1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 The land policy process

The Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP) provided a set of guidelines and principles that gave direction to the initial process of formulating the land reform policy and programme. By May 1995, with almost a year of experience behind it, the Department of Land Affairs issued a Framework Document on Land Policy. This was the starting point for an extensive process of public consultation on land policy issues. Over 50 organisations, including farmers' associations, NGOs, government departments and concerned individuals, responded to the Framework Document. At the same time, a series of task teams of experts with knowledge in the different areas of land policy worked to refine and develop the different issues. This work, together with the public comments, was then incorporated into a Draft Statement of Land Policy and Principles that was the basic document discussed at the National Land Policy Conference held on 31 August and 1 September 1995.

This historic conference was attended by over one thousand delegates from all walks of life and from all parts of the country. The majority of the conference delegates were representatives from disadvantaged communities and most were from rural areas. The conference document was hotly debated. All participants voiced strongly-held views as to the correct way forward in regard to land policy. These views, together with feedback from the implementation process, were again taken into account in formulating the Green Paper on Land Policy.

The Green Paper, containing a series of firm proposals on a wide range of policy issues, was distributed widely in February 1996. Once more, submissions were solicited from the public and over 50 written responses were received. In addition, a series of workshops were held in each province where the Green Paper was presented to a wide range of stakeholders and community groups. Over 30 of these workshops were held, many of them in remote areas of the country, and most of them were conducted in more than one language.

The Department is indebted to all who have contributed to the land policy debate. Public concerns about land matters have been taken into account when reviewing policies and programmes. The inputs received through this process have significantly guided the Department of Land Affairs in its endeavours to ensure that the land policy put forward in this White Paper reflects the deepest concerns of our country's people in regard to land. The following is a summary of the public responses to the Green Paper on Land Policy.

1.2 Responses to the Green Paper

In the course of these workshops, aspects of land policy set out in the Green Paper were questioned by participants. Generally, people felt that the land reform programme should not rely on the willing-seller principle and that land should be made available free to the poor and disadvantaged. Further, they argued that there was no guarantee that land redistribution would improve people's livelihoods unless a wide range of support services were provided.

People felt that:

• The Settlement/Land Acquisition Grant
• the Settlement/Land Acquisition Grant of R15 000 was too little;
• the definition of a 'qualifying household' discriminated against women;
• where people leased land, they should be able to use the Settlement/Land Acquisition Grant for farming expenses.

• low interest loans to supplement the grant should be made available to beneficiaries of the grant ­ the Agricultural Credit Board and the Land Bank should relax their requirements;
• there should be free agricultural and farm management training;
• the support previously given to white farmers should now be available for black farmers.

• underutilised farm land should be expropriated;
• there should be restrictions on the size and number of farms that an individual could own;
• there should be a special tax on private land;
• absentee landlordism needed to be investigated;
• a property clause should not be included in the new Constitution.

• the present asking prices were too high ­ compensation should be paid only on on-farm investments and improvements;
• valuation criteria should take account of the history of land acquisition ­ the subsidies the owner had received and the profit made on the farm, the environmental damage from past agricultural practices and the use value for future owners;
• valuation should exclude the value of all investments made by farmers.

At the Green Paper workshops, there were widely different opinions on the future involvement of tribal authorities and chiefs in land administration. Those in favour believed that:

• the state should not hold the land on behalf of black people ­ chiefs should get the title deeds, chiefs should redistribute the land;
• there would be problems if land were bought by subjects and not by tribes as the subjects would be separated from the tribes.

• communities falling under chiefs should get their own title deeds;
• government should do away with PTOs;
• chiefs should not accept bribes;
• the lack of security of tenure on communal land in urban areas hampered development.

The Department's policies regarding tenure security were felt to be inadequate. People wanted:

• farm workers to be given secure tenure;
• more coordination between the Departments of Land Affairs and Labour, because evictions sometimes related to labour disputes ;
• farm workers to be given the right to acquire the land they had lived on for a long period of time;
• more information to be provided to farm workers about the schemes proposed by the DLA.

Public land

People wanted:

• the policy on accessing parastatal land to be made clearer;
• the public land data base to be completed;
• the million hectares of state land available to be redistributed immediately;
• priority to be given to sorting out the chaotic situation in trust lands;
• assistance to enable people to access commonage held by local authorities ­ people wanted the land to be leased at an affordable price and not at the rates paid by commercial farmers.

People felt that:

• the 1913 cut off date should be scrapped;
• tenants forcibly removed in urban areas should benefit from the land restitution programme;
• people should be compensated for lost minerals rights on land taken by the government ­ compensation should be fair and market related.

There were calls for:

• the roles and responsibilities for land administration at the different levels of government to be clarified;
• land offices to be located close to the people;
• the clarification of relations between tribal authorities and local authorities;
• black farmers to be represented on land reform institutions;
• trusts, committees and councillors responsible for implementation to be democratically elected;
• land administration at local level adequately to represent the interests of land users;
• better coordination between different departments;
• more clarity on the nature of the partnership between NGOs, CBOs and government.

A wide range of views were expressed by the different stakeholders: For example:
Commercial farmers and farming organisations

• All submissions from this group were strongly in favour of a constitutional clause protecting property rights.
• Other submissions were concerned about:
• the criteria for assessing compensation due to land owners;
• the need to take a firm stand against land invasions;
• the subdivision of land into uneconomical units;
• communal ownership, especially the problem of 'free riders'; and
• the Green Paper's stance on the viability of small-scale farms.
• The need was expressed for a user-friendly, accessible national land data base.

• The Centre for Applied Legal Studies made a submission on tenure rights in tribal land.
• The submissions from the National Land Committee and Transvaal Rural Action Committee echoed many of the concerns raised by black rural communities at the Green Paper consultative workshops and in their written submissions (see below).
• Black rural communities
• Most felt that the R15 000 Settlement/Land Acquisition Grant was far too small an amount to allow them to get a foothold in agriculture. There was also concern on the definition of a qualifying household in the Green Paper.
• Concerns were expressed about:
• the willing-seller approach and the problems raised by inclusion of a property rights clause in the Constitution;
• the 1913 cut off date in the Restitution of Land Rights Act;
• the high transaction costs involved in land transfers.
• Many felt that policy on the roles and rights of women should be explicitly integrated into the White Paper.

• The issue of transparency in the appointment of planners was raised.
• The necessity to plan for support during and after transfer of land was emphasised; and for formalising the process of participation.

• These came out in support of the proposed market based approach to land reform, but expressed concern that it should not unduly distort the operation of the land market. They were in support of a national, user-friendly land data base.
• Concern was expressed about the need to safeguard property rights in the Constitution.
• They advocated support and training during and after transfer of land.

• Many submissions were made in respect of the manner in which the DLA planned to value land, including the willing-buyer, willing-seller approach.
• Concern over communal ownership was raised and the problem of free-riders was highlighted.
• The KwaZulu-Natal government made a range of comments on provincial autonomy.

• Many of these organisations felt that environmental issues (national and cultural) should be integrated into the White Paper.