in particular in areas such as Hillbrow, Mayfair and others, which are at the moment White areas—approximately 20 000 people of colour are living in White areas. Firstly the country’s laws are being made a laughing-stock in that a blind eye is being turned and people are being allowed to live where they are not allowed to live. The Group Areas Act is not being applied. This is a matter which in my opinion definitely falls under this hon Minister, because these are things that are happening in White group areas. Secondly, the Rent Control Act is not being applied. Where this Act to be applied in Mayfair alone, at least 30% to 40% of the people of colour have moved into Mayfair would not have been able to do so because those less well-to-do Whites are living in houses which fall under the Rent Control Act. The problem is that there is no protection for those White families. One could go and report it and institute legal proceedings with the group areas police—which they are no longer. The poor police are being used and abused today in the sense that they no longer know where and when they may act. If a man is illegally resident in a group area—but legally according to the Government—then one can report him and go and put the case to the police. My voters, tell me that they have reported 200 to 300 names. Complaints have been lodged with the group areas police, yet they say that there is nothing they can do about it, because they have received instructions not to prosecute in such cases.

Order! I am under the impression that the administration of the Group Areas Act falls under the Department of Constitutional Development and Planning.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: The point that the hon member for Langlaagte is making is that the hon the Minister, who controls local government and own affairs, is the protector of the Whites in those areas which are now being occupied by Coloureds. I should therefore like to suggest that you give him a little freedom to proceed.

Order! There is some merit in the statement of the hon member for Brakpan. That is why I have permitted the hon member for Langlaagte a considerable measure of freedom, but I wish to point out to him that he must not take this argument too far. The hon member may proceed.

In other words, the hon the Minister is also the Minister of White own affairs and is therefore involved in White housing. In my constituency, at Octavia Hill Flats, 126 White families that have been there since 1936, already have been moved out of a White area in order to make room for Indians. Is that what one could call protection for the Whites? If they were people who could provide enough protection for themselves by means of the purchase of another house, then it would have been another matter, but these are people who—one could almost say—have lived there in sheltered environment there. They are either pensioners or people whose incomes are low that they cannot live anywhere else. For that reason they lived in Octavia Hill Flats.

The Johannesburg municipality has suspended these people’s rent. That is so, but according to the Group Areas Act it is a White group area. That housing also falls under this hon Minister. Now those people have been moved, but no newspaper or anyone ever speaks about it because they are merely less well-to-do Whites. If a Black is moved, one hears about it all the way to the UN, but when the rent of 126 families of less well-to-do Whites is suspended, no one hears about it. Some of these people live as far away as Clermont. If hon members want to see bad housing, they must take a look at Clermont. Go and take a look and see if it is a place where any White or anyone would like to send their parents or their pensioner to live. The residents of Octavia Hills have now been scattered far and wide.

Some of them live in Vrededorp, others in Moffatsview, Jeppestown, and even Suid-heuwels—7 kilometres from where they originally lived, not to mention how far they have to travel to their places of work. It is appalling how we can complain when Coloureds from Lenasia have to come to Johannesburg to work there. When that happens, there are endless complaints because it seems those people have to get up so terribly early in the morning. What about these people, who do not own any vehicles because they are less well-to-do people? Nevertheless they are good White people who together with me, and my hon colleagues built up this country. Today they are being thrust to one side. It is unfair to remove those people from their homes and to move them to places as far as those where they now have to live.

I have already asked this hon Minister whether the costs of those people were paid when they were relocated. He said that it had been done in the case of pensioners. I know the Johannesburg City Council relocated these people. But this hon Minister will have to take action there. These people fall under White own affairs. It is unfair to treat those people in this way. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, in regard to the hon member for Langlaagte there was a bit of ill feeling here this afternoon. Now, however, he has addressed us very tranquilly. The hon member spoke chiefly about his constituency. I believe that his representations to the hon the Minister, about the fact that White areas falling under the hon the Minister’s jurisdiction should come under the hon the Minister’s control, are reasonable ones, and I think the hon the Minister will give him a reasonable answer.

Mr Chairman, it is also a privilege for me to be able to participate in the discussion of this Vote. At the very outset I also want to associate myself with other hon members and congratulate the hon the Minister and his department on its first, very excellent report. The fact of the matter is that this department has an effect on 90% or more of the Whites in South Africa. And it is true that more than 90% of the Whites live in cities and towns. What is also true is that from the cradle to the grave their lives are regulated by local authorities. That is why it is of the utmost importance to us that this matter be in good hands. With the phasing out of the provincial councils, we look forward to the take-over of local authorities by the hon the Minister. We know that amonst other things the department has already accepted responsibility for housing. As far as that is concerned, on behalf of Walvis Bay I should live to extend a sincere vote of thanks for the loans already granted. I also want to express my sincere gratitude for the exceptional understanding of the problems of Walvis Bay.

