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

The few ideas I wish to express regarding the Public Administration and the state in which it now finds itself, will refer more specifically to the White civil posts existing in the Public Service, and not to those specially set aside for people of colour. In any case they are a separate problem, a problem which is definitely not susceptible to any instant solution or even to a short-term or medium-term solution.

The fact of the matter is that the problem is a dual one as regards people of colour. In the first place they are not qualified for the middle-ranking and higher posts in the Public Service because their education and training were neglected in the past. In the second place many people of colour who do in fact have the necessary qualifications are not prepared to accept the salary scales applicable to the lower ranks in the Public Service. During the past six months, and particularly during the past few weeks, the newspapers have printed banner headlines about crises which reportedly existed in the Public Service, particularly in certain departments. I do not wish to make a further fuss about this. In my opinion, however, the time has come to create a better climate and a greater sense of confidence. After all, this is at present the great obstacle in the process of finding new recruits for the Public Service. However it is true that in respect of the 77 600 White civil posts in the Public Service there is an official shortage of 17 000. This is the information received from what is referred to as authoritative sources. These are not particulars which I obtained from Opposition newspapers, but from newspapers which usually support the NP.

One of these newspapers said 17 000 vacancies are not nearly a realistic reflection of the actual position, and that the figure is closer to 34 000 …

Whoa!

… if it is also taken into account … Well, newspapers supporting the hon. member’s party say so. If the posts not suitably filled are also taken into account the number can in fact be 34 000. The most recent sensational report received on this entire matter was of course the second interim report of the Hoexter Commission, the commission which investigated the courts. This report contains disturbing facts. May I just point out that this report was signed on 4 February this year in Pretoria, and that Parliament had the privilege of scrutinizing the report for the first time on 4 September. I do not wish to go into the inherent contempt for this hon. House which such behaviour implies. Nor can I accept that the Government Printer could not have printed this report in seven days at most. Yet it took seven months before we, in this highest authoritative body in the country, received the report.

The hon. the Minister of Justice, who is unfortunately not here this afternoon, says he has in the meanwhile arranged for special compensation for State Prosecutors. This is just another of the pieces of patchwork which will do more harm than good in the long run. This kind of special treatment of certain groups only in the Government sector, as happened in the case of the police and teachers as well, does not go unnoticed by other employees in the Public Service.

Now is your chance to make a name for yourself. You tell us what we should do. [Interjections.]

I think the hon. the Minister of Pollution should stay out of this argument. In November last year already there was evidence before the Hoexter Commission—

This evidence by a responsible official in the Department of Justice dates from November 1980. However, it was only during the course of this year that we got this special emergency measure by means of which State prosecutors are being treated in a special way in that they are being given special compensation. The turn-over in the State Prosecutor’s staff in Johannesburg over a period of two years was 94 out of a total establishment of 100. This process has therefore been under way for some time. But it was only this year that some of our administrators woke up and realized that something drastic had to be done.

In the regional courts, which have jurisdiction to impose sentences of ten years imprisonment or fines of up to R10 000, the position as regards prosecutors is no better than in the district courts. The administration of justice is among the most responsible work in South Africa.

It involves dealing with cases where a person’s freedom and property are at stake in a criminal case and in the process of ensuring that justice is done, the State Prosecutor plays an exceptionally great and important part. If he does not do his duty, the community can suffer because a guilty person may be found not guilty and acquitted or an innocent person may be found guilty. If the State Prosecutor cannot do his job properly, with the necessary experience and academic background, the magistrate, no matter how good he is and no matter how hard he tries, can make mistakes. These are the kind of disadvantages for the community which can result from this.

The newspaper report I now wish to quote from reads—

This economic upswing which began in 1979 and reached its zenith at the end of 1980 and the beginning of 1981, did not surprise anyone. Economists prophesied it and a graph for 1979 and subsequent years showed that in August-September 1981, we would lapse into a critical situation unless something special and exceptional was done. The rationalization programme which we heard so much about, the one arising from the hon. the Prime Minister’s undertaking, his promise when he assumed office that he would try to bring about a sound, good administration, is, as far as I am concerned, conspicuous by its absence. I do not know whether there are insufficient people to carry out the rationalization programme, but the hopes cherished about what this programme could achieve, the hopes that there would be a smaller and more efficient Public Service, that the people working there could therefore be paid better and that the Public Service as a whole would diminish and the total expenditure become less—hopes cherished by the public and by new recruits—have all been dashed because this simply did not happen. The Commission for Administration, people for whom I have the greatest sympathy because they must deal with such a completely hopeless situation, say that in spite of everything the Public Service is still growing by 6% a year. At the same time, however, the number of resignations is increasing, the total establishment has more and more vacancies.

This Parliament posses 100 or more acts per session, but we are never told how many additional officials will be needed to implement any specific act. That is the cause, the reason for the 6% increase. That is the cause of the question why we have an unwieldy administration that neither the hon. the Minister nor the Commission for Administration really knows how to deal with, except by way of short-term patchwork. I should like to suggest that in respect of every Bill brought before this House in future, a report should be submitted by the Commission for Administration on the number of additional officials who will be required to implement that Bill properly if it is passed.

One of the evils resulting from this shortage of manpower is the fact that in many of the departments which render services there is a lack of expert senior officials. This of necessity requires that some of the work has to be farmed out to private contractors. Because they are privileged to be remunerated by the Government, they are able to lure away and take over the remaining experts left in the department and employ themselves. This has happened repeatedly. If the Commission for Administration could furnish the actual facts about this phenomenon we shall see that it is in fact happening. As these contractors lure experts from the Public Service, the department becomes weaker and weaker in respect of expert assistance and the number of contracts farmed out becomes larger and larger. In other words, it is a vicious circle. Perhaps the hon. the Minister could explain to us what he sees as a solution to this problem, but everything points to the fact that a long-term plan is missing, that this position should have been foreseen long ago, that a plan should have been devised and that it is now too late.

Next Monday the public servants are holding their annual meeting in Pretoria, a week from today. I can assure hon. members that the public servants pinned exceptionally great hopes on an extension of their bargaining powers. They want either or both of the following which are normal bargaining powers in the industrial world. The one is compulsory arbitration and the other is an industrial council on which employers and employees will be represented, where there will be bargaining and where there can eventually be agreement. As far as I am concerned, however, something disastrous has happened. The Manpower Commission has recommended, unconditionally, that compulsory arbitration has to be applied, that public servants have to be given this right so that they can stipulate better conditions than those they were able to receive in the past in negotiations behind closed doors. There is a tremendous spirit of distrust in this regard. In its wisdom the Government stated in its White Paper that that bargaining power should not be given to public servants—at any rate not at this stage. This was referred to the Commission for Administration and in its wisdom the Commission for Administration decided to appoint a special committee of inquiry—yet another committee to add to the dozens which already exist—to report on the desirability or other wise of extending the powers of negotiation of public servants.

A committee of delay.

My hon. colleague says it is a committee of delay. I can assure hon. members that this is how it will be regarded next Monday. Something will have to be done soon and I wish to suggest that it be done this week. I wish to suggest that the hon. the Minister should intervene in this situation and take the necessary steps to introduce better prospects for the public servants in the short, middle and long term.

What do you suggest?

We have already had Manpower 2000. Let us now have Administration 2000. If heads must roll in the process then it is worthwhile because we cannot allow the present position to continue. The newspapers are using big words like crisis, chaos and the like. I do not want to use those words, because it is utterly wrong to create the impression among potential recruits that the Government is a poor employer, that one is being robbed of one’s basic rights when one joins the Public Service and that one does not have the protection enjoyed by an ordinary worker. That impression must be removed. In my opinion there is only one person who can do that now and that is the hon. the Prime Minister. He must intervene and call on the people who got Manpower 2000 under way, to carry out a similar task in the Public Service so as to give new hope to the people in the Public Service and to possible new recruits.

Mr. Chairman, before I reply to what the hon. member for Johannesburg North had to say, I want to refer to a few other matters first. This is the first time that the hon. the Minister has dealt with this Vote and we on this side of the House wish to assure him of our full support and wish him everything of the best. [Interjections.]

Dr. Steyn, the present Secretary of the Commission of Administration, has been appointed Provincial Secretary for the Transvaal. We on this side of the House extend our sincerest congratulations to Dr. Steyn. He has now become the executive official of the province which is not only the largest in the country economically but also the most beautiful. [Interjections.] Our best wishes go with him.

We also convey our sincerest congratulations to his successor, Mr. Gerrie van Zyl. We on this side of the House not only wish him luck, but also bid him a cordial welcome.

It is unfortunate that Mr. Van Vuuren, one of the members of the Commission, is to retire at the end of the year. We wish him a peaceful and fruitful retirement and everything of the best to him and his family.

The hon. member for Johannesburg North referred to various matters in the discussion of this Vote. I gained the impression that he became a little mixed up with the various votes. First he discussed the Justice Vote and then ended with the Manpower Vote. [Interjections.] In actual fact he never got to State Administration as such. Later on in the course of my speech I shall refer to the shortcomings in the Public Service and I should also like to deal with them.

It was a modest confession on the part of the hon. member for Johannesburg North when he said that the training of people of colour was greatly neglected in the past. If we go back in history to the time of the old United Party and then consider the training of Blacks, we find that this aspect was neglected by that party during its years in office, and now we suddenly have strange bedfellows.

I refer to the speech made by the hon. member for Johannesburg North on 6 August 1981. I refer to Hansard, col. 389 and what follows. He made this speech during the censure debate and I wished to ascertain what he actually wanted to tell this House. He even went so far as to ask the hon. the Minister in advance to be present. We then thought he would refer to the crux of the problem in the Public Service. Then he made his speech. First he tried to attack the hon. the Minister because the hon. the Minister did not react to Press reports. We read in col. 390—

In col. 391 he said-—

In the same speech, in col. 393 he says the exact opposite, however, namely—

Staatsamptenare het gister weer eens die versekering gekry dat voortgesette aandag aan hul salarisse en personeeltekorte gegee word.

In consequence of what the hon. member said one must first deduce that the hon. the Minister did nothing. Immediately after that, however, the Minister held discussions with officials and the assurance was again given that their representations would receive attention. On that occasion the hon. member quoted one newspaper report after another. Besides being a ridiculous way of making a speech, the hon. member did not further the cause of the Public Service. Yet again he was engaged in scoring petty political debating points, and this side of the House rejects that practice.

We are certainly aware of the problems that exist in the Public Service and need therefore not to read about them in the newspapers. In any case we represent the public servants in this House. How many public servants are there in Johannesburg West, Parktown, Yeoville or Houghton? I would venture to say there are very few, perhaps not one. It is this side of the House that lives and works with the public servants and is involved with them in the spheres of religions, cultural and social life. They are welcomed as friends in our homes and we also visit them. Without fear of contradiction we therefore claim that we know the public servants; as a matter of fact many of our children and friends are members of the Public Service, and for this reason we know their needs and we know the problems at present existing in the Public Service.

We know that the recent salary adjustments did not come up to expectations, and we also know that the Public Servants’ Association has put forward responsible representations and will continue to do so in an attempt to improve the position. However I do not believe that salaries as such are all that are causing problems, and I should like to point out a few problems and ask that the commission and the hon. the Minister give attention to them.

There is the problem of public servants leaving the service and going to work in the private sector. Particularly in a boom period, i.e. when things are prospering and going well in the economic field, there is an alarming flow of highly skilled manpower in particular to the private sector. During a recession, when there is an easing in the economy, it can happen that many of these people must return to the Public Service, but then they have already sacrificed all benefits, for example pensions and housing, and these people then find themselves in a serious losing position from which they cannot easily recover.

Another matter which bothers me even more is that there is no parity between the Public Service, the Railways and the Post Office and other statutory bodies as regards salaries, housing and other conditions of service. Why should a junior clerk in the Public Service earn as much as R100 to R150 per month more than one in the Railways, the Post Office or other statutory bodies? Why is there a difference in housing benefits between the Public Service, the Railways and the Post Office? Today I should like to make a serious appeal for greater parity in this regard. It has become necessary to put our heads together in this connection to find a solution to one of the greatest problems in the national economy. Sir, may I suggest that the hon. the Minister, in consultation with the other departments and with the Commission, consider appointing an interdepartmental committee representative of the Public Service, the Railways, the Post Office and other associated statutory bodies to investigate this entire matter? Such a committee could fruitfully research and identify one of the real problems in the Public Service and make meaningful recommendations to the Minister concerned, which could eventually lead to the elimination of the irritating anomalies existing at present. A start was already made when the commission invited three persons from the private sector to make themselves available for three years, in the first place to create a channel for exchanging business expertise and in the second place to create a forum where representatives of the Government and the private sector could meet. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Johannesburg North kicked up a great deal of fuss about public servants this afternoon. He asked, inter alia, how it was possible that in these times of economic prosperity public servants were worse off than they had ever been before. However, this is simply not true. The plain truth is that we must see the Public Service, the central government and the government sector as a whole as part of the total problem in South Africa, viz. that there are too few people and too many employment opportunities. I can give the hon. member the assurance that many of the excellent officials whom the Public Service has lost are today doing fine work in the private sector. The hon. member said that we in this Parliament ought to consider how many people were added to the Public Service with each piece of legislation. The hon. member for Johannesburg North has been in this Parliament for quite a while now, and it is part of the task of a Parliamentary opposition to point out not only the staff implications of every piece of legislation, but also its financial implications. However, I have never heard the hon. member for Johannesburg North doing any such thing.

Where are we to obtain that information?

He can come and show me whether he has ever done so. [Interjections.] The hon. member for Johannesburg North spoke about things which were being done so slowly.

Petty politics.

That hon. member need not be concerned. I do not want to make politics out of this.

Just petty politics.

However, the hon. member knows that problems are experienced in the legal world as regards the rapid completion of cases. The hon. member, who was in the legal world himself—and I am not casting any reflection on him or on the legal world—knows that in his time too there were matters which, as a result of very definite problems, took a very long time to finalize and about which many people were unhappy. But I shall leave the matter at that. [Interjections.]

However, the hon. member for Johannesburg North is quite right. What we need in South Africa is not distrust of the officials who work in our central Government machine. We need only confidence. In my heart I am concerned about the fact that all of us as politicians are politicizing the position of the public servants to such an extent that we shall be unable to eliminate the emotional content in future, however hard we try. I personally believe it is quite wrong to drag the service conditions and general position of the public servants into the political arena. I want to assure the hon. member for Johannesburg North that we, the members on this side, are doing everything in our power to improve their position, and we have done so over the years, for as the hon. member for Gezina said, we represent those people. Let us also tell our public servants, from this House, that every representative in this House has only respect and esteem for the wonderful work being done by the many thousands of competent people despite all their problems. The rest of South Africa must join us in paying tribute to the fine officials in our Government machine.

If we continue to drag the conditions of service and salaries of those people through the mud, I see hard times ahead for us, for what are we doing? We are creating an image of the Public Service which will simply deter our young people in future. What young people would want to work at a place which is constantly being denigrated for supposedly paying such poor salaries, which is accused of not doing its work properly and of red tape and delays, etc. Let us all join forces to build that machine which must be built for our country, South Africa. There is no doubt that some of our finest people are working in our Government machine. It is true that here and there our Government machine does not have a very good image. Moreover there are intelligent people who share our grave concern concerning the tremendous resignation rate. I want to tell the hon. member for Johannesburg North that he must go to Anglo American, one of the wealthiest companies in the world, or to Federale Volksbeleggings. The other day I read an article and I was surprized to see that those companies, that can virtually pay what they like, are struggling with a 30% staff shortage, on those very levels at which our Public Service is also experiencing shortages. We could review the whole economy in the same way. Every small businessman, every industrialist, every dealer—in fact, everyone who is involved in the private sector—is struggling to obtain people. There is no point in saying that we must make use of the services of Coloured and Black people, for at present not many of them can be used. We are dealing with a long-term training process, and in view of the total problem with which we are struggling I should like to make an earnest appeal to the hon. the Minister about one thing today. I know that when one discusses this point, irrespective of who one is, one is sticking out one’s neck. However, I am doing this out of sympathy for the central Government machine and for the excellent officials and, I believe, in the interests of South Africa as well. I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether we cannot again carefully consider how much of the work being done by the central Government machine and by other Government institutions in South Africa which do not fall under the hon. the Minister, could be given to the private sector. I am sincerely convinced that since the Public Service is being burdened by a manpower shortage, there has never been an opportunity such as this to channel to the private sector as much of the work as possible which is being done by the Government sector. The simple truth is that a rand is turned over once in the Public Service, but in the private sector the same rand is turned over twice or three times in the same year. If we want to utilize to the optimum the fundamental resources of our economy, viz. manpower, capital, raw materials and a spirit of enterprise, it is necessary for us to admit that here and there in the central Government and in the total Government sector we are not utilizing our manpower and financial resources to the best of our ability, because the State is performing part of the task. I say this specifically because the hon. the Prime Minister took the lead and said that we should set the private sector in South Africa in motion, and also because he said that we wanted to do everything in our power to stimulate the private sector.

The fact is that we are dealing here with a Third World problem. 48% of our Black people are below 15 years of age. In view of that problem South Africa will never in all eternity be able to get by if we allow our own Government institutions to continue to expand and allow the Government institutions we are establishing for the Black peoples around us to grow out of proportion to our economic capacity. Because I am convinced that there is a great deal of opportunity for this in a variety of spheres, I want to make a very strong appeal to the hon. the Minister in this regard today. The officials of the central Government have benefits in a variety of spheres which we must advertise. The pension scheme for public servants in South Africa is one of the best in the Republic. Why do we not tell our people this? Why are we only negative? Why do we not tell our people what large sums are again being allocated in this budget to the public servants’ Medical Aid Fund? Why do we not develop these peoples’ self respect, these people of outstanding quality who are doing such fine work? If we pay tribute to our public servants and do them justice by not politicizing their cause, we shall make great progress with productivity, as with everything else in this country of ours. We must at the same time farm out as much work as possible to the private sector. I am amazed that the hon. member for Johannesburg North is concerned about this. He said we had reached the stage where an increasing amount of work was being farmed out. However, I do not find this wrong. I find it in complete harmoney with a sound free market system that the state should farm out more and more work. I should like to ask the hon. the Minister whether in future the Commission ought not to give more in-depth attention to this specific matter, viz. the Government’s involvement in the private sector. Apart from that I want to reiterate what I said a few years ago—and I was not very popular for saying it—i.e. that we must instil in every official in our Government machine how crucial it is to cause the economy to move more rapidly, not more slowly. It is not always the laws, rules and regulations which are the cause. Often it is also the attitude of people who feel: “Wait a moment; too much money is being made.” If we had the time we could spend a great deal of time discussing this subject. The fact is that the central Government today is for the most part in the hands of Afrikaans-speaking people. We have a long history of withholding ourselves somewhat from the capitalist system, but we are now beginning to reach the point of maturity where—I am absolutely convinced of this—we can take with us every official in the central government service, whatever his task may be, to be motivated and to do everything in his power not to prevent, or impede, or cause things to move more slowly, but to allow our economic system of private enterprise to gather momentum, for therein lies the salvation of our country as well as the future of our officials. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, both the last two speakers did the Public Service a disservice by trying to identify the public servants with the NP. There is only one body which represents public servants and that is their own association. Each one of us in this House represents them as individuals, as voters, but to pretend that the NP is the mouthpiece of the Public Service, is to do the Public Service a disservice. [Interjections.] That is the implication and I reject it.

Vause, I reject it too.

Mr. Chairman, I agree with one thing the hon. member for Innesdal said and that is that we should make the maximum possible use of the private sector in taking over some of the burdens the Public Service carries. This is, however, a problem relating to the philosophy of the Government. The Public Service should be a body to co-ordinate and to administer, but instead of that it becomes a monstrous organization of red tape, dominating and controlling every field of our national life.

That is not true.

From the cradle to the grave the Government has to have its finger in the pie, it has to have control. That is why we have today an army of permit writers and pass writers in every field of our national fife.

I am afraid that the rationalization of which we heard so much and to which we looked forward with so much expectation has done nothing to help us get away from that attitude of the Government itself, the philosophy of government that one must have a vast Public Service to control and regulate everything. In the approach of the hon. member for Gezina it came out that the few differences that exist between two business organizations under State control, who by their very existence are required to operate as business organizations, and the Public Service must be eliminated so that everything will be standardized. We have this obsession with standardization while what we need is flexibility. We do not want a greater standardization but more flexibility. The approach adopted is however typified by the statement of the hon. member for Gezina.

It comes back in fact to the core body, the old Public Service Commission, now the Commission for Administration, which, although it is in new clothes with a new name, still has the same attitude and approach as it used to have.

You are fighting with the wrong man.

What we need is more flexibility and not greater standardization.

The hon. member for Johannesburg North was quite right when he said there was growing dissatisfaction amongst public servants themselves. One has but to read the evidence submitted on their behalf to the Wiehahn Commission. In that they spelt out their views loud and clear. What they ask for is the power to negotiate and the power to have compulsory arbitration. They themselves reject any claim to strike rights. In their own proposals they say that the restriction on their right to negotiate, which excludes strikes, should continue. They say—

They are not asking for trade union rights in the sense that they want to be able to strike, but they want to register as a trade union so that they can use the machinery for collective bargaining, which every other worker is entitled to use.

The fifth report of the Wiehahn Commission was unanimous in its finding that public servants at all levels—national, provincial and local—should be entitled to collective bargaining and to compulsory arbitration. The Government does not agree with this, however. The Government appoints yet another committee to investigate the matter, another committee to put the matter off, to pigeon-hole it. For how long? I should like to ask the hon. the Minister to tell this House now that he will give that committee a time limit in which to report and within which to take a decision, because this matter has been pending for so long that it is now time for a conclusion to be reached.

The hon. member for Innesdal says we should not criticize because that will prevent people from joining the Public Service. It is not our criticism that keeps people away from the Public Service. It is the salaries and conditions of service, and to sweep these things under the carpet so that they will not be seen is not going to change the position. Nobody is going to decide on the basis of what a member of Parliament says whether he will join the Public Service. He is going to look at the pay and the conditions of service before he makes his decision.

What is the attitude of the Government? I said before, and I say it again, that as long as the attitude of the Government and the attitude of the Commission for State Administration remains tied to outmoded concepts of pen-pushing public servants and fails to accept new modern concepts and approaches towards government, we will continue to have the same problems. This was demonstrated again in respect of nurses. The Government merely fiddled with their pay, giving them what seemed a very high percentage increase, but left the problem unsolved. As long as that attitude continues we will have to consider the attitude of the Government and of the Commission for State Administration a public enemy of the Public Service, because we are not going to draw people to the service by just throwing out a few little crumbs for them to nibble on. We have to attack the problem with a true realization of the seriousness thereof. We have had a crisis in the nursing service, as well as a crisis in the police service. Now we have a crisis in the courts, and other crises are developing in all fields of public administration. Must we wait for crises to develop every time? Must we wait until the spotlight of publicity is focused on matters before we act? Can we not identify the potential crises before they develop and counter them? That will, of course, mean the removal of a lot of the Government’s red tape from the field of State Administration. It will also mean the streamlining, not of the Administration only, but of what the Public Service has to administer. It will also mean reducing the unnecessary and complicated systems of government which are brought about by the philosophy of the Government.

I should like to repeat—it is my old hobby horse, but I ride it again—my plea for Defence to be taken out from under the control of the Commission for State Administration. I also want to lodge a plea for the removal of the Police from the control of the Commission for State Administration. I say this because the work done by members of the Police Force and of the Defence Force cannot be equated with the work done by someone who works from 08h00 to 16h30.

We have just come back from a visit to the border. We have seen what our soldiers, our Permanent Force members, are doing. We have seen what they are called upon to do. We have seen their dedication. There is no such thing as working hours or overtime. They have to work day and night. There is no such thing as a tea break or a lunch break. One cannot equate the service of a soldier with that of any other job in the Public Service. The same applies to the Police Force. When they are out on special duties, when there are crises and unrest, they do a job which cannot be equated with any normal administrative job. At some time, at some stage, the Government has got to accept that our two security organizations, namely Defence and Police, have got to be taken out of the whole arena of measuring them against posts in the Public Service. This will then mean that the Chief of the Navy, who now cannot fly a flag because he is not … [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I should like to begin by saying that there is actually no art in adopting a negatively critical attitude when judging any situation, particularly if it is a difficult situation, but there is an art in being positively constructive and trying to make a contribution by means of which the difficulty can be relieved.

In respect of the question of the rationalization of the Public Service, the hon. member for Johannesburg North made statements that actually amounted to saying that not much good had come of this matter. I want to point out that the rationalization of the Public Service, with regard to which the Government took a decision two or three years ago, is in actual fact nothing new, but that we must see it as a phase in a period of development, as a phase in a long process, a process which at this juncture is being tackled purposefully, intensively and in a specific way. After all, it is general knowledge that since 1910 the Public Service has grown and developed tremendously over the decades. In the nature of things, it had to adopt additional functions. In addition to this, a shift of functions took place, a division of functions occurred and new departments had to be created, and in this entire process of growth and development it was essential that the question of rationalization should be given attention from time to time. In the latest decision by the Government with regard to intensive rationalization, the leading role has been given to the Commission for Administration, and I think the commission deserves gratitude and appreciation for what it has achieved in this regard. To refresh our memories, to put the terms of reference that were given to this committee into perspective, it may possibly be a good thing to take another look, by way of a summary, at the three objectives that were laid down and at the fulfilment of which is being strived for in this regard.

The first objective is to reorganize the government functions in such a way that a smaller number of better co-ordinated Government departments will be able to carry out the functions. The second objective is to review all legislation in order either to delete obsolete legislation, or to renew it to good effect, and to consolidate and simplify the valid functional measures as far as possible and thirdly, to go through the Public Service staff with a fine toothcomb with a view to the most effective utilization of staff. In this regard the Cabinet decided on 5 November 1980 that the rationalization programme of the commission should be continued and implemented on the basis of a function-centred investigation approach, i.e. that the specific functions should be looked at in order to put each important function on a basis of maximum efficiency. In the nature of things, such an approach must inevitably look beyond the existing structures and areas of jurisdiction. All of this aims at providing a better service, a more efficient administration, a saving of funds and an economic application of manpower. In the light of the large number of Government departments with their functions, every thinking person will concede that this is a gigantic undertaking by means of which the commission must work in order to bring about this rationalization, and that it cannot simply be completed overnight. The question that now arises is: To what extent has success been achieved in the effective achievement of these objectives or parts thereof? Then, in one’s judgment of this, one must look at the time factor that has expired, at the tremendous scope of the task, at the available manpower and also at the results that have been achieved and one must then measure it against these things.

