As
an
ex-Zimbabwean
farmer
whose
farms
were
confiscated
by
the
Mugabe
government,
and
now
living
in
Hermanus,
my
worry
is
that
South
African
farmers
could
suffer
the
same
fate.
If
the
proposed
property
expropriation
laws
are
not
executed
with
extreme
caution,
the
positive
developments
now
appearing
on
the
country’s
economic
front
could
sink
back
under
the
horizon.
By
Richard
Tate
Nearly
200 000
land
claims
have
been
lodged
since
1995;
only
34%
have
been
settled.
This
seems
like
a
total
lack
of
commitment
by
the
government.
But
no
matter
how
many
experts
quote
the
percentages
of
land
owned
by
white
farmers,
the
land
imbalance
remains
in
dispute.
No
number
of
warnings
of
potential
losses
in
export
earnings
or
food
shortages
will
help,
should
this
issue
be
mismanaged.
The
state
may
take
property
for
public
benefit,
but
it
must
be
lawful,
justified
and
fair,
and
the
owner
must
be
compensated.
Who
decides
justified
and
fair?
In
the
event
of
expropriation,
the
most
valuable
tool
for
farmers
is
the
valuation
of
their
land
as
well
as
every
single
improvement
on
it,
down
to
the
fencepoles,
boreholes
and
pumping
equipment.
We
had
professional
valuations
done
in
Zimbabwe,
which
were
recognised
and
applauded
by
the
World
Bank.
South
African
farmers
are
skilled
and
able
to
feed
the
country.
Many
are
helping
their
less
fortunate
neighbours
get
into
production.
But
that
won’t
be
enough
to
satisfy
the
voters
under
an
African
National
Congress
that
is
now
clearly
on
the
backfoot.
To
put
these
storm
clouds
to
rest,
a
national
scheme,
supported
by
all
sectors,
is
crucial.
Firstly,
we
need
new
leaders
of
stature
who
understand
the
needs
of
the
populace
and
can
tell
government:
Look,
we
will
fix
your
problem
over,
say,
the
next
10
years
by,
for
example,
identifying
a
number
of
keen
young
farmers
every
year
and
getting
them
properly
settled
on
the
land.
Next,
we
need
buy-in
from
the
agricultural
unions.
They
must
be
part
of
the
solution,
even
if
farmers
ask,
“Why
should
we,
what’s
in
it
for
us?”
But
if
the
unions
can
be
positive
about
outcomes,
the
government
should
really
be
very
happy,
since
the
politicians
simply
don’t
have
the
skills
and
know-how
to
make
agriculture
work.
In
Zimbabwe,
the
tobacco
trade
finances
the
farmers
(since
banks
refuse
to
provide
loans
without
title
deeds)
from
seedlings
to
point
of
sale,
including
capital
items.
The
unions
should
be
supported
by
farmers’
co-ops,
the
big
downstream
agri
industries,
and
banks.
And,
of
course,
the
government
ministries
need
to
be
involved.
All
backed
by
a
guaranteed
fund
of
several
billion
rands
aimed
at
expanding
the
farmer
base.
But
without
the
knowledge
and
skills
of
the
current
farmers,
the
scheme
will
fail.
Training
centres
need
to
be
built
to
draw
new
farmer-pupils.
These
pupils
will
learn
the
basics
of
farming,
how
to
service
a
tractor,
understanding
the
soil
and
fertiliser
needs,
weather
patterns,
horticulture,
water
and
micro
jets,
and
stock
management.
Re-skilled
agricultural
extension
officers
should
train
and
monitor
the
new
farmers
as
they
become
established.
Commercial
farmers
should
be
encouraged
to
employ
new
graduates
with
tax
incentives.
A
successful
programme
is
a
must
to
prevent
chaos.
Big
Business
may
not
quite
appreciate
the
importance
of
farming,
but
if
they
don’t
support
a
national
scheme they
must
expect
a
rude
awakening.
Examples
of
success
and
failure
are
just
across
the
border
in
Zimbabwe,
for
all
to
learn
from.
Initially
stability
will
have
to
be
ensured
by
not
interfering
with
the
“super
farmers”
–
the
big
food
producers
and
exporters.
Paint
them
green
and
leave
them
to
feed
us.
First
world
farms
are
essential,
especially
in
the
face
of
changing
international
market
demands
and
consumer
pressures.
Then
work
through
an
accurate,
up-to-date
land
audit
to
see
where
the
viable
spare
land
lies
and
how
best
to
settle
new
farmers.
There
will
be
some
difficult
questions
for
existing
farmers
on
vacant
and
unproductive
land
but
that
will
be
the
price
of
a
peaceful
countryside.
As
yet,
war
is
a
long
way
off.
In
fact,
despite
the
difficulties,
South
Africa’s
lights
are
coming
on
again
after
the
downturn
that
followed
the
euphoria
of
the
first
democratic
elections.
Let’s
not
shoot
out
those
lights
for
short-term
political
points.
Granted,
there
are
some
major
differences
between
Zimbabwe
and
South
Africa.
The
economy
of
the
latter
is
much
more
diverse
and
depends
far
less
on
agriculture.
Also,
South
Africa’s
high-potential
soils
are
limited,
with
the
vast,
harsh,
bone-dry
interior
consisting
mostly
of
low-productive,
environmentally
sensitive
semi-arid
veld.
In
contrast,
Zimbabwean
commercial
farmers
were
able
to
build
20 000
irrigation
dams.
And
Robert
Mugabe
was
strong
on
schools.
He
saw
good
education
as
non-negotiable
and
built
1 800
schools
and
nine
universities.
To
return
to
“land
imbalance”
regarding
ownership
percentage
as
perceived
by
millions
of
South
Africans:
The
pattern
has
been
the
same
throughout
Africa
since
Harold
McMillan’s
speech,
“Winds
of
change”
in
Cape
Town.
As
government
views
its
potential
losses
at
the
ballot
box,
so
the
risk
of
the
Expropriation
Act
being
implemented
increases.
This
can
clearly
be
seen
after
the
Government
of
National
Unity
meeting
with
the
White
House.
Irrespective
of
pressure,
the
Act
remains
law.
I
am
anxious
that
when
the
tenure
of
the
two
DA
ministers
of
agriculture
and
public
works
expires
at
the
next
general
election,
the
incoming
ministers
will
be
prepared
to
operationalise
the
Act,
resulting
in
lack
of
confidence,
a
falling
rand,
and
uncertainty
for
the
business
community,
let
alone
the
farmers.
I
think
that
government
will
be
very
wary
of
“food
security”.
High
on
the
agenda
of
both
farming
unions
and
government
should
be
the
transfer
of
skills
to
new
farmers.
Without
this
agenda
the
new
farmers
will
be
at
great
risk
of
failure.
A
further
concern
that
I
have
is
the
valuation
of
farms
in
South
Africa.
There
seems
to
be
three
levels.
First
is
municipal
valuation
for
rates
and
taxes,
second
the
banks
valuation
on
a
higher
level,
and
thirdly
a
professional
valuation
higher
and
more
realistic
for
a
sale.
In
Zimbabwe
the
farms
were
valued
by
professional
valuers
and
applauded
by
the
World
Bank
in
the
farmers’
quest
for
compensation.
Farmers
with
multiple
title
deeds
will
also
experience
pressure,
in
spite
of
these
title
deeds
being
essential
to
make
farming
profitable.
There
is
a
lot
of
homework
required
by
farming
unions
in
dialogue
with
government
to
help
them
understand
the
issues
required
for
a
successful
industry
to
feed
the
nation.
Richard
Tate,
during
his
tenure
as
President
of
the
Zimbabwe
Tobacco
Association,
settled
6
000
small-scale
farmers,
still
farming
today.
Later,
as
President
of
the
World
Tobacco
Association,
he
represented
35
million
small-scale
farmers.
His
two
farms
were
acquired
by
the
Zimbabwe
government.
He
is
an
Associate
of
the
Free
Market
Foundation.
Disclaimer:
The
opinions
expressed
in
this
article
are
those
of
the
author
and
do
not
necessarily
reflect
the
views
of
African
Farming.
Source:
South
Africa
must
not
repeat
Zimbabwe’s
land
reform
disaster
–
African
Farming