Political Perspective: Land Not An Easy Cure-all

WHAT really bothers me about the thorny subject of redistribution is the predominant view among so many Namibians that access to land is a get-rich-quick solution which will solve the problems of the poor. Nothing could be further from the truth, especially if you start out with scant knowledge about farming in the first place. And I really think that Government needs to educate people about the pitfalls involved so as not to create false expectations that access to land is the magic solution.

I HAVE to reiterate, as I’ve done on every occasion I’ve written about it, that no one can deny that ownership of commercial farmland in Namibia is skewed in favour of whites, and that the balance has to be redressed. Quite how and to whom and to what extent it should be redistributed is the more legitimate question.I also have to disagree with those who say that the struggle was primarily about land.It was not, in my view.The struggle was against colonialism and apartheid domination, and not against white Namibians, farmers or otherwise.In fact, during the struggle years quite a number of ‘white’ delegations travelled to meet with the Swapo leadership, at the latter’s request, so that they could set their minds at rest about the intentions of a future Swapo Government.It is with this spirit in mind, that I feel strongly the question of expropriation should apply to foreign and/or ‘chequebook’ farmers as they are also known.Once the farms are in possession of Government, proper planning needs to take place if we are to ensure that the whole exercise doesn’t backfire on us all.I’ve asked a number of questions before, such as who’s on the list and how the order of priority is determined for resettlement.I repeat that question.And if those who were primarily robbed of land are the Herero and the Nama, how does this fact figure when people are resettled? It may not sound important, but it is.If we’re talking in general terms about affirmative action in farming, then I guess it would not matter which Namibians got what land.But we are not.We are talking of those who were dispossessed in the past.And as a matter of curiosity while on this subject: can a non-Baster buy land in Rehoboth; and are any non-Ovambos in possession of communal land in the north? I would guess the answer to these questions is ‘no’ to both; and if so, why not? And if certain areas of the country are set aside, as per the apartheid Odendaal Plan, for certain groups, and are not opened to access by ALL Namibians, then aren’t some double standards at work here? Anyhow, my point was really that we cannot expect access to land to solve all our problems as many seem to believe.Arguably, an unemployed person with a bit of land is better off than someone with none, but this again brings to the fore what the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Hidipo Hamutenya, warned about in the north recently, namely, that people should not develop a dependency on handouts.Unfortunately, this has already happened.So land or no land, if things don’t work out for people, they look to Government to assist.Many do believe that land reform will alleviate poverty.I’m not certain this is so.There’s also a perception that all farmers are rich – and while some are undoubtedly among our more affluent members of society – there are others who battle along just as most ordinary mortals do.There are good times and bad times, not least of all caused by the vicissitudes of our climate.While I’m all in favour of people getting access to land, I also believe it is essential they are assisted in the process which needs to be undertaken in a transparent manner, and all options must be looked at in an attempt to make these sustainable co-operatives.In the case of chequebook farmers (and they are not only whites) the land is often not being fully utilised to the benefit of our economy.What is the difference after all, between the Austrian who keeps land here to hunt once or twice a year; and the Government Minister who visits his farm over weekends? In both cases, neither is making a living from the land, as they have other means of income; and neither are utilising the land to the benefit of our economy.Farms in this instance are simply a rich man’s toy.I would therefore argue in favour of change accompanied by good sense, fairness and transparency so that it can work to the benefit of the country as a whole.Quite how and to whom and to what extent it should be redistributed is the more legitimate question.I also have to disagree with those who say that the struggle was primarily about land.It was not, in my view.The struggle was against colonialism and apartheid domination, and not against white Namibians, farmers or otherwise.In fact, during the struggle years quite a number of ‘white’ delegations travelled to meet with the Swapo leadership, at the latter’s request, so that they could set their minds at rest about the intentions of a future Swapo Government.It is with this spirit in mind, that I feel strongly the question of expropriation should apply to foreign and/or ‘chequebook’ farmers as they are also known.Once the farms are in possession of Government, proper planning needs to take place if we are to ensure that the whole exercise doesn’t backfire on us all.I’ve asked a number of questions before, such as who’s on the list and how the order of priority is determined for resettlement.I repeat that question.And if those who were primarily robbed of land are the Herero and the Nama, how does this fact figure when people are resettled? It may not sound important, but it is.If we’re talking in general terms about affirmative action in farming, then I guess it would not matter which Namibians got what land.But we are not.We are talking of those who were dispossessed in the past.And as a matter of curiosity while on this subject: can a non-Baster buy land in Rehoboth; and are any non-Ovambos in possession of communal land in the north? I would guess the answer to these questions is ‘no’ to both; and if so, why not? And if certain areas of the country are set aside, as per the apartheid Odendaal Plan, for certain groups, and are not opened to access by ALL Namibians, then aren’t some double standards at work here? Anyhow, my point was really that we cannot expect access to land to solve all our problems as many seem to believe.Arguably, an unemployed person with a bit of land is better off than someone with none, but this again brings to the fore what the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Hidipo Hamutenya, warned about in the north recently, namely, that people should not develop a dependency on handouts.Unfortunately, this has already happened.So land or no land, if things don’t work out for people, they look to Government to assist.Many do believe that land reform will alleviate poverty.I’m not certain this is so.There’s also a perception that all farmers are rich – and while some are undoubtedly among our more affluent members of society – there are others who battle along just as most ordinary mortals do.There are good times and bad times, not least of all caused by the vicissitudes of our climate.While I’m all in favour of people getting access to land, I also believe it is essential they are assisted in the process which needs to be undertaken in a transparent manner, and all options must be looked at in an attempt to make these sustainable co-operatives.In the case of chequebook farmers (and they are not only whites) the land is often not being fully utilised to the benefit of our economy.What is the difference after all, between the Austrian who keeps land here to hunt once or twice a year; and the Government Minister who visits his farm over weekends? In both cases, neither is making a living from the land, as they have other means of income; and neither are utilising the land to the benefit of our economy.Farms in this instance are simply a rich man’s toy.I would therefore argue in favour of change accompanied by good sense, fairness and transparency so that it can work to the benefit of the country as a whole.