<div style="display: block; position: relative; max-width: 730px;">
<div style="padding-top: 56.25%;"><iframe style="width: 100%; height: 100%; position: absolute; top: 0px; bottom: 0px; right: 0px; left: 0px;" src="//players.brightcove.net/1571595826001/default_default/index.html?videoId=6005745124001" allowfullscreen="" border=0 frameborder=0></iframe></div>
</div>
<p>The issues surrounding land reform and the economic costs are of critical importance given the impending constitutional amendment. CNBC Africa’s Lubabalo Mashiqana attended the two day colloquium and spoke to South Africa’s Minister in the Presidency responsible for planning, monitoring and evaluation, Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma.</p>


Nkosazana Dlamini: Land reform pivotal to economic development

<p>CAPE TOWN (Reuters) &#8211; President Cyril Ramaphosa said on Tuesday there was no reason to believe that any country would impose sanctions on South Africa over the government’s plans to redistribute land to address racial disparities in ownership.</p>
<p>Ramaphosa announced in late July that the ruling African National Congress (ANC) plans to change the constitution to allow the expropriation of land without compensation, as whites still own the majority of South Africa’s land.</p>
<p>U.S. President Donald Trump waded into South Africa’s high-octane land debate last month when he asked his Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to study South African “land and farm seizures” in a late-night tweet.</p>
<p>Some analysts have since speculated that Trump’s government could impose economic sanctions on South Africa to express its disapproval with the ANC’s land reform agenda.</p>
<p>“We have no reason to believe that any country would impose sanctions on South Africa for any actions that we take, actions that are constitutional, that are lawful and consistent with international law,” Ramaphosa said in parliament while answering a question from an opposition party on his government’s land reform plans.</p>
<p>Ramaphosa added that the government was ready to discuss its land reform plans with any country. He repeated that land reform would follow a parliamentary process and that the government would not tolerate “land grabs”.</p>
<p>Reporting by Wendell Roelf; Writing by Alexander Winning; Editing by James Macharia</p>


Will South Africa face sanctions over land reform? Here’s what Ramaphosa thinks…

<div style="display: block; position: relative; max-width: 730px;">
<div style="padding-top: 56.25%;"><iframe style="width: 100%; height: 100%; position: absolute; top: 0px; bottom: 0px; right: 0px; left: 0px;" src="//players.brightcove.net/1571595826001/default_default/index.html?videoId=5826452117001" allowfullscreen="" border=0 frameborder=0></iframe></div>
</div>
<p>Yesterday, United States President Donald Trump tweeted that the US state secretary would look into South Africa&#8217;s proposed land reforms with urgency. South African Afrikaans lobby group, AfriForum, welcomed these comments as a sign of support from the international community. The group’s Chief Executive, Kallie Kriel spoke to CNBC Africa&#8217;s Karabo Letlhatlha about their stance on land.</p>


Here’s why AfriForum defends Trump’s tweet on land

<p>By Lubabalo Mashiqana</p>
<p>South Africa&#8217;s land expropriation without compensation intentions have caught the attention of United States President Donald Trump.</p>
<p>Trump tweeted on Thursday morning</p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<p dir="ltr" lang="en">I have asked Secretary of State <a href="https://twitter.com/SecPompeo?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@SecPompeo</a> to closely study the South Africa land and farm seizures and expropriations and the large scale killing of farmers. “South African Government is now seizing land from white farmers.” <a href="https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@TuckerCarlson</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/FoxNews?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@FoxNews</a></p>
<p>— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1032454567152246785?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 23, 2018</a></p></blockquote>
<p><script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></p>
<p>This follows after SA’s President <a href="http://cnbc.africa/insights/ramaphosa/2018/07/31/land-expropriation/">Cyril Ramaphosa had a Q&amp;A on land expropriation</a> in Parliament on Wednesday, and just over a month after land hearings began around the country. Apparently Trump&#8217;s tweet was motivated by the below Fox News insert.</p>
<p><iframe loading="lazy" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/EThwj4NtnvU" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p>
<p>Trump&#8217;s comments sent the rand 1.87% lower to the dollar to 14.42 as fears spooked investors that sanctions could be imposed on South Africa.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>


