as Chairman, presented the Second Report of the Standing Select Committee on Mineral and Energy Affairs, dated 16 May 1986, as follows:

Bill to be read a second time.

as Chairman, presented the Fifth Report of the Standing Select Committee on Finance, dated 20 May 1986, as follows:

Bill to be read a second time.

Mr Chairman, before the Committee reported progress yesterday evening I had just started to refer to the importance of the function of local authorities and said that they were also important in the provision of housing.

The hon member for Koedoespoort then asked me if he could put a question to me today. I shall help him now, because I know what he wants to ask me. He wants to know whether I belonged to the “Stormjaers”. This is a question which he asks often. [Interjections.] I want to tell the hon member that I did belong to the “Stormjaers”, but I want to tell him that the statement that he made that we signed our names in blood was not true. [Interjections.] When Dr Malan adopted a standpoint on the NP’s attitude towards the Ossewabrandwag, I sided with the NP.

You do not have a standpoint of your own! [Interjections.]

I think that hon member should have learned just as I have that we cannot take over the Government of this country by force. [Interjections.] He should also have learned that problems cannot be solved by means of force. [Interjections.] He must also take cognisance of the fact that this country must be governed in an orderly fashion. He can also tell his friends in the AWB that law and order can only be maintained in this country by means of discussions.

The hon member for Sasolburg also wants me to give a few more particulars.

Are you not a “Stormvalk”?

Order! I hope the particulars have a bearing on the Vote.

Sir, they have a bearing on the local government part of it. [Interjections.] I just want to point out to the hon member for Sasolburg that he tried four times without success to get a seat in Parliament, and eventually lowered his sights and ended up in the Provincial Council; then he fled to the Free State.

And what happened in the Free State?

Welfare …

Tell the people!

Order!

I then mentioned that the local authorities were also responsible for housing, and consequently for welfare housing too. Welfare housing concerns the provision of housing and facilities to the aged, mentally and physically handicapped persons, the blind and other people who need care such as alcoholics and children for whom no other accommodation is available. The same applies to care facilities such as crèches, day care centres, and so on.

Welfare housing is usually provided by welfare organisations and utility companies to which the department allocates loan funds through the local authority to finance capital expenditure for projects which meet the needs of the people who qualify for them. According to estimates there is a countrywide shortage of accommodation for approximately 16 000 aged people. In order to meet the housing shortage, applications are placed on a waiting list. Depending on the need and the urgency of the case accommodation is then allocated with due regard to the independence of an aged person to allow aged people to continue to live in the community as long as possible. In the past it was the rule to build homes for aged persons who were strong and healthy enough to live on their own. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I do not intend getting involved with the hon member for Middelburg’s speech. I do not know how anybody can be proud to admit that he was a member of the Stormjaers. [Interjections.] However, I shall be referring to welfare and the question of age in the course of my speech, and I hope to touch on the same matters which the hon member is concerned with.

I want to refer today to the question of housing. [Interjections.] From time to time questions have been asked in Parliament concerning the number of houses required, and obviously this figure varies. It happens that people are on the waiting list and by the time their turn comes up, they cannot be contacted or they have already found accommodation. Therefore it is necessary to determine the need for housing among all the population groups and to maintain that number regularly. The figure of 390 790 people on the waiting list is probably not correct, and that is why we need a survey. On 17 January this year the hon the Minister said that there was a backlog of 16 000 houses as far as White housing alone was concerned. So, we must check it.

In this respect I commend the hon the Minister for calling for a national survey. He announced it on 21 April and—I think he would agree—at that stage I responded quite positively to this announcement. However, I want to know why—if I am correct—a survey on Blacks is excluded if we are going to cover all the population groups in this survey. That is what I understand is the position. We want the total picture of the needs of all the communities of South Africa. I suggest, with respect, that it must cover all the race groups.

While referring to the survey—the hon the Minister touched on it again yesterday in his speech—I should like to ask whether the survey is going to give us details of the income group of each person; those who are personally unable to finance their own homes; those who do not need assistance and have private means; those that need State assistance; and their ages. Their ages are important, but I shall touch on that when I refer to the needs of the aged later on. A data bank is of course necessary to complete the information. This department will apparently act on an agency basis with other groups and regional offices will be established in all parts to represent all three Houses of Parliament.

I must now ask this hon the Minister what will happen when we receive the survey figures. How will the hon the Minister tackle the problem? How many houses does the hon the Minister intend building in the present financial year? How will this liaise with the total requirements of the country and of the other population groups? Is it not necessary to consider a five year plan for housing so that everybody knows where he stands and the backlog can be tackled? I must say that whereas I agree with the first part of the national survey, I again voice my objection to the splitting of the functions of the other groups and say that this should remain one body.

We opposed the Bill—now the Act— which divides the Community Development Board and the National Housing Fund, as most hon members are aware. The Development and Housing Board has been established—we know now—for Whites. It would appear that the Government’s policy is merely to play a supportive role; in other words, the individual must first do everything within his means to provide his own family needs. I have no quarrel with that. Secondly, the private sector must play the leading role in the provision of housing. This I can go along with. Thirdly, the State must only take cognisance of the housing needs of those who cannot readily be satisfied with their own means, or the assistance of the private sector and, must as far as possible, restrict its own housing assistance as such.

I understand that R64,9 million was spent on White housing last year. Incidentally, 25% of this went to Cape Town. R15,7 million, the second largest amount, was spent on White housing in Pretoria and the Witwatersrand received R14,5 million. I want to ask the hon the Minister now whether they spent all that money. What are the priorities this year and how will the amount be divided this year? Can the hon the Minister advise us of the proposed distribution? Where local authorities have money for housing and the money has not yet been spent, is it not possible to allow the local authorities to carry over those funds into the next financial year? If they are not allowed to do so, can that money not be put to better use rather than having its appropriation lapse and its having to be voted again the following year?

The private sector—particularly utility companies—has been playing a major role and are to be commended for the homes that they have provided. I praise the individuals who administer these companies for their unselfish dedication. I want to suggest that the State recognise these services to the country.

Many of these schemes fall under Home Assistance programmes that make provision for a couple to purchase a new home if it is their first purchase of a house. They must be prepared to live in that house which costs up to R40 000, and the Government will subsidise the interest at 33,3% for the first five years. This increase from 20% is certainly welcome.

This is commendable, but with today’s market, although the cost of the land is not included, R40 000 is a very small amount with building costs running at something like R500 per square metre. I would therefore like to appeal to the hon the Minister to review this limit of R40 000 and to raise it to at least R50 000, on an inverted basis, as mentioned by the hon member for Greytown. I make the point very strongly in support of what he has said, namely that the principle that the more someone earns, the higher the subsidy he receives, is wrong. This should be inverted completely; in other words, the less someone earns, the higher his subsidy should be.

If it is the Government’s policy to ease the burden of obtaining homes, I would urge the hon the Minister to consult with the hon the Minister of Finance to do the following things: Firstly, the purchaser should be allowed to deduct for tax purposes the interest paid on the bond for a home, whether or not it is a first home, provided he lives in that house.

Secondly, I would urge the hon the Minister to consult with his colleague and discuss the possibility of the increase of the exemption from transfer duty in respect of the transfer of a home to somebody’s name from R30 000 to R40 000, or to a comparable limit should he raise the R40 000 to R50 000. This could be done quite easily. I do not think this should present a great problem to the hon the Minister. The hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning was quoted in the Cape Times on 21 March 1986—as recently as that—as having said the following:

We fully support this sentiment and we can all go along with it.

I would also like to commend the utility companies and thank the hon the Minister for the tour that was arranged for us to visit Bothasig, Edgemead and Zonnebloem. Part of the scheme is to make land available as cheaply as possible, and therefore one must keep down expenses in the townships. I notice from a report in the Cape Times of 17 January 1986 that the hon the Minister said the following:

The hon the Minister did refer to this in his speech yesterday, and he did make some recommendations with regard to projects in Pretoria. He mentioned the question as to whether we should sell by sectional title. We go along with the sentiments expressed by him, but I should like the hon the Minister to spell out more precisely how privatisation will be affected, whether we are going to sell certain housing projects and what money is going to come in. We should also like to have more details concerning an enlarged programme and what we are doing about privatisation. My reference to housing must, of course, tie in with my remarks on township development as this is vital.

Another problem relating to housing is the care of the aged, to which hon members have referred. These institutions for the aged are full and there are waiting lists. I believe that local authorities should be given the task welfare organisations have. We must call for annual returns from local authorities showing what provision they have made available for aged people, what progress they have made, and how many names there are on the waiting list. I believe that local authorities should be given the right to provide welfare services, particularly social welfare. The hon the Minister may not be aware of it, but the Hoexter Commission which sat many years ago prohibited local authorities in the Transvaal from carrying out welfare services. I believe that should be reversed and that local authorities in the Transvaal should now be given the right to carry out welfare services as I believe this is sorely needed.

The care of the aged is a most important factor. I welcome the hon the Minister’s announcement of the committee to investigate the housing needs of the aged. These institutions, as I say, have long waiting lists.

As far as the Development and Housing Board is concerned, it is considered to be a step towards the disbanding of the National Housing Commission. Self-help is necessary and this board provides loans and rent subsidies to home owners in certain categories. This also brings me to the limits laid down for economic housing of R800 …

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

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

The hon member for Hillbrow may proceed.

I thank the hon Whip, Mr Chairman.

I want to refer to the limits of R800 per family and R450 per single person laid down by the Housing Act. I think it is high time that these limits were raised as they are completely out of step with the value of the rand and the rate of inflation which has ravaged the rand. Looking at the value of the rand today, namely 42c, I shudder to think what will happen to the value of the rand if we carry out any more raids outside this country’s borders.

The figures I have quoted are also relevant to rent control which I shall touch on in a moment and it is therefore important for these levels to be raised. I would call for a minimum increase from R800 to R1 300 and from R450 to R700 in order to round off the figures put forward by the hon member for Cape Town Gardens, who made the proper calculations, bearing in mind that the R800 includes half the earnings of the spouse.

Local authorities will have to play an important part in housing. They will have a programme and a list of people waiting for accommodation. Moreover, they should have plans and specifications ready when loan applications are approved.

The local authorities should also have an urban renewal scheme in order to assist individuals in respect of the renovation of their homes. I believe that local authorities should submit annual returns to the Department of Local Government in respect of the waiting list of persons waiting for homes; the number of homes actually built; and thirdly, the number of homes or schemes to be built together with the dates pertaining to those programmes, so that it can keep proper control. I believe there should also be close liaison between the Government and the building societies to ensure that the rates are kept as low as possible.

As far as mobile homes are concerned, I believe that town planning schemes should allow them. Moreover, if the mobile homes are fixed to permanent foundations, they will provide a cheap form of housing for people who are sorely in need of such housing.

The amending of building by-laws and regulations should enable the hon the Minister of Public Works to exempt certain areas from the application of these building regulations, and building standards may be lowered in certain respects to meet the situation.

There was a report in The Argus last weekend about a R6 billion housing plan for Cape Town. I believe this refers to the area known as Blue Downs. The Argus stated that the plan included housing for Whites. Perhaps the hon the Minister could clarify this issue as I am not quite sure whether that is correct.

As far as the philosophy of housing is concerned, many changes have taken place over the past decade. Since the advent of sectional title and share block schemes, the flat is no longer a temporary dwelling. It has now become a permanent home, and we should consider it as such.

The events in respect of sectional title and share block schemes lead me to the question of rent control. I am disturbed that the Department of Community Development, which has heretofore administered this aspect, saw fit to exempt certain buildings from rent control. Particularly when the hon the Minister heard that the building was in either Killarney or Houghton, he immediately thought that they were very affluent areas and he decontrolled those buildings. I believe that up to now, 63 blocks of flats throughout South Africa have been exempted from rent control over the past 12 months alone. That is approximately five per month. This is a grave mistake as many people are on fixed incomes and have difficulty in meeting the increased rentals which are no longer controlled by the rent board but by the property owners.

The hon the Minister had in mind amending the Rents Act and he will recall that we had a commission of inquiry that sat for some years before making recommendations regarding rent control. So far, none of these recommendations have been implemented although nearly three years have elapsed. We were, however, able to bring relief through the Share Blocks Control Act and the Sectional Titles Act. However, some of the most urgent needs of the Rent Control Act have not yet been attended to.

In particular, the commission established that persons earning in excess of a stipulated income—the figures of R800 and R450 to which I have referred and which I feel should be raised—should not receive protection. Their protection should be phased out over a period of two years, whereas those persons under those income limits deserve the full protection of the rent boards and the boards should thus continue. This is a philosophy which I am sure we can all go along with.

Proof of a person’s income should be by way of affidavit and should not be subject to an inquisitorial examination which terrifies elderly people.

According to the recommendations contained in paragraph 8.2 of the Gazette of 2 December 1983—as far back as that—a lessor shall not give a lessee notice in terms of subsection (l)(f) unless … a competent court has ordered—

• (i) in the case of a reconstruction or rebuilding scheme, that it is in the public interest that such reconstruction or rebuilding scheme be proceeded with;
• (ii) in the case of repair work or restoration, that the vacation of such dwelling is essential before such repair work of restoration can be proceeded with;
• (b) in the case of demolition or conversion for purposes other than residential purposes, written consent of the Minister has been obtained in terms of section 24.

1. (3) A notice referred to … shall be accompanied by a copy of the order of court or by a copy of the consent granted by the Minister, as the case may be.

