Govt must seize land, says NGO

2004-12-09 22:55

Cape Town - The department of land affairs should consider using expropriation as a part of its land reform programme, says the Surplus People Project (SPP).

The proposal was one of several in a pair of reports released by the non-governmental organisation in Cape Town on Thursday.

The reports said the government should look at restricting how much land an individual could own, making the right to property contingent on the productive use of the land, and following the Zimbabwe example of claiming right of first refusal when any land was sold.

The SPP said the market-based approach to land reform - which centred on the concept of willing buyer, willing seller - had proved "inappropriate" and was not advancing the interests of the landless.

Coherent land reform programme

They said: "It is necessary to consider alternative remedies or instruments that may address the pressing challenges of land hunger."

"It is suggested that expropriation be considered as part of a planned and more-coherent land-reform programme that is based on district or area-based plans that are responsive to land need."

There should be selective expropriations in areas where there was demand for land, where no land was available or where negotiations had failed.

Sue Tilley, author of the reports, told a media briefing her research in communities in the Western and Northern Cape showed the greatest obstacle the landless faced in acquiring land was the lack of appropriate and available land.

There were also problems in gaining access to land affairs grants and with the department's budget itself, "cumbersome and inappropriate" land-reform project procedures, and the attitudes of landowners.

Most of the obstacles pointed to the way the land-reform programme had been framed, with reliance on the market.

Competition with buyers

It was clear from her examination of title deeds in Namaqualand, the Hantam Karoo and the West Coast for the four years to 2002 that reform beneficiaries had acquired only a negligible amount of land through the market.

The willing buyer, willing seller approach assumed the sellers and buyers were equal.

In fact, landless people were competing with buyers, who generally had more information on land sales in the area because they were part of networks, and had ready capital and did not have to first ascertain whether they were eligible for a grant.

At least 58% of the properties in the areas she studied in this period were bought by people who already owned land.

She said: "This has huge implication for prospective land-reform beneficiaries and people trying to break into the land market."

Tilley also suggested the government rethink its stand on subdivision, saying a more-relaxed approach could bring more land on to the market.

- SAPA