Hon Speaker, hon Ministers, Deputy Ministers and hon members, all anticolonial struggles are at the core about two things: repossession of land usurped through force or deceit; and restoring the centrality of the indigenous culture. That is why the colonialists targeted land - to subdue conquered populations, in order to turn them into vassals and slaves. At the outset I make the submission that landlessness does not only impair the section 10 constitutional right to human dignity but perpetuates poverty and inequality.
Forced removal of people from their ancestral land is overtly a strategy that serves an idealistic colonial agenda of undermining cultures and customs of the colonised. However, I contend that the use of race as a basis for forceful land dispossession is a phenomenon, but not an essential one. In essence, I dare say, it is a matter of divorcing the producer from production means to convert him into a proletarian whose labour power is at the disposal of the malicious usurper for unfettered exploitation, to realise unlimited profit maximisation. The truth of the matter is that land dispossession is never a matter of pure sentiment impelled by a sense of racial supremacy, though ostensibly it could manifest itself beneath such cloak or identity. Land restitution's purpose is to return victims of dispossession to the original position prior to the unlawful disturbance of their occupation. In other words, the purpose is not merely the restoration of ownership of land to victims of dispossession but the reunification of the producer with the means of production. Allow me to illustrate the point about returning the victim to the original position, that of producer, by recalling with you the conditions that were obtained on the eve of the signing of the Natives Land Act 27 of 1913, by Lord Gladstone, on 16 June and its promulgation on 19 June 1913.
Wide-scale dispossession of land from the indigenous communities of South Africa was not a phenomenon that only began in 1913. The forcible dispossession, which went together with colonial conquest, already had a massive impact on the distribution of the African population. Taxes forced people to seek wage-paying labour in the towns and cities. Peasant producers lost land when they were unable to manage their debt.
This notwithstanding, there was a category of close to a million African tenant farmers who lived and farmed on white-owned land. They did so either as ordinary or rent-paying tenants, or as sharecroppers paying half of their crop as rental, or as labour tenants making the labour of family members available for part of the year, in return of the use of land for cattle and cultivation. Although they were pejoratively referred to as squatters, in many ways, they were prosperous farmers.
The Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform presented a highly misleading statistic to Parliament, exaggerating the scale of purchase of land by Africans. Complaints were made by Members of Parliament about the squatters doing their own farming and being unwilling to provide labour to white farmers, who were, as a result, forced to use their own children to work on the farms. This led to the introduction of a short notice to Members of Parliament and no notice to the African population, of the Natives Land Bill, by the Minister of Native Affairs, J W Sauer.
It is therefore not surprising that, days before the signing of the Act, some white farm owners had already begun to enforce the grim choice posed by the Act on African tenants renting land from them. They said to the African tenants, and I quote, "either you forgo your cattle and your crop farming and work for me as my labourer, or you leave!"
Racial discrimination conjoined with economic exclusion inexorably created conditions for the birth of its nemesis, its gravediggers. On 8 January 1912, the SA Native National Congress, SANNC, was formed in Mangaung. The National Executive Committee of the SANNC, led by President John Langalibalele Dube, appointed a delegation to travel to Britain to lobby the imperial government to use its power as the colonial government and perceived protector of rights of the native population, to bring about the repeal of the Act. However, the representations to the imperial government fell on deaf ears. Sol Plaatje, the then secretary-general of the SANNC records that the secretary of state, and I quote, "took notes on nothing."
It is trite that the SANNC became the ANC in 1923. The ANC has always understood that land restitution is inalienable to agrarian transformation, as epitomised in the declaratory words of the Freedom Charter, "the land shall be shared among those who work it." Land reform to the ANC signifies more than the compensation of victims, which, according to section 25 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa - equitable redress - may, in lieu of restitution of property, be awarded to victims. In other words, those who suffered land dispossession may, instead of land, be awarded its financial equivalent.
The 52nd National Conference of the ANC resolved to, amongst other things, embark on an integrated programme of rural development, land reform and agrarian change, based on, amongst others, and I quote:
... fundamental changes in the patterns of land ownership through the redistribution of 30% of agricultural land before 2014. This must include comprehensive support programmes with proper monitoring mechanisms to ensure sustainable improvements in livelihoods for the rural poor, farm workers, farm dwellers and small farmers, especially women.
The conference further resolved as follows:
Where necessary expropriate property in the public interest or for public purposes in accordance with the Constitution to achieve equity, redress, social justice and sustainable development.
In the 2009 Manifesto, the ANC committed to, among other things:
Intensify the land reform programme to ensure that more land is in the hands of the rural poor and will provide them with technical skills and financial resources to productively use the land to create sustainable livelihoods and decent work in rural areas, [to] ensure a much stronger link between land and agrarian reform programmes and water resource allocation.
The ANC regards rural development as a pillar of the struggle against unemployment, poverty and inequality. It is also critical that correcting the injustices of the past ensures that women increasingly become beneficiaries and decision-makers in respect of strategies to overcome poverty in rural areas.
Having acknowledged the challenges that accompany land reform, especially in relation to land acquisition through the willing-buyer, willing-seller principle, the ANC resolved in its 53rd National Conference:
To replace the willing-buyer, willing-seller principle with the just and equitable principle in the Constitution immediately where the state is acquiring land for land reform purposes.
Therefore, since the promulgation and repeal of the Natives Land Act, the ANC has unceasingly undertaken to reverse the dispossession of the masses of South Africans. It has sought to reverse the grim choice imposed on African people as epitomised by the greed-laced words of the then white farm owner who said, "Either you forgo your cattle and your crop farming and work for me as my labourer or leave!" In essence, the ANC is relentless and resolute in its intention to reunite the producer with the means of production.
Our oversight visits testify beyond reasonable doubt that our government has made strides to ensure access to land by our people. The beneficiaries appreciated being awarded property as opposed to financial compensation. By and large, the expressed conviction by beneficiaries is that land is a resource for the benefit of the current generation and posterity, unlike money, which is fungible and ephemeral.