This section of the Rents Act has been abused time and again. People have been given notice to the effect that renovation and repair schemes are to take place. In terms of the present Act, 6 months’ notice must be given. On completion of the renovation, the tenant is entitled to return to the property but, of course, he never does because he has been forced to find other accommodation. When the building then becomes vacant, the owners apply to convert it to sectional title. An abnormally high rate of abuse occurs in this regard. Evidence of this was given before the commission. We were promised faithfully that an amendment specifically to this section would be implemented as soon as possible. However, since 1983—it is now 1986—no amendment has been forthcoming and the abuse continues.

The need for rent control still exists, even though supply and demand change from time to time. At the moment there is a slump. Therefore, there is very little building activity. Meanwhile, the population grows, people get married, have families, and some get divorced. They all require additional accommodation. We may find that the present surplus of accommodation will turn into an acute shortage similar to that in 1978. There are many people who are unemployed and who are struggling to make a living.

In answer to questions on the Question Paper, the hon the Minister has advanced the information to me—I thank him for that—that 29 000 flats and 27 000 houses still fall under rent control. In total there are thus 56 000 units which fall under rent control which could mean that a minimum of 166 000 people need the form of protection rent control provides.

In addition to this, there are a large number of people—I do not have the details available—who live in decontrolled premises. People who occupied such premises between October 1949 and June 1966 qualify for the protection of rent control but the Government is presently phasing these occupants out by not increasing the limits of R800 and R450 to which I have referred. I want to know whether it is the deliberate intention of the Government to squeeze people out of those premises.

Three years have elapsed since our commission sat. Stacks of memoranda were studied and evidence was given by many people and organisations throughout the community. Is all of this to end in the dustbin? Is that to be the fate of all the work which has been done? That certainly is the impression we have received.

There is one other matter concerning the Rent Control Act to which I should like to refer. I placed a question on the Question Paper with regard to applications which have to do with the Rent Control Act in the areas of Athlone and Grassy Park, and I shall tell the hon the Minister why I did that. In terms of a notice which appeared in the Government Gazette of 27 March 1986, the rent boards of Athlone and Grassy Park were dissolved and, when the other rent boards, namely those of Landsdowne, Wetton, Ottery and Wynberg were restored in a subsequent notice, these two boards were not re-established. Therefore, the handling of the four applications in Athlone and the two in Grassy Park referred to in the reply I received, actually took place ultra vires because the applications were considered by rent boards which no longer existed.

I want now to refer to welfare work in this context. There is an organisation known as Aletheia. It consists of international ministries. It is situated at 16 Louis Botha Avenue in the Hillbrow constituency, and is a registered welfare organisation. The organisation houses a number of people on these premises who have, for various reasons, fallen into difficulties of a social nature. Some of them are handicapped in certain ways.

The administrators of the organisation were faced with the crisis of having to pay the purchase price of the building occupied by them as the executors in the estate which owned the building required payment. I should like to thank the hon the Minister for the assistance given by his department by way of making a sum of R240 000 available at 1% interest to enable the Aletheia International Ministries Association to acquire these premises. On behalf of this organisation and myself, I wish publicly to express our sincere thanks and gratitude for the assistance given and to the officials who made the recommendations in this regard.

I do not have time to deal with urban renewal. I would like to reserve that for a later stage if I am allowed the necessary time. In the meantime I will conclude on this note.

Mr Chairman, the hon the Minister will need the wisdom of Solomon to reply to all the questions put by the hon member for Hillbrow. I am reminded of the days when that hon member and his old United Party were in power in the Johannesburg City Council. We put so many questions that he learned the art of doing so from us. Answering all those questions, however, is another matter. I hope the hon the Minister will be able to do so.

We asked clever questions, but he asks stupid ones.

Today I want to confine myself to empty accommodation, meeting tenants half way and the needs survey. I think it is a good thing for me to congratulate the hon the Minister sincerely on his fine staff. His staff have excelled in various spheres in what they have achieved in the past few years.

Today, in the discussion of section 61(1) of the Development and Housing Act of 1985, we actually come to the gist of the matter, i.e. that of local authorities having certain responsibilities. We must start looking at it in that light. It is also the task of local authorities to bring themselves up to date on what land is available and where accommodation is available. They must then also provide us with such a needs survey indicating those who do not have proper accommodation or who are living in poor conditions. We should also have proper surveys of those who have no accommodation. That is the first step in such a housing survey. Without that no project can be properly planned. It must be tackled systematically and for that there must be proper budgeting.

I do want to ask whether the time has not come for the introduction of advisory committees in this connection. It is all very well for us to say that this is a complicated task and that circumstances have changed and are precarious, but we need a reliable and valid data base.

Apart from local authorities that must be involved, I am also advocating a co-ordinated, broader advisory committee. In such an instance it is no use merely having recourse to the authorities or to local bodies. I think we should involve church associations, educational and agricultural bodies, welfare bodies, utility companies and individuals who can make tangible contributions, and also members of the House of Assembly, in those advisory committees. I am asking for co-ordination in this connection. It is no use simply consulting one, two or three bodies or persons and accepting their advice when there is no co-ordination yet.

On-going investigations must be instituted, the data must be collected and processed and then interpreted. Only then can we build up a comprehensive data base. Then we can begin with the implementation of policy and start thinking about socioeconomic matters. This can then be followed by physical applications and financial structures can be built up. Use must be made of these computerised systems, a housing data bank must be built up, a data bank that can be employed on a broader front, only on a territorial or provincial basis, but also on a national basis. Then we can have the actual waiting-lists computerised.

Our problem at present is that there are long waiting-lists for funds, but injudicious schemes have also been tackled, schemes which have never been completed. We can no longer afford that sort of thing in this country, and that is why the Development and Housing Board must clearly tell us how we should tackle this matter.

Without the assistance of a local authority this cannot be done. In this connection we must also have a look at the natural increase and immigration figures, the development of growth points, medium-term and long-term development, methods for stimulating the private sector, the creation of the necessary infrastructure and the expediting of township development, housing, projects and welfare projects.

I also want to associate myself with certain questions the hon member for Hillbrow put. The essential requirements with regard to the data bank are really quite a different matter. It is not merely a question of numbers or of statistics. We must have a clear knowledge of which sex the people belong to. We must also know the age of members of the family and how large the families are. We must also determine the incomes of the various families.

I should also like to see a calculation made of a family’s expenditure. Many people cannot work at all. They allege, however, that they receive a certain amount of money, but that they cannot get by on that. We think we should also know that the expenditure per family is.

We should also know the nature of the planning of the family’s dwelling. Important too, is knowledge of environmental factors, for example the degree of pollution. I see the hon the Minister of Mineral and Energy Affairs sitting there in his bench. He would be able to inform us of the quantity of lead poisoning in large cities as a result of the poisonous exhaust gasses from motor-cars. We shall therefore also have to take the relevant environmental factors into account. Then there are also people’s purchasing facilities, their churches, their schools and so on, and of course the recreational facilities as well.

I think that the Johannesburg City Council provides and excellent example in this context. In the past year the Johannesburg City Council spent R75 million on capital projects, and specifically with the assistance received from the Government. What is of importance to me, of course—something which I think local authorities also give attention to—is the fact that R35 million of that amount was, for example, financed from the city council’s own development fund for housing and properties. The Johannesburg City Council obtains its own loans abroad and the advances, paid in regard to the accommodation for senior citizens, amount to R5,5 million. R3,5 million was spent on economic units. This comes to a total of R9 million.

There is one matter that bothers me, however, and I should like to highlight it. I am referring to the waiting-lists, kept in Johannesburg, of applicants for economic dwelling units. There are, in total, 1 450 names on that waiting-lists. There are 86 applicants for bachelor flats, whilst there are 234 applicants waiting for one-bedroomed flats, 683 applicants waiting for two-bedroomed flats and 447 applicants waiting for three-bedroomed flats. We must bear in mind that there are still people who need three bedrooms. I find this long waiting list of applicants for economic units truly disturbing.

However, let me now come to the female applicants for accommodation. This gives us a clear indication of the number of female applicants whose spouses have perhaps died or who are divorced. These women are the ones who are responsible for the care of the family. Of the female applicants, only 60 have no children, whilst 495 do have children. This amounts to a total of 555 women on a waiting-list for dwellings. In regard to the aid units there are seven women without children and 156 with children.

Of the grand total of 1 450, 334 have no children, 473 have one child, 344 have two children, 211 have three children and 65 have four children. We shall definitely have to try, within the family context, to do something about this. I know the State is giving this matter its attention. I also know that we shall be meeting our responsibilities in this regard.

An analysis of the monthly incomes of the relevant 1 450 applicants brings to light that 170 of them receive between R151 and R250 per month, 492 of them between R451 and R650 and 429 of them between R651 and R800. The major group in this context is the 492 group, together with their children. The applicants in this group therefore only receive between R451 and R650 per month. From these figures it is evident exactly how important this matter is.

I am not getting round to saying everything I would have liked to say, Mr Chairman. I do, however, just want to issue a warning by saying that our people should not be so pessimistic. I have here a cutting from the magazine Style of May 1986. It has therefore just been published. I refer to an article Gloom and doom … or Cape Town boom! I briefly want to quote a few paragraphs:

The writer, Noel Jordan, is referring to all the things that happened in Soweto, in Sharpeville and elsewhere and then goes on to say, and I quote again:

He is referring to a house in Bantry Bay which was sold for R26 000 in 1976. Its present-day value is R300 000. In Oranjezicht there is a house which was sold for £300 in 1943. In 1976 the same house was sold for R50 000, and in 1985 it changed owners again—this time for R200 000. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, at the outset please just give me an opportunity to raise a matter concerning a remark the hon member for Middelburg made to me yesterday evening. Let me just tell the hon member that he did not give me any indication that he wanted to refer to me. I was therefore not present in the Council Chamber.

The hon member mentioned the many newspaper clippings that the hon member for Sasolburg and we on this side of the Committee made use of. [Interjections.] Then he said the following about me:

With all due respect, Sir, I mentioned the fact that newspaper reports to that effect had reached me, but I did not quote from that publication. I just want to put that matter straight. [Interjections.]

I fully want to accept what the hon member said. Being the good Dopper colleague of mine that he is, I have no reason to doubt his word. I therefore accept that what he said about the Middelburg Town Council’s standpoint on regional services councils and free trading areas is, in fact, so. I should like to ask the hon member, however, whether he would say that the municipal voters of Middelburg feel exactly the same way about these two matters.

Wait until the next election. [Interjections.]

The hon member says we should wait until the next election, but I now want to ask the hon member whether he has already received an invitation from the chairman of the CP’s constituency council in Middelburg. Has he received such an invitation? The hon member is indicating that he has not yet received such an invitation, but let me tell the hon member that he is, in fact, going to receive an invitation from the chairman to hold a joint meeting in Middelburg to discuss, on a public platform, the question of regional services councils and free trading areas before the municipal voters of Middelburg. [Interjections.] I now want to ask the hon member whether he would be willing to participate. [Interjections.] It seems as if the hon member is saying yes. I hope the hon member will keep his word and appear with those people on that platform. [Interjections.]

The hon member went on and eventually came round to the hon the leader of the CP. He referred to the time when the hon leader of the CP was a Deputy Minister in the National Party. I now want to ask the hon member, if the hon the Minister of Agriculture and Water Supply would just give him a chance to pay attention, whether he was not a supporter of the hon member for Waterberg, too, when the latter was sitting on that side of the Committee. Did the hon member not vote for the hon member for Waterberg, too, as leader of the NP in the Transvaal? I really think …

Order! The hon member for Pietersburg must really discuss the Vote more specifically.

I just want to say that it really is a bit late now to broach that matter of the hon member for Waterberg.

I abide by your ruling, Mr Chairman, and shall now come back to the Vote under discussion. Let me therefore turn my attention to the hon the Minister.

In his preliminary reply the hon the Minister indicated that he would only be continuing with his reply today. He nevertheless also indicated that I had again tried to make politics out of this Vote. [Interjections.] Talking as we are of regional services councils and free trading areas, let me ask the hon the Minister who placed these two matters in the local government arena. It was not this side of the Committee, but the Government which did so! So unfortunately regional services councils and free trading areas are now a part of South African politics. That is also in the local authority field. It is therefore the Government who must carry the blame, because it is the Government that brought these matters into the political arena. Nor must the hon the Minister shy away from the fact, because we are conducting a political debate, and in future it is going to be a political debate. We must look at it squarely, and I therefore expect frank answers from the hon the Minister.

I want to tell the hon the Minister and the hon the Minister of Constitutional and Planning that it is very interesting to examine the original submission by the Transvaal Municipal Association about the relevant views of local authorities. It is now becoming very clear that the views held by the Transvaal Municipal Association at the time are now beginning to crystallise as the opinions of local authorities. Each time I quote this submission in the House, it elicits an hysterical response in Government ranks. The hon member for Newcastle decries it as being one of the first and oldest reports or TMA views on these matters, but this report is not even five years old and is signed by the then President of the TMA, Dr T L Boshoff who, as a present-day Nationalist, is a member of the minority group in the Pietersburg Town Council.

Let us have a brief look at the arguments raised by the TMA at the time and submitted to the President’s Council. About regional services councils it was said:

That is, of course as meaningful development, but it was White local authorities that could very successfully make use of joint regional services such as fire brigade and ambulance services, etc.