US President attacks SA’s land expropriation intentions, rand slides

<div style="display: block; position: relative; max-width: 730px;">
<div style="padding-top: 56.25%;"><iframe style="width: 100%; height: 100%; position: absolute; top: 0px; bottom: 0px; right: 0px; left: 0px;" src="//players.brightcove.net/1571595826001/default_default/index.html?videoId=5824420953001" allowfullscreen="" border=0 frameborder=0></iframe></div>
</div>
<p>The rand has lost 11.9 per cent since the beginning of August as the sell-off in emerging markets continued triggered by the Turkish Lira. And locally there has been investor apprehension to land expropriation without compensation and the Economic Freedom Fighters tabling an amendment bill to nationalise the Reserve Bank. CNBC Africa’s Karabo Letlhatlha caught up with Finance Minister Nhlanhla Nene and his deputy at the financial results of the land bank and started by asking them about investor apprehension in the face of expropriation.</p>


SA FinMin Nene moves to ease investor apprehension over expropriation

<p>JOHANNESBURG (Reuters) &#8211; The chairman of South Africa’s ruling African National Congress was quoted as saying the state should take without compensation land from those who own more than 12,000 hectares, comments that sent the rand weaker.</p>
<p>More than two decades after the end of apartheid, white people still own most of South Africa’s land.</p>
<p>Ownership patterns remain highly emotive as the government has been slow to transfer land to the black majority after centuries of colonial and racial oppression.</p>
<p>The ANC’s plans to amend the constitution to redistribute land have been interpreted negatively by some investors, who see them as undermining property rights.</p>
<p>The ruling party has sought to assuage those fears by saying that land reform will follow a parliamentary process. [nL5N1UR8OX]</p>
<p>“You shouldn’t own more than 12,000 hectares of land and therefore if you own more, it should be taken without compensation,” ANC Chairman Gwede Mantashe, who is also the country’s mines minister, told the News24 website in an interview published on Wednesday.</p>
<p>It was not immediately clear whether Mantashe’s comments represented official ANC policy. Four key party officials did not answer their phones when called by Reuters for clarification.</p>
<p>Mantashe is one of the top six most powerful officials in the ruling party and a close ally of President Cyril Ramaphosa.</p>
<p>The rand fell more than 3 percent against the dollar earlier, partly weakened by Mantashe’s comments, a report by Moody’s ratings agency on the struggling economy and a resurgent dollar, which struck a 13-month peak. [nL5N1V62YT]</p>
<p>The ANC is under pressure to make headway with land reform ahead of next year’s national election, where the ultra-left Economic Freedom Fighters party has made faster land redistribution one of its main policies.</p>
<p>The 12,000 hectare land ownership limit was mooted in 2016, by then-rural development minister Gugile Nkwinti. But Nkwinti said the government would seek to buy, not expropriate without compensation, land from those owning more than 12,000 hectares.</p>
<p>AfriForum, an organisation that mostly represents white South Africans on issues such as affirmative action, has criticised the ANC’s decision to endorse constitutional changes to allow the state to seize land without compensation, saying the move would be “catastrophic”. [nL5N1US5TC]</p>
<p>Writing by Alexander Winning; Editing by James Macharia and Alison Williams</p>


Chairman of South Africa’s ruling party wants land expropriated without compensation from those with over 12,000 hectares

