Hansard: Appropriation Bill: Budget Vote No 32 - Rural Development and Land Reform
House: National Assembly
Date of Meeting: 23 Apr 2010
Summary
No summary available.
Minutes
WEDNESDAY, 24 MARCH 2010
PROCEEDINGS OF EXTENDED PUBLIC COMMITTEE – OLD ASSEMBLY CHAMBER
_______
Members of the Extended Public Committee met in the Old Assembly Chamber at 14:01.
House Chairperson, Mr K O Bapela, as Chairperson, took the Chair.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr K O Bapela): There are no prayers today because you have just done so in the National Assembly.
Mr M J ELLIS: But we like praying.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr K O Bapela): Do you like praying every minute?
The MINISTER OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND LAND REFORM
Start of Day
APPROPRIATION BILL
(Debate)
Budget Vote No 32 - Rural Development and Land Reform:
The MINISTER OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND LAND REFORM: Chairperson and hon members, I would like to welcome especially a number of important guests here in the gallery today. We have here Mrs Maria Mathavini, who, since the last policy debate, has become the proud recipient of a home in Muyexe. She is one of 264 people who received new homes in Muyexe. [Applause.] She is also a member of the Macena Women's Group. That is an agricultural group that is supplying Spar with their fresh vegetables in Limpopo. Mr Mokete Daniel Radebe, chairperson of the Council of Stakeholders in Diyatalawa in the Free State, is sitting in the gallery. [Applause.] Mrs Delina Jantjies, who runs the community food garden at the Dysselsdorp clinic in the Western Cape, near Oudtshoorn, is here and is a very important guest. [Applause.] Mr Semomonyane Bin, the recipient of a home in North West, is also in the gallery, as is Ms Thandiwe Gladys Madondo from the Asisukume crop production co-operative in Msinga, KwaZulu-Natal. [Applause.] They are our guests today, Mr Chairperson.
Afrikaans:
Ons het vanmiddag ook die verteenwoordigers van die Mamre-gemeenskap in die Wes-Kaap hier. [Applous.] Hierdie gemeenskap ontvang deur die Omvattende Landelike Ontwikkelingsprogram 4 700 hektaar grond wat ontwikkel gaan word vir huisvesting, kultuur, toerisme en landbouproduksie. Deur middel van strategiese vennootskappe, naamlik nasionaal, provinsiaal en die Kaapstadse Metro, gaan sowat 3 000 huisgesinne baat vind by hierdie ontwikkeling. Die beginsels van die ontwikkelingsprogram sal toegepas word in hierdie ontwikkelingsfase.
English:
I am also very happy to see traditional leaders in the House and in the gallery. At the opening of the National House of Traditional Leaders on 23 February 2010, the President underlined the important role that amaKhosi have to play in the planning and implementation of rural development. He implored us to work together for the improvement of the quality of life of our people in rural communities.
The resolution of the 52nd National Conference of the ANC in 2007 on agrarian change, land reform and rural development confirmed the ANC's acute awareness and sensitivity to the centrality of land, the land question, as a fundamental element in the resolution of the race, gender and class contradictions in South Africa. National sovereignty is defined in terms of land. That is why, even without it being enshrined in the Constitution of the country, the supreme law, land is a national asset.
That is where the debate about agrarian change, land reform and rural development should, appropriately, begin. Without this fundamental assumption, talk of land reform and food security is superfluous. We must, and shall, fundamentally review the current land tenure system during this Medium-Term Strategic Framework period. This we shall do through rigorous engagement with all South Africans, so that we should emerge with a tenure system which will satisfy the aspirations of all South Africans, irrespective of race, gender and class.
It is, therefore, fitting and appropriate that the strategy of the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform be "agrarian transformation", interpreted to denote "a rapid and fundamental change in the relations of land, livestock, cropping and community". The objective of the strategy is social cohesion and development. All anticolonial struggles are, at the core, about two things: repossession of lost land and restoring the centrality of indigenous culture.
To deepen one's appreciation of this statement, one has to look in depth at the colonialist use of land to subdue the conquered population and the use of tribal or ethnic subcultures to submerge the cross-cutting culture which characterises all tribal or ethnic groups - Ubuntu or "human solidarity" in the case of Africans. The superprofiling of ethnic or tribal subcultures by colonialists is deliberately meant to create competition and conflict among them; the "divide and rule" tactic generally used to deepen subjugation. Ubuntu, the overarching African way of life, is integrally linked to land. Any attempt to restore Ubuntu without a concomitant land restoration is futile.
Social cohesion is a direct function of the restoration of land and indigenous culture. It is not just about allegiance to national symbols, for example the national anthem and flag, important as they are. Social cohesion is built around a people's culture. In multicultural societies, it is built around the recognition of cultural diversity as strength and using such diversity to build social cohesion. Despite cultural differences, members of communities generally share the same values and taboos and tend to use those values and taboos to develop hybrid or subcultures which combine to hold people together.
People tend to attend the same churches and schools, play for the same clubs and become members of the same stokvels, societies, trade unions, business organisations, political parties, co-operatives, etc. These institutions create subcultures that bind them together. In rural communities, relationships are much deeper, as they tend to be historical and intergenerational. Mutuality is a way of life and would have evolved organically, nourished and cemented by shared hard and good times. In African societies, these relational values are summed up in one word: Ubuntu. This is the bedrock of African culture. Colonialism and apartheid sought at all times, and by all means, to destroy it. Of all such means, the Natives Land Act, Act 27 of 1913, and the migrant labour system are the ones that wreaked the greatest havoc in African rural communities, seriously undermining the virtues of Ubuntu as people lost their basic expression of Ubuntu, namely the ability to give, which disappeared with the loss of their land. They could no longer produce enough food to eat and feed themselves; they could not keep livestock; they had to survive on meagre wages, which could hardly meet their family needs, let alone being generous and sharing with neighbours.
Colonialism and apartheid brutalised black people, turning them into hostages of perennial hunger, related diseases and social strife and disorder. Rural development and land reform must be the catalyst in the ANC government's mission to reverse this situation. It took centuries to inflict it on black people, and it is going to take quite a while to address it, but it shall be done. That long road necessarily starts with the crafting of a new, pragmatic but fundamentally altered land tenure system for the country. Any other option will perpetuate social fragmentation and underdevelopment.
Development and its corollary, underdevelopment, as outcomes are a function of certain political choices and decisions, as well as certain administrative actions, processes, procedures and institutions. Defined in this context, development denotes social, cultural and economic progress brought about through certain political choices and decisions and realised through certain administrative actions, processes, procedures and institutions. The key parameters for measuring development, therefore, are social, cultural, political, administrative, institutional and economic. Depending on the type of political choices and decisions and administrative actions, processes, procedures and institutions put in place today, there will be progress, or underdevelopment, or stagnation.
In short, depending on the type of political choices we make, and the decisions we take now, the type of administrative actions we take, and the processes, procedures and institutions we put in place, we will either bring about the desired social cohesion and development or we will perpetuate colonial apartheid's social fragmentation and underdevelopment.
For the sake of clarity, in this text "development indicators" are shared growth and prosperity, full employment, relative income equality and cultural progress, while those for "underdevelopment" are poverty, unemployment, inequality and cultural backwardness. It is submitted here that these two opposing socioeconomic pillars, development and underdevelopment, are a function of certain political choices and decisions, as well as certain administrative actions, processes, procedures and institutions, not just any political choice or decision, nor any administrative action, process, procedure or institution. They distinguish one ideological perspective from the other.
Apartheid was an outcome of particular political choices and decisions, which were executed through a plethora of oppressive policies and laws, which were carefully crafted to achieve the set outcome. Consider the following passage taken from the words of one Maurice Evans, addressing the reduction in the Natal land quota for black people. He says:
Yet even this will mean an average of 156 acres per head of European population, and 6,8 acres for every native, while the land which will fall within the European areas is infinitely healthier, more fertile, and altogether more desirable than either present locations or the areas recommended by the Beaumont Commission.
That was a comment by one Maurice Evans. This was not an isolated case. It was the South African story in the systematic denudation and impoverishment of black people. Our effort to bring about the corrective measures necessary to tone down the anger, bitterness and pain of those who were subject to this brutal treatment must be collective. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission adequately demonstrated the capacity of black South Africans to forgive. But we should not take this goodwill for granted, because it is not inexhaustible. Working together, we must build our collective future on this critical social asset.
In our efforts to make rural development a reality, we have developed the Comprehensive Rural Development Framework. This has been shared with all sector departments at national and provincial level. The key thrust of the framework is an integrated programme of rural development, land reform and agrarian change.
In our quest to create vibrant, equitable and sustainable rural communities, the department is implementing the Comprehensive Rural Development Programme, CRDP, in several wards in the country. Since the launch on 17 August 2009 by the President of our Republic in Muyexe, in the Giyani municipality in Limpopo, the department has expanded the implementation of the CRDP and is currently operating in 21 wards in the country. This work will be rolled out to 160 additional wards by 2014, as stated by the President. We have adopted all the Integrated Sustainable Rural Development Programme, IRSDP, sites or nodes and have incorporated the lessons learnt into the CRDP. As from 1 April 2010, the war on poverty, which has prioritised 1 128 wards over the Medium-Term Strategic Framework period, will be relocated from The Presidency to the department.
During this period, we have also been working on building the institutional capacity of the department to deliver effectively on this mandate. A new organogram has already been approved by the Minister for the Public Service and Administration, and by National Treasury. The department is currently in the process of recruiting in order to populate this organogram. As promised during my maiden speech last year, the post-settlement support strategy has been strengthened and properly capacitated with more than 100 employees across the country. Realising that we cannot do this alone, partnerships have been developed with tertiary and research institutions. An overview of the department's overall performance has been completed and has guided the development of certain short and medium-term strategic and operational remedies.
Of importance is that in each area where the CRDP is being implemented, a new vibrancy has been created around working together, involving communities, the three spheres of government and the private sector. This has enabled us to mobilise resources from all sectors of government to enhance delivery. An inclusive CRDP stakeholder participation model has been developed, with the Council of Stakeholders functioning as the planning, implementation and monitoring body. Communities themselves have become central to their own development. We have, through the work undertaken at the CRDP sites and in conjunction with both national, provincial and local government, erected infrastructure such as housing, water, sanitation, agricultural inputs, community halls, multipurpose centres, fencing, renovation of schools and clinics and much more. Simultaneous with the implementation of these different projects, we have been piloting a job creation and skills training model.
The mandate of the department is derived from the five priorities of the ruling party and government's MTSF priorities. The CRDP has set us on a new course for postcolonial reconstruction and development. This shall be achieved through co-ordinated and broad-based agrarian transformation, which will focus on the following: building communities through social mobilisation and institution building; strategic investment in both old and new social, economic, and information and communication technology infrastructure and in public amenities and facilities co-ordinated through the rural infrastructure programme; a new land reform programme implemented in the context of the reviewed land tenure system; rendering of professional and technical services, as well as effective and sustainable resource management through the component of Geospatial Services, Technology Development and Disaster Management; and effective provision of cadastral and deeds registration, as well as surveys and mapping services.
The department is committed to the achievement of outcome number seven of the 12 outcomes pursued by government over the MTSF period and that is "vibrant, equitable and sustainable rural communities". The success of this department over the MTSF period will be measured through delivery on the following outputs: sustainable land reform, food security for all, rural development and sustainable livelihoods, and job creation linked to skills training.
