Land Affairs Ms Thoko Didiza at the National Council of Provinces
19 May 2006
Honourable Members
Member of the Executive Council in the various provinces
Honourable guests
Ladies and gentlemen
On 8 May, this Parliament celebrated the 10th year anniversary of our
Democratic Constitution. Interestingly, this event took place within a period
which we have defined as the Age of Hope. Indeed the functioning of the
different spheres of government and the State as a whole will prove, will
confirm the correctness of the fundamental we had inserted in this most
important document which is the foundation of our democracy.
Our Constitutions amongst others has created a framework around which as
government we have to redress the imbalances of our past, while at the same
time giving us a framework on what we have to do to build a functioning State.
Land Reform, Chairperson is one of those elements in which the Constitution
asks of us to make good to those who were disposed as a result of our previous
legislative framework as a country.
It is with interest that this difficult and emotional area of our work has
been handled in a way that has sought to bring justice, equity, sustainability
and reconciliation in our rural landscape. When one travels in the various
regions of our country it is gratifying that there are many South Africans with
goodwill who have extended a hand of friendship and support to the newly
established farmers. I am reminded amongst others of Mr Motlock who works with
the women in the Goxe Cut Flower project in Kokstad, Alfred Nzo Region in the
Eastern Cape.
Chairperson, honourable members, last year on 12 April on this very august
occasion I pointed out that as we make increased progress with the
implementation of both agricultural and land reform programmes it has also
become clear that the success of the said implementation depends largely on
inter-governmental relations. That is the cooperation between the three spheres
of government and other government departments.
Still on that occasion, I lamented the fact that this much-needed
co-ordination is sometimes extremely lacking. In the same breath I also
commended the proposed legislation of the Department of Provincial and Local
Government on inter-governmental relations. Especially the provision for
protocols between different spheres of government as it opens the way for
healthy relations. It is indeed heartening to note that the Intergovernmental
Relations Framework Act No. 13 of 2005 was finally passed towards the end of
last year.
Chairperson, this Act will help enhance our capacity to deliver our mandate
as a Government. It will also help in alleviating some of the challenges we had
already identified in spending resources allocated for programmes such as the
Comprehensive Agriculture Support Programme (CASP).
In regard to the CASP, we began with its implementation in 2004/05. During
that year, focus fell mainly on the on-off farm infrastructure pillar as it had
been identified as the Achilles heel of most new entrants. The budget
allocation was R200 million of which only R124 million (62%) was spent. The
outstanding amount was rolled-over to the 2005/06 financial year. On taking
stock, we identified several challenges:
* lack of capacity e.g. economists, engineers, project managers and so
on
* lack of proper planning
* procurement procedures were said to take too long
* lack of alignment with other programmes.
During the 2005/06 the CASP allocation was a total of R309 million of which
R256 million (83%) was spent. The improvement in the CASP implementation can be
attributed to a number of interventions:
* Department of Agricultureâs top management (DEXCO), together with
representatives from National Treasury visited provinces to assist.
* The CASP Secretariat regularly interacted with provincial officials through
visits and workshops. These workshops were aimed at aligning programmes so as
to fast-track implementation.
* Plans were discussed at MinMEC, now called National Intergovernmental Forum
for Agriculture and Land, on the implementation of the programme.
CASP is now entering its third year and the budget allocation is R300
million. Already provincial Heads of Departments of Agriculture and their MECs
have committed themselves to further improvement in the implementation of this
programme.
Chairperson, we launched the Micro Agricultural Finance Institutions of
South Africa (MAFISA) in 2005. The scheme was launched in three pilot
provinces, namely Limpopo in ga-Sekhukhune District Municipality, Eastern Cape
in the O.R Tambo District Municipality and Umkhanyagude District Municipality
in KwaZulu-Natal.
Presently officials from the Department of Agriculture are engaged in
work-shopping extension officers with a view to expand MAFISA roll-out
throughout the three provinces. The said officials have already conducted
awareness workshops among departmental officials in other provinces. We are
currently finalising retail agreements with Development Finance Institutions
such as Uvimba in Eastern Cape (EC), Ithala in KwaZulu-Natal and the Mpumalanga
Agricultural Development Corporation. A number of loans have already been
processed, particularly through the Land Bank and Uvimba. In Limpopo R34,834
million has been disbursed for 236 loans, in the Eastern Cape, R2,153 million
was disbursed for 51 loans. From KwaZulu-Natal we have received 1 000
applications to the tune of R8 million that are in the final stages of
consideration.