Almost all 27 projects visited reported creation of job opportunities, although at varying levels. However, competitive pressures confronting the agricultural enterprises and disputes within the legal entities put job security at risk. Yet, some Communal Property Associations, CPAs, and trusts visited were investing their profits in public goods. Of note is the Makuleke CPA located in the Vhembe District, which created over 200 jobs for CPA members. The CPA invested profits in public goods such as schools. Another example is the KwaCele CPA, which created jobs for 200 workers and formed a bursary scheme to fund students who took courses in agriculture.
The Commission on Restitution of Land Rights reported that over 97% of just fewer than 80 000 claims lodged by 1998 had been settled. The settled land claims have benefited about 370 000 households, with a total of about 135 000 being female-headed households.
However, the costs of restitution have been prohibitive due to the cost of land acquisition. Since the inception of restitution in 1995, the state has paid over R15 billion for land purchases and R7,5 billion in financial compensation. About 69 000 of the land claimants were awarded financial compensation instead of restoration of land. This is mainly due to the urban nature of land claims, which rendered it not feasible to restore original land.
In the postapartheid era Parliament passed the Interim Protection of Informal Land Rights Act of 1996 as a temporary measure for protection of certain rights to and interest in land. In 2004, Parliament passed the Communal Land Rights Act of 2004, which was declared unconstitutional after it was challenged by a group of communities. Cabinet published the Green Paper on Land Reform for public comments in August 2011. The policy proposes communal land ownership under a communal tenure system with institutionalised use of rights.
The overall vision of the land reform process has been to redistribute 30% of white-owned agricultural land by 2014. Government policy on land redistribution has evolved from the delivery of land through the Settlement Land Acquisition Grant, which targeted the poor households - those with incomes below R1 500,00 - to the Land Redistribution for Agricultural Development, LRAD, programme in 2001. The LRAD programme was introduced to include all black South Africans not employed by the state, but mostly with a portion of own contribution in the purchase of land. The current policy for land redistribution is the Proactive Land Acquisition Strategy, Plas. The Plas mechanism involves the state purchase of privately owned land and the leasing of it to potential emerging black farmers. It focuses primarily on the creation of black commercial farmers.
Some of the objects of the Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act 16 of 2013 are as per section 3 of the Act, namely ensuring that the system of spatial planning and land use management promotes social and economic inclusion and redressing past imbalances. In this regard, the Act provides for a municipality to amend its land use scheme in the public interest or to advance the interest of a disadvantaged community.
We are therefore pleased that the land audit that the department has recently launched is beginning to bear appropriate fruit. It is only when we know the true ownership of each hectare and the purpose and use thereof that the public interest shall be served meaningfully. Land, in the main, should not be used for recreational purposes, as prime land is being used for golf courses. Land should be used to redress past imbalances and fight poverty and unemployment.
Today, our nation is confronted with the legacy of the 1913 Natives Land Act and it is upon our shoulders to reverse it. We should do so now and not later. Yes, we have traversed the path, but more should be done to reunite the producer with the means of production. We can't but fully agree with the beneficiaries of land restitution that land is an asset for our generation and posterity, whereas money is fungible and ephemeral.
We bear the hopes of our forebears that land shall be shared amongst those who work it. Food security and economic development can only be ensured when prime agricultural land is not only returned to the dispossessed but used according to its natural purpose. If we join hands together, hunger and dependence will be but a faint, distant memory. Again, we must underscore the point that land reform rings hollow if it is disembowelled of agrarian transformation. The two must move together. I therefore move that this report be accepted. The ANC supports the report. I thank you, hon Speaker. [Applause.]
Hon Speaker, the DA participated fully in the oversight visits to carry the resolution passed by Parliament. The DA supports initiatives aimed at correcting South Africa's history of a racially based system of land ownership. The emotions attached to land and land ownership in intergroup relationships contribute to the complexity of the land debate. The DA supports a land reform process that achieves redress in the rural communities, that promotes economic inclusion to lift people out of poverty, and supports growth and prosperity. This is a constitutional imperative in terms of section 25(5), (6) and (7) of the Constitution.
The ad hoc committee asked for submissions from affected communities, groups, institutions and private individuals. They all made presentations. The committee then visited provinces and communities which were deeply affected to hear and see how restitution of land rights was conducted through oversight. There were serious issues discovered on the ground. The issue of conflict between the traditional leaders and the communal property associations, CPAs, poses a serious threat to the land restitution programme.
The traditional leaders see themselves as the sole custodians of communal land. They do not want to work with or recognise the communal property associations and their right to exist. Some of the traditional leaders want land claims to be transferred to their trust. The CPAs are created through an Act of Parliament and therefore they have the right to exist and serve the claimants and the beneficiaries.
Some of the claimants who formed the CPAs feel that the CPAs are no longer representing their needs but serving themselves. These conflicts need to be addressed. There is also an issue of strategic partners appointed by the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform to help successful claimants and CPAs. The strategic partners are not actually investing money into the project; instead they bankrupt it.
There are farms which collapsed due to huge loans taken by strategic partners. Evidently, support for CPAs is a vital necessity. The conflict within the CPAs and with the traditional leaders arises from a lack of understanding of their respective roles. The CPAs and claimants are not allowed to check the books under the strategic partners. Some farms are not utilised due to conflicts.
It is not all doom and gloom as there are CPAs that are starting to invest their profit in public goods. The Makuleke CPA built schools and dividends were shared, for example, and the Ravele CPA in Levubu has set up a bursary scheme. The project has resulted in the creation of job opportunities, although in varying degrees due to scales and types of products, profitability and support given to enterprises. The roll-out of the land restitution programme remains a concern.
The restitution of land rights programme does not update claimants who lodged their claims prior to 31 December 2008. The cost of restitution has been high due to the cost of land acquisition. Since the inception of restitution in 1995, the state have paid over R15 billion for the land purchased and R7,5 billion for financial compensation.
The claimants are now worried that lodging new claims will cause serious conflicts. The committee observed that restitution of land rights is a complex programme which depends on the ability of government officials to negotiate settlements with parties. Claimants also expressed frustrations at the lack of postsettlement support from the Commission on Restitution of Land Rights. Communal land tenure security is threatening the livelihood of communities across South Africa. People in the rural areas feel that their rights to own property are being threatened by traditional leaders.