<p>The South African government’s plan to <a href="https://www.timeslive.co.za/politics/2018-07-31-anc-to-change-constitution-to-expropriate-land-without-compensation/">change the constitution</a> to mention land expropriation without compensation could, ironically, end up strengthening the property rights on which investment depends.</p>
<p>Pressure to change the Constitution to allow the government to expropriate land without compensation is currently the country’s most contentious issue. Supporters insist that the measure is essential to end racial land ownership patterns which continue to favour whites a quarter century after the end of apartheid. Critics insist that this will threaten property rights and choke off investment.</p>
<p>President Cyril Ramaphosa has now announced that the governing African National Congress will support a change to the constitution’s property clause. This was greeted with predictable <a href="https://www.fin24.com/Markets/Currencies/big-blow-for-rand-economy-as-anc-set-to-change-constitution-on-land-20180801">anxiety</a> among pro-business commentators. But their fear that the change will weaken property rights seems misplaced. To see why, we must look at what property rights are, what the constitution says and what Ramaphosa and the ANC leadership may have in mind.</p>
<p>Much of the fear seems based on a view of property rights which sounds credible but does not describe reality in market economies. It sees property rights as the right to do whatever you like with what you own. The philosopher <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Property-Mainstream-Positions-C-B-MacPherson/dp/0802063365">CB MacPherson</a> pointed out four decades ago that this is not how property was understood until fairly recently, and not how property rights actually operate.</p>
<p>There is no unlimited right to property anywhere. People who own homes cannot use them to make banned substances or to fire missiles at neighbours. People who own factories cannot use them to enslave labourers or to pump poisons into the air and water. If owners ignore these rules, they will be forced to give up some of their property. Some might even lose the property – think of restaurant owners whose businesses are closed down by health authorities to protect consumers.</p>
<p>None of this is inconsistent with a market economy. On the contrary, these rules are essential to markets. A good analogy is a set of traffic lights. They limit what car and truck owners can do with their property, but they are essential to keeping the property safe.</p>
<p>The property rights of owners are, therefore, strong enough to allow them to invest with confidence when they know what the rules are which decide whether they keep their property.</p>
<p>Certainty is the key – not a blank cheque.</p>
<h2>The Constitution</h2>
<p>Section 25 of the South African Constitution, which is often held up by friends and foes as a cast-iron guarantee of property rights, is nothing of the sort. It does say the state can expropriate property only if it pays compensation and lists criteria which courts must take into account when deciding compensation. But clause (8) says:</p>
<blockquote><p>No provision of this section may impede the state from taking legislative and other measures… to redress the results of past racial discrimination</p></blockquote>
<p>That’s if it complies with Section 36(1) which says the measure must be:</p>
<blockquote><p>reasonable and justifiable in an open and democratic society based on human dignity, equality and freedom.</p></blockquote>
<p>So the Section does allow expropriation without compensation – but the wording spelling out when it is allowed is vague. If the government were to test this in court, different judges would inevitably come to different conclusions. This gives owners no certainty and so they don’t know whether their property is safe.</p>
<p>If the constitution is changed to make clear which property may be expropriated without compensation, property rights would be stronger because it would be clear to owners whether their property is safe and what to do to keep it that way.</p>
<p>This is what Ramaphosa and his party say they have in mind. His announcement did not say the constitution should be changed to allow expropriation without compensation – he said that it already does this. The aim, he said, was a clause which “outlines more clearly the conditions under which” land can be expropriated without compensation – in other words, to provide the clarity the current clause lacks.</p>
<p>If he makes good on his promise, the effect will be to strengthen property rights by making it much clearer when the state can take land without compensation. The wording of the clause will be crucial – if it’s too vague and allows the state too much latitude, it will not strengthen property rights. But it’s unlikely that it will seriously threaten these rights because this would place the property of every home-owning ANC voter at risk.</p>
<h2>Ramaphosa’s change of view</h2>
<p>But, whatever the effect of this particular change, a look at why Ramaphosa made the announcement shows that the right to property in South Africa will be challenged until and unless inequality and economic exclusion are tackled far more vigorously than they are now.</p>
<p>He clearly did not want to change the constitution. After a previous ANC summit on land issues, in May, it insisted that it would not change the constitution. It would, rather, pass an <a href="https://www.businesslive.co.za/bd/politics/2018-05-22-anc-may-bolster-bill--for-land-seizures-without-compensation/">Expropriation Bill</a> and test whether the land redistribution it planned was possible within the current wording.</p>
<p>His <a href="https://probonomatters.co.za/2018/08/ramaphosa-our-people-want-the-constitution-be-more-explicit-about-expropriation-of-land-without-compensation/">announcement</a> this week sounded reluctant: he said that the current constitutional wording does allow expropriation without compensation and then insisted on the need to change it – there was no logical connection between the two.</p>
<p>This strongly suggests that he was forced to change position. Since the change came after a meeting called by the ANC’s National Executive Committee, it was surely pressure from this body which forced a change. This is confirmed by a <a href="https://www.businesslive.co.za/bd/national/2018-08-02-anc-aims-for-explicit-clarity-in-land-law/">report</a> claiming that he shifted because the faction within the National Executive Committee which supports former president Jacob Zuma is using the land issue to embarrass him and his faction.</p>
<p>It’s easy to see why Ramaphosa and his allies had no answer to this. Inequality and economic exclusion remain deeply entrenched – the well-off are no longer all white but the poor are still almost all black.</p>
<p>Many black professionals and business people believe the economy is still controlled by the white minority. Given all this, no politician whose support base is overwhelmingly black can deny the need for change without facing the same ridicule as Congress of the People leader <a href="https://www.businesslive.co.za/bd/national/2018-07-12-whites-bought-their-land-says-cope-leader-mosiuoa-lekota/">Mosiuoa Lekota</a>, whose opposition to land expropriation has politically isolated him .</p>
<h2>Realities need to change</h2>
<p>South African economic realities mean that rejecting economic change is simply not an option for politicians who seek a large black support base. It will be hard for them to insist on strong safeguards for property when many of their voters do not own any.</p>
<p><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/100979/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />The obvious way to change this is to change these realities – to begin to negotiate economic changes which will open the mainstream economy to millions who now languish on its fringes while securing property rights for all.</p>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/steven-friedman-297963">Steven Friedman</a>, Professor of Political Studies, <em><a href="http://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-johannesburg-1275">University of Johannesburg</a></em></p>
<p>This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/changes-to-the-constitution-may-boost-not-weaken-south-african-property-rights-100979">original article</a>.</p>