Further proposals from the following provinces are receiving
attention:
* Limpopo - R34,5 million in respect of 3 300 ha
* Eastern - Cape R30 million in respect of 4 000 ha
* KwaZulu-Natal - R26 million in respect of 3 144 ha
* Mpumalanga - R34,9 million in respect of 10 400 ha
We are also in talks with Post Bank with a view to conclude an agreement
that will enable us to use the Post Bank/Post Office infrastructure as well as
in assisting on savings mobilisation.
One of the many challenges that we need to confront and eradicate is the
grant mindset by beneficiaries. There is a need to conduct awareness campaigns
to educate end-users of the scheme to inculcate a sense of responsibility in
terms of loan repayments.
In the meantime, the AgriBEE Steering Committee has concluded its mandate
following the AgriBEE Indaba in December last year. On 15 May they presented to
me an AgriBEE Charter and Indicative Scorecards that have been consulted and
negotiated with all stakeholders in the sector who have an interest in this
important matter.
The AgriBEE Charter builds upon the draft that was widely accepted at the
Indaba. It has been improved upon by the inclusion of the key recommendations
that were developed at the Indaba and have been aligned with the phase two
draft Codes of Good Practice. These were published later in December by the
Department of Trade and Industry.
I would like to commend the Steering Committee members for their sterling
work. They met the set deadlines and continued their work in this final phase
in a transparent and consultative manner. The broadest spectrum of
stakeholders, including all national farmersâ unions and their affiliates,
agribusiness, labour and Government have contributed to the development of this
Charter which I will be signing with them in the not-so-distant future.
Chairperson, the launching of the AgriBEE Charter and Indicative Scorecards
truly marks a watershed in the way in which we will deal with the imperative of
transformation in the sector. Indeed we are in the Age of Hope. In the spirit
of a United and Prosperous agriculture and in line with the Strategic Plan for
Agriculture, it signifies a key joint initiative to address real transformation
of the sector in a practical and aggressive but balanced way.
Chairperson, it is rather funny if not bordering on the bizarre, that after
such wide consultations, there are still other partners who profess that BEE in
agriculture is âimpossible.â And I quote: âAgri-North West (Agri-NW) insists
black economic empowerment proposals for agriculture are not feasible, not
least of all because of the poor conditions in which farmers find themselves.â
This statement is attributed to Agri-NW President Mr Pieter Meyer (Citizen: 5
May 2006). This is all reason why I believe that closer working relations with
civil society and the private sector is of utmost important, but in the same
breath, there should be reciprocity from these groupings in terms of
negotiating in good faith.
The Steering Committee has highlighted a number of areas that will require
further in depth work including empirical studies to ensure that AgriBEE
targets are achievable in a growth environment, thus supportive of the
Accelerated and Shared Growth Initiative of South Africa. It has in particular
highlighted the need to fast-track the development of the knowledge and skills
required in the sector value-chain and to ensure that the skills development
systems, including the Sector Education and Training Authorities (SETAs) are
well resourced and can deliver in accordance with the skills demand.
Chairperson, following the outbreak of swine fever in the Eastern Cape, our
Veterinary Services set up a Command Centre at Dohne. So far the commercial
sector is free from the disease whilst mopping up operations still continues in
the communal areas. According to our veterinary servicesâ officials, these
should be completed in the next two months. We still have flash points in areas
such as Mthatha, Ngcobo, Zwelitsha and Lady Frere.
Compensation of farmers is continuing steadily through Uvimba Bank. We have
also roped in the Post Office to help with these payments. Although there has
been some discontentment with the pace of payments, all bottlenecks are being
attended to in order to fast track the process. So far more than R85 million
has been disbursed in this regard and we are likely to spend an additional R65
million.
In the meantime, we have imposed an import ban on cloven-hoofed animals and
their products from Botswana, following reports of a foot and mouth disease
outbreak in that country. The presence of officials at the official border
posts with Botswana has been increased to enforce this ban.
The presence of officials along the borders between Limpopo and North West
provinces of South Africa on one hand and the border of Botswana on the other
has also been increased to prevent illegal introduction of cloven-hoofed
animals or their products from Botswana into South Africa.