By means of four phases, the first objective has been successfully achieved since 1 March 1980, by making a functional evaluation of 39 central Government departments, regrouping and amalgamating them or dividing them into 24 departments and more than 20 state functions with their accompanying funds, posts, staff, powers and quasi-Government institutions, were shifted in order to departmentalize them purposefully and to bring about purposeful Government services. Surely this is a positive achievement of an objective. It is not simply something which one can overlook and say that nothing has been achieved.

One does hear criticism in this regard. There are people who talk about large, clumsy departments and structures that have been created, there are adaptation problems, there are growing pains, there are difficulties and there are shortcomings. However, when one is dealing with such a large set-up then one must at least be fair enough to give this whole matter the opportunity to overcome these growing pains of regrouping, the problems and the changes and all the other adaptation problems that emanated from it. After all, one must allow the opportunity to overcome these things so that one can ultimately see what one has achieved as streamlined Government machinery which can provide an efficient service such as the objectives envisage achieving. We are dealing here with an intensive process of re-organization. There are departments that have been rearranged, there are functions that have been divided and that have been grouped together elsewhere. One must now give the various departments the opportunity to take a look at their internal organization as well and to streamline these organizations. One must also give them a reasonable period to bring about this organization so that ultimately one will have an end result consisting of a streamlined service with which we shall be satisfied.

With regard to the second objective, I just want to say that it deals with the revision, reduction, co-ordination and simplification of legislation which also has a methodical impact. The department was requested to draw up lists of legislation for which each one was responsible and we must take note of the fact that these lists have already been examined. Obsolete legislation has already been identified and it will gradually be phased out or, where necessary, reviewed and put to better use. The balance of the legislation will systematically be revised, co-ordinated and simplified for efficient implementation by the limited manpower at the disposal of the Public Service. In this regard too, we must judge this fairly and one must accept that all these things cannot be accomplished overnight. It will take time. An intensive study will have to be made of these things and they have to be carefully considered so that one can retain what is effective and can make improvements in the process in order to improve the entire administration and functioning of the State.

Mr. Chairman, by this time we know that the administration of the various Government departments is not an easy task. Then we still have hon. members like the hon. members for Durban Point and for Johannesburg North, who have a great deal to say about how badly organized the Public Service is, how badly the people are treated, and so on. However, we do not hear a single word from those hon. members about what can actually be done in an attempt to solve the problem. Those who are responsible for this, also have a thankless task, because in actual fact, according to the official Opposition and the other Opposition party, they can never do the right thing.

When the economy reaches a levelling-off phase, the State finds that there are more than the required number of workers available for public services. Then, unfortunately, the State has to do its utmost to employ people. However, then the other side argues: Just look how unproductive the State administration is; look how many people it employs; look how clumsy it is; it employs more people per capita of the population than any other public service in the world. This is what we encounter on the one hand.

On the other hand, when the economy of the country is booming again, we are faced with the opposite situation. The economy is now bursting out of its seams and we find the opposite pattern. All sectors are now exerting pressure on the available manpower. All sectors are trying to drink at that small fountain. Unfortunately, the private sector has a tremendous lead over the State administration and the State machiners. The private sector can very easily and very rapidly swing its entire financial programme around in order to utilize that available manpower to its advantage.

The private sector—many of its people are fat cats and hon. members know what I am talking about when I refer to this—are like a crowd of vultures descending on a carcase, and that carcass is the State’s source of labour. They are injuring the public sector. They are drawing more people away from that sector than the State can put back. All that remains, are those few bones in the public sector. I am referring here to the few willing, loyal workers who are keeping the public services running under extremely difficult circumstances.

What is most serious of all, is that it is usually those fat cats who are first in line to criticize the Public Service when it discovers that it can no longer provide those services as well as it did in the past. They are the very first to complain that the Post Office cannot provide the services that it should provide. They then complain that it takes ten days for a letter posted in Johannesburg to reach Cape Town.

We must be reasonable. When we go to a medical practitioner as patients …

The Opposition is reasonable …

It sounds like the honking of an Egyptian goose over there!

If we sit and wait in a doctor’s rooms, it may happen that we wait from 08h30 until 12h30 for an appointment. Not once do we say that the medical practitioner is unproductive—oh no, he is working terribly hard! If we have to wait two months for a dental appointment, no one ever says that the medical profession is unproductive; no, they are working hard! If someone has to stand in a queue in a Post Office or if a plane at Jan Smuts Airport is delayed by half an hour or an hour, then it is ostensibly the entire State machinery that is being so unproductive and does not know what it is doing. Then there is no mention of technical problems; no, then it is the poor public servant who has to suffer.

A great deal can be said about salaries having to be increased in order to be on a par with those in the private sector, but I myself come from the private sector and I can point out that as soon as salaries and fringe benefits are increased in order to be adjusted to and brought directly in line with those in the private sector, the private sector simply increases its salaries and conditions of service further. This is the only way in which they can supplement their labour resources. Let us be honest. Who is trying to bluff who here? If we were to continue in this way, we would simply be causing a spiral which would continue to rise and which would have no end. What happens in the old end? Once again we shall find that that side of the House will sit here like angels and criticize and allege that inflation is getting out of hand. This entire issue must be viewed in the broadest sense. One cannot simply take one factor into account and try to solve the problem in this way. However, hon. members on the Opposition side realize that if one thorny aspect is solved, it leads to other problems, and this gives them the opportunity to criticize the Government once again.

We have never viewed the Public Service as part of the NP. What we are in fact trying to do, is to protect these people, who are so often criticized by the ranks of the Opposition and are so violently attacked by them. One so often hears that some public servant or other failed to render a service, or that someone had to wait for a long time to be served. We are trying our best to solve this problem on a balanced basis, and in this respect we cannot but pay tribute to the Minister of State Administration and his department. Rationalization has been introduced into the Public Service; and in my opinion, it has succeeded thus far. Furthermore, the Commission for Administration has been reorganized because it was realized what an important factor manpower resources is in the entire Government set-up. This office has now been divided into seven large sub-sections, viz. system development, personnel structuring, employment and career supervision, personnel training and development, data systems, organization and work study and administrative evaluation. The steps that have been taken thus far indicate one thing only to me, and this is that the people are trying to approach the problem of manpower utilization in the Public Service in a professional way.

If we take the true figures into account and see how the number of people in the State Administration set-up has decreased—excluding services, teaching and nursing—we realize that the Public Service has done a great deal to increase productivity. However, we must have a proper understanding of productivity. Many people think that one should decrease one’s manpower. However, productivity means that one retains the same input and achieves a greater end-product, or maintains the same end-product and introduces a smaller input. One of the facets is manpower, although there are many others, such as finance, machinery and so on. However, I believe that manpower is the most important, because without it no end-product can be produced. The hon. the Minister and his department accept this fact, and that is why so much emphasis is being placed today on recruitment, selection and bursaries that are granted. Everything is being carried out on a scientific basis at the moment. I believe that these days the Public Service is doing much more in this respect than many private bodies that are so inclined to adopt a very critical attitude towards the lack of productivity of the Public Service machinery.

In spite of the criticism, however, State Administration continues to play its role and provides services over a much broader front, although the number of people involved in this, have decreased over the past years. In 1970 there were 133 966 people employed in the central administrative sector—excluding services, teaching and nursing—and in 1979, there were 104 535, therefore a drop of 22%. My personal opinion is that at the moment the public servants are providing more services over a broader front than ever before, and they are doing so with fewer people. Therefore, productivity has increased a great deal.

I want to make this request of all hon. members in this House today, as well as of people outside this House: Please treat our public servants like people. Friendliness does not cost a thing. There is nothing that has such a demotivating effect as the continual allegations by John Citizen that the Public Service is so bad. This is really not the case. Those people are simply asking for the ordinary recognition which the man in the street requires. I raise my hat to them for what they are doing under extremely difficult circumstances, and I think that every one of us is much indebted to those people for what they are accomplishing under such difficult circumstances. We hope and trust that this new dispensation and the rationalization programme which the Government is now launching, will also assist in the years that lie ahead in removing these bottlenecks from our Public Service.

Mr. Chairman, my observation, in the brief time that I have been in this House, particularly with regard to the official Opposition, is that they launch an attack in every debate, in season and out of season, but never come up with alternatives or with a solution to a problem. [Interjections.] Our problem with that Opposition is that it is an Opposition that has no past and no future. [Interjections.] In my possession I have newspaper clippings from the ’fifties. According to the official Opposition of that time, there was also a so-called crisis in the Public Service. However, we are now dealing with a completely different Opposition. I have a problem with the hon. member for Johannesburg North. He spoke about patching, but my mother taught me that one can never sew a new patch onto an old article of clothing. However, this is our problem with him. It is a question of a new patch on an old article of clothing, and this can never work, and he knows it.

That is what I said.

This afternoon the hon. member for Johannesburg North tried to drive a wedge between this Government and its officials.

Never!

I find it a pity that someone is using this House …

Public servants belong to all of us, not only to you.

That hon. member reminds me of a cicada on a hot day in the Transvaal Bushveld. [Interjections.] The official Opposition must stop dragging our public servants, who have an important function to fulfil in this country, into the political arena for their own political gain.

You are the one who is doing so.

Those people are far above the level of statements that he made in this House this afternoon.

I have a great deal of appreciation for the fact that, when he came into power, the hon. the Prime Minister gave an undertaking to which the hon. member referred as well. The Public Service is undergoing a total change and it is necessary for something of this nature to happen from time to time. This afternoon I should like to express my particular appreciation towards the hon. the Minister of State Administration and of Statistics, and at the same time I should like to wish the Commission for Administration, its chairman, and all its members everything of the best for their tremendous, responsible task.

They need it.

The function of a Government is to govern a country. This is important. Laws are being made in this council chamber. Ordinances are also being issued by other levels of government. There are ordinances, regulations and by-laws, but the people who are responsible for implementing them, are our officials. I want to say this afternoon, as seriously as I can, that we have the most loyal, most efficient officials in the world in our Public Service, and I have the greatest appreciation for this.

Dead right.

This brings me to the question of the rationalization of the Public Service. Here I should like to put a few ideas to the hon. the Minister. I appreciate the fact that rationalization is chiefly being implemented on the horizontal level at the moment, but the hon. the Minister must please give some thought to whether we should not rationalize on the vertical plane too. The point that I want to make this afternoon, is that we have many laws in this country. I have appreciation for this. If we look at the report that was submitted, it is clear that those laws are being reviewed at the moment. I think this is important, because there are too many laws on our Statute Book which can definitely disappear.

When speaking of vertical rationalization, I also want to involve the other two levels of government in this, viz. the provincial and the local governments. In this country we are faced with a shortage of manpower. What is important to me, is that we should look at alternative resources. This is important, but to my mind, what is most important is that we should look at the optimal utilization of the manpower that we have at our disposal. We must use people for the work for which they have been trained. There are several examples that I could mention to illustrate this, but with the limited time at my disposal, I just want to mention welfare work as an example. A welfare worker is trained for a specific task, but he or she devotes a large portion of their time to writing reports. This creates a problem. When we talk about vertical rationalization, what I have in mind is that although we are faced with a shortage of manpower in this country, overlapping is taking place. It is definitely taking place. We have the first, second and third levels of government which definitely overlap with regard to certain departments. For instance, if we look at nursing, we find that there are people in the nursing profession who fall under the central Government, the provinces and the local governments. Due to the shortage that arose, there is competition for the services of those people. The hon. member for Johannesburg North referred to the administration of justice today. I do not want to refer to this in the same spirit as he did, but I ask myself: Since there is a shortage of people with legal qualifications, is it really necessary for several local authorities in our country each to have their own legal division and that they should be competing for the services of those people? I think this is a matter that should be looked at.

There is a further aspect that also bothers one, and this is when one looks at road building programmes. There is a shortage of people to build roads, and this too is a sphere in which all three levels of government are involved. We are in fact faced with a shortage of staff, and we have to train staff. Now I ask myself: Should we not take another look at this? The solution is not merely to increase benefits and adjust salaries. To me, the solution lies in the fact that we shall have to look at the situation afresh. There are too many laws, regulations and by-laws, and we can definitely do away with some of them. For instance, there is a sphere such as the building industry, in which the third level of government is involved as well. There are certain aspects of the industry which affect the factory inspectors, for instance. Before a building plan can be approved, the report on that aspect must be referred to three different departments before it can be approved. These are just a few ideas that I should like to put to the hon. the Minister so that they can be looked at in order to relieve our problems with regard to the manpower shortage.

I should like to raise another matter this afternoon, viz. the question of close liaison between the three levels of government as well as on the officials level. On the Public Service level, a lack of close liaison definitely leads to frustration. Since we are exerting pressure on people to be productive, I should like to state this afternoon that a frustrated person can never be a productive one. It is impossible. There is competition with regard to salaries. For instance, one may have certain cases where people are employed in the first or second level of Government, and then there is competition with regard to the salaries. I think that this too is a matter which must be looked at. There was a point of contact between the local Government and the central Government, at which the second level of government was included. That point of contact was the salary of the town clerk. However, with the rationalization, we have the problem that that point of contact has fallen away completely. I think it is important that we should have that point of contact once again, because it would be in the interest of the country to join up the three levels of government, wherever possible, in order to conserve manpower—and to put it to optimal use.

Mr. Chairman, at the outset I wish to support the hon. member for Stilfontein regarding his remarks about the civil servants. I believe they are an essential part of our system and that as such they should be treated with the respect one would like to receive oneself. About that I do not think there can be any doubt.

The annual report of the Commission for Administration makes, I believe, very interesting reading. I should like to refer to Part I of the report and specifically to the section under the heading “The personnel position in the Public Service” on page 5 of the report. In part it reads—

It goes on to say—

The last-mentioned fact I shall refer to later. It is quite apparent that the problem has not been solved notwithstanding the reorganization, higher salaries, better housing subsidies, improved pensions and the introduction of a service bonus scheme as from 1 April 1980. I believe the department should be congratulated on the special feature it has introduced, namely that 7% of the service bonuses are deposited into the civil servants’ Civil Pensions Stabilization Account which has been introduced for the sole purpose of using those funds to provide better civil pensions. I believe that this is a very good measure which is to be commended in respect of pensions.

However, the overall position as regards attracting staff to the Public Service has not improved at all. In fact, it has deteriorated. Various reasons have been put forward for the personnel position. One thing it has been put down to is the general shortage of skilled manpower in the country on the one hand and the economic boom during the year under review on the other hand. A further reason advanced in the report is the following (page 7)—

That may well be. Having regard to the aspects mentioned before, viz. higher salaries, the service bonus scheme, improved pensions and improved working conditions, I do not believe that the question of salaries in all instances is the reason why the necessary staff is not being attracted to the Public Service. I believe that there are many other reasons which the Commission for Administration has not yet been able to put its finger on. In this regard the recent elections showed us two distinct moves, one to the right and the other to the left of the Government’s present position. Quite obviously, then, there is a general unhappiness about the general attitude of the Government and the direction it appears to be taking, or not to be taking. Obviously I am not in a position to put my finger on reasons why the Public Service is not attracting staff, but I may just add in passing that in a speech made by the hon. member for Rissik on 2 June 1980 he made some statements which I found thought-provoking. I quote him (column 7746)—

Fair comment. I read on—

This, as I have said, may or may not have an effect on the position of staff and also on the resignation of a fair amount of the senior staff.

Added also is the very interesting note that advancement in the Civil Service is now on a merit basis only, which, I respectfully suggest, may not have been the position a few years ago.

We are coming now to the alternate sources of labour and I quote—

I submit with respect that the 1970 census figure showed us that there was a total married White population of 849 000, of which 240 000 were either in employment or seeking employment. The 1980 census figure shows us that there has been an increase in the White married population, which now brings the total to 1 083 000. The figures in respect of those being in employment or seeking employment are not yet available. I do suggest, however, that if there were tax reforms—major tax reforms—in respect of married women, we would see greater numbers of married women seeking employment, not only in industry and commerce but more specifically in the civil service, for the simple reason that the hours and the conditions of service are, in my opinion, far more attractive.

We also come to the position of the non-Whites and the number of posts that have been created for them, and we look at it percentage-wise. The figure given in the report reflects an increase from 47,7% to 53,6% during the period 30 June 1975 to date. It also states, as I have said, that it is significant that larger number of non-Whites in the categories higher than the unskilled and semi-skilled classes, are being utilized.

I should want to refer now to the comment made earlier in which it was said that 75% of the posts are filled by personnel who comply with the minimum requirements for appointment. While more posts have been created the figures tell us they have not been filled, and the main reason for this is that the educational qualification for appointment to a clerical post—which, I am led to believe, is matric—still prevails. We certainly do not want to drop the standard of service provided by civil servants. Having said this, however, we also accept that tremendous strides are being made in the field of non-White education. I believe that the Government is now trying to make good its omissions in the past. It is nevertheless going to take a long time for the position to reach parity, if it will ever happen. This leads me to believe that we may well find in order to fill certain posts in the lower categories may well force the level of education to be dropped in respect of certain categories of jobs in order to allow those who hold matric to move further up the ladder and to accept greater responsibilities.

I should like to refer now to rationalization of legislation, to which reference is made on page 7 of the report. I quote—

I should like to take this opportunity of asking the hon. the Minister to spell this out in more detail. I should also want to ask him if discriminatory measures are included in this rationalization programme.

If I may now deal briefly with statistics, I should like to point out that anyone who is in business finds that he is getting two to three statistical forms to complete every year. I should like to ask the hon. the Minister to give us an approximate time factor indicating the time lapse between a decision being taken by the department to ask for statistics and the time the forms have been completed and returned, and the information contained therein assessed and publicized, because I find that in many instances it may well happen that by the time the statistics are published they are already out of date. Added to the fact that a lot of these statistics are causing extra expense, especially to the small companies, and in larger companies extra staff have to be employed to fill in these forms, it is important that this time factor should be given priority consideration.

Finally I should just like to ask the hon. the Minister for an explanation regarding the real position of the controversial household and fertility surveys. I do believe that it was rather audacious—if I may say so—to inflict upon the South African public the crudity of a fertility and contraceptive survey, which was gazetted and carried out. The proviso that penalties would be incurred in the case of women who preferred to keep their most private practices private, I think, was a matter of gross insensitivity, and while we all accept that it is generally conceded that the penalties would not be applied, I do believe that the hon. the Minister should give some explanation in this regard. I also accept that the latter measure was withdrawn, but I still appeal to the hon. the Minister to clarify the position in respect of that particular survey.

Mr. Chairman, before I deal with the contributions of those hon. members who participated in the discussion, for which I should at this stage like to express my sincere thanks in advance, there are a few matters I should like to bring to the attention of this House.

To begin with, we are unfortunately in the position that one of the members of the Commission for Administration, Mr. Harold van Vuuren, has informed us that he is retiring on pension at the end of this year. This is a great loss to the commission, and I should like to place on record our great appreciation for the services Mr. Van Vuuren rendered to the Public Service. Mr. Van Vuuren was a member of the Commission for Administration for three years and served in the Public Service for a total of 37 years. He was born in Willowmore and began his Public Service career on 1 November 1944 in the Department of Justice. He served in various magistrate’s offices, as well as the head office of the Department of Justice. It was in the legislation section of that department in particular that Mr. Van Vuuren left his mark and came to our attention as an official whose work was of such a particularly outstanding quality, that it was praised in this House on various occasions, even by hon. members of the Opposition. One departmental head told us that Mr. Van Vuuren’s work was among the very best he had ever seen. In April 1968 Mr. Van Vuuren was promoted to Deputy Secretary of the former Department of Welfare and Pensions and on 1 August 1970 to Secretary. Nine years later, on 1 August 1979, he was appointed a member of the Commission for Administration. We are sorry to take leave of him but we want it placed on record that we greatly appreciate his long career of excellent service, for which we are extremely grateful to him, and we wish him everything of the best for the future. I am almost tempted to say he is still too young to retire but we do not begrudge him some well-earned relaxation—I shall not say “rest” because that sounds a little strange.

It also gives me pleasure to announce that the State President has appointed Mr. J. W. A. van der Merwe, the Director-General of Internal Affairs, to be a member of the Commission for Administration in place of Mr. Van Vuuren. Mr. Van der Merwe is a man with wide experience in the Public Service. He worked for five years with the former Department of Agriculture and after that he served on the Public Service Commission for 17 years. On 1 July 1975 he was promoted to Provincial Secretary for Natal. During 1980 he was seconded to the office of the Administrator General in South West Africa and on 1 April 1980 he became the Director-General of Internal Affairs. I should like to avail myself of this opportunity to congratulate him on this achievement and also to express the hope that our co-operation in this connection will also be extremely good—as a matter of fact I am sure it will be.

At the same time it is with regret that we take leave of Dr. Willem Steyn, the Secretary for the Commission for Administration. As hon. members know, Dr. Steyn has been appointed Provincial Secretary for the Transvaal with effect from 1 October of this year. The hon. member for Gezina has already referred to this and I should like to associate myself with the good wishes he expressed. Dr. Steyn began his Public Service career in 1956 in the training division of the former office of the Public Service Commission. There he progressed to Director of Public Service Training. On 1 March 1974 he was promoted to Chief Public Service Inspector. On 1 October 1975 he took over the reins as Secretary to the Commission and now, after a period of 25 years in the office of the commission during which he excelled on many occasions and in many ways, we are compelled to take leave of him. We do this with regret. It is not pleasant to lose Dr. Steyn, but we do not begrudge him to the Transvaal and we shall follow his career there with interest. We should like to wish him and his wife everything of the best in his new sphere of responsibility.

It is also appropriate that I refer to Dr. Steyn’s successor, who is Mr. G. B. S. van Zyl. He will be the new Secretary to the Commission for Administration. I should like to congratulate him sincerely and in the same breath say there was actually only one man who was considered for this position and that was Mr. Van Zyl. We congratulate him sincerely on his appointment, and I am absolutely convinced that the co-operation between him, the commission and myself will be sincere and fruitful. We therefore convey our good wishes to him.

The hon. member for Johannesburg North kicked off in this debate. I am glad he spoke in a slightly different vein than he did during the censure debate. I do not wish to refer back to that. The hon. member for Gezina commented on it and I associate myself with his comments. In the course of my observations I shall refer to the contributions hon. members made, but allow me to begin by referring to a few matters of more general interest.

I wish to begin by referring to the Public Servants’ Association, which was seized upon by the hon. member for Johannesburg North during the censure debate in order to place me in an embarrassing position. As regards the Public Servants’ Association I wish to emphasize that the executive body of that association and the members of the association itself in so far as I have had contact with them, are reasonable and responsible people who are trying to negotiate the best conditions of service for their members. There is no fault to find with that. The question is: What is the best bargaining machinery for the Public Servants’ Association, the Public Service and the Government? We are looking into this.

It goes without saying that those members will expect the best results from their executive body which represents them and that that body will want to demonstrate that it acted in their interests and achieved the necessary results. The Public Servants’ Association is at present on a very good footing with the Commission for Administration. As a matter of fact, the Commission for Administration is the body through which they address their representations. This is the body to which they deliver the inputs in the interests of their members. There is very good co-operation between the Commission for Administration and the executive body of the Public Servants’ Association.

I wish to say further that the members of the executive body of the Public Servants’ Association are welcome in my office and it is because they are and have always been welcome that they came to see me. The Public Servants’ Association is aware—and that is why they did so—that they are following the correct procedure by turning to the Commission for Administration in the first place. That is how things should be done—-in the orderly manner. However, there is no harm in receiving them and listening to them and in my turn holding discussions with the Commission for Administration on the representations brought to my attention by the Public Servants’ Association.

I also wish to say that the hon. the Prime Minister has kindly agreed to receive and listen to members of the Public Servants’ Association, being fully aware what the royal way, the correct procedure is. He has kindly agreed to receive them. I asked him to receive them. He has agreed and that interview will take place soon. The hon. the Prime Minister agreed as a gesture of goodwill.

The fact of the matter is that the Public Servants Association has also experienced the power of attraction of the private sector on their members. Comparisons are made, as hon. members also indicated here. This is a matter which affects both the association and ourselves. The case of a public servant with a salary of between R10 000 and R11 000 a year who receives an offer from the private sector for a salary of R18 000 plus a free motor-car, sketches the problem for us. This is an official with a specific salary. He gets an offer from outside which means that he will have in excess of 75% more in his pocket than the salary he is receiving in the Public Service and a free motor-car to boot. Surely that person cannot refuse such an offer! The result is that there is one less person in the Public Service. I shall return to this matter later.

The attack on the Government regarding the staff position in the Public Service makes one wonder whether hon. members are being fair in their criticism. Let me put it this way. I should like to ask hon. members on that side of the House: What is their contribution and the contribution of their friends and of their friends who are active in the private sector to the staff in the Public Service? What is their contribution?

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition referred in a speech already quoted in this House—I am referring now to the speech he made in Bonn—to the Public Service and the Public Service’s involvement with the Government. He went on to refer to the Afrikaans-speaking members who constitute 80% of the staff of the Public Service. I am still not sure exactly what he wished to achieve by this, but what it amounts to as a statement of fact is that some of our English-speaking friends do not choose the Public Service as a career and turn to the private sector. I am not saying this in a derogatory way and not in a reproachful way either, but if it is a fact, hon. members must not reproach us in this House that this is the percentage composition of the Public Service if people from the other language group do not make the same percentage contribution to the Public Service.