I want to give the hon the Minister the assurance that this creates mutual trust and also leads to greater co-operation.

It does, however, remain the responsibility of the head of a family to look after his family. That is why there is always the desire in everyone to have a small place of his own. It is not only ownership that is important, but also the concomitant security. With this as background, the hon the Minister has laid down four very clear guidelines for us. And these guidelines form the housing strategy of the department. I should now like to present these four guidelines to hon members.

Firstly it is the task of the individual, with in the context of his own capabilities, to see to accommodation for himself and for his family. Secondly the private sector must also play an increasing role in making accommodation available to the public. Here, for example, we have in mind building societies and other similar institutions. Thirdly the department must assist the private sector in carrying out this task. Here we could also refer to the very good work done by the Venter Commission. Fourthly—and in my view the most important; several hon members also referred to this—the department must look after those who cannot obtain assistance elsewhere, the proviso of course being that housing aid be limited to the basic need to instil a sense of independence. Here, for example, I have in mind the core-housing schemes that have already been launched, housing subsidies, interest subsidies and so on.

I should also like to congratulate the hon member for Unhlanga on, and support him in, his representations on behalf of those young people who cannot obtain assistance elsewhere. The truth is that we frequently have to hear the reproach from people who cannot afford high rentals, people who cannot afford their own homes either. Frequently we also here such reproaches from the aged who tell us we should supply them with the same kind of accommodation that we provide for the other population groups and at the same rental. That is why the department has the major task of ensuring that our own people are provided with adequate housing. The truth is—and this is emphasised in the report—that throughout the country there are waiting lists for housing loans, waiting lists which are outdated and in regard to which there are many duplications!

That is why I should like to support the hon the Minister’s plea to local authorities, housing utility companies and welfare organisation to grant positive support to the proposed data bank which is going to be introduced throughout the country. I really trust that it will quickly become a reality. I also want to express the hope that information will be kept of people to whom loans are granted, so as to ensure that they are not able to sell a house in one town, pocket the profit and then apply for a loan in another town and start from scratch.

As far as the granting of loans is concerned, in accordance with departmental practice local authorities, for example, must apply for a housing scheme for say 50 houses, but subsequently they must apply individually for each application. My request is that we do away with this practice. In my view it is sufficient for a local authority, for example, to present this shortlist to the department to be checked against information in the data bank, but the local authorities must subsequently be left to allocate these houses and then to proceed without further delay. The truth is that too many obstacles are still being placed in the way of local authorities. I therefore appeal to the hon the Minister, to make it his primary task to do away with these obstacles.

I have in mind, for example, the subdivision of a plot. Once the City Council has approved this, the owner of the plot is expected to refer his application to the Townships Board and to obtain the approval of the administrator. Frequently the owner of that plot must also obtain legal assistance—at great costs—to bring about the subdivision. I really do not think that is necessary. Here we have an opportunity for the devolution of authority, and I hope the hon the Minister will be quick to make use of this.

Some hon members have referred here to regional services councils. The hon member for Kuruman, pointed out that there would now be two bosses. I should like to say a few words about that. The truth is that the establishment of regional services councils is going to change local government fundamentally. Specifically for that reason the role of the own affairs Ministers is clearly spelled out in the act. As far as that is concerned, let met point out that we have the mandate of the electorate to change the constitution. For that very reason own affairs Ministers were appointed. Amongst other things the own affairs Ministers must agree on the areas of jurisdiction, the designation of functions, the appointment of chairmen, the transfer of assets and staff and even the establishment of regional services councils. They even have a seat on the appeal board in the case of an appeal against a decision of a regional services council. The importance of an own affairs minister must therefore not be underestimated. The Act affords him enough room to facilitate the protection of group areas.

Let me also make it clear that it is also our earnest endeavour to protect group areas, as it is to protect the own way of life, the own schools and the own residential areas of various groups. That is our policy too. [Interjections.] Anyone who thinks that the Group Areas Act can be abolished without anything to replace and who thinks that schools can simply be thrown open is playing into the hands of those seeking the downfall of the Government. [Interjections.] The NP represents the Whites and we have no intention of shirking our duty [Interjections.] We specifically want to appeal to City Councils to assist us in this. City Councils and the United Municipal Executive can play a gigantic role in lightening the hon the Minister’s heavy burden. With the optimal utilisation of existing resources the new mechanisms can be employed by the regional services councils and lead to the rendering of better service. It is also extremely important for the upliftment of the deprived areas. [Interjections.] Lastly I should like to appeal to the hon the Minister, particularly with regard to loans and the erection of buildings in Walvis Bay. The differences inherent in Walvis Bay and the arid climatic conditions make it essential for building methods other than the ordinary and conventional methods to be employed. More expensive building material must be used and therefore the building costs are also higher than elsewhere. That is the reason why we are asking for understanding when decisions are made about housing and the erection of buildings in Walvis Bay. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I want to thank the hon member for Walvis Bay for his speech and also for his kind words. At a later stage in the debate I shall be returning to the requests the hon member made in the Committee. I also want to thank him for the brief exposition he gave of this department’s involvement in regional services councils. At a later stage in the debate, I shall be responding in more detail to aspects of local government and matters relating to rent control.