Chairperson, this Government has identified human resource development as a
strategic priority for the country. Our response as the Department of
Agriculture together with other stakeholders has been the development of the
Agricultural Education and Training (AET) Strategy to address human resources
challenges in the agriculture sector.
The strategy advocates working jointly with other departments and public
entities such as the Departments of Labour and Education as well as with the
SETAs and the South African Qualification Authority to realize a coordinated
and relevant AET system that will address the skills needs of the agriculture
sector.
The strategy embraces agriculture as one of the major economic drivers in
which the great number of rural communities, who in most cases cannot
contribute to the economy in any way, can participate.
The AET strategy represents the first effort in the identification of
implementation approaches that will yield certain performance outcomes. It
maintains that reflection, evaluation and adjustment will be required on a
regular and systematic basis. The implementation of the strategy remains our
responsibility as the Department of Agriculture. However, the success in
meeting its goals requires a joint effort with all other stakeholders who have
an interest in agricultural growth and development.
As we commemorate the 10th anniversary of our Constitution which is
internationally renowned as the most liberal Constitution in the world we need
to pause and introspect for a moment and consider whether we, as nation, have
lived to its expectations.
Amongst others, our Constitution seeks to âheal the divisions of the past
and establish a society based on democratic values, social justice and
fundamental human rightsâ. Rights in land are an integral part of these basic
rights.
The integration of rights in land into the baskets of basic rights is by no
means a misnomer, nor an after thought given the ingrained history of how land
ownership has for decades and generations been the source of conflict in our
country a history of conquests and dispossession; of forced removals and
racially skewed distribution of land resources. Indeed, a history that has left
us, collectively, with a complex and difficult legacy to undo.
In addressing this complex legacy, our Constitution specifically
incorporated three clauses relating to restitution, redistribution and land
tenure reform.
Firstly, our Constitution instructed us that a person or community
dispossessed of property after 19 June 1913 as a result of past racially
discriminatory laws or practices is entitled, to the extend provided by an Act
of Parliament, either to restitution of that property, or to equitable redress;
Secondly, it further instructed that the State must take reasonable legislative
and other measures, within its available resources, to foster conditions which
enable citizens to gain access to land on an equitable basis. Finally, our
Constitution directed us that a person or community whose tenure of land is
legally insecure as a result of past racially discriminatory laws or practice
is entitled, to the extend provided by an Act of Parliament, either to tenure
which is legally secure, or to comparable redress.
As a catalyst and foundation for economic development, land and agrarian
reform is well-positioned to contribute towards the Accelerated and Shared
Growth Initiative for South Africa (AsgiSA) objectives and targets by making a
meaningful and substantive impact on the eradication of poverty and advancing
economic growth to improve the quality of life of all South Africans
particularly those in rural areas, where the legacy of socio economic
deprivation is mostly palpable; and where the greatest need to improve the
quality of life for those who have borne the sharpest brunt of the legacy of
the colonial and apartheid past is highly discernable.
Our interventions such as the Land Redistribution for Agriculture
Development (LRAD) a joint programme between the Departments of Agriculture and
Land Affairs highlights the direct correlation and impact land and agrarian
reform has on our rural economies. Land and agrarian enterprise remains largely
the backbone of most of the economies of the rural South Africa from
KwaZulu-Natal to Mpumalanga and Limpopo.
In the State of the Nation Address this year, the President instructed the
Department to complete the remaining land claims, which currently stands at 8
107 by March 2008.
The Land Claims Commission has performed remarkably well in the period under
review in discharging its Constitutional mandate, in spite of the momentous
challenges it faces. By the 31 December 1998 cut-off date, the Commission had
79 696 land claims lodged with it and to date has settled 71 645 of these. Of
the 8 107 remaining claims, 6 975 are rural whilst 1 132 are urban claims. To
date a total of just over R6,1 billion has been awarded beneficiaries who opted
for financial compensation, benefiting a total of 986 981 beneficiaries and 194
487 households. The total cost to the Department to purchase and restore land
to claimants in this period amounted to R2,4 billion.