Traditional leaders don't want people to have title deeds; they want to have title deeds on behalf of the people. Women and vulnerable people are denied their constitutional rights to own private property. They also want to have rights to own land and use their land claimed of their ancestors to farm and produce goods. Furthermore, some boundaries of the apartheid era, enforced through Bantustans, still exist while poverty remains high. While we welcome some of the Comprehensive Rural Development Programmes, CRDPs, aimed at alleviating and eliminating poverty, there is much to be done, to bring about the desired results.
Tenure security reform, especially the communal land tenure, has been the most difficult and slowest programme of land reform. Section 25(6) of the Constitution provides:
A person or community whose tenure of land is legally insecure as a result of past racially discriminatory laws or practices is entitled, to the extent provided by an Act of Parliament, either to tenure which is legally secure or to comparable redress.
Communal land tenure security areas constitute 13% designated to black people in terms of the 1913 and 1936 Land Acts. No less than a third of the country's population live in these areas that are characterised by overpopulation. [Time expired.]
Hon Deputy Speaker, the effects of the 1913 Land Act were the disposition of blacks, both politically and economically. Therefore, the restitution and land reform policies have to be directed at addressing the negative effects of the 1913 Land Act legacy. It would not help to only address the political objectives of land reform at the expense of the economic imperatives of both land reform and land restitution.
To begin with, in its implementation of the land reform programme, government has to conduct a proper land audit of state land, privately owned and communally owned land. Current land ownership includes the state, private sector and traditional leaders' land, which is managed on behalf of the communities, as well as unmatched parcels of land, that is land whose owners are either not found or unidentified. The survey conducted by the chief surveyor-general, for the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform, in March 2011, indicated that out of 1,1 million state-owned land parcels, 265 000 land parcels were unmatched, which constitutes 24% of the total state-owned land parcels. On the other hand, out of 4,8 million privately owned land parcels, 750 000, which is equal to 16% of the total privately owned land parcels, was unmatched.
In the proposed second phase of land reform, the state-owned land, which is not being put to good use, including the unmatched land from both the public and private sectors, should be the first target for redistribution. It does not make sense for the state to begin a process of expropriating land, which is being used productively, when there are large parcels of land that are not in good use or in any use at all. The release of state land would not require actual cash disbursement. Instead, it would be a book entry, as the land is already owned by the state. In short, its impact on the budget would not be direct, as is the case with land taken from the private sector. It is, therefore, Cope's view that state land should be prioritised for redistribution.
Hon Deputy Speaker, all political parties that were involved in negotiating our Constitution accepted the need to redress the land ownership inequalities created by the 1913 Land Act. Regrettably, government has not been effective and efficient in managing both the land reform and restitution programmes. Since the initial land claims window period closed in 1998, government has only finalised and settled some 59 000 of the 77 000 valid claims at a cost of R25,2 billion. In spite of the enthusiasm to reopen the land reform and restitution programme, the National Treasury has cut the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform budget. In the Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement, the restitution programme was cut to R2,9 billion. There are currently 397 000 new land claims that need to be processed, and R2,9 billion is clearly not sufficient to meet this demand. Based on these potential claims, government would need as much as R169 billion to settle the claims.
Hon Deputy Speaker, one of the key considerations to be taken into account in addressing land reform and restitution is the issue of the location of arable and commercial land. The government should consider introducing a short to medium-term plan to revise and resuscitate land whose value has been eroded, especially in communal areas and former homelands. The state, in its quest to address its land reform objectives, must not be driven by political expedience to achieve quantity. It is Cope's view that dealing with the quantity of land redistribution would only address political concerns and perceptions, whilst addressing quality of land redistribution has the effect of addressing both economic considerations and wealth creation. Cope supports the report. Thank you. [Applause.]
Deputy Speaker, the ad hoc committee under the chairpersonship of hon Thibedi must be commended for the sterling work it has done upon the very successful completion of its mandate. My special thanks must go to the chairperson and all members of the committee. Hon Deputy Speaker, the Natives Land Act was the beginning of a very dark era for the majority of South Africans. We cannot rewrite the past but we can heal the future, and the committee has taken great strides in this regard.
The committee worked tirelessly and conducted all of its activities at the highest standard. Having said this, one must point out the fact that there are successes and failures regarding the CPAs. Regarding successes, those who received their land back are happy and content. The assistance from government has made beneficiaries realise the importance of working these farms. More funding, however, is required. Regarding failures, identification of strategic partners remains a challenge with some of them losing CPA funding and disappearing. Regarding challenges, traditional leaders in some areas see CPAs as competing structures because the land was taken from communities under their leadership. This is the creation of a new structure on top of an existing structure. Deputy Speaker, in conclusion, our committee was warmly welcomed in all provinces we visited as the approach by government to reopen land claims. It was a pleasure to serve on this committee. I thank you. [Applause.]
Deputy Speaker, hon members, on 19 June 2013, South Africa commemorated the brutal Natives Land Act, Act 27 of 1913. This marked 100 years since the Act was promulgated. This piece of legislation, which aimed at regulating and severely restricting the acquisition of land by Africans, had far-reaching socioeconomic and political consequences, many of which are still being felt today.
The Act not only sought to severely circumscribe African ownership of and access to land, but its intent was also to meet the rising demand for cheap labour. It did so by targeting African sharecroppers and tenant farmers; stripping them of their independence as farmers and stock owners and changing them into farm labourers and servants.
Inspired by the Freedom Charter and the Reconstruction and Development Programme, RDP, the Polokwane 52nd National Conference of the ANC in 2007 decided that rural development and land reform should rank among the top five national priorities. It further recognised that the Natives Land Act, Act 27 of 1913 left lasting scars on rural communities. The Freedom Charter stated that:
There Shall be Houses, Security and Comfort! All people shall have the right to live where they choose, be decently housed, and to bring up their families in comfort and security; Unused housing space to be made available to the people; Rent and prices shall be lowered ... Slums shall be demolished, and new suburbs built where all have transport, roads, lighting, playing fields, crches and social centres ...
