South Africa’s land reform problem: How can it be fixed?
Vložit
- čas přidán 25. 08. 2024
- The land Debate looks at what government has done to address land reform in South Africa since the country became a democracy in 1994. CNBC Africa’s Fifi Peters speaks to land experts including farmers, lawyers and businessman about how government can fix the problem of land reform in South Africa without hurting the economy and risking food security.
www.cnbcafrica...
South Africa doesn't have a land reform problem! It's got a history problem! A knowledge of self problem!
What makes you assume that?!?
@Kazeshini Hijacker but we know our history. Even though they don’t teach it at school but trust me we know the whole truth. Truth can never be hidden.
Yes the history of whites taking land
21:03 .... Nuff said. This guy gets it. Unless you give people access to capital, training, modern agricultural machinery, technology & processes ... then you'll end up with another Zimbabwe. It can be done - but you need to make sure all those other things are sorted before you pull the trigger.
I think this guy is doing a good job. I hope all the others who get farms will be able to strategise this way to make a farm a success
Zimbabwe did not starve because they had no skills or farming equipment, they starved because the white world (UK investors) stood up against them and they got sanctions . South Africa is a capitalist country so we have investors from everywhere. If this matter is handled properly and legally we shouldn't have any problem with sanctions. The farming part the government will handle that .. not the ANC government which is incapable of running state owned enterprises
Nonsense. Sanctions have nothing to do with Zims poverty.
The sanctions are minor and affect a handful of corrupt individuals and are only applied by the West.
When the world imposed serious sanctions on Rhodesia , they didn't starve and nor did the economy collapse , despite being engaged in a civil war.
@@rockrabbit253 How does a Western Power sanction an individual? Practically speaking that's nonsense. Sanctions imposed usually affect entire countries. Not just a group of people
@@simplyballing1592 Go and do a little research. The West has a list of people (I think it's under 300 Zimbabweans) with whom they will not do business with and will not allow to travel to their countries because they deem them corrupt.
The only blanket sanctions on Zimbabwe is an arms embargo but that is pretty meaningless too as they can still buy weapons from China , India , Russia and others.
@@rockrabbit253 Yes I have done some research and according to what I've read, sanctions imposed on Zimbabwe by the US and UK are intended to cripple their entire country's economy. Not just several individuals' pockets. To learn more please watch the following video: czcams.com/video/DRJ-SFdz4-M/video.html White supremacy doesn't want to see blacks empowered. But fingers crossed we'll see the Zimbabwean economy recovering to respectable levels sooner rather than later.
@@simplyballing1592 That video clip clears it up. US sanctions against 141 entities and individuals - less than half my estimated 300.
How you jump to the conclusion that this will cripple the economy beats me.
The ANC regime in South Africa have stupidly started on the process of amending the constitution to allow expropriation of property without compensation claiming some or other historical wrong is being righted and they claim that there needs to be some form of transformation. This is what happened in Zimbabwe. In case people do not know. There is already a land claims process where any people were unlawfully dispossessed of their land can claim such land and these claims go back all the way to 1913. 1913 was chosen as that was the first time that all the people in South Africa fell under one government and of course was the year of the native land act. Before this there were colonies under Britain, various black kingdoms and until 1901 two Boer Republics each with differing law systems. This land claim process started in 1996 and over 90% of the land claims have been settled. Over 93% of all successful land claimants asked for money not land. They were paid for the land that was "stolen". Often these claimants have not relinquished the alternative land that was granted to them during Apartheid as compensation for the forced removal. So some claimants have been compensated twice.
Many people are unaware of the various land purchases that took place in South African history. The Crudop agreement where the Khoi or San King sold the Cape of Good Hope to the Dutch was the earliest. The Retief/Dingaan agreement where the Zulu Kingdom sold hald of present day Kwa Zulu Natal from the Tugela River to Port St Johns to the Boers under Piet Retief in the 19th century is another. This was bought not stolen.
