Independent Democrats Submission to the National Land Summit by Lance Greyling
2006-01-05. It is truly is an honour for the Independent Democrats to be addressing the Land Summit today. ID believes that this Summit is long overdue and that we will hopefully be able to find workable solutions to what are some very difficult challenges in this field.
It goes without saying that land is
an extremely emotive issue in South Africa. As a party that is
committed to bridging the divides in our country, the Independent
Democrats maintain that addressing the inherited land inequalities in
South Africa is crucial towards creating a stable and prosperous
nation. Unfortunately, as I am sure we can all agree, the pace of land
reform has been far too slow and we need to find ways of improving it
to address the very real concerns held by our people.
In doing this we firstly need to place land reform in the context of the enormous changes that our agricultural sector has undergone over the last ten years. South Africa has moved from a highly protected and subsidized agricultural sector to one of the least protected in the world, which in the face of huge agricultural subsidies in the North have made farming a very risky profession. These changes have also led to agriculture shedding a number of jobs and exacerbating our high unemployment rate. Some commentators believe that South Africa’s future does not lie in agriculture and that the government should place its emphasis on simply creating an industrialized economy. It is pertinent to note, however, that many of the so-called Asian tigers initially relied on agriculture as the basis for their economic take-off. In economies like China and Taiwan, it was also their extensive land reform programmes that created an equitable basis for their future economic growth.
ID therefore believes that greater priority must be given to agriculture and land reform in South Africa and that more financial and technical resources should be directed towards it.
Having set the context I would like to consider the three major components of land reform namely, restitution, redistribution and tenure reform. On the issue of restitution it is encouraging to note that in this year’s budget far more money has been set aside to finalise restitution claims. This is certainly welcome as we need to move forward on this issue. The slow pace of settling restitution claims is resulting in frustration on the parts of both claimants and those farmers whose land is currently under claim. While ID recognizes the government’s motives in setting a deadline for the registering of restitution claims, we believe that this approach has meant that many individuals and communities have been effectively excluded from obtaining justice on past dispossession of their land. ID has been approached by a number of people who have valid claims of being dispossessed but were unaware of the cut-off date of 1999 for the registering of these claims. Many of these people live in the deep rural areas and they were not adequately informed of the cut-off deadline. Dispossession of land is like an open sore on our new democracy and we should be finding ways of accommodating such claims if we want to be build a new society based on justice and equality.
In terms of redistribution there are many constraints on the current approach adopted by the state which will make it difficult to reach the 30% target by 2014. Initially, according to the Reconstruction and Development Programme the 30% target should have been reached in the first five years of our democracy. This target has since been shifted to 2014 and if one considers the slow pace of land reform it is clear that we will have immense difficulty in even reaching it by that date. Without a doubt far more resources will need to be allocated to land redistribution if we are to have any chance of meeting this target. This is particularly so in the context of escalating land prices in South Africa. ID maintains, however, that we need a more proactive strategy towards land reform which is not just driven by market supply but through a systematic assessment of all land needs in a particular area. In doing this we need to build trust between all the different stakeholders involved, so that the optimum solution, not just for individuals, but society as a whole is obtained. There are successful examples where previous landowners have assisted land reform beneficiaries in turning the land into productive farming units. We need to learn from these examples and wherever possible replicate them. A spirit of goodwill, cooperation and ability to compromise is needed if we are going to fundamentally address the challenges of land redistribution.
In the area of tenure reform, ID is concerned that the budget allocated to the implementation of the Communal Lands Rights Act is only a paltry R12 million for this year, which consequently will only allow it to be implemented as a pilot project in KwaZulu Natal. ID would strongly urge for more money to be set aside for its full implementation as there is currently huge uncertainty over land ownership in many parts of the Eastern Cape. This is having an adverse effect on development as investors are unable to get clarity on the processes that need to be followed in obtaining leases for projects. This is a matter that has to be urgently addressed if we are to encourage development in what is one of the poorest regions of the country.
ID is also concerned that despite the enactment of the Extended Security of Tenure Act, we are still seeing large-scale evictions of farmworkers, particularly in the Western Cape region. ID would like to see rights education programmes being stepped up throughout the country and in accordance with the court judgement of 2001, all possible evictees being given free access to legal representation.
Ultimately though, the challenge for land reform is to not only transfer land, but ensure that the land generates wealth for the beneficiaries and society as a whole. To do this the level of post settlement support needs to be drastically improved. The Freedom Charter states that “The state shall help the peasants with implements, seed, tractors and dams to save the soil and assist the tillers.” I know of many rural communities who don’t receive a fraction of that support and it is time for us to prioritise their needs. This is particularly the case for small scale agriculture, which if nothing else could be a very effective poverty alleviation strategy and provide a sustainable livelihood for many rural people who are enduring grinding poverty.
Currently the government emphasizes commercial agriculture over subsistence agriculture. It will be impossible, however, to move from subsistence to commercial agriculture if we do not adequately train people and provide them with the necessary inputs to farm on a subsistence level. ID maintains that we should be adopting a Subsistence Plus programme throughout the country that allows all households to achieve food security. This is particularly important in the context of the HIV/AIDS pandemic where nutrition plays a vital role in strengthening the health of HIV positive people.
It is extremely sad for me to visit rural areas where people are buying their vegetables from local trading stores at sometimes three times the price charged in cities. I have also, however, seen some households turn their plot of land into productive farming entities through the assistance and training of non-governmental organizations. These efforts need to be broadened and the government should be running a public works scheme that trains some of the rural unemployed to become rudimentary agricultural extension workers in natural agriculture that requires very few inputs. In this way we can bring about a true green revolution in the country and ensure that household food security is achieved.