Mandiyibeke icace ukuba lo rhulumente, ekuzameni ukulungisa imeko ebekuyiyo, ukwazile ukuba iSebe lokuHlaliswa koLuntu libe nemithetho emininzi eliyipasisileyo. Xa sibalula le mithetho, siyayazi ukuba i-Housing Act, Act 107 of 1997 ikhokelwa nguMgaqo-siseko ne-Social Housing Act, Act 16 of 2008. Lo Mthetho ngulo namhlanje wenza ukuba sibone abantu besakhelwa iifleti ezininzi ukuze bakwazi ukungena bahlawule imali yerenti efikelelekayo.
Omnye uMthetho owenziweyo yi-Housing Development Agency Act, Act 23 of 2008 ekuthe kwavunyelwana ngo-Outcome 8 yiKhabhinethi, ukuba kuzanywe kufumaneke umhlaba ongangama-6 250 ehektare ukuze kwakhelwe abantu izindlu. I-Arhente yoPhuhliso lezeziNdlu ikwazile ukuba ifikelele kwezi hektare bekujoliswe kuzo yade yagqithisa. Kubekho umgaqo-nkqubo okhoyo obizwa ngokuthi Breaking the New Ground Strategy, BNG, obhekiselele kubantu abahlala kwiindawo ezikude, ezingxonderheni. Abantu baye bakhuthazwa ukuba babuye kwezi ngxondorha badityaniswe nabanye abantu baseMzantsi Afrika.
Le nto ithetha ukuba kolu tyelelo lwethu kwiindawo ngeendawo siyile komiti esekwe yiPalamente, sibonile ukuba kukho iindawo ezifana naseLimpopo, kwindawo ekuthiwa kukwaMike's Chicken, apho kukho inkqubo entle yabantu abafunelwe umhlaba. Bakhelwe izindlu kwaye bayakwazi ukuba basebenze kwalapho kuloo mhlaba. Bayakwazi ukuba baqhubeke namashishini abo nokunye bakwazi ukuba baqeshe nabanye abantu.
Ezi zinto akufunekanga ukuba sizithathe kancinci kuba le nkqubo ize notshintsho. Abantu bayakwazi ukuba bafumane iitayitile kuba kaloku ezi zindlu bazinikwayo bangamisa ngazo ematyaleni. Ziphinde kwakhona zenze ubutyebi kuba xa abantu beneetayitile bangenza ushishino ngezindlu nto leyo ebalulekileyo kurhulumente we-ANC.
Olunye utshintsho oluthe lwenzeka yile nkqubo yeehostele. Asisenazo iihostele ezifana neziyaa zakuqala. Sineendawo ngoku ezibizwa ukuba zii- community residential units apho abantu bahlala khona neentsapho zabo. Lutshintsho olo oluthe lwakhona ngale nkqubo yokubuyiselwa kwemihlaba into eyenza ukuba urhulumente akwazi ukunika abantu amathuba okuba nezindlu.
Masikhumbule ukuba kukho inkqubo ekuthiwa yi-enhance discount benefit scheme. Into eyenzekayo kule nkqubo kukuba abantu ababehlala kwiihostele ezizezikarhulumente behlawula irenti iminyaka engama-30, bayazinikwa simahla. Loo nto ithetha ukuba iitayitile bayakwazi ukuba bazifumane. Ndizama ukuthi masiyincome i-ANC ngomsebenzi wayo omhle ethe yawenza ukutshintsha iimpilo zabantu ngoba urhulumente wocalu-calulo ebengazenzi ezi zinto. Abantu babebekwa phaya kude emagqagaleni bekude nempucuko. Namhlanje sibona abantu besakhelwa izindlu behlangene. Yiyo ke loo nto le BNG kufuneka ukuba siyikhuthaze ukuba ibekhona ukuze iqhubele phambili. (Translation of isiXhosa paragraphs follows.)
[Let me state categorically that in trying to redress the imbalances of the past, this government, through the Department of Human Settlements, managed to pass many pieces of legislation. We know that the Social Housing Act, Act 16 of 2008 is preceded by the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Act of 1996 and the Housing Act of 1997. It is because of the Social Housing Act that we see flats being built as part of affordable rental housing.
There is also the Housing Development Agency Act, Act 23 of 2008, and Cabinet agreed on Outcome 8 in terms of which 6 250 ha of municipal land had to be found and set aside for housing. The Housing Development Agency managed to secure more than the required amount of land for this purpose. There is also the Breaking New Ground Policy, relating to people living on the outskirts of the cities. People were encouraged to move from the outskirts and integrate with their fellow South Africans.
As a result of our visits as the parliamentary committee to various areas, we came to a place called Mike's Chicken in Limpopo, for instance, where land has been found for people. People have been provided with housing there and they can also work from there. They are able to open businesses and create jobs.
We must not take this programme for granted because it has brought about change. People get title deeds and they are able use their houses as collateral to get loans. Their houses are a source of wealth because when people have title deeds they can use their houses for commercial purposes, which is important to the ANC-led government.
There has also been change to the hostel system. We no longer have the old form of hostels. We now have what are called community residential units where people stay with their families. This is a change that came with the land restitution programme which has enabled government to provide people with housing opportunities.
Let us remember that there is also what is known as the Enhanced Discount Benefit Scheme. According to this scheme people who rented public hostels for 30 years, get them for free. That means they get title deeds for them. I'm trying to say, let us commend the ANC for the good work it has done to change people's lives, which the apartheid government failed to do. Black people were settled in the bundus, far from civilisation. Today we see a housing plan that promotes integrated societies. It is for this reason that we have to encourage the continued existence of the BNG.]
In 2013 Medium-Term Expenditure Framework Budget allocations covered various programmes of the Department of Human Settlements which can be outlined as follows: R27 billion was allocated to housing development, which included the Human Settlements Development grant and the Urban Settlements grant.
Le nkxaso-mali yile inikwa oomasipala abambaxa ukuba bazame ukutshintsha iziseko zophuhliso ezingundoqo ziyeke ukuba lolwaa hlobo lwakudala, ukuze abantu bakwazi ukufumana amanzi, izindlu zangesese neendlela nayo yonke into edibene neziseko zophuhliso ezingundoqo. (Translation of isiXhosa paragraph follows.)
