171
through the land reform process, the infrastructure was not maintained. While the logistics were being sorted out, the properties were left unattended by the previous farm owners. The whole thing took place prior to reoccupation by the land reform beneficiaries. There was no security to ensure that the property remained intact before the occupation took place.
The department should encourage the land reform beneficiaries to work hard, tilling the land, growing vegetables to feed their families, and, for those with livestock, practicing acceptable methods of cattle farming, such as rotational grazing. Working hard means that beneficiaries must equip themselves with the necessary farming skills, including financial and operational farm management skills.
The fact that respondents were able to come up with practical, focussed suggestions about ways in which the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform could improve their farming situation indicates their level of commitment to these projects. It became clear in the course of the interviews that beneficiaries hoping to make progress in farming were critically hampered by inadequate equipment and infrastructure.
172
respondents (57%) thought the legislation and regulations had been appropriate, while 43% disagreed. This suggests that the problem might not be with the legislation and regulations per se, but with the public administration that is not implementing the legislation as expected.
7.6.2 Reviewed policy on land acquisition
The majority (75%) of the respondents supported the idea of fast-tracking land reform by allowing the Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform to acquire land without necessarily going through the Land Claims Court. This also indicates that delay in the settlement of land claims is a matter of serious concern for people who are affected. It is against this background that the government should note that the legislative and regulatory framework in place needs review. Accelerating the whole process of land reform would make an enormous contribution towards poverty reduction and community development.
A similar pattern occurred in Zimbabwe’s Fast Track Land Reform Programme policy, which yielded good results. Over 220 000 families received farming land by 2006. It indicates that if South Africa can fast track the land reform programme many people can be assisted (African Renaissance, 2006: 51).
7.6.3 Legislative review
Only 24% of the respondents regarded the recent review of legislation as being applicable in the study area. They indicated that numerous land claims had been lodged with the commissioner in their area, signalling the extent of land need there. Most respondents (76%) saw no relevance to local circumstances in the recent changes in legislation. They held this view because numerous redistribution projects in the area had been applied for but were still waiting approval. It should be noted that reviewing the current legislation to fast-track restitution projects was an initiative of the Minister.
7.6.4 Information about Land Reform programme
Asked whether people in the GLM were informed about land reform programmes, in particular land redistribution and land restitution, more than 70% of the respondents agreed that people had been informed about the land
173
reform programme, with only 30% dissenting from this view. The 70% is a significant proportion, which implies that the government is seriously engaged in a communication campaign about the programme. One could conclude that information is adequately disseminated in the study area.
7.6.5 Proposals for information sharing
Respondents were asked to provide suggestions on how the community could be informed about the various programmes and the following proposals were offered:
Workshops and meetings could be used as a mechanism for reaching out to people in various communities. This is an indication that people really need information in order to participate in such initiatives and also that workshops and meetings within the community play a significant role in the gathering of information and knowledge sharing.
Local municipalities should conduct monthly meetings where people would get information on land reform programmes and other development initiatives.
In some cases, a forum could be facilitated by the local municipality to communicate various development initiatives and opportunities that are available to the community. The respondents felt that the local municipality should educate people about land reform programmes, and recognised the local municipality as having a key role in the dissemination of information to its constituency in view of its accessibility to everyone in the community.
Some respondents called for the municipality to approach headmen for discussion meetings pertaining to land reform. At the moment, the two institutions (traditional authorities and local municipalities) do not see eye-to-eye on issues regarding land, since the balance of power seems to have changed in favour of the local municipalities. The municipalities have land administration authority in many rural areas, a function that was initially administered by traditional authorities through the headmen.
174
This kind of cooperation could assist in establishing linkages relating to land reform and other development initiatives. Currently, local municipalities do not seem to have an interest in land redistribution and the result is that the traditional authorities go it alone. The local municipalities are not involved as authorities in land reform and this makes them less interested in land redistribution. However, the traditional authorities do not have any problem with that, because most of the land reform projects relate to land originally dispossessed from them. In fact, they stand to benefit from the land reform programme more than the municipalities.
Some respondents suggested that the lack of land-related information in the study area could be resolved through government intervention.
Although they did not indicate the type of intervention, this showed that they understood the role that government has to play.
7.7 Impact of Land Reform on Key Community Determinants