†I should like to thank the hon member for Hillbrow for his kind words to me and to the department. I sincerely appreciate it. The hon member dealt at length with particular local authorities and with regional services councils. As I have indicated, I will come back to this aspect later in the debate.

*I should like to extend my sincere thanks to the hon member for Bellville, who is also chairman of the study group, for his contribution this afternoon and also for his words of appreciation to me and to the department. The hon member, who is also an expert on rent control measures, gave an interesting survey of the history behind rent control. Let me tell him and the hon member for Cape Town Gardens that I shall be speaking about rent control at a later stage in this debate.

In a moment I want to deal with a specific aspect to which the hon member for Bellville and other hon members referred, but first I just want to discharge a few duties. Firstly I want to thank the parliamentary Nasionale Vroueklub for the lovely bouquet and for the good wishes they sent me. [Interjections.] The way in which the Nasionale Vroueklub always supports me and my colleagues is something we value very greatly.

I should also like to extend my sincere thanks to the head of our department, Mr Gerberg, for his dedicated service to the department. The same applies to the other directors, the senior staff and every other head office member of staff. I also want to thank all the regional representatives sincerely for the work they do.

This is a department that serves the public of South Africa and the department and its people would like to furnish the best service possible. I should also like to thank the Parliamentary staff for the work they do. This applies equally to my personal staff and I am glad to be able to say that this morning a little junior private secretary was added to our staff. My private secretary became a father this morning, but he is nevertheless on duty today. [Interjections.] This shows one what teamwork in a department means.

On this occasion I should also sincerely like to thank the chairman, the deputy chairman, the secretary and other members managing the affairs of the study group for the work they are doing.

I have already, on more than one occasion, had an opportunity to visit the respective regional offices and to meet the staff there. I greatly appreciate the dedication and loyal service furnished by the motivated team.

The fact of the matter is that the department also feels the pinch of specific staff problems. Recently a work study investigation was carried out in this connection. Recommendations were formulated, and at present consideration is being given to the expansion of the staff in areas where specific bottlenecks exist. On a later occasion I could elaborate further. The fact is that the task of providing housing over the whole spectrum, and in particular for the aged, is a matter that will constantly have to be reviewed, in detail, on the long-term basis. This will require the dedication of both the department and the private sector. Information from all quarters indicates that there is an increase in the age at which people in South Africa are dying. Data which I received recently, and which I have no reason to doubt, indicate that a total of approximately 355 000 Whites reached the age of 65 years or older in 1980. According to projections, by the year 2000— and that is already in sight—there will be approximately 503 000 Whites of 65 years of age or older. Increasing provision will therefore have to be made for the retired and the aged and their accommodation. Firstly this will have to be done by the private sector and, where necessary, supplemented and supported by the authorities too.

In this connection I want to deal with two matters. The hon member for Bellville, the hon member for Walvis Bay and other hon members have already referred to the first matter, which concerns the housing needs survey which was launched on 21 April. By the end of June the department and I would like to have received the data and to have made the first abstractions. This housing needs survey is being carried out on a national basis and we are obtaining good co-operation from local authorities. It is of exceptional importance in the planning, particularly the financial planning, to provide housing where the needs are the greatest.

In this connection I should again like to make an appeal this afternoon requesting those who have housing needs to make the necessary application to local authorities.

I am also aware of the fact that there is, in fact, some suspicion-mongering in regard to this needs survey, suspicion-mongering by certain bodies which, amongst other things, are alleging that those whose names appear on the existing waiting lists will now, as a result of the new needs survey, be losing their places on those waiting lists. I should like to make it very clear that that is not the case and that the new application form makes provision for the date on which someone first applied for housing. These particulars will also be included in the computerised system, and there is consequently no chance of anyone losing his place on the waiting list because he is registered in terms of a new form. This needs survey is nothing if not beneficial; there are no disadvantages involved. I should like to see full co-operation in this connection.