[These grants are allocated to metropolitan municipalities so that they can improve key infrastructure and provide people with water, build them toilets and roads, and provide them with everything related to key infrastructure.]
The National Upgrading Support programme has been established and the budget allocation for 2013-14 is R97 million. The National Upgrading Support programme structures have been established in all nine provinces in order to facilitate alignment with relevant municipalities.
Masiyincome into yokuba okwangoku into eyenzekileyo ... [Let us applaud the fact that so far ...]
... 192 253 formal housing units have been allocated to 255 628 households during the 2012 financial year, and that represents 63% of 400 000 units of the 2014 target.
Siphinde siyincome into yokuba ... [Again, let us applaud the fact that ...]
... billions of rand have been spent to purchase land through the Housing Development Agency Act, and utilising the Urban Settlement Development Grant, USDG, allocated to metros. In 2013, Parliament passed the Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act, Act 16 of 2013, Spluma, administered by the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform to address sparse, spatial and regulatory imbalances.
This act plays a critical role in the planning of human settlements. It also provides inclusive development, and equitable and efficient spatial planning in different spheres of government to provide a framework for monitoring, co-ordination and review of the spatial planning and land use management system. It also provides a framework for policies, principles, norms and standards for spatial development planning and land use. This is one of the progressive pieces of legislation that have been passed by this Parliament to address the issues of the previous regime.
Agrivillages have a huge potential to contribute to sustainable human settlements in our communities. There are a number of them that we have come across on our oversight visits across the country. We need to encourage support for the establishment of more such villages. The Department of Economic Development plays a critical role in empowering these communities.
The land question is a very crucial issue for the development of any nation. It is therefore important to note that South Africa has given priority to the transformation of land ownership. Through collaborative efforts with the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform, as I have mentioned, the Department of Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs also plays a critical role in the implementation of Spluma. Therefore, working co-operatives by these departments, including the Department of Public Works, will accomplish the vision of the ANC and that of government, of bringing a better life to all.
President Jacob Zuma has endorsed the process of land claims to be reopened, therefore the ANC calls upon each and every citizen to rally behind and support the programme of rural development. The ANC supports the report. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Deputy Speaker, the DA supports land reform as a necessary process in undoing the legacy of the Natives Land Act, Act 27 of 1913, in order to ensure nation-building and social cohesion.
Postapartheid South Africa inherited a dual agrarian system with large- scale commercial farming comprising some 37 000 farmers and small-scale subsistence farming comprising about two million farmers. During the nationwide oversight tour, it was evident that government has made strides to ensure access to land for historically disadvantaged groups. These beneficiaries, however, were at different stages of use of land, depending on the kind of support available to them.
I would like to focus on the support provided to land reform beneficiaries. South African land reform has suffered from the lack of a comprehensive support programme. The committee noted that the imperative was to push for the acquisition of land, in order to reach the target of redistributing 30% of agricultural land by 2014, whilst neglecting the follow-up support required for the majority of beneficiaries. The postsettlement process has been, to a large extent, characterised as unco-ordinated, fragmented, and inadequate. For example, Symandrift claims citrus production collapsed due to a lack of water. The Mkhuzane Community Trust in KwaZulu-Natal has also raised challenges related to water shortages. Furthermore, almost all enterprises, schemes, and projects visited were being hamstrung by high operational costs.
The committee could not establish any mechanisms to ensure that such services were supplied. Failure to co-ordinate these activities resulted in the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform taking over responsibilities of other line function departments. Currently, R2,15 billion has been allocated for the recapitalisation and development programme. In some cases, the recapitalisation amount distributed to farms is more than the original land price.
The almost nonexistent support from the Department of Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries is most concerning and needs special attention. As an attempt to better co-ordinate support services for land reform beneficiaries, the Comprehensive Agricultural Support Programme, Casp, was launched as long ago as 2004. It is almost a decade since the inception of Casp. Therefore, the department should be able to give specific details on how Casp has, in the past nine years, changed the quality of life of the targeted beneficiaries. This information is, however, not available. The newly launched Fetsa Tlala programme must be focused towards providing support to small-scale farmers and cannot be used for political gain.
The committee also noted the proposal for the establishment of the Office of the Valuer-General. The DA is concerned about the establishment of such an office. Section 25(2)(b) of the Constitution explicitly provides that land may only be expropriated "subject to compensation, the amount of which and the time and manner of payment of which have either been agreed to by those affected or decided or approved by a court." Appointing an extra- judicial body to determine compensation will open the process of awarding compensation to abuse. Land reform could contribute to the equitable and comprehensive growth of the rural economy but only if it is not used for short-term political gain. Policy uncertainty is currently one of the biggest factors hampering agricultural growth, and consensus on how to proceed must be found.
Ek wil Minister Nkwinti bedank vir die kalm manier waarop hy grondhervorming aangepak het. Ons het kalmte nodig en nie opruiende uitsprake van politieke partye met F's in hul name nie. Daarom vra ek hierdie Huis om seker te maak dat geen opruiende uitsprake gemaak word in die aanloop tot die verkiesing nie, want dit kan die grondhervormingsproses belemmer. Dankie. [Applous.] (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)
[I should like to thank Minister Nkwinti for the calm way in which he has tackled land reform. We need calm and not inflammatory utterances from political parties that have Fs in their names. That is why I am requesting this House to ensure that no inflammatory utterances are made in the run-up to the election, since this could hamper the land reform process. Thank you. [Applause.]]
Adjunkspeaker, as ons praat oor grondhervorming is dit die uitgangspunt van die ANC dat 'n belangrike voorwaarde is dat die Wet op Naturelle Grondbesit, Wet 27 van 1913, aangespreek moet word en omgedraai moet word om te verseker dat daar nasiebou en sosiale samebinding in Suid- Afrika kan plaasvind.
Ek wil vir die agb Minister s dat die wyse waarop die regerende ANC dit gebruik, niks anders is as misbruik om emosies op te jaag en om verwagtinge by mense te skep wat hul weet hul op die einde van die dag nie aan sal kan voldoen nie. U wil die indruk skep dat u vir almal net 'n stukkie grond wil gee, en as jy grond het, is jy mos nou ryk. Ek weet dit vorm mos deel van die Vryheidsmanifes, soos die agb Thibedi hier ges het. Die werklikheid is dat u fokus op ras.
Ek wil vandag vir u s dat u u fokus moet verskuif, want met ras as fokus jaag u emosies op, en u ken die uitsprake. Ek wil hul nie eens herhaal ten opsigte van witmense en swartmense nie. Die fokus vir grondhervorming, as u dit wil toepas, moet die ekonomie wees. Dit moet ekonomies haalbaar wees. Dan kan dit dalk 'n sukses wees. Dan kan dit dalk 'n geval wees dat daar nasiebou en nuwe sosiale samebinding kan plaasvind, maar nie die wyse waarop dit misbruik word vir politieke werwing van stemme vir volgende jaar se verkiesing nie.
Ek wil ook vir u s dat daar ernstige probleme is. As u nou praat van sosiale samebinding, wat van daardie gevalle - want dit is wat die verslag s - waar daar nou ook eise ingestel kan word in terme van restitusie waar daar reeds grond in terme van restitusie toegeken is? Nou moet u vir ons s: Waar was die bedrog? As daar mense is wat ges het hulle het 'n reg op 'n stuk grond in terme van restitusie, en nou kan daar weer nuwe eise ingestel word op juis daardie toegekende restitusie-eise, dan was daar mos bedrog? Dan het iemand mos iewers gelieg deur te s dat dit hul grond is. Hoe gaan u dit aanspreek?
Ek wil regtig vir u s as ons gaan kyk na die koste is dit ook totaal onaanvaarbaar dat die belastingbetaler soveel moet opdok. In die verslag self is net die administratiewe koste om 'n kantoor te vestig R1,367 miljard, waarvan salarisse ongeveer die helfte van daardie bedrag beloop. Is dit net weer kaderontplooiing om vir mense werk te gee? Kry dan die bestaande mense om hul werk te doen. Dan het u nie nodig om daardie koste aan te gaan nie. Ek dank u. [Applous.] (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)
[Mr P J GROENEWALD: Deputy Speaker, when we are talking about land reform, it is the point of departure of the ANC that an important condition is that the Natives Land Act, Act 27 of 1013, should be addressed and turned around so as to ensure that nation-building and social cohesion can take place in South Africa.
I can tell the Minister that the manner in which the ruling ANC is using this amounts to nothing but abuse in order to whip up emotions and create expectations among people which they know at the end of the day they will not be able to accommodate. You want to create the impression that you just want to give everybody a piece of land, and when you have land, you are then rich. I know this forms part of the Freedom Charter, as the hon Thibedi has just said here. In reality, you are focusing on race.
I want to tell you today to shift your focus, because by using race you are whipping up emotions, and you know the utterances. I don't even want to repeat them with regard to white and black people. The focus of land reform, if you want to implement it, should be the economy. It should be economically viable. Then it might just be successful. It might then be the case that nation-building and new social cohesion can take place, but not in the way it is being abused for political canvassing for votes in next year's election.
I would also like to tell you that there are serious problems. If you are talking about social cohesion, what about those cases - because this is what the report states - where claims can now also be instituted in terms of restitution where land has already been awarded in terms of restitution? Now you must tell us: Where did the fraud take place? If there are people who said they had a right to a piece of land in terms of restitution, and now new claims can again be instituted on precisely those awarded restitution claims, then surely there had to be fraud? Then somebody somewhere surely must have been lying, by saying it was their land. How are you going to address this?
I really want to say that when we take a look at the costs, it is also totally unacceptable that the taxpayer must cough up so much. In the report itself the administrative costs of establishing such an office alone will total R1 367 billion, of which salaries amount to half of that figure. Is this once again cadre deployment, to give people jobs? Then get the incumbent people to do their work. Then you will not have to incur those costs. I thank you. [Applause.]]
Deputy Speaker, the ACDP acknowledges that the promulgation of the Natives Land Act in 1913 was the start of a dispensation in which Africans were prohibited from owning or renting land outside of designated reserves - a total of just 7,13% of South Africa's total land area.
The unemployment, persisting poverty, and deep inequality existing in South Africa today are undeniably linked to this and other legislation designed to enforce segregation. This exercise of co-ordinated oversight of the reversal of the legacy of these Acts is an important piece of the puzzle. I say piece of the puzzle simply because we know human existence is a complex and complicated matter which defies simple or even rational explanation at times.
Based on the ad hoc committee's observations and findings, we note recommendations directed at the Departments of Rural Development and Land Reform, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Human Settlements, Public Works, Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs, and Arts and Culture to: finalise consultations, convene a national dialogue, assess skills, develop monitoring and evaluation systems for partnerships in mentoring programmes, draw lessons from best practice in South Africa, restructure land distribution, finalise policy and legislation, draw up memoranda of understanding, conduct audits and assessments, and much more.
To touch on just point in the short time that we have today, the ACDP is optimistic about the concept of a valuer-general to address the sluggish pace of redistribution of land in South Africa. Redistribution, which has relied on the willing-buyer, willing-seller principle to date, has experienced many problems. We acknowledge the obligation that the South African Constitution places on the state to "take reasonable legislative and other measures within its available resources" to effect land redistribution and that the Bill of Rights clearly allows for the state to expropriate property.
The Constitution does, however, prohibit the arbitrary deprivation of property and provides that expropriation be subject to the payment of compensation. Whilst it does not require the state to pay the market value, it is required to pay "just and equitable" compensation, "reflecting an equitable balance between the public interest and the interests of those affected."
The ACDP believes land reform would be better served if a dedicated valuations court existed to approve all forms of compensation in cases of forced expropriation. The ACDP also believes it is critical for all decisions and interventions to result in economic growth and food security. These must be a priority if people are to truly prosper and benefit from land redistribution. Thank you. [Applause.]
