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.]]