ID believes that only with the right political will, financial resources and partnerships built on trust can we hope to turn what is potentially a divisive issue into a source of strength for our country.
I thank you.
In doing this we firstly need to place land reform in the context of the enormous changes that our agricultural sector has undergone over the last ten years. South Africa has moved from a highly protected and subsidized agricultural sector to one of the least protected in the world, which in the face of huge agricultural subsidies in the North have made farming a very risky profession. These changes have also led to agriculture shedding a number of jobs and exacerbating our high unemployment rate. Some commentators believe that South Africa’s future does not lie in agriculture and that the government should place its emphasis on simply creating an industrialized economy. It is pertinent to note, however, that many of the so-called Asian tigers initially relied on agriculture as the basis for their economic take-off. In economies like China and Taiwan, it was also their extensive land reform programmes that created an equitable basis for their future economic growth.
ID therefore believes that greater priority must be given to agriculture and land reform in South Africa and that more financial and technical resources should be directed towards it.
Having set the context I would like to consider the three major components of land reform namely, restitution, redistribution and tenure reform. On the issue of restitution it is encouraging to note that in this year’s budget far more money has been set aside to finalise restitution claims. This is certainly welcome as we need to move forward on this issue. The slow pace of settling restitution claims is resulting in frustration on the parts of both claimants and those farmers whose land is currently under claim. While ID recognizes the government’s motives in setting a deadline for the registering of restitution claims, we believe that this approach has meant that many individuals and communities have been effectively excluded from obtaining justice on past dispossession of their land. ID has been approached by a number of people who have valid claims of being dispossessed but were unaware of the cut-off date of 1999 for the registering of these claims. Many of these people live in the deep rural areas and they were not adequately informed of the cut-off deadline. Dispossession of land is like an open sore on our new democracy and we should be finding ways of accommodating such claims if we want to be build a new society based on justice and equality.
In terms of redistribution there are many constraints on the current approach adopted by the state which will make it difficult to reach the 30% target by 2014. Initially, according to the Reconstruction and Development Programme the 30% target should have been reached in the first five years of our democracy. This target has since been shifted to 2014 and if one considers the slow pace of land reform it is clear that we will have immense difficulty in even reaching it by that date. Without a doubt far more resources will need to be allocated to land redistribution if we are to have any chance of meeting this target. This is particularly so in the context of escalating land prices in South Africa. ID maintains, however, that we need a more proactive strategy towards land reform which is not just driven by market supply but through a systematic assessment of all land needs in a particular area. In doing this we need to build trust between all the different stakeholders involved, so that the optimum solution, not just for individuals, but society as a whole is obtained. There are successful examples where previous landowners have assisted land reform beneficiaries in turning the land into productive farming units. We need to learn from these examples and wherever possible replicate them. A spirit of goodwill, cooperation and ability to compromise is needed if we are going to fundamentally address the challenges of land redistribution.
In the area of tenure reform, ID is concerned that the budget allocated to the implementation of the Communal Lands Rights Act is only a paltry R12 million for this year, which consequently will only allow it to be implemented as a pilot project in KwaZulu Natal. ID would strongly urge for more money to be set aside for its full implementation as there is currently huge uncertainty over land ownership in many parts of the Eastern Cape. This is having an adverse effect on development as investors are unable to get clarity on the processes that need to be followed in obtaining leases for projects. This is a matter that has to be urgently addressed if we are to encourage development in what is one of the poorest regions of the country.
ID is also concerned that despite the enactment of the Extended Security of Tenure Act, we are still seeing large-scale evictions of farmworkers, particularly in the Western Cape region. ID would like to see rights education programmes being stepped up throughout the country and in accordance with the court judgement of 2001, all possible evictees being given free access to legal representation.
Ultimately though, the challenge for land reform is to not only transfer land, but ensure that the land generates wealth for the beneficiaries and society as a whole. To do this the level of post settlement support needs to be drastically improved. The Freedom Charter states that “The state shall help the peasants with implements, seed, tractors and dams to save the soil and assist the tillers.” I know of many rural communities who don’t receive a fraction of that support and it is time for us to prioritise their needs. This is particularly the case for small scale agriculture, which if nothing else could be a very effective poverty alleviation strategy and provide a sustainable livelihood for many rural people who are enduring grinding poverty.
Currently the government emphasizes commercial agriculture over subsistence agriculture. It will be impossible, however, to move from subsistence to commercial agriculture if we do not adequately train people and provide them with the necessary inputs to farm on a subsistence level. ID maintains that we should be adopting a Subsistence Plus programme throughout the country that allows all households to achieve food security. This is particularly important in the context of the HIV/AIDS pandemic where nutrition plays a vital role in strengthening the health of HIV positive people.
It is extremely sad for me to visit rural areas where people are buying their vegetables from local trading stores at sometimes three times the price charged in cities. I have also, however, seen some households turn their plot of land into productive farming entities through the assistance and training of non-governmental organizations. These efforts need to be broadened and the government should be running a public works scheme that trains some of the rural unemployed to become rudimentary agricultural extension workers in natural agriculture that requires very few inputs. In this way we can bring about a true green revolution in the country and ensure that household food security is achieved.
ID believes that only with the right political will, financial resources and partnerships built on trust can we hope to turn what is potentially a divisive issue into a source of strength for our country.
I thank you.
