Using land to improve lives

The writer says land shouldn't be parcelled out to enhance the status of the dispossessed, but transferred to private ownership for high productivity. File photo: Simphiwe Mbokazi

The writer says land shouldn't be parcelled out to enhance the status of the dispossessed, but transferred to private ownership for high productivity. File photo: Simphiwe Mbokazi

Published Dec 23, 2014

Share

The government must balance symbolism with hard cold facts and spell out stark realities of modern agriculture and food security, writes Max du Preez.

 

The clamour for land reform is not essentially about agriculture, job creation, making a living or building financial security – it is more about history, about restoration of pride and a sense of justice.

For as long as we South Africans – especially those making policy and those in organised commercial agriculture – don’t openly acknowledge this reality and its implications, we will not make significant progress with this problem.

When the EFF make their militant demands around the redistribution of land and threaten illegal action, as they did again last week at their first congress, we should understand that they’re not really talking about establishing a dominant new agricultural sector.

The statements from the EFF congress documents should make that clear: “Land return is essentially for the reparation of the haunted African soul and to create new social relations away from the current ones which are essentially racist and anti-black. Without land, there is no redressing the 350 years of dispossession and disfigurement of black life. What we would do with the land is none of the business of the land thieves.

That there shall be a new efficient black farming class and that land shall be used productively is a secondary question. We want it back even if it’s to look at it every morning and cry out loud, Izwe Lethu!”

When senior ANC leaders praise the Zimbabwean model of land repossession, either outright or through soft condemnation, that’s exactly what they also mean but can’t say because they’re in government and have to uphold the Constitution. Also, they can’t as the governing party afford a collapse of the agriculture sector because it will have disastrous consequences for the economy, the banks, employment and rural stability.

This duplicity has complicated the land reform process since 1994.

Of course I realise there is also a genuine and pressing need for new black farmers to own land and become providers of food and jobs. But if it were only a question of establishing those genuine aspirant farmers on the land and get them farming, the issue would have been much simpler. The proposals of the National Development Plan are ambitious and workable and have been accepted by the commercial sector; only they seem to be gathering dust.

AgriSA and others have started several schemes that have proved to be quite successful. On the surface the land issue is self-evident: when the first Europeans arrived in the country in the mid-17th century, most of the land surface was available to the aboriginal Khoisan and black farming groups.

Less than three centuries later, most of the land was owned by white farmers.

This was clearly a great injustice that should be rectified swiftly.

The reality is more uncomfortable.

As happened in other “colonised” societies like the Americas and Australia, history and economic realities complicated matters significantly.

In the 21st century, agriculture is not so much about owning land as it is pure business and entrepreneurship.

With the massive growth in population over the last century, there is a need for land to produce food and jobs. Farming today is highly technical and scientific – and fiercely competitive.

But surely these developments alone don’t mean we should shrug our shoulders and say ‘oh well, that’s it then, let’s just maintain the status quo’.

The issue of “the reparation of the haunted African soul” is not going to go away because of economics.

Clearly, South Africa cannot afford to give viable commercial farms to people who have no intention of farming it. But we should work much harder and smarter to get those who do want to farm on viable land and support them so they can be successful.

We should also cut through the red tape and finalise all land claims by communities, and also assist them to be able to live off the land and improve their quality of life.

The 18 million hectares of black communal land should be upgraded and rejuvenated, and much of it transferred to proper private ownership.

But we have to face the fact that two-thirds of South Africans are urbanised and see their future in the cities. That’s the most pressing need: providing land for people to live on in and around the cities and towns. If the political will is there, this problem can be solved relatively quickly. For those city dwellers who still feel the desire to keep a few cattle or chickens or to plant a patch of mealies, the system of urban commonages should be expanded.

But most of all the government should spell out the stark realities of modern agriculture and food security to the people. We have to find a way to balance symbolism with the cold hard facts.

* Max du Preez is an author and columnist.

** The views expressed here are not necessarily those of Independent Media.

Pretoria News

Related Topics: