Hon Chairperson, let me also recognise the Chairperson and the Deputy Chairperson of the NCOP, the hon Minister, the Deputy Minister, the MEC and hon members, and of course our invited guests. We meet here just five days before the 56th anniversary of the adoption of the Freedom Charter by the Congress of the People, the real Congress of the People, on 26 June 1955. [Interjections.] Therefore, I suggest, as I did in the EPC when Minister Nkwinti presented his Budget Vote, that we take this opportunity, Mr Van Rensburg, to look at what the Freedom Charter had to say about the land. I am doing this, because, of late, when we look for votes, the DA adopts the Freedom Charter. I am not sure whether they want to implement it. So the relevant section is entitled, "the land shall be shared among those who work it."
Uyabona-ke Sihlalo, uma sikhuluma ngezomhlaba nokuthuthukiswa kwamakhaya, siye sivukelwe wumoya ngoba lapha sibona ubuhlungu, nokuhlukunyezwa, sizizwe lezi zinhlungu zokuphathwa kwabantu bakithi siyibone nendlala enkulu ikakhulukazi laphaya emakhaya nasemapulazini. Sikubuke nokugqilazwa kwabantu bakithi, lapho behlukunyezwa khona okwezigqila emhlabeni wabo ngalesi sikhathi senkululeko; yikhona-ke lokhu okwenza sivukelwe wumoya. (Translation of isiZulu paragraph follows.)
[Chairperson, when we speak of land and rural development, we get very emotional because here we see the pain and the abuse. We feel the pain of abused people and we see hunger, especially in rural areas and on the farms. We even see our people treated as slaves in their own land in this era of democracy; this is what enrages us.]
The Freedom Charter includes the following demands: restriction of land ownership on a racial basis shall be ended and all the land re-divided amongst those who work it to banish famine and hunger; the state shall help the peasants with implements, seeds, tractors and dams to save the soil and assist the tillers; the freedom of movement shall be guaranteed to all who work on the land; all shall have the right to occupy the land wherever they choose; people shall not be robbed of their cattle; and forced labour and farm prisons shall be abolished.
Uyabona-ke lokhu kwakubhaliwe ngonyaka we-1955 kodwa kukhulunywa ngezinto ezenzeka namhlanje. [This was written in 1955, but it speaks of the things that are happening today.]
For us from the liberation movement, Chairperson, the imminent imposition of the 1913 Land Act that dispossessed the native Africans of their land and livelihood was the trigger that led to the formation of the South African Native National Congress in 1912. To us, the land question is fundamental to our National Democratic Revolution. We are not going to apologise for that. Unless we deal with this issue successfully, we are not going to be able to talk about stability.
A brief summary of where we are now, in relation to these historic demands - we are talking about production discipline and food security, which are now prioritised by the department. A number of the departmental programmes focus on providing concrete support to black farmers, for example, seeds, implements, infrastructure, training and support.
In theory, racial segregation is outlawed, but in reality, of course, landownership and social relations in the countryside still reflect the apartheid legacy. We may have outlawed forced labour and farm prisons, but we still hear of cases where vulnerable farm dwellers have their cattle impounded, and farm evictions continue, often illegally.
This is exactly why the department has drafted the Land Tenure Security Bill, to close the loopholes. You see, the Freedom Front Plus harangued - like you are doing now - and accused us of populism when we said farm dwellers were still treated as slaves on their own land in this day, in the era of democracy.
The Freedom Front Plus challenged us to present the statistics on farm evictions. I have two researched documents here, which I am referring you to in order to acquaint yourself with what I am talking about. I have returned them with the information.
There is one background statistic which should make us all pause. Between 1994 and 2003 approximately 940 000 farm dwellers were evicted and only 1% in accordance with the Constitution through what we call a court order. This report was conducted by Cousins and Hall; here is the report. That is why it is vital to tighten the legislation on the security of tenure to provide legal assistance to the three million farm dwellers who are left on commercial farms. Let me talk about this report on the legal services that was initiated by the department. This project was carried out by Cheadle Thompson and Haysom Attorneys under the advisory board chaired by Prof Asmal - that is when a national legal panel to assist the vulnerable and dwellers was established.
Over three years, the panel dealt with 1 020 cases affecting 20 500 occupiers directly. Four hundred and thirty-three of these cases were settled by November 2010, with an 86% success rate in favour of the occupiers. The vast majority of the cases related to evictions, with livestock and burial disputes also featuring - something very sensitive to the African community.
Cheadle Thompson and Haysom concluded that, "the 1 020 cases dealt with represent only a snapshot of the state of tenure security in South Africa". Again, the case for a review of policy and legislation regarding the tenure is overwhelming.
Another report of Mediation and Transformation Practice of May 2011 says, "in a three-year period, the project dealt with 670 land rights disputes; the majority related to eviction and grazing rights". Mediators reported massive tensions as they tried to balance the rights of often illiterate occupiers with those of obstinate farmers who often did not understand the Extension of Security of Tenure Act, Esta, Act 62 of 1997, legislation. More positively, of the 599 closed cases, 77% mediated suggested that progress is being made.
The overwhelming majority of the disputes were between white landowners and black occupiers. The Mediation and Transformation Practice, MTP, found an escalating trend towards illegal evictions and threats of evictions in an attempt to prevent the occupiers from reaching long-term occupier status. Again, the need for legislation to stop these loopholes is very clear. In all these gross human rights violations we never heard a word of protest from the DA or the FF Plus.
This is the opposite of their stunts when the white farmers were killed. They were correct to raise that issue, but when it was about black people, they were simply quiet. Why? Because the black life is very cheap and you only need it for votes when it is elections. [Interjections.]
Let me come to the land question. We are all aware of cases such as District Six, a symbol of apartheid inhumanity and the destruction visited upon the vibrant communities in the name of racial supremacy. There are hundreds more of such cases throughout South Africa. The point I am making here is that the hurt and damage caused by apartheid is still with us, and this National Democratic Revolution of ours will not be complete until the land question is addressed. Hence the Minister is proposing a lot of issues in the Green Paper, and these issues are responding to some of the issues that are topical debates today.
In his budget policy speech, Minister Nkwinti referred to the challenges that face the land restitution programme, the complexities of dealing with competing interests and claims which often require careful research, facilitation and mediation, together with a lack of capacity and resources. With courage and integrity the Minister has met with thousands of claimants and beneficiaries to hear their experiences and engage them on how to take the process forward - and in all humility, to apologise for some of the delays.
It is the first time that a Minister takes responsibility in this government, under President Zuma, to apologise. I do not know if the others are ready to apologise about their sins of the past. From our side, systems are now in place to fast-track claims. The challenge of inadequate resources remains. I am particularly concerned about the implications of the recent court decisions which called for compensation of old-order mineral and land rights. There appears to be tension at the heart of our Constitution; whilst it recognises and seeks to promote the rights of the dispossessed, it simultaneously effectively entrenches the rights of the vested and the landed interests.
Where are we now? Many of the farms transferred to black ownership failed. This should not have come as a surprise. Apartheid did two things: it dumped millions of black people in the countryside - those who were superfluous to the labour needs of the urban economy - and simultaneously it denied them any meaningful access to productive agricultural land. Black people were dumped in semi-arid areas in the homelands - that you must know. Even basic subsistence agriculture declined. So, when we gave people land after 1994 without providing adequate follow-up training, credit and other support, we were setting our people up for failure.
Going forward, all restitution and land reform projects are now accompanied by viable business plans which include training, mentorship, partnerships and other forms of support. All of this is guided by the principles which the Minister has been able to talk about.
Therefore, as government our task is twofold: we want to restore the land to the people, which is a political and moral imperative; but at the same time we want to restore people to the practical knowledge of the land - an economic and developmental necessity.
This reflects to us a crucial shift from the approach of handing out land willy-nilly with the inherent danger of failure to a productive model of development which stresses empowerment and skilling people to create their own employment opportunities, with the necessary support from government.
In general, the process of land claims is long and tedious, as is the process of the post-settlement grants and support. Unfortunately, we also have to acknowledge that the land restitution process has suffered from corruption to the point where the Minister - not told by anybody - has invited the Special Investigating Unit to investigate all these allegations and he has reported on what is going on there.
Despite all the challenges of this complex process of restitution and land reform, stakeholder consultations over the last six months have all concluded with the call to proceed with renewed vigour and indeed to reopen the process of land claims to those who - through no fault of their own - missed out on the earlier process. The Minister was very clear here. He said he will convey these sentiments to Cabinet; it is up to Cabinet to take a decision. Even regarding the issue of the land audit, the Minister is seized with that particular issue.
It requires from us clear focus on how we intend to implement. This requires greatly enhanced capacity on the side of the department, as well as ongoing debate on how restitution and land reform will be financed, given the high costs government is facing. One of the positive statements that you must take from what you say, hon Van Rensburg, is in the media, is that unless we address these issues in a calm and disciplined manner, as government and all of us, with farmers and landowners, we will reap the whirlwind of rising social dissatisfaction in the future. This will happen unless we confront the issues now which are obstacles facing us. We must not run away and scream left, right and centre. [Interjections.]
An hon MEMBER: Like Julius!
An hon MEMBER: Yes, like Julius. [Interjections.]