A second matter I should like to deal with in this connection—the hon member for Bellville, the hon member for Witbank and other hon members have already referred to it—is the question of retirement villages for the aged. These are increasing in popularity as a relatively new field of development for the private entrepreneur. With the increasing maximum age that I have indicated, this is a matter that will have to be given increasing attention. It is important for people who obtain an interest in a retirement town to make provision there for their old age. It is a fact—the hon member for Bellville also indicated as much—that in conjunction with security, such a retirement town or village will also offer facilities that the aged will need when, because of their advanced age, their powers fail them. This would prevent their having to be transferred again when they need care.

Since this specific aspect came to the fore with certain problems arising in regard to retirement towns, and this came to the department’s attention, the South African National Council for the Care of the Aged and Sapoa conducted independent investigations into the phenomenon of retirement towns. Each group, of course, approached this from its own specific angle. The SANCCA chiefly carried out its investigation from a welfare point of view, whilst Sapoa did so from an investment point of view. What is interesting is that quite a few of the findings of the two bodies actually agree.

One of the findings confirms the phenomenon of the increase in the maximum age— as far as the Whites are concerned, an increase over the age of 65 years. Secondly it was found that no adequate provision has been made for the care of the aged, particularly as far as the middle and the higher income groups are concerned and that it is essential that needs of the aged, other than accommodation, be provided for. The investigations also brought to light that it would be possible to meet all these needs without State assistance, particularly when people become debilitated, and that retirement villages should also make provision for the debilitated aged.

Another important aspect that has come to the fore from these two investigations is that extensive market research ought to be done because the capital investment in these cases is much higher than that relating to ordinary housing and that it is therefore advisable to do cost-effective studies in this regard to ensure that projects are viable so that one can ensure that the aged do not lose their capital as a result of possible bankruptcies.

A further important aspect emerging from the findings of the investigations relates to the kind of proprietary rights involved specifically to ensure that the investment is safeguarded.

Let me also say that the findings indicate that in actual fact there are very few deliberate malpractices to rob the aged of their savings, even if it is a fact, as the hon member for Bellville has said, that the aged are frequently soft targets. Certain instances have nevertheless come to our attention, instances of old people having lost the money they invested in a development because the developer had gone insolvent. That happens, in particular, if there is no adequate security.

The two bodies that carried out investigations into the phenomenon of the retirement villages did not actually come to light with any specific solutions.

In the present financial situation, it is only logical that the State cannot possibly take upon itself the full responsibility for the care of the aged. I have also referred to the complexity of this matter and to the fact that there are several divergent interest groups. Consequently I appointed a committee of the Development and Housing Board to carry out investigations, and the committee must advise the board not later than 30 September 1986 of specific aspects that I have referred to them. The first is the need for housing, including facilities for those who have retired. The second involves the methods that can be used to provide for such needs, with specific reference to the respective roles that can be played by the public and private sectors, including utility companies and other bodies. The third is the security of proprietary rights in regard to housing for those who have retired. The fourth involves the investigation of all matters related to the aforementioned aspect.

The terms of reference and composition of this committee—I shall supply the names in a moment—will be published and all interested bodies and people are invited to assist the committee with its investigation.

The Chairman of the committee and also of the Development and Housing Board is Mr W J Marais. The members are Mr J G M van Straten, Deputy Chairman of the Development and Housing Board, Mr N M Karsen, the Director of Housing and Works in the Department, Mr S Bornman of the Department of Health Services and Welfare in the Administration: House of Assembly, Mr G Pretorius, Director of Internal Trade and Consumer Affairs in the Department of Trade and Industry, Pastor J H Snyman of the South African National Council for the Care of the Aged, Mr P C Erasmus of the South African Property Owners’ Association and Councellor R W A Yeld, on behalf of the United Municipal of Executive of South Africa. The secretary is Mr J W A Botha of the Department.

I am seriously of the opinion that this investigation can only contribute to the granting of security for the aged who invest their money in retirement villages for the purpose of sharing in this fine development.

Referring as I am to specific terms of reference to the Board, let me thank the hon member for Losberg for his speech. He is the secretary of our group and also referred in his speech to the terms of reference entrusted to the board in carrying out its investigation. In this regard I want to emphasise, in particular, that a committee of the Board will investigate, and reflect on, the whole question of expropriation procedures which, on the face of it, seem to be a very time-consuming and expensive process. I trust that the investigation by the Board and its committees will also be able to furnish a contribution in this regard.