Hon Deputy Speaker, Ministers, hon members, good afternoon, the ad hoc committee's oversight visit was to assess how land reform was being implemented, how successful the projects were, and what some of the challenges were. The ad hoc committee visited a total of 27 projects and/or schemes in Limpopo, North West and KwaZulu-Natal, and 10 of these were Communal Property Associations, CPAs.
This government, through the Department of Public Works as the custodian of state assets, from 01 April 2007 to 31 March 2010: assisted in the land reform process and released 661 000 hectares of land for restoration purposes. It further released 21 000 hectares for redistribution purposes, including tenure.
The department is also in the process of finalising and tabling before Parliament the Expropriation Bill. The Bill aims to align the existing Expropriation Act, Act No 63 of 1975 with the Constitution. This Bill will allow for property to be expropriated for the public or in the public interest subject to just and equitable compensation and not just the market price.
The following are some of the findings made by the ad hoc committee, specifically related to CPAs: land can only be transferred to a legal entity, CPAs and trusts that have been constituted in terms of the law; the most commonly used legal entities for holding of land by beneficiaries are CPAs. Since the inception of the Communal Property Associations Act, Act No 28 of 1996, there existed approximately 1 500 registered CPAs to date.
The Communal Property Associations Act is the legal basis for the establishment of a CPA and requires agreement between community members, which is written into the Constitution. The ad hoc committee found that there have been numerous challenges in the manner in which some of these institutions were established, who is represented on them, and how they are managed.
Examples of challenges are that some members of a CPA appear to have signing powers without any form of internal controls, as was the case with the former chairperson of the Morobola CPA who withdrew R400 000 from the CPA without the consent of other members. In the case of the Tshakuma CPA, which forms part of the Levubu claim in Limpopo, claimants only received 50% of the land that they had claimed.
There were also a number of cases following restoration, where title deeds were not transferred to the CPAs. Some projects, as in the case of Marobola CPA, used most of their income for security and maintenance due to the theft and vandalism that was experienced. Another requirement of the Communal Property Associations Act is that the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform monitor and support CPAs and make sure that they meet the requirements of the Act.
The ad hoc committee found that the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform had difficulty in implementing its monitoring and support responsibilities in respect of the CPAs. The department's role of monitoring and supporting the legal entities was made difficult by the existence of approximately 1 500 registered CPAs, as previously stated. The department reported that it struggled with capacity constraints, particularly human resources.
The ad hoc committee found that the department opted to provide onsite technical support to land reform beneficiaries through the use of consultants who serve as strategic partners on the projects. However, there is no clear definitive role that these strategic partners play. In most instances, the value of the land was based on its productive capacity. Where there is no activity no income was generated, as was the case in Rathateng CPA in Brits, in the North West Province. This lack of productivity decreases the value of the land.
The following are a few examples of successful projects: The Bakgatla-ba- Kgafela claim, for example, consists of a good relationship between Chief Nyalala Philane and the CPA. The CPA committee consists of equal numbers of people representing traditional leadership and beneficiaries.
Some CPAs used the income for social development such as building or renovating schools, as in the case of the Makuleke CPA in Limpopo. In many projects there was an established local market for selling vegetables and fruit to a supermarket and local vendors. The Snymandrift CPA, for example, also sells its products as far afield as Botswana.
Property in conservation and protected areas such as the Makuleke CPA in Limpopo and Dikgatlong CPA in the North West, is comanaged by members of the CPA, the private sector, and the state. In these cases the beneficiaries did not settle the land, but received their title deeds.
Based on the findings from the oversight visit, the ad hoc committee made a number of recommendations as presented in the report, dated 22 October 2013. Some of these recommendations include: that there should be proper guidelines on how the CPAs should function; that the role of traditional leaders within the CPAs be clarified; that the relations between the beneficiaries and the strategic partners should be managed; and that the support and monitoring role of the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform be strengthened.
In conclusion, the ad hoc committee embarked on a fact-finding mission that included public hearings, workshops and the oversight visit. In this process, we learnt a lot in terms of the urgent need for continuing the process of the reversal of the legacy of the 1913 Land Act. Even though this process was undertaken under very tight timeframes that presented challenges, at the end of the day, we achieved the overall objective of the ad hoc committee.
I therefore wish to thank hon Thibedi for his leadership, members of the ad hoc committee for their thoughtful engagement during the process, and the support staff that assisted throughout this vigorous exercise. I thank you. [Applause.]
Hon Deputy Speaker, there can be no question that the 1913 Natives Land Act had far-reaching economic, social and political consequences for South Africa and her citizens. Not least among these consequences are the many who were dispossessed and forcibly removed from their land. Our Constitution obligates us to provide measures for the restitution of their property or comparable redress. But we need to acknowledge a few realities. Hon Thibedi spoke about the reunification of the producer with the means of production. He also spoke about the fact that beneficiaries preferred land to financial compensation. I need to make a correction to this.
The Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform, hon Gugile Nkwinti, noted earlier this year that 92% of land claimants seek financial compensation, rather than a return to the land.
Now, we visited projects and the people there said yes, they wanted the land. But we did not speak to anyone else.
Research by the Centre for Development and Enterprise has shown that fewer than one in ten black people who are not farmers have aspirations to become farmers. It also showed that land aspirations are most often linked to a desire for urban land and housing opportunities.
Indeed, as was mentioned earlier, we are an increasingly urbanised nation, and the bulk of our agricultural production no longer occurs on small, family-owned farms, but rather on large commercial properties, where economies of scale permit the production of food at prices that are both locally and globally competitive.
Hon Thibedi and hon Mabuza spoke about the cost of restitution, particularly the willing-buyer, willing-seller model and that fact that it was prohibitive. But again, Prof Nick Vink, an agricultural economist, has stated that the amount spent to date on land restitution would have purchased 58% of all agricultural land in South Africa. That implies enormous inefficiencies within the department.
It is estimated that in South Africa the cadastral system covers 80% to 90% of the country. Figures for those living outside the system are about 3 million households, or 16 million people. However, the status of the rights on land which is nominally state-owned and the provision of legally enforceable rights - in other words tenure reform - to the occupants in these settlements, is at best uncertain.