Another fact is that two-thirds of those who were asked to indicate why they were leaving the Public Service said that it was because of inadequate salaries. If we are referring to inadequate salaries I must point out that the hon. member for Johannesburg North implied in the course of his speech during the censure debate already that that was now my responsibility. It is the responsibility of the Government which decides after the Commission for Administration, the Treasury and other bodies have listened to the entire spectrum of inputs—i.e. has taken the position of all departments into consideration. The representations made by the Commission of Administration, incorporating the representations made by the Public Servants’ Association, are being considered. After the Government has considered everything in its correct perspective, it comes to a decision on the salary improvements it will approve and which will be paid to officials. It is therefore not the responsibility of one man; it is the responsibility of the entire Government.

The dilemma we are faced with—this is a dilemma hon. members have already pointed out—is the dilemma of unprecedented economic growth. The hon. member for Johannesburg North and other hon. members referred to this. Briefly the dilemma is this: The prosperity of the private sector is also the prosperity of the country. That is why I said that we did not reproach the prosperity of the private sector; the country’s economic prosperity is involved with this and benefits from it. Consequently we do not refer in a derogatorily to the successes in the private sector. In addition the prosperity of the private sector is indispensable to the Treasury. I am speaking as a layman now, but I think this is of benefit to the Treasury from which the salaries of the public servants must be paid. However this is only one aspect of the dilemma.

The other aspect is that in its turn the Government must establish the necessary infrastructure to allow the private sector to utilize the period of growth which there is to best advantage. That is where the problem lies. On the one hand the Government machinery must work, but for it to be able to work there must be people doing the work so that the private sector can make its contribution to the economy. Of course this makes great demands on the staff of the Public Service.

The private sector relies on the same source of manpower for its staff as does the State. If I remember correctly this is more or less also the position in regard to churches, where use is made of the pastoral call system. If there are too few ministers and the congregation must issue a call, the ministers are kept in circulation as a result of the fact that there are too few of them. In this way manpower is kept in circulation between the Government and the private sector because there are too few people to meet the demand. The demand reflects a kind of tug-of-war between the various sectors.

If it is true that in certain cases the private sector pays an official with more or less comparable qualifications between 30% and 35% more, it goes without saying that if there are attractions in the private sector for people in the Public Service, an official will find it very hard to refuse an offer from the private sector which will benefit him, which offers him a salary which is 35% and in some respects 100% better than in the Public Service. I should just like to point out that if one were to make the salaries of public servants equal to that of persons in the private sector and thus eliminate the 35% difference this would mean an immediate increase of R1½ billion, because it costs R45 million for each percentage difference one has to eliminate.

I should now like to refer in particular to the staff position because this is the major issue that was raised here. The fact of the matter is that the Public Service does not attract a satisfactory percentage of the skilled manpower in South Africa. A second fact is that on average the vacancies in the Public Service total about 21%, which is 58% more than in 1980. This is a perturbing figure, but it is nevertheless true. In the technical division the vacancies total 29,2%, and the total loss in staff members during the past year was 2 600. Having said all this and calculated the impact on the Public Service, I still wish to make an appeal against this background. In the first place I feel we can do better than to dramatize the staff position of the Public Service in the public media. I do not mean that it should not be mentioned, but dramatization of this aspect is taking place, which I do not think is to the benefit of the Public Service or the country.

Censorship.

No, this has nothing to do with censorship; it is simply a matter of ordinary level-headedness.

In the second place I am asking that we should not demoralize the available staff with unilateral crisis talk and make them despondent with negative criticism. Do not turn our officials into a political football. Some of the hon. members said here that they represented public servants. The hon. member for Bezuidenhout said they were represented by all members of Parliament. However, hon. members have spoken on behalf of their own constituencies where many of their voters are public servants, and they therefore represent those voters.

So do I.

Very well. But we did not claim that privilege for ourselves. Let us express our appreciation for the officials who are making such an important contribution to the welfare of the whole of South Africa. They ensure good administration, although there are shortcomings. They ensure that an infrastructure is created by the Government within which the private sector can make its essential contribution to the development of this country. I should like to convey an unqualified word of thanks to those officials who keep the administration of the country going. I wish to convey a word of thanks to those officials who worked 8½ million hours of unpaid overtime during the past year. Moreover, I wish to thank officials who qualified for overtime payment and other officials who worked 3 million hours overtime.

The big question is: What are we doing in connection with the staff position? Earlier in the session I raised certain points and spoke inter alia, about the use of the available sources of labour, for example the use of women as an integral part of our labour force. Interestingly enough, 67,6% of all appointments on a permanent basis during the past year were women, compared with 65% the previous year and 63% the year before that.

In addition there is the utilization of the services of women on a part-time basis However I do not wish to say anything further about this matter. Nor do I wish to tire this House with further details of the employment of non-Whites. At the beginning of the year, in Hansard, column 296 I referred to the employment of non-Whites. Perhaps for purposes of comparison I should add a few more statistics. Let us consider the economically active part of the population and see what percentage of them are in the Public Service. Of the 1 888 000 Whites who form the economically active part of the population, including agriculture, 498 602 are in Government employ. This is a percentage of 26,4. However, it is only 11% of the total White population.

Of the economically active coloured population of 845 000, 144 279 are in Government employ. This represents 17,1% of the economically active Coloured population, and only 5,7% of the total Coloured population.

For Asians the figure is even smaller. Only 10,5% of their economically active population is in Government employ, including agriculture. For Black people the figure is 9,5% of the economically active population. The deduction I wish to make is that the Coloureds, Asians and Blacks have a backlog as regards their contribution compared with their total population and their economically active population. In other words there is still room for a larger percentage of them to enter Government employ.

One can also do various other things. But the question hon. members are asking is what is being done about the staff position. In 1979 the Government decided to make a renewal in staff administration part of a programme of rationalization of Government activities. The Commission for Administration is giving close attention to the entire staff set-up. Hon. members are now asking what is being done. The hon. member for Durban Point spoke about pen-pushing public servants. I think this is a little derogatory, a little too derogatory.

I did not refer to them in that manner. I said that was the attitude of the Government.

Perhaps I can give the hon. member a little information on what the attitude of the Government in fact is. I have already said that the Commission for Administration is giving close attention to the entire staff set-up. For this a development programme has been accepted in which all the major development projects are incorporated. This is already under way. Priorities are being ascertained for the meeting of these development needs.

There are three matters in particular which are of importance. A thorough investigation is being instituted into the role and the staffing of the personnel sections of departments, and the recommendations in this connection have been accepted. This work has already been completed. The staff in the personnel sections has been restructured and the selection and training of personnel functionaries is now taking place. This is already being done. It is expected that the change will bring about great renewal in personnel functions. In the second place the Commission for Administration has committed itself to transferring greater powers at staff level to the departments. This will probably bring about changes in the Public Service Act, but the commission has committed itself to imparting greater managerial self-sufficiency to the departments. This will mean that there will be shorter lines of communication, and this means that if there is red tape it will be eliminated and work will therefore be disposed of more rapidly. This also means that it will be possible for departments themselves to make appointments within departments up to a certain level. The commission will act as a guide and undertake inspections in those departments.

I do not wish to refer hon. members to the improvement in the housing subsidy scheme again. I referred to this aspect during the censure debate. However, I wish merely to add that at present there are approximately 200 incentive schemes in operation. Approximately 9 500 workers are doing the work which would normally have been done by 14 000 and they are doing this without sacrificing quality. I can for example refer hon. members to the work being done by the Department of Statistics where people are being employed on a part-time basis. With incentive wages the achievements are 140% as compared with the normal achievement. This saving alone represents R15 million. Another example I could mention is the office of the Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner with an establishment of 432 posts. The activities in that office have increased by 80% since 1963, but with the bonus incentive scheme there has been no increase in the size of the establishment. These are facts.

There is also the simplification of procedures and methods. With the aid of the work study divisions, 271 posts were phased out in 1979 and the creation of 314 new posts were avoided as a result of the savings programme which was put into operation. I can also refer to the word processors, on which there was a programme on television. Word processors are being used to overcome the shortage of typists. In that way productivity was increased by between 20% and 40%. We also have the system of electronic computers to do routine work and intricate designing and planning tasks. If all the work in the Public Service were to be done by people, i.e. without these computers, we would have needed 20 000 additional working units.

I now come to the question of remuneration. This is a difficult problem. This afternoon I should like to give this House the assurance that no stone is being left unturned in an effort to ensure the officials of the best service benefits. However, hon. members will all understand that this must be within the limits set by economic and financial realities. We already have the occupational differentiation scheme, in terms of which certain occupational groups are singled out because there are particular problems in that area, in an effort to overcome those problems. If an investigation is undertaken and a report is published, the recommendations can be implemented immediately if there are funds available. In addition to the occupational differentiation scheme it is the policy of the Government for a general salary adjustment to be made once a year. Such an adjustment brings more order, and prevents a see-saw effect between various departments. It also brings greater satisfaction. There is a special Vote which covers salary improvements. To ascertain these improvements calls for a process of assessment to determine what the salary adjustments for the Public Service should be.

This is the procedure in connection with which the Public Servants’ Association supplied its input. They repeatedly submitted proposals. Those proposals have far-reaching implications for the general remuneration structure and I can say that the in-depth investigation needed for this, is at present under way and that we expect the report within the next few months. This is an investigation into the general remuneration structure of public servants. To the hon. member who asked me whether I have set a time limit, I wish to say that we expect this report within the next few months.

I do not wish to say anything further about occupational differentiation. I had already referred to it. There is, as I have said, a separate Vote for salary adjustments. Let me say in passing that since the separate Vote was introduced in 1979 there have been annual improvements for our public servants. In 1979 the improvements totalled R257 million; in 1980 R503,5 million and in 1981, R745 million. This means salary improvements totalling R1,5 billion in three years. This means an improvement of almost 96% between 1979 and 1980 and of 48% between 1980 and 1981, and an average improvement of 63,5% in the salary position. I do not wish to compare this with the consumer price index, because if one wishes to be unpopular nowadays one must tell people they are better off than ever before and that they have no reason to complain. I shall therefore not place myself in that position, except to say that everything possible is being done, bearing in mind the country’s economic situation, the tax situation and all the other factors, to create the best possible dispensation for our public servants.

I wish to make a few brief observations in connection with rationalization. In the first place I wish to say that we also have staff shortages here. This means that the process of rationalization is perhaps not being completed quite as rapidly as is necessary. There is an undersupply of staff for the starting ranks. There is also a lack of suitable accommodation for those departments whose functions have already been rationalized but whose staff cannot all immediately be accommodated in the same building. For example we still find that one department is being housed in seven different buildings. Nevertheless there has been progress in this connection.

Hon. members also referred to the legislative programme, to the repealing of obsolete legislation, etc. I should like to say that we have made considerable progress as regards the rationalization of legislation. Various old agricultural laws, for example, are being repealed in the near future. At present 34 laws are being investigated. This is the process of rationalization of legislation which is under way. As regards the Department of Finance, eight laws have already been repealed. As regards the Police, the rationalization of legislation has already been completed. As regards the Department of National Education, two laws have already been repealed, while it has been recommended that 17 others be repealed and two be consolidated into one. The process is therefore under way. As regards the Department of Justice, eight laws will be repealed in the near future, while 31 will be transferred to other departments. This is part of the rationalization process. In the Department of Water Affairs, Forestry and Environmental Conservation it is expected that about 10 of the 49 laws will have been repealed by 1983. This indicates the measure of success we are achieving with rationalization. As regards the Department of Education and Training, one law has been transferred to the Department of Manpower, while all the regulations of the Department of Education and Training have been amalgamated into one set. This is rationalization. It has been recommended that two laws relating to the Department of Industries be repealed, and a further two will also be repealed within a year. As regards the Department of Manpower it is general knowledge that all legislation involving that department is being revised and where necessary consolidated.

Certain hon. members referred to functions which could be transferred to the private sector. This is receiving careful attention, and results have also been achieved in this connection. Examples of this are that two sawmills belonging to the Department of Water Affairs, Forestry and Environmental Conservation have been transferred to the private sector. Research into timber technology has been incorporated into the CSIR. The Department of Education and Training has transferred work to the value of approximately R70 million per annum to the private sector. The repair of police vehicles has been transferred to the private sector. I could continue in this way to enumerate a diversity of things.

In conclusion I should like to refer to the contributions made by hon. members. In connection with what the hon. member for Johannesburg North said I merely wish to mention that the number of vacancies he referred to—he spoke of 17 000—amounts to 9 964 according to the Commission’s annual report for the 1979-’80 year under review. This is the number of vacancies as far as Whites are concerned. The hon. member spoke specifically about Whites. [Interjections.]

Perhaps I should point out to the hon. member for Johannesburg North that he need not always believe everything that appears in the newspapers. There are some things he should take with a pinch of salt. I am saying this as a former newspaper editor. [Interjections.]

As regards the expansion of the Public Service, the hon. member mentioned the figure of 6%. However if he takes the facts into account, the position can be summarized as follows: The increase in staff for providing the non-Whites with education alone is 7 264, and this is part of the aforementioned 6%. In the case of health and welfare services the figure is 1 757, and in connection with protective services, 1 215. The grand total is therefore 10 236. This is the numerical increase in these posts alone, and this constitutes 70% of the total increase of 6%. I am mentioning this for interest’s sake only and to draw the attention of the hon. members to it.

The hon. member went on to refer to the Hoexter Commission report. I believe I can safely leave this matter to the hon. the Minister of Justice. Meanwhile I could perhaps just refer the hon. member to an announcement made by the hon. the Minister of Justice last week in which the position was set out. The fact of the matter is that the report to which the hon. member referred is rather outdated. Because of the short session earlier this year, the report could not be tabled at the time. The information contained in it is therefore out of date and steps have been taken in the meanwhile. According to our information the outflow has to a large extent been stemmed and there might even have been a stabilization of the position in the Department of Justice. I do not wish to say more about this matter. I refer the hon. member to the statement made last week in this connection.

As regards the investigation which is in progress in connection with collective bargaining on the part of public servants, I merely wish to point out that the matter has not been referred to a commission of inquiry. The Commission for Administration is undertaking the investigation itself. As I have already said, progress is being made in this connection.

I wish to thank the hon. member for Gezina for his contribution. I also thank him for his good wishes to both Dr. Steyn and Mr. Van Vuuren. I believe he has already replied effectively to certain facets of the speech made by the hon. member for Johannesburg North. The hon. member referred to the outflow of public servants to the private sector. I have also discussed this. The question of parity with the Railways and the Department of Posts and Telecommunications is receiving attention. There is also a degree of co-ordination between the Public Service in the narrower sense and those departments in order to ensure that there is not unnecessary competition for manpower in certain sectors.

The hon. member for Innesdal made a plea for the transfer of certain Government functions to the private sector. I have already referred to a few examples of this. I believe that the hon. member raised an important argument. I wish to thank both him and the hon. member for Gezina for their contributions. As I have said, the Commission for Administration, by means of its function-orientated investigation, is examining all the possibilities for the transfer of further functions to the private sector.

†The hon. member for Durban Point spoke on behalf of the public servants and pleaded for the idea of collective bargaining for them. This matter is under investigation and we hope that in the near future, in a matter of months, we shall have a report in this connection. I think the hon. member will realize that this is something of a sensitive nature and that one has to consider all the implications of collective bargaining.

Did the Wiehahn Commission not look at that and make recommendations?

Perhaps I might just add that it is necessary to have all the different viewpoints on the matter. I think the hon. member must find an answer for himself on this question: Does he want that sort of bargaining in the Public Service? It is something different. I maintain that it is some-what different from the position in other spheres of labour.

*I think the position of a public servant is a more sensitive one for the State, not the Government, than is the case in the rest of the labour sphere. I think it is necessary to consider all the implications in this regard.

The question of Defence and the Police is a matter we are looking into. I made a note of this. I think we can exchange ideas in this connection in the future.

The hon. member for Koedoespoort did his homework in connection with rationalization well and we associate ourselves with his expression of thanks to the Commission for Administration and our public servants. I have already said a few words on rationalization, and I feel I have done justice to the subject.

The hon. member for Stilfontein also emphasized a very important matter, and that was the effect of the levelling off which could occur in the economy and the consequences of this for the public service, with more people turning to the Public Service for employment, whereas if you have economic prosperity and there is limited man power at your disposal you are looking at the same pool of human material and then there is an oversupply as regards salaries and the like from the private sector. I should like to associate myself with the good word he put in for the public servants.

The same applies to the hon. member for Witbank, who warned against politicizing the Public Service. As regards vertical rationalization, rationalization of legislation, etc., I have already replied to this in part. I may just add that the Commission for Administration is in the throes of negotiations, for example with the provincial administrations and also at a local level, to see if we can get better co-ordination and whether certain functions dealt with by both the central authority and the provincial authorities cannot be amalgamated by means of a function-orientated approach. That investigation is already under way. Discussions are under way. There is also the question of a legal division for every department. At present this is not only receiving the attention of the Government but also of the Commission for Administration.

The hon. member for South Coast referred to certain matters. I should like to refer to one in particular and that is the investigation into fertility. The position was briefly as follows: There was a similar investigation in 1976, and nothing happened. There was no outcry; there were no newspaper reports and no crisis situation. At that stage more or less the same investigation was undertaken; information was gathered and no one said a word about it. What happened in this case is that when the investigation was about three quarters complete, certain newsmen got hold of it and in the province the hon. member comes from the newsmen began to kick up a fuss about the matter. This blew across to Pretoria, to the centre page of a Pretoria newspaper and the impression was created that this was a so-called sex-probe. I wish to say that this is a very sensitive matter because the questions asked are sensitive questions. However the crux of the matter did not merely involve obtaining the information. This information was to enable us to make certain population projections for the future so that we need not rely only on statistics dealing with births, deaths, age, etc. You can then rely on certain data on marriage, contraception and the like. These particulars are considered necessary.

I also wish to say that this is an investigation undertaken in many countries in the world but it is done in a delicate way. In this case it was also undertaken in a delicate way until certain newsmen emphasized certain questions and people began to make telephone calls. Then it was said it was not proper to ask people those kind of questions. I believe this is a new form of obscenity. What I mean by this is that these are things which were never intended to be brought out in the open. But these matters were brought out in the open to draw the attention of the country to them. These delicate questions were handled in this way. The fact of the matter is that trained nurses were directed to undertake this task in a neat and refined way and to choose their respondents. If there were people who were not prepared to co-operate they were not forced to do so, but unfortunately the penalty clause appeared in that questionnaire. The Secretary for Statistics, Mr. Louw, however, immediately made a statement in this connection to explain that for the sake of formality, as is the case in all commissions of this kind, this clause appears in the questionnaire but no one is forced to answer the questions. Peoples’ names are kept secret and there is strict confidentiality.

The position should have been clarified at the outset.

That is all I have to say regarding this matter. At this stage then, with my sincere thanks to all the colleagues who took part in this discussion and our good wishes to our officials, I shall let what I have said suffice.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to lend my support to the appropriations under the Statistics vote. My motivation for doing so is the statement that the department is performing a valuable and indispensable task in commendable fashion.

As a new member I spent some time paging through the Hansard of previous debates in order to acquaint myself with the tenor of the contributions which have been made under this Vote, and I noticed that irrespective of their party affiliations, hon. members who spoke in the past did so—without exception, as far as I could ascertain—very appreciatively and commended the task of the Department of Statistics and the way in which it was carried out. There may be two reasons for this. I believe that the one may involve the people in the department who have to do the work and the other, the nature of the work done in this department. As far as the people are concerned, a considerable number of them are statisticians. I myself am a mathematician and I am acquainted with this kind of person. I believe that they are people who do their work with immaculate precision and that they display a strong professionalism. As far as the nature of their work is concerned, as regards the statistics, I believe that the following statement by F. H. la Guardia is valid—

Furthermore it is significant that usually only two members participate in the discussion of this Vote every year. I do not believe that this is because so little work is done by the Department of Statistics, and indeed I want to indicate this afternoon the scope of that department’s work and how well it is being performed. A vast number of tasks have to be performed before it is possible to publish statistical tables, diagrams and census results. It is more likely to be a case of hon. members refraining from saying too much about figures, because as General Charles H. Grosvenor once said—

No statistics organization can function effectively without a Statistics Act which prescribes the statistical functions. This department functions under the Statistics Act, 1976 (Act 66 of 1976). The department collects, processes and publishes information. There are three important provisions in the Act which one must bear in mind. Firstly, they may collect statistics on any subject concerning which the Minister of Statistics issues a directive. Secondly, it is the case that the Act compels respondents to furnish the statistical data. The third point is that the Act protects the people who furnish the statistics, for secrecy is compulsory.

The provision of meaningful statistics must necessarily be closely linked to the demand for them. There must necessarily be a need for specific statistics; there may, of course, be an existing need or a need anticipated in future. The reason for this is that statistics which are made available must indeed be used. Due to his qualifications the statistician must be acquainted with the demand for statistics and must be able to provide what may be necessary for the future.

Basically the department undertakes two kinds of surveys, viz. periodic surveys and short-term surveys. I briefly want to quote a few statistics in order to indicate the extent of the work involved in carrying out these surveys.

As far as periodic surveys are concerned, the following task was envisaged for 1981: The collecting of 245 800 surveys, the checking of information from more than 22 million respondents, the writing of 656 computer programmes, the evaluation of 1 851 tables, the release of 44 news reports and the writing of 54 reports. As far as short-term surveys are concerned, the task for 1981 comprises, inter alia, the following: The collecting and checking of approximately 6,7 million returns, the release of 644 news reports and seven reports.

To further illustrate the scope of activities, it may be pointed out that 30 different questionnaires are used for the Consumer Price Index every month, and prices of 600 different items are collected. 12 000 returns are received every year and 250 000 price quotations are obtained. For the calculation of the index of the physical volume of manufacturing production, 80 different questionnaires are used every month and information is collected in respect of 2 000 items, while 3 400 respondents are approached for information every month.

Quite apart from the above-mentioned activities and publications, the results of monthly and quarterly surveys are repeated in the Bulletin of Statistics and the publication Short-term Economic Indicators. Four quarterly editions of the Bulletin of Statistics are compiled and published.

Since the statistical field covers such a wide range of subjects in the national economy, there is a need among various users of statistics for summarized information which provides an overall picture of the nature, the scope and in particular the trend of activities of various sectors of the community. In order to meet this need, the publication Statistics in Brief is issued in February each year.

A further publication which is issued every month by the department, is Economic Review. Every month 125 series are analysed and 81 graphs are brought up to date for this review, which is compiled by the National Accounts and Finance Branch. I came across an interesting remark which a certain L. Wittgenstein made in respect of statistics. He said: “Don’t ask what it means, but rather how it is used”. Any Department of Statistics has a definite task with regard to information on the use of statistics. To illustrate the incorrect use of statistics—there is a real danger that statistics can be used incorrectly—I shall mention a case where the simple concept of an arithmetical average was dragged in incorrectly. This is a report of the case of a man who drowned in a river with an average depth of 10 cm. Andrew Lang also referred to a person who transgressed in this respect and said: “He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts—for support rather than illumination.”

I also want to refer to the recently completed 1980 population census. Hon. members rightly said here this afternoon that one does not want old statistics, for old statistics give one a picture of the history of the industry, and one wants the status quo of the industry reflected in statistics. With a view to making certain data available as soon as possible, test samples of 5% of the returns were drawn and processed. This provisional data is now being prepared for publication and will be available presently.

A provisional report on population group and sex on a basis of magisterial districts was published as far back as September 1980. A report being prepared at present will furnish population figures according to sex and population group for cities, towns and non-urban areas. All the results of the census will be available between July 1982 and March 1985. If one compares this to census in other countries, this is a rosy picture, in respect of the 1970 census as well. The final results of our 1970 census were published only in 1977. We have just had a census, the results of which will be published in 1985, in other words within five years, as opposed to the previous seven years. I consider it to be a gratifying trend that the final results are now being made available more quickly. As I said, the most important results are being made available at an earlier date on a test sample basis.

As a result of, inter alia, Black urbanization, the demography of South African society is changing rapidly, and consequently the Minister of Statistics has given his approval for another population census to be held on 5 March 1985 again. Certain statistics, based on 1980 census questions, are subject to slow change and will be valid until the 1990 census results are available.

According to the Statistics Act, a census must be held in each year ending on a nought, but the Minister is also authorized to issue any other instruction for an interim census.

However, other statistics are subject to rapid change in a rapidly developing country and only such questions will be included in the 1985 census questionnaire. Consequently there will be an abbreviated questionnaire in 1985. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, in the few minutes at my disposal I want to confine myself to a single remark and a few questions to the hon. the Minister. I am pleased to follow the hon. member for Pretoria East and I associate myself with what he has already mentioned.

In the first place I want to express my gratitude for the Government’s decision to allow a smaller kind of mini-census to take place every five years. The demands of the present-day ethnic structure and the problems resulting from the increase in numbers, make it imperative to have more recent data available. Concentrations of peoples, labour utilization and availability and growth potential in identified development axes can hardly be ascertained properly if the census data are not new and fresh. The importance and necessity of having this data as up to date as possible consequently justifies the expense such a census would entail. I am grateful that the hon. the Minister and the Government as a whole have not allowed themselves to be deterred by the cost aspect.

This then brings me to the recent census. A great deal of hard work is being done in processing the data gathered. We should like to know from the hon. the Minister when this data processing will be disposed of. The survey was carried out more than a year ago and I suspect that we shall shortly have the first results of these details available, and I should like to know from the hon. the Minister what the future expectations are in this regard.

This brings me to the remuneration of checkers. There are those who are available to do this checking during the mornings, i.e. on a half-day basis, and others who are available after hours. Quite apart from the normal remuneration, a system of bonus remuneration, to which the hon. the Minister referred a moment ago, is also being used. The more checking done, the greater the remuneration. It seems to me that this bonus remuneration will have to be extended as far as possible. It encourages checkers to work as productively as possible. In order to make this data available as soon as possible, I believe it is necessary for such an incentive bonus to be available so that checkers may work at full capacity. This could only mean the more rapid completion of work. Having said this, may I express the hope that we shall shortly have the processed data at our disposal in order to promote the planning we need to place our country on a sound basis.