I should like to refer to the hon member for Kuruman. He apologised for the fact that he cannot be present here, and I shall react tomorrow to specific aspects he touched upon. I want to thank the hon member for Witbank, who is the deputy chairman of our study group, for his kind words and for a particularly balanced speech. The hon member specifically spoke with great compassion about the handicapped and about the duty that we have to promote the independence and the human dignity—I think that is how the hon member put it—of these people. I should like to tell the hon member that I wholeheartedly support him in his plea. In regard to this department’s role in granting assistance to the handicapped, I should like to say that the department is constantly examining, in detail, the financial assistance that is granted. An amount of R3,4 million was allocated from the National Housing Fund for the completion of ten current projects during this financial year. And there are also eight new services, and approval has been obtained for those projects to commence during this financial year, the amount involved being R9,7 million. Of that amount, R5,6 million will be spent in this financial year and R4,1 million in the next financial year.

I have here the particulars of the number of projects dealt with, but I should like to tell the hon member that there are a large number of them and that we do, in fact, take a careful look at the extent to which it is possible for us to be of assistance in this regard too. Apart from the statistics I have mentioned, from the State Revenue Fund an additional amount of almost R1,2 million is going to be spent on services and the launching of specific projects.

I think the hon member would also understand if I said that of the amounts allocated, approximately 14% of the present allocations were used for loans for projects relating to the handicapped. I agree with the hon member that the fact that these people need a place to live, and that since there will always be a soft spot in our hearts for them, in this connection we can jointly make a contribution towards promoting the objectives of independence and human dignity. I would also like to take a further look at the hon member’s plea in this regard and give him further answers.

†I should like to thank the hon member for Umhlanga for his kind comments on the annual report. I agree with him and I also wish to thank my department for the annual report which they have produced. I think it is also, in fact, intended to be a report to which reference can be made and which can lay the basis for further discussion on various topics. I therefore thank the hon member.

The hon member also requested consideration of an increase in the interest subsidy scheme which at present has a limit of R40 000.

Don’t thank him too much! [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, I am always a little afraid to thank an hon member overly much because I might get a question from the hon Minister of Transport. [Interjections.]

I would, however, like to say to the hon member that the cost of the plot is not included in the R40 000 limit. That amount only represents the value of the improvements and the building costs. It is true, however, that I have received various requests as far as this particular limit is concerned. The hon member will recall that the last year the percentage was increased from 20% to 33 1/3% by my colleague the present hon Minister for Economic Advisory Services. I can also tell the hon member that I have received representations on this matter from the housing industry and at present urgent consideration is being given to whether we should increase the limit or whether we should maintain it at its present level.

*It is interesting to note that this scheme is very popular. Over the past four months there has been an average of 215 applications granted under this scheme per month. This is an indication of the fact that there is an area that is very well utilised and that there is a demand for this. What is very interesting is that although the average size of houses erected a while ago was approximately 130 square metres, this scheme has led to the fact that in order to qualify at present the average size of a house has to be in the vicinity of 90 square metres. It is therefore also important to incline towards more modest housing without relinquishing quality, and that is a factor that should also be taken into account when considering a change to the scheme, regardless of the fact that this could, of course, have specific cost implications.

I should like to refer to the hon member for Losberg. I have already referred to him in part, and I particularly want to thank the hon member, too, for having pointed out very effectively here what the importance of the functions of the Development and Housing Board are. Together with the department I am proud of the Development and Housing Board, and in this connection I should also like to say that I greatly value the way in which the chairman, Mr Willie Marais, carries out his task. He is a very great expert in the field of housing, and we have great expectations of the work that he and the Board will be doing in this connection and the investigations they will be carrying out in the interests of providing housing.

The hon member for Parow touched upon a particularly tricky subject relating to the question of rent and the payment of rent, concessions in that regard, etc. Without going into the matter too deeply—I shall possibly be doing so later in the debate, if time permits—I would firstly like to refer to the concessions made in specific cases in regard to the payment of rent. I also referred to this during the second reading debate on the Appropriation.

As hon members know, as a result of a question from the hon member for Cape Town Gardens, to which I replied, the chairman of the Board is at present investigating the question of income limits and rental formulas. The whole question of rental formulas are at present the subject of an in-depth investigation by the inter-departmental committee. I trust that they will find it possible to make specific proposals with a view to granting relief in this connection.

As far as the question of the housing needs of the less well-to-do are concerned, and after the survey of existing needs is finalised, it will logically become apparent where the greatest need lies and in what way the problem can be addressed. We can then consider tackling relevant projects on the basis of the data then available to us. I just want to tell the hon member that at present we are engaged in a project for the erection of 60 flats at Ruyterwacht. Hopefully that will also bring relief in this regard.