Then it is clearly stated:

Then there is this very significant paragraph:

I want to ask hon members whether this is not happening now. The report goes on to state:

The TMA said this was completely iniquitous. The report goes on to state:

That is precisely what is happening now. A regional services council is not, in fact, publicly accountable to the municipal voters who contributed to its financing. Surely that is a completely incorrect democratic principle in regard to Government institutions. The report concludes by stating:

As it was known at the time:

Mr Chairman, may I put a question to the hon member?

Order! The hon member has just quoted the concluding passages of the report, but I am sorry to say that he has now also reached the concluding section of his speech, because his time has expired. So unfortunately the hon the Minister may not put a question to him.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Pietersburg will not take it amiss of me if I do not react to what he said. I think the hon the Minister will indeed do so.

It is a pleasure for me to associate myself with those who congratulated this ministry on the fine annual report presented to us and its informative contents. In this report we have a beautiful exposition of what the department has achieved during the past year and also what is projected for the coming financial year.

I largely want to confine myself to the functions of the Department of Works which fall under this Vote. If we look at the report we find, on pages 66 to 71, a description of all the building projects completed in the past year. From pages 76 to 87 we have a list of institutions and building complexes that have to be maintained by this department.

Last year this ministry was still in its infancy, and at that stage it was extremely difficult to determine precisely what this department’s responsibilities would be. At that stage a date had not yet been fixed for the phasing out of the provincial councils and one could not determine with any certainty how much of the work would be transferred to this department. Last week, however, the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning announced that provincial councils were to be phased out at the end of June this year.

I just want to take this opportunity, on behalf of this side of the committee, of expressing our sincere thanks and appreciation to all the provincial councils which have, for so many years now—I think 76 years—furnished such good service to our country. [Interjections.] I would like to put it to the hon the Minister that since millions of rands worth of work is now to be transferred to this department, a new approach will also have to be adopted in planning and carrying out this work. Here I am referring, in particular, to the erection and maintenance of buildings.

I am fully aware of the fact that the planning and decision-making does not rest solely with this department and that many of these decisions have to be taken by other departments, with this department only responsible for the implementation. That is why I also feel myself at liberty to appeal to all Government departments to give this department the closest possible co-operation.

If one looks at the escalation in building costs, one sees that one cannot afford long and sometimes unnecessary delays. I should just like to mention a single example here. According to the Transvaal Provincial Administration’s quantity surveyors, the cost involved in building a primary school for 750 pupils in 1981 was R1,65 million. Today a similar school costs R2,2 million. From this we can deduce that there is an annual escalation of approximately 20% in building costs. As a result of delays, thousands of rands are being spent unnecessarily. I believe that this could be prevented by proper planning and collaboration.

In the process of urbanisation it goes without saying that many more buildings such as schools and other Government buildings will be needed in urban complexes. In the rural areas, however, one has just the opposite, because as a result of urbanisation the rural areas are becoming depopulated and buildings are falling into disuse. Many of these buildings are becoming dilapidated and unsightly, and eventually a bulldozer has to be used to raze them to the ground. I really do not think that our country can afford such luxuries. Many of these buildings were still in a relatively good condition when they were vacated and could really have been used for other purposes.

I should like to refer to a few of these buildings which could still, with a few small changes or renovations, have been effectively utilised. Before I come to that, let me first ask for a thorough survey of requirements to be carried out to ascertain what the needs of the handicapped, the blind, the aged and, in particular, the debilitated aged are. I am just mentioning a few. In Wolmaransstad at present there is an empty technical school with its hostels. This building could be employed for the aged. In Leandra there is an empty school building that could be used as a nursery school. In Ventersdorp there is an empty hospital, in Boksburg a school and hostels, in Kempton Park a primary school, in Cornelia there are hostels, in Parys there are also hostels, in Adelaide there are two hostel buildings, in Darling a school building, in Koringberg a primary school and a high school and in Estcourt a primary school. I think that with a little renovating all these buildings could still effectively be utilised for housing the aged, for nursery schools and for the handicapped.

I should like to refer to a good school building in my constituency which had to be vacated owing to subsidences. Although it has been ascertained that this building is safe, it has been empty for many years now, and it would now cost a considerable amount to restore it. All these years the local authority has tried to obtain the building and use it for housing for the aged. They have not, however, as yet succeeded in doing so. There is a great need amongst the aged in these towns—I am now referring to Westonaria—for housing for the aged. It would appear, however, as if no one knows who can give the town council the necessary permission to take over this building. Personally I think that it is a typical example of the red tape involved in such matters. Since I became an MP in 1981 I myself have been involved in this matter, and to this very day it is still receiving attention.

Another matter I should also like to broach is that of the material used in the erection of buildings. Attempts should be made to limit future maintenance costs to a minimum. It struck me that aluminium door and window frames are used at the coast to obviate the problem of rust. As far as I am concerned, that is progress. My request is that we should always ensure that the correct material is used in accordance with the relevant climatic conditions. One of the finest examples of this can be seen very close to Parliament, and here I am referring to the restoration of blocks of flats. Unfortunately some of them have become so dilapidated that they have had to be razed, but I think that today the rest can be seen as something Cape Town can be proud of.

When one notes the works transferred to this department, one sees that in future Appropriations much more extensive financial provision will have to be made for the department. I should just briefly like to refer to one other matter in my constituency. I am not going to argue at length about this, because the hon the Minister is well aware of the problem. I just want to say, however, that the inhabitants and town council of Venterspos would be very glad if this problem could be given attention as quickly as possible.

In conclusion I just want to say that this side of the House is proud of what this competent hon Minister and his officials are doing for the White section of our population.

Mr Chairman, I would like to begin by both commiserating with and congratulating the hon the Minister. I commiserate because I feel that his talents, ability and enthusiasm are wasted on the half jobs he is given. I congratulate him on his enthusiasm and ability and that of his staff, which have enabled him to do as well as he has done, particularly in the field of housing for the White community and in the construction element of his works function.

It is, however, a rather crazy setup. There are basically three elements in the hon the Minister’s portfolio: White local government; White housing; and White works. It would be much the same if the United Kingdom Government had Ministers who dealt with these affairs for blondes, brunettes and redheads, respectively.

Gentlemen prefer blondes!

As far as I am concerned that would be just as crazy, because these particular functions are to all intents and for all practical purposes indivisible.

Many hon members have already dealt with the question of housing, so I do not wish to dwell on it at length except to say that, although the White community of course needs attention in this respect and must be given a fair crack of the whip, the greatest needs are in the Coloured, Indian and particularly the Black communities. The hon the Minister most capable of dealing with housing affairs is, however, responsible for the smallest element of housing. That seems quite ridiculous.

The same applies to the hon the Minister’s works function. The hon the Minister deals with buildings which are presumably occupied, run or owned by the White segment of the community, and yet the greatest need here too exists in regard to the buildings in the other communities. It seems ridiculous indeed in the present circumstances that the usefulness of the hon the Minister’s efforts is diminished because he cannot apply them across the full spectrum of his responsibilities. Perhaps I may suggest that he and his counterparts in the other two Ministers’ Councils get together and form a consortium under the hon the Minister’s chairmanship to do the job together, instead of subdividing it.

I wish to deal with the subject of local government in more depth. Regrettably, only two pages of the 103 page annual report deal with the question of local government, and those comprise the Afrikaans and English versions of only one page. My point is that local government is supposed to be one of the primary functions of the department and, although he is now in the second year of his present appointment, the hon the Minister has not yet taken over this function.

In the initial stages of the implementation of the new Constitution, many of us felt that the concept of own affairs could work at the level of local government, but I say here and now that the proposed breakdown of local government into own affairs administered by the three communities can never possibly work in the way originally intended. In theory, it originally appeared to have possibilities, but as time progresses it is becoming more and more obvious that it cannot work.

I am a member of the Standing Committee on Constitutional Development and Planning in which various Bills are discussed. The attitude of the members of the Coloured and Indian communities on even minor matters is such that it is quite clear that they are not going to support the idea of entirely separate local authorities. They have made that clear at every meeting that I have attended.

Unless they can be persuaded to accept the concept of separate, racially constituted local authorities, the Minister responsible for White local government will never be able to perform that function as he is intended to. Of course, this goes for the Ministers responsible for the other two communities as well.

I come then to the question as to why I believe this hon Minister will never be able to perform the function he has been charged with in his capacity as Minister of the White local government. The provisions of the Group Areas Act in respect of the opening up of the central business districts are, if not already rescinded, in the process of being so. From what one hears in the talk around the country, there appears to be some doubt as to how much of the group areas concept, if any, is going to be retained.

It is quite obvious to me that if the Group Areas Act is either severely modified or abandoned altogether—either of which I believe is not beyond the bounds of possibility—then this hon Minister is not going to be able to administer White local authorities because they just will not exist. If I may just give as an example the following: Even in a city such as Durban, if one excises Chatsworth and Phoenix, and if one makes absolutely sure that the Black areas become part of the Black homelands and kwaZulu, one will still have large enclaves in the city which virtually cannot be excised for one reason or another. If the central business district is opened, those properties in the centre of the city will be open for acquisition and ownership—not merely for renting, but for ownership—and those people who own the properties will be ratepayers and will be entitled to have a say in who governs the city. I know that in terms of the local authorities legislation ratepayers will include commercial ratepayers. However, that does not alter the fact that lily-white local authorities cannot exist in these circumstances.

I do not wish to enlarge on the question of regional services councils per se, but the representatives on those regional services councils will represent a variety of local authorities, some of which will be racially “pure” local authorities. For example, it may well be that in the Greater Durban regional services council there will be Vendant and Isipingo, and perhaps another odd one that are Indian local authorities. However, the majority of the local authorities will be racially mixed. They will be members of the regional services council and as a consequence they will be answerable to the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning insofar as their regional services council activities are concerned. However, as far as their local authority activities are concerned, if they are racially segregated, they will be responsible to the appropriate own affairs Ministers.

In other words, it is a complete mess!

Well, I will come to that in a moment.

Then we go one step further. To return to the local authorities themselves, even at present, they will not break down the existing local authorities voluntarily into racially separated local authorities. There are White councillors, Coloured members of the LACs and Indian members of the LACs. Presumably the White councillors will be responsible for council affairs to this hon Minister, but I am not sure about this as it seems a little vague. The Coloured LAC members will be responsible to the Coloured Minister in the House of Representatives, and the Indian LAC members will be responsible to the Indian Minister in the House of Delegates.

We are creating a situation for utter turmoil. As far as I can see this is a complete “gemors”. I think that is the best and most expressive word I can use for this. [Interjections.]

“Gemors” with two esses! [Interjections.]

Whichever way you would like to have it. [Interjections.] It does seem to me to be a real mess and I really cannot see that this hon Minister is ever going to be able to perform the function of Minister for Local Government in respect of White local authorities. I believe I have given a fairly reasonable set of cogent reasons for my opinion in this regard. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Umbilo was rather pessimistic in his approach.

Realistic!

You should hear him when he is pessimistic!

I would therefore prefer not to continue on that note.

*The hon the Minister and his department have a very important task because these matters affect people’s daily lives and can be very sensitive. Housing and local authorities are affected. These matters affect the daily lives of people where they live and work.

Local government is an important part of the government institutions, and the new dispensation in respect of local government is an inherent part of the reform process in South Africa. We could see this with reference to the discussions in this debate in which hon members referred to reform in particular.

The new dispensation gives each group a say in the decision-making processes which affect their interests on the level of local government. This applies to primary local authorities as well as regional councils. It should have a fundamental influence on improving the standards in the rendering of services. As a result it is a pity that members of the communities who take part in local government bodies are terrorised, and community leaders are discouraged and deterred from taking part in government institutions.

In this connection, with reference to the reaction of the hon members of the PFP yesterday, I also want to say it is a pity that some hon members of the PFP do not condemn violence and intimidation. On the contrary, they criticise only those bodies which try to oppose violence. [Interjections.] It is strange therefore, that the hon member for Hillbrow objects to the mutual co-operation between towns in the regional services councils, and that he feels aggrieved about the possibility of the large cities, such as Johannesburg, having to support poorer communities. What did the hon member say? I quote him:

What more do you want?

Read on!

That comes from the PFP, the so-called champion of the underdog. Apparently the hon member prefers to be a kind-hearted fellow out of another man’s pocket.

*He dearly wants things to go well with these people. He wants to uplift them, etc, as long as the rich barons in the city of Johannesburg need make no contribution. [Interjections.]

The hon members for Kuruman and Pietersburg also spoke about regional services councils. It is very clear that hon members are under a misapprehension as far as the functions of the regional services councils are concerned. This emerged very clearly from their speeches. The hon member for Pietersburg challenged the hon member for Middelburg about this matter and he wants them to have a public discussion about it.

He says the regional services councils will not be responsible to the voters. But these regional services councils are made up of city council representatives who have been elected by the municipal voters. I cannot accept his statement, therefore. It is incorrect.

What did the UME suggest? The hon member for Pietersburg tends to go back in history. He would like to prove in this way that no one on local government level has ever accepted or supported the fact that regional services councils were to come into being.

The Administrators negotiated with local authorities about these affairs in their respective provinces. Let us look at what the UME proposed at the time. They proposed that there be two kinds of local government bodies, viz primary local authorities and regional councils. This idea comes, therefore, from the United Municipal Executive, which is the mouthpiece of local authorities on national level. Now the hon member for Pietersburg wants to imply that these people have never been in favour of this system! The hon member’s facts are not correct.

