Tuesday, August 18, 2009

Zuma vows ‘pragmatic’ land reform

As if on cue, JZ himself provides a perfect follow-on piece to yesterday's post - thanks to ExZanian for the link. I thought it was important enough to post in full.


President Jacob Zuma today declared unequivocally that his government is planning to make "significant changes" to the willing-buyer-willing-seller method of land redistribution.



Speaking in Limpopo, he said at the official launch of his government’s comprehensive rural development policy: "We have recognised that in order to move forward decisively with the land redistribution programme, significant changes will have to be made."

He said that in order to move ahead with land reform, government will have to "investigate less costly alternative ways of land acquisition, by engaging with all stakeholders within the sector".

He added: "The general view is that the willing-buyer willing seller model does not work. We will be seeking a much more pragmatic formula to land redistribution. [general amongst whom?]

"It will be a formula that should address the issue as part of our country’s ongoing effort at national reconciliation." [hahaha]

And he warned: "It should not be seen as a super-profit-making business venture." [you can bet on that]

The president told his audience that a critical part of the rural development strategy, which was approved by cabinet last week, is to stimulate agricultural production with a view to contributing to food security, and he promised that government will support the provision of agricultural implements and inputs to boost emerging farmers and households nationally.

"We must also make agricultural loans accessible and ensure agricultural extension services of a high quality," he said.

"Over the medium term, the aim is to bring about a measurable increase in agricultural output."

He said that the Ilima/Letsema campaign which helps recultivate land that has been lying idle will be intensified to enhance household food security.

Other farmland will be protected from encroachment by developers.

"While we focus on encouraging communities to grow their own food, measures will also be put in place to ensure access by poor households to basic foods at affordable prices; and generally to improve the logistics of food distribution," he said.

He also undertook to promote rural transport infrastructure and services.

"This will include non-motorised transport infrastructure, provision of rural transport passenger facilities and rural freight transport logistics," he said.

"It pains us to see women carrying groceries walking long distances from the taxi drop-off point to their homes [their husbands too drunk/lazy to help]. Many rural school children also walk unimaginable distances to schools due to lack of proper roads and lack of transport."

13 Opinion(s):

FishEagle said...

"Over the medium term, the aim is to bring about a measurable increase in agricultural output" The opposite has been happening on the land that has been transferred to blacks. This is classical democracy at work - Zuma is just implementing what the people want. A democracy is a farce - the popularity game.

Viking said...

@FishEagle
none of that Bolshie talk!
In a democracy, stealing people's land would be illegal. O, wait, it is!
The constitution should prevent this kind of land grab from happening. Whoever wrote the clause that a vote of 66% can change the Constitution should be shot. It should be 90% at least, or should be by referendum..

Exzanian said...

Spot on Viking. But that is exactly where CODESA fell apart. Because of this percentage value. In the end, Roelf Meyer and De Klerk relented (they were pushing for 70%, they knew their demographics) and that is where we are today. F U C K E D.

FishEagle said...

Viking, what would happen if we had a vote to determine who the land belonged to? The majority blacks would vote that the whites stole the land from the blacks in the first place, therefor it needed to be redistributed to the original owners. The numbers game has always been at work.

The reality of a democracy and communism is almost exactly the same thing. It doesn't surprise me that the ANC stands for both, which most people perceive as a contradiction. The only contradiction within the ANC is their communism and capatilism policies.

FishEagle said...

P.S. For those that didn't know, I'm a supporter of the meritocracy :)

Anonymous said...

I hope Roelf Meyer dies of herpes for all the shit he put the country in. What a cock!

Viking said...

@FishEagle
I hear you. And that vote would have knock-on consequences, such as complete lack of investor confidence; SA would be bankrupt overnight.

That's why the government is supposed to be more forward-thinking than its citizens. The only thing preventing what you suggest from taking place is that even the ANC aren't retarded enough to starve themselves. Also, even the masses know that if it's legal to take any land they want, then they're vulnerable to having their land taken away by someone else. There has to be some sort of right to private property.

SA is unique in the world; nowhere else has a population gone from 5m or so to 40m or so overnight, as happened in 1994.
Even the ANC leaders knew they had to control their constituents, and I'm all for that.

FishEagle said...