Mr. Chairman, I request the privilege of the half-hour. It is indeed pleasant for me to be able to agree with the hon. member for Pretoria East and the hon. member for Gezina. I should, in the first instance, also just like to mention a few of the statements made by the hon. the Minister. Family planning is, of course, a very important subject. In that regard it was not, in my opinion, the survey as such that was the problem, but who actually undertook the survey. I think it should have been done by the Human Sciences Research Council or some private market research institute. I agree with the hon. member for Pretoria East that statistics is not a party political matter and that is the reason why he has never found any politics entering into this issue.

Let me tell the hon. member for Gezina that I shall be dealing with the matter of the census in the course of my speech, but I do agree with him about bonus remuneration.

The Department of Statistics appears to be the stepchild of this House when one considers the amount of time allocated for debate and the money budgeted for that department. Nevertheless every member, from the hon. the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance downwards, utilizes its information to support his case. The media and their various publications use the statistics provided to an ever-increasing degree.

Let me just indicate how important is the role of the statistical/economic review issued in conjunction with the budget, because the department has produced the very latest possible statistics which are very useful indeed. Whether the Department of Finance’s interpretation and presentation of those statistics really benefits South Africa or not cannot, however, be laid at the door of the hon. the Minister. The statistical services currently provided by both the Department of Statistics and the S.A. Reserve Bank compare favourably, in range and quality, with those in countries at a comparable stage of economic development. I would appreciate it if the hon. the Minister could inform us what co-ordination there is with the Reserve Bank to ensure that there is no duplication. Furthermore I should like to know if economy of manpower could not be effected if those two institutions made use of each other’s computers to expedite statistical processing.

In the budget debate I raised a number of points about the Department of Statistics, and I refer the hon. the Minister to Hansard, col. 1123. I apologize for the fact that my limited time does not allow me to repeat, in detail, what I have to say. His answer would, however, be greatly appreciated. The five points were: Firstly, the provision of figures which are as up to date as possible; secondly, the fact that the general public are usually not conversant with statistical and economic concepts; thirdly, the revision and updating of statistical series; fourthly, the provision of unbroken time series covering a long period of time and, fifthly, the very important point, viz. the access by both the private and public sector to a centralized computer data bank.

I should now like to deal with the population census of 1980. This census was conducted as long ago as 6 May 1980. More than a year has elapsed, and yet the amount of data published to date is minimal. In reply to question 129 this year, put by the hon. member for Yeoville, the hon. the Minister stated that the final date when computer tabulations would become available to users was September 1982. However, the publication will only take effect after mid-1985, by which time the data will be stale. Who are these so-called users? Why can this data not be made available on computer print out form for people to purchase without necessarily having to await publication? This data is urgently required by everybody, both in the public and in the private sectors. According to the hon. the Minister’s reply, even the sample tabulation will only become available in November 1981, almost a year after enumeration. We on this side of the House are well aware of the manpower problems in all State departments, but the real future planning of both the public and private sectors is dependent on the timeous supply of these population statistics. We believe that a large number of private computer companies should have been utilized to work out these statistics, then they would have appeared earlier. I implore the hon. the Minister to see whether he cannot use the services of such companies even at this stage in order to expedite the production of these results.

As far as the 1985 population census is concerned, I see that it is stated in the latest Statistical Report for 1980 that the Cabinet has approved of a population census in 1985 with a very much abridged questionnaire. We on this side of the House would like to know why, before the results of the 1980 census have been completed, it is now announced that only a five-year period will elapse. We should like to know whether anything went wrong with the 1980 census compilation. Is it necessary to have this census on the same basis? With regard to the 1985 census, we should like to know whether it is necessary to do a full census. Could not the same results be achieved on a properly compiled sampling basis?

I should now like to deal with the utilization of the expertise of the private sector. With the high degree of expertise of the members of the Statistical Advisory Council, the Statistical Society of South Africa, the universities and the various organizations in the private sector, it should be possible to devise a more up to date method to ensure the more rapid provision of results. I sincerely recommend to the hon. the Minister that, in conjunction with the statistical advisory council, he should as soon as possible convene a convention of statisticians where the private sector can meet the public sector to ensure the provision of essential statistics and the elimination of such programmes as are not required. I have spoken to a few professors of statistics of how to improve the official statistics, but their reply has been that my request to them is like asking a doctor to diagnose a disease and give a prescription over the telephone.

I should now like to deal with the consumer price index and its weighting pattern. This particular statistical provision is the main basis on which the country views the inflationary trends. All national economic adjustments—and the hon. the Minister has mentioned one, viz. wages and salaries—are based on this. There has been criticism, both in the Press and at various economic conferences, that the 1975 pattern is out of date. The statistical advisory council appears to have concluded that the slight improvement in accuracy does not justify the cost of a revision. Mr. Chairman, let me inform the hon. the Minister that the cost of such revision cannot be considered a factor because, if the consumer price index can provide the public and private sectors with a true indication of the ravages of inflation, our most serious economic disease can be properly studied at any time. I believe the hon. the Minister would be doing the country a great service if he called the type of conference mentioned earlier to deal specifically with this, so that an accurate consumer price index can be formulated.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to have dealt with valuable extensions to the present range of statistics provided by the Reserve Bank and the Department of Statistics but unfortunately the time at my disposal does not allow me to continue with this. I shall, however, hand my queries to the officials with the object of trying to get some answers to these matters.

I should like to say in conclusion that it is the interpretation of statistics that is most important. I would therefore like to quote Oliver Cromwell: “A few honest men are better than numbers.”

Mr. Chairman, in the few minutes at my disposal—it has been agreed that this debate be finalized within a certain time limit—I should like to try to react to hon. members’ speeches. The hon. member for Pretoria East is clearly an expert in this field and consequently he made a very valuable contribution. The hon. member for Gezina also brought a few matters to my attention. He wanted to know, inter alia, when the census data would be available. I should like to say something about that.

†The hon. member for Bezuidenhout has also made some very valuable recommendations. I cannot respond to all of them at the moment, but I promise the hon. member that I shall make a study of his speech and go into the matter to see which of the recommendations can be implemented. I shall give close attention to the recommendations the hon. member made.

*To begin with, I want to say in connection with the question of the recent census that the census data are being processed at present. The Government decided on a mini-census in 1980.

†I can tell the hon. member for Bezuidenhout that it is not a question of anything being wrong with the 1980 census data. However, certain data become obsolete and for that reason a new census is necessary within five years. I may tell the hon. member that this is also done in other countries, for example in Canada, New Zealand and Japan. I think that West Germany is also contemplating, for obvious reasons, having a mini-census every five years.

*To make a success of the census held in 1980, a publicity campaign was launched in advance. The services of consultants were used in this regard and the census covered all population groups. It is interesting to take note of certain data. 21 branch offices were opened in metropolitan areas, and 296 magistrates were involved in the process. Furthermore the following staff were used: 23 controllers, 15 assistant controllers, 654 temporary clerks, 2 599 chief enumerators, 27 774 enumerators, and 3 095 assistant enumerators. By means of this census approximately 7 million returns were collected from families and individuals.

With a view to making details available at an early date—hon. members want them at their disposal at an early date—a 5% test sample was drawn from the returns and processed. The provisional data with details in connection with age, profession, industry, education, income, religion, etc., is at present being prepared for publication. It is expected that the first publication, the report on age, will be made available as early as 1982 and that the other reports, too, will subsequently appear at regular intervals.

†I am well aware of the fact that the hon. member for Bezuidenhout expects these things to happen more rapidly.

I do not want that for myself. The country needs it.

Yes, the country needs it. That is true. The fact of the matter is, however, that it is done more rapidly now than in the past.

With the help of computers it can be done even faster now than ever before.

Yes, and we do take that into consideration.

*The complete processing of returns is being done with the assistance of 451 workers, mainly housewives, who work during the mornings. These are people who are achieving great things. They are being assisted by 475 after-hour workers. To date, 7 million individual returns relating to the Republic of South Africa out of an estimated 24 million have already been processed. Approximately 60 000 returns are at present being processed every day by the workers to whom I referred. Consequently it is expected that the processing of the returns will last for approximately another 11 months. It is true that the information is available, but its publication takes up a great deal of time. The information is available and can be put at the disposal of hon. members. Its processing into the form of a report takes up somewhat more time.

Tell the public that they can buy computer printouts. [Interjections.]

I shall make a note of that. In order to maintain high productivity, the workers have been placed on a direct financial incentive system. As I said earlier, this means that an excellent result, in fact 40% above average, is being achieved.

A question was also put to me on the final data. Fifty reports on a variety of facets, for example age, employment, etc., are to be published, and these reports will be published during the period July 1982 to March 1985.

In comparison with the 1970 census—and, after all, we have had computers since 1966—this process will be finalized more rapidly. The first report of the 1970 census was made available only in January 1974. The final report of that census appeared only in 1977. However, I have taken cognizance of the fact that the hon. member is of the opinion that this ought to be taking place even more rapidly with the assistance of the computer system. We are expediting matters somewhat, and it seems to me that the hon. member is delighted about this.

Furthermore I want to add that we did, of course, carry out surveys pertaining to the three independent national States: Bophuthatswana, Transkei and Venda as well. We are at present negotiating with the Department of Foreign Affairs as to the cost of these surveys. We are also processing the information collected. This means that approximately 4 million surveys in that regard will be processed for the national States mentioned.

One could mention many other interesting things. Quite apart from the 1980 general census, periodic surveys are also being carried out, including short-term surveys. Among the periodic surveys there are 245 000 surveys, the checking of information pertaining to 22 million people questioned, the writing of 656 computer programmes, the evaluation of 1 851 tables and the release of 44 news reports and 54 reports. All these things are being completed under this programme.

Then, in addition, there are the short-term surveys—and I with this want to conclude—which entail the collection of 6,75 million surveys, as well as the checking thereof, and the release of 644 news reports and seven reports in that regard as well. Similarly, there is a variety of other data which one would like to bring to the attention of the public. However, in view of the agreed time limit, I shall let that suffice. I express my sincere gratitude to the hon. members for Pretoria East, Gezina and Bezuidenhout for their contributions. I should once again like to study the speech made by the hon. member for Bezuidenhout and the matters he raised in it and, where possible, give effect to them.

Votes agreed to.

Vote No. 16.—“Education and Training”:

Mr. Chairman, once again we are indebted to the hon. the Minister and his department for an excellent annual report, the report for 1980 which he has made available. Hon. members have come to expect a report of this magnitude in respect of a department that covers hundreds of thousands of people. Once again we could spend the entire debate just reflecting on this report. However, the report has been available for some time and there is no need for me to make too many comments on it. But I should like to refer to two matters under the heading “Introduction”. I am sure the hon. the Minister would not expect me to agree with “a special word of thanks … to the hon. the Prime Minister … for their decision, during the process of rationalization, to allow the department to continue its existence as an independent department with its own Minister.” Of course, we are opposed to that. But the hon. the Minister knows our position very well; so I do not have to dwell on that.

I am sorry that the only reference to the boycotts is the suggestion that “unscrupulous agents from outside education use this for their own political ends”. I hope that the hon. the Minister will give us some indication of just how the situation is at the moment, with special reference to those teachers who had to be released from their posts, those children who were no longer able to receive their education and the building programme that was interrupted. An update of that position would be very helpful. I want to say here immediately what I said during the discussion on the National Education Vote, i.e. that the non-availability of the De Lange report I believe makes nonsense of a debate on education. This is a vital report, and it is a great pity that we do not have it before us so we could debate this meaningfully. I gather from the hon. the Minister of National Education that the report will be available and that a White Paper is going to be published but that we will simply have to wait for it. However, I do hope that as a result of that a new approach will be ushered into debates on education in Parliament. In our view it is quite ludicrous to discuss the educational needs of South Africa under three quite separate Votes, namely National Education, Education and Training and Internal Affairs. In the meantime I want to put a concrete proposal to the hon. the Minister in the hope that he will take this up at Cabinet level. I want to propose to him that a Select Committee on education be appointed in time for the next Parliamentary session. In the same way that there is a Select Committee on pensions, I believe that it would bring about a considerable degree of co-ordination if we could have such a Select Committee in Parliament to look at the total needs of education rather than only one or the other as the case might be. If we are to have a realistic assessment of what needs to happen in the provision of the quality of education for Blacks, we must be aware of a number of forces, forces that are beyond our control and are operating and will operate at a greater rate of acceleration over the next 20 years. I want to list them.

The first important factor is the dramatic change in the structure of the population of South Africa. In 1951 the White population was 20,6% of South Africa’s total population. In the year 2000 it will be only 11,2%. In contrast, Blacks who made up 67,9% of the total population in 1951, will make up 78,5% by the year 2000. This difference must be seen against the background of the total population of South Africa that will increase from 27,7 million in 1980 to an expected 47,5 million by the year 2000. We often boast, and often with justification, of our natural resources but they are largely fixed and in many instances are a declining asset. Much, much more important to any country, and to ours especially, are our human resources. Our very future will depend on how we develop this quite invaluable asset. In view of our population growth and the change in the structure of our population this presents all of us in South Africa with a frightening and formidable challenge. That is the first factor I believe to be irreversible.

The second factor that we need to be aware of is the demand for skills by industry and the other side of the coin which is so often overlooked, namely, the demand for work. These we have to see together. Even at the relatively high economic growth rate of 5% per year one can expect the unemployment figure to reach about 11,5% in 1987 which is about 1 200 000 people. This figure may well be hopelessly underestimated because it is looking at the employment situation in a First World South Africa. If we look at the demographic patterns for all population groups the figures are much more ominous. Prof. Sadie of Stellenbosch has estimated the increase in the labour force in South Africa for the period 1980 to 2000. According to his reckoning the South African labour force is expected to increase from about 10,5 million in 1980 to about 17,6 million by the year 2000. This represents a straight average increase of about 354 000 per annum. This prediction will give us some indication of the challenge that awaits us to create jobs on the one hand and also—and this is particularly significant to the hon. the Minister’s department and this Vote—the need to develop the necessary skills by means of education and training.

I have talked about the structure of populations and the demand for skills and the demand for work, and two of the major forces which must influence the work of this department. To further emphasize the urgency for what I can only describe as a revolutionary approach to education and training we must also be aware of the following factors. Firstly, there is the growing inability of the rural agricultural areas to support a growing population. This will force more and more Blacks into the modern, industrialized sectors of South Africa. The only way we will be able to accommodate this flow, this irreversible flow is through training and the development of skills on a massive scale. Secondly, personal development and changing lifestyles will always promote, as other societies have demonstrated, a growing awareness of the importance of education. Thirdly, domestic environment, namely housing, electricity and the general rise in standards of living, have always led to an increased demand for formal education. It follows from this that the increased demand for education in the Black sector and the rising expectations that will accompany this will lead to socio-political instability unless such education is available and is accompanied by job opportunities. It is this hon. the Minister and his department who have to ensure that such education is available. Let me deal with this for a moment.

An indication of the educational needs in terms of numbers is vividly illustrated by the breakdown of the population structure into the 5-25-year old age group. This is obviously the area with which this department is concerned. In 1980 the Black percentage of all groups between the ages of 5 and 25 years was 74,43%. By the year 2000 it will be 83,04%. The significance of this one figure is highlighted if one looks at the comparative figures in the White group. In 1980 the figure was 12,86% for the age group five years to 25 years. And in the year 2000? The projected figure is 7,73%.

Order! The hon. member’s time has expired.

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

Mr. Chairman, I am very grateful to the hon. Whip. This is a further indication of the pressure upon South Africa to provide for greater facilities for Black education. Let us look at the projections by the department itself. There will be an overall increase of 2,6 times in the Black school-going population between the year 1980 and the year 2000, and an overall increase of 4,8 times in secondary school enrolment. In 1981 the Black school-going population, from Sub-A to Std. 3, is estimated at 3,4 million pupils. Again, a single fact throws this into perspective. The number of Black pupils in Sub-A this year is approximately equal to the entire White school-going population. This is a fact pregnant with meaning.

This is progress.

No, it is not progress; it is a challenge. That is what it is.

It is progress.

The hon. member misunderstands the nature of the significance of this fact. A second indicator, which further highlights the growing pressure for additional resources in our educational planning, is the number of pupils who pass Std. 10 or its equivalent. By the end of this decade the number of Blacks with a matriculation qualification, or its equivalent, are expected to exceed the figure for Whites by an estimated 10 000. By the year 2000 the number will reach 185 807, whilst the figure for Whites will be 53 399. To put it another way, the number of Black matriculants, at the end of this century, will be 3,5 times that of Whites and more than double that of all the other population groups combined. I submit again that unless adequate opportunities are created, the existence of this growing body of educated people could be the basis for social instability. It is not enough simply to acknowledge that this is progress. The results of what is taking place now are quite frightening. The hon. the Minister perhaps knows better than most just what I am talking about. Let me try to illustrate what I mean.

There are two major resources required to meet the needs I have outlined. There are actually many others, but we need only concentrate on two. Firstly, there are teachers and, secondly there is money. In 1980 approximately 105 000 teachers were employed in 16 000 Black schools. About 80% of these teachers were in possession of a Std. 8 or lower qualification. The hon. the Minister knows this. It is nothing new. Secondly, the current average teacher/pupil ratios in Black schools are approximately 48:1 in primary schools and 35:1 in secondary schools. If we project the demand for teachers in Black schools over the period 1980 to 2000, and if we assume a slight improvement in the pupil/teacher ratio in primary schools from 48:1 to say 40:1—I think that is reasonable because we are all trying to improve this—and we maintain even the same ratio of 35:1 in the secondary schools, I estimate that we will need about 228 000 additional teachers by the year 2000. I am talking about 105 000 teachers now and 228 000 additional teachers by the year 2000, and this makes no allowance for retirements and resignations. It can therefore be seen that there is absolutely no room for complacency and that the magnitude of the task is overwhelming, in fact staggering.

That is just the teaching side. If we consider the expenditure on education per pupil in South Africa, it will quickly be seen that if we maintain the present allocation and discrepancies, there is absolutely no way on earth that we can meet the challenge. If we continue in the present way, we are headed for disaster. The estimated expenditure for Whites for 1980-’81 is approximately R1 071 per pupil and for Blacks R113,50 per pupil. To state it more fully: Government expenditure for a Coloured student is about 30% of that spent on Whites; on an Indian student about 51% and for Black students about 11% of that spent on Whites. So the actual expenditure on Black education in 1980-’81 was about R537,5 million, or approximately 1,1% of the gross domestic product. If we wish to place Black education on a par with White education—only on a par—it would entail the expenditure of 10,4% of the gross domestic product. By the year 2000 it will have to be 10,7% of the gross domestic product. These are frightening figures, Sir.

The conclusion is that despite the increased expenditure on Black education this year, last year and the year before; despite the improvements that have been made, the combination of population growth, urbanization, industrialization and rising expectations create what I would call an irresistible force which, if not met, could lead to a breakdown in our society, and we therefore simply must review the matter of priorities demanded for Black education with the utmost urgency.

I believe that new initiatives and new methods will have to be explored, and some of these will have to include, firstly, a far higher percentage of the gross domestic product allocated to education, especially to Black education. We are simply not investing enough in our priceless human resource. Secondly, there must be a movement away from separate facilities for separate race groups. We simply cannot afford duplication in the light of what I have said. Thirdly, we will have to have a rationalization of exclusive White facilities, some of which are no longer going to be required because of the declining population growth rate for Whites. Fourthly, use must be made of every available teacher, whether they be Black, White, Brown or Pink. It makes no difference as we need teachers everywhere. Fifthly, we must ensure the maximum use of electronic equipment, the far greater development and use of radio, TV, etc., and, sixthly, there must be a radically new understanding of formal schooling.

Whatever else is true, the challenge is breath-taking in its magnitude, and anything less than a dramatic and urgent rethinking regarding resources and facilities for Black education will not only prove to be hopelessly inadequate but will also lead to very serious social instability. We are grateful for that which has happened, but in the light of the factors that I have raised, unless we meet that—and this not only involves this hon. Minister and his department; it needs the total commitment of this Government and of this country—we will move on to a road of disaster.

Mr. Chairman, before commenting on various aspects touched on by the hon. member for Pinelands, I want to convey the congratulations of this side of the House to the department for this brilliant report to which the hon. member for Pinelands has already referred. I agree with him that it is a source of information, but on studying it one finds that it is sometimes also a source of concern, and I shall come to this later. Indeed, the hon. member for Pinelands has already discussed the extent of the problem.

When the hon. member for Pinelands began to outline the problems surrounding education and training, particularly Black education in the Republic, I wondered what he was getting at. My very first thought, after he had indicated all these problems to us was that he would have to come up with a solution at some stage. Indeed, that is what I have come to expect of him, and it took no prophet to realize that the solution that would be produced would be based on the philosophy of that side of the House, something we have argued about so often, viz. that one should use all available funds for one educational system so that the expenditure on so-called Black education, as a percentage of the gross domestic product and in regard to education, could be divided among the three sections, White, Black and Coloured.

What is your solution?

I am coming to that.

It is indeed true that I agree with the hon. member for Pinelands in regard to many of the matters he referred to, particularly as regards the scope of the matter and the difficulties involved. These are figures we have before us. It is not the solution to see the problems and then to run away saying: “Very well, because there are so many problems with regard to the education of Black people, we must simply all put them in one basket and have an integrated educational system.” Doing so would necessarily create other problems, and I shall deal with those problems in due course. I say that that is not the solution.

The problems exist, and this side of the House is prepared to accept the challenges. In what I shall say later in the course of my short speech, I shall be coming back to some of those solutions as we see them.

It will get the hon. member for Pinelands nowhere to contend that astronomical amounts will have to be spent in this regard, that there is a population explosion among the Black people and with regard to the numbers in education, and that we shall simply never be able to achieve this. If we adopt that standpoint we shall be capitulating.

But I did suggest a solution.

We reject the solution put forward by the hon. member. I shall come back to that later, but the hon. member knows the argument already. It is true that there is an opportunity to deal with these problems as long as we are prepared to accept the challenge and establish an educational system in the best interests of all the different population groups.

This immediately brings me to the very first argument advanced by the hon. member for Pinelands, viz. that he thinks that it is monstrous that we should have this discussion concerning Black education today whereas the De Lange Report has not yet been tabled and is not at everyone’s disposal. Let me say here and now on behalf of this side of the House: The De Lange Commission was appointed to report to the HSRC. We all know its history. That report and the recommendations contained therein must come before the Government. After that the Government will issue a White Paper, in which it may accept some of the recommendations and reject others. What nonsense to maintain at this stage, as the hon. member for Pinelands did, that it is ridiculous to have this discussion while the De Lange report is not yet available? After all, the De Lange report is not the final answer in regard to the future policy. The argument that the De Lange report is essential in order to take a broad look at education is correct, and therefore we, too, should very much like to have the report at our disposal. However, it does not commit the Government, because the Government will come forward later with its decisions concerning the report.

This brings me to the next point. Through the hon. the Prime Minister, the hon. the Minister of Education and Training, the hon. the Minister of National Education and various speakers on this side of the House, the Government has repeatedly spelt out the policy of this side of the House very clearly, viz. that we believe in separate educational systems linked to the traditions, the history, the culture and the language—i.e. the national culture—of each separate group. This is something that is non-negotiable. This the hon. the Prime Minister spelt out once again this year in this House. It is therefore pointless to argue the matter. It is non-negotiable, and we believe that it is in the best interests of the various population groups that we serve. For the sake of the hon. member for Pinelands and the hon. the Leader of the Opposition I want to stress that it is not a question of colour; it is a question of the education and training of the children of a specific people. That is the point at issue; it is not a matter of colour. It is nothing unusual. We encounter examples of this throughout the world. We encounter it in the leading country of the West, in America, but at the same time we also encounter it in the most primitive people within the borders of the Republic of South Africa, the Bushmen. There we find that the two ethnic groups, the Waskela and the Barakweno in the Caprivi, refuse to sit alongside one another in the school where the Bushmen children are taught. They have decided that the one group should sit in front and the other at the back. The most primitive people have an inbuilt national culture and are tradition-bound. They want this to be the case with regard to their education as well. Hon. members are acquainted with the history of America, where an effort was made to impose school integration by the “melting pot” idea. Hon. members are acquainted with the consequences, too, and know what gave rise to them. That idea is therefore well known throughout the world, has been put forward by a number of educationists and has been proved in practice as well.

The issue here is not one of inferior and superior education. It concerns equal educational opportunities for every national group. When we say this we are of course aware of the problems in that connection. It is of course true, as the hon. member for Pinelands said, that there are major problems with regard to Black education. I shall come to them in a moment. However, what is also true is that we are striving to achieve an ideal.

There was a time in the history of this nation, too, when the State schools were far better equipped than the CNE schools, and when the schools of one language group in particular afforded more opportunities than the schools of another language group. In time, however, a balance was reached. It is still a matter for the future, and the challenges of the times demand of this side of the House that we must eventually be able to give equal education to the various population groups.

What about the large numbers?

I am coming to that.

I also want to say to the hon. member for Pinelands that we shall have to realize that each of the different educational systems has its distinctive problems. Apart from the situation in the classroom, if education is integrated I think it would be an injustice to the Black man if we were to involve him in a single educational system in which Whites, Coloureds, Asians and Black people studied together. Why is this so? It is so because the education of each of the different groups demands a specific method. There are problems surrounding Black education which no longer exist in White education. For argument’s sake, let us take the tremendous lack of qualifications among Black teachers. This is something we no longer encounter among the Whites.

That is why I said we must use all available teachers.

The hon. member must just give me a chance to complete my argument.

Because this is so we have specific methods in Black education which we shall not be able to implement if we put all the groups together. Take Soweto as an example. In Soweto the Black people have themselves come forward and at the moment a programme is being launched to ensure that all the teachers in Soweto have at least passed matriculation standard. This is praiseworthy. It is laudable. The department is assisting in various ways in order to make this possible. Let us take another instance. Surely the hon. member for Pinelands is aware that the parents of the White children have a totally different conception of the significance of training than do Black parents at the moment. For that reason we shall also find that there are specific programmes in adult education to bring home to the parents of Black children that it is important to obtain the highest possible qualification, whether at the academic or the technical level.

