The content on this page is not written by Polity.org.za, but is supplied by third parties. This content does not constitute news reporting by Polity.org.za.

A spokesperson for the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform, Elton Greeves was quoted in this morning's Die Burger as saying that the proposed plan to place the control of all productive farmland in the hands of the state was necessitated by the need to ensure land tenure for farm workers. This argument does not stand up to scrutiny. The fact is that two laws already exist to ensure that security of tenure of farm workers, namely the Extension of Security of Tenure Act (ESTA) and the Land Reform (Labour Tenants) Act.

The Democratic Alliance (DA) is in full support of reversing the effects of cruel land dispossession under Apartheid, as it will ultimately be disastrous for all if these injustices are not undone. This cannot, however, be achieved if the ANC administration, inspired by outdated nationalisation dogma, tries to find a shortcut to achieve this aim, and in the process destroys the right to private land ownership.

The claims by the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform that declaring all productive farmland as a ‘national asset' is not the same as nationalisation is merely an argument in semantics. The ANC government's proposal would place in the control of the state all productive land. How this would be different to nationalisation is not clear, since the state, through legal means, would take control of formerly private property. The Department's Strategic Plan spells it out quite clearly: "...all productive land will become a national asset and a quitrent land tenure system either with perpetual or limited rights is envisaged. This may require an amendment to section 25 of the Constitution."

What the ANC has forgotten is that it does not have the votes to amend the Constitution. The DA will vote against any attempt to amend section 25, and we expect other opposition parties to follow suit.

This proposal is a devastating rebuttal of everything that the President promised foreign investors in his recent visit to the United Kingdom. The President himself should immediately intervene, and state categorically that the nationalisation of South Africa's farm lands is not on the ANC's agenda. The Director General of Rural Development must withdraw this proposal.

It is quite clear that the introduction of this proposal is an attempt to deflect attention away from government's inability to manage an effective and efficient land reform programme using legally sound and sustainable measures.

What is required is, firstly, for government to commit the necessary resources to finance land reform and secondly, for it to ensure that there is sufficient capacity within the state to manage the process. Over the past decade funding allocated by the ANC government has not even averaged R5-billion per year - far short of the now R70-bllion that is estimated to be needed over the next five years to make real inroads into the problem.

This is why the DA proposed, in our alternative budget, to expand the budget for Land Reform by more than 50%.

Furthermore, it is quite clear that the reason why 90% of land reform projects have failed is due to the lack of awarding of post-settlement support to land reform beneficiaries due to a lack of capacity by the department.

There are an array of other issues at play, including the lack of political will in concluding audits of state-owned land - which could be utilised to speed up the process - and the crippling of land reform financing institutions such as the Land Bank due to corruption and mismanagement

Instead of consistently blaming the willing-buyer-willing-seller model and the resistance of farmers as a hindrance to effective land reform, the ANC government must face up to the facts. And - they must immediately withdraw their proposal to nationalise South Africa's farm lands.