Issued by African National Congress - Parliament
1 April 2003
Today I stand here again full of gratitude and great pleasure and serious and great pleasure and serious pride reporting on the excellent work so well done by the Portfolio Committee on Agriculture and Land Affairs in monitoring especially government's programmes deliveries, dictated by the RDP as the main government policy direction. I am convinced that we are at one as members of this committee by saying yes, this government, especially this department has done extremely well if we are to judge it against that policy direction.
Of course, as members of different political parties from different political backgrounds and different organisations, we are certainly going to differ on the emphasis on what we think should have happened. But today this debate should be an indication that as this committee we are a solid rock in-terms of monitoring the government process against the RDP.
Let me just interrupt myself by saying that there was only one incident in this committee, that was last week, when members of the portfolio committee marched out during a heated debate around land transformation and land redistribution. Let me say that it was not an advisable move to make, as it is an issue that warrants debate amongst that committee rather than to run away from the from the debate. Let me also invite all members of this House and the public out there, to the judge and bear testimony to what we are saying today. As members of this committee, we are at one in terms of judging government department, particularly Land Affairs, on what has been delivered since 1994, going back to the RDP. Without boring members about the statistics and what happened, let me highlight three issues that the RDP spoke about; redistribution of land, restitution and land tenure reform.
On redistribution, starting under the leadership of Comrade Derek Hanekom.
Under the settlement land acquisition grant, which was known as 16000 for land and so forth, many people benefited from that process. I dare challenge anybody who would say today South Africans did not benefit from that programme. And honourable Minister, that was work well done. On restitution, I want to say that in his state of the nation address the President reiterated the need to speed up the settlement of land 2005 we really need to have finalises this process. However, we have some challenges, confronted by government officials and Ministers on this particular matter. I am aware that R391 million was budgeted for last year. Today 854 million is being budgeted. It is a significant increase. The issue is will the be enough money for us to finalise this process.
My reading is no! There is not going to be enough. This warrants the debate between the Department of Land Affairs and the Minister of finance, particularly treasury, to discuss and engage on this particular matter because for me that is an instructive from the President, in this House. We dare not to fail that instruction.
There is a need for us to engage in this debate around allocation of this money on this particular matter. I would not go back into details about what needs to be allocated annually and so forth. The point I am trying to make is that there is a need for us to engage in this debate around the issues. I am challenging the Minister to facilitate that meeting between the portfolio committee, treasury and herself to discuss this particular matter and to resolve it as early as now.
On land tenure reform, under the same hon. Minister we have passed some Acts and the Extension of Security of Tenure Act, Act 62 of 1977. In my view, there were some flaws in the legislation; hence many people today are still being evicted in the communities by farmers.
The challenge for us is to ensure that by the end of this calendar year, the department of Land Affairs should have a consolidation of the two pieces of legislations so as to enable us to protect vulnerable communities, particularly black people, who are being evicted in the communities. For me, the issue is not to say that they should actually be forced to stay in the land. I want to challenge the Government departments and the Ministry in particular. There is a need for us to come with better mechanisms of how we want to protect the security of people. My challenge is that there is a need for us to come with Agricultural villages. There may be problems with that, but there is an important factor on that issue. If we create a situation like what happened in Bothaville, where farmers created some accommodation for our people, in some places where they are safe. They then move from those places, but they go to the farm to go and work. Why can't we do the same thing to secure the security of the people in the white communities. For me the security cuts across both colours. It is important that we look into that particular situation.
Government has promptly responded to what we wanted it to respond to. Today, on the same land tenure reform we have only one white farmer who has been convicted by court for evicting African people. The problem is not what is happening but the problem is how best do we co-operate between black and white farmers in ensuring that our people benefit out of this process of land tenure reform. I dare challenge anybody, who will approach this podium today, to say yes this department has not delivered against the RRDP programmes. On this particular matter I am convinced that we have delivered.
The only problem for me is that land reform, broadly as a process, is moving at a speed we are not anticipating it to move at. My personal opinion is that this land issue impacts on the economy of our society, impacts on the relationship between black farmers and black workers, impacts on white farmers and black workers. How best do we want to deal with that situation? The answer for me is co-operation between black farmers and white farmers and the rural communities.
In closing, the situation by which we are confronted today warrants the sensitivity it deserves. I am calling upon all public communities, members of parliament, not to recklessly deal with the land redistribution in the manner in which you are doing, because we are touching on the sensitive historical past. We don't want to encouraged black people of this country to just grab land of white farmers. We don't want that thing to happen. We call upon white commercial farmers to co-operate, to hand over land which is not being utilised profitably for agricultural purposes. It is important. As Members of Parliament, member, we must desist from writing articles that would polarise the relationship between black and white in this organisation, in this country.
It is important for us look into that matter. We must be sensitive, we must be creative in the manner in we want to deal with co-operation among our people. This South Africa belongs to all who live in it, black and white as stipulated by the Freedom Charter in 1955. This government has delivered to date. If you want to charge against the RDP, ho. Member, it is a challenge. It is a very unfortunate situation that you are not on the speakers list to address the issues that you are raising outside this parliament. Unfortunately, you are not on the speakers list.
In closing, then this government to date has delivered on land transformation for our people. The speed is not what want we want it to move at we want it to move at a high speed to resolved the land question.
Thank you.