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

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

Thank you very much. There is just one other aspect I want to mention, and that is that due to the leeway to be made up by the Black people with regard to technological understanding in comparison with the Whites, we have specific programmes in Black education, for example the so-called technical centres. The Black people are already being trained there to gain a better understanding of technology. Those programmes have already borne fruit and afford a solution for the major problem which the hon. member for Pinelands himself has, viz. that the Black people, too, show a greater interest in respect of further technical training so that they can also meet the labour needs. This is the problem to which the hon. member for Pinelands referred. Having said all this, it is surely clear that there are specific problems relating to Black education which could best be tackled from within their educational department and their educational system. This one cannot lose, because if one were to lose that then, as far as I am concerned, that would constitute treason against the various groups which the hon. member wants to put together in one basket.

Of course I admit here and now that the educational facilities for the Black peoples today are not the same as those available for Whites. Anyone who knows the circumstances knows that this is so. The question immediately arises: Why is this so? There are several reasons. Due to a lack of time, let me just touch on two or three briefly. The first is the cultural backlog—I have already dwelt on that for a moment—linked to “preparedness for education”, if I may call it that. The hon. member knows full well what I mean by “preparedness for education”. I do not have the time to spell it out in detail.

That is in terms of Dr. Verwoerd’s policy.

The hon. member must not side track me now.

That is true.

The hon. member for Houghton also wants to quarrel. They know as well as I do that the negative connotation attached to Dr. Verwoerd’s policy is not correct. What is more, if it were to be correct according to the two hon. members opposite, it is nevertheless clear that since Dr. Verwoerd, the former hon. Prime Minister, Adv. Vorster, the present hon. Prime Minister and various hon. Ministers of Education and Training have clearly pointed out that equal education is the goal. Why should we keep raking up old stories for the sake of a political argument?

[Inaudible.]

Wait a moment. The hon. member must not sidetrack me now. Let me proceed. I do not have much time.

There has been a tremendous explosion in the number of pupils at schools, and that is one of the reasons why it has not yet been possible to equalize education. The fact is that in 1955 there were a little more than a million Black pupils—excluding Transkei—whereas in 1980 there were 3,5 million Black pupils. That represents an increase of 251%. There is nothing we can do about that. Indeed, we welcome this because every nation wants to learn. Therefore one cannot prevent it, in any event.

Another reason why there is still a lack of equality is the shortage of qualified teachers. This is a vicious circle, because more than half of the Black pupils do not progress further than standard six with the result …

But that is going to change.

Wait a moment. The result is that few of the pupils achieve matriculation exemption and few of them find their way to university or the teaching college. This in turn results in bigger classes, an unsatisfactory teacher/pupil ratio, etc. Then, too, there is the shortage of adequate classrooms, which in turn contributes to the lack of equality. Then there is the shortage of finance. As the hon. member for Pinelands rightly said, astronomical sums are involved.

I could produce additional reasons too. If one considers the tremendous scope of Black education, one is tempted to become discouraged and merely to seek a solution as the hon. member for Pinelands does. It is true that as far back as 1978 there were more than twice as many Black pupils at school—including the independent States—as White, Coloured and Indian pupils combined. It is true that in 1978 there were more Black pupils in standard eight in the Republic of South Africa than the total number of White pupils in the Free State. What is more, in the same year there were as many Black pupils in sub B as the total number of White pupils in the Transvaal.

Today it is more than the number of White pupils in the whole country.

We must take cognizance of the tremendous scope of the matter. It is primary training, secondary training, secondary technical training, trade training, technical orientation, advanced technical education, teacher training, university training, adult education etc. I take my hat off to the department for what it has already achieved. The question immediately arises—and the hon. member for Pinelands asked this too—as to whether progress is being made and what we are doing about the matter. In this regard it is pointless the hon. member saying that the large numbers overwhelm all progress. Let us at least show appreciation for the progress that has in fact been made. Compulsory education was the exclusive cause of us having such large numbers in the sub A classes. Surely the hon. member for Pinelands knows that. Why does he not mention that? Why does he take it out of context?

[Inaudible.]

No, wait a moment. Surely the hon. member knows that compulsory education has been applied since the beginning of this year and that it has been introduced in 38 residential areas and at 202 schools. This is why we have approximately 14 000 pupils in sub A this year. It is because compulsory education already applies. This system will of course be proceeded with. Next year there will be more pupils in sub B.

Let us consider the figures with regard to matriculants. In 1955 there were 674 Black matriculants. However, in 1980 there are 43 000. Why? Because the NP Government is indeed prepared to make the facilities available. After all, it is pointless to overlook this. In 1981 there were already 49 000 matriculants in Black schools. This represents an increase of 13,8% from 1980 to 1981. I want to answer here and now the question as to how many of them are passing matric. These are interesting data. In 1960 182 passed, representing 19% of the total number of enrolments. In 1979, 73,5% passed. Why? Because they are being given sound training. It is also interesting to note that in 1980, only 58% passed. Why? These are the bitter fruits of the riots that we are plucking. Now the hon. member for Pinelands still asks that the hon. the Minister should react to that standpoint of his.

He must give an account, yes.

Yes, the hon. the Minister must give an account of that. However, the hon. member for Pinelands knows—indeed, we have discussed this matter before in this House—that the issue was not that of education as such but that the riots were the result of the actions of people with political motives who misused the educational situation. [Interjections.] Now it is the Black school children that have to suffer due to that irresponsible action. [Interjections.]

Let us now take a brief look at the figures relating to Std. 8 candidates. In 1980 there were approximately 129 000 full-time pupils in Std. 8. In 1981 the figure is 161 000, an increase of 24%. The hon. member spoke about teachers. In that connection I want to mention the following figures. In 1955 the number of Black teachers was 18 530. In 1980 the figure was 75 640. It now no longer seems impossible to make available that number of teachers which the hon. member mentioned. Let us look at the teacher/pupil ratio. In 1968 the ratio was 58:1, whereas in 1980 it was 44:1. Therefore progress is being made. Let us take a brief look at educational preparedness in the quality of education offered. I ask the hon. member for Pinelands to reflect a little. Only 34,4% of the pupils in sub A in 1955 reached Std. 4, and only 0,5% of them progressed to matriculation. In 1970, 43,5% of the pupils who began in sub A reached Std. 4, whereas approximately 2% of them progressed to matric. This is outstanding progress.

Let us look at the number of university students. In 1960 there were 1 894 Black university students. In 1979 that number had risen to 16 077. Surely that represents progress. We now come to the building programme, which the hon. member for Pinelands also mentioned. Since January 1981, 21 schools have been built at a cost of R6,7 million. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, my response to the hon. member for Virginia is merely the remark that he emphasized his hobby-horse of ethnic education, but that he did not address himself to this particular problem, which is to build up the economy of this country with the co-operation of these Black youngsters who he persists to call a problem. If we cannot do that we will never actually overcome the problem.

Western Europe’s tradition of 12 years of education of a fairly standard type, in which most young people were involved, proved to be inadequately correlated with the demands of a modern economy. It turned out large numbers of young people insufficiently trained for the skills required. Frustrated, unemployed young people felt that society required them only as a convenience. It resulted in a black of commitment to the system, sometimes a complete rejection of that system, with social instability and flirtation with foreign ideologies as a further consequence. But are we not walking down the same path and making those exact same mistakes, except that in our situation that instability would be of far more dangerous dimensions? For example, whereas the number of pupils at secondary schools increased between 1970 and 1980 from 122 000 to 550 000, the numbers doing vocational, trade and technical training over the same period dropped from 3 600 by 500 to 3 100. Our future, and particularly the Black man’s opportunity, lies in the direction of technical education. Without dragooning people as units of labour into a planned economy, how does one do a better job of co-ordinating the labour element with the other factors of production? If it is not just lip service that we pay to the free enterprise system, I think one could do this by making the environment in which the free enterprise system works freer so that there is a free field in which the forces of the market can take place. This is an absolutely essential element in solving this particular problem.

The hon. the Minister of Manpower has carried out an essential task in his restructuring of the industrial legislation. If the economy’s skilled labour, managerial and entrepreneurial requirements are going to come increasingly from the Black population, they must be drawn into those areas where they are needed. This is done primarily by the forces of supply and demand working in a free market system. In addition, it is suggested that the ten following steps be taken.

Firstly, endorse the first general guiding principle of the Human Sciences Research Committee. The establishment of a programme for the attainment of education of equal quality for all sections of the population. Secondly, schools must provide a satisfactory science and mathematics foundation so that ultimately the pupils, when they leave school, can absorb the technical training that they must have. Thirdly, adequate post-school training facilities must be available. The State and private enterprise must be involved in the provision of these and all employers, not only the willing horses, must contribute. Fourthly, training facilities must be sensibly correlated to the economy’s requirements and adapted to fit its needs. Fifthly, people must believe in the prestige that attaches to the skilled trades and vocational training. They must experience the opportunity that is available to them through this route and they must see the rewards of success in a transformed standard of living. Sixthly, we must carry out aptitude and interests tests for the children when they are leaving school so that we cease trying to force square pegs into round holes. Seventhly, Blacks moving into an unknown environment need assistance in placement and some adaptation training. Eighthly, establish Black teachers training colleges in the White urban areas. They will be much easier to fill and they will be cheaper to staff as well. Ninthly, make a decision that all tertiary educational institutions will be full while there are students able to attend them, no matter to what race these students might belong. Concentrate on training and retraining of teachers. Tenthly, eliminate as far as possible the physical impediments to learning. There are 300 000 people in the Port Elizabeth Black townships, while there are only just over 5 000 houses with lights. Imagine just the physical problems of a youngster trying to do his homework in those impossible conditions.

Above all, we must be conscious that it was the American technician who created that economic miracle. The Dodge brothers had their hand tools in the board room and they showed them with pride. A nation’s wealth is not created initially by arts graduates, lawyers and political scientists. Carpenters originated the great construction companies of this land of ours, journeymen started the great engineering shops and even our unskilled, unemployed figure has a direct correlation to the absorption of skilled labour into the labour force. You cannot actually keep them employed unless you pull in at least 3,2% of skilled labour every year. How do we inspire people with the realization of the opportunity that awaits them if they will only become qualified technically? I believe that the correct tackling of this problem starts with the realization of the complete interdependence of the various elements of our society. Nowhere can this interdependence better be seen than in the relationship between education and training and manpower utilization, education and training and housing, and education and training and discrimination. In an earlier debate the hon. the Minister of Manpower said that people were attacking his initiative by claims that—

That, I think, is the most extraordinary remark I have heard this session because it is impossible to have peaceful labour relations unless those other things also happen. It is the total problem that requires from us a total solution.

Mr. Chairman, later in my speech I should like to react to a few remarks made in the course of his speech by the hon. member for Walmer. In the first place I want to convey my sincere thanks to the hon. the Minister of Education and Training and his department for what they have achieved over the years, particularly during the last few years, in respect of education for Blacks. The official Opposition do not want to recognize this. The thanks are far and few between, but there is ample criticism. As in the past this debate will once again amount to criticism by the Opposition, and it does not take a prophet to predict that.

As far as we, as well as the thousands of grateful Blacks are concerned, Mr. Chairman, we should like to express our thanks, in the first place, for the enthusiasm with which the department performs its task. These officials are unobtrusively performing an enormous task, an almost impossible task, if it is viewed in the light of the population explosion in Black schools over the past few years. The orderly and purposeful way in which this large and almost unwieldy machine is kept in operation deserves the highest praise of this House. It also deserves the thanks of the Blacks. It is not only academic advantages that the Blacks are enjoying. This is also fundamental to a firm and solid foundation for the development of the various Black peoples. The privilege they enjoy of undergoing their education in their own milieu and surroundings, and in their home language at the beginning of their primary training, gives them the sound foundation on which to establish themselves as developing and up- and-coming peoples.

Nationally oriented education is not, however, merely a privilege of the children of a people. It is a right, a right which can be demanded. This right the official Opposition seeks to deny them. It is true that sound education is based on a sound and purposeful teachers corps. That is why the department is constantly introducing methods of improving the quality of the teacher. Like the department, we recognize that an enormous amount remains to be done in order to achieve the ideal situation of a full supply. Therefore the Government is giving constant attention to teacher training and has set itself the objective of steadily increasing the quality of education. It is clear that the department is doing everything possible to bring about a drastic improvement in the backward position as regards teachers, and I want to refer to this briefly.

The unfortunate position still exists that there are too many teachers who possess only a pre-matriculation training. This side of the House, the hon. the Minister and the department as well are fully aware of this and it is seeking to achieve the following objectives through its planning of and in its programme for teacher training—we are also striving to achieve them—and I just wish to mention them briefly.

Firstly, there is the training of well qualified specialist teachers for all fields of education. In this regard, two post-matriculation teacher training courses were introduced at the beginning of the year, namely, the junior primary teacher’s course and also the senior primary teacher’s course. Those are two-year courses with a further year of specialization. This one-year specialization course will also be accessible to teachers at present in service.

In this connection I want to make a friendly appeal to the hon. the Minister to do everything possible in an effort to convert all the teachers’ courses into post-matriculation courses as soon as possible, preferably in the form of a three year course. Proper school training and the associated education of the child certainly cannot come into its own if the teacher is not properly trained for his task.

I am therefore grateful to learn from the annual report that the department accords in-service training such a high priority. The centralized in-service training centre at Mamelodi near Pretoria, as well as the decentralized in-service training facilities in the seven regions, are eloquent examples of what the department earnestly desires to achieve in this connection. This helps the teachers who do not yet possess a senior certificate, to improve their qualifications. The second objective the department wants to achieve.

The third objective is the improvement of the teacher/pupil ratio by increasing the number of teachers trained every year. In 1970 the numerical ratio was 1:58; in 1979, 1:45; and I believe that this year it is considerably lower. It is extremely illuminating to consider the number of students studying to be teachers, and the figures speak for themselves. In 1971 there were 8 148, whereas in 1975 there were 13 300, but the latter number excludes those in the Transkei. In 1980 the position was 14 442, again excluding the Transkei, Bophuthatswana, Venda and South West Africa.

Looking at amounts spent by the department on bursaries, we see that in 1978-’79 the amount was R170 118, as against R357 765 for the subsequent year. This amounts to an increase of R187 647, or in other words, an increase of 110%. An amount of R437 000 was budgeted for bursaries in 1980-’81.

A further objective is the realization of the ideal of compulsory education. Apart from the far-reaching financial implications of this, it is also of the utmost importance to ensure that an adequate number of well-trained teachers are available to meet the demand. At the beginning of 1980 there were 36 institutions providing training. Of these, seven are within the White area and 29 are situated in the national States. During 1980 a further three colleges were opened, one in Qwaqwa, one in Gazankulu and the Ndebele College in Valschfontein. The Cape Teachers college in Fort Beaufort and the Ndumeza College near Pietermaritzburg, each with a capacity of 1 000 students, are to be opened in the course of this year. Two more new teachers’ colleges, each with a potential student population of 1 200, are at present being planned, one on the East Rand and the other near Thaba Nchu.

Linked to this, of course, is the dramatic increase in the salaries of Black teachers. Let us just take a brief look at these figures. In 1979 the salary of Black teachers was 58% of that of White teachers; in 1978 it increased to 68%; and in 1980 to 76% of the salaries of White teachers, with parity in the case of inspectors and higher grades. This year we have parity for headmasters, deputy headmasters and departmental heads with qualifications in C category and higher. Moreover, the scales of men and women in the post of headmaster in S.1 and P.1 and S.2 and P.2 groups are being placed on an equal basis.

Order! The hon. member’s time has expired.

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

I thank the hon. member for Wynberg.

It is therefore very clear that this is not merely an attempt to improve the academic qualifications of the teacher; the department is keeping abreast of the demands of the times in regard to salary adjustments as well.

For the Black student this is at present an attractive and highly remunerative profession, because without academic and financial restrictions it affords the matriculant the opportunity to enrol as a student without hesitation in order eventually to perform a major service for his nation as a teacher.

In 1955, when Black education was transferred to the Department of Education, the training of teachers was largely at the standard six level. This stemmed from the situation in the old days of the UP when not much attention was given to Black education. This situation has gradually begun to improve, and in the early ’sixties the level of training was shifted up to standard eight. The Opposition must recognize that the department has succeeded in bringing about a dramatic improvement in the training of teachers. It is therefore unjust and uncalled for to lay the blame for the existing backlog at the door of the Government and the department unconditionally and without further ado. It is clear from what I have tried to sketch here that planning is aimed at placing training on a generally sound basis as rapidly as possible.

I just want to dwell briefly on secondary education. We are at present engaged in eliminating the shortage of teachers slowly but surely, although I concede that it will still take a considerable time. However, this does not prevent the pupil from seizing the opportunity and utilizing his academic qualifications to the fullest. There are still ample opportunities for every pupil with the will to undergo secondary training. It is encouraging to note in the annual report that the largest increase in the number of pupils has been in standard ten, namely 102,8%, whereas in standard nine it is 46,1%. Similarly, the teachers in secondary education have increased from 13 421 in 1979 to 15 436 in 1980, representing an increase of 15%. The department is also continuing to improve this learning situation and the methods as well. The work programmes for every subject in the secondary school are drawn up after an analysis of the examination results of 1979. This enables every teacher to evaluate and monitor his progress against the prescribed syllabuses. As a result, prescribed work can be dealt with in full and in good time.

Differentiated education has come a long way, and pupils are afforded the opportunity to develop in accordance with their aptitudes, interests and abilities and undergo the appropriate training. Black education has been placed on the road to success, and parents, pupils, teachers and others involved must now utilize the opportunity to make the best use of it.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Gezina must please pardon me for not following up directly on what he had to say. This is, of course, all very much interrelated. I should, however, just like to make a few comments about the annual report, which some hon. members commented on. It is, of course, full of tremendously valuable information. I would, in fact, say that the contents of this report are absolute dynamite as far as this country is concerned, because it is the conclusions one can draw from the figures in the report which are going to spell out so much of the success or failure of this country’s efforts to come to grips with the real problems it is facing in all the fields of labour, human relations, etc. One seeks to win the hearts and minds of people in an insurgency or counter-insurgency situation, and the contents of this report do, in fact, relate directly to such a situation right here in the Republic.

This brings me to another point I should just like to make in passing, and that is that I do think that some of the statistics might be regionalized, because the department does work very much on a regional basis. If many of the figures given were to pertain to a particular region, they would perhaps be more interpretable by hon. members in this House in terms of their own constituencies and the situations pertaining there.

In the main thrust of my speech today I should like to point out that coming from a rural constituency, as I do, I find it very interesting to note that in the entire Cape Province there is not one hostel. There are, in fact, no boarding facilities in the entire Cape Province, and this poses a question of tremendous import, because the rural community quite obviously cannot be served entirely by community schools existing either in the towns or in the bigger urban areas. Having some experience of this in the area in which I live, I would say that the rural people are at a tremendous disadvantage in the education system as it exists at present. The farm-school situation is far from adequate. I know that it is a tremendous headache to the department and its officials in the sense that the problem of teachers, facilities, etc., poses an enormous question to which there are no easy answers.

I must say that unless we concentrate our attention on this area, and take adequate steps to solve the problem of drop-outs, which must be far higher than in the case of the urban areas, we are going to run into great difficulties. The reason for the high drop-out rate is that most children in the rural areas live a long way from the farm schools. They have to make a great effort to walk the long distances, knowing that even after they have passed a few standards—even standard five, say—there will not be many outlets open to them. They therefore tend to drop out that much more easily and are at a distinct disadvantage when they enter the labour market—be that when it may—in competition with their urban counterparts. The sort of situation that exists there, is that, as we all know, these people largely live with their families in specific areas and unless they have relatives near a community school with whom they can board their children, the possibility of their attending any sort of secondary educational institution is denied them. In many cases the fees are also far beyond their reach. I believe the responsibility for education in the rural areas is the State’s. It is not the farmers’ responsibility. The State must take full responsibility for seeing to it that adequate schools are available. At this stage the variable factor is whether or not there is a willing farmer, whether he is interested in the farm school, whether he is going to manage it very well and whether he might withdraw his managership. All those things are detrimental to the children and must be sorted out. I believe the acquisition of proper facilities which are at present available to the urban community schools must equally apply in the rural areas.

In this regard I think I must also say something about the possibility of training—as was mentioned by the hon. member for Walmer—in the agricultural and technical spheres right there in the country, bringing the education to the people in a way that they can readily make use of it. I know of magisterial districts running through the Border corridor where there are simply no secondary schools available at all. Quite obviously there is an imbalance here, and I would be interested to hear what the hon. the Minister has to say about this, because unless there is a specific policy in terms of which all those rural people are supposed to attend schools in the homelands or in the national States, we have a tremendous gap as far as rural education is concerned. If we were able to have better schooling in the rural areas established by the State, I am quite certain that schemes such as adult education after hours would be more attainable for some of the rural people. This is something which they are also denied at present. The point on which the hon. member for Durban North will address the House will also deal with that aspect viz. that if there were a more formal, better organized type of schooling available rurally, I am quite certain that many qualified White teachers, perhaps farmers’ wives, could be employed in this role to improve the whole set-up in the rural areas. The question of education in agriculture and in the rural areas is a vital one. The stabilization of that part of the population and their ability to participate fully in the improved output and productivity in the agricultural sphere is going to be seriously hampered unless we revamp the rural policy very quickly. I would be very interested to hear from the hon. the Minister whether there are in fact new lines of thought in this regard, because as far as we on these benches are concerned the rural education situation leaves a lot to be desired.

Mr. Chairman, I shall come to the hon. member for King William’s Town later. In the first instance I should like to thank hon. members for their congratulations in respect of the annual report and also on the progress of the department over the last couple of years.

The hon. member for Pinelands, who is the official Opposition’s chief spokesman on this subject, also criticized the department. I think it is a universal phenomenon nowadays to criticize educational departments and for people to come forward with all types of solutions. In the magazine Time of 16 June 1980 I read in connection with the educational policy and operations in the United States—

Certain solutions are then suggested. I quote further—

Then finally they analyze the reasons for this deterioration—

*This is not being said about South Africa, but about the Department of Education of the United States of America. Now it is very interesting that the hon. member for Pinelands also made certain recommendations or suggestions, including suggestions which are advanced in this article as reasons for the failure of America’s educational system. In the article one reads that—

Who mentioned busing?

The hon. member said we must move away from separate schools.

We do not have to move away in buses.

By means of busing, people in America were forced to attend schools which they were not previously allowed to attend. But the hon. member says we must move away from separate schools. I want to say that if we were to do what he suggests, we would not be improving the quality of education, but would in fact be causing it to deteriorate, and that we are not prepared to do.

Tell us what you are going to do.

I shall tell the hon. member what we are going to do.

The hon. member also said: “More money must be spent on education for Blacks.” Naturally we agree with that, and we are doing that.

But we need much, much more.

In 1972-’73 R27 million was allocated to this department. Five years ago R69 million was allocated to this department. Last year R244 million was allocated to this department, and this year the department is to receive R369 million. There has therefore been a tremendous increase in the allocation.

I agree with you on that.

Thank you very much. I appreciate it.

But if you do not increase the percentage of the GDP for education …

Order!

I want to put it to the hon. member for Pinelands that the increase between last year and the present—from R244 million to R369 million—amounts to 52%. This means an increase of 52% in one year. It is a greater increase than in any other Government department. There is no other Government department in which such an increase has occurred. This is the greatest ever.

The first thing I want to say, therefore, is that the Government has its priorities. It applies its funds on the basis of its priorities. The fact that this department shows the greatest increase of all Government departments—on a percentage basis—is a clear indication that the Government accords a very high priority to Black education.

Black education ought to receive considerably more money than that. [Interjections.]

I shall come back to this later. One could of course go to extremes here and squander money without it having any effect in the long run. In any event, we are proceeding as rapidly as possible to apply it in an effective way in order to improve education. We have our priorities in the Department of Education and Training as well.

The hon. member for Pinelands says that we must increase the appropriation even more rapidly. We are increasing it as rapidly as we are able to utilize it effectively. I want to give the hon. member one example. We are encouraging Black teachers in our employ to improve their qualifications. On this subject the hon. member for Gezina made a very good contribution, and the hon. member for Pinelands also emphasized the importance of teacher training. We are encouraging teachers to improve their qualifications. If teachers who are not fully qualified were to avail themselves of the opportunities which exist for the improvement of their qualifications, it would require an additional amount of R120 million in order to compensate them because their qualifications would then be up to date. However, for the Government to make the amount of R120 million available in advance is of no use if the people do not improve their qualifications. It is not a process which is completed overnight. It must be done systematically and judiciously. People must be encouraged and incentives must be offered to them. The incentive is the fact that today qualified teachers—teachers who are heads of departments or who occupy higher positions—receive precisely the same salary as any other teacher in any other department. Consequently, if the teacher avails himself of that opportunity, he can earn this additional amount, and that will also have a tremendous effect on the department’s budget.

The Government has its priorities, and Black education is one of them. We in the Department of Education and Training also have our priorities. The department’s priorities can be deduced from an analysis of the budget. The first priority I wish to mention is the training of teachers. I agree with the hon. member for Pinelands that the training of teachers should be priority number one. A department sets itself certain goals, and to realize those goals, the most important asset it needs is well-trained teachers. One cannot achieve any goal if one does not have well-trained teachers. That is why the training of teachers is priority number one for the department.

Priority number two is technical training. I shall refer to this again when I reply to the speech made by the hon. member for Walmer. Priority number two is technical training because in this technological century one cannot simply produce people who are going to do clerical and other similar work. It is also necessary to produce people who are going to produce, people who are going to achieve things in the economy and who are going to pay the salaries of other people. That is why technical education is priority number two.

Priority number three is secondary education. So I can continue. If we analyse the budget, we shall see that the increase in spending on technical education—the amount relating to this department’s budget, as well as the amount relating to the budget of the Department of Community Development for buildings—was 194%. I am referring now to programme No. 5—Vocational and Trade Training—of the Education and Training Vote, as well as to the Community Development Vote in which provision is being made for the erection of buildings. Here we find an increase from R4,5 million to R13 million, within the space of one year. That is an increase of 194%.

The amount being spent on the training of teachers increased by 80%. This is because we already have a reasonably strong infrastructure. Secondary education increased by 65%. This illustrates that the budget is also in accordance with the department’s own priorities, i.e. to give attention to these matters which are of cardinal importance.