If the members of the respective population groups in the country have equal privileges and opportunities, there should be no desire or urge among members of any of the population groups to be incorporated into or to live among another group. There would be no advantage in moving from one group to another. That is the ideal condition we must strive for. After all, everyone has such a thing as group pride and collectivity, also in respect of where one lives. The standard of services rendered to the respective communities in towns should be equal as far as possible.

The history of local government finance is an interesting one. It is a history which attests to inadequate income, chiefly because of the inflexible and limited main source of income, viz property tax. Through the years many commissions and committees have inquired into this aspect. Hopefully the new dispensation, with reference to recommendations of the Browne Committee and the Croeser Working Group, will result in a better dispensation, and the regional authority will have a more flexible source of income.

The hon the Minister will have a considerable say in this connection. Hopefully this government system will ensure right of self-determination, and gradually the equal treatment of the municipalities of all ethnic groups. Time will tell whether the shoulders of the new government tier will be broad enough to bear the burden. We trust the supervisory authorities will watch the development with care and understanding. It is the task of the hon the Minister and his department to monitor that aspect.

If perhaps research has been done in one of the large metropolises with regard to the revenue that will be generated from the tax system, and the hon the Minister has details in this connection, I should like to hear more about it. Unfortunately I could not get this information from any of the departments.

According to the annual report, senior staff members of the hon the Minister’s department undertook a tour abroad. According to the report these were the Director-General and the Director of Local Government. I think an overseas inquiry in connection with these matters can have positive results. I should like to know what aspects these gentlemen investigated abroad as well as whether a report containing their findings will be issued. Naturally the circumstances in this country differ considerably from those existing in most countries in the world. We have unique circumstances, yet I think there are certain facets in which we can learn from other Western countries.

I want to wish the hon the Minister and his department, who are actually entering a new field, every success in this very important task. I think local authorities will contribute greatly to ensuring the success of the new government levels which are being established and the hon the Minister and his department will have to play a large part in ensuring that success. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Welkom, like many other hon members, ranged far and wide on this matter but what strikes us on this side of the Committee is that up to this point there has not been a single eulogy or indication that the new dispensation holds advantages for local authorities. It appeared from the hon member for Welkom’s speech that he was concerned about the hon member for Pietersburg’s challenge to the hon member for Middelburg. We as inhabitants of the Free State cannot permit those from the Transvaal to conduct a debate on this important subject on their own and therefore I invite and challenge the hon member for Welkom that the two of us hold a meeting in Welkom at our expense. He must agree to it this afternoon and we can then debate the position of local government under the new dispensation. What does the hon member say to this?

Mr Chairman, may I put a question to the hon member?

Yes, Mr Chairman.

Mr Chairman, in the first place I want to tell the hon member …

No, the hon member must put a question.

I wish to ask him whether he will see that a chaotic situation will not arise as that for which they were responsible in Brits. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, I guarantee a meeting which will resemble a church service. [Interjections.] I would do anything just to get him there. [Interjections.] I would not sell my soul but anything to get the hon member for Welkom to such a meeting. [Interjections.] I should now like to know whether the hon member accepts the invitation.

Order!

He does not accept it. That is our trouble. Democracy is coming to a standstill in South Africa. The hon member for Middelburg does not want to debate either but we could hold a debate as Lincoln and his great opponent did in the year dot if hon members would only participate but they do not want to! [Interjections.]

There is a total misconception among the NP. Its members have no idea what the position of provincial councils and especially municipalities will be under the new dispensation. [Interjections.] Not one of those hon members has told us yet whether this will lead to greater certainty as regards local government. The reply is obviously negative. Enormous new uncertainties are merely being created. Will the new dispensation be more democratic at local level? It will not.

We know for instance that voting power will be determined inter alia by financial contributions in particular but even if a White municipality contributes 80% to the costs of a regional services council, its voting power remains limited to 50%. This is removing the political voting power of the White man and the entire reason is obviously that the White man is being involved, White local government is being involved to finance Black local bodies and to assist in their development.

That is the reason why Mr Obie Oberholzer, known as Mr Johannesburg, came to only one conclusion in Klerksdorp last year on the occasion of the congress of the Transvaal Municipal Association. This was that we, meaning we at municipal level and local authorities, would pay under the new dispensation. Those were his words. That was the entire conclusion of his argument and I agree with him wholeheartedly. This is where it is heading.

The hon member for Welkom and I—we two Free State people—know equally well that only three regional services councils are being planned pro tem for the Free State— Welkom, Sasolburg and Bloemfontein. Why, Mr Chairman? Because those are the three urban areas. And the three urban areas in which most White people are concentrated will just have to pay according to Mr Oberholzer’s view. To have them pay more efficiently, they are being made the centre around which regional services councils are being built in the Free State.

Mr Chairman, people in the Western Cape are backing out. Paarl had barely backed out when Stellenbosch did so as well; subsequently the Swartland backed out. Not one wants to venture into this Cape vacuum, Mr Chairman; they do not wish to do so because they are concerned about their future. They know nothing whatsoever about what awaits them. Even the chairman of the Black local authority of Mbekweni at Paarl said they did not wish to involve themselves in this Cape dispensation. They said they chose to remain under the jurisdiction of the local authority of Paarl. Wherever one goes, Mr Chairman, people are drawing back, local authorities are drawing back and do not wish to venture into this new dispensation because the present dispensation, the current system of local government in South Africa, can suffer enormous damage. In addition, they are afraid; they are afraid to debate; they do not want to debate in the Transvaal; they do not want to debate in the Free State; they do not want to debate anywhere—not even here, Mr Chairman. They want to sit and discuss every other subject under the sun but they do not talk about what is to happen to local authorities—especially municipalities—under the new dispensation. They do not discuss this as it will cost them votes. That hon member knows he will lose between 500 and 1 000 votes in Welkom the moment this new dispensation is carried out. [Interjections.]

That is why, Mr Chairman, we also find it shocking … [Interjections.] I have the relevant …

Mr Chairman, will the hon member for Sasolburg inform the House if he is satisfied that the current system of taxation applicable to local authorities in this country is actually adequate?

Mr Chairman, I do not know what the hon member for Welkom means in speaking of adequate. [Interjections.] Does he mean too little or too much? What does he mean? I cannot reply to such a question. In speaking of adequate, what does he mean? Adequate with a view to what? [Interjections.] I cannot reply to such a question, Mr Chairman. The hon member should put a clear question to me if he wants me to give a proper reply. [Interjections.]

Order!

If he cannot put a clear, proper question to me, I can unfortunately not reply to it. As the hon member is unable to put a better question, I should like to point out in closing … [Interjections.]

Order!

… that in the recent exposition by Dr Andreas van Wyk, Director-General of Constitutional Development and Planning, of the position of local authorities under the new dispensation which was published by way of a long article in Die Burger, there was not a trace of an indication of what the position of local authorities would be. Nobody—not even he or the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning or the hon the Minister of Local Government, Housing and Works—took a single municipality and used it as a model to work out what the position of that municipality was now—for instance financially—and what it would be under the new dispensation. This was not done anywhere, Mr Chairman. If they were to do this, it would only cost the National Party more votes in whatever case they made the calculation. It would cost the National Party thousands of votes wherever they betook themselves! [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Sasolburg once again proved here today that he represented a party living in the past. [Interjections.]

Give him a good dressing down, Willie! [Interjections.]

Order!

Mr Chairman, the argument put forward by the hon member as applicable to certain towns he named here no longer deals with the principle of regional services councils but the hon member for Sasolburg was silent about this. The principle has already been accepted; what is actually involved at this stage is the demarcation of regions—surely that is what it is about here. [Interjections.] The principle was accepted some time ago.

[Inaudible.]

Mr Chairman, I really do not intend debating the principle any longer with either the hon member for Kuruman or the hon member for Pietersburg; surely we have concluded the debate on that.

Just ask Fanie Ferreira!

Nevertheless the hon member for Sasolburg said no one on this side of the House was debating and pointing out the benefits of regional services councils to local authorities. I should therefore like to spend some of my time on that.

We are listening!

Mr Chairman, in his speech to the President’s Council on 15 May this year the State President once again referred to the multicultural nature of the South African community. He stated it as a condition that each new dispensation should not only take this aspect into account but also reflect it. The State President said, and I quote him:

One of the basic objectives of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa confirms this very standpoint. We find this in the Preamble to the Constitution:

Institutions of local authority can, in fact, be seen as the governmental level at which self-determination on own affairs comes into its own. Since 1982 the Government has confirmed the principle of own local government institutions for the various population groups where it has been at all possible. Of importance to local authority institutions, however, is that their area of jurisdiction should provide as far as possible for the total need of the community or at least hold the potential of providing for this in time.

It should not only be a place to dwell but also to work, relax and purchase. It should cover the entire spectrum of community services—social, managerial and economic. The Council for the Co-ordination of Local Government Affairs confirmed this very standpoint. The said council also came to the conclusion that, in creating and maintaining separate residential areas and own, independent local authorities for every population group, the area of jurisdiction should be such that it was financially and otherwise viable.

In determining criteria for viable local authorities, the council issued certain guidelines with a view to the new dispensation: Firstly, the creation of a demographic dispensation in which everyone has a say individually and in a group context in decisions affecting his interests; secondly, the striving for a dispensation in which domination of one group over another is eliminated and in which the rights and just aspirations of everyone be retained and satisfied as far as possible …

You are talking like Chris Heunis’s parrot.

… and thirdly, the self-determination of each group has to be ensured. No guidelines are acceptable which erode the right of a group and therefore in its opinion threaten its identity and survival in any way.

That is a parrot …

Lastly, provision should be made for co-responsibility on matters of common concern.

Hon members of the CP say this is parrot talk but it is very interesting that, when the self-determination of the various local authorities is confirmed, it is parrot talk in their terminology.

No, you are parroting a speech.

Up to this point I have emphasised the principle of self-determination on own affairs by own local authority institutions—in other words, own decision-making on own affairs and in own communities.

What are these “own affairs”?

Yes, what are they?

If hon members would only calm down for a while, we would get to that.

Nevertheless the realities of the multicultural society of South Africa also demand co-responsibility on matters of common concern to the various population groups living in our cities and towns.

Is the rugby field a common concern?

I shall reply to the hon member for Pietersburg’s question in a while. If he is quiet, he may learn something about local government.

Item 6 of Schedule 1 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1983, provides firstly for local government institutions by which every group obtains a say in own affairs and which is a constitutional mechanism to protect the interests of minority groups and, secondly, general local authority institutions, like regional services councils, by which the various groups with their own institutions co-operate on matters of general interest to all groups. The purpose of regional services councils is: Co-operation on and co-ordination of service …

But he has not yet reached the essence of own affairs.

I shall get to that point in a moment. [Interjections.] As I have said, the purpose of regional services councils is co-operation on and co-ordination of the rendering of service between local authorities to ensure efficiency by good liaison. Official and non-official investigations over years have indicated—this deals with benefits but now hon members do not want to listen—that co-operation between adjacent local authorities can effect savings as well as better furnishing of service and better utilisation of available facilities. [Interjections.]

Regional services councils are therefore institutions in the hands of and controlled by local government. As I shall indicate, regional services councils do not replace but are supplementary to primary local authorities.

But is that an improvement?

It is very definitely an improvement. The hon member should have listened. As regards the composition of regional services councils, the Regional Services Councils Act provides for each local authority or management body in a region to nominate one member for every 10% or part of 10% of the total number of votes such a member has at its disposal on the council.

We have also read the Act.

The hon member for Pietersburg says they have also read the Act but the principles contained in this Act and in this specific section of the Act have not been …

… accepted.

… accepted. The hon member is correct because they have not accepted them.

We do not accept integration.

Two important principles are contained in this provision. Firstly, primary local authorities of the various population groups within the area of jurisdiction of a regional services council confer the right of existence on that regional services council. Secondly, the minority rights of every participating local authority are protected by limiting the maximum number of votes per local authority. It is clear from the composition of the regional services council that primary local authorities are actually the building blocks of a regional services council and that minority rights of every participating group are protected.

As regards the functions of regional services councils—the hon member for Kuruman can listen to this …

Is a regional services council an own affair?

… the local authorities in the region themselves decide which one or more of the services in Schedule 2 of the Regional Services Council Act ought to be regional services to the specific local authority. A local authority can therefore be a member of the council only for purposes of certain functions. The services referred to in Schedule 2 are all services of a general nature—they are therefore general affairs in the region.

What about recreational facilities?

If local authorities in the regional services councils come to such a decision, it is their decision—then it is a general affair. [Interjections.] It is the decision of the participating local authorities. If a matter in Schedule 2 affects only the interests of one community in a region, it is an own affair to the community concerned.

A last aspect I wish to mention in this regard is that a decision of a regional services council has to be taken with a majority of at least two thirds of the number of members’ votes. This ensures that large city councils or authorities supporting one another will not dominate smaller local authorities and that real co-operation and consensus should be striven for before a decision is executed. Provision is therefore made at local government level for self-determination on own affairs and co-responsibility on affairs of general concern in a way which protects the interests of every group.

I conclude in the words of the State President:

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Newcastle has given us a lecture on regional services councils. His idea can work relatively well in areas in which there are reasonably viable local authorities situated close to one another. I think it is inevitable that these councils will be able to work in such cases.

Because of the Government’s obsession with races, they say we must divide local authorities into their ethnic components first and then we can combine the ethnic components in some other way.

