Anthony Evans, who chairs the Rhys Evans Group, a large agribusiness based at Viljoenskroon, Free State, describes his attempts to launch a land reform project in his area, and how he kept running into a bureaucratic wall. This, he says, despite the agriculture minister’s accusations of white farmers obstructing land reform.
The northern Free State supports extensive summer crop farming. Farming is on dry land and therefore tends to be on a large scale. Those of us who are in the industry doubt whether small-scale farming will ever succeed in this region. I was keen to contribute to government’s stated goal of transferring 30% of agricultural land to black people and have therefore made several attempts to initiate a land reform programme involving my own and other properties. should mention that there are no land claims in our area, which makes it very different from many other parts of the country where land claims are a big issue. My first attempt – some eight to 10 years ago – was to transfer a particular farm to a small group of beneficiaries, comprising people with very good farming and farm management experience, as well as a few businesspeople whom we thought could play an important role. The idea was that my company would initially co-manage the farm, then play an advisory role and finally just a consulting role.
A failure
That project failed due to a lack of funding. At that stage the LRAD grant was allocated on a per capita basis and there was no way in which it could be made to cover the costs of buying the farm or contribute towards working capital. Some years later, made another attempt to transfer land to black owners. This time decided to follow the Land Affairs policy and proposed a transfer to a large group of beneficiaries, which would have included all the farmworkers and their families. The farm would have been run by an experienced manager. Again, my company would have initially co-managed the operation, helped to train a management board and eventually reduced its involvement to a consultancy role. The department rejected that proposal on the grounds that there would be too many co-owners.Finally and out of the blue, the department proposed to buy the farm that had been discussing with them, which it then did early last year. Since then have been in constant discussions with Land Affairs officials about their plans for the farm. have made numerous proposals. All of them have been either rejected or ignored and the farm will lie idle for the next 12 months. That’s a 1 000ha. So that’s my experience. Its not a very happy one because my objectives have not been achieved and have felt fairly frustrated as a result.
The drawn lines
The issues that stand out are the differences between the political agenda and what would call the farming agenda; the ideas of job creation, poverty alleviation and so on, versus a commercial farming approach – which really makes communication quite difficult. Changes in Land Affairs policy have also complicated the situation. Certainly in the Free State there is a view that Pretoria rules; Land Affairs officials don’t seem to have much authority and are not allowed to exercise their own judgment. This tends to paralyse decision-making. Moreover, most Land Affairs officials and members of the provincial government dealing with agriculture don’t have farming qualifications and know little or nothing about farming. For example, the MEC and chief director of Land Affairs didn’t understand the seasonal nature of maize farming – that if decisions weren’t made ahead of the summer planting season, the farm would lie idle. In contrast, my experience with officials of the National Department of Agriculture is that they have a very good grasp of agriculture and would be better equipped to make decisions about land reform projects of this kind. think the ability and capability of provincial Land Affairs and Land Claims officials need serious attention. – Jasper Raats |fw