The hon member for Greytown suggested that housing subsidies should decrease in accordance with an increase in the income of the purchaser or borrower. The hon member will understand that this matter is not all that simple. In fact, there are frequent indications of how tricky and how exceptionally complex the situation can be. He will understand, if I reply to him in this regard, that housing finance is already granted at differentiated interest rates to persons earning up to R800 per month, an amount which is increased over the period of amortisation of the loan as the borrower’s income increases and he moves from one income category to the next. The department only grants financial assistance to those who cannot readily obtain or afford loans through building societies, as the hon member is aware. This 33,33% subsidy scheme is specifically designed to help people to obtain financing from building societies.

In connection with the high cost of land and so on, we trust that with the implementation of the proposals made at the time by the Commission for Township Establishment, the more rapid finalisation of those township establishment procedures will also be able to contribute towards a decrease in costs. According to information at my disposal, in practice townships are already being proclaimed within six months, or an even shorter period, specifically as a result of the abridged procedure.

The fact of the matter is also that we are propagating plots of a more realistic size—of approximately 500 square metres. These standards will, of course, contribute towards reducing land prices or costs.

I should like to study the hon member’s speech in more detail and also approach it from the department’s point of view with a view to informing the hon member, in due course, whether detailed attention can be given to the request he made.

The hon member for Pietersburg basically made politics of the question of free trading areas. At a later stage in the debate I shall be dealing with local affairs matters and the questions the hon member asked.

The hon member for Springs made an important speech about privatisation. I should also like to tell him that both the department and I have a very positive attitude towards privatisation. There are large numbers of matters or services in the department that have already been privatised. There is the possibility that the department could market specific housing projects, for example the Eikenhof block of flats in Pretoria. There is also the possibility that blocks of flats in an area to the north of Johannesburg could be sold under sectional title. They could possibly be made available through the agency of a private management company. There is also the possibility of selling first phase of the block of flats called Kruger Park in Pretoria, a project completed by the department. I can also mention that the private sector has been invited to consider the further development of the whole Kruger Park development project. There is also the possibility of the following services being privatised: The marketing of available fixed properties, to which I have referred; cleaning services, which are largely dealt with by private undertakings; security services; gardening services and also the services rendered by urban planning consultants. Let me therefore tell the hon member that as far as possible the department and I will take steps with a view to privatisation. We shall, of course, also bear in mind factors such as efficiency and cost-effectiveness.

†I have indicated to the hon member for Cape Town Gardens that I will refer to rent control later on in the debate. The hon member addressed himself only to the question of rent control, and I will come back to that.

*The hon member for East London City focussed his speech on the question of sales campaigns, home-ownership and the promotion of home-ownership. The hon member certainly made an interesting speech here this afternoon. On the strength of his request, I want to indicate that as far as the sales campaign is concerned, my department and I have already made recommendations to the Development Board and the National Housing Commission for the sales campaign to continue, on the present footing, until 30 June 1987. So far as that is concerned, it is a pleasure for me to be able to say that I gladly accede to the hon member’s request.

The hon member also referred to matters such as long-term leases—the hon member for Bellville also referred to that—consideration of a concession making accommodation available, at a nominal purchase price, to people who have already been renting that accommodation over a long period, and also consultation with local authorities to persuade them to launch their own sales campaigns. The matters the hon member touched upon here are matters I should like to reflect on, and in due course I shall be informing him of the decisions we have taken in this regard.

The hon member for Langlaagte almost did not get a turn to speak this afternoon, but I do want to tell him that I am glad he did, even though he did not say what I thought he would say. The hon member referred to the fact that at the time he was instrumental in arranging the sale of the Crown Gardens premises. In 1976, of course, the hon member still sat on the right side of the Committee and was still doing the right things. I have no doubt about that.

The hon member referred to a point relating to purchasers. As he said, the purchasers paid the purchase price. He is quite right. They could not have had a safer depository for their payments than the State. So they were never exposed to any risks as far as their properties were concerned. The hon member will concede as much. The fact of the matter is that they also obtained possession and paid no further rent since the purchase prices were paid. The point the hon member wanted to make was that they should obtain interest on the money they paid at the time. What is the rent, however, that I should ask the hon member and his people—as he refers to them—to pay for the two-year period? Surely one cannot live anywhere for nothing, without paying. If one has paid, and then lives there free of charge, at what interest rate must I calculate the two-year period of occupation?

Mr Chairman, may I ask the hon the Minister whether it is not true that he gave those people partial transfer and actually made a mistake? Those people paid and the hon the Minister gave them partial transfer. He therefore cannot ask them to pay rent now, because they purchased the property.

I do not know what partial transfer is; I have never heard of anything of that nature.

May I explain it? [Interjections.]