I should like to know from the hon the Minister his point of departure concerning regional services councils, especially in respect of the smaller towns. I am talking about a town such as Newcastle, for example, which is 50 or 60 km from the nearest town. I can see now what the hon the Minister’s problem is, because the hon member for Newcastle says the smaller local authorities are the building blocks of the regional services councils. If he is looking for coloured building blocks, his town must go to a town like Dundee to find white building blocks so that the regional services council can at least be worth looking at. Cannot we be sensible about this matter? We even received a request from a relative of the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning in George as to whether the town could not simply be one.

I have no relatives in George! [Interjections.]

Can you tell me which Heunis is mayor there? [Interjections.] In any case, we got the same request from towns such as Swellendam, Eshowe, Grey-town and elsewhere, that subdividing such a tiny rural town into its ethnic components makes no sense at all. There is as little sense in trying to bring another town, which is 30, 40 or 60 kilometres from such a town, closer just to make it look like a regional services council. I therefore want to know from the hon the Minister what his point of departure is as far as the smaller local authorities are concerned. Is he going to insist that the White component of the smaller rural towns be independent of all the others?

Yesterday we spoke about some of the auxiliary schemes for housing, and I want to refer to them quickly once again. During our inspection tour we went to Bothasig inter alia. I read in the information booklet that houses were sold here for between R32 000 and R35 000 in terms of the scheme for people who earn less than R800 per month. When one looks at the income groups and the relevant interest rates, it says that the applicable interest rates are 3% for R300, 7% for R400, 9% for R600 and 11% for R800.

If a man who earns R800 may repay R200 on a loan, the maximum loan he can afford at the interest rate of 11% is only R19 900. If one were to permit him to pay one third of his salary, he could afford a bond of only R24 000. I should like to know from the hon the Minister how it is possible for people who earn less than R800 per month to obtain housing for up to R35 000. When I do my calculations, it looks as if those people were allowed to make repayments at lower interest rates, or as if the subsidy the hon the Minister had to pay to a man earning R800 per month could be as high as R240 per month. I should like to know how that is possible.

I have mentioned that there are disparities in this scheme and I pointed out that after R800 there is a sudden jump with regard to the amounts people can earn as subsidies. The employer of someone who earns just below R800 is really doing him a great disfavour by increasing his salary to R900.

The hon member for Umhlanga and other hon members asked yesterday for the ceiling of R40 000 on the subsidy of one third to be increased to R50 000 or even R60 000. This would mean that the Government’s subsidy on R50 000 at the prevailing rate of 17% would amount to R236. On R60 000 the subsidy would amount to R285 per month, and such a person would have to be earning R2 400 per month.

†The hon member for Umhlanga’s party is taking part in the Indaba and much was said there about the protection of rights. This was very sceptically seen by Blacks as actually referring to the protection of privileges. I feel that a plea of this sort substantiates the perception of the Blacks that when we discuss White housing in this White Chamber we are actually looking for privileges for Whites as opposed to the other race groups. Will the hon member be brave enough to stand up in Inanda and tell the Blacks there, many of whom earn only about R300 to R400 per month, that he is appealing for R285 per month from the State for every young White couple already earning a monthly income of R2 400, or will he also ask the State to give the same amount to any first-time home owner irrespective of income? Does the hon member know that a monthly repayment of only R285 will secure a R20 000 bond? Perhaps he and other hon members would rather tell the Black man that the State cannot afford to give him proper housing, so it will legalise his squatter’s shack instead.

*I agree with the hon the Minister that, as he said yesterday, the matter is a delicate one. Housing is definitely a very delicate matter, just as everything we do to channel the Government’s funds in various directions is very delicate. When speaking about delicate problems, the greatest problem the hon the Minister and the hon member for Umhlanga have in my opinion is how to structure housing assistance so that it meets with the approval of the greatest number of their White voters.

If this is how we are trying to solve our problems, it is going to cause us truly great problems, because housing is the most concrete expression and proof of what a community gets out of the system. If we advocate only the case of White housing here and create systems which are not applicable to other groups, we are perpetuating the disparities and causing problems for ourselves.

I suggested yesterday that we should have a single auxiliary scheme which is applicable to all groups, viz a scheme based on a diminishing sliding scale. It can involve everyone, except of course destitute and elderly people for whom special schemes will apply. Since the hon the Minister cannot consider the housing policy as a whole, I ask him to ask the hon the Minister of Communication and Public Works to review the whole question of the housing policy and to submit it to the standing committee, so that we can discuss it in depth, because if we discuss it in a vacuum, there are really going to be great problems.

Mr Chairman, may I ask the hon member if I would be correct in assuming from his argument that he would prefer to see the whole scheme of a 33,33% subsidy on an amount of R40 000 scrapped because of the privilege that it accords White people?

No, the hon member would be incorrect in making that assumption. Perhaps he was not here yesterday when I suggested a scheme providing for a sum which decreases with the size of the bond. One could take as a starting point, for example, a monthly subsidy of R200 for any first-time home owner with a R20 000 bond, and the sum would decrease to R50 monthly towards a R40 000 bond. A bond of above a certain value, say R50 000, would not qualify for a subsidy. That was my proposal. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, firstly I want to react to the speech of the hon member for Greytown by again confirming that the whole question of housing assistance, and the formulas that are applicable, is a complex one.

Yesterday, in my reply to the hon member for Umhlanga’s representations, I indicated that at present the whole question of interest subsidies is again being investigated in depth by the Development and Housing Board. That answer applies equally to the hon member’s request for an adjustment to the limits. It is part of the investigation being carried out under the chairmanship of the chairman of the National Housing Commission. Rents and conditions of sale for all population groups, and also the whole question of income limits, are being dealt with there. Particularly the question of the specific limit of R40 000 for first-home owners is also a matter that must receive urgent attention.

The hon member referred to Bothasig, and I want to tell him that the department does not rigidly confine itself to a figure of 25% of the breadwinner’s income. The R800 limit is merely in regard to the breadwinner’s income. When there is an application, the department looks at the applicant’s overall position and also at the income of the family. The policy is that a house is not sold to anyone if he cannot afford it. I also want to tell the hon member that the dwellings in Bothasig, which he saw that day on the study tour, have indeed been much sought-after and have—I would almost say—immediately been sold out.

In a separate answer I shall refer to the other matter of regional services councils and so on to which the hon member and other hon members referred.

I should like to thank hon members sincerely for their participation. It is naturally impossible to reply to all the matters, but I shall arrange for each speech to be examined so that attention can be given to all matters falling within my province—the truth of the matter is that matters were raised which did not fall within my province. My hon colleagues will be given the necessary answers.

In well-argued speeches yesterday the hon members for Bellville and East London City also referred to the question of possible long-term leases as a basis for making land available for housing. The department has already considered this matter. The hon members argued the merits of the case very well, and within the department the overall concensus is that it would be technically possible to lease land on a long-term leasehold basis. Any long-term improvements that a tenant makes to the land would also be incorporated. So one would actually be in a position to achieve the same objectives as those normally achieved by negotiating a long-term purchase deed. It is technically possible, although one finds that there are financial institutions which, from a security point of view, view this possibility with scepticism.

These long-term leases could form the basis in the case of residential parks or the so-called mobile home parks to which an hon member also referred here today. As far as this aspect is concerned, I shall ask the Development and Housing Board to have a more specific look at the possibilities of using this question of long-term leases as a basis, thus also giving people a form of proprietary rights in residential parks.

The hon member for Kuruman could not be here yesterday when I was replying, and I therefore kept my reply concerning Sishen in abeyance. As far as the question of local government is concerned, I am aware that there are other hon members who still want to speak about the issue, and for that reason I shall not be referring to the matter in this reply.

In regard to certain remarks by the hon member for Bellville about retirement villages, the hon member yesterday lodged a plea for the town of Sishen, which is a ghost town. It is true that I have received representations about Sishen, and the information at my disposal indicates that this town, built by Iscor, is indeed a ghost town. There are approximately 300 houses standing empty, apparently as a result of a decrease in the demand for steel. The department’s regional representative investigated the possibility, but at present we are of the opinion that the town would not prove to be a viable proposition. We understand that there are quite a few dwellings in towns in the vicinity which are empty. At this moment—I am responding to the moment when the hon member was speaking—there is apparently no need for accommodation for Whites at Sishen.

I also understand that Iscor is conducting negotiations about and investigations into the utilisation of Sishen. The hon member is welcome to make further, motivated representations in this regard. I shall then request the department to give attention to the matter. I just want to tell the hon member that I am basically reacting to his present request and on the basis of the initial investigations carried out by my department.

Yesterday the hon member for Langlaagte referred to two matters. I have already replied to the first, and in regard to the matter of Octavia Hills I actually replied fully to the hon member in my reply to the written question he put. I think I gave the hon member a comprehensive reply. I do want to tell the hon member, however, that the tenants who were living in Octavia Hills moved voluntarily after having accepted the alternative put to them by the city council, which is the owner of Octavia Hills. Moving embodied specific benefits for the residents, amongst others the possibility of care facilities in the case of the aged and also home ownership in the case of people who wanted to avail themselves of such an opportunity. The hon member will agree with me that these people in Octavia Hills would never become home-owners. Some of these people were given such an opportunity and some of them did, in fact, become home-owners. I think the hon member himself knows that those who moved to Moffat View did, in fact, become home-owners.

That is scandalous. What happened in Octavia Hills is utterly scandalous.

No, the hon member really cannot be serious!

Of course I am serious!

No, the hon member is not being serious. He can come with me and have a look. The circumstances prevailing in Octavia Hills were unacceptable. Why did the hon member not make representations to me in this connection? The circumstances prevailing in that area …

Mr Chairman, may I ask the hon the Minister whether he is aware of the fact that when an application was made to have houses made available to Coloureds, I made a request to the then Minister? In that request I pointed out what housing problems existed in Octavia Hills. The Minister then said that those people would stay there because they were pensioners. Is the hon the Minister aware of that?

Mr Chairman, the hon member brought another viewpoint to the fore. We are now discussing the situation in Octavia Hills. My information is that it was to the benefit of the inhabitants to obtain alternative accommodation. The hon member would, in fact have noticed that 37 of the inhabitants voluntarily made arrangements to obtain other accommodation.

Of course! They did not go and live 37 kilometres from there!

Mr Chairman, the hon member is welcome to debate this matter further with me. From the information at my disposal I am convinced that it was to the advantage of the inhabitants to obtain new accommodation. [Interjections.]

The hon member for Walvis Bay spoke yesterday about the transfer of authority to local authorities. That request implies that a lump sum is loaned to a city council, from which the city council can grant loans to individuals, subject to departmental provisions. The department is in favour of procedures relating to the handling of individual loan applications being streamlined and simplified, provided this takes place with due regard to the essential financial measures and the principles underlying accountability. I should like to tell the hon member that owing to the particular situation of Walvis Bay, we shall also be instituting an in-depth investigation to the housing assistance, as the hon member has meanwhile been informed.

I want to thank the hon member Dr Rina Venter for her kind words yesterday. The hon member referred to day-care centres and, in particular, to the problems experiencing by welfare organisations in financing the administration of these facilities. The truth is that day-care centres meet an essential and growing need and therefore enjoy high priority as far as the allocation of finance for that purpose is concerned. A standards committee of the Development and Housing Board has been appointed, on a permanent basis, to investigate welfare housing and facilities. The aspects which the hon member raised in connection with loans for the financing of day-care centres will be brought to the committee’s attention so that consideration can be given to the establishment of realistic standards with a view to keeping the costs involved in supplying and administering day-care centres as low as possible. The question of the redemption period for loans for the financing of day-care centres, to which the hon member also referred together with the question of standards, also forms part of the overall assistance package, and therefore attention will also be given to this aspect.

The hon member for Middelburg also had an altercation with the hon member for Pietersburg. I think he came off well in that altercation.

Beware the Philistines!

The reaction of the hon member for Pietersburg this afternoon clearly indicates that one has nothing but trouble once one has relinquished Calvin. He should tell that to the hon member for Rissik. [Interjections.]

The hon member referred, in particular, to local authorities that are also involved in community development. He also referred, in detail, to the responsibility for the provision of welfare housing. I want to thank the hon member for the remarks he made in this connection.

Can I also say thank you …

The hon the Minister is very welcome. [Interjections.] In the past financial year an overall amount of R64,9 million was spent by the authorities on welfare housing. During this period an amount of R52,1 million was employed for the aged alone, and in the current financial year R47 million has already been spent to cover building costs for housing for the aged.

The fact is that increasing building costs are a problem as far as welfare organisations, utility companies and local authorities are concerned, and the truth is that with the high land prices there is an increasing tendency to erect multi-storied buildings for the better utilisation of the land. This also brings about considerable cost savings on land and services, whilst no set amounts are taken into consideration for land and site services.

In the case of multi-storied buildings the cost per square metre is quite a bit higher than in the case of single-storied buildings. The opinion is, however, that if the pro rata savings on the land and site services are taken into account, particularly in large urban areas, the cost per square metre for multi-storied buildings would compare favourably with that for single-storied buildings.

Approval has consequently been given for the application of varying per capita costs for single-storied buildings and multi-storied buildings with effect from 1 May 1986, a process whereby the per capita cost for multistoried buildings would average approximately 12% more than that for single-storied buildings. That increased cost also includes the cost of stairs, whilst in single-storied buildings stairs are calculated as an extra at R445 per square metre.

The implication of this is that some projects, which have already been approved, and which would otherwise not have got off the ground, can in effect be implemented. The implication is also that projects that would not have been approved, can in fact be taken into consideration.