I now wish to give hon. members a little more information on the matter of teacher training. The hon. member correctly singled out the problem by saying that by the end of the century the number of children was going to be far greater than it is at present. If one takes the White area of South Africa, the national States and the independent States into consideration, the number of school-going children at present already exceeds 5 million. The hon. member was correct when he said that the number of children in sub A in the Black schools was equal to the total White school-going population. It is also the equivalent of the total Black school-going population when this department took over, and I am now referring to sub A pupils only. The sub A pupils at present equal the total Black school-going population which we inherited. In other words, there has been tremendous progress. The hon. member asked how we were going to produce all the necessary teachers by the year 2000. From 1955 until the time we took over, the growth of the Black population was more rapid than it will be in the last 20 years of this century. This is because the growth of all population groups in South Africa is declining to a certain extent. Consequently, if we were able to improve, and we have improved, the average number of pupils per teacher has decreased from 58:1 a few years ago to 48:1 at present. Despite the difficult conditions of the past, the unsatisfactory conditions which we inherited, we have made progress.

That is why I want to tell the hon. member that I am very confident that this progress will continue until the year 2000 because the 250 000 teachers who are going to be required, and to whom the hon. member referred, have to come from the ranks of the Black people themselves. There are not enough Whites to produce this number of teachers. They must and they are going to come from the ranks of the Black people themselves. In this connection I should like to quote a few figures. The hon. member for Gezina said that at present there were 36 teachers’ training colleges. This excludes the independent States, i.e. Venda, Transkei and Bophuthatswana were not included. Those 26 teachers’ training colleges, plus the universities, are at present producing almost 7 000 teachers per annum.

7 000 per annum?

7 000 per annum who are completing their studies, entering the labour market and are prepared to go teaching. To be precise, the figure is 6 920. This does not include the three independent countries. If one multiplies by 20, the 20 years which lie ahead, this already gives us 140 000 of the 250 000 who will be required. If one includes the three independent States as well, it brings us up to almost 10 000. Over 20 years this brings us close to 20 000, but this is based on the present size of the population. The hon. member himself said that the population was virtually going to double between now and the year 2000; in other words, where we are now producing 10 000 per annum, we will have to produce in the region of 20 000 per annum in the year 2000.

But that does not take into account any resignations or retirements.

If we produce 20 000 per annum, we can make provision for resignations and then the status quo is maintained. The present level is then maintained. What I want to suggest is that just as the situation has improved over the last 25 years, so the situation will improve in future, and it will improve more rapidly. The present production of teachers by the present teachers’ training colleges demonstrates to hon. members that we are making that progress. I now wish to inform hon. members under what circumstances we shall be able to keep on making that progress. I come to the first point which the hon. member raised, namely when he said that we cannot talk about education as long as the De Lange report is not available. That was, to put it mildly, a ridiculous remark. What have we been doing all these past years when we discussed the matter here? Were we talking at random? Is the De Lange report now the alpha and the omega, the only thing which one must have to be able to discuss the matter meaningfully.

It is very important.

It may be important, but surely we must carry on. What the hon. member proposed, viz. that we should stop talking about education now, will not further the cause of education, but cause it to deteriorate. That is what the statement which the hon. member made means.

My point was that it should be available.

But it is not available at the moment.

Why not?

Because we are still studying it.

Business suspended at 18h30 and resumed at 20h00.

Evening Sitting

Mr. Chairman, I want to make haste and reply to the remaining questions. One of the first statements which the hon. member for Pinelands made, was when he referred to the annual report and to the paragraph dealing with the boycotts. He asked who these people were who were misusing the children for their own purposes. He asked me to say a little more about this. I want to tell the hon. member that there is no doubt about whether the children are in fact being misused. We are receiving many pieces of evidence to prove that this is so, and I want to give him just one piece of evidence. It is based on a report which appeared in The Star of 14 January 1980, under the headline “Bitter mother speaks.” It reads as follows—

That, Sir, is precisely what is happening. Hundreds of children are being intimidated to stay away from the schools. This happened last year as well. This is being done for the purposes of other people. We received evidence to prove this from these people who said: We should like to go back to school. We know we are wasting our time, but we are being intimidated and we are being threatened. I just want to say that in the end the community got the better of these elements and these communities succeeded in restoring law and order and in curbing the activities of these elements. But we must not forget that it cost those children one year of their schooling. This must be laid at the door of those people who misuse them. They must pay the price for that. It is their fault, and they must be brought to book. Hon. members opposite must help to eradicate elements of that kind and to enable the children who are still attending school to continue to do so.

What about the schools that were closed?

Oh well, the schools were closed because it was no longer possible for those children to attend school. At the beginning of this year the schools were reopened and the children returned to school in all the areas because the communities had got the better of the subversive elements. Last year when no teaching took place the teachers had no work to do and they were transferred to other areas where they were able to help with the education of other children. They have now returned to the schools they came from. The building programmes which were discontinued as a result of the fact that there were no children at school and because contractors did not want to work in those areas, could be resumed. The end result of all these things was that those boycotts did not help them at all. They only delayed matters and besides they cost those children a year’s education. They gained absolutely nothing in the process. The fact that they participated in boycotts, merely delayed the future and the development of education in those areas. At that stage there were some of those areas that were being burdened by strikes that wanted us to introduce compulsory education in those areas. But how can one introduce compulsory education in an area in which the children are not attending school? Surely that is out of the question. In other words all those areas were automatically unable to come into consideration for this tremendous step which we were able to take at the beginning of this year of introducing compulsory education. All of them will now have to wait for a subsequent opportunity in order to come into consideration for it.

The hon. member made a suggestion. He said we should appoint a Select Committee to deal with the education of the various departments. In view of our standpoint on the other recommendations which the hon. member made, I want to tell him that the other factors which he mentioned—that more should be spent on Black education, that teachers should be used well, that radio and TV should be used well—are all matters with which we are already dealing in the department. We are using the radio on an experimental basis. To tell the truth, our department is paying the SABC a certain amount every year to broadcast educational programmes. We are using the computers of certain companies experimentally to establish whether they have any value in education. We are doing this. We shall not use these things if they were not an improvement. If they are an improvement then we are going to use them. We are using television and we should like to see whether doing so will result in improvements. We know we shall never be able to replace the teacher, but we are putting all these things to the test. I have no problems with the hon. member on that score. We agree on those things, but of course we differ on the ideological aspects. When the hon. member says we must move away from separate institutions for the various peoples, we say: No, that is not a principle which we feel predisposed to consider. We are not prepared to do that.

In view of this, I should like to return to his suggestion in connection with the Select Committee. I am not the only one involved. There are two other colleagues of mine who are also involved. It is, however, a suggestion which we could consider in the light of our standpoints that there must be different institutions for the various population groups, and that we are in favour of coordination. There must be co-ordination on the level of examinations, standards and various other aspects in order to maintain standards and to ensure that there is no malfunctioning. In that sense one could consider the suggestion and a Select Committee could perhaps play a part. We shall look into this.

The hon. member for Walmer spoke about technical education and pointed out that the number of children had decreased to 3 000.

The number decreased by 500.

It does not matter to what extent the number decreased. The fact of the matter is that it decreased. The reason for that is that the figure for the independent States was taken out. In the first figure which the hon. member for Walmer has in front of him, the figure for those States, for example Venda, was still included. Those figures were published in May. Those institutions which are now situated in independent States, are no longer being included. The second reason is that the number of 30 000 pupils who are receiving training in the technical centres, also had an effect on this figure. In reality the number of children who are receiving technical training has increased, and increased very considerably. I wish to furnish a few figures in this connection. At present there are 15 departmental technical centres where the children are being orientated for 2½ hours a week, while they are working on their normal school programme, to become acquainted with technical education as well. This year more than 23 000 of them are involved in these programmes. Technical colleges and institutes have been established by my department outside the national States. Last year there were only two such technical colleges. Since then we have made a start with a further 12 colleges, some of them in temporary buildings and others in planned buildings. At present 14 of these colleges are being operated in the White areas. In the national States, with the exception of the independent States, 14 of them are in full operation. The evidence to prove that we are making good progress is there. In this year we have, in this regard, taken a tremendous step forward. Then there is of course the technikon at Mabopane, which has enrolled its first students. Those numbers are going to increase every year until there will eventually be 5 000 of them. Consequently we are making tremendous progress in the sphere of technical education as well.

Just before I come to the other matters, I wish to tell the hon. member for Pinelands that he should take another look at those figures in connection with the projections which he mentioned to us. His informants, the people who prepared those figures for him, made a very big mistake somewhere. I think he said that in the year 2000 the people between the ages of five and 25 years of age, would comprise 86% of the population. That is completely impossible, because it would then mean that only 14% of the population would be older than 25 years and younger than five years. It does not work like that. With the development which is coming, the number of people in the lower age groups become proportionally less. Their numbers do not increase. The hon. member said that they now represent 73% of the population. The figure is not 73%, but less. Proportionally they become less because people live longer as a result of better health services, etc. Therefore that figure of 250 000 teachers which the hon. member arrived at, was based on an incorrect assumption. Even if it were true, we would still be able to take it into account and cope with it, because the teachers will have to come out of that number of people. Proportionally more teachers are being trained than in the past. However, I just want to tell the hon. member that his figures are not entirely correct. He must look at them again.

My figures came from Stellenbosch.

Yes, but Stellenbosch can also make mistakes. He must not simply believe what they say. [Interjections.]

Mr. Chairman, may I ask the hon. the Minister whether the figure of 30 includes technical colleges?

Yes. That is right.

And a total school population of 3 500? I know that progress has been made, particularly in the past year, but the hon. the Minister must accept that it is still a very unsatisfactory situation with an average of … [Interjections.]

The report deals with the situation as it was at the end of last year. Since the beginning of this year we have established 12 new technical colleges in the urban areas, and that is a tremendous improvement.

*The hon. member for King William’s Town discussed farm schools, and said, inter alia, that there were no hostels for farm children. As from next year there will be a hostel for the secondary pupils of Fort Beaufort and surrounding areas which will meet their specific needs, and as the needs increase, more facilities will be made available. The hon. member also said that the same facilities should be made available to farm children as those enjoyed by children in towns and cities. The teacher who teaches in a farm school is paid by the State and in addition the books, desks and all the equipment in that school are provided by the State. The school building belongs to the farmer and is subsidized by the State, because we cannot, and in fact we do not want to alienate a piece of the farmer’s land to erect a school building on. We therefore enter into an agreement with the farmer to establish a school, and then he is subsidized per class-room by the State. As far as farm schools are concerned, I believe that these schools are to the credit of the farmers of South Africa. This is one of the really heart-warming stories which illustrates the attitude of the people of South Africa, because there are no fewer than 4 982 farm schools.

Totally inadequate.

If one compares what the farmer is doing with what the mining industry and other industries are doing in this connection, you will be astonished. Agriculture’s contribution to the gross national product is less than that of the mining industry and far less than that of industry, but the contribution of mining and industry to education is not a fraction of what agriculture is doing in this sphere. The farmers are not big capitalists, but they care a great deal for their employees. They have the interests of their employees at heart, and they are giving their employees’ children the most important thing in life, i.e. knowledge and learning. There are 4 982 farm schools involving no fewer than 10 000 teachers and 459 000 pupils. This is almost one-third of the number of children and almost one-third of the number of teachers we have in the White areas. This is a wonderful achievement and an unparalleled testimonial to the farmers. I thank them very much indeed for this positive contribution and for the goodwill with which it is being made.

In future we shall have to give more attention to the subsidy, because building costs are rising all the time, and R2 000 per classroom only covers a part of the costs. In future, therefore, we shall have to consider increasing the subsidy, because these farmers are making a wonderful contribution.

Mining and industries would do well to follow their fine example.

We are also grateful for what the mines and factories are doing. However, it is nothing in comparison with what is happening in the farm schools. They can therefore follow the example set by the farmers, and do far more in this connection, because even as far as taxation is concerned, this Government is very sympathetically disposed towards these people, and would like to accommodate them.

I wonder whether Savage and Lovemore is one of them?

I think it was the hon. member for King William’s Town who said that the drop-out rate must be reduced and that we should introduce guidance.

Guidelines.

We have been doing that for a long time. I want to invite that hon. member to come and see on what tremendous scale this is being done. A section of the inspectorate has been set aside for vocational guidance. We have appointed teachers especially for this purpose. We test children’s aptitude, and we are also making all kinds of other education available, particularly in the primary schools where we are engaged in a tremendous programme of remedial education, upgrading and maturation for school attendance. We are enabling children who are scholastically unable to make normal progress to obtain the normal benefits of education through remedial education and all kinds of other methods. In this sphere too, there is tremendous progress. That hon. member should come and see what is happening. It was precisely as a result of that progress which we had made that we were able to introduce compulsory education in certain of these areas this year. That hon. member may therefore take note of the fact that in the sphere of vocational guidance and remedial education we are progressing with leaps and bounds, and this is one of the reasons why the children are staying at school longer and why the number of children in the secondary schools has risen so astronomically.

If there was ever a time in history when the department ought to collapse under the pressure of the tremendous increase in numbers, it was during the past few years, because we had a phenomenon which was unique in the world. Where in the world has the number of matriculants doubled between one year and the next? One must of course have the extra teachers, as well as extra laboratories, schools and all the necessary equipment to accommodate that flood of pupils. However we were able to manage; of course it was not easy, but we accommodated the flood of pupils of the past few years. This year we have far in excess of 50 000 pupils in Std. 10, and this improves our future position, because at the beginning of this year we were able to set Std. 10 only as admission requirement at certain of our teachers’ training colleges. In other words, the products which those colleges are going to produce, will be provisionally qualified.

We went further. We adjusted the courses which are being offered there. These are no longer pre-matriculation courses, they are post-matriculation courses, full three-year courses, with or without university subjects. Those people will therefore be fully qualified. This is going to mean, however, that the older teachers who are already in our employ, will have to compete with the new products, who are better qualified. We have taken very important steps to enable them to compete. In the first place the adult education centre is there so that the people can improve their academic qualifications, and they are making use of these centres. In Soweto, for example, the teachers, of their own accord, set themselves the target that each teacher should have a Std. 10 certificate by the end of this year. These teachers have all enrolled at the centres for adult education and they are attempting to obtain Std. 10 qualifications by the end of the year. This is a wonderful achievement. But when they have that qualification, we must enable the people we already have in our employ to bring their professional qualifications up to the same standard as those of the teachers who are in future going to be produced by the teachers’ training colleges. For that reason we have taken steps to enable them to improve their professional qualifications by means of training in the form of remote courses, contact tuition, and all kinds of other ways. This is an indication of the progress we have already made.

That is why I wish to content myself at this stage by telling the hon. member for Pinelands that if we had done what he suggested we do, viz. to abolish this department, we would have been doing tremendous harm to the Black man in South Africa for the simple reason that those whom this department takes care of, have needs which are unique to them. These are needs which do not exist in the White population. In the White population we are not dealing with the situation where 80% of the teachers only have a Std. 8 certificate. For that reason the White educational department does not need adult education centres where people can pass their matric exam or can learn to read and write. Nor does the White educational department need a programme enabling a teacher who does not have a fully professional qualification to obtain one. These are specific needs which exist in my department, in respect of which we are experts by this time and are meeting successfully. If there had been only one department, I can guarantee the hon. member for Pinelands that this need would not have been fully met, as is the case at present.

I can mention a second reason. There are not large numbers of Whites who are still illiterate. This is the case among the Blacks. This means that the generation gap between child and parent is far greater. The children simply come to their parents and say: “We are not going to listen to you. You are not at school and you do not know what you are talking about.” Then they do whatever they like, and the parents lose their authority. By means of these adult education centres, that gap between the parents and the children is being narrowed. However this is a gap which exists specifically in the population we are serving. If there were only one department, this matter would not receive the attention it deserves. There are numerous other aspects in respect of which we are meeting specific needs. We are geared to eliminating the vast backlog which exists. The fact that there is one department which is specifically meeting the needs of these people, has meant that we have made tremendous progress and that the Black people in particular have benefited. That is why the future, as far as education is concerned, holds promise for them, because their specific needs are being met.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to confine myself to only two aspects of the education and training of Black people. They are the two aspects in regard to which the thoroughness, enthusiasm and idealism of the hon. the Minister and his department are displayed with regard to this education and training action. I refer to the aspects of compulsory education and adult education.

12 January 1981 will in future be regarded and recognized as a day of exceptional significance in the history of the education and training of Black people in the Republic of South Africa. As has already been said, on that day, compulsory education was introduced countrywide in 38 different regions and 202 schools, and this affected the lives of approximately 40 000 pupils. What is praiseworthy in respect of the introduction of compulsory education is that it followed a specific and carefully planned preparatory period or programme which had been launched many years before. Certain objectives were set for that programme which had to be achieved before compulsory education could be introduced. I refer to the years spent in reducing the pupil/teacher ratio, the reduction in the admission age, the introduction of compulsory attendance in lower primary classes, the phasing-out of double sessions, the provision of pre-primary education and comprehensive building programmes aimed at the elimination of the backlog. Only after these objectives, inter alia, had been achieved did the department proceed to introduce compulsory education. Its introduction should be seen as the most important step in the achievement of the ideal of equal educational opportunities for all in our country. The introduction of compulsory education must lead to pupils being taught from an early age, as a result of which they will be able to complete their school career at an early age too. Due to compulsory education the failure rate will also have to drop considerably. What is more, the homogeneous class groups will improve the quality of class teaching. It will be a different situation to the present, in which one may encounter a boy of 10 years in Sub A with another of six years. The introduction of compulsory education has been facilitated due to thorough spadework by the department and the hon. the Minister. A summary decision was not simply taken to introduce compulsory education. Meetings were held in advance with school committees that had been fully informed with regard to compulsory school attendance. Compulsory education was only introduced after the department had received the mandate of the parents, through the school committees, that they were prepared to have it introduced.

Linked to progressively introduced compulsory education is the issue of free books. Time does not permit me to dwell on this. I just wish to point out that it was found, by way of the random test carried out in May this year, that of the free books issued in January, 40% were already no longer suitable for further use. Are we not pouring funds into a bottomless pit by way of our system of free books? How much are we not losing thereby? When books are purchased, a small home library is built up. I read Uit Oerwoud en Vlakte for the first time when my elder brother brought it home after using it as a prescribed book for a year. I developed my love of geography, history, science and mathematics after looking at and spending time on the books which an elder brother had brought home. There was a small domestic library in every home. I could elaborate on that. It is not only I who had that experience. We have all had it. How can we deprive our people of the wonderful experience of having their own small and intimate home library?

I wish to say the following in connection with the issue of free books. I honestly believe that we started providing free books to pupils in our schools before any in-depth and scientific investigation had been carried out into the advantages and disadvantages of doing so. I therefore wish to appeal to the hon. the Minister, who can be so enthusiastic in regard to the whole matter of education and training and everything that involves, to take the initiative and, in conjunction with the other educational departments—all departments, provincial and national, concerned with the education and training of our youth—to ensure that a committee or commission be appointed to carry out an in-depth investigation into the whole question of the issue of free books.

Another matter to which I should like to refer is the question of adult education. It has been stressed repeatedly how important and how fine this institution is. What is important is that these centres for adult education are not simply established. Excellent control is exercised over them by inspectors who carry out inspection work. Who is served by these centres? In the first place, they create the opportunity for serving teachers to improve their qualifications. They also help other adults to improve their qualifications, as the hon. the Minister has just strikingly explained. To me, however, the most praiseworthy is the question of training in literacy.

Let us consider what this department does, how it sees this important task of literacy training. There are many Black people who are unable to read or write. Now, it is not simply a case of us teaching these people to read and write. Courses are also offered for the teachers who are to perform this task. For example, last year nine courses were introduced for teachers who are to offer this course on literacy, and in my opinion this is a fine achievement. This is an excellent illustration of the idealism, the enthusiasm and the correctness with which these teachers tackle a task. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I should like to congratulate the hon. member for Kimberley North on a very good and well-considered speech.

I want to refer to a front-page report in Die Afrikaner of 15 July 1981. I quote—

The reporter of Die Afrikaner makes certain allegations and states, inter alia—

What are the facts? As regards the matriculation and senior certificate examinations written by Black candidates, the following principles apply. The Department of Education and Training does not offer its own examination at matriculation level. Black candidates can choose whether they want to write the examination of the Department of National Education or that of the Joint Matriculation Board. More than 95% of all Black matriculants write the National Senior Certificate of the Department of National Education.

The question papers for all subjects are drawn up and moderated by examiners and moderators appointed by the Department of National Education. In the case of a few practical subjects not offered by the Department of National Education, special approval has to be obtained to offer such practical subjects. However, the appointment of moderators and examiners for these subjects, too, is still subject to the approval of the Department of National Education.

In all instances, and in the case of other education departments offering matriculation or senior certificate examinations, the question papers are approved by external moderators of the Joint Matriculation Board. Correcting is carried out under the supervision of chief and senior examiners and subsequently moderated by internal moderators of the Department of National Education and the Joint Matriculation Board.

Every department that offers such examinations had adjustment committees—that is nothing new—to which members of the Joint Matriculation Board are appointed. If adjustments are deemed necessary, they are only effected in terms of scientifically determined reliability limits and standard distributions based on the raw score achievements of pupils over a period of five years. The representatives of the Joint Matriculation Board peruse these raw scores, and adjustments and the examination results are not approved before the Joint Matriculation Board has given its approval to the adjustments.

Any allegation that Black pupils are being placed in an advantageous position in comparison with other population groups is therefore devoid of all truth. Precisely the same requirements and standards for passing are set and there is no question of a pre-determined percentage of pupils having to pass, or unearned points being allocated.

As regards the statement by the anynomous letterwriter that an eventual pass rate of 86% was achieved, what are the facts? In the November 1980 examination, 57,6% of the Black candidates passed. In ten subjects there were no adjustments. In the case of a further seven subjects no adjustments were made in the intervals 0% to 39%. In the remaining cases, where adjustments were deemed necessary in certain intervals, the adjustment was between 0% and 5%. Only in the case of one subject was an adjustment of 7% necessary.

The generalization that widespread irregularities occur is equally untrue. All educational departments have to contend with irregularities to a greater or lesser extent, particularly when it is borne in mind that examinations are conducted countrywide at literally thousands of different examination centres. The Department of Education and Training, that acts as agent of the Department of National Education in the conducting of examinations, sees to it that all examination regulations and directives are strictly complied with in order to ensure the most stringent possible supervision and control. For example, regional directives and inspectors are directly involved in the super-vision and control of examinations. Moreover, if irregularities do take place, an immediate and thorough investigation is instituted and the necessary disciplinary steps taken.

Who, then, is this so-called informed spokesman of Die Afrikaner who does not even have the courage to put his name to his letter? He introduces himself as follows in his letter in the same edition of this newspaper—

Then he goes on with this rubbish in this letter and concludes with this amazing statement. He says—

Here again we have a typical example of the mendacious politics practiced by the HNP. This so-called educationist—from Pretoria, no less—visits some good friend who is responsible for the processing of points. He looks at the points and he looks at the standard, and behold! He draws the wildest conclusions and states them in an anonymous letter. Die Afrikaner follows this up with a shameful frontpage report, and in this way the Department of Education and Training, and the Government, too, of course is cast under suspicion. This is another eloquent example of the pernicious, mendacious politics of the HNP, calculated to blacken the name of the Nationalist Government and its actions in the most scandalous fashion.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Smithfield will forgive me if I do not follow directly on the points he made. I want, however, to focus attention on some of the problems associated with education in the rural areas as the hon. member for King William’s Town has done. However, before doing so, I should like to pay tribute, as did the hon. the Minister, to what farmers have done for Black education on their farms. The hon. the Minister mentioned some statistics here. He told us that there were some 5 000 of these schools which employed 10 000 teachers and which educate some 500 000 children. When we consider, Sir, that in toto in South Africa there are no more than 70 000 farmers, this means that one in every 14 farmers has a school on his farm. I work that out at something like 90 children per farmer and that is a splendid achievement. It is one that would be hard to beat in any farming community anywhere in the world. Obviously there is room for improvement and I am sure the farmers are not going to rest on their laurels.

Does Helen agree?

Oh yes, with provisos.

Mr. Chairman, let us remember that supervising a school means that the farmer is responsible for interviewing and hiring the teacher, providing the facilities, seeing to it generally that the school functions smoothly and maintaining that school in a decent state. What are the problems? Firstly, in terms of the system, Black farm labourers are entirely dependent upon the goodwill and interest of the farmer and, in particular, of the farmer who is strategically or centrally situated. Unless such a farmer is prepared to open a school there will either be no education at all or else a long walk to the nearest school some kilometres away will be involved. As I have mentioned, Sir, it is to the credit of the farming community that a great many farmers have gone out of their way to provide these schools. However, it is unfortunately true that there are still areas in which schools have not yet been provided. For example, there is a valley not very far from where I live in which there are about 30 children who have to walk up to 25 km to school daily because the local farmers will not provide a school. In all weathers these children have to walk up and down a steep mountain pass. When one works this out, it amounts to about 500 km per month, or, put another way, it means that in one school year they will walk from Cape Town to Johannesburg and back twice. That is an awful long way for an eight-year-old-child to have to walk, but they do it. I cannot see the White community allowing that sort of situation to continue in their community for very long without having it changed. However, Blacks in this situation are powerless to do anything about it. They depend on the White farmer to put it right.

Black schools upon White farms are subject to summary closure. I maintain that farmers are the finest and most generous people in the world, but one still finds the exception that proves the rule, and I will again quote an example. In the Eastern Cape a short while ago a farmer bought a farm on which there was a school which housed 120 pupils. It had been there for many years and it had done a fine job. However, this farmer did not want the school so he just closed it down and virtually overnight 120 children were left without schooling. To cut a long story short, Mr. Chairman, education for Blacks on White farms is a privilege, and not a right, and it is a privilege which can be summarily withdrawn. There are few hon. members in this House who would defend all aspects of the system. I shall be making some constructive suggestions towards improvement a little later in my speech.