Whilst the Commission has gone a long way to address its efficiency, the
biggest risk to it meeting its objectives and targets yet leaving behind a
legacy of successful and sustainable projects are twofold:
Firstly, belligerent landowners who prolong negotiations and/or inflate land
prices with potential disastrous effect on the effective implementation of
meaningful land reform taking place in the country, or hamper progress to the
finalisation of claims through engaging Government in protracted contestation
around the validity of claims, prices, etc. Whilst the FCJ Visser case in North
West is a well known example of such cases, provinces are littered with many
similar examples in North West (in the Brits area), Limpopo (about 200 farms in
the Levubu area), Mpumalanga (about 70 farms), KwaZulu-Natal (several farms in
the Gongolo area), etc.
The second challenge manifests itself in the form of internal conflicts
amongst warring factions within the beneficiary community, leading to either
slowing down claim finalisation process or leading to project collapsing.
Whilst the media has focused public attention on problematic or unsuccessful
land claims projects, the Matsafeni community (Mdluli Clan) is one of such
examples of land claims where beneficiaries successfully utilise the claimed
land for the betterment of the community. Following their successful claim on
the 22 April 2003, the Mbombela Local Municipality chose the Matsafeni Trust
Land for the development of the 2010 soccer stadium. The construction of the 45
000âseat stadium is expected to begin this year on the restored land and is to
be completed by mid-2008. The stadium will be built in Matsafeni behind the
Mpumalanga Parks Board offices, with 25 000 permanent seats, while 20 000 seats
will be installed for the duration of the World Cup.
The KwaLugedlane community (Ludwich lust) is yet another example of a
success land claims story that never caught media attention. Following
successful land claim on the 19th June 2005, the community is now ready to
create a new tourism resort on the banks of the Crocodile River. Hanrob CC and
Associates is managing the R150 million project that is expected to improve the
living standards of the community, consisting of 5 000 households. A memorandum
of understanding between Hanrob and the community will allow Hanrob to create a
five star ecotourism destination, a hotel and possibly a golf course, 60
corporate lodges, 400 residential houses, a school, clinic, a resort on the
Crocodile River, a community complex and two filling stations. Construction
should be complete by 2009 and about 4 020 jobs are expected to be created. The
entire project is expected to generate profit in the region of R10 million a
year.
Moving forward, whilst the Commission remains committed to negotiated
settlement as well as undertaking, speedily, valuations in line with relevant
legislation, landowners hell-bent on frustrating the restitution process
through protracting negotiations will not be allowed to go on unabatedly. The
Commission is committed to negotiations, but also to referring belligerent
landowners to the Land Claims Court for adjudication. Processes of
expropriation will also be considered in line with relevant legislation.
In spite of these and numerous challenges, the Land Claims Commission has
succeeded in contributing 43% to the total of land delivered between 1994 and
to date.
We would have failed the spirit of reconciliation and of healing the wounds
of the past as intended by our Constitution if we do not address the racially
skewed land ownership and distribution patterns inherited from our ghastly
past. Therefore, as a country, we took a decision to redistribute 30% of the
white owned agricultural land by 2014 this being the 24.6 million ha of the 82
million ha currently in white hands.
To realise the 30% redistribution target, about 1.75 million ha needed to
have been redistributed every year from 2000. To date, 3.3 million ha have been
redistributed and therefore 21.3 million ha must still be delivered. This means
on overage, about 2.3 million ha must be delivered per annum between 2006 and
2014. Again I would like to reiterate, Chairperson, that this target was
adopted by this parliament and by this Government and reflected in the
Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP) as a policy position.
The 2005 Land Summit made specific recommendations to fast-track land reform
and to ensure, amongst others, that the 30% land redistribution delivery target
remains sacrosanct. Land reform cannot for the Department and our social
partners are business as usual in the backdrop of this pace of land reform in
South Africa. The Department of Land Affairs has consequently planned to
deliver 3.1 million ha per annum for the next three years to enable us to meet
this 30% target. The following are some of the specific measures the Department
is implementing to achieve this monumental target:
* The review of the willing-buyer willing-seller principle is at an advanced
stage and I will make pronouncement on this matter in the third quarter of this
year.
* I will submit to Cabinet the report and recommendations relating to the
investigations into the policy on land ownership by foreigners by the end of
the second quarter this year.
* Also by the third quarter this year, I will avail the strategy on pro-active
land acquisition methods.