†The hon member for Hillbrow spoke at length on various subjects and raised a fairly large number of questions to which I shall unfortunately not be able to reply within the scope and the time limit of one debate. I shall, however, peruse his Hansard and furnish the hon member with a reply. I do though wish to refer to the question which the hon member raised as far as the construction of projects in 1986 is concerned. We replied to a question—Question 49—put by the hon member for Johannesburg North regarding projects under construction in 1986 and projects to be commenced during 1986—that is the total number of units involved in these projects, some of which were completed prior to 1986 and some of which will be completed after 1986. As far as welfare housing is concerned, accommodation is being provided for 16 548 persons and 3 549 dwelling units are also involved.

The hon member went on to ask whether the National Housing Survey would provide details of income groups, ability to afford housing, etc, and the answer to that is yes. The system collates comprehensive information regarding the socio-economic position of all home-seekers.

He also asked whether local authorities would be required to report annually on the state of waiting lists and the number of persons on waiting lists who have been assisted. In this regard, the reply is that the National Housing Survey is an ongoing project which provides for the abovementioned information to be furnished to the department on a regular basis.

As far as the other matter of rent control is concerned, I shall come back to it during the course of this debate. If there are any specific matters which the hon member raised to which he would like an early reply, he is welcome to raise them again.

The hon member for Rosettenville, who always has such a knack when it comes to making representations on behalf of his constituency, raised quite a number of important matters here this afternoon. I should like to tell the hon member that I also want to study his speech in detail. I shall shortly be saying something about the whole question of the time that elapses from the moment a project is approved until it is funded. I should like to refer to that long waiting period. The hon member referred to long waiting lists and so on, which we also hope to be able to deal with in future in a concerted fashion with this needs survey. I agree with the hon member that there is cause for concern when one looks at the applications submitted by people and sees what the position is, particularly that of female applicants and the dependent children to which the hon member referred. I should like to ask the department to give attention to the matters the hon member raised here this afternoon.

The hon member referred, amongst other things, to an advisory committee that should consist of representatives of the community. At this stage I should like to give the hon member a reply to this, even though I do not regard this as an adequate or final answer. The primary bodies involved in collecting information and determining priorities at the local level are the relevant local authorities, assisted by welfare organisations and utility companies which have the services of dedicated community leaders. Methods adopted in regard to the determination of needs therefore have a strong local flavour. Local housing experts are thus also given an opportunity of making contributions. It seems to me, however, as if we are unanimous about the ideas the hon member expressed here this afternoon. I should like to thank the hon member for Rosettenville very sincerely for his contribution.

The hon member for Carletonville supplied interesting particulars to the Committee about the work set-up of the department. He also elaborated on the question of the maintenance of specific projects. I should also like to express my thanks to the hon member for his words of appreciation here this afternoon.

The hon member for Carletonville also referred to two matters falling within the ambit of his constituency. As far as Venterspos is concerned, the hon member is aware of the progress made in this connection. It is naturally a sensitive matter because of the involvement of the community which, in a certain sense, is living in uncertain circumstances. The matter must therefore be treated in such a way that the people there receive the greatest possible measure of emotional security. I should like to tell the hon member for Carletonville that it is, in fact, my approach and that of the department to deal with the Venterspos matter with care and with the necessary degree of sensitivity.

The hon member for Carletonville also referred to Westonaria and the school premises there. I am completely au fait with the situation there. I think the hon member is aware of the fact that those premises fall under the jurisdiction of the province. I actually want to join the hon member in expressing the hope that in future it will, in fact, be possible to employ the premises for the accommodation of the aged.

For some time now the department has been giving attention to the phenomenon of empty accommodation, particularly in the rural areas, but also in specific urban complexes. The hon member for Carletonville referred to specific examples. I always think it is a pity if existing infrastructure is not utilised. It is important for one to give attention to the possible employment and proper utilisation of existing infrastructural facilities. In this way one can prevent unnecessary expenditure or duplicated expenditure on the establishment of further facilities when there are already certain premises available which are not being utilised.

In conjunction with the department of my hon colleague, the Minister of Health Services and Welfare, and the relevant local authorities, I should like to do a survey of prevailing needs so as to determine the possibility of converting that unoccupied infrastructure into a usable form of accommodation, including the financial implications involved.

The hon member for Pietersburg spoke basically about regional services councils and local authorities. I shall be returning to that in the course of the debate. There are further hon members who took part in the debate …

Mr Chairman, may I ask the hon the Minister if he would not do us the favour of replying now to the questions put to him about local government so that we can conduct a meaningful debate on this issue? We would then be in a position to react to what the hon the Minister proposes. I want to make a very urgent appeal to the hon the Minister to reply to that now. [Interjections.]

Sir, I do not think that would be fair. I have already indicated that there are hon members who still wish to speak about local authorities. If I were now …

The very reason why! We also still want to speak about that.

I did not say I was going to speak for so long that the hon member would not get an opportunity to participate in the debate again.

But we would like to hear your opinions on the questions we have put to you!

Perhaps the hon member for Kuruman should just exercise a little patience.

We shall wait until …

Mr Chairman, I am really not going to allow myself to be pushed every which way by the hon member for Rissik. [Interjections.]

Order!

The hon member for Kuruman was not here yesterday when I was replying. I therefore did him the courtesy of postponing the discussion until today. I expect more or less the same courtesy, even though that may be very difficult for him.

I asked the hon the Minister very nicely …

The hon member for Umbilo spoke on the question of local authorities, and I will come back to that subject. I would like to say to the hon member that there is also a well-structured system of co-operation and consultation among the Ministers responsible for housing. A committee of housing Ministers has been established, who meet quarterly to discuss matters of common concern. Therefore there is a regular basis of co-operation and consultation among the various housing Ministers.

As far as the other matters on local government are concerned, I shall come back to those as well.

*The hon member for Sasolburg basically referred to regional services councils, as did the hon member for Welkom. The hon member for Newcastle also gave a very good exposition of the principles underlying local authorities and the development in this regard.

I also just want to touch on specific matters concerning two issues, because as far as I am concerned these are also important ones. One of these matters was raised by various hon members, ie the fact that after housing projects are approved there is normally a long period before any money is allocated. In the process, despite the escalation of costs, expectations are created in certain communities, and frequently money has already been collected by the aged to contribute to the projects. This matter has been considered in depth, and on the strength of specific decisions I should like to inform the Committee of certain facts with a view to achieving the objective of bringing the approval for a project and the allocation of funds closer together—I am almost tempted to say immediately after the final planning of such a housing project.

The procedure in accordance with which projects will be considered in future, will basically take place in three phases. The first of these is the granting of approval in principle, and in this connection local authorities will determine the housing needs and allocate a priority rating to projects, after which they will be considered by the department and merely approved in principle. I just want to interpose here by saying that a circular in this connection will be issued to local authorities shortly. The Department of National Health and Population Development must certify the needs as far as welfare services are concerned. This afternoon I should like to say that there is the closest co-ordination and consultation between the two departments and between me and the hon the Minister of Health and Welfare Services when it comes to the overall question of welfare housing and the eventual allocation of money.

The second stage is the planning stage in which once a year local authorities will, prior to 31 August, submit all projects, for which approval has already been granted in principle, to regional offices of the department in order of priority. These will then annually— prior to 30 September—be submitted to the departmental head office and annually be considered by the Development and Housing Board, not later than 31 October, with a view to inclusion in the building programme. The building programme—this is logical—is drawn up on the basis of guidelines laid down by the Treasury in accordance with projections over a number of years. After local authorities have been notified of a project’s inclusion in the building programme, applications for loans can be submitted for immediate expenses in regard to obtaining the necessary land, survey costs and consultancy fees. After completion of sketch plans, projects are submitted for formal approval. Only cost estimates are approved at this stage with a view to the formal granting of a loan when finances are allocated. The planning and the contract documents can already be completed at this stage. Not later than 30 November, local authorities must annually submit a statement of projects which have already been formally approved, to the regional offices of the department in order of precedence. On the strength of those submissions a regional priority list is drawn up, a list to be submitted to the departmental head-office not later than 31 December.

The third stage to which I want to refer is the building stage. Financial allocations are considered by the department, on the basis of regional priority lists, and local authorities will be notified of the fact and empowered to call for tenders. Tenders will, as is customary, be considered in accordance with existing procedures. No tender will, of course, be accepted or considered before a loan is granted and a specific tender has been approved. When the tender is approved a loan is also granted for the implementation of the project. Payments are made in accordance with the relevant developmental stages of the project. Thus there are continual reports of the progress made in the construction work. Reports on the progress made in the construction work will be submitted each quarter at the very least.

I just want to add that as a transitional measure all projects, for which applications for loans have already been submitted to the department, will be regarded as projects for which approval has been granted in principle, in accordance with the new procedure, and which have progressed up to the planning stage. Local authorities must examine all projects approved in terms of the old procedure and determine whether there is still a need for the said projects. They must also review or cancel such projects, depending on what they think necessary.

Mr Chairman, if there is still any ambiguity in regard to the matter I have just dealt with, local authorities, welfare bodies and other interested parties must not hesitate to contact the department or one of its regional offices immediately.

Several hon members referred to the question of the ability to pay for accommodation, to the importance of promoting home-ownership and to realistic standards, etc. I appreciate that. Now I should also like to refer to specific aspects in this regard.

†The Government provides housing assistance to those who cannot obtain housing by way of their own resources or through the private sector. As a result of the present high building costs and rates of interest it is becoming more difficult for the man in the street to obtain affordable housing in accordance with the standards to which the community has become accustomed. I believe this is exactly the point the hon member for Umhlanga made yesterday.

In my view, and also in the view of my department, it is still possible in certain instances for first-time home buyers to obtain housing of an acceptable quality and standard provided it is done in accordance with their means and immediate needs. It has been decided—as hon members might know—to erect pilot projects in various of the larger centres in the country to promote the concept of housing satisfying one’s immediate needs but planned in such a way that it can be extended in future in accordance with elevated means and needs. The self-help principle is also to be propagated by means of the pilot projects, since they show how an owner can extend his home. I believe we have an example of this in the annual report—an example of a plan that can be executed in this way.

By way of interest I should also like to refer hon members to the proposals in relation to this matter in the annual report. A self-build manual will be provided, and a technical advice centre will also be established on the site of a pilot project at Elandspoort near Pretoria where sites of more or less 500 square metres are utilised in consultation with the City Council of Pretoria. Plans of fully completed houses have been drawn and these will be developed in phases. The project illustrates the different phases and also the completed dwellings. The erection costs of the first phases of the three housing types in the Elandspoort project amount to R17 528, R18 280 and R20 477, respectively.

In the interests of the community the department wishes to publicise the concept as embodied in the pilot projects as widely as possible. A case study of a project as well as a video recording thereof will be made, pamphlets will be distributed, and it is intended to arrange a basic homes exhibition in about August this year. I would therefore like to make an appeal to everybody, especially those who will be home owners for the first time, to accept realistic standards in order to be self-sufficient in their quest for home ownership.

*With these specific pilot projects the department and I would like to promote the concept of modest, but still good quality housing.

The majority of us probably also began with our modest little houses. I myself had to start off with a modest little house and add on as the family grew. That reminds me of the day when one of my legal colleagues—I was still in legal practice then— telephoned me. We spoke about the matter that gave rise to his telephone call, and then he said: “By the way, Amie, is Betsie expecting again?” When I said’ “Yes, Steven, how did you know?”, he replied: “Well, I saw a load of bricks has been delivered to your house.” [Interjections.]

The fact of the matter is that a house with which one makes a humble start, adding on as the needs of one’s family increase, always remains a firm base and a source of security in one’s life. [Interjections.] I think that in South Africa we have to make sure that we do not help people to live beyond their means, but that we continually promote modest but good quality housing. The department and I are committed to that. I think one attaches the greatest value to the products of one’s labours—ie one’s own home.

In this regard I should like to congratulate the department on its initiative, and I trust the private sector will follow the department’s example and promote modest, but nevertheless good quality housing in South Africa.

On a later occasion I shall give further attention to certain other matters touched upon in the debate.

Mr Chairman, it is actually a great pity that, after rising twice, the hon the Minister did not refer to those aspects of local government raised by various hon members. The hon the Minister said there were other members who would probably talk on this and that was why he did not wish to anticipate the matter.

Nevertheless this question is of such intense interest that we do not want to hear what the hon the Minister’s attitude on local government is only at the end of the debate; we would rather hear it in the course of the debate so that we may argue with him on the matter. You see, Sir, the problem is that those hon members to whom the hon the Minister referred cannot actually give us answers to the matters raised by the various sides of the House. [Interjections.]

He is leaving them in the lurch.

The hon member for Sasolburg is right. In the process the hon the Minister is leaving his hon colleagues in the lurch. [Interjections.] Let us take the example of the hon member for Newcastle. This hon member again explained to us here what the State President had said in the President’s Council on multicultural communities, on the protection of minority groups and that the representatives of local authorities on regional services councils would have the right of veto and that they would not be able to make a general affair apply to own affairs without a two-thirds majority and that minority rights would be protected in this way. The hon member also referred to Schedule 1 of the Constitution but he did not tell us at all what the aspects of own affairs were which remained to local authorities. And that matter comprises one third of the hon the Minister’s portfolio and the hon the Minister has spoken twice already! [Interjections.]

The hon member for Sasolburg also mentioned that 80% of the income in the area of a certain regional services council could perhaps come from a White city council but that its maximum vote would be only 50%. [Interjections.] In addition, those people are not yet in a position to carry their motion because they still have to convince 16,67% of those of colour to vote for it before it can be carried. [Interjections.] There you have own affairs! There you have Whites’ right to self-determination. We have seen the hon the Minister’s annual report and I think it an achievement that such a report was at our disposal after such a short period. We wish to congratulate him and his department on it. In the process a picture was revealed of the approximate extent of the hon the Minister’s department. The process of rationalisation, the process of the organisation of the department, the fact that only 20% of the advertised posts of the department are currently filled and the shortage of money have caused the stated objectives not to be achieved in all respects. The availability of money is an especial problem. Last year R241,4 million and this year R271,487 million was made available to this department. Does that amount represent the right of self-determination of the White population on own affairs? To think that the NP wants to continue arguing that Whites’ right to self-determination has been retained in South Africa! This indicates afresh that if this House is not empowered to levy taxes itself in order to compile its own budgets, the right to self-determination in the new dispensation remains an illusion.

Last year the hon the Minister said, in Hansard col 4675, that there were no restrictions on the House of Assembly submitting and piloting through legislation on own affairs as set out in Schedule 1 of the Constitution. He was not right; I hope he has reviewed his position. There are factors which restrict his submission of legislation on own affairs as set out in Schedule 1. The position is that he has to take section 16 of the Constitution into account which gives the State President important powers. He also has to consider section 31 of the Constitution which is relevant in this respect. All legislation which the hon the Minister can possibly introduce is therefore subject to a veto by the State President acting on the advice of his mixed Cabinet. Legislation on own affairs can therefore not simply be piloted through as referred to in Schedule 1. Sections 16 and 31 of the Constitution are applicable and the State President and his mixed Cabinet have the right of veto over the powers the hon the Minister possibly thinks he has. The hon member for Lichtenburg said previously that the church council of Koekenaap had more powers than the hon the Minister of Local Government, Housing and Works.

A Directorate of Local Government has now come into being. As regards own affairs, the Director of Local Government is really carrying out the task of four provincial secretaries, and perhaps seven, if another three provinces are to be added. The hon the Minister is carrying out the duties, regarding own affairs, of four administrators and four executive committees and, if they are still to be added, those of three administrators and three executive committees. According to page 10 of the annual report, the execution of inter alia the following Acts has also been assigned to the hon the Minister: The Expropriation Act, the Rent Control Act, the Slums Act, the Housing Act and other important Acts. There are 476 municipalities in the RSA.

In the few minutes left at my disposal I wish to refer to only one aspect mentioned by the hon member for Hillbrow. That is the limited ways in which municipalities can acquire money to deal with own affairs. The current position is that they chiefly obtain money from property tax, sewerage and refuse removal and water and electricity. A tendency is emerging to which I wish to draw the hon the Minister’s attention which is that, according to Ordinance 20 of 1933, in the Transvaal city councils have the right to compile a new valuation roll triennially at most. It happens that city councils draw up a valuation roll before the three-year period has expired which in past years frequently caused properties to be valued at a higher figure than in the previous year. Accompanied by a great fanfare the city council then reduces the rates payable and it is announced in the newspapers that the city council has generously reduced rates for instance from 6c to 4c in the rand. Meanwhile the value of the property has increased by 150% or more, however, and that after two years. In the second year rates are increased again but then the city council draws up a new valuation roll.

This causes people in certain municipalities—I think it includes the municipality of Klerksdorp because I see the hon member can actually afford to buy bricks—to rent their properties from the city council for R200 or more per month today. The situation becomes intolerable because one is actually being taxed on one’s capital assets and not on one’s income. This matter was referred to the Browne Committee, the Croeser Work Group and various other organisations but at this stage no fair solution has yet been produced to these increasing problems.

Mr Chairman, I listened attentively to the hon member for Brakpan. He put certain questions to the hon the Minister and I am sure he will receive replies. In the light of the matters of principle raised here by the hon member, it appears to me that the hon CP members are still living with the anxiety complex which has beset them since their break with the NP.

When we argued the new Constitution in the House, those hon CP members lost badly in that debate; they lost even further in the referendum which occurred subsequently. It now seems to me that their brains seized up stubbornly at that point. [Interjections.] It is not a case of their not being able to understand but not wanting to understand.

The hon members for Kuruman, Rissik and now also Brakpan asked repeatedly across the floor what own affairs were and what general affairs were.

You tell us!

The hon members are throwing up smoke screens about regional services councils and say they are also own affairs whereas they know they have nothing to do with own affairs.

When did we say that?

Hon CP members stated this clearly. The hon member for Kuruman …

You are talking non-sense!

… asked the hon member for Newcastle whether regional services councils were an own affair. [Interjections.] That is the question the hon member for Kuruman put.

I wish to ask the hon members whether an own community life and all matters connected with that are not of importance to them. Is hon members’ own community life which comprises their culture and their daily life in the neighbourhood where they live not important? [Interjections.] The hon member should just sit down and make a list of what is essential to him in his own community life and what he feels he wishes to maintain in that sphere. He has the fullest right because the Constitution tells him he may exercise those rights without any outside interference. [Interjections.]

Order! No, we cannot go on like this! Too many interjections are being made. The hon member for Kroonstad may proceed.

I shall leave the hon members of the CP at that.

I wish to state unequivocally as regards local government that we are at the point of entering yet another exciting phase in the evolution of the constitutional development of our country. This development removes many of the frustrations of local authorities in terms of the Government’s express policy that local authorities will be entrusted with the conclusion of the maximum of functions and that a minimum of administrative control will be applied. It has already been said times without number that local government forms the cornerstone of a democracy because through this the individual is given a direct say in matters which affect him directly. Hon CP members had better listen to this yet again.

Bringing government closer to the individual and so reinforcing the level of local government is regarded worldwide as one of the most important building blocks of democracy. It is an effective form of government precisely because it is so close to the individual; it gives the individual a direct say in those matters most closely affecting the neighbourhood in which he dwells, lives and works.

It should also be regarded as of the utmost importance that the inhabitants identify themselves with their local authority and that local authorities should handle as many functions as possible with a local bias.

To us who have been concerned with local government for many years it is certainly a happy day that there will be even greater regulation at local government level in the near future by means of the Government’s declared policy of greater decision-making power for local authorities. Over all the years I have been closely connected with local government matters the limited decision-making powers of such authorities were definitely the greatest source of criticism and frustration. Local authorities certainly had very little room for movement in this regard which inter alia caused public functionaries at local government level not to develop as desired in all cases owing to the limitation of their decision-making powers.

The entire principle of the devolution of power or decision-making rights is obviously not a new phenomenon or merely a result of the new Constitution. It has been Government policy for years to leave decisions on matters dealing particularly with the own affairs of a community, group or organisation to such a community, group or organisation. We have numerous examples of this, especially in the spheres of sport, culture and such matters.

Of course, the capabilities and circumstances of various communities vary from place to place and therefore the devolution process will have to occur with cognizance of the capabilities and the desire of the individual local government body to handle matters independently. Local authorities will have to be consulted on the tempo at which this is to be phased in.

It is and will remain the Government’s standpoint that the political rights and socioeconomic welfare of individuals can only come into their own within their own group context under the unique South African circumstances. The devolution of authority to local government institutions for the various population groups is a constitutional mechanism to maintain the interests of minority groups in a heterogeneous society as was clearly set out in his speech last year by the State President on opening the meeting of the co-ordinating council.

This young department and the hon the Minister deserve great praise for what they have accomplished in a very short time. The enormously important task of making the local level of government function smoothly as soon as possible in terms of the new constitutional dispensation rests on the shoulders of the hon the Minister and the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning.

On speaking to local government institutions, I obtain the impression that quite a number of them are still uncertain and even confused. If we cannot clear this up as soon as possible, it will affect the entire reform process without a doubt and really good local government could then be prejudiced.

In consequence, I should like to make an urgent appeal to the hon the Minister to clear up all uncertainties on the position of officialdom and on the functions and powers of local authorities as soon as possible by means of a clear outline.

The increasing responsibility which will rest on local authorities in future can also cause the role of the local councillor to change fundamentally. The phasing out of provincial councils will definitely make greater demands of the municipal councillor. Not only will his responsibility to his voter be greater as the elected representative of the community but his executive duties will demand far more time and attention from a city councillor during his term of office.

In terms of the Constitution the principle of own and general affairs will also assume substance at local government level. In closing I wish to air only a few thoughts on this. I wish to state it very clearly that the institution of regional services councils to handle general affairs will not affect the autonomy of local government. Regional services councils are not a new government body but an extension of local authorities which can assist such authorities to furnish better and even cheaper services to their local communities. Only matters of a general nature or of common concern will be dealt with and it will remain the responsibility, right and privilege of every local authority to handle its own affairs without interference. If hon CP members could only get this concept into their heads, they would make fewer comments and also start making a real input and an actual contribution to good local government which is very important at this time.

On the subject of regional services councils, I wish to appeal to the hon the Minister today that the greatest caution be exhibited in the demarcation of these councils. We should guard against forcing communities of diverging nature and circumstances together but should consider smaller regional services councils. I even want to go as far as telling the hon the Minister that, if we were to reduce the size of the councils, we would be able to get them off the ground much faster. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, it is pleasant to follow the hon member for Kroonstad. If we had listened attentively to what the hon member said, we should realise what the future of local government is in South Africa. I wish to suggest that hon CP members make it their business to read the hon member’s speech. [Interjections.] They will then know what local government will cover in future, what the responsibilities of local government will be and what awaits us.

Over the years there have been various commissions which inquired into the functioning and finances of local government in South Africa. All these commissions always pointed out to a greater or lesser degree that too many restrictive measures were imposed on local government which delayed its activities and could frustrate local communities. The institution of the new second and third-tier facets of government is bringing government closer to the people. As we are discussing own affairs under this Vote, that is White local government as one of the aspects of own affairs, I think it incumbent upon us to come forward with proposals which will permit maximum delegation of power to devolve upon local government.

Business interrupted in accordance with Standing Order No 21.

Mr Speaker, I move pursuant to Standing Order No 21:

I should like to thank the hon member for Berea for giving notice of this in my absence from the House yesterday.

Regrettably this is not the first occasion that we in this House have debated cross-border raids and noted the situation in this country and the reaction to these raids. Each time we hope it will be the last occasion on which we debate such raids. Perhaps because of the critical state of South African politics both internally and externally, there can be no doubt that the raids carried out on targets in Botswana, Zimbabwe and Zambia on this occasion have evoked a widespread reaction both here in South Africa and around the world.

The issue which we in the PFP want to raise in this debate is not that of the ability of the South African Forces to hit at selected targets in neighbouring states or the legal arguments on the right of the South African Government in terms of international law or convention to launch such raids. That we can leave for another occasion. We simply wish to raise the issue of whether raids of this kind promote the interests and the well-being of the people of South Africa or not.

Hear, hear!

Will they help us in South Africa to resolve our rapidly deteriorating internal problems and our external relationships or not? That is the issue that we wish to raise and it is my considered opinion that whatever the Government may think it has achieved, these raids are going to prove damaging if not disastrous to South Africa and its people. Any short-term advantage which the Government may have achieved in the security field will undoubtedly be offset by the damage that this is going to do to South Africa in the field of international relationships. Whatever they were intended to achieve, these raids will take South Africa another step down the road of violence and counter-violence along which we have been moving at increasing speed.

The Government has stated that it wants to get the process of negotiation going in South Africa. I want to ask the Government and the State President whether they really think that raids of this kind will help to get the process of negotiation going in South Africa. I fear they will not. Does the Government really think that raids of this kind will bring peace to this troubled land? I do not. Does the Government really think that it will reduce communist or Marxist influence in Southern Africa? I fear they will not; on the contrary, they will increase dependency on the Soviet Union and thereby extend Soviet influence both in South Africa and Southern Africa.

Does the Government really think that the raids will reduce the level of terrorism in South Africa? I fear they will not, any more than the raids on targets over the past five years have reduced the level of terrorism in South Africa. The reason for this is that while there are external factors relevant to terrorism in South Africa, this ugly phenomenon of terrorism is primarily a manifestation of the conflict situation that exists inside South Africa today.

Bearing in mind that the Government—or at least the Department of Foreign Affairs component of the Government—must have been aware of the grave international repercussions there would be, we ask the Government whether it took all possible diplomatic and other steps to deal with this problem other than raids into neighbouring countries.

Only a few months ago—I think it was in February—following the Ellisras land mine blasts, the Government had discussions with the Botswana Government and announced that, while they had not come to any formal agreement, new practical arrangements had been agreed upon in the field of security matters. Was this machinery used to the full before the button was pressed?

Let us look at relations with Zimbabwe. In spite of the cool relations between South Africa and Zimbabwe, the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs has often said that Zimbabwe was honouring its declared policy of not allowing Zimbabwean territory to be used for the planning and execution of terror attacks on South Africa. When South Africa became aware of the fact that Zimbabwe was not honouring that policy, was this drawn to the specific attention of the Zimbabwean Government before those two targets were attacked?

In relation to Zambia, following the State President’s meeting on the border with President Kaunda, it has been possible for the South African Government to enter into direct communications with the Zambian Government. Did the State President communicate directly with President Kaunda in respect of this specific matter? Was every alternative step explored and tried before the Government decided to continue on the path of raids?