Why South Africa’s plans to change constitution by expropriating land without compensation could strengthen property rights

<p>By Gary van Staden, Senior Political Analyst at NKC African Economics</p>
<p>President Cyril Ramaphosa on Tuesday, July 31, took a leaf form his predecessor’s play book and sprung a late-night surprise on the nation with the announcement that the constitution would be amended to facilitate land expropriation without compensation, rendering futile any further discussion and representations on the issue.</p>
<p>It was a legalistic, populist political gambit that merely reinforces the belief that the ruling African National Congress (ANC) has no unclouded vision of where it wants to go but is determined to go there anyway.</p>
<p>The decision taken at the ANC’s two-day National Executive Committee (NEC) lekgotla was apparently informed by the views expressed at the ongoing hearings on land taking place across the country and headed by Parliament’s Constitutional Review Committee.</p>
<p>The fact that the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) voiced the view in favour of expropriation without compensation the most loudly spooked the ANC NEC and led to what is a premature decision.</p>
<p>The decision to amend the constitution to facilitate something the constitution already allows for was explained as a need to allow for the “explicit” expropriation of land without compensation.</p>
<p>Local media reported that Mr Ramaphosa said it had become “patently clear that our people want the constitution be more explicit about expropriation of land without compensation, as demonstrated in the public hearings. The lekgotla reaffirmed its position that a comprehensive land reform programme that enables equitable access to land will unlock economic growth by bringing more land in South Africa to full use and [will] enable the productive participation of millions more South Africans in the economy.”</p>
<p>It would be difficult to find a reasonable South African who would deny the urgent and necessary need for land reform, but such a reasonable person would also want to see the plan to understand the strategy and policy framework that would guide such reform in order to ensure that it would succeed in its mission of empowering the dispossessed and unlocking economic potential.</p>
<p>What they would have seen on Tuesday night was an ANC terrified that the EFF was going to stake a leadership claim on the issue of land redistribution and that was politically unpalatable.</p>
<p>So, we were treated to another dose of populist rhetoric with no clear answers or even a hint to the critical questions of what land, where, how, for whom under what policy and regulatory environments, and with what predetermined outcomes.</p>
<p>While it would be reasonable once again to accept that such details and agendas and policy frameworks could not be explored at Tuesday night’s late briefing, there is a real concern that these details, agendas and policy guidelines do not in fact exist and that the detailed issues of land redistribution and the myriad problems that the whole saga brings to the fore are seriously lagging electoral concerns.</p>
<p>There are several institutions and NGOs who have done sterling and valuable work on the ‘backstage’ issues, problems and complexities of a serious land reform programme that would address the real problems and facilitate real solutions without political grandstanding and empty rhetoric.</p>
<p>These institutions deal with key aspects of a land reform programme and offer various scenarios for taking the entire process forward, but these solutions do not always carry the electoral windfall political parties are seeking to tap into.</p>
<p>There is broad agreement among those organisations serious about land reform that constitutional amendments are not required to facilitate the process, but this detailed practical set of policy initiatives is far less sexy than political posturing on electoral platforms and the late, late press show.</p>
<p>The problem is that the consequences of these press shows are often dire and, given the lack of any context or any reasonable framework in which to place the dramatic announcements, inevitably lead to negative financial and economic consequences and undermine confidence.</p>
<p>There was a chance here for a successful land reform programme that would involve both benefit to our people and a growth of investor confidence in how well the issue was managed. That outcome is now off the table.</p>


