Agri SA het sy kommentaar op die Onteieningswetsontwerp op 22 Februarie 2021 elektronies by die Portefeuljekomitee op Openbare Werke en Infrastruktuur ingedien, sê Annelize Crosby, die organisasie se hoof van Grondsake.
Dit is gedoen met die mandaat van al dié organisasie se