Secondly, considering the tremendous price South Africa was bound to pay for the raids, were the targets hit in reality of such critical importance to the whole chain of terrorist incursions into South Africa that they warranted wrecking our relationships with our neighbours, and especially with Dr Kaunda, the Chairman of the Frontline States?

Did they warrant intensifying and accelerating the campaign to force disinvestment in and to apply sanctions against South Africa? Did they warrant pushing President Reagan into a corner over his executive order, jeopardising what is left of the policy of constructive engagement, and of giving ammunition to the very people who are in favour of punitive action being taken against South Africa? Did they warrant damaging, if not wrecking, the efforts of the EPG to try to help South Africa to start in a meaningful way negotiations on a future constitution for our country? Here one must bear in mind that the EPG was actually an initiative of Mrs Margaret Thatcher when she initiated at great risk to herself in order to try to be of assistance, in order to try to resist the campaign of sanctions. If the EPG’s efforst collapse as a result of these raids, economic sanctions are bound to be applied by the Commonwealth countries against South Africa.

Were the targets of such a nature that they warranted the inevitable damage that is going to be done to the economy of the country—the decline in the value of our currency, the problems that will be created in our quest for international loans, in respect of our foreign trade and our balance of payments? Was the importance of these targets of such a nature that we had to jeopardise the economic future of South Africa?

Finally, what of the timing? Was the time factor of such critical importance that raids had to be made into three Commonwealth countries at the very time that seven representatives of the Commonwealth were here in South Africa, on what the Government knows was a helpful mission to try to help South Africa in some way or another in resolving its internal dilemma?

Inside South Africa we are supposed to be moving into a period of make or break importance. We all know this. We are moving into an era of make or break importance. We realise that the future of our country as an orderly, democratic society will depend very largely on whether in the next few weeks—at the most the next few months— we in South Africa will succeed in getting negotiations among the genuine leaders of all sections of our nation off the ground.

We are at a watershed period in the history of South Africa. In this sense our future is balanced on a knife-edge. The State President has announced that he will soon be publishing a Bill dealing with the proposed National Council. Does he really think that these raids will help to get negotiation off the ground and to cause people to come to take part in his council? In the absence of a satisfactory explanation I must say that I find the timing of these raids simply appalling. I ask myself if these raids were an act of carefully considered statesmanship or merely a display of old-fashioned “kragdadigheid”.

Whatever this Government may have intended—and its intentions may have been different—to achieve in the security field, I believe that these raids were a major political blunder for which, regrettably, not just this Government but all the people of South Africa are going to have to pay a tremendous price.

I believe the majority of South Africans— South Africans of all races—would prefer to live in peace. Peace will not be brought about, however, through terrorism or petrol bombs or “necklacing”. Neither will it be brought about by raids or bannings or shootings or sjambokkings. It will only come about when the leaders of our nation come to their senses and start the process of negotiating a new deal that all South Africans will want to defend.

Mr Speaker, the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition has now whined for ten minutes about the strong action of the Defence Force against a bunch of cold-blooded murderers, This did only one thing. It pointed out the deep ideological differences which exist between that party and ours. [Interjections.]

I should like to convey my good wishes, and those of my hon colleagues, to the hon the Minister of Defence, who is undergoing an operation. We hope and pray that he will have a speedy recovery.

The point at issue here today is simple. Is the Government doing the right thing when it orders the Defence Force to attack South Africa’s enemies in our neighbouring states? This is the question at issue; and the CP’s answer to this is loud and clear: “Yes”. [Interjections.] Military actions which are aimed at wiping out cowardly, murderous terrorists, are in our opinion entirely justified, even if our Defence Force must follow those cowards into our neighbouring states. Many overseas countries do this, including the USA and Israel.

We do criticise the timing of the present actions. In our opinion the Government waited too long after the Weipe bloodbath and other cruel bloodbaths. The Government should have taken action earlier.

The world has already forgotten the sorrow of the innocent blood which was shed then. Now it is easy to see the present military action in isolation, and they no longer link it to the cruel acts of terrorism which took place approximately five months ago. Whatever South Africa does to defend itself, will be condemned by the outside world. That is why the Government has only one guideline it must follow. That is to do what is in the best interests of South Africa and its people. That is to protect South Africa and its people against cowardly terrorists. Critics must not forget that the USA, supported by Britain, undertook the attack against Libya. There is no fundamental difference between that step and our action.

I should like to address a word to the hon members of the PFP. They must now start to realise that the time has come in South Africa where careful egg-dances regarding loyalty in respect of the defence of the country are no longer acceptable. The time has come for the hon members of the PFP to stand up and for each of them to say what their own convictions are with regard to the defence of the country in South Africa. [Interjections.]

We should like to congratulate the Defence Force on the great success they achieved, and we want to say that we are proud of the SA Defence Force. We say it is in the best interests of South Africa and all its people and all civilised countries in the world that in future cowardly terrorists both inside and outside South Africa must be hit so hard by South Africa that the world will get rid of this deadly terrorist pestilence which is trying to destroy it like a cancer.

Mr Speaker, I said yesterday and I want to say again today in my 60 seconds that it is essential that the Government should demonstrate to the public and to the media clearly and unequivocally that the raids were firstly militarily necessary and that the targets were directly linked to terrorism against South Africa and the killing of innocent South African civilians. I believe this is vital to neutralise internal questionings and criticisms and to counteract the inevitable foreign furore which we all expected. We must have brought back documents and weapons which will give added credibility in presenting those who question the need for actions like this with the facts. While in principle we support pre-emptive strikes—we have always done so— in the present climate we believe that we must also convince our accusers that the action was both unavoidable and fully justified.

It is in that spirit that we ask the Government to give the public and the world the information which will prove what I have requested in these few words.

Mr Chairman, the HNP wholeheartedly supports the attack by the Defence Force on ANC posts in Zimbabwe, Zambia and Botswana, and wants to congratulate everyone who had a share in the operations on the success achieved. But the ANC’s military onslaught against South Africa is continuing, and consequently we must emphasise that until the ANC has been destroyed militarily—and the Defence Force can do this—South Africa will remain subject to the war which the communistic ANC is waging against it from neighbouring and frontline states.

Mr Speaker, the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition said that the Defence Force’s timing was wrong. Now I just want to ask: When must we take action? People from all over the world come and visit us; if it is not the Americans who are here, it is the members of the EPG. When must we then take action? When is the convenient and right time to take action?

Consequently I want to reply to the question of the hon the Leader of the Opposition as follows: We were of the opinion that for security reasons it was necessary to take action then and that is why the Defence Force did so. Furthermore it was asked why the Defence Force took action at all. Let us look at the facts. The Defence Force were carrying out orders, and the way in which those orders were carried out, attested to the highest degree of professionalism. It was done perfectly, and we can congratulate the Defence Force on their excellent action.

For years now the ANC and their followers have been committing acts of violence in South Africa against innocent people. But for almost two years now the ANC’s acts of violence against innocent people have escalated alarmingly.

According to irrefutable evidence the ANC is responsible for literally thousands of incidents of unrest, arson and damage to the property of innocent White, Coloured and Black people in our country. These are facts; not political gossip. These are hard facts of which we must take cognisance.

Even worse, is the fact that the ANC and its gangs of terrorists are irrefutably responsible for the death and maiming of hundreds of innocent and defenceless inhabitants of our country. The ANC does not even deny this; on the contrary, they boast about it. Last week they threatened to escalate their activities in South Africa. These are now the ostensible underdogs of whom the hon members on that side spoke.

Between these perpetrators of violence and the innocent, defenceless people stands the Government and our Security Forces, who act as the protectors of these defenceless people. This is our task. We will protect the defenceless, innocent people against the perpetrators of violence and the murderers, and we are not apologising to anyone for that.

Hear, hear!

The average South African—White, Coloured and Black—is sick and tired of the violence of the ANC and its followers. These South Africans expect the Government and its Security Forces to act against these murderers of innocent people. They ask this of us.

Where does the Official Opposition stand in this regard?

They are crying about it.

Today they again condemned the actions of the Government with words like “appalling”.

You lot should rather …

It has got to stop now! You have run out of working options! [Interjections.]

Order!

The time has come for the Official Opposition to tell the public, the people who have been maimed, and the next-of-kin of those who have died, where they stand with regard to this matter.

Where are you leading us?

You are using brawn and not brains!

Mr Speaker, I regret to have to inform this House of the unavoidable absence of the hon the Minister of Defence. I can give the House the assurance that he is making considerable progress, and I hope he will be back at his post again soon.

The hon the Leader of the Official Opposition asked whether we had taken diplomatic steps to ensure, or try to ensure, that the violence is curbed. My reply to him is an unequivocal “yes”. Both the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs and I went out of our way to enlist the aid of Western leaders to exert pressure so that these onslaughts on South Africa from across the border would be halted.

†It is a particularly serious transgression of international law for states to provide sanctuary to elements which plan, instigate and execute acts of terror against other states, as is happening in Southern Africa. It is an established principle of international law that when this occurs, the state against which such acts are perpetrated, has the right to resort to acts of self-defence and to carry out pre-emptive strikes. Israel attacked the PLO headquarters in Tunisia and America attacked Libyan installations. These are cases in point.

The South African Government has on numerous occasions offered to enter into non-aggression pacts with its neighbours. The Nkomati Accord and the security treaty with Swaziland serve as visible proof of this.

*On 31 January this year, in this House, I once again extended a hand of friendship to our neighbours. I proposed a mechanism with this object in mind. It was ignored by the states that harbour terrorists, and there was no reaction to it.

†The Government has also stated repeatedly that it does not wish to become involved in the domestic affairs of our neighbours, and expects them to act accordingly. On the other hand, we have repeatedly given fair warning to neighbouring states that South Africa has a duty to protect its territorial integrity and the lives and property of its citizens. The hon the Minister of Defence expressed such a warning in this House only last week during the discussion of the Defence Vote. Irrefutable proof of the existence of ANC bases in some countries and of ANC activities within and from such countries has been provided to them. In this respect I draw the attention of hon members to a statement which the South African State Security Council released on 20 December 1985 in which it was made clear that terrorist elements continued to operate from within, inter alia, Zambia, Botswana and Zimbabwe. We warned against it, and our warning was brought to the attention of the governments concerned.

There can be no question about the fact that South Africa has exhausted all peaceful remedies that have been at its disposal, and its approach to this matter has been more than reasonable. We will continue to prevail upon these neighbouring countries to adhere to international law.

To think that the UNO actually condones the killing of civilians by means of landmines, and that it supports the ANC materially and otherwise, is not only a sad indictment of an organisation ostensibly dedicated to the promotion of international peace, but also underscores the need for South Africa to look after its own interests. [Interjections.] We cannot accept the killing and injuring of innocent people. We cannot tolerate the smuggling of arms into our country. We saw photos only a few days ago of what happened when murders upon innocent families were perpetrated. May I remind hon members of this House that three years ago today Pretoria paid a heavy price when a terrorist bomb exploded there.

*To a far greater extent than merely our tangible experiences and what people have personally experienced, our Security Forces could also describe to hon members what they have prevented—things that might have happened to this country as a result of the reckless actions of people across the border.

During the recent discussion of my Vote I elaborated in detail on the contact and co-operation between the ANC and the PLO, as part of the over-all Libyan terror plan. The ANC and the PAC have for several years now been sending recruits for training as terrorists to the training camps of Col Gaddafi, as well as to those in Angola. The ANC’s ties with the exporter of terrorism whom President Reagan called “the mad dog of the Middle East” have also been confirmed.

South Africa will not allow the double standards and the hypocrisy of the Western World, even in regard to the application of legal principles, to stand in the way of our responsibility to protect our country.

Hear, hear!

In commenting on the attack on terrorist installations in Libya, President Reagan said the following on 14 April:

Even Mrs Thatcher, who of course assisted President Reagan by making available aircraft bases in Britain, had a clear vision of terrorism and those who perpetrate it. Let us look at a few of the British Prime Minister’s remarks. She said the following:

In recent times the South African Government has provided visible proof that it intends to accommodate the legitimate political aspirations of all South Africans in democratic structures which will be the products of negotiation.

Consequently, it must now be patently clear to the international community that the ANC is not engaged in a so-called liberation struggle but that it is hell-bent on the destruction of the South African society; that it wants power through the barrel of a gun and that it fully intends to remain in power by means of force. [Interjections.]

The ANC is responsible for the perpetration of no fewer than 193 serious acts of terrorism in South Africa since April last year. South Africans cannot tolerate this without taking notice and action. We will fight international terrorism in precisely the same way as other Western countries, despite the sanctimonious protests of the guardian of international terrorist movements, the United Nations.

The smugglers of terrorist arms into our country and the murderers of innocent people must be hunted down. I want to quote one instance: 19 Eve’s Crescent, Harare, is an ANC transit house, and we have established that the terrorists responsible for the land mine episodes during November and December last year in the north of our country were accommodated there before and after having committed their treatherous deeds in South Africa.

Like the United States of America and every other civilised government, we reject internationally organised terrorism. We, likewise, will not tolerate terrorists hiding in other countries with the intent to perpetrate crimes against people in our country who prefer to live and work in peace.

*I accept full responsibility for the actions of our Security Forces.

Hear, hear!

I wish them luck, and I assure them that we and the country will stand behind them in this regard. My appeal to everyone in South Africa is this: Unite against terrorism; unite for peace!

Hear, hear!

Just like Ian Smith!

Discussion having continued for half an hour,