The hon member may have another turn to speak. The people made the purchase, and a purchase deed is also an agreement with certain rights and obligations on both sides. Let me tell the hon member that the State has no problem in doing right by people. In fact, I think that was done as far as they were concerned. I have indicated to the hon member that as far as property rates are concerned, I am quite prepared to make those payments as easy as possible for the people concerned. I have instructed the department, in all cases of purchases in which transfer has not yet been effected, to debit certain amounts for property rates from time to time and provide the people with an account. I want to give the hon member the assurance that there are no problems that are actually surfacing.

The hon member is now trying to arrange for 25% interest for the people for the period during which their money was deposited there, but in the meantime they did have occupation and could live there. They paid no rent or interest. At the same time let me tell the hon member that I think the premises are worth a great deal more today. If we could take back the premises today at the original price, would the hon member advise the people to let us do so, allowing us to sell them again at a profit?

I would in any case demand an exchange purchase! [Interjections.]

Oh no, I do not think the hon member himself is convinced of the case he put forward here this afternoon.

About the other aspects the hon member touched upon, I would like to give him a further indication at a later stage. The hon member referred to Octavia Hills. I shall also be clarifying this aspect for him.

At this stage I should like to content myself by thanking hon members sincerely for their contributions. I look forward to the resumption of the debate. It is pleasant to be able to conduct a debate with hon members in this spirit on a matter that is dear to our hearts. Housing is also a service we can furnish to people.

Mr Chairman, I should very much like to start by expressing my appreciation to the hon the Minister for the way in which he took over this portfolio. I think the original ideas he came up with deserve praise. He wanted to ensure that by revising the determining of needs the best use of our resources became possible. Particularly people who are involved with welfare organisations and are consequently aware of the difficulty which exists in providing the facilities, appreciate the way in which he did this.

On several occasions the hon members of the CP have now tried to make out a case that the NP Government is not giving enough attention to the affairs of White people in the country. This afternoon I should very much like to maintain and state that some of the most attractive and efficient day care facilities as well as other welfare facilities which have in fact been erected were possible because of the support of the Government. The fact that throughout the country there is evidence available in every community of such facilities which are amongst the most luxurious and attractive, attests to a Government which really has the interests of the Whites at heart.

The demand for day care facilities is a matter which crops up in the Press time and again. There are constant requests for more such facilities to be erected, and there are also representations regarding who should accept responsibility for the provision of these facilities. A great deal can be said about the running and the quality of the facilities, but I do not think this is relevant to the discussion of this Vote.

Consequently this afternoon I want to concentrate mainly on the provision of the facilities which is made possible by the funds made available by the department. This afternoon I should very much like to state that the provision of these facilities must be a joint effort between the community, the State and the employer.

In the past we did not involve the employer actively in the provision of these facilities. All three of these groups must have an equal share in their provision, but in my approach to the matter I also want to emphasise that this is not a welfare matter.

The provision of day care facilities is in fact also aimed at the working mother who has a reasonably high income. She can also make use of the facilities because we specifically do not want to have a welfare approach to the provision of the facilities.

As regards the present extent of the facilities about a year ago there were 891 registered day care facilities in South Africa. Welfare organisations run 128 of these facilities. This means that 733 of the projects are under private management and are consequently run on a business basis.

There are quite a number of problems in the erection of these facilities. Several of the private organisations approach the welfare organisations from time to time to take over these institutions, because they cannot in fact run them economically. The department provides a 100% loan at 1% interest over a period of 40 years to registered welfare organisations to erect new buildings. But it is also possible to purchase existing buildings which can be converted effectively. In order to repay this loan a subsidy is made available which totals 75% of the compulsory instalments in respect of interest and repayment up to a maximum of R30 per child per year.

As a result of the high building costs during the past five years, welfare organisations are finding it increasingly difficult to pay the monthly instalments. I should like to mention the Zonnebloem project of the ACVV here in Cape Town as an example. The capital cost of the project was approximately R700 000. The monthly instalment which the organisation has to pay totals R2 326. For this a subsidy of R4 200 per year is available to them.

From this hon member can consequently deduce that there is quite a shortage which must be made good by the welfare organisations themselves by means of the profession and donations. Consequently welfare organisations are finding it increasingly difficult to collect these kind of funds, precisely owing to the fact that these facilities are made available for the children of parents from the lower income group. In spite of the fact that the Department of Health Services and Welfare also adjusted this subsidy for people in the lower income group in 1985, there are still management problems which make it difficult to pay these instalments.

In my opinion the matter to which welfare organisations must give all their attention is that greater emphasis must be placed on the conversion of effective buildings which could probably be purchased for this purpose, and that the standard laid down for the purchase of such buildings should not be so high.