I have to acknowledge that the land reform programmes implemented to date have not been successful and sustainable and have not provided the anticipated benefits to the recipients of the programme. To date, approximately 6 million hectares of land have been transferred through restitution and redistribution and much of this land is not productive and has not created economic benefit for many of the new owners. There has been an overemphasis on hectares at the expense of development and food security.
This has contributed to declining productivity on farms, a decrease in employment in the agricultural sector, and deepening poverty in the countryside. Coupled with this is a "leak-out" of the redistributed land, which results from recipients failing to honour debts with the Land Bank and other commercial banks. The monetary implications of transferring the remaining 19 million hectares of land by 2014 has been calculated at approximately R72 billion if we are to continue pursueing the willing-buyer, willing-seller model. It is clear that the current land reform environment is the result of institutional weaknesses in overall land management, policy and legislation.
One of our key responsibilities is the revitalisation of small rural towns, because they act as catalysts for development and job creation in the rural and peri-urban areas. This will be achieved by interfacing rural and peri-urban areas through infrastructure development, initiatives to meet basic human needs, enterprise development, agro-village industries and credit facilities. Key drivers in this regard will be water services, energy, sanitation, communication systems and human skills. The department will also form an integral part in the local government turnaround strategy by providing support to municipalities in the compilation of spatial development frameworks.
The challenges in our current service delivery model and fiscal constraints have compelled us to review our targets and develop alternative approaches relating to the restitution and redistribution programme. The following principles will underpin our new approach towards sustainable land reform, namely the deracialisation of the rural economy for shared and sustained growth; secondly, democratic and equitable land allocation and use across gender, race, and class; and finally, a strict production discipline for guaranteed national food security.
To respond to the challenges of the collapsing land reform projects and defunct irrigation schemes in the former homelands, we have introduced a new programme called "recapitalisation and development". The objectives of this programme are to increase production, to guarantee food security, to graduate small farmers into commercial farmers and to create employment opportunities within the agricultural sector. The core principles of the programme are mentorship, co-management and share equity.
To implement this programme, we have taken the decision to allocate 25% of our baseline land acquisition budget to that. This amounts to R900 million for the 2010-11 financial year. The centrality of the public-private partnership in this recapitalisation and development programme cannot be overemphasised. We are encouraged that organised agriculture has fully embraced this strategic intervention. We are driven by the vision to put one job in every rural household. From the CRDP entry point of mobilising and organising rural people and communities, we build the skills of unemployed people, particularly the youth, and unleash them in their own communities to do decent work.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr K O Bapela): Minister, unfortunately your time has expired. Could you conclude, as you thank people in your department?
The MINISTER OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND LAND REFORM: Thank you, Chair. Briefly, to address the institutional weaknesses in land management policy and legislation alluded to earlier, there is a need for a land management institution that will be autonomous but not independent, and characterised by accountability, transparency and professionalism; have the power to subpoena, to inquire on own volition or at the insistence of interested parties; to verify or validate title deeds; to demand declaration of landholdings and grant amnesty and/or lead to prosecute; to ensure that state land will not be disposed of but rather leased.
Finally, I am pleased to announce that over the past few months the department has been focusing on the development of a Green Paper on Agrarian Transformation, Rural development and Land reform, which will articulate and elaborate on some of the measures mentioned above. It is intended to culminate in a new land policy framework and an omnibus of legislation, which should be consolidating all land-related laws. The Green Paper will soon be presented to this House. Of great importance in the Green Paper is that we will propose that for South Africa to achieve equitable access and sustainable land use, the current land tenure system must be overhauled in this regard.
We propose as follows: a three-tier land tenure system, namely state land under leasehold, private land under freehold with limited extent, and foreign ownership with precarious tenure, linked to productivity and partnership models with South African citizens. The above system will be based on a categorisation model informed by land-use needs at the level of household, smallholder and commercial farming. Thank you, Mr Chairperson. [Applause.]
Ms H F MATLANYANE
The MINISTER OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND LAND REFORM
Ms H F MATLANYANE: Hon Minister and Deputy Minister, hon members of Parliament, comrades and compatriots...
Sepedi:
Bjalo ka mokgatlo wa ANC, re thekga ditekanyetšo tša lefapha le. Re di thekga ka baka la gore go a bonagala ka tšona, tema e tla tšhaba diatla. Go bonala gore batho ba gabo rena ba ba dulago dinagamagaeng, bjale le bona ba tla buna dienywa tša tokologo tšeo e lego kgale di ba pota ka nthago. Ba be ba sa kgone go ka dira selo ka ge e be e le gore ba kgethollotšwe go tloga kgale. Bodidi, go hloka, tlala yeo e iphilego maatla le hlokego ya mešomo yeo bao ba ikhwetšago ba ne diatla tša go šoma, mešomo e sa fihle go bona, di be di e iphile maatla.
Temokrasi ya Afrika Borwa yeo re e hweditšego ka 1994, e bile bohlokwa go batho kamoka. Ke yona yeo e dirilego gore MaAfrika Borwa ba meameele, ba ipethe difega bare le rena re fihlile tokologong. Go diregile mohlolo woo lefase le bego le se la o lebelela. Go tlošitšwe tlala, dillo le ditsikitlano tša meeno moo go bego go le kgethollo; gwa fedišwa bohloki go ba bangwe bao ba dulago dinageng tša ditoropong.
Re fihlile temokrasing ye e tlišitšego bophelo bjo bo kaone go batho ba baso - tshepo ya bophelo bja tokologo yeo e feleletšego, bokamoso bjo bo edilego, tshepo ya go tseba gore wa geno ke wa gešo, ngwana wa ka ke ngwana wa setšhaba kamoka. Ge a ka bolawa ke tlala, a hloka mošomo, a šitwa go tšweletša dithuto tša gagwe pele, a hloka madulo le go hwetša kalafi, setšhaba kamoka sa motho yo moso ga sena bokamoso, se lahlegile, Afrika Borwa e lobile.
Go bohlokwa go tseba gore tokologo le temokrasi tše ke bolelago ka tšona mo, ga se tša re fihlelela kamoka ka go swana ka nako e tee goba ga di lekane. Badudi ba dinagamagaeng moo tšohle e sa lego bošuana, bohloki, moo malwetši a e philego maatla ka mabaka le go hloka tša maleba le tša phepo e kaone, go hloka ditirelo tša maemo le gona go hloka monyetla wa go tšea karolo mo ikonoming ya naga ka botlalo, go ba palediša go ka ba maloko le badudi ba Afrika Borwa ba ba feleletšego.
Mopresidente o hlomile Kgoro ya Tlhabollo ya tša Selegae le Tsošološo ya Naga ye ka baka la go bona gore go swanetše go ba le se sengwe seo e lego gore ga se direge go swana le mehleng, go bona gore e bohlokwa.
English:
The ANC's strategy and tactics state that, and I quote, "The national democratic revolution has a national and democratic task and should strive to realise a dignified and improved quality of life among all the people by providing equal rights and opportunities to all citizens and to restoring the birthright of all South Africans regarding access to land and other resources."
Sepedi:
Ke ka fao bjalo ka mmušo wa go etelwa pele ke ANC, re bonego bohlokwa bja dinagamagae le go tšea šedi, gore maphelo a batho ba dinagamagae a swanetše go hlabollwa gore le bona ba kgone go bona bophelo bjo bo kaone.
English:
In its 2009 manifesto, the ANC identified an equitable sustainable and inclusive growth path that brought decent work and sustainable livelihoods, education, health and safe and secure communities as one of the objectives in order to ensure a better life for all South Africans.
The Comprehensive Rural Development Programme, as a strategy, provides the opportunity to address job creation in the rural areas. The concept of "rural areas" draws from the definition under the Rural Development Framework of 1997: "sparsely populated areas in which people swam or depend on natural resources". It may be villages or some small towns. Rural areas include large settlements in the former Bantustans created by apartheid's force removals and dependent on migratory labour and remittance for survival. One of the components of rural dwellers is farm dwellers and workers resident on privately owned commercial farms.
Sepedi:
Go se rutege le gona go hloka thuto ya maleba go iphile maatla. Ke ka fao re bonago bontši bja batho ba dinaga magaeng ba gapeletšega gore ba ntšhe bana kamoka ka sekolong, tšeo le tšona e lego gore di ba kgole. Ba tšea nako e telele ba sepela maeto a matelele gore ba fihlelele thuto goba ba ba tšea ba ba iše go šoma dipolaseng. Se se dirwa ka ge bontši bo bolaya noga.
Ge go nale bana ba bane goba ba ba hlano ka mo lapeng, gona go ra gore matikinyana a gona a tla tsebalega le ge e le gore ga a reke selo, a re kgontšha feela go reka lesaka la bupi goba sesepa sa go hlatswa.
Ka ge re tseba gore le gona ka dipolaseng batho ba šomišwa bošaedi, ba lefelwa tšhelete e nnyane ba boe ba hlorišwe ka mešo e go fela. Se se direga ka ge bontši bja bao e le bomme, e le basadi. Ka fao mmušo wa ANC o bone go le bohlokwa gore thlabollo ya dinagamagae, kudukudu go tša thuto, e bohlokwa, go direla gore le bona bokamoso ba bana ba gabo rena bo kaonafale.
English:
We are sounding a clarion call to big businesses to assist and work with government in creating decent jobs in rural areas by not regarding people as cheap migrant labourers but by focusing on the establishment of industries that will ensure that our people are trained and skilled in different fields.
A province like Limpopo, which produces many agricultural products, can thrive and create work for its people if processing plants are built. This can produce final products like juice, purées, jams and dried fruits from its abundance of fruit and vegetables, instead of exporting them to highly industrialised provinces like Gauteng. Even the minerals that are mined in that province can produce expertise in final products if plants are built there. So, we are requesting the department to take that into consideration.
The Comprehensive Rural Development Programme provides a framework and an opportunity for intervention in those areas to make a difference in the lives of the rural poor. Planned interventions such as rural infrastructure projects can provide a huge benefit in terms of the creation of job opportunities in the rural areas.
It is unfortunate that some of the hon members didn't listen to the President when he said go and talk to Julius Malema himself, don't come and make it our responsibility.
Training and development programmes...[Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr K O Bapela): Order, hon members!
Ms H F MATLANYANE: ...can assist in building skills based in rural areas, creating co-operatives and rural enterprise.
The department, through its job-creation model under the Comprehensive Rural Development Programme, has planned the following: increased employment on commercial farms; increased percentage of small farmers producing for the markets; increased number of employees in agro processing; jobs through working for water, forest, fire and woodlands through the Department of Agriculture Forestry and Fisheries; jobs created on land reform projects, and the development and training of a number of entrepreneurs.
The pilot project launched by the President in August in Muyexe, Greater Giyani, Limpopo saw an intensive programme where national and provincial governments joined hands when it came to information gathering and initiated something that was the first of its kind.
Sepedi:
Go ile gwa tsenwa motse ka motse go kgonthišiša gore malapa kamoka a a balwa gore go nyenkurelwe gore batho ba nyaka le go hloka eng. Se se ile sa fa mmušo boteng bja maphelo a batho ba dinagamagae le go kwa seo bona ba bonago e ka ba tharollo mo bohumaneging bo baleng go bjona.
English:
Together with our people, we can do more. Out of that came a comprehensive plan to ensure that in each and every household, one person was employed and initiated in basic technical skills. About 900 individuals were trained in social, technical and institutional facilitation and enterprise development. These individuals will be contracted for two years, which gives all 900 households an income for that period and a lifelong skill that can never, ever be taken away, not even by anybody who is talking against this department today.