Viking, "The only thing preventing what you suggest from taking place is that even the ANC aren't retarded enough to starve themselves." I know you like to give people the benefit of the doubt, however, I don't think the ANC's intelligence is in doubt:)

Viking said...

@FishEagle
point taken :)

This article expresses perfectly the ANC's plans, and a copy of it should be stapled to the head of each and every liberal:

http://www.thetimes.co.za/PrintEdition/Insight/Article.aspx?id=924668

I've been wondering if maybe this de-urbanisation plan might be worth the loss of all the big farms, if it can prevent the in-migration of peasants to the cities.

However, I fear it would be cyclical, with all the peasants trying their hands at farming for a while, say, until it gets too hard, and then massing in the cities again looking for handouts.

But if it were to work - fair play to them. A nation of happy African peasant farmers, toiling in the fields to feed themselves? great. Leaves the cities to those of us who want to live in them.

Exzanian said...

I reffered some bonehead "blogger" on the original article on Times to Viking's previous post and had the following outdated (2004) PDF file chucked back at me.
SARPN

Too bad said bonehead had not read the entire article because it also contains this sentence "Speeding up the pace and scale at which land is transferred overall will not resolve the underlaying constraints on sustainable implementation, may even exacerbate these. The national obsessession with overall targets and total numbers, works against improved quality, stronger local institutions, more appropriate development plans".

The numbskull thanked me for my input and then went on to lecture me about potassium leakage and root systems. Eish, screeeech, you can't engage with them!

Viking said...

@Exzanian
Aye, I've just read the exchange! He seems to think that "land reform needs to happen" irrespective of the actual facts involved.

When I read some of the comments from black SAns on some of these news sites, I find it very frightening what opinions count as normal among people who presumably have enough knowledge to switch on a computer and read the news online.

That land reform needs to happen is a purely ideological stance - there is nothing to stop new farmers starting up on land that's standing empty.

If you read that earlier article from January 25th, there are some real gems in there, from Jeff Radebe and Jessie Duarte.

So-called experts seem to think that black folks from the Eastern Cape have some sort of right to walk around looking for a nice farm, and the government must buy it for them.

The figure of 87% that's bandied about as "white-owned" land, seems to be the amount of farmland that's OUTSIDE the old homelands. Of course a lot of what's inside those lands is owned by "local, traditional" authorities that the government doesn't want to deal with in any way.

no amount of research or literature will change the fact that messing with farmers is plain stupid.

Anonymous said...

Viking said: "But if it were to work - fair play to them. A nation of happy African peasant farmers, toiling in the fields to feed themselves? great. Leaves the cities to those of us who want to live in them."

How long you lived in Africa, Viking?
Don't you realise Negroes are NOT farmers? All they've ever done is destroy any area they move into. They are PASTORALISTS who first wipe out the people and then the wildlife of any area they move into, leaving it free for them and their cattle to destroy - first the vegetation, then the topsoil.
Why do you think the Boers thought they'd be safe on the "sourveld" of the Highveld after the British took Natal from them? In fact, the Zulus and Xhosas would all still be living in Zululand and Transkei if the Brit Government hadn't invaded those countries to try to outnumbe the Boers with less intelligent and more easily manipulated Bantu!

Common Sense

FMCLAW777 said...

The whole problem with land reform and land distribution is as follows:

1) South Africa has so much undeveloped land available, why do they want the land that is already developed? And when they do get that "whitey farm" that was "taken/stolen" from them, they simply do not work the soil, sell all the farm equipment in pieces and scrap metal, then destroy the house by stripping it completely and then live the way they did back in 1652 (a month before Jan arrived). Why don't they produce food for their families by farming the land and sustaining it's development??

One answer come to mind - they did not work for it therefore they don't care about it. Just like everything they receive / received for free, pre and post 94.

Build them schools and provide free schooling - they burn it down and assault the teachers.
Build them free houses - they complain that it's to small and the 5 families staying in the house have to share 2 rooms.
Give them electricity - they go about stealing the copper wires to sell and then illegally connect to the traffic light located conveniently close to his house.
Give them free water - they pollute the rivers and dams.
GIVE THEM VOTING RIGHTS - well need I say more about what they did with that privilege!!!!!