Parties’ land policies: A comparative review
May 12, 2013 in Opinion
As the MDC policy conference is almost around the corner, it is important to
look at one of the most controversial issue of land and agricultural policy.
Sunday Opinion with Shakespear Hamauswa
This note provides a comparative analysis on the MDC policy against that of
Zanu PF.
Both policies acknowledge that the land question has been central in the
people’s struggles for independence, sovereignty and equality.
However, what differs is the interpretation given to the aforementioned
words. As such, the word independence according to Zanu PF’s perspective,
has been narrowly defined, to the extent of causing confusion to land
policies and other valuable resources in the country.
While this definition is not in black and white, it has been clear through
the manner in which the Zanu PF government has been dealing with the land
question, among other property rights.
Thus from Zanu PF’s perspective, independence implies the right to loot
resources including political power. Again, their view of equality is
reminiscent of the Animal Farm (by George Orwell) scenario where other
animals are more equal than others.
On the opposite side, the MDC policy proposal is based on the principles of
equality and equity. As such, the MDC government seeks to ensure that women
have access to land and other resources.
Customary laws that discriminated women when it comes to issues to do with
property rights in general and access to land in particular have guided Zanu
PF since 1980.
As is the case with Zanu PF, the MDC policy document to be discussed from
May 17 recognises the irreversibility of the Land Reform Programme. The
policy proposal states that, “the MDC recognises the irreversibility of the
land reform programme and that the land ownership pattern that existed
pre-2000 was unsustainable”.
However, unlike their Zanu PF counterparts the MDC correctly views the land
reform programme as a means to an end, rather than an end in itself. This is
the reason why their land and agricultural policy is closely linked to
poverty alleviation.
As such, the MDC policy proposal seeks to ensure that: Zimbabwe’s total land
mass of 39 million hectares, 16 million hectares of which is under communal
areas, 10,8 million under the FTLRP, 3,7 million hectares under Old
Resettlement Areas, 2 hectares under commercial farms, 0,79 million hectares
under Conservatives, 0,15 million hectares under institutional ownership and
0,76 million hectares not formally unsettled, is made productive.
This is a clear and positive departure from the Zanu PF policy that is
always driven by political overtures. Giving people land basing on political
lines destroyed the agricultural productivity of this country, yet since
1980 Zimbabwe was the major exporter of agricultural products ranging from
beef products to flowers, as well as milk products.
It is now a shame that the country is importing tonnes of maize from
countries such as Zambia, that were well known for producing copper. The
most disgusting development is that those farmers who were chased away from
this country are the ones producing the maize to feed our dear nation.
What is only needed for the MDC is to live up to their word. They have to
remember that policy matters take a form of a cycle that goes beyond
formulation to the implementation and evaluation stage. In this regard, the
MDC needs to show its sincerity by accepting the criticism that delegates to
the policy conference will give to their document.
The MDC lands and agricultural policy is commendable in relation to the
issue of security of tenure. Through this policy proposal, the MDC is
pledging to ensure productivity in all agricultural lands through ensuring
security of tenure through issuance of title deeds. Zanu PF on the other
hand has not been prepared to give meaningful title deeds to the people.
This has again affected productivity of the agricultural sector in many
respects.
With the absence of real rights to agricultural land, the beneficiaries of
the Zanu PF-led discredited land reform programme are hesitant to develop
their land beyond extensive utilisation. As a result, environmental
degradation is not an issue to them, as they fear one day they will be
chased away from the farms.
The intrusion of the security sector into the political arena clearly shows
the inadequacies of the Zanu PF property rights. The major fear is not that
the country will be given back to the former colonial powers, but because
their rights to land derives from them being supporters of Zanu PF regime.
It is important for all Zimbabweans to understand that real property rights
should be protected by a regime of laws and not by a political regime in
office.
When people have political rights based on the laws of the land that are in
line with the constitution and other international standards, no one will be
worried about the future.