There is also another major problem. It is the policy of the department not to provide facilities for secondary school education in rural areas. All secondary schools must be built in urban areas. One can understand the rationale behind this and I agree with it. It is sensible and makes good sense. However, the catch comes when the farm child attempts to gain admittance to the urban secondary school, because according to departmental policy, the urban child must get preference. Only if there are still places left in the school after all the urban children have been admitted, do the farm children have a chance to attend. Anyone familiar with the crowded state of most Black schools will understand that it becomes an almost superhuman task for rural parents to get their child admitted. However, their troubles have not then ended. As the hon. member for King William’s Town pointed out there is a distinct lack of hostel accommodation. I was very pleased to hear the hon. the Minister tell us about the plans to build a hostel at Fort Beaufort. This is a start. It is a breakthrough and we from these benches welcome it wholeheartedly as I am sure the hon. members on that side will do. The lack of boarding facilities in the Black townships means that up to now the farm parent has had to find someone in town, a friend or relation, who has been prepared to accommodate his child. Usually he has had to pay a very high fee for such accommodation and this creates real hardship in many cases.

What happens in practice is that most of the nearly half million Black children who grow up on farms and attend farm schools, after having reached standard four, standard six or however close to standard six they can get, are then cut off from further education, however bright they may be. This problem ties in with the problem of the provision of Black farm schools. The education of a Black child can be held to ransom by either a farmer who refuses to provide a school or a headmaster who will not take a child in, or a relative who refuses to provide accommodation. It is a very tenuous path that these children have to walk. There is no security for a farm child because he does not know for certain that he is going to get a place in a secondary school.

An argument that has been advanced by the Administration Boards when this has been taken up with them, is that the parents of children in town have contributed to the funding of urban schools, and therefore it is their right to have first option for places. The farm child accordingly does not have an equal right to a place in the school. But, Mr. Chairman, for years now farmers have been paying a substantial levy to the Administration Boards and have been getting nothing in return for it. It is a bone of great contention among all the farmers I know. I suggest that if we know that the levy that we were paying was being utilized for the provision of educational or boarding facilities for the children of our workers, we would feel a lot happier about paying that levy. I would suggest that a way to overcome these difficulties would be to make provision for adequate boarding facilities for children from rural areas. I believe that this is a development that must take place, and I want to stress that I welcome the hon. the Minister’s announcement that a start has been made with the provision of boarding facilities.

I also feel that we should do away with the barrier between the primary education of the rural child and secondary education. I believe that all Black children, urban and rural alike, must have equal access to secondary school education. There should not be this discrimination against the child on the farm. At the same time it goes without saying that those farmers who have gone out of their way to provide schooling, should be congratulated, and more farmers should be encouraged to make facilities available to their labourers.

These are some of the problems that I see in this regard and I have made some suggestions as to how these problems can be solved.

Mr. Chairman, I agree with many of the points that the hon. member for Albany raised. This year we are hearing a completely different sound from those benches than was the case last year. I remember that one of the speakers on that side accused us or the department last year of allowing our farmers to construct farm schools simply to obtain cheap labour. However, the hon. member for Albany has painted a completely different picture now and, as I have already said, I agree with many of the points that he raised. If he alleges that many of the children have to walk 25 km to the schools, I feel that he should raise the issue with the farmers concerned. The farming associations in the area should pool their resources and arrange for schooling facilities. It is not the responsibility of the department to erect a school there, but they are prepared to provide facilities for such a school. However, I shall leave the hon. member at that.

The ’eighties will go down in history as a decade of education, training, preparation and qualification. It will always be to the credit of the NP Government that they created the opportunity for people to qualify themselves for a certain task or profession. The Department of Education and Training definitely plays a very important role in this process. The Black child is being given the opportunity to complete his schooling, and after that he can undergo university or technical training. Furthermore he is being put in a position, whilst he is working, to improve his qualifications. It is clear from the budget for the past three years how serious the Government is in their approach to this important matter. The hon. the Minister referred to this, and therefore I do not want to repeat it. There was an increase of R63 million in the Vote for 1980-’81, in comparison with that of 1979-’80. In this year’s budget an additional R125 million, or 52%, has been voted, as the hon. the Minister also pointed out. This is a very large sum of money.

The start of training depends on primary education. The Black child, and even the White child, must be able to count, read and write before they can undergo further training. The general forming of the child is an important facet in primary education, including the intellectual, physical, religious and moral development. It is in this regard that the farm school is so important, and I should like to dwell on this for a moment. At the moment there are approximately million Black farm workers in White areas. The hon. the Minister said—and the hon. member for Albany repeated it—that at the moment there are 4 782 farm schools with approximately 459 000 pupils and 10 000 teachers who have to teach these children. The department subsidizes these farm school buildings by R2 000 per classroom, and in the past year a subsidy of R481 000 was paid for 322 classrooms. However, this does not give the full picture. Many farmers erect these school buildings without even applying for a subsidy. They do so at their own expense, because the farm school in the platteland plays a very important role. The building is not used for teaching purposes only. The building that is erected there, is also used for church services, prayer meetings and social functions.

I want to break a lance for the teachers that teach at those schools, because they are not as well off as their equivalents in the schools in towns and cities. They have to sacrifice a great deal, because they are far from certain facilities. The disposition that is displayed by the teachers in the platteland, is very important for the farmers. During the riots or unrest last year, not a single farm school was involved, whilst pressure was nevertheless exerted upon them to participate as well.

Tonight I should like to put a request to the hon. the Minister that the teacher who teaches at the farm school should receive an extra grant. I am doing so so that we can attract better educationists to the farm schools, because there are few hostel facilities for those children if they have to go to schools in towns in order to receive secondary education. That is why they must be fully developed in the primary section.

A further request that I should like to make, is that aids or working material—equipment such as clay, cardboard or wool and thread—should be made available in the primary school. This must be done to increase the possibilities for handwork or to develop the artistic abilities of the children. At the moment they have to purchase that material from their own pockets. I have here an example that I should like to show the hon. the Minister. One of the farm schools that I know, has an art class, but the only material that the pupils used, were grains of maize and wheat sorghum.

The best products.

They created this little work of art entirely on their own, without using any other aid. I feel that the abilities of these children should be developed to the full. I know there are always problems with finances, but cannot the R30 which the manager of a school receives, be used for the farm school? Perhaps we could also supplement it here and there. I feel it would be quite adequate for providing for these needs.

In conclusion, I just want to congratulate the hon. the Minister on his steadfast action last year when riots break out at certain schools. I know it was not an easy time for him as Minister. I know he is very concerned with the interests of the children, particularly the Black children, but nevertheless he took firm action and took no nonsense from the trouble makers. However, if this should happen again—and of course I hope it will not happen again—we should like him to act just as firmly in the future in order to combat this.

Mr. Chairman, I just want to say to the hon. member for Winburg that we wholeheartedly support his plea to the hon. the Minister about the aids and facilities that must be established for farm schools. The hon. member for King William’s Town also made his plea, and we agree with that as well.

†The issue which I should like to discuss with the hon. the Minister this evening is that I hope he will be able to help us to solve the mystery concerning literacy training for Black adults in South Africa. The reason why I am going to discuss this question with the hon. the Minister is because the hon. the Minister of Manpower, when I debated the matter with him for 2½ years in the House, said that the question of adult literacy training is not his responsibility, but the responsibility of the hon. the Minister of Education and Training. I therefore want to ask the hon. the Minister to pay specific attention to this problem. Perhaps when he replies to the debate this evening he can give us some answers to the questions I am going to put to him.

I just want to sketch the background briefly. In terms of the Education and Training Act, Act No. 90 of 1979, the hon. the Minister is empowered, in terms of sections 5, 8 and 9 of the Act, to provide funds for specific institutions that provide for instance adult education and literacy training. As the hon. the Minister and hon. members know, however, the hon. the Minister cannot provide funds to any institution or establishment which is not a school, unless of course they do not provide training for gain. But any institution where this is done for gain has to be registered in order to qualify for support from the hon. the Minister’s department. From the report of the hon. the Minister’s department and from the budget we notice that provision is being made for an expenditure of some R802 000. I am referring to Vote 16, programme 8. The hon. the Minister has commendably increased the contribution in that regard from R549 000 to R802 000 for the coming financial year. This represents a commendable improvement of 48% for the provision of literacy training. I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether he visualizes that it will be possible—and I cannot see that it will be possible in terms of Act No. 90 of 1979—for a company or industry that provides inhouse literacy training for its employees to benefit financially from tax incentives or from contributions by the hon. the Minister’s department. This is a very serious problem, because the hon. the Minister himself says there is insufficient infrastructure available to cater for the needs of all those Black adults that require literacy training. To put the parameters around the problem, it is interesting to see from the report of the department that some 9 288 individuals benefited from adult literacy training as distinct from adult education. These are the figures for the past year. What is even more interesting are the age groups of the people who are taking advantage of adult literacy training. They are almost equally divided between males and females. In the age group 16 to 19 years of age, which is the age group when most Blacks have already left school, there were 923 pupils. The age group 20 to 29 years of age consisted of 2 642 people, and the age group 30 to 39 years of age, of 2 909 adults who took advantage of the training and were able to obtain basic literacy training. What is even more fascinating to see is that in the age group over 60 years of age 162 people were able to take advantage of adult literacy training. This is in terms of established schools, and that is what the hon. the Minister is making provision for here. These institutions cannot, however, fulfil the total need for adult literacy training. There are more than 7 million economically active Blacks in South Africa, and I venture to say that more than 50% of those adults have less than six years’ formal education, which means Std. 4 or below. That is the manpower, the womanpower, the resource we have to train for upper and higher skill categories.

These people will not be returning to school. They cannot be aided by the institutions which have received funds from the hon. the Minister’s department. It cannot be done because they are geographically far apart. In many cases it is impossible for the Black employee who lives in a Black township to travel home and then to the institution in the evening and home again. It becomes almost physically impossible. Therefore only very limited numbers can take advantage of the adult literacy training provided by the institutions which the hon. the Minister can finance in terms of Act No. 90 of 1979. I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether private companies, factories, industries and mining houses can obtain some kind of fiscal incentive, such as a tax incentive, or some other remuneration for the adult literacy training programmes they run. I am sure the hon. the Minister is aware of the fact that there are a number of organizations which pay out of their own profits to establish adult literacy training class

Looking at the overall picture, it is interesting to see that 64 042 Black adults took advantage of adult education programmes, of whom roughly 21 000 improved their standard of education at the primary level—although they are adults already—while some 33 000 improved their education to secondary school level. That is very commendable, but our real problem in South Africa is to make up for past inequities, past inefficiencies, incorrect policies applied by that side of the House, which have left millions of Blacks without the opportunity to improve their quality of life. With the greatest will in the world they cannot improve their quality of life unless they have basic literacy. I believe that this is very important and, as the hon. the Minister of Manpower has shifted the responsibility on to this hon. Minister, we would be very interested to find out from him what his attitude is to this and how he sees his department being able to assist industry and commerce in this regard; and perhaps not only industry and commerce but also other institutions which do not qualify in terms of the Act and which could possibly draw on the resources of the hon. Minister’s department, especially his fiscal resources, to fill this existing vacuum in South Africa.

Then I should just like to draw to the hon. Minister’s attention the fact that it seems as if most of the adult education and literacy training is occurring in the Northern Transvaal, on the Highveld and in the Johannesburg area. That is of course where there is a lot of economic activity. There is a tremendous amount of economic activity there. We are, however, very disappointed to see that with our very large Zulu population in Natal, very few institutions and establishments exist there for the training of Blacks, although it is very interesting to note that, when it comes to language groups, among the Black people whose numbers I mentioned earlier who take advantage of adult literacy training, Zulu-speaking people predominate, but they live in the Transvaal and on the Highveld. We of course are very concerned that in Natal in particular progress should be made and establishments should be set up for adult literacy training.

The objection the hon. the Minister may raise is: Who is to teach all these people and give them basic literacy training? Fortunately there are a number of fairly sophisticated adult literacy programmes which have been developed and written in South Africa. The hon. the Minister probably knows about the Arnold-Varty programme which was written at Natal University and which is very successful indeed. However, companies are not that interested in utilizing it for in-house literacy training because there is no tax incentive. One can of course appeal to their loyalty, their sense of duty and their moral values and say to them that companies should provide this training even though it is going to cost the money and they are going to make nothing out of it. But I believe the State must take the initiative here in indicating the direction and positively motivating companies to undertake this, because the savings in the long run to the hon. the Minister’s department will be tremendous.

The hon. the Minister’s department will not have to provide the infrastructure or the salaries of the teachers. The companies will do that and they will do it willingly provided there is some sort of financial return to them. The Department of Education and Training is of course in competition with other departments. The hon. the Minister of Manpower is very concerned about the development of skills and trades amongst the working population, and there is a desperate need for that. Of course, they are looking after that particular area and they are recruiting people for training in that area. This hon. Minister, however, will have to be competitive with those other trades and with the skills training programmes and will have to provide adult literacy training courses.

It is interesting to note that in the total programme of adult training which is a relatively new innovation—and I believe it is going reasonably successful—the per capita expenditure on the primary and secondary adult improvement programmes was approximately R94 per pupil. On adult literacy training the figure is R89 per capita, which is a very low price to pay for affording the members of other population groups in South Africa the opportunity of improving themselves. It is a sort of educational self-help programme, and the per capita cost in that respect is very low indeed. It is quite admirable that one can in fact improve one’s standard of education at such a relatively low cost. Therefore I commend to the hon. the Minister that he should direct his attention to the whole question of adult literacy training in respect of those people who are already in employment and who have no chance to go back to school, people who cannot take advantage of the institutions created in terms of the Act, but who can and will be trained by their employers, on condition that the hon. the Minister’s department provides the resources in terms of incentives to employers.

Mr. Chairman, I have listened attentively to the hon. member for Durban North. I know my own limitations, and I am very well acquainted with the abilities of the hon. member for Durban North. Therefore I shall not attempt to solve his problems for him tonight. I believe that he put his problems to the hon. the Minister. However, allow me to say that the hon. member for Durban North had a problem yesterday which I solved for him. He knows about it. [Interjections.]

I am talking about fiscal matters now.

This evening and this afternoon, repeated references have been made to the limited funds allocated to the Department of Education and Training. Of course, this is a matter which is very close to the hearts of all of us, and I suppose we should all like to have considerably more funds made available to this department. There have also been repeated references this evening to priorities in this connection. Of course, the general availability of funds is severely restricted today as a result of one very important priority we have to observe. This is the communist onslaught we have to resist, the onslaught by the ANC and by Swapo as well.

Hon. members will agree with me—especially hon. members in the defence study groups—and will also be able to confirm that as a result of that onslaught, an enormous amount has to be spent on defence, which we should much have preferred to spend on the activities of this department, a department which has such important tasks to perform.

However, I should also like to refer tonight to some of the important tasks performed by this department in spite of limited funds. I believe that we often tend to overlook the important achievements of this department. I think one should refer to these more often, and I should like to refer tonight to a very important task which the department undertook last year, a project which I want to call the “outdoor education action”. This is a programme or course which is aimed at giving attention in an organized way to non-formal education and specifically to outdoor education. The policy in presenting this project is to present youth activities in an organized way within the school context. The department believes that it is not enough to give attention only to the formal education of the pupil.

Now one asks oneself: What do we mean by formal education? Formal education is the education and instruction of the pupil within the four walls of the classroom, to put it simply. In formal education, great emphasis is laid on the pupil’s intellectual abilities. However, the pupil is not only an intellectual being. He is also a physical being, a religious being, an emotional being, a social being and a creative being. For this reason, the Department of Education and Training felt that education should provide for all the aspects which go to make up a human being. That is why the concept of outdoor education was strongly emphasized. By outdoor education, formal education can be beautifully supplemented. When we talk about non-formal education, therefore, it means the essential supplementing of the child’s formal education. It means that the pupil will be instructed and educated in his totality. It was with a view to this that the department started this project which I call outdoor education last year. It was a small beginning, but what is important is it is a beginning. When one looks at the relatively small amount of R20 000 which is being appropriated for this project this year, it is a pity that a much larger amount has not been allocated for this purpose, and therefore we should like to express the hope that a considerably larger amount will be appropriated for this in the next budget. This amount is small, but Rome was not built in a day, and we know about the fine plans which the department has for this project in its intention to promote the after-school activities of our young people in particular. For this reason, the department began last year and brought together 1 800 inspectors, principals and teachers at 30 different places in our country, where they explored and reflected on this whole new project and did everything in their power to get this project off the ground. According to the report we received, there was a very positive interest on the part of the teachers. There is great enthusiasm, and the attempts at training youth leaders have hitherto been very successful. More than 90 youth leaders have been trained up to now. They are in the field now, helping to carry out this project. The programme is under way, and although there are many problem areas, one of the most important is the fact that there is a great shortage of suitable areas for young people. Much has still to be done to create these facilities. It is true that the Administration Boards in the Transvaal and elsewhere have made many of their youth areas and recreation facilities available for the presentation of this project and for the courses that are offered. There are also church and other benevolent organizations which are making available their areas at different places in our country, and we know that the department is very selective in choosing those areas.

I should like to break a lance here tonight for the Administration Boards. These boards are often unjustly criticized for what is done. However, when we see the way in which they are making facilities available for the presentation of these courses, one is grateful for that.

In particular, I wish to refer—if time allows me—to one of those youth areas near Zeerust in the constituency of the hon. the Minister. There we have a beautiful area of more than 700 morgen which has really been beautifully developed. It is an area with lovely ridges and ravines in which at least 71 species of trees have already been identified. It is also a game park in which at least 16 kinds of game are being kept at the moment, including kudu, zebra, gemsbok, rhebuck, red hartebeest, waterbuck, nyala, blesbuck, bush-buck, eland, springbok and even ostriches. These facilities are ideally suited to this outdoor education project and one is grateful for the fact that they are being made available. There are also other facilities at this particular holiday resort which really come very close indeed to the facilities in the Kruger National Park, and one is also very grateful for this, for the sake of our Black young people who have a great need for this kind of non-formal educational activity. We want to thank the Department of Education and Training, as well as the Department of Co-operation and Development, for the fact that these facilities are being made available there, and we would express the hope and expectation that the Department of Education and Training will continue this project which was launched last year and that it will be very successful in the future.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to begin by responding to one or two remarks that have been made across the floor of the House this evening.

The first of these is the view expressed from that side that each group in this country must in fact have its own educational system. That point of view represents a fundamental difference between us. A question I should like to put to hon. members on the other side of the House—I know that it goes somewhat beyond the scope of this debate—is: What about the Coloureds? The hon. the Prime Minister is on record as saying that he does not see the Coloured people as a separate group. I should like to hear the thinking from that side of the House in this regard.

I should also like to mention to the hon. the Minister that in fact bussing forms no part of our policy whatsoever. We still believe that schools should serve their local areas and that if a Black man happens to live in the area, he is quite entitled to send his children to the school in question. In fact, if he does live in the area, the chances are that he will identify more with the people in that area than with the people in any other area.

One other matter that has been raised by hon. members on the other side of the House is that speaker after speaker has drawn comparisons. They have compared developments between 1950 and the present or from 1970 up to the present and situations in this country have been compared with those in other countries. I am not denying the importance of this but one thing I want to emphasize very strongly is that when Black people draw comparisons they do so between themselves and the Whites. They are not interested in what is happening in Paraguay or Uruguay or Zambia or Malawi or anywhere else. They draw comparisons between themselves and the Whites in this country. That is the only comparison in which they are interested. I do not want to be negative and claim that there have been no improvements. I believe that there have been fantastic improvements over the past few years especially when we see the increased numbers of Blacks attending technical colleges and the actual increase in the number of matriculants. We on this side of the House are trying to point out some of the problems that will be facing us within the next 20 years and are trying to assist, where we do not differ too much, in finding some sort of accommodation as far as these problems are concerned. I think that what we are facing now is a backlog in education due to the deliberate policy or otherwise of hon. members on that side of the House. Therefore, any criticism that we may have to pass in relation to these problems is directed more at the predecessors of the hon. the Minister rather than at the hon. the Minister himself.

If we are going to provide educational facilities for Black people comparable to those for Whites and upgrade these, it will be a formidable task over the next 20 years. If we are going to improve the educational standard to the level of that for Whites, it will in fact be a more formidable task. There is no doubt, and I think hon. members on that side of the House have said as much, that Black education simply is inferior to that of Whites. The hon. member for Pinelands, for example, pointed out that expenditure per Black child projected for 1980-’81 is R113 per child whereas for White children it is R1 071. In addition, the qualifications of Black school teachers are obviously also inferior. More than 80% of Black school teachers only have a Std. VIII education. The pupil/teacher ratio in White schools is 1:19; in Black schools it is 1:46. In addition to this there are approximately 2 900 schools where the double session system is in operation, while 690 schools are involved in the platoon system. This means that approximately 10% of all teachers and 17% of all students are involved in these systems.

I am sure it is the hon. the Minister’s intention to phase this out. I believe this type of schooling only leads to a lowering in standards because of the lack of facilities. I hope he will give us the assurance that it is his intention to phase these out.

A number of speakers on that side of the House have mentioned the increased number of students who pass their matriculation examination. I think this is a very welcome improvement. However, what they do not point out is the number of students who drop out of the system between Std. VI and matric. Only 14% of Black students in Std. VI eventually reach matric, whereas approximately 69% of White students go from Std. VI and progress through to matric. Again I believe that this is due to a lack of facilities available to Black children.

I want to give a few other statistics. Currently there are 1,9 students out of every 1 000 of our Black population in matric and 12,3 students out of every 1 000 of our White population are in matric. If by the year 2000 we are going to increase Black students in matric to the very low figure of five per 1 000 of the population, we are going to have to create facilities for 139 000 Black matriculants by the year 2000. If we are going to make this comparable to Whites, we are going to need space for approximately 278 000 Black matriculants. That assumes that we have more or less the same age distribution throughout the population.

83 000 Whites were registered for technical training last year, and the hon. the Minister told us tonight that 23 000 Black students were registered for technical training. I must compliment him on an impressive increase from 3 505 to nearly 23 000 in a matter of approximately 18 months. I have calculated a few figures from this. This works out at 188 White students per 100 000 of the population receiving some sort of technical training. It also works out at 14 Black students per 100 000 of the population receiving some sort of technical training. Proportionately on a population basis this means that for every one Black student in a technical institution there are, approximately 54 White students. There again, we have a large backlog that we have to make up. This presents problems in the years ahead.

There is a similar situation with universities. There are ten White university students for each Black university student. Proportionately on a population basis this amounts to 40:1, which again is a vast backlog which we have to make up. Earlier tonight the hon. member Mr. Theunissen spoke about the informal curriculum in education. Here I believe Black students are particularly disadvantaged. They have very little contact with the outside economy where they are going to have to work and where they are going to have to earn their living one day. Because of this they lose out on this very valuable aspect of their education.

I have said in this House before and I want to say again that in my view it is very important for Blacks to see that the educational system is fair because, if they do not look upon it as being fair, I think we have a tremendous potential for conflict in this regard. They blame their failures on the educational system instead of blaming themselves and that is why I think it is absolutely essential that Black education should be upgraded to the same level as White education, at least as far as expenditure is concerned. I should therefore like to call on the hon. the Minister to state whether he is unequivocally in favour of the same expenditure for Black and White students alike. I believe that he will say yes to this. Obviously, this is something that cannot be done straight away but will have to be phased in. However, then I believe intentions are not enough, and I should like the hon. the Minister to draw up and announce a long-term plan showing how and when they intend to bring about parity in education. A large amount of money is involved in this and it is a long-term project, but I believe a project of this nature must, in fact, be tackled on this basis.

I would like to support the suggestion made by the hon. member for Pinelands in which he called for a select committee, as I feel that a committee of this nature could assist in these long-term projections and also in drawing up a long-term plan to provide for equality in education for all South Africans.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg South has joined in the chorus that we have often heard, saying that we should not juggle with comparisons. Of course, it suits anyone to say so when the comparisons contradict his arguments. The idea has also been expressed that the Black people are only interested in comparisons between White and Black. This may be so, but then it is the task, not only of this side of the House, but of that side as well, to provide the necessary perspective, and if this has to be done by means of comparisons, that is also in order. However, I want to leave it at that, for the hon. member has not been in this House for long, and I believe that when he has acquired a broad perspective concerning the whole question of Black education, he will most probably present his speech somewhat differently.

When my time expired at the end of my previous speech, I concluded by referring to the building programme. I said, inter alia, that since January 1981, no fewer than 21 schools had been built at an amount of R6,7 million, and this is an excellent achievement. For the current financial year, tenders for no fewer than 220 building projects have been called for, including 29 secondary schools, 47 primary schools, a second phase of two teachers’ colleges, two technikons and 1 117 additional classrooms. This is a gigantic task and I believe it is a tremendous building programme, which we are grateful for. For the three years up to March 1982, the intention is that 7 595 classrooms will be built. When one compares this with the 25 000 classrooms built during the entire period before 1979, this also represents excellent progress.

As far as the budget is concerned, I only wish to bring the following to the attention of this House. We have been given comparisons of the budget during the past year, but with regard to the last two years I want to point out that the increase of 26% and 39% in the budget of the past two financial years in respect of Black education, as against a total increase of 13% and 17% in the total Government expenditure, is surely a valid comparison to show that the Government is really serious in its intention to promote and to solve the problems in Black education, especially in the light of the argument advanced by the hon. member for Pinelands, namely that far more money should be appropriated for Black education in the budget.

Do you not agree?

Of course, if there are funds available. As the hon. the Minister has said, however, it is no use simply voting the funds if it is not in line with the planning of the department. Then it would only be a waste of money, and I think the hon. member will agree with me.

I now want to go on to a somewhat different subject. We are now talking about the achievements of the Black pupils. This side of the House and that side of the House agree that the facilities in Black education are still inferior to those in White education, but in spite of that those people achieve brilliant results, and I say that as a man who was involved in education for 22 years myself. When we consider the facilities they have, the teacher/pupil ratio, and the qualifications of the teachers, I maintain that excellent work is being done there. Therefore I wish to pay tribute tonight to the Black teachers who are providing excellent instruction under difficult circumstances. To these I add the Black and White members of the inspectorate, who also do excellent work under very difficult circumstances, and not only with regard to education as such, because those are the people who are sometimes faced with problems when confrontation is sought by people who do not have the interests of Black education at heart. However, I also want to praise the Black pupils for their eagerness to learn.

