The land reform programme in Zimbabwe was used primarily to secure political patronage and has done irreparable damage to the agricultural production base there, Agri SA claimed on Friday when its leadership returned from a tour of the country.
”While we were alone with (Agriculture and Land Affairs) minister (Joseph) Made, he bragged about the fact that politicians had received farms,” Agri SA president Japie Grobler told reporters in Johannesburg after a three-day visit to Zimbabwe.
Grobler and other Agri SA and National African Farmers’ Union representatives accompanied South African Agriculture and Land Affairs Minister Thoko Didiza, for part of the visit.
Made had told them that all the officials around the table had received farms, adding that they were not working on Mondays or Fridays now, because they were on their farms.
”At least they are being productive,” Made had said, according to Grobler.
Agri SA executive director Hans van der Merwe said the beneficiaries of the land reform programme did not gain sustainable profitability.
About 350 000 farm workers were refugees in their own country, and seven to eight-million people were facing starvation due to a lack of food, he said.
The land reform programme was not driven by a wish to enhance the economic growth of Zimbabwe or to ensure equality or food security, according to Van der Merwe.
”It is a tool to gain and secure control in Zimbabwe.
”We can’t believe we’ve seen a turning-point in Zimbabwe where things will start improving.”
Didiza sketched a different picture when she returned to South Africa on Thursday.
”The challenges are there, but you are beginning to see some process of mitigation,” she said.
According to Didiza, the Zimbabwean government estimated that the maize that had been planted would yield a crop of 1,1-million tons, if the season went well.
Agri SA deputy president Lourie Bosman, however, said only 75 000 tons of maize were expected, compared to the long-term annual average of 600 000 to 800 000 tons.
Less than half the soy-bean requirement would be met. The recent wheat harvest amounted to 160 000 to 170 000 tons, compared to the over 400 000 tons required and the 300 000-ton long-term average.
Less than 10% of arable land was under some sort of grain, according to Bosman.
The commercial beef herd had declined from 1,2-million to less than 200 000, he said. Food-and-mouth disease was out of control and there was no money for vaccines.
”It seems they expected our minister to pledge enough vaccine.”
There were major obstacles to food production, Bosman said. ”We found the people have no implements, and no money for input costs.”
Because the beneficiaries did not have the title deeds to the land, they had no collateral to get credit from the banks, he said. Van der Merwe said: ”In most cases the beneficiaries do not know anything about agriculture … they are only occupying the homesteads.
”A huge decline in production is inevitable.”
The beneficiaries were totally shielded from the real costs and market prices, Van der Merwe said. ”They are basically employed and paid by the government to keep the commercial producers away from farming and the farms.”
There were only about 600 to 800 commercial farmers left, and they were required to act as service providers to newly established land owners in their areas, virtually cost-free.
”There is a huge frustration building up. It will be difficult, if not impossible, to control,” Van der Merwe said. Despite this, Made had told them the government was planning more interventions, by ”indigenising” the rest of the economy, like it did with agriculture.
Agri SA called on the South African government to speak out against the lack of legality of the Zimbabwe regime and the ”fraudulent practices”.
The government should make it clear that if its Zimbabwean counterpart continued with its corrupt practices, it should not expect any support or life-line from South Africa, Van der Merwe said.
”South Africa must try and reach national consensus on the land reform process … to ensure it does not end up in a messy situation like Zimbabwe.”
The Agri SA leadership were to meet Didiza after their news conference on Friday.
Didiza denied on Thursday that she had been on a propaganda visit, as claimed by Freedom Front leader Dr Pieter Mulder. ”The Zimbabwean government was very frank with us in terms of the challenges they face,” she said.
Grobler, however, talked about ”inhibited conversations”, saying that in some instances where they met farmers, the government representatives present answered questions on the farmers’ behalf, ”like a ventriloquist”.
”We had the feeling that no one was allowed to speak freely.”
That included the Commercial Farmers’ Union, whose members were being terrorised and beaten up.
Didiza had been there as a guest of Made’s, and it would be unfair to expect her to have seen the real picture, Grobler added. Bosman said: ”Unfortunately our minister did not see the real Zimbabwe as it should be seen by people with an objective attitude.” – Sapa