Op-Ed: South Africa’s rush into populist politics in a policy vacuum

<p>STATEMENT OF ANC PRESIDENT CYRIL RAMAPHOSA ON CONCLUSION OF ANC NEC LEKGOTLA</p>
<p>31 JULY 2018</p>
<p>Fellow South Africans</p>
<p>Comrades and Friends,</p>
<p>The African National Congress has just concluded a two-day NEC Lekgotla in Tshwane.</p>
<p>The Lekgotla focused on a number of issues, including the current status of our economy, job creation and land reform.</p>
<p>It further engaged on issues of governance, social development and broader transformation which will be elaborated on by the Secretary General tomorrow.</p>
<p>We thought that it was important for the President of the ANC to clearly and unambiguously articulate the position of the organisation on two matters that are critical to the economic development of our country and the well-being of its people.</p>
<p>The first is the implementation of of the ANC’s resolution on land reform.</p>
<p>The second is about the current   economic environment.</p>
<p>On land reform, the ANC applauds our people, from all walks of life – including the rural poor, farm labourers, the unemployed, the landless, urban residents, farmers and traditional leaders – for expressing their views on this critical matter.</p>
<p>Our people have been expressing their views on the land question openly and without any fear or favour.</p>
<p>They have been putting forward solutions on how the land question can be resolved.</p>
<p>This is the constitutional democracy that we fought for.</p>
<p>The ANC reaffirms its position that the Constitution is a mandate for radical transformation both of society and the economy.</p>
<p>A proper reading of the Constitution on the property clause enables the state to effect expropriation of land with just and equitable compensation and also expropriation without compensation in the public interest.</p>
<p>It has become patently clear that our people want the Constitution be more explicit about expropriation of land without compensation, as demonstrated in the public hearings.</p>
<p>There is also a growing body of opinion, by a number of South Africans, that the constitution as it stands does not impede expropriation of land without compensation.</p>
<p>The lekgotla reaffirmed its position that a comprehensive land reform programme that enables equitable access to land will unlock economic growth, by  bringing more land in South Africa to full use, and enable the productive participation of millions more South Africans in the economy.</p>
<p>Accordingly, the ANC will, through the parliamentary process, finalise a proposed amendment to the Constitution that outlines more clearly the conditions under which expropriation of land without compensation can be effected.</p>
<p>The intention of this proposed amendment is to promote redress, advance economic development, increase agricultural production and food security.</p>
<p>It will also transform the unjust spatial realities in urban areas.</p>
<p>To accelerate agrarian reform, the ANC has further directed government to urgently initiate farmer support programmes in depressed areas before the first rains this year.</p>
<p>This should include supporting farmers with tools, tractors, fertilisers, seeds, extension services, finance and access to key infrastructure.</p>
<p>Our economy is facing serious challenges. The recently released figures on unemployment are worrying.</p>
<p>Given this economic environment, the Lekgotla directed government to move with urgency to develop and implement a stimulus package to ignite growth that will lead to the creation of jobs, especially for young people and women.</p>
<p>These efforts should focus on rural communities and townships.</p>
<p>This stimulus package will be based on existing budgetary resources and the pursuit of new investments while remaining committed to fiscal prudence.</p>
<p>It will comprise, amongst others, of the following:<br />
&#8211;   Increased investment in public infrastructure.<br />
&#8211;   Increased support for entrepreneurship and employment opportunities for youth and women, as well as small and medium businesses<br />
&#8211;   Trade support measures for sectors such as sugar and products affected by big import surges<br />
&#8211;   Ensure that procurement focuses on localization<br />
&#8211;   Training for unemployed young South Africans with the skills necessary to compete in a rapidly-changing economy.</p>
<p>As deployees of the ANC in government, we have committed that the work to develop this stimulus should start now to ignite growth, tackle unemployment and mitigate the effects of the rising cost of living.</p>
<p>We call on all South Africans to work with us in developing a social compact for economic inclusion, economic growth and jobs for all.</p>
<p>I thank you.</p>


SA’s President Cyril Ramaphosa’s statement on expropriation of land without compensation, economic stimulus

<div style="display: block; position: relative; max-width: 730px;">
<div style="padding-top: 56.25%;"><iframe style="width: 100%; height: 100%; position: absolute; top: 0px; bottom: 0px; right: 0px; left: 0px;" src="//players.brightcove.net/1571595826001/default_default/index.html?videoId=5803131089001" allowfullscreen="" border=0 frameborder=0></iframe></div>
</div>
<p>Izak Petersen, CEO of Dipula Income Fund spoke to CNBC Africa on the side-lines of SAPOA’s property convention about his outlook following the land reform conversations.</p>


Dipula CEO calls for speedy resolution to the land question

<p><em>By Gary van Staden, Senior Political Analyst, NKC African Economics </em></p>
<p>The only issue that became crystal clear after the first day of a discussion forum on land redistribution and expropriation in Johannesburg on Tuesday, March 27, was that the African National Congress (ANC) has once again opened a Pandora’s box by plunging into the issue of land seizure without compensation. The ANC does not seem to have considered the consequences.</p>
<p>The gathering – National Forum for Dialogue on Land, Heritage and Human Rights – brought together land owners, farmers, political activists and the government for a forum on the thorny issue of land and ownership. The forum was designed to seek common ground on the way forward in an environment characterised by mistrust.</p>
<p>Contributors included Constitutional Review Committee member Mathole Motshekga, advocate Thembeka Ngcukaitobi, large scale farmers, members of the African Farmers Association of South Africa and the new minister of mineral resources Gwede Mantashe.</p>
<p>This is a critical and unavoidable debate and we need to find lasting and just solutions or we face another crisis that will dwarf the Zuma debacle. But there appears to be little prospect that this second bite at the cherry is going to produce anything more substantial than it did: a generalised, unconvincing communique that anticipates further talks.</p>
<p>Mantashe attempted to outline government’s thinking on the issue but left the impression that it remained muddled and confused. Mantashe has clearly been tasked with managing the land debate rather than leaving it to the incoherent minister of land reform and rural development, Maite Nkoana-Mashabane, who claimed to be preparing a test case to expropriate land without compensation without bothering to wait for Parliament to complete its constitutional review process.</p>
<p>&#8220;We cannot wait for Parliament,” she said. &#8220;If we need to expropriate your land, we are going to do that, because it is in the Constitution… there are elements that say, if you live in Brussels and you are using the land that should feed my children for speculation, we will do that.&#8221;</p>
<p>Local media reported Nkoana-Mashabane then added that her department had already identified the test case land to be expropriated but would not disclose where it was because that would tip off the current owners to prepare a legal challenge to the illegal land grab.</p>
<p>Instead of adopting the spirit of dialogue and finding common solutions, this is the attitude of the minister in charge of land reform: to hell with Parliament, they are too slow, and we need to sneak up on people so that their right to legal recourse is derailed.</p>
<p>No wonder Mantashe was called in – but, while far more coherent, he often appeared equally confused. Mantashe said a debate was needed on the concept of expropriation and whether it was a legitimate term given that the land was taken in the first place.</p>
<p>Restoration was not expropriation, he said, adding that greedy farmers who own large portions of land will be dealt with first as government moves to expropriate land.</p>