Urban tenure remains a pipe dream for many South Africans, who have waited in vain for the title deeds to properties they were promised by the ANC in 1994. The department's focus is on restitution and transformation of the property ownership demographic, without really considering the demands or needs of the people. Their key deliverable is hectares of land transferred. In contrast, tenure reform looks at the number of beneficiaries provided with title to land passes. We are looking here at the number of people.
During the committee's oversight work, I had the opportunity to visit the community of Syferkuil in the North West province. This was a project that sought to provide tenure reform through the provision of title deeds to long-standing residents, turning de facto ownership into de jure ownership. But even this innovative project was not without its challenges. These include incompetence and lengthy bureaucratic red tape which delayed the process and increased the costs.
The DA believes that tenure reform is a critical element in addressing the injustices perpetrated by the 1913 Natives Land Act and subsequent legislation. We believe that, by delivering title deeds to state-subsidised housing, and real rights to property on which they reside or operate, citizens are provided with an economic asset that they are able to use to empower themselves further. In our land reform policy, we recommend that transfer fees and red tape for first-time homeowners be reduced, and that government invest in a subsidy programme aimed at the low-income housing market gap to assist those who do not qualify for RDP housing to gain access to bank loans.
Our approach to land reform seeks to promote redress and alleviate real land pressures whilst creating an enabling environment for rural economic growth and maintaining food security. The DA remains committed to ensuring that, where we govern, we implement successful land reform projects that ensure that beneficiaries are able to use that land productively and lift themselves out of poverty.
With much of South Africa's land in state hands, surely the starting point must be to provide those living and working on that land with the title deeds to the property they occupy. Thank you, Deputy Speaker. [Applause.]
Hon Deputy Speaker, hon Ministers, and Deputy Ministers, hon members, good afternoon. Perhaps today I should begin with a quote from Jomo Kenyatta. I quote:
When the Missionaries arrived, the Africans had the land and the Missionaries had the Bible. They taught us how to pray with our eyes closed. When we opened them, they had the land and we had the Bible.
I pray today that it were that simple, that we could simply close our eyes, render a prayer and, when we opened our eyes, we would have the land of our forefathers back and they would have their Bible back. [Applause.] But the situation we find ourselves in is more complicated than that.
It is complicated by submissions which we've had to endure as the ad hoc committee on the legacy of the Natives Land Act of 1913 from the Afrikanerbond who claimed that, and I quote, "when they arrived in the 1600s, there were no black people here."
There is absolutely no truth to their submission, as we all know that Africans have been in this part of the country far earlier than the arrival of Europeans. The loss of the land rights by black people in rural areas in South Africa started in the 17th century and ran up to the 19th century through a process of colonisation and apartheid.
The assertion made by the Afrikanerbond is that the vast amount of land they have today was not occupied. The truth of the matter is that there were many wars of land dispossession which resulted in millions of black South Africans being butchered. For example, the war in Grahamstown of 1818 led by the mass murderer, Col John Graham, forced the Xhosas off their land which is now amongst the colonisers.
But as usual, the explanation for the wars of dispossession, as attested by the Afrikanerbond, was Mfecane. This is the universally accepted idea that the series of upheavals which took place in the 1820s and 1830s were caused primarily by the explosive expansion of the Zulu Kingdom under Shaka. Prof Julian Cobbing in his article, The Mfecane as Alibi, dismissed this notion saying, and I quote:
Dispossession was a result of the expansion of European colonial settlement.
More particularly, and I quote: They had been caused by the slave-raiding and slave-trading from the Cape colony in the south and from the Portuguese trading post at Delagoa Bay in the east.
Dispossession of land was thus cruel and brutal as it forced many Africans such as the Khoi, the Griquas, the Xhosas, and the Thembus off their land, and the list goes on.
One of the most brutal measures was the Natives Land Act of 1913, which was promulgated on 19 June 1913. The most important provision of this Act was that it restricted black people from buying, leasing and selling land, except in the scheduled areas which were referred to as reserves. As a result of the 1913 Natives Land Act and subsequent laws, millions of people were uprooted from their ancestral lands, often with deliberate cruelty and without compensation.
Land questions have played a key role in the history of South Africa, and their successful resolution is critically important for stability, democracy and development.
The hon Groenewald shares the same sentiments as those of the Afrikanerbond, who submitted that: "Application of race and ethnicity in land allocation is outdated".
I want to say to you that as long as whites, who form the minority in South Africa, own the majority of the land, the ANC will never change its policy on land reform, which consists of two elements. [Applause.]
Firstly, restitution for those who were dispossessed through forced removals and, secondly, redistribution of land to deal with the land hunger and the unequal distribution of land.
Hon Steyn speaks about the willing-buyer, willing-seller policy and I want to attest to the fact that ... [Interjections.]
That's the king's salutation, by the way; I'm just a chief. I just want to point that out and correct you. [Applause.]
Order, please.
Expropriation will be the solution to speeding up land distribution. The willing-buyer, willing-seller principle has certainly failed and we need to speed up the process to ensure that the people of our country have access to the land.
Let's address the issue of communal land use as an African curse, as attested to by the Afrikaner Boerebond. Communal land and traditional leaders have, for the most part, been totally violated through the wars of dispossession. You have only to take a trip to the Robben Island prison to see who the first political prisoners were there. The likes of Nkosi Siolo, Nkosi Charlie, Nkosi Makoma, Sagile, and the list goes on. So, let's remind the Afrikaner Boerebond: Communal land is definitely not an African curse. It needs to be addressed, transformed and democratised.
Therefore, hon Deputy Speaker, the ANC supports this report of the Ad Hoc Committee to Exercise Co-ordinated Oversight on the Legacy of the Natives Land Act. I thank you. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
Hon Deputy Speaker, I move:
That the report be adopted.
No! I objected immediately, hon Deputy Speaker. Just when we thought that sanity had prevailed, we had to listen to the hon Mandela. We object and we would ask that the objection be noted. Thank you.
Motion agreed to (Freedom Front Plus dissenting).
Report accordingly adopted.