* I will unveil a report on the investigations into the imposition of a land
tax and land ownership ceilings.
* I will, also, review the policy on state land administration and
management.
* I will ensure the Department undertakes a review as well, of the Act 70 of
1970 to provide for the relaxation of sub-division of agricultural land to free
more land into the public domain for land reform.
* An amendment to the white paper will be undertaken by 2008/09.
Chairperson, all the above attest to the fact that implementation of the
Land Summit resolutions is on track, contrary to the views of the
detractors.
The matter of the de-registration of beneficiaries from our Settlement and
Land Acquisition Grant (SLAG) projects has recently been in the public domain
and perhaps we need to again, pause and reflect on what may have gone wrong to
necessitate this measure.
Some beneficiaries who were not interested in farming but in accessing
housing benefits had accessed our SLAG programme allegedly on the basis that
the housing queues were too long for them. As such, these groups of
beneficiaries were not productively utilising the agricultural land they had
been settled on.
In December last year I made a call to all those who had accessed government
grants to buy land through SLAG programme but were not interested in farming to
come forward and de-register and de-list from the national land and housing
database which were linked to make sure that people do not benefit twice to
assist them to be eligible to benefit from other government grants should they
wish so. Besides meeting their specific needs, the success of the campaign
would free agricultural land for productive purposes for those interesting in
farming.
This experience reflects some of the challenges effective land reform faces.
Whilst the issue of inter-departmental coordination is evident, it is important
to note that the call for de-registration was precipitated by the general
deterioration sometimes total collapse of the SLAG projects due to first, the
unavailability of the new owners, with some properties abandoned and
vandalised; secondly, protracted inter-group conflicts (given that some groups
membership went beyond 350 families) and lastly, fear and uncertainty of the
few remaining members whether they could continue to farm without any
interference and claim by the rest of project members who disserted the
project.
To the millions of our people living in abject poverty and underdevelopment
that characterise the communal areas of South Africa particularly the former
homeland and ex-SADT the economic growth and boom South Africa has been
experiencing in the past decade is a mere gossip. For them, the better life
promise embodied in our magnificent Constitution is but a mirage.
In spite of the impending legal action against the Department of Land
Affairs in relation to the implementation of ClaRA, the Departmentâs resolve
and commitment to implementing ClaRA remains unchanged: we shall continue to
challenge the colonial and apartheid legacies that have so much led to the
current, unsustainable imbalances in our approximated 21 million of our
compatriotâs access to land, legal recognition afforded to land tenure rights
and consequential levels of insecurity of tenure and registration of those
rights. We remain committed to ensuring that South Africa provides tenure
security that creates socio-economic opportunities for people living and
working on farms and in communal areas.
To that goal, the Department has undertaken consultations with Provincial
Houses of Traditional Leaders as well as Departments of Traditional Affairs at
the provincial level with regards to the process of implementing ClaRA in the
provinces. Given the magnitude of the task at hand, we have budgeted R7 billion
for the implementation of ClaRA over the next five year period.
Equally, our estimated 6 million compatriots living and working on
commercial farms continue to be exposed to inhuman conditions, suffering and
constant evictions. By the end of this year, the Department of Land Affairs
will unveil a policy on the separation of management of evictions and security
of tenure for people living and working on commercial farms;
Our Constitution is vocal on rights to proper housing. Post-1994 period has
witnessed the mushrooming of undesirable settlement growth patterns and this,
together with the apartheid settlement patterns, has perpetuated squalor and
underdevelopment for the majority of our people.
In line with the Presidentâs instruction to integrate land reform plans with
the Integrated Development Plans (IDPs) of municipalities, the Department of
Land Affairs has commenced the process to develop interventions to halt these
patterns and will have develop MoUs with municipalities by September this year
for housing development for restitution claimants. In undertaking this task,
the interests of vulnerable groups will enjoy a central and priority stake in
every development of settlement and/or business plans on restored land.
Madam speaker, it is my contention therefore, to say indeed, the Ministry
for Agriculture and Land Affairs has gone a long way to ensure that the
liberties, freedom and self-actualisation objective contained in both the
Freedom Charter as well as our Constitution are accessible to all South
Africans.
I thank you.
Issued by: Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs
19 May 2006
Source: Department of Agriculture (www.nda.agric.za)