<p>“South Africans are hungry for land and some white farmers are greedy and buy more land as it becomes available… When a person is greedy and takes every piece of land for himself, that person should be the first for expropriation because he doesn’t need land.”</p>
<p>But Mantashe also stated quite clearly that land redistribution will be done in a responsible manner: &#8220;We must ensure that we do not undermine future investment in the economy, or damage agricultural production and food security.&#8221;</p>
<p>He attempted to address some of the wider policy fears around the issue by saying that it was not a policy to drive white people into the sea. “That is not the policy. It will never be the policy of the ANC, unless the ANC becomes something else.”</p>
<p>The attitudes and outrageous opinions of ministers such as Nkoana-Mashabane encourage lawlessness and ultimately confrontation as she talks of sidestepping a slow legal parliamentary process and looking for ways to undermine the legal rights of people about to be dispossessed by the State.</p>
<p>How is that any different from the communities around Hermanus in the Western Cape, and others in Gauteng, who this week illegally occupied land because Parliament was too slow and current owners have too many legal rights?</p>
<p>But Mantashe wants the law to take its course against these illegal invasions that he strongly condemned.</p>
<p>The Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) will continue to use the ANC’s policy incoherence to encourage fresh land grabs that have two consequences – they will inevitably become violent and racially polarising, and they will seriously hinder any constructive and ultimately necessary debate over the issue of land reform and ownership.</p>
<p>It will also have negative economic and investment consequences despite what Mantashe believes.</p>
<p>There is clearly massive mistrust dividing all parties to this crucial issue and it is up to the ANC to deal decisively and swiftly with restoring a measure of trust and honesty in a process we cannot avoid.</p>


Op-Ed: South Africa’s land policy confusion is disingenuous and dangerous

<div style="display: block; position: relative; max-width: 730px;">
<div style="padding-top: 56.25%;"><iframe style="width: 100%; height: 100%; position: absolute; top: 0px; bottom: 0px; right: 0px; left: 0px;" src="//players.brightcove.net/1571595826001/default_default/index.html?videoId=5756920476001" allowfullscreen="" border=0 frameborder=0></iframe></div>
</div>
<p>South Africa&#8217;s deputy finance minister, Mondli Gungubele addresses the on-going land issue and also the recent African free trade deal.</p>


Deputy FinMin Gungubele on the African free trade deal

<div style="display: block; position: relative; max-width: 730px;">
<div style="padding-top: 56.25%;"><iframe style="width: 100%; height: 100%; position: absolute; top: 0px; bottom: 0px; right: 0px; left: 0px;" src="//players.brightcove.net/1571595826001/default_default/index.html?videoId=5756920473001" allowfullscreen="" border=0 frameborder=0></iframe></div>
</div>
<p>South Africa&#8217;s deputy finance minister, Mondli Gungubele addresses the on-going land issue and also the recent African free trade deal.</p>


Deputy FinMin Gungubele speaks on land expropriation

<div style="display: block; position: relative; max-width: 730px;">
<div style="padding-top: 56.25%;"><iframe style="width: 100%; height: 100%; position: absolute; top: 0px; bottom: 0px; right: 0px; left: 0px;" src="//players.brightcove.net/1571595826001/default_default/index.html?videoId=5743737954001" allowfullscreen="" border=0 frameborder=0></iframe></div>
</div>
<p>Nedbank’s share price was slightly up in early trading.</p>