Although the circular specifies that the period for the repayment of the loan is 40 years, the interest rate for many of them is determined for a 30-year period. I should like to know why this is the case, and if it is not possible to make this term repayment over a period of 40 year. This will greatly relieve the pressure on the welfare organisations. Furthermore it would be wonderful if the hon the Minister could negotiate an increase in this 75% subsidy with his colleague with a view to the repayment of the capital loan.

The next matter to which I want to give attention briefly is the provision of afterschool centres. In my opinion the State’s point of departure is correct that funds or a loan should not be made available for the erection of after-school centres, but that existing school buildings must be used. But welfare organisations are finding it increasingly problematic to get these buildings placed at their disposal, because the point of departure applying in this case is that the headmaster can decide on this himself.

I think it may be advisable for greater cooperation to be brought about here to get these buildings placed at the disposal of welfare organisations. There are also schools that provide these facilities themselves, but then they are frequently operated for as a fund-raising purpose and not as a service to the community as such. It may be necessary for attention to be given in the right place to the care and the education which is very important in this connection.

In conclusion I want to sum up briefly and thank the hon the Minister for the way in which welfare organisations were helped in the past to obtain these loans. I should also very much like to lodge an appeal and ask that serious attention be given to these problems which are making it very difficult for them to repay these very high loans at the moment.

Mr Chairman, at this late stage of the debate one cannot actually apply oneself to what one would like to say. But in the remaining minutes I should like to address a few words to the hon member for Pietersburg who was here all afternoon, but who is now unfortunately absent.

There is a tendency among the hon members of the opposition parties here next to us to make a great deal of use of newspaper reports and newspaper cuttings. I see the hon member for Sasolburg always has a large pile of them here. He strings them together and in this way he wants to proclaim Government policy to us. [Interjections.]

The hon member for Pietersburg fell into the same trap when he spoke about regional services councils last week. He really offended my local government badly. Without checking, he quoted a report from a unsavoury publication called Die Dapper Kommando, which was placed in our letter boxes.

That is Stoffie’s commando! [Interjections.]

In this report it is stated:

He then went on to say: “Well done!”

The hon member did not check up on this. He need only have asked me about this, because we are good friends, and what is more he is not a bad Dopper either! [Interjections.] In his speech he said that there were many local authorities who according to Press reports had already dissociated themselves from the principle of regional services councils. [Interjections.] He then mentioned Middelburg inter alia in this connection. [Interjections.] I am astounded that people who are so uninformed can make such statements here in the Committee!

The correct facts are that there was a motion before the Middelburg town council that they dissociated themselves from regional services councils. But the motion was entirely defeated by the votes in favour of regional services councils. The town council then associated itself fully with the principle of participation in regional services councils. [Interjections.] As a matter of fact the hon member for Witbank will be able to support me in this connection.

Are you going to stand for election in Middelburg again?

Yes.

The town councils of Middelburg and Wit-bank have agreed on how they are going to co-operate when the regional services councils are introduced. [Interjections.]

What I find interesting is that a CP member, the hon member for Waterberg, who was the Deputy Minister at that stage, agreed that a Black eating-house could be opened in the middle of the White town of Middelburg. He did this against my wishes, as a member of Parliament, and those of my MPC. At that stage he totally ignored our representations and allowed a Black eating-house to be opened there, which in any case turned out not to be successful.

Disgraceful! [Interjections.]

Hendrik, you are a racist!

Order!

Let us go a bit further. The CP is also opposed to the introduction of free trade areas. The town council of Middelburg has declared itself unanimously in favour of them, but 18 months before this was done, I handled representations from someone in Middelburg to approach the hon the Minister with regard to the introduction of a free trade area in Middelburg. [Interjections.]

For the information of the hon member for Sasolburg, I should like to say that the person on behalf of whom I addressed representation for a free trade area was not a member of the NP. [Interjections.] He was not a member of the CP either. [Interjections.] The hon member for Sasolburg, who has tried unsuccessfully since 1974 to win an election in Middelburg, must take cognisance of this and decide for himself to which party that person belonged. [Interjections.]

Say who it is!

No, the hon member can find that out for himself. I am not going to mention the man’s name. He is not a member of the NP, nor a member of the CP. [Interjections.]

Surely he is not a Prog! [Interjections.]

Order!

He is not a Prog, and he is not a member of the NRP either. [Interjections.]

Only one party remains!

Local government is a very important tier of government, which deals directly with the daily lives of the people. In Schedule 1 of our present Constitution Act, local government is classified as an own affair, and as more authority is transferred to local government this tier will become increasingly important. Local government is also intimately involved with community development, of which the provision of housing is an integral part. It also has the function to provide other services, such as water, electricity, sewerage and similar services. The Government’s policy is to afford every population group the opportunity to have its own local government and to develop local affairs.

Business interrupted in accordance with Standing Order No 19.

House Resumed: