The land reform department’s controversial call for land to be declared a national asset must be seen as a “cry for help” and is unlikely to find support from Parliament and critical ANC structures, senior ANC insiders said this week.
The sources said that although there is huge concern about the pace of land reform, the plan will require a major change to constitutionally enshrined property rights.
“It’s a cry for help from the department to kick-start land reform again,” an ANC MP said. “You and I know that it’s highly unlikely that any change will be made to the Constitution willy-nilly. We don’t want a Zimbabwe.”
But he said that the latest proposals are sure to raise heated debate, “and maybe that is what’s necessary for land reform”.
Several politicians also questioned whether it was the department’s role to give political direction on land reform and whether it should not follow the direction given by the ANC’s Polokwane conference to develop a viable rural sector.
There is confusion about what the department meant by proposing that land should be declared a national asset without nationalisation.
One option proposed in the strategic plan is a form of the feudal “quit-rent system”, which would see all productive land becoming a national asset, with farmers leasing from and paying taxes to the state. The model for this is Mozambique, where land is leased for 99 years and cannot be inherited.
The second option would be that of a ceiling on the amount of land individuals can own. It remains unclear just how such a plan would be implemented and whether a ceiling would apply to both individuals and companies.
Recent political workshops suggest that the government is keen to promote the productivity of land and is deeply worried by what it estimates to be the 90% failure rate of land reform projects.
Also under fire are game farms, which many in the land department perceive as consuming land that could be used for reform and crop production for food security.
Earlier this month the department published a strategic plan for 2010 to 2013 that moots a form of land nationalisation and a change to the Constitution.
The document, largely written by director general Tozi Gwanya, has attracted furious opposition from farmers and opposition parties.
The plan must still go before Parliament and a draft Green Paper is due to be submitted to Cabinet.
In Parliament this week Gwanya and the deputy minister of rural development and land reform, Joe Phaahla, said farmers had nothing to fear. But their comments suggest that the conversion of land into a national asset is under discussion in the department.
The two men told Parliament’s public accounts committee that a new way of thinking about land reform is needed and there may be too much emphasis on property rights in South Africa.
They also questioned whether game farming is an appropriate form of land use and whether it does not affect food security.
Phaahla said it could not be morally correct that a few privileged farmers hold large tracts of unused agricultural land when there is a hunger for land and land reform in the country. He called for a debate on this, even if the policy is not law.
Gwanya refused this week to clarify the plan. His spokesperson said he would give clarity during the department’s budget vote in Parliament next week.
The land reform minister, Gugile Nkwinti, was also unavailable for comment. The department and minister’s silence may reflect tension over policy and whether the issue should be brought to Parliament.
AgriSA deputy president Theo de Jager believes Gwanya, has a delicate relationship with commercial farmers, is the grand architect behind the newest controversy. De Jager said Gwanya had made controversial statements before, such as threatening to expropriate farms on a large scale without considering the legal implications.
AgriSA has had several emergency meetings with the department, but is still unsure about where the department is heading with the plan.
“Foreign investors are worried; farmers are worried,” he said. “This is not the right signal that the department is sending out. They are doing lasting damage to the agricultural sector.”