Nedbank CEO Mike Brown talks life after Old Mutual split

<div style="display: block; position: relative; max-width: 730px;">
<div style="padding-top: 56.25%;"><iframe style="width: 100%; height: 100%; position: absolute; top: 0px; bottom: 0px; right: 0px; left: 0px;" src="//players.brightcove.net/1571595826001/default_default/index.html?videoId=5743737950001" allowfullscreen="" border=0 frameborder=0></iframe></div>
</div>
<p>Nedbank’s share price was slightly up in early trading.</p>


Nedbank’s view on land expropriation

<div style="display: block; position: relative; max-width: 730px;">
<div style="padding-top: 56.25%;"><iframe style="width: 100%; height: 100%; position: absolute; top: 0px; bottom: 0px; right: 0px; left: 0px;" src="//players.brightcove.net/1571595826001/default_default/index.html?videoId=5743121510001" allowfullscreen="" border=0 frameborder=0></iframe></div>
</div>
<p>Barclays Africa plans to change its name back to Absa. The bank reported a 4 percent rise in annual profit.</p>


Why Nigeria makes sense for Barclays Africa

<div style="display: block; position: relative; max-width: 730px;">
<div style="padding-top: 56.25%;"><iframe style="width: 100%; height: 100%; position: absolute; top: 0px; bottom: 0px; right: 0px; left: 0px;" src="//players.brightcove.net/1571595826001/default_default/index.html?videoId=5743117653001" allowfullscreen="" border=0 frameborder=0></iframe></div>
</div>
<p>Barclays Africa plans to change its name back to Absa. The bank reported a 4 percent rise in annual profit.</p>


Land Expropriation

Nkosazana Dlamini: Land reform pivotal to economic development

Will South Africa face sanctions over land reform? Here’s what Ramaphosa thinks…

Here’s why AfriForum defends Trump’s tweet on land

US President attacks SA’s land expropriation intentions, rand slides

SA FinMin Nene moves to ease investor apprehension over expropriation

Chairman of South Africa’s ruling party wants land expropriated without compensation from those with over 12,000 hectares

Why South Africa’s plans to change constitution by expropriating land without compensation could strengthen property rights

Op-Ed: South Africa’s rush into populist politics in a policy vacuum

SA’s President Cyril Ramaphosa’s statement on expropriation of land without compensation, economic stimulus

Dipula CEO calls for speedy resolution to the land question

Op-Ed: South Africa’s land policy confusion is disingenuous and dangerous

Deputy FinMin Gungubele on the African free trade deal

Deputy FinMin Gungubele speaks on land expropriation

Nedbank CEO Mike Brown talks life after Old Mutual split

Nedbank’s view on land expropriation

Why Nigeria makes sense for Barclays Africa

Barclays Africa plans to take Absa brand to the rest of Africa

News Tips

Advertise With Us

Land Expropriation

Nkosazana Dlamini: Land reform pivotal to economic development

Will South Africa face sanctions over land reform? Here’s what Ramaphosa thinks…

Here’s why AfriForum defends Trump’s tweet on land

US President attacks SA’s land expropriation intentions, rand slides

SA FinMin Nene moves to ease investor apprehension over expropriation

Chairman of South Africa’s ruling party wants land expropriated without compensation from those with over 12,000 hectares

Why South Africa’s plans to change constitution by expropriating land without compensation could strengthen property rights

Op-Ed: South Africa’s rush into populist politics in a policy vacuum

SA’s President Cyril Ramaphosa’s statement on expropriation of land without compensation, economic stimulus

Dipula CEO calls for speedy resolution to the land question

Op-Ed: South Africa’s land policy confusion is disingenuous and dangerous

Deputy FinMin Gungubele on the African free trade deal

Deputy FinMin Gungubele speaks on land expropriation

Nedbank CEO Mike Brown talks life after Old Mutual split

Nedbank’s view on land expropriation

Why Nigeria makes sense for Barclays Africa

Barclays Africa plans to take Absa brand to the rest of Africa

News Tips

Advertise With Us

Newsletters