Sixty percent of the salary earned through this intervention will go towards feeding the families of those who are employed. The intervention has a multipronged social impact, which is to reduce HIV/Aids infection – we know that people in the rural areas are very vulnerable when it comes to disease; reduce dependency on social grants; reduce crime and domestic violence; and delay teenage pregnancies by at least two years.
The department plans to reach 160 wards under the Comprehensive Rural Development Programme by 2014 and ensure that one member is employed. This shall reach approximately 320 people. For this programme to succeed, it will require stringent monitoring so that the department can draw lessons from the effective roll-out of the programme throughout the country.
For the programme to create jobs, it should address the following: Rural jobs would require investment in economic infrastructure. It should also focus on the development and delivery of rural economic services that would act as a trigger and catalyst for local economic activities. It should align the programme with the concept of decent work and embrace dimension such as increasing the quantity of work available in rural areas, improving the quality of work for workers, ensuring fair labour practices and general workers' rights and a society free from child and forced labour while promoting social dialogue.
Sepedi:
Tšhologelo ya batho go tšwa dinagamagaeng go ya ditoropong ke lehutšo la goba kgauswi le ditirelo le go hwetša mešomo, le gona goba karolo ya bophelo bjo bo kaone go tliša thlobaelo le go šašarakantšha bophelo bja ka lapeng. Ke ka moo tlala, bohuma, bodidi le gona go hloka mošomo o hwetšago di aparela kudu basadi le bana kua dinagamagaeng.
Bomme ba ikhwetša e le bona bao ba šalago ba hlokometše bana le go ba godiša mola bopapa ba ile go nyaka bophelo bjo bo kaone ditoropong. Se ke seo se ilego sa hlohleletša bomma go thoma tšhomišanommogo ka go ipopa ngata e tee go thuša go lwantšha lehuma la tlala. Letšema e be ele thebe le sebo seo ba bego ba kgona go fepa malapa a bona ka sona.
English:
The department is urged to assist communities in technical support and internal skills and assist in dispute resolutions where disputes exist. Working together with rural people, we can try and defeat joblessness, hunger and deprivation.
Because land is a source of survival for every nation, the important role of owning land and being able to cultivate productively and sustainably cannot be overemphasised. The right to land, as enshrined in our Constitution, will protect, recognise and address the past injustices of the black majority by the white minority.
According to Another Country, a book edited by Ruth Hall, and I quote, "Land reform is a political project that needs to clarify its economic rationale."
As the ANC, we support the department's Budget Vote. [Interjections.] [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Mr M M SWATHE
Ms H F MATLANYANE
Mr M M SWATHE: Chairperson, hon Minister, the DA supports sustainable, equitable rural development and land reform to address the imbalances of the past. We believe in an open opportunity society where all citizens are equal and are given equal opportunities to accomplish their goals and realise their aspirations using sustainable rural development and land reform.
The DA is, however, concerned about the inadequate Budget allocation to the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform. The R6,7 billion allocated to the department is too little to fully execute its mandate. This should be viewed in context of the department's failure to finish the restitution of land rights programme due to insufficient funds in the 2009-10 Budget.
Poor land claimants pinned their hopes on the Budget for the 2010-11 financial year to address their outstanding claims. Farmers who signed contracts with the department also hoped that they would get money in the next Budget, as the previous Budget was exhausted. The department changed its plan and forgot about commitments they made that were worth over R3 billion.
Farmers and land claimants feel betrayed and some intend going to court to force the department to honour its signed commitment to purchase farms. Some farmers are seeking legal advice against the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform.
The 2010-11 Budget was supposed to address the backlogs and move forward on a clean sheet, but unfortunately Budget constraints will continue to impede progress. People's patience is being tested dangerously by a small Budget allocation. It is unacceptable to keep people waiting for justice for too long.
The Land Restitution Programme has been allocated a mere R1,5 billion. Effectively, the restitution programme can use only R800 million to buy farms. This budget is way below the R3 billion that is owed to farmers. The restitution of land rights is one of the constitutional imperatives to address the pertinent land rights issues of those who were forcefully removed from their ancestral land.
The DA is concerned that the department has shifted focus from restitution to rural development and land reform. Land restitution is an emotional issue, which deserves attention and needs to be addressed urgently. It should be placed as priority number one and be settled.
The DA welcomes the National African Federated Chamber of Commerce and the Industrial Development Corporation's initiated programme of creating 54 business centres in rural areas. We commend their bold move, because business in the rural areas declined due to a lack of financial support. That led to young entrepreneurs moving from rural areas to urban centres. This initiative will boost the economy in the rural areas and thereby create hope for the hopeless. It will open up opportunities to millions of unemployed youth.
The Department of Rural Development and Land Reform, through the Comprehensive Rural Development Programme, should embrace NAFCOC and IDC'S programmes. The department's focus on initiation and facilitation, of being the catalyst and driver of development in the rural areas, must include private sectors such as mining and agriculture.
These two private sectors are doing business in the rural areas. People in the rural areas need infrastructure upgrades and development. The creation of job opportunities will change the face of rural areas.
The Department's focus on 160 wards on the CRDP over the next four years poses a serious threat. It makes people lose patience because it covers a small area. It is a drop in the ocean of unemployment and underdevelopment in the rural areas.
President Zuma raised people's hopes when he announced in his state of the nation address that people in the rural areas must have a better life. They expect to be provided with basic services and have shops to buy the things they need. The President also announced that rural development and land reform is one of the government's top five priorities. The masses in the rural areas listened when the President announced that they deserved a good life and well-maintained infrastructure to lead a better life. People were happy that government finally acknowledged them.
It is our concern that it seems as if the President's announcement is not aligned to the Budget. The budget of the department does not show or confirm that this department receives the attention it deserves. People in the rural areas still share their drinking water in the rivers with animals, they have no proper roads, have less job opportunities and no sewerage.
Until development and upgrading is done and services are rendered in the rural areas, people will move from the rural areas to the cities and urban centres. Rural development has the capacity to make people stay where they are if allocated sufficient budget and if officials with the knowledge, skills, expertise and relevant qualifications are employed.
When appointing staff, merit and quality should be considered to ensure that we have engineers, architects and highly experienced, qualified managers and administrators. Highly qualified staff in the department will help to deliver on their mandate. People will always want to live a better life, therefore those who leave rural areas for the cities think that life will be better. They end up living in shacks and commit crime if they don't find employment.
The DA is concerned about the department's proposal to amend the Constitution. The proposed amendment to section 25 of the Constitution will scare investors and experienced farmers. It is a real threat to food production and to the right to private property.
TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S FARISANI): This is not Zimbabwe!
Mr M M SWATHE: We believe that one cannot change the Constitution of a country simply because one cannot meet the target set for land redistribution. We must look at why the department is failing to reach the target of transferring 30% of land from white farms to black beneficiaries by 2014. It is not because of the Constitution. It's a question of the department's staff capacity to deliver on their mandate.
Some officials are corrupt and collude with some farmers to inflate prices. The slow pace of delivery is also caused by vacancies in the department. The hiring of inexperienced and unqualified staff in the department contributes to failure. The Auditor-General gave a qualified audit report for the past five years. Some officials who are incompetent must be blamed, not the Constitution. Some department officials serve their masters in politics rather than the nation.
The willing-buyer, willing-seller principle is not to be blamed because it protects the rights of individual farmers. It enables them to negotiate with whoever wants to buy their property. It is a tool used in negotiation and also serves as a guide. This principle cannot be used as an excuse for failure by department officials. It is not perfect, because some people use it wrongly for their selfish benefit outside of market-related prices. Those people - farmers and officials - must be exposed and dealt with. The willing-buyer, willing-seller principle needs to be strengthened, not scrapped.
The DA is concerned about the department's controversial statements, which angered both farmers and poor landless people. The department first issued a statement about expropriating farms, which worried farmers. Some stopped farming and investing in their farms. This has lowered food production.
We see this as discouraging and threatening our hardworking commercial farmers. The department talks about food security in its strategic plan but, on the other hand, proposes such constitutional amendments as property rights being scrapped in favour of putting productive land as a nationalisation asset. Some people see that as a move towards the nationalisation of land. This in itself scares potential investors. The DA will oppose the amendment to the Constitution.
South Africa cannot succeed where communist countries failed. This move will compromise our hard-won democracy, the one where all citizens thought and believed their rights would be protected under the Constitution. We disagree that nationalisation will speed up land reform. Turning commercial productive farmland into a national asset will not work. It will scare away hard-working, experienced farmers and investors. South Africa is where it is today because of experienced, hard-working commercial farmers, not subsistence garden farming. The country's food production will suffer if we are not careful.
In the strategic plan the department talks about using white experienced farmers as mentors to help inexperienced black farmers. Speaking with a forked tongue might jeopardise that arrangement.
The DA visited farms given to land beneficiaries by government in 2009 and found that 90% of those farms were in a state of collapse. The hon Minister supported this when he said 90% of farms given to black farmers were not functional and were failing. The government plans to invest about R500 million this year to rescue black farmers who have not received support from the state. This move proves that the DA was always correct to say that giving people farms without support from the state equals land reform failure. [Applause.]
Sepedi:
Di ward tse 160 ga di dire mmasepala e meraro ya kgaolo. Batho ba ipotsa gore...
English:
Thank you very much. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Rev H M DANDALA
Mr M M SWATHE
Rev H M DANDALA: Chairperson, Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform, hon members, Cope places considerable emphasis on a comprehensive rural development strategy that is linked to land, agrarian reform and food security. This is strategic priority 3 for the department although it should more correctly have been strategic priority 1.
The need to prioritise land reform and rural development is obvious. Land is a fundamental national asset. Used well and fairly, land can be a launching pad for the equitable distribution of the wealth of a nation. It was never coincidental that the primary aim of the conquests of the past was to acquire land. It should surprise no one, therefore, that land will play a central role in the reversal of such injustices. Land is not only an asset for food security but also a deeply emotive issue because it is part of the self-definition of a people. It is this tightrope that our processes of rural development and land reform must seek to walk.
The Congress of the People supports the department in wanting to aggressively implement land reform policies, stimulate agricultural production with a view to contributing to food security, promote rural livelihoods, ensure that there is food security, improve delivery to ensure quality of life, revitalise rural villages and towns, promote skills development, explore and support non-farm economic activities, build institutional capacity and stimulate co-operative development.
The Congress of the People wants to keep the above as a perpetual checklist to evaluate monthly progress. We request the Minister to continue keeping the portfolio committee posted on each of the above items.
It is a fact that rural poverty is the result of policies that over centuries deliberately sought to impoverish our people in order to use them as a source of cheap labour. This fundamental injustice of the past has to be reversed and rural life has to be transformed without delay.
We wait to see whether a department dedicated to the task of correcting a fundamental flaw in our society will finally deliver the results we have all been waiting for. The task is too important and the outcome is what will determine our destiny.
The fact that the department is new is common cause. Even so, an enormous sense of urgency must pervade everything the department does. This task has got to be driven with speed, caution, patience and the utmost tact.
Workers on farms as well as rural inhabitants eking out an existence through subsistence farming are among the poorest of the poor in our country. Utmost urgency is demanded in changing the circumstances of their lives. This department must invoke a sense of patriotism among South African people, especially those involved with farming and working with the rural communities, so that they can be at the forefront of defining the relationships that will craft a South Africa that future generations will be proud of.
In rural areas there is a concern that city planners may attempt to change rural areas into pseudo towns. The Minister must ensure that this problem is addressed head on. At the same time, without sacrificing the sense of communality which is the hallmark of these communities, the goal of economical viability should be realised.
While Cope fully recognises the catalytic role of this department, we also maintain that it must not be squeezed for resources so that it spends its time carrying a begging bowl for the funding of rural projects. This is our rendezvous with history. We cannot afford to fail. We must not fail.
We commend the department for recognising the institution of traditional leadership as a significant stakeholder in this process. We would further urge the hon Minister to develop a concept and a programme that will see rural citizens being afforded land ownership rights that are equal to those of urban citizens. This will go a long way in addressing the equality of land tenure within rural communities.
Nonetheless, we are concerned about the pace of restitution. We acknowledge that the department is new but the programmes are not. We urge the department to find a speedy way for the resolution of this problem. Meanwhile, the department should build capacity within communities targeted for restitution so that when their land claims are processed, they will have the experience and the expertise to be able to farm commercially and maintain production at historical levels. The Congress of the People supports this Vote. [Applause.]
Mr R N CEBEKHULU...
Rev H M Dandala
Mr R N CEBEKHULU: Chairperson, hon members, when President Zuma announced upon his ascension to the presidency last year that he will establish a new department called Rural Development and Land Reform, the IFP complimented him. It concluded that this was a serious effort to fight the poverty that afflicts people in rural areas.
The department has its challenges given that it cuts horizontally across a number of other vertical departments with their own timetables and programmes, but the IFP has always surmised that these challenges could be overcome through carefully considered strategic planning. Regrettably, developments since then have run contrary to the above expectations, and the IFP is subsequently viewing the department's budget with at least two serious reservations. The first pertains to budget allocation as it focuses on rural development. The second pertains to land acquisition and focuses on land reform.
Commencing with the rural development budget allocation, the IFP was confounded to learn from the Medium-Term Budget Policy last year that this all-important department received only R256 million for its budget. It became worse when we were informed by the Auditor-General's office that by March this year only 5% of the meagre budget had been spent. To add fuel to the fire, the budget for 2010-11 has been fixed at R256,2 million. This is a far cry from the urgency and seriousness of the situation. The question is: does the government take rural development seriously?
When allocating budget, the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform should prioritise, focus and allocate funding to the areas that require the greatest assistance. These are, in other words, areas in dire need of a comprehensive rural development programme. In 2009 the department identified certain areas in need of development, and funds were allocated to development programmes and projects within those communities. However, the department did not reach all areas and some communities were not assisted at all. The IFP hopes that during this financial year the Minister will task his department with an equitable distribution of funds for all municipalities within our country. This is imperative because we now have a situation where people across the country who are breadwinners have lost their employment because of the recession and have no other form of income.
Turning to our second reservation on land redistribution, the IFP notes with disbelief that the government has reneged on its promise to transfer 30% of agricultural land to black farmers. How long will the black people of our land remain landless? With land prices escalating the way they are, it will cost the government double or triple the amount to purchase and transfer this land sometime in the future, when it will probably prove to be unaffordable.
To the IFP, rural development and the resolution of land acquisition remain top priorities, and we accordingly support this budget, in spite of our reservations. Thank you. [Applause.]
Ms P DE LILLE
Mr R N CEBUHKULU
Ms P DE LILLE: Chairperson and hon Minister, the ID understands that this new department faces the difficult task of trying to implement its new plans against the backdrop of decreasing finances.
It is indeed unfortunate that during the years when there was enough money, not enough was done to support the beneficiaries of land reform. The ID agrees that all transferred land must be used productively, and we are happy with the department's recognition that the land reform process has been flawed because redistributed land did not receive enough post-settlement support. The ID remains concerned that land reform is being put on hold and that we are getting conflicting signals on how we are going to deal with this issue as we move forward. South Africa needs clear direction on policy, together with achievable targets.
Mr Minister, we also do not want to see the aspirations of the landless being continuously dashed, as they have been over the past 16 years. The proposal to make land a national asset in the upcoming Green Paper must be carefully considered. The ID supports the second option that was proposed: the review of current tenure policies and legislation and the current freehold title system, and a land ceilings framework linked to the categorisation of farms. It would be wrong to attempt to bring about land redress by simply amending the Constitution. This shouldn't be the response to government's own failures of the past 16 years.
I would like to call on the Minister to ensure the institution of a comprehensive rural development programme that will help rural people to gain access to all basic services such as roads, electricity, health, quality education, water and sanitation. The ID also calls on the Minister to pursue those people who were responsible for corruption and maladministration at the Land Bank and ensure that it provides proper developmental assistance to farmers. Now that we have recapitalised the Land Bank, it is crucial that money is directed to small-scale farmers.
Chairperson, last week I attended a Scopa meeting that looked at the annual report of the department and there are extremely serious inefficiencies in its administration. I would therefore like to indicate to the Minister that if we are to achieve the objectives outlined by him here today, then there is a need for the Minister to sign a performance agreement with the director-general and all other senior officials. The ID supports the vote. [Applause.]
Ms P C Ngwenya-Mabila
Mrs P DE LILLE
Ms P C NGWENYA-MABILA: Chairperson, let me start by saying that the willing-buyer, willing-seller approach must be reviewed because people have taken our land for free, while others gave our forefathers mirrors and took their cattle. They are charging exorbitant prices for land they did not buy. I think we also need to indicate that water... [Interjections.]
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mrs M C MABUZA): Hon member, may you please take your seat? Hon Groenewald, can you withdraw the statement you have made?
Mr P J GROENEWALD: Which one is that?
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mrs M C MABUZA): You said, "Nonsense". That's not the parliamentary language.
Mr P J GROENEWALD: Since I have to participate in the debate, I will withdraw on those grounds, or else I couldn't have withdrawn.
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mrs M C MABUZA): Hon member, may you please withdraw?
Mr P J GROENEWALD: But I said that I withdraw, Chairperson.
TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mrs M C MABUZA): Thank you very much. You must say, "I withdraw, with attachments." That's what I want. Thank you.
Mr M J ELLIS: Madam Chair, I rise on a point of order. Since when has the word "nonsense" been unparliamentary?
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mrs M C MABUZA): Hon member, please take your seat.
Mr M J ELLIS: No, Madam Chair, I absolutely...
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mrs M C MABUZA): To me, it is.
Mr M J ELLIS: Madam Chair, it's not a question of what it is to you.
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mrs M C MABUZA): The member has withdrawn.
Mr M J ELLIS: It's not a question of what you want but what is acceptable in the House.
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mrs M C MABUZA): Hon member, may you please take your seat? The member has withdrawn.
Mr M J ELLIS: Madam Chair, I rise on a point of order.
TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mrs M C MABUZA): Hon member, the member has accepted and withdrawn.
Mr M J ELLIS: Madam Chair, I'm rising on a point of order to ask you why the word "nonsense" is suddenly unparliamentary.
TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mrs M C MABUZA): The member has withdrawn; hon member. The member saw it fit for him to withdraw.
Mr M J ELLIS: Madam Chair, I am rising on a point of order to ask you why the word "nonsense" is unparliamentary.
TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mrs M C MABUZA): It is.
Mr M J ELLIS: It is not.
TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mrs M C MABUZA): It is.
Mr M J ELLIS: It is not, Madam Chair.
TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mrs M C MABUZA): To me, it is. The member has withdrawn, hon member.
Mr M J ELLIS: Madam Chair, I want to say to you that if you allow this ruling to go through, you are setting a precedent that is unacceptable. We can't start making rules as we go along.
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mrs M C MABUZA): Hon member, may you please take you seat? Tthe member has withdrawn.
Mr S B FARROW: Madam Chair, on a point of order...
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mrs M C MABUZA): Let me first make a ruling, hon member. Hon member, I'll come back and make a ruling on this matter. Can we continue with the debate?
Ms P C NGWENYA-MABILA: Chairperson, water or no water, it's true that the lives of the Muyeshe community have changed for the better. We need not worry about people who just criticise, even when it's not necessary. We need to learn to appreciate good things and make proposals on what more can be done to address the challenges identified. The work of the ANC government will speak for itself, whether criticised or not. People are not blind.
Hon Chairperson, hon Ministers, Deputy Ministers and hon members, the South African colonialist experience was based on the intersection of relations of power based on class, race and gender. These social and biological features have been used in human history to exclude, repress and stigmatise the progress of individuals and communities and manifested in the dispossession of land, marginalisation of the African peasantry, and reducing the rural areas into reserves of cheap labour. For the ANC government this was not acceptable and we immediately passed the Restitution on Land Rights Act No 22 of 1994, which provides for the restoration of land rights and equitable redress as contained in section 25(7) of the Constitution.
The progress that has been made so far in settling restitution claims is commendable, considering the fact that only 5% of the claims are outstanding. As we are aware, 95,5% of claims were settled by 31 March 2009. The highest number of outstanding claims, out of 4 296, is in KwaZulu Natal, Mpumalanga, Eastern Cape, Limpopo, and some other provinces.
The challenges facing land restitution are land prices, mining and forestry activities and nature reserve claims, which are very complex. However, the budget allocation for restitution has been drastically reduced in the Multilateral Trading Facility, MTF, period, which will not make it possible for the Restitution Commission to finalise claims within the targeted date.
In the 2009-10 financial years, 100% of the budget was spent within four months, which indicates the high demand on the programme. Besides budget constraints, the vacant posts of two regional commissioners are of concern, since the two provinces affected, namely Mpumalanga and KwaZulu-Natal, still have the highest number of outstanding claims.
The ANC has identified five priority areas for the next five years. One of those priorities is rural development, food security and land reform. The department has introduced new branches. It is crucial for the department to fast-track the filling of the critical vacant post. The increased budget allocation for compensation of employees from R954 million in 2009-10 to R1,1 billion in 2010-11 is welcomed. It will enable the department to fill the strategic positions in order to deliver on its mandate.
The Comprehensive Rural Development Programme, CRDP, is critical. It needs people who are skilled and competent to drive it effectively. The challenge will be to retain skilled staff. Continuous human development is necessary for people to improve their capacity in regard to the processes and procedures of their work and to deal with insufficient staff capacity.
The provision of internship programmes in the field of BSc Geomatics and town and regional planning is one way of addressing the shortage of scarce skills. We welcome the initiative of the department to make sure that this area is being addressed. This will discourage the over-use of consultants in favour of the department building its own internal capacity.
We appreciate the engagement of universities of technology, agricultural colleges and Further Education and Training, FET, colleges to assist in the training of students in rural development-related careers. The mobilisation of the private sector is also crucial. Rural infrastructure development and agricultural reform are at the heart of the ANC's plan to improve the country's food security. Insufficient funding for land reform and redistribution will make it difficult for the department to achieve the target. It is clear that with the allocated budget it will not be impossible for the department to reach the target. In 2008-09, the department was able to transfer only 4,7 million hectares due to financial constraints.
The Comprehensive Rural Development Programme cuts across all departments. The Department of Rural Development is the catalyst, initiator, facilitator and co-ordinator of all the programmes, but that does not mean it must not be funded properly. We have realised the weakness of the department working in silos, but through the CRDP the government departments are fulfilling their responsibilities to communities in an integrated way.
The ANC government knows very well what needs to be done to address the apartheid past. It is the government that puts people first and it is building a participatory democracy by involving the people through house profiling. The department is using community development needs to ensure that the CRDP is people-driven. Mobilisation of communities is central to all its objectives.
The empowerment of communities to participate in socioeconomic growth will contribute to local economic development and will help rural people liberate themselves from poverty through participatory and representative democracy. That is because the CRDP is an anti-poverty programme which is aimed at addressing the challenges of unemployment, poverty and underdevelopment, especially to vulnerable groups. Rural people were excluded from development, and the department is making sure that the rural masses face the task of taking an active part in defining and implementing strategies for rural development. The CRDP is about changing peoples' lives and enabling them to take control of their destiny and enjoy the dignity enshrined in the Constitution.
The lack of capacity within the land reform project is a threat. The initiative by the department to assist struggling projects, together with the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries and the Agricultural Sector Education Training Authority, AgriSETA, and the agreement with the University of Fort Hare to develop dedicated training in projects and farm management for land reform beneficiaries, are appreciated.
For the productive use of land and to create sustainable livelihoods and decent work in rural areas, land reform beneficiaries have to be provided with technical skills, financial resources and access to markets. Therefore, to support the growth of a rural market, we need to build links with the formal-sector value chain and to co-ordinate their activities to realise economies of scale. Training will assist the people to be employable, self-employed and to be able to start their own businesses in order to sustain themselves.
Postsettlement support on infrastructural development, finance and extension advice is critical for sustainable land reform. For development to be meaningful and sustainable, beneficiaries should not be seen as spectators but contributors in their own development.
Projects are struggling due to many factors, such as postsettlement support, conflicts among beneficiaries and a lack of operational funding and monitoring. We appreciate the monitoring mechanism that will be put in place to ensure sustainable improvement in the livelihood of rural people.
Provision of capital for the sustainability of land reform projects is crucial. This calls for a review of the mandate capacity and operation of the Land Bank and Micro-Agricultural Finance Initiative of South Africa, MAFISA, to ensure that the state is able to provide direct credit and capital for investment support of a transformed agricultural sector and rural economy.
Land reform is aimed at redistribution of land to both urban and rural areas for the benefit of those who were denied access under colonialism. To address this, the department initiated the audit of state land to identify what the land is used for and by whom, and to ensure that the available and underutilised land is redistributed to needy people for profitable use.
In order to ensure effective and sustainable land and agrarian reform, effective measures must be put in place, bringing the Department of Agriculture on board to assist emerging and small farmers and co-operatives to eliminate the monopolistic practices that contribute to high food prices which, in turn, undermine economic growth and the fight against hunger and poverty. [Time expired.] Thank you, Chairperson.
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S FARISANI): I hope the transition will not go wrong when I call the hon S Z Ntapane.
Mr S Z NTAPANE
Mrs P C NGWENYA-MABILA
Mr S Z NTAPANE: Chairperson, hon members, the Budget Vote before us is the subject of much policy controversy. We have been assured by the Minister that his department's recently released documents on changes to the land reform policy are in fact not official government policy. Unfortunately it creates the impression that there is uncertainty within the government and the ruling party about the fundamental approach to the question of land.
The UDM maintains that the majority of the population continues to be locked out of the formal economy because of the land tenure system. It is up to the government to devise means of assisting these people to access financing because, currently, this hurdle prevents them from offering collateral to financial institutions.
The other perennial problem of land reform is that beneficiaries of land with agricultural potential are often failing to make productive use of this land. It is a loss for these communities that they are not making a success of their new land, but it is also a loss for the country because we are under severe pressure to ensure our national food security. Clearly, the current strategies of government are not succeeding in assisting the beneficiaries of land reform to succeed.
It is particularly disconcerting to read in the latest Mail and Guardian that a person with close ties to the family of the President has seemingly been the beneficiary of a generous offer by government to buy land she owned in KwaZulu-Natal. The timing of the government's offer creates the impression that this is a handy bail-out for a politically connected individual.
The UDM is delighted that rural development now has a dedicated department and budget. It is a specific area of government failure that we've long campaigned against.
We urge the Minister to do a formal survey of the severe infrastructure backlogs in rural areas. The economic and social crisis of rural areas can be traced back to the poor state of basic infrastructure such as roads, water and electricity. These backlogs hamper the ability of people to do the simplest of tasks, such as travelling to a market or going to school. A rural development strategy that does not address this underlying infrastructure crisis would be doomed to failure. The UDM support this Budget. I thank you.
Mr P J GROENEWALD
Mr S Z NTAPANE
Mr P J GROENEWALD: Chairperson, I want to start by saying to the hon Minister that he has missed a golden opportunity this afternoon to give clarity on the whole issue of privately owned land in the farming community. There were high expectations among people outside who listened to your Budget Vote this afternoon. Unfortunately, you were too vague.
To recognise state land, freehold land and foreign-hold land is good, but that is the de factosituation out there. We know that, but the people of South Africa want clarity. The people out there who own land want to know exactly what is going to happen to section 25 of the Constitution. I want to urge the Minister to speak to his civil servants. A civil servant is there to ensure that government policy is executed, not to make policy. Your Thozi Gwanya wants to make policy and it is causing confusion and anger among people outside this House.
Afrikaans:
U amptenare weet nie waarvan hulle praat nie. Hulle sê byvoorbeeld wildplase moet eintlik genasionaliseer word, want produktiewe landbougrond is nou omskep en is nie meer produktief nie. Daardeur ontbloot hulle eintlik hulself. Hulle wys hoe onkundig hulle is.
Ek het verlede jaar in November 'n vraag aan u in die Parlement gevra. Ek het gevra hoeveel hektaar en watter persentasie van produktiewe landbougrond oorgedra is en bedryf word as wildplase. U het tot vandag toe nie vir my 'n antwoord gegee nie. As u departement nie eers vir my 'n antwoord kan gee nie, hoe kan hulle uitsprake maak en sê dat wildplase voedselsekerheid bedreig?
Ek wil nou vir u sê, die boere bel my. Hulle sê hulle is nou moeg daarvoor dat die ANC regering alles vat wat werk, want hulle moet die land voed. Volgens hulle vat die ANC alles en breek dit, want dan werk dit nie meer nie.
English:
Hon Minister, you admitted it. Ninety percent of "land reform" land does not work.
Afrikaans:
Ek wil vandag vir u sê, as ons van produktiwiteit praat, moet u sorg dat daar produktiwiteit is op daardie grond wat produktief was en wat deur grondhervorming daargestel is. U sal dán suksesvol wees.
English:
I want to conclude by saying to the hon member on the other side that he is still talking nonsense, because he doesn't know what is going on. [Laughter.]
TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S FARISANI)
Mr P J GROENEWALD
Afrikaans:
Die TYDELIKE VOORSITTER (Mnr T S FARISANI): Agb lede, daar is 'n verskil tussen fluister en praat en sommige van ons tref nie daardie onderskeid nie.
English:
Heckling is acceptable. But when an hon member keeps on talking, to the extent that I can hear him or her from where I am, that is not acceptable when another hon member has the floor.
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND LAND REFORM: Chairperson, hon Ministers and Deputy Ministers, hon members, MECs ...
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S FARISANI): Hon members! I have just told you not to speak when another member is speaking.
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND LAND REFORM: Hon members, hon MECs for Rural Development and Land Reform from various provinces – some of whom are in the gallery – traditional leaders, representatives of organised agriculture, our partners from the private sector, senior government officials, hon ladies and gentlemen, let me also join the Minister in welcoming all our stakeholders, friends, comrades, colleagues from different sectors who found it necessary to set aside other important engagements in order to come and join us in our Budget Vote. Your presence here today is highly appreciated and it provides inspiration for our humble efforts.
The work of this department started just a little over 10 months ago, on 10 May 2009, when the newly inaugurated President Jacob Zuma announced his Cabinet to the country. Among the new Ministries announced was the Ministry of Rural Development and Land Reform. In making this announcement the President was taking the first decisive step in fulfilling a desire expressed by delegates at the historic 52nd national conference of the ANC held in Polokwane in December 2007. The delegates unanimously passed a resolution spelling out what they felt needed to be done to transform South Africa's rural areas.
Amongst other things, the delegates noted that, and I quote:
Colonialism and apartheid were rooted in the dispossession of the African people of their land, the destruction of African farming and the super-exploitation of wage labourers, including farm workers and their families. Poverty, inequality and joblessness are the consequence of centuries of underdevelopment and exploitation consciously perpetrated on the majority of the population, which had its most destructive and enduring impacts on rural South Africa. Consequently, the structural faults that characterised the apartheid rural economy remain with us today.
The conference further noted that the Constitution enjoins the state to take action to enable citizens to gain access to land on an equitable basis; to ensure security of tenure for people and communities; and to realise the restitution of land rights for those dispossessed after 1913. The delegates further stated that, based on the belief that rural development is a critical pillar of our struggle against unemployment, poverty and equality, more equitable distribution of land is necessary, both to undo the injustices of history as well as to ensure higher productivity, shared growth, employment and sustainable livelihoods.
Then, among other things, the conference resolved to embark on an integrated programme of rural development, land reform and agrarian change; to build stronger state capacity and devote greater resources to challenges of rural development, land reform and agrarian reform with the particular aim of creating an overarching authority with resources and authority to drive and co-ordinate this programme; and to ensure that the state regulates the land market effectively with a view to promoting the goals of rural development and agrarian change.
To this end, the management and control of state land must be consolidated under one roof. We must also accelerate the roll-out of rural infrastructure, particularly roads, and other services; including potable water, electricity and irrigation. Also, we must ensure that the former Bantustan areas are properly provided with an infrastructure base for economic and social development. Finally, we must improve the co-ordination and synergy between departments and all levels of government to ensure an integrated approach to land reform and rural development.
It is therefore quite clear that when President Zuma announced the establishment of this Ministry and the expansion of the mandate of the former department of land affairs, our work was cut out for us by the ANC Polokwane conference. This also clearly dispels the myth that the Polokwane conference was only about change of leadership without substantive attention to policy direction. In pursuance of the objectives of this resolution, the ANC national executive council, NEC, further included rural development and food security as one of our top priorities in our 2009 election manifesto.
Over the last 10 months a lot has been achieved in implementing this policy directive. Immediately after we were sworn in, and together with our top managers, we started working to unpack the mandate and put flesh to the aspirations entailed in these policy decisions. Within a few months and weeks we were able to conceptualise the Comprehensive Rural Development Programme, CRDP, with a clear vision, mission and anchor strategy. It is this clarity of purpose that has enabled us to also make inputs into the outcomes-based approach which has been developed by the Presidency.
Our decision to embark on a pilot project at Muyeshe village in Limpopo provided us with an invaluable avenue to match our theoretical conceptualisation with practical experience. We took this decision only a week after our appointment. This enabled us to keep refining the model as we were getting ready to roll into other pilot sites in the other provinces. I wish to take this opportunity to express our gratitude to our management and staff for their enthusiastic embrace and participation in the engineering and implementation of this new vision.
The current pilot projects in the eight provinces provide a valuable mix of experiences, each with its own unique challenges and opportunities. These projects are: the Muyeshe project, as already mentioned; Riemvasmaak in the Northern Cape; Mkhondo in the Mpumalanga Province; Diyatalawa and Makolokwe in the Free State; Disake, Mokgalwaneng and Matlametlong in the North West; Mhlontlo in the Eastern Cape; Msinga and Sekame in KwaZulu-Natal; and Dysselsdorp here in the Western Cape. These projects vary from tribal villages to former trust land, former homeland areas, state farms and even restituted farms, as is the case in Dysselsdorp.
The experience gained from these projects will certainly make us better prepared for a more extensive roll-out of the CRDP. The CRDP speaks to key tenets of our policy decisions - both of the ANC manifesto and the Polokwane conference - that rural development should speak to poverty eradication, the provision of employment opportunities, the reduction of inequality and support for sustainable livelihoods. As envisaged in our policy decisions, the CRDP also speaks to the rolling out of rural infrastructure, roads in particular, potable water, electricity and irrigation. The CRDP also speaks fundamentally to the issue of improved co-ordination and synergy between departments and also among the various spheres of government as pronounced in our policy decisions.
All the CRDP implementation projects, be it social facilitation, community profiling, laying out of economic infrastructure such as roads, water and electricity or social infrastructure and social services such as schools, clinics, multipurpose centres, early childhood development centres, etc, provide major opportunities for our young people to acquire skills which can result in medium- to long-term jobs or even the ability to start their own businesses.
In terms of resourcing the programme – I know some hon members have made comments about the budget - we have gone a long way in making sure that there is a budget dedicated to rural development. This started with the Medium Term Budget Policy Statement in October and now it is part of the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework from 2010-11 to 2013-14. While we would be the first to accept that the current allocation may seem a far cry from what this mandate seems to suggest, we believe, nevertheless, that it's a good beginning. We should also bear in mind that our department is not expected to be the full implementer of all rural development projects. We see ourselves as initiators, catalysts, facilitators and co-ordinators. Our role is to bring in other role-players within government, parastatals and also from the private sector, as certain hon members have commented. We are already doing that.
We have also gone a long way in the restructuring of the department to align its programmes and organogram with the new mandate. An ongoing need is the reorientation of the mindset of our staff, some of whom have been in the employ of other departments for many years. Many of our staff previously focused on land affairs and on the functions of the Land Claims Commission. Now we have to bring them around to a more comprehensive rural development and land reform focus. We are a long way into creating one department with different branches focusing on different responsibilities but with one vision, one mission, one strategic approach, and under one leadership.
We also need to take this opportunity to thank our various stakeholders who have enthusiastically embraced the new vision, both in the three spheres of government and outside of government. We are not yet at the stage where we can claim that government co-ordination is at its best but a lot has been achieved. The commitment is showing and everywhere we go we encounter colleagues from different Ministries and departments. We are also grateful for the unwavering support of our President.
All the premiers, MECs, mayors, councillors and officials that we have worked with have displayed the utmost commitment to the new vision. We have also been met with great enthusiasm outside of government, by parastatals, institutions of higher learning, agricultural organisations and private business in general. Our challenge is to turn all this support into tangible, visible results.
From a land reform perspective, this programme has been a serious learning curve and a major challenge over the last 10 months. We admit that. First of all, in the first few days of our appointment we were confronted with the reality that the land restitution budget would soon be exhausted due to a pile-up of finalised claims awaiting payment. To make matters worse, there were some huge claims - one was about R600 million – that had to be settled as one specific claim.
It also became evident that while 95% of the claims had been settled, the remaining 5% were mostly highly complex and many of them potentially very expensive. Even more challenging was the fact that up to 50% of long-settled claims on previously productive and economically viable farms were not functioning optimally. We are the ones who pronounced on that. We were not coerced; we wanted to address this. Many claims settled in terms of research of validity could not be finalised due to financial constraints, while others that had been finalised could not be supported with development grants.
With regard to proactive land reform, it became evident that while a lot of progress had been made in terms of transferring land to previously landless black people, huge challenges remained, with many allocated farms either not fully productive or functioning under optimal levels. As we already indicated, the land reform programme, including restitution, has now been integrated into the CRDP and we will focus on making sure that all land allocated for a specific purpose, food production in particular, is well utilised. We have reached the conclusion that it is better to chase quality utilisation than quantity of acquisition. This is a hard choice and I want to emphasise that it has its own consequences. That is why we must review the entire land tenure system, because this is not sustainable.
The recapitalisation programme, which we have already announced, will go a long way in making sure that many of our farms are functioning. As far as the comprehensive rural development programme is concerned, our challenge now is to make sure that we progress from a few pilot projects to the massive roll-out of this programme. The day-by-day experience provided by the pilot projects is proving to be useful...
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S FARISANI): Hon member, please conclude. Your time has expired.
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND LAND REFORM: The experience of pilots is proving very useful in terms of perfecting a conceptual framework enriched by practical experience. However, it looks like we are going to have to speed up translating our practical experiences of the pilot projects into a large-scale roll-out. Our pace will have to be faster than we had initially ... [Time expired.]
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND LAND REFORM
Ms C DUDLEY: Chairperson and Ministers, the ACDP is encouraged that the need for more spending and better co-ordination has been acknowledged, and we welcome the Minister of Finance's statement that in addition to the funds allocated to the Department of Rural Development and Land Affairs for the comprehensive rural development strategy, a new grant has been set up to support on-site water and sanitation infrastructure as part of the rural housing programme.
About 85% of the poorest South Africans live in rural areas, so it is no surprise that the President has declared rural development and land affairs one of government's five priorities. The ACDP expects serious attention to the fact that past budgets have been grossly inadequate to meet capacity requirements to achieve targets in redistributing land and for making restitution.
As the Deputy Minister has just said, in fact, by October last year the department had reported it had settled 95% of the 79 696 claims lodged since 1994. It is also reported to have said that the outstanding claims are all rural, of a complex nature and will require higher budget allocations to settle with the claimants. The restitution programme responsible for settling land claims and providing settlement support, however, shows a huge drop from R2,1 billion to R1,57 billion.
The recent government report has proposed two future land-use models for South Africa. In response to this document, the ACDP places on record that we oppose nationalisation of productive land, which will have disastrous repercussions for the South African economy. It is ludicrous that government is using the extremely high failure rate of farms taken over already to justify the seizing of remaining productive land.
While the pros and cons of the second proposal merit debate, the ACDP cautions that impulsive actions could take us further from our goal of prosperity for all. Careful consideration of the impact of such a move on the lives of South Africans is critical.
The first proposal, declaring all productive land a state asset, creates a greater concern because it threatens to unleash a steep fall in agricultural investment, directly affecting employment. Small rural communities will suffer most and rural poverty will increase, resulting in increased urban migration and further hardship. A drastic fall in food production will affect food-processing industries and agricultural supply industries, and rising food prices will further impact negatively on the living standards of all South Africans.
Job creation is a national priority, and we cannot afford to disregard the role of agriculture in our economy. The number of jobs created per unit of investment is higher in agriculture than any other sector and supports 8,5 million people.
While the budget for land reform has drastically increased, it is far less than the R15 billion the department estimated it will need in the year 2010-2011 to reach the 30% target of redistributing white-owned agricultural land by 2014 - not even a quarter, I believe. The ACDP calls for an increased budget allocation to facilitate the acquisition of land for redistribution. Thank you.
UMNTWANA B Z ZULU
Ms C DUDLEY
IsiZulu
UMNTWANA B Z ZULU: Somlomo, mhlonishwa Ngqongqoshe neSekela lakho, amalunga ahloniphekile.
Umhlabathi owasala ezandleni zabantu abansundu ngesikhathi izwe lidakadikwa nguhulumeni wobandlululo waba ngu13% kuphela. Kuyamangalisa uma kukhona abantu abafana nomhlonishwa uGroenewald uma ethi yena lokhu ukubona kwakukukhulu kakhulu uma izwe lali ngu13% out of 100 lasala kubantu abamnyama bephucwa ngenkani.
Izwe elasala nabamhlophe laba ngu87%. Lo mhlaba ongu13% abantu bakithi babekwazi ukuziphilisa kuwo ngokulima, nokuphilisa imfuyo yabo. Wonke lomhlabathi ongu87% unezincwadi zobunikazi kulaba abamhlophe bese kuthi lomhlabathi ongu13% owasala kubantu abamnyama ungabinazo izincwadi ezingamagunya obunikazi kubantu bakithi.
Izindawo zasemakhaya ezenganyelwe ngamaKhosi zinomhlabathi ongumgogodla wokuthuthukisa lelizwe. Uma zingaxhaseka kahle noma lowo mhlabathi kuthiwe ngu13% kodwa abantu bakithi bakwazile ukuphila kuwona isikhathi eside kakhulu kwaze kwafika leso sikhathi lapha bephoqeleka ukuba bahambe bayosebenza bashiye amakhaya.
Kodwa umnumzane ubephuma ayosebenza izinyanga eziyisithupha, abuye azolima akhiqizele umndeni wakhe nezwe lakubo ukudla izinyanga eziyisithupha aphinde aphume ayofuna umsebenzi. Izizwe eziningi zalwa kakhulu zilwela umhlabathi, akukho okwakulwela ngale kwalokho. Ongangukuthi ekwehlulweni kwabantu abamnyama eNingizimu Afrika kwafika lapho khona ukuthi kababumbe imbumbe bakhe inhlangano ezobenza ukuba balwe bakhulume ngezwi elilodwa emhlabathini omncane ongu13% wamaKhosi owawusasele kubo.
Yingakho bavumelana ngezwi elilodwa ukuthi akwakhiwe inhlangano enjengoKhongolose, eyavumelana ngezwi elilodwa ukuthi akuhlanganwe yathi mzulu, msuthu kanye nomxhosa, hlanganani. Lokho kwakukhulunywa ngendaba yezwe elalisasele emaKhosini.
Umhlaba uphethwe ngamaKhosi unabaniniwo abangenazo izincwadi eziyisiqiniseko zokuthi ngowabo. Umhlaba wamaKhosi unikeza umuntu owakhele ilungelo lokuba azakhele umuzi wakhe kuwo. Abe namasimu okulima ukuze akwazi ukuziphilisa ngawo. Abe nedlelo lezinkomo ezingumnotho nomgogodla walelizwe.
Ibhange lendoda kumuntu omnyama isibaya sezinkomo ekhaya, kuyadabukisa nje ke mhlonishwa ukuthi ezikhathini eziningi nxa kuthiwa kubhombe i-ATM kugijima onke amaveni aphikelele lapho kuyobhekwa ukuthi ngobani ababhombe leyo ATM.
Bese kutholakala ukuthi uma ekhaya kufika izigebengu ebusuku zingqongqoza emnyango zithi ungabe usaphuma, ziyothatha izinkomo zonke. Akubibikho ngisho abomthetho abazosuka ngakusasa bagijime bethi masiyophenya. Kuvele kuthiwe nje zibhekele ukuthi zathathwa ngobani bese ubuye uzositshela sizobopha lowo muntu. Kodwa iqiniso ngelokuthi ibhange lomuntu omnyama isibaya sezinkomo ekhaya.[Ihlombe.]
Umhlabathi umuntu awakhele akuwona owakhe ngesingaye, kepha ungowomndeni wakhe. Ngakho akuthi ngoba iNkosi isixabene nenhloko yomndeni lowo, bese kuba yinto elula nje ukuthi iyabaxosha endaweni yayo. Lokhu esikubona kwenziwa yilaba abamhlophe lapha emapulazini, kukhishwa abantu beyohlala emgwaqeni nomndeni ngoba exabene nendoda ephethe lelo khaya.
Kodwa ngesingathi akwenzakali lokho, kepha ngokosikompilo yethu iNkosi iyamhlawulisa lowo muntu aphinde futhi ahlale nomdeni wakhe aqhubeke, anikeze iNkosi inhlonipho efaneleyo.
English:
Hon Minister, let me quote the hon president of Contralesa, iNkosi Phathekile Holomisa, when he said:
Just as government, nationally or provincially, has no legitimate claim to ownership of the communal land, the new local council cannot be the owners of the land. The African communities and traditional leaders are the owners. To ensure continuity and stability in the communal areas, legal ownership of such areas must be transferred from the state to owners – that is, the African communities and traditional leaders. A single title deed should be issued in the respect of the communal land. The legal entity in whose name the title deed should be issued is "the traditional authority".
IsiZulu:
Umhlaba osezindaweni zabantu abakhele aMakhosi ucebile kakhulu ngamahlathi emvelo. Lomhlabathi noma lezi zindawo ezivulekileyo ezihlonishwayo ngokugcina indalo njengezilwane zasendle. Kepha namuhla lo mhlabathi ubhekene nenkulu inselelo yokhula lokufika" alien plants". Njengamanje amahlathi adliwa yilolu khulangalendlela esabisayo. Kuthi laba beziqiwi banikezeke isabiwomali esivela KuMnyango Wezolimo ukuba bakwazi ukugawula lezi zihlahla. Kodwa uma sekuyiwa ezindaweni zabantu abanikezwa, abantu abaqasheke, bathole amatoho ukuze babulale lezihlahla.
Bese kuba khon enye inkinga ekhona yokuthi eminye imindeni ithatha lolu khula ibiye ngalo umuzi ngoba luyabukeka luba luhle, ludliwe yizinyoni uthole ukuthi ngeke luze luphele ngaphandle ukuba uMnyango uze ubeke umthetho ukuthi kuvinjelwa kanjani lokhu.
Kukhona izindawo okuthiwa amaxhaphozi eziya zincipha kakhulu emakhaya. Beziligugu elikhulu lezi ndawo ngoba yilapho bekumila khona utshani obuligugu nobuwumcebo obusetshenziswa ngamakhosikazi akithi, ikhwani, incema, ibhuma, imizi konke lokhu bebeluka ngakho amacansi nezicephu. Bakwazi ukuthengisa baphile. Ayikho inkosazane engaphuma iyogana ingaliphathi icansi lencema lomnumzane.
Nangu noBhishobhu uDandala uyaludinga ukuthi uma esegana undodana wakhe, afike umakoti amphathele icansi lencema, aliphose phansi, alale umfundisi kulona. [Uhleko.] okunye okulimaza amaxhaphozi akithi ukulima, abantu belima izingadi. Basuke bavule imisele uyabona lobutshani bonke bese bunyamalala. Imifula ebineziziba zishile lezi ziziba.
Uyabona uma kukhulunywa ngalesiVuvu jikelele "global warming" umuntu ukubona kahle uma usuyemakhaya ngoba besingenayo inkinga yamanzi enganga le. Kodwa uyakubona kuyakwanda kakhulu lokhu. Sengigcina Sihlalo...
English:
I think I must go back to the president of Contralesa, when he said:
One of the steps which should be taken is to do an audit of land – private, communal, state and public. Also to be investigated is the amount of South African land in the hands of foreign nationals. On completion of the audit, the state will have to determine the land needs of people.
[Applause.]
IsiZulu:
Mhlonishwa njengoKhongolose siyalwesekela lolu hlahlo mali olwethule namuhla. Ngiyabonga.
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Dr T S FARISANI): Hon members, I have made a very interesting observation. On this side, only three hon members are wearing translation equipment - only three. On this side, I would not have been surprised if the hon Minister of Transport was wearing one because he does not understand the language the Prince used. But no members are wearing the earpieces. Multilingualism has come a long way in this country if what I observe is really correct! [Laughter.] [Applause.]
Mr M J ELLIS: Chairperson, I was very concerned that you were going to say that in light of the fact that nobody appeared to be listening to the hon member, he could make his speech again. I am glad you did not do that, Sir. [Laughter.]
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Dr T S FARISANI): You would not have made that speech if a pastor was not presiding. You would have been ruled out of order. Thanks to grace.
Ms A STEYN
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Dr T S FARISANI)
Ms A STEYN: Chairperson, I also want to welcome all the guests here this afternoon. Mr Minister, land reform, or agrarian reform, is an often controversial adjustment in social arrangements, whereby government administers possession and use of land. Throughout history, public discontent with land-related institutions has been one of the most common factors in provoking revolutionary movements and other social upheavals. I want to quote from a book written by Sol Plaatje. Please listen carefully:
We are told to forgive our enemies and not let the sun go down upon our wrath, so we breathe a prayer that peace may be to the white races, and that they, including our present persecutors of the Union Parliament, may never live to find themselves deprived of all occupation and property rights in their native country, as is now the case with the Native.
Hon Minister, an economically free society is one in which institutions are characterised by personal choice, voluntary exchange, freedom to compete, and protection of person and property. It requires policies that promote open markets, limited government, stable monetary growth, free trade and a strong rule of law. Your department has broken this fine balance that creates a stable environment that leads to the economic prosperity of a country.
The inclusion of the controversial paragraph in your strategic document in the section that deals with the proposed amendments to the Constitution sent shockwaves through an already uneasy agricultural sector. What made matters worse, is that you, Minister, your Deputy and the director-general sent out contradictory statements that did not do anything to allay the fears of ordinary South Africans.
Hon Minister, Zimbabwe is a constant reminder of how horribly wrong things can turn out if a government does not respect the rights of all its citizens. This situation can turn into a reality here if your department keeps on deflecting attention away from government's inability to manage an effective and efficient land reform programme using legally sound and sustainable measures.
Poverty in South Africa is most dire in rural areas. We all agree. Inequalities between urban and rural areas are on the increase. Government policy since 1994 has failed to address this problem. To date, no coherent vision and strategy for rural development has been articulated. Your efforts to change this are a good starting point, and we acknowledge it.
However, I need to inform you that your department is battling to do even the most basic things correctly. Firstly, one of your regional land claims offices recently changed phone numbers without informing the public. This only came to light after I asked the regional commissioner why they did not answer their phone.
Secondly, Mr Whiskey Kgabo from Limpopo fears for his life after the Limpopo commissioner wrongfully transferred only two portions of his three portions of land to the land claims beneficiaries.
Thirdly, your department ran out of funds for restitution in June last year, after they had a similar problem in 2008. It was not new last year. They still kept on entering into purchase agreements without informing the public of their situation.
Fourthly, after questioning the director-general on the findings by the Auditor-General on the issue that the state does not have a proper land audit, the department answered, "We have boxes full of records." There is no land audit; it is in boxes, Minister! That is what the answer was.
Lastly, land transferred to beneficiaries is in a state of disrepair after the department did not keep their promise to beneficiaries to transfer money for development. It is estimated that the department owes in the region of R6 billion to beneficiaries for post-settlement grants. Where these funds were transferred, no capacity exists to monitor and evaluate progress. This is one of the contributing factors to the fact that 90% of land reform projects have failed.
Here follows some statements from judges against the Commission on the Restitution of Land Claims:
I wish to express my dissatisfaction with the manner in which the applicant's claim was handled by the Regional Land Claims Commissioner of KwaZulu-Natal. The claim has been investigated for more than 10 years without publication thereof.
Here is another quote:
This case has been dragging on at great expense for the second defendant, that is, the farmer. The plaintiffs are sponsored by the state.
Minister, this was not one of those difficult cases, it was a normal case.
On Sunday, a report by Carte Blanche showed alleged misappropriation by staff members of your department in the awarding of farms to beneficiaries. This is due to the fact that your department does not have a risk management plan in place. Hon Minister,...
Afrikaans:
Daar is 'n mooi gesegde in Afrikaans: "Waar daar 'n rokie is, is 'n vuurtjie."
English:
Your department must immediately ask for a forensic audit to get to the bottom of this. It is also not the first time that these kinds of allegations have been made.
Communication with your department hardly ever elicits any response. President Zuma himself commented about the lack of communication with communities and farmers. Minister, even your own office is not responding to urgent queries that I personally sent to you three weeks ago. This situation cannot continue without your urgent attention.
For many years now, landowners have been blamed by the government for causing delays in the land reform programme. These allegations are totally unfounded and are clearly intended to distract attention from the true reasons for this delay.
Afrikaans:
Minister, dit is nou tyd dat u die bul by die horings pak. Die mense van Suid-Afrika is bereid om hul kant te bring om van grondhervorming 'n sukses te maak. Wat nodig is, is dat u sê waarheen die regerende party op pad is met grondhervorming. Steun u die uitlatings soos wat ons weer vanmiddag hier gehoor het, wat sê, "Ek weet in elk geval nie hoekom die regering die grond moet koop nie – die boere het dit destyds gesteel"? Of is u regering regtig bereid om by die ooreenkoms soos wat ons aangegaan het met die Grondwet, te hou? Dankie.
Mr P S SIZANI
Ms A STEYN
Mr P S SIZANI: Chairperson, I think the matter which was raised by hon Swathe in this House was very important. It is important because hon Swathe is a member of the portfolio committee. He raised the matter, fully aware of the answer to the question. But he pretended in this House that he did not know the answer to that question.
IsiXhosa:
ILUNGU ELIHLONIPHEKILEYO: Uthengiwe. [He is a traitor.]
English:
Mr P S SIZANI: A specific explanation was given to the committee by the department on why there is a shift from land restitution to land reform. It has been repeated so many times by both the Minister and the Deputy Minister here. That is why the Deputy Minister concluded by saying that the shift from land restitution to land reform has consequences which we are prepared to face as the ANC.
Also, I don't quite understand why hon Swathe mentioned the shops which people in the rural areas have to buy fro. He knows the government does not build shops. Instead, he could have commented on the integrated rural infrastructure development programme which the department is part of. Furthermore, I would like to remind hon Swathe that we, the committee and the department, collectively acknowledged that the budget was not adequate. Yes, we collectively acknowledged, including the department, that their budget was not adequate.
There are three reasons why that budget was not adequate. [Interjections.] The first reason is that the department was under construction. It could not have been given R15 billion when its capacity with regard to reconstruction indicated that it could use only R3 billion. It is not possible. It is an irresponsible government that would give that amount of money to a department like that.
The second reason the department received the budget it did is that the Land Bank and Agriculture of South Africa has a "revolving door". With that I refer to the Land Bank's practice of taking the land from the beneficiaries and then selling it back to the same people from whom it was bought. [Interjections.] Why should we continue to buy land when, in fact, we should be using the land that we have in our own hands? A question one would ask is: Why are we not stopping the Land Bank from doing so? [Interjections.]
Mr I O DAVIDSON: Chairperson, I rise on a point of order: Will the hon member take a question on that matter?
HON MEMBERS: No! [Interjections.]
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S FARISANI): Hon members! Part of the decorum of this House is that we behave orderly. Will you take a question, hon member?
Mr P S SIZANI: When I have finished.
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S FARISANI): No, he won't take a question now. Please take your seat. Continue, hon member.
Afrikaans:
'n AGB LID: Luister! [Listen!]
English:
Mr P S SIZANI: The reason why the Land Bank is behaving in this manner – and I don't understand why hon members have such a short memory - is because it used to belong to the land affairs and agriculture department, if one remembers. It was moved to the Department of Finance because of alleged corruption. [Interjections.] That investigation is ongoing. This particular Minister has no control over the Land Bank and, therefore, cannot direct the Land Bank.
Recently, the Minister asked the Land Bank to give back farms worth R207 million, which are in its possession, and they refused. The reason for that is because they may not be sold to captive market but sold back to the marketplace. Why? The reason has got to do with who are the buyers in the market place and, therefore, whose Land Bank is it? [Interjections.] [Applause.]
Mr I O DAVIDSON: Hon Chair, will the hon member take a question now?
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S FARISANI): Hon member, were you raising a point of order?
Mr I O DAVIDSON: Hon Chair, I was asking whether he would take a question now.
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S FARISANI): You raised that issue before and he was very clear. According to the rules, when the Chair speaks, you don't talk back. [Laughter.] I was saying he indicated that he won't take a question. He will do that only when he has finished with his speech, if there's time.
Mr M J ELLIS: Mr Chairman, I rise on a point of information: The hon member has just told us ...
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S FARISANI): Look, I might rule wrongly because I don't hear what the hon member is saying.
Mr M J ELLIS: Chairperson, the hon member has just informed us that it's our Land Bank and we are very excited about this. We would like to have more information, if that's possible.
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S FARISANI): That is not a point of order. Continue.
Mr P S SIZANI: I want to come to a very important point which is very sensitive, hon Groenewald. South Africans have a very short memory; a dangerously short memory. From 1652, when the settlers came into this country - brought here by a private company, the Dutch East India Company - there was no land tenure system. It was "smash and grab". [Interjections.] When the English took over the Cape after 1795 and 1806, they created rules that made it impossible for the vryburgers to work the land; hence the Great Trek. They made it impossible for the vryburgers to till the land but, still, there was no land tenure system.
After the Anglo-Boer war in 1910, the English and the Afrikaners made a pact to take over the country, share it among themselves and exclude the African people. Again it was "smash and grab". [Interjections.] In 1948, when the then National Party took over, they created an exclusive smash-and-grab licence for themselves.
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S FARISANI): Hon member, nobody has raised a point of order but did I hear the word "shit" from this side? [Interjections.] If I was certain that someone had used that word, there would have been consequences. Continue, hon member. {Interjections.]
Mr P S SIZANI: From 1948 onwards, there suddenly were "black spots" in the country. Blacks were removed from the black spots so that there could be a white South Africa and reserves for the Bantu. I must now remind members that there was a gentleman called Jaap Marais in this country. I'm sure many of you have forgotten about him. Everybody wished he would not be remembered. He coined the term...
Afrikaans:
"Kaffir op sy plek". [Tussenwerpsels.]
English:
Do you remember that? What the democratic government did not do in 1994 was to undo all the "smash and grabs". In fact, the democratic government decided that all the boundaries that were created by the colonialists would be respected, including the "smash and grab" licences named "freehold title deeds".
We suggest to South Africans, like the President did this morning, that in order to have meaningful reconciliation, let us enter into a debate among ourselves so that we can talk about the things that are hurtful to us. That's what will make South Africans live together in harmony. [Applause.]
The reason I'm making this point in reference to hon Groenewald is that he made the point that the Minister was expected by many farmers to make a pronouncement on freehold land in this country.
Chairperson, no Minister, no Member of Parliament, as a member of ANC, makes policy decisions by decree. All policies are processed within the structures of the movement. Therefore, no Green Paper has been tabled in this House because there is no process that has been followed. When that Green Paper has been processed it will be brought here ... [Inaudible.] [Interjections.]
Mr P J GROENEWALD: Chairperson, on a point of order: Can I ask that the hon member ensures there is enough time so that I can also ask a question, please?
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S FARISANI): Hon member, will you take a question?
Mr P S SIZANI: Later. Hon members, in South Africa and all over the world, land is a national asset. There's no need for anybody to amend section 25 of the Constitution. Land is a national asset. We have water rights because water is a national asset. We've got fishing quotas, because the fish in the ocean is a national asset. We've got mining rights because the minerals under the soil belong to all South Africans. Why is there such sensitivity when it comes to land? We treat this national asset the same as we treat water, education and health. What we need to do and engage ourselves in, hon Groenewald, is the debate that all South Africans must engage in so that we are unanimously agreed on how we handle these national assets for the benefit of all South Africans. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSOM (Mr K O BAPELA): Order, hon members! Although the time allocated to the speaker has expired, the business of the Extended Public Committee, EPC, is continuing. Hon member, are you rising on a point of order?
Mr M J ELLIS: Mr Chairman, I would like to ask whether it is possible to give the hon Mr Sizani more time because there are two very important questions we would like to ask him?
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSOM (Mr K O BAPELA): That should have been arranged with the Whippery.
Mr M J ELLIS: Mr Chairman, the problem is that you've taken over the Chair from somebody else and we would like hon Sizani to answer a couple of questions.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSOM (Mr K O BAPELA): Well, let's deal with it later in the debate that he is proposing, that is, when that debate takes place here. Before I call on the hon Minister I understand there is a ruling that has to be made by the temporary Chair, Ms Mabuza, on an earlier issue that arose. I invite her to the Chair. She will give the ruling. I'll then come back and invite the Minister to comment on the debate.
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Ms M C MABUZA)
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr K O Bapela)
RULING
(On whether the word "nonsense" is parliamentary)
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Ms M C MABUZA): Chairperson, hon members, earlier in the debate I indicated that I will get back to this meeting with a ruling. This was in relation to a point of order raised by the hon Ellis to the effect that the word "nonsense" had not been ruled unparliamentary in the past.
I just need to indicate that when a Presiding Officer rules on a matter, he or she takes into account the tone and the context in which the remark is made. At the time when the hon Groenewald made the remark, it was my view that the remark was meant to offend and I therefore asked him to withdraw. He obliged.
It is correct that the word itself has never been considered offensive, and it is therefore not unparliamentary. However, I wish to thank hon Groenewald for acceding to my request at the time. I thank you. [Applause.]
Mr P GROENEWALD: Hon Chair, before you leave the chair, you have to help me now. After you had left the Chair, I repeated what I said to the hon member in my speech and I said she was still talking nonsense. Must I withdraw that or not? [Laughter.]
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Ms M C MABUZA): Hon Groenewald, I was not in and I didn't hear you referring to the member talking nonsense. I ruled on what I heard. Thank you.
Mr P GROENEWALD: Thank you, Chair. I accept that my last one was unparliamentary. Thank you. [Laughter.]
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Ms M C MABUZA): Thank you.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr K O BAPELA): Order! Hon members, we invite the hon Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform. [Applause.]
The MINISTER OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND LAND REFORM (Mr G E Nkwinti): Thank you, hon Chair.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr K O Bapela): I am not aware of how many minutes allocated to you, but I hope this has been communicated to you.
The MINISTER OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND LAND REFORM (Mr G E Nkwinti): Eight minutes.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr K O Bapela): The hon Minister has eight minutes, which was saved by his party as earlier indicated. I understand.
Mr M J ELLIS: I want to say, Sir, that we actually timed the ANC speakers very carefully and you are right, unfortunately. [Laughter.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr K O BAPELA): I am very right. So hon Minister, you have eight minutes. [Laughter.]
Mr P J GROENEWALD: Chairperson, the FF Plus can even give him 10 minutes if he can give clarity on the issues, please. [Laughter.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr K O BAPELA): Unless you have the two minutes to donate from the FF Plus, I am not sure whether those minutes are available. Hon Minister, we have not touched your minutes yet, so now you can start.
The MINISTER OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND LAND REFORM: Hon Chairperson, Firstly, I would like to thank the members of the opposition for contributing to this debate. Clearly, it's a very sensitive matter. Secondly, we would like to invite members, particularly from the DA, to visit Miyeshe and see the change. Those who were there in August when we launched this RDP are invited to return so that they can come to the House and explain the changes that have been achieved there. A lot more still needs to be done, but please do visit.
Thirdly, members of the ANC did not really raise the matter of section 25 of the Constitution. This matter came from other hon members. In the speech I read I didn't mention this matter at all. I actually said we had looked at and reviewed the land tenure system, and we proposed to introduce it to the House as a three-tiered system. Firstly, there is state land and we won't sell that; it will be leasehold. Secondly, there is private freehold in South Africa, which we will not touch. What we are saying is there will be "limited extent". Thirdly, we acknowledge that foreigners own land in South Africa, but now we will introduce "precarious tenure". So, we haven't said anything at all about nationalisation of land.
I will be shocked if any South African has a problem with the fact that land is a national asset. We met and sat with the CEO of AgriSA and legal advisors on this question. We explained it to them in terms of that first paragraph of the strategic plan and we all agreed. I am shocked that there will then be politicians sitting here who feel that the land should belong to someone else. Let's just kill that non-existent debate.
Our department has been qualified for the last five years, as one of the hon members mentioned. Do you know why? It is mainly because we don't know how much land we own and where is it, because there is no register. This is because of the terrible state of land management in the country.
The hon member is talking about 1795. In fact, between 1795 and 1844 there was no land administration in this country because every administration, particularly the British administration, completely ignored the question of land administration. There was such complacency, indolence and laziness on their part. In fact, it was not important to them. For us, it is very important because we are a responsible government and we must account to the members of the House here.
As we stand here, we know that we will probably again be qualified because of this question. That is why we are proposing a land management commission. This will help us to start exerting pressure on those who own land so that we can know what land belongs to the state and what belongs to other people. This will allow us to start leasing out on long lease the land that belongs to the state, while we regulate privately owned land in terms of the land tenure system. So, there is no such a thing as nationalisation of land.
My fifth point is that perhaps it is important for me to say again that there is the question of the Extension of Security of Tenure Act, Esta. We will amend this Esta legislation, as is the case with the Land Tenure Act. We will amend that. We will bring before this House a Bill that deals with this question and which we can look at. There are three critical objectives. The first objective, and it is very important, is to sustain production discipline on farm land. Now, because in South Africa we want to derationalise, we agreed on this with farmers. Therefore, we have to derationalise the rural economy. We are moving away from this thing that black South Africans are victims. We are not victims; we own this land together. We must, then, find the way of derationalising the rural economy. So, we can get farmers to also use state land to integrate black and white farmers for production purposes.
The second objective is that there must be democratic, equitable allocation and use of land across race, gender and class perspectives. We have to deal with that. That is a very important consideration. Therefore, as far as the Extension of Security of Land Tenure Act, Esta, is concerned, it is driven by the objectives I mentioned: food production, the derationalising of economy and the democratisation of the allocation of land.
We introduced the concept of "relative rights" because we recognise that now, with the changes that are taking place, more black people are assuming ownership of land – rural land, for production. This is an integration that we want to achieve as a country. It is no longer going to be a black or white land. There will be ownership and non-ownership across the colour line. In other words, it is going to be more of a class issue.
Therefore, in that context we cannot continue talking about black people as victims and white people as oppressors. No. The issue now is going to be those who pay tax and own land will pay tax to the state; those who work on the land must have rights but they must produce; those who live in homes on the farms as dwellers must be protected in terms of tenure. We discussed this and found that it's fine for these farm dwellers to sell their labour power to the land owners, but they must also be secure where they live. So, that is what we are bringing to this House in terms of the Land Tenure Bill. Thank you, Chairperson. [Applause.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr K O Bapela): Order! Just before I conclude business, I want to note something that might be of interest to the executive members. Firstly, there is a culture in Parliament that EPCs are like budget days. On a budget day, departments will usually exhibit and showcase outside the EPCs, wherever they are taking place. I saw yesterday that this has disappeared and I am not sure whether this was a decision by the executive, or what?
Secondly, these exhibits afford other members, those who are not members of the portfolio committee, the opportunity to have access to the information displayed on those tables.
Lastly, members usually get invited to a dinner, or whatever, as a way of networking. After all, we have guests in the gallery and they probably wanted to discuss some of the opinions raised in the debate itself, so that they can then take those discussions to network and share information.
I am just saying that this culture and tradition ought to continue. I saw some didn't do it yesterday. So, you are invited to the Marks Building for a cocktail function, all of you. [Laughter.] The Ministers have responded on that one, but as for the exhibition side of it, the next time Land Reform is here, it must be treated as a budget day.
Debate concluded.
The House adjourned at 16:27
END OF TAKE
Audio
No related
Documents
No related documents