We have already referred to the achievements of the matriculants. The report mentions on page 287 that in 1960, 56,1% of the Std. 8 pupils passed. In 1970, the figure was 69,8%, and in 1979, 67,8%. In 1960, 79% of the Std. 6 pupils passed. In 1970, the figure was 77,9%. In 1975, Std. 5 actually became the senior standard for the primary school, and in 1979, the pass rate was 72,9%. If pupils can maintain such pass rates under those circumstances, it says much for the Black pupils’ eagerness to learn, so I want to congratulate them on their achievement.

There is another matter to which I wish to refer, and that is the parent-teacher associations which exist. The parent-teacher association is a well-known concept in White education and such associations do very good work. Therefore it is very gratifying to learn that most secondary schools in Soweto already have parent-teacher associations as an extremely important link between the school and the parents, especially in the sense that the parents are more closely involved in the problems of the school and are also able to realize the full value of education. At the request of various parties, the department is already providing the necessary guidance for the creation of parent-teacher associations throughout the country.

I also wish to refer briefly to guidance as a school subject. One of the hon. members opposite also pointed out the importance of vocational guidance and the hon. the Minister pointed out that we had long been providing a guidance programme in the schools. In the schools themselves, guidance as a school subject has been introduced from the beginning of this year for Std. 5 and throughout the secondary school. One period a week is set aside all the standards, plus two periods a week for Std. 6, i.e. just as we have it in the White schools. This syllabus for school guidance is very important and includes personality guidance which helps the Black pupil, by means of individual attention, to solve his own personality problems and problems of adjustment at the school. It also includes educational guidance, guidance with regard to subject choices, examination techniques, or how to write examinations, and guidance concerning study techniques. In other words, it entails exactly the same things as we have in the White schools as well. Then, of course, there is the general vocational guidance which furnishes particulars concerning professions, possible professions, possibilities of promotion in professions, etc.

Then there is another very important project undertaken by the department which I am personally very glad about. I think it would be an excellent idea in White education as well. I am referring to the student magazine Student. I have a few editions of it here. It is a monthly magazine sent to all pupils in Black secondary schools falling under the control of the Department of Education and Training. Approximately 200 000 copies are printed every month. This monthly magazine contains extremely interesting information. In the October 1980 edition there are reports under the headings “Press will get exam results”, “Matrieksertifikaat die sleutel tot universiteitstudie”, “The right way to study” and “How to make the most of examinations”. In the January 1981 edition, there are reports under the headings “New subjects for high schools”, “Sound study methods for success” and “The Health Inspector”. In the February 1981 edition, there is a report under the heading “Schools shine in examinations”, next to which pictures are published of the 10 Black pupils who achieved the best results. There is also a report under the heading “Prescribed books: Stds. 9 and 10”. In the March 1981 edition, there is a report under the heading “Mabopane East Technikon to offer several new courses”. There is extremely important information in this monthly magazine which is sent to schools and which provides very useful information to the pupils and which also assists them, not only in respect of their study habits, but also by informing them of the activities of other schools. An extremely interesting aspect of the magazine is that pupils may also write letters to the editor and those letters are answered in a regular column. This is something which is naturally stimulating and which the pupils find interesting. I wish to congratulate the department on this fine idea.

Although the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg South said that one should not draw comparisons, and although I know … [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Virginia raised a number of important points tonight. First of all I should like to say I am not familiar with the publication entitled Student to which he referred. I wonder if we cannot arrange through the hon. the Minister for the chief spokesmen on Education and Training on each side to receive copies of it. It would be useful to have a look at it.

As far as finance is concerned, I made the point earlier in the debate that if one looks at the expenditure on Black education, it represents approximately 1,1% of the gross domestic product. I stand by the point I made earlier, namely that despite the increases that have been made to the department—and this is no reflection on the department—it still does not come anywhere near the projected targets as I outlined them this afternoon and which the hon. the Minister knows better than I do. Therefore I still say that if one is going to take this with deadly seriousness, the hon. the Minister should be knocking at the door of the hon. the Minister of Finance every day of his life, demanding and entreating him for more money, despite all the other needs there may well be in South Africa. I do not believe that the hon. the Minister does not have the ingenuity and ability within his department to make the necessary plans to use more money. I am confident that the hon. the Minister needs more money and can make more use of it. Therefore the hon. the Minister should thank the official Opposition and other hon. members who have spoken about this, because money can be used in a worthwhile manner in his department for the future. The hon. the Minister also suggested that there was something wrong with my figures regarding the number of people between the ages of five and 25 years. My notes indicate that in 1980 the percentage for all groups—not only of the Black group—of those between the ages of five and 25 years was 74% and that that figure will be much higher in the year 2000, namely 83%. If one takes the percentage of their own population group, as distinct from all the groups in South Africa at school, the figure for 1980 was 46,67% and the figure for the year 2000 will be 45,58%. I think we are at one on that. It may be, however, that I did not stress sufficiently that I was talking about all groups rather than just their own group.

The hon. member for Virginia also paid tribute to Black teachers who are battling under extremely difficult circumstances. Of course we are at one on that. Their circumstances are difficult and one pays tribute to them for the quite remarkable job they are doing despite these conditions. I should also like to pay tribute to those who are successful. Not only do they have to contend with difficulties at school, but also with social problems which they experience at home. One thinks of the lack of background, the lack of funds, unemployment problems and transport problems. Despite the many difficulties they face, they do remarkably well.

The question of one department or several is obviously something on which we are poles apart. I want to stress just one point. Of course there are unusual and peculiar problems relating to Black education. Nobody would want to deny that, but just as there are unusual and peculiar problems in rural areas, whether relating to White or Black, and in urban areas, that does not mean to say that one cannot look at the total educational picture so as to gain perspective and make quite sure that the total resources of South Africa, whether in terms of money or people, are used to best advantage for all. I think that that is the other side to it. I am glad that the hon. the Minister is at least going to look at the possibility of a Select Committee. Obviously he will have to talk with his colleagues in the Cabinet about it.

The other point I wanted to make—it is not a popular point but it is a fact—is that ever since 1953 there has been a very real sense of grievance amongst many Blacks. Again, whether we like it or not, the perception of many Black educationists, many Black parents and many Black pupils today in regard to their own department or their own system of education, if you like, is that it is inferior because it is different, because they have known something that used to be quite different or unified. Consequently, if one is going to try to erase the suspicion and the distrust that exist, it may well be that one will have to look very seriously at a new system of education in South Africa. That is our view, but obviously it is a different one to the one the hon. the Minister and his colleagues hold. I am sorry that the hon. the Minister and the chairman of the education and training group on that side of the House seem to be anticipating what the De Lange report is going to recommend and what the Cabinet is going to decide about it. I would have thought that we would first look at the report—that is the point I was trying to make earlier—and then decide, on the merits of the argument, whether there should be changes or not.

In the few minutes left to me, I want to refer to the regulations which govern the Department of Education and Training. The original regulations, we know, were contained in the Government notice of 4 November 1977—as long ago as that. Then they were amended by Government notice of 19 December 1980 and consolidated on 29 May this year. I just want to highlight a couple of these, because I think that some of them are extremely harsh. Firstly, in the Government notice of 1977 there were certain regulations about the admission of children to schools. In the new Government notice, No. 2600, the following have been added: For admission to a Government school permission of the circuit inspector is required; for admission to a community school the permission of the school committee is required; for admission to a State-aided school the permission of the manager is required; in the case of a Government school and a community school the approval of the Secretary, or now the Director-General, of the Department of Education and Training is in addition required for a person who has been expelled from any school or whose name has been removed from the admission register in terms of regulation 8(a). If that applied to White children, can you imagine, Sir, the outcry that would result? It does seem to me that the regulations which obtain are extremely harsh.

They do apply to White pupils.

No, not at all. The hon. the Minister cannot tell me that a reply from the circuit inspector would be needed. I never needed that, and my child goes to a Government school. We simply went to the principal and put his name down. We were living in the area and the principal said it was all right, there was room for the child. There was no discussion; none at all.

[Inaudible.]

Well, I am saying that the regulations are there and that I think they are unduly harsh.

Then, Regulation 2(3) in Government Notice R2258 lays down that no child older than 13 on 31 March of the year of admission shall be admitted to school for the first time. We now have the addition that no person older than 16 years shall without the permission of the Secretary be admitted to or continue to attend any primary school, that no person older than 18 years shall without the permission of the Secretary be admitted to or continue to attend any Std. 6, 7 or 8 class, and also that no person older than 20 years shall without the permission of the Secretary be admitted to or continue to attend any Std. 9 or 10 class. It is quite clear that if there is a boycott situation, for instance, or any other problems at school—and the hon. the Minister will concede this—it is not easy for a child to stand out over and against the crowd. It very often happens that one has a great number of people who are victims of a situation. If they should be involved in a situation like this, and the school is closed, it means that they become older as a result of that …

Sometimes two years, as with the 1976 riots.

Yes, sometimes even one or two years.

This has nothing to do with boycotts.

Well, as it stands it is going to affect certain pupils.

Those pupils can attend the adult training centres because they are adults.

Yes, I know that, but there are many, many people who do not have access to adult training centres. There are very few indeed who have that access. The hon. the Minister knows that. I believe there are people who will be penalized. We all admit that we all want the best possible education, the best building up of our human resources in South Africa, and therefore I believe we should look again at some of these regulations because they are pretty tough.

Then there is one final regulation to which I should like to refer.

Order! The hon. member’s time has expired.

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

How very nice of you. [Interjections.]

Well, I am most grateful to the hon. member for Umhlatuzana for letting me have this extra time. I am obviously making a great deal of sense, and I appreciate the opportunity. [Interjections.] I would not have galloped the way I have if I did not make sense. I will only take another couple of minutes to complete my speech.

I should like to refer paragraph 8.1, which deals with regulation 8 in Government Notice R.2258. That is the old regulation, which provides for expulsion and suspension. In the original wording it included the words “when a pupil conducts himself at school”—this is the operative phrase—“in such a way that in the opinion of the principal the continued attendance of such pupil will be detrimental to the welfare of the school as a whole or to that of any of the pupils”, such pupil could be suspended or expelled. Now, the new regulation—the regulation as consolidated this year—replaces this subregulation, and the main difference is now that the words “at school” have been deleted.

And that is very important.

In other words, it used to be applicable in the case of a child misbehaving at school in such a way that it constituted an offence or that it was detrimental to the welfare of the school as a whole or to that of any of the pupils, in which case the principal was allowed to take action. Now, even after school, at home, on the street corner, on the playing field, or anywhere else, if a child behaves in such a way that it may appear to be detrimental, he can be suspended and expelled from school. That is pretty rough. That could be pretty tough indeed. Again it is the child, the young person, who can be victimized in this way, about whom I am concerned. That is why I ask again for this regulation to be reconsidered.

Finally, I should like to refer to paragraph 8.3, which relates to regulation 8(5) in Government Notice R2258. Here it is stipulated that if a child intentionally or negligently violates any regulation made in terms of the Act, he could be expelled from school. Can one imagine a young person who negligently violates a regulation made in terms of the Act, and who is expelled as a result of that? The same thing could happen if he intentionally destroyed anything at school. He could then also be expelled. I want to tell the hon. member for Virginia that I guarantee he broke a window at school. I can just see him. Look at him; he sits there; of course he did it. He probably did it intentionally. He should have been expelled.

But this would not happen to the Blacks.

Why not?

But of course not. This is not what that provision says.

It states it quite categorically. [Interjections.] It states—

But has this ever happened?

No. Well, of course, if you do not want the regulation, scrap it. Why must you have this regulation in the Act? I believe this is a horrendous regulation. I concede that when I was at school I intentionally damaged part of the property. [Interjections.] I agree with that. I think that most children at some time or another at school, unless they are perfect little angels like the hon. member for Virginia, “’n Swart engel” or “’n Wit engel”, do damage property. The word here is “summarily”. It says “may summarily expel any pupil”.

That is ridiculous.

That is very tough language. I know that there have been problems and I know that there has been extreme provocation in many instances, but I think the reaction and response here is far too harsh. All I ask is that the hon. the Minister will take another look at this and ask his department to review this, particularly in the light of certain proceedings that have taken place lately in Natal.

I bet you put your initials on the desk.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member said that the amount allocated to this department represents about 1% of the GDP.

1,1%.

Yes, but I think the hon. member must take into consideration that this is not the only amount allocated to the department.

I stated the total amount, R537 million.

Yes, but the hon. member must take into consideration that besides the amount of R369 million there is a further amount allocated to Community Development. It does not make provision for the salary increases. That is also an additional amount. Then, too, the hon. member must also remember that the Department of Education and Training is responsible for only about one-third of the Black children. There are ten other departments that also budget for Black education. If one takes that into consideration, the figure will at least be doubled.

I have included the whole lot.

If one takes into consideration the amounts allocated to the national States, for both the Departments of Education and the Departments of Public Works, then it is a total …

What is the amount for your department now?

For my department the amount if R369 million.

My amount is R537 million.

Yes, it will be more than that because one must also take into consideration the amount allocated to the Departments of Public Works of the national States. It is not only the Departments of Education but also the Departments of Public Works.

Not all of it, surely?

All of them, yes. The Departments of Education in the Black States do not provide the buildings; the Departments of Public Works supply the buildings.

They do not only build the schools?

No, they provide other buildings as well but schools are included. Therefore the total amount for education is not only the amount allocated under Education; one must also take into consideration the amount allocated for Public Works in the national States.

The amount for last year was R537 million.

Well, that is the first thing. One must also take that into consideration. The next thing is in connection with the regulations. The position is that in our case the regulations are more or less the same as in the case of other departments.

More or less.

More or less, yes. The same principles are applied. If a pupil intentionally damages a school building, what must I do? Must I say: That is quite all right because the hon. member for Pinelands did it in his day and therefore I am going to allow you to do it?

There are shades of difference.

So we shall not expel a child if, for example, he damages a window. But if he intentionally sets the school on fire, then, of course, he will be expelled.

Yes, if he blows up the place, I agree that is a problem.

What is more, the community must take care of such a child because we cannot allow a child to damage school buildings in that way.

*We have a regulation which provides that a child who is over a certain age is no longer allowed in the primary school. Over a certain age he is no longer allowed in the junior secondary school either. The regulation also provides that when a child is over a certain age, he may no longer attend the secondary school. We find the same in other departments of education. Have you ever seen a 30-year-old being allowed to attend Std. 3 in a school in Pinelands, for example? [Interjections.] It simply does not happen.

I want to tell hon. members why there is a regulation like this, but before I come to that, I may point out that the department has never turned any child away from a school, while in the case of White education, many old people were once turned away from schools. We have that regulation because we intend to improve the quality of education. One cannot have the good quality of education when one has a child of six years in a class while his father, who is 26 years old, is sitting in the same class. [Interjections.] The hon. members may laugh, but I really experienced this. I received a complaint from a certain school. When the department investigated, they found that the pupil and his father were sitting in Std. 3. How can a teacher maintain discipline in a school where one has such a situation? In that case, in order to improve the quality of education, one should tell the father in a kindly manner that it would be better for him to go to the adult education centre. There he can make more rapid progress, in any event, because in the adult education centre one does not have to take 12 years to pass Std. 10; those courses are arranged differently, so that one can complete three school standards in one year. It is not necessary for the father at his stage of development to waste so much time. It is all intended to improve the quality of education and nothing else.

While I am on the subject, I wish to emphasize once again that it is the declared policy of the Government as well as of the department to organize its affairs in such a way that the quality of Black education will be the same as that of all other population groups. That is what we are striving for. We are already using the same basic syllabi and our pupils are writing the same examinations. The type of building we provide is exactly the same as that of any other department. So the Government’s policy is intended to give the various population groups the same opportunities so that they may maintain the same quality of education.

Mr. Chairman, may I ask the hon. the Minister whether the distribution of free text books is on the same basis now as for the other races?

Yes, as far as compulsory education is concerned it is exactly the same in our schools. It is our intention to bring about exactly the same position in our schools as is the case in other schools. This is, in fact, our declared policy.

It is still a very small percentage.

No, we have made a great deal of progress. What I have just outlined is the premise from which we proceed.

We have once again been blamed tonight for the fact that there are differences. This is not the fault of the Government, because we inherited a situation in which there were enormous backlogs, but we are steadily wiping out the backlogs. When we took over in 1954, only 8% of the total Black population was at school. Of those who were of school-going age, approximately 25% to 30% was at school. Today, 25% of the total Black population is at school, and of those who are of school-going age, 80% goes to school. Surely this is proof that we are wiping out backlogs.

Therefore I want to associate myself with the hon. members who congratulated the department on its achievement and dedication. I thank the hon. members who did so. I should like to endorse that and to tell the department that I am really very proud of what they have accomplished in the past and of their self-sacrifice and dedication in performing their task. It is really a privilege to be the Minister of this department. [Interjections.] I also wish to pay tribute to the inspectors and to the Council for Education and Training, which advises the Minister, very well, I may say, on the interests of Black education. I thank them very sincerely for their contribution. I also thank the inspectorate and all the people, especially the Black people, who perform their task with dedication. Then I should like to tell the teachers, who do such excellent work and who devote the lifes to this task, that I appreciate their contribution.

I am also in a position to co-operate with the Ministers of Education of the national States. There must be the closest cooperation between my department and the Departments of Education of the national States. It is absolutely essential that the same standards be maintained, that a certificate obtained in South Africa will be recognized in Lebowa, or in Qwaqwa, or wherever. We must pay the same salaries, so that teachers will not move from one department to another. For this reason, cooperation is essential. Therefore I should also like to take this opportunity of thanking the Ministers of Education of the national States for their co-operation and for the constructive way in which we can deliberate, develop and plan to improve education. One of my Black colleagues is sitting on the gallery and I should be glad if he would convey my thanks to his colleagues as well as for the positive co-operation we have been receiving from them lately. I want to mention only one example in this connection. At one stage this year I was absolutely determined summarily to abolish the Std. 8 examination. However, the Ministers of Education of the Black States and the Council for Education and Training told me that it should not be done overnight, but that it should gradually be phased out because there are very good reasons for it. Therefore it is a good thing that we have this co-operation. Ultimately it would in fact be better to do it systematically but rapidly, rather than to do it overnight. Therefore the discussions that take place and the cooperation that exists are very valuable.

The hon. member for Kimberley North spoke about compulsory education and said that we had reached a historic milestone this year. The introduction of compulsory education not only has the advantage of free stationery for children. The biggest advantage, in my opinion, lies in the fact that we now have homogeneous class groups. The result is that education of a better quality can be provided than would otherwise have been the case, because all children now go to school at the age of six years, so there will no longer be older children in the lower classes. This will tremendously improve the quality of education. Therefore it is really a very big step forward we have been able to take this year.

The hon. member also referred, as did other hon. members, to the educational programme for adults. Adult education is one of the areas in which we have made enormous progress and I can assure hon. members that no great costs have been incurred. The hon. member for Durban North also referred to adult education. In 1979, we had 178 centres as well as satellite campusses. Within two years, the number has increased to 261. Every school can actually become an adult education centre. There is nothing to prevent a farm school from becoming an adult education centre. Therefore this will be brought within the reach of adults just as much as the school is within the reach of children. We already have full-time principals at some of these centres. They are there full-time and do nothing else. There are also 4 200 teachers who teach at these centres on a part-time basis. A total number of 55 000 students and 4 000 teachers attend the classes at these centres. Of course, this does not include the independent States, but refers only to the White areas. Therefore this programme is very important. The hon. member for Durban North asked what advantage it held for companies. Quite a number of companies participate in this programme and provide education, and the advantage for them lies in the fact that they can do so at little extra cost because the department provides the teachers and the educational matter. A further advantage for them is that their employees become literate in the process. Actually these companies need to incur very few expenses, because the buildings which they make available for educational purposes can be used for other purposes as well. So the incentive is more in the nature of an indirect subsidy, in the sense that the teachers are subsidized and the correct syllabi and educational matter are provided.

The hon. member for Pinelands asked me to make arrangements for him to receive Student as well as some other publications. I shall do so. We were talking about television a short while ago, and I wish to refer to an article which appeared in Student of 5 April 1981—

Very good.

Yes, it is good, and it is a pity that the hon. member does not read these magazines.

Why don’t you send it to me?

I shall see to it that he gets it, because it will mean a great deal to his education. It will teach him that one should not damage schools.

It happened because of subversive literature that was sent out.

Unfortunately it is a little late in the day, but let me make a start now with a programme of education for that hon. member, and I hope I shall be successful, although I do not know whether I shall make a success of it. I must first prepare him for school and I think I must prepare him for some other things as well.

The hon. member for Smithfield referred to an allegation to the effect that the examinations set by the Department of Education and Training are of such a nature that a certain percentage of the pupils has to pass. If they do not pass, their results are simply marked up, i.e. whether or not a pupil is up to standard, he gets his certificate in any case. The hon. member very effectively refuted that allegation and indicated that in actual fact we do not have an examination of our own. The examinations which our children sit for are those of the Department of National Education or of the Joint Matriculation Board. The examiners are appointed by them and we act as their agents. When the papers have been marked they are moderated by the moderators of the Department of National Education or of the Joint Matriculation Board. Exactly the same happens in our department as in other departments. It happens from time to time in departments that the examination papers have been too difficult or too easy, with the result that an adjustment has to be made, but this is not done to a greater or lesser degree in our department than in others. The statement that was made that marks are simply adjusted is untrue. This is proved by last year’s figures, when about 57% of the matriculants passed. In my opinion, this low figure is to be attributed to the unrest at schools, because the year before, 74% passed. As has already been indicated, the figure dropped to 57% for 1980, but I hope that it will be higher again this year.

The hon. member for Albany also spoke about farm schools. As far as secondary education is concerned, I mentioned the one school, Fort Beaufort, where there is a hostel. However, we are providing specifically for the rural children at four places in the Republic, not only by building a secondary school with a hostel, but also by building a teachers’ training college for the training of teachers who will be available specifically for the rural areas, and not only for farm schools, but also for small towns. Provision is also being made for a technical college, so that the children who do not wish to attend the ordinary academic school will be able to attend the technical college. There, too, hostel facilities are being provided. As I have said, therefore, we are specifically providing for the needs of those children at four places in the Republic. However, we are also making bursaries available to children who want to go to boarding school to further their studies, and it is striking that the total amount available to us has not been fully utilized during the last few years. This is something which hon. members can propagate in their farmers’ associations or wherever. Hon. members should tell people to go to the inspector and to apply if they want to go to a boarding school. They must apply for a bursary, because up to now, the amounts have not even been fully utilized, and we should like the people to make use of these bursaries. I think a bursary is now worth R200. So it would be a good thing if hon. members could inform the farming community about this.

The hon. member said we should do something different in connection with the primary schools, but in my opinion, the present system is working very well. As the hon. member said, it is the exception when someone does the wrong thing, because the great majority of people would not easily close down a school. However, we are negotiating with the agricultural unions to find a basis on which we may ensure that when a school has been built, and we subsidize it, it will not be possible to close that school for at least ten years. We are negotiating with those people to take the necessary measures to be able to ensure this. So we are seeing to it that schools will not summarily be closed down, and as I said a short while ago, we are also prepared to reconsider the question of subsidies in the future to ensure that there are enough schools.

The hon. member for Winburg spoke specifically about farm schools, and I want to thank him very sincerely for his contribution. I take it that the piece of artwork he showed us came from his own school, and I thank him for that. I shall also bear his suggestions in mind. I have already mentioned company participation. The advantage they derive from such participation is that they are indirectly subsidized by the department.

The hon. member Mr. Theunissen spoke about informal education and youth areas. This is something we started recently, and there are some splendid projects under way at certain places which in my opinion are making an enormous contribution towards character-building and equipping the children to become good adults.

The hon. member for Pietermaritzburg South spoke about the backlog due to policy, drop-outs and technical training. The hon. member also said that the upgrading of facilities should receive attention and that double shifts should be eliminated. However, double shifts have already been eliminated and 400 000 children have already been involved in programmes preparing them for school and other programmes which we have introduced. As a result, the failure rate has dropped from 18% to 3%. This indicates the success which has been achieved. However, we are still only in the initial stages, and yet 400 000 children have already been involved. This is almost one third of the children falling under my department. If it is possible, we shall extend this programme to all schools. In other words, it is going to have a tremendous effect on the failure rate. The result will be that the repeaters will be reduced by at least 200 000. This will save 3 000 classrooms and 3 000 teachers. This can be achieved by preventing so many children from failing every year. These are all things which we are working on and which are showing positive results.

I should like to thank the hon. member for Virginia, the chairman, and other hon. members of the group who participated in the debate, for the obviously thorough study they have made and for their constructive and positive contributions. I appreciate it, and I look forward to working with them during the rest of the year. I hope we shall have positive co-operation next year as well. I also wish to thank the Opposition members for their contributions, even though we do not always agree. I do not know whether there is something wrong with the Opposition, whether they are feeling a bit off colour, perhaps, but it struck me that they were rather listless. They did not want to fight.

We were being constructive.

I came here to have a little fun, but I do not know what was wrong with the Opposition today. They have lost their fighting spirit. However, I thank them for the positive contributions they made and for the credit they gave. I appreciate that. Perhaps their hon. leader told them to take it easy and not to go too far. The hon. member for Houghton, for example, said that she agreed that the farmers had accomplished much. She would not have said this last year.

No, I said they still had a long way to go.

The hon. member for Houghton has now recognized this because there is now a farmer in their ranks. I am amazed about this, because the hon. member for Albany should not be a member of the PFP. However, he did help to prevent the hon. member for Houghton from adopting quite so extreme a standpoint as she always did in the past. This may be all he will accomplish in his career in the PFP.

Vote agreed to.

Chairman directed to report progress and ask leave to sit again.

House Resumed:

Progress reported and leave granted to sit again.

Mr. Speaker, I move—

Agreed to.