The largest land claim submitted to the land claims commission is in fact a claim by white people for land sold by the zulu kingdom to the Dutch South African people. This claim is over most of the Kruger National Park and much of the Province of Mphumalanga. The claim pertains to the land described in State Archives R117/1846, namely - From Ohrigstad to the north till the Olifantsrivier, then downwards to the Delagoa Bay line; to the south till the Crocodile River; to the west to Elandspruit till the 26 degrees line; east till where the Crocodile River joins the Komati River. The said land is the property of the Dutch South African nation and according to the Deed of Sale, should by administered by the Dutch South African nation ONLY. This right was unilaterally taken from the Dutch South African nation/Afrikaner on 27 April 1994 and is currently administered by the South African Government in contravention of the deed of sale. The sale of said land on July 25, 1846 were between King Masous (representative of the Zulu) as seller; and Commandant SJZR Burg (representative of the Dutch South African nation) as buyer and a copy of the agreement is filed in the Government Archives under file R117/46. The recipients for payment were issued by the Zulus and are also on file.
This large part of land was bought not stolen.
However Not all title was acquired by peaceful means. Title by conquest was used by the Zulu, the British and other kingdoms to acquire land. It was part of international law until 1945. If it was ok for the zulu to enlarge their territory by means of conquest then surely no-one can complain if the white tribes did the same thing.
Lastly the title was acquired by Res Nullius. Ownership of Unoccupied things (like animals and land) could be acquired through occupation This method of acquiring title to unoccupied things was upheld by black judges in the supreme court of appeal as recently as 2018 in Eastern Cape Parks and Tourism Agency v Medbury (Pty) Ltd (816/2016) [2018] ZASCA 34 (27 March 2018). The Zulu Mfecane took place in the 19th century where the zulus killed over 1 000 000 black Africans leaving much of the interior of SA unoccupied and ripe for Res Nullius. Most of SA was uninhabitable by black people due to a lack of water. White settlers brought the technology of borehole drilling and water pumps to the dry uninhabited interior of the country and thus making it possible for sustained large scale human habitation.
This guy is fantastic! If we could get another 5000 of him to get portions of governments 1 million unused hectares of land we'd reduce poverty and increase food production tenfold!
labour is such a major part of farming. that is the biggest problem in the farm issue.
Disappointed with your chart what percentage is land owned by state?
So this issue of government owing billions to banks is being viewed only now that land issues are waking up? Why didn't they treat it after 1994 given that land redistribution was amongst the top agendas? Could it be that they let it lag behind because it wouldn't work with the current corruption in the government?
Govt owes nothing to banks, the banks owned by whites bonded the land on their own valuation to protect the beneficiaries of apartheid incase they are dispossed
19:50 - How is increase in spending on housing from 5 bn to 169 bn equal to 238%? By my count = 3280%.
Why doesn't South Africa just invest in industrial technologies, like factories? Get involved in global trade and dip your hand into the endless pot of American dollars. The US is getting sick of Chinas taxes and it's the perfect time to step in and take a piece of the cake.
Samuel W because they are all idiots. There are so many industries south africa could develop than fight over land.
Brilliant to watch. Reveals the true struggles
Let's all share
The focus should be on government subsidized production and not on title deeds. Title deed dynamic is a great distraction of WS. WS is solely focused on being in charge. WS does not care for justice. ...
The land is ours as blacks. Should we seat back and let the white man who stole it from us enjoy the it's milk and honey while we scrambles for bones and fleas. My people in Venda especially Nzhelele live in horrible terrain. On top of mountains. We running out of land to build while our neighbor white man still enjoy the peace of privite property in the most fertile land which rightfully belong to our ancestors. A few days ago I was beaten up by a white man for heading cattle in a land that I grew up heading cattle in since 1999. I believe my people are not dumb enough to see us go into the deep end if the land is given back. It will be hard to adjust but not impossible.. We will lose our economic output but we will rebuild. Our generation might not see that coming to fruition but our sons and daughters will. If we do not make the necessary sacrifices then who will.
EFF is no way right wing. The DA is right wing. The ANC is feeling the pressure from the EFF. Juju is coming!
Racist DA will never win in South Africa,Black people aren't fools
DA is Liberals (centre) ANC and Eff is far left
Pack up, move out, let them have it & see how long it takes to fuck it up.
Why can't this man buy the land or have the land given to him. Why should he have to pay rent to farm the land the government tells us was stolen from them. If it was stolen it should be returned free of charge...
Shame shame shame as i am Ethiopian how could white ownn 72% of the majority black land sad sad sad sad and shame and disgrace for south Africans
whites started creating their own wealth from 300 years or so ago, after they first arrived, whilst the nguni people were still throwing spears at each other. Whites were never given anything for free from the Govt. not even back in the apartheid years and thats a fact.
The figures are misrepresented. 39% of the land is individually owned. Whites own 72% of that , not of the entire country.
How can it be fixed? Don`t do it!
I am interested in leasing a farm for vhicken and meat farming.
Interesting that you call EFF right wing
That's nice
What about the very fertile and productive land in the bantustans that white farmers had to vacate? What happened to that land? White people was not allowed to own land there. The argument is not even about land, its about upliftment. Has that happened many successful black farmers would have been around. Those bantustans has land to sustain half of Africa if run correctly. Farmland is very cheap in South Africa for what you get because of all the drama and dangers that surround it. It is more a political issue to hide government failure than anything else.
There is still a lot of communal farming in the Tribal Trust areas and very little commercial farming. Until they change their traditional way of farming they will continue to live as subsistence farmers.
This article is propaganda.
Is it a matter of interest? Do the black youth admire farmers or have any drive to farm? Outsiders curiosity
South Africa is urbanising rapidly and the rate would be even greater if our economy was doing well. Relatively few people , black or white want a career in farming.
Ja, the future of S. Africa which you don't see on CNBC:
A prominent member of South Africa's governing African National Congress (ANC), Thandi Modise, has hit back at campaign groups over their plan to bring a private prosecution against her for alleged animal cruelty, including the deaths of pigs and goats.
The threat to prosecute Ms Modise, who is the chairwoman of the upper chamber of parliament, amounted to an "abuse of judicial processes for narrow political ends", parliament's spokesman Moloto Mothapo said in a statement.
The campaign groups wanted to "advance a narrow narrative of failure of black farming", he added.
"The threat to privately prosecute coincides with the process led by Parliament regarding [the] possible amendment to Section 25 of the constitution to expropriate land without compensation [from white farmers]," Mr Mothapo said.
It is important to note that state prosecutors have declined to charge her because she had "delegated people she trusted to look after the farm while she is away fulfilling her parliamentary responsibilities", he added.
Mainly Afrikaner lobby group AfriForum plans to prosecute Ms Modise after the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals reported that dozens of animals had died on her farm in 2014 because of neglect.
Private prosecutions are extremely rare in South Africa, and are usually brought when lawyers are confident that the state had blundered by refusing to charge a suspect.
This guy should buy that land.
Corn/maize is not profitable. Go for melons, chillies or peas during maize off season to increase productivity of land.
You don't get it, land is not a commodity to be bought. else if the govt gave him title deed, he would not even be farming, he would have immediately sold it
Well maize is the most profitable in South Africa. It’s a staple diet from breakfast(porridge), snack(milie), lunch(pap) and supper(pap) that is all made from maize and people consume it daily
Think for a moment about the most basic human right denied to billions of people around the globe: the birthright of equal access to the planet and the natural resources required for a decent human existence. Winston Churchill described the state of the world as it existed in 1909, which has only worsened with each passing year:
"It is quite true that land monopoly is not the only monopoly which exists, but it is by far the greatest of monopolies - it is a perpetual monopoly, and it is the mother of all other forms of monopoly. It is quite true that unearned increments in land are not the only form of unearned or undeserved profit which individuals are able to secure; but it is the principal form of unearned increment which is derived from processes which are not merely not beneficial, but which are positively detrimental to the general public.
"Land, which is a necessity of human existence, which is the original source of all wealth, which is strictly limited in extent, which is fixed in geographical position. Land, I say, differs from all other forms of property in these primary and fundamental conditions."
Churchill did not advocate that the people in every society rise up to violently destroy the prevailing system of landlordism. He embraced the simple solution put forward by the American political economist Henry George. As every parcel or tract of land has some potential annual rental value, a value based not on anything the owner of land does or does not do with the land, but based on a combination of natural and societally-created advantages, this rental value belongs to the community, to society. Once this rental value of land is collected, the holder of land has fulfilled his or her financial obligation to the community. Funds will then be available to pay for democratically agreed-upon public goods and services.
Edward J. Dodson, M.L.A.
Director
School of Cooperative Individualism
www.cooperative-individualism.org
This is no time to be listening to the barbaric thieves. They have not the nature for yruth
Benjamin Rougier you lost. Get over it 😏🎯
Only woman are allowed to own land... "Lady just lease me the land... I am a farmer man..."
America talking about land ownership in South Africa. Dont make me laugh. Texas king ranch is about quarter of our country. How about you give that back to native Americans?
Take your time and forge a proper business.
How can that land audit be accurate. It said blacks only own 4% of the land in SA but tribal land is much more than just 4%
The figures are misrepresented.
39% of the land is individually owned. Of that 4% is owned by blacks and 72% by whites. i.e. 2.88% is individually owned by blacks and 28% by whites. It also does not take into account the value of the land per hectare. White farmers are predominantly in the arid regions which require large farms to be viable.
@SICELO BHEKI BAFANA KHUMALO No. Tribal land is under private Trust
@SICELO BHEKI BAFANA KHUMALO tribal lands are also called tribal trust lands. It is a statement. The Ingonyama Trust is a corporate entity established to administer the land traditionally owned by the Zulu people, represented by their king, for the benefit, material welfare and social well-being of the Zulu nation, who continue to occupy the land as they historically have done.
@@rockrabbit253 can I see the stats, can't find it
@@mrmusanda3576 Google 2017 land audit.
So who will commercially grow if every black is to get land at most 1 to 5 acres a person that’s enough for a small stall or market or feed yourself and family but I’m sure not everyone will be successful so who decides who gets the 100+ land to commercially grow
In the struggle to regain back their land and control over their mineral resources black south afrikans should draw inspiration from the Haitian revolution and NOT from the "negro accomadationists" leadership inside the ANC.
How did it turn out for Haiti?
Zim 2.0
And yet Gift doesn’t own the land he farms on, it’s a lease, so he rents the property from the government, therefore it’s not owned by Gift and therefore the ANC nor the EFF are delivering on their promises to “give stolen land back”, like it was stolen by white people in the first place, the title deeds were bartered for with material items with the same value as the land or it was conquered through warfare, and the greatest culprit is the Nguni people who came down from North Africa and conquered their way down to the most fertile part of SA , KwaZulu Natal, they raped, killed, pillaged and stole for the land they settled on whilst there were very little cases of the Boere people doing just that, and it only happened by accident that gold and diamonds were found in Transvaal where there were no Nguni people to have settled as it was dry and barren beyond comprehension and the people struggled for centuries to just bring it to where it is today and if they want to discuss who was where first then Transvaal, Orange Free State and the Cape must not be open for discussion...
Could you please provide evidence
Why doesn't this have more views? People could learn a lot from this guy instead of going off half cocked about stolen land. It must be done wisely, or you're looking at Zimbabwe 2.0. Point. Blank. Period.
End of story.
American Reaper 25 years is too long. Generations have been lost. They better get smart.
hahaha i don't see any farm from this guy there's nothing beside died crops
Its clearly late in the season
White farmers should prove themselves by sharing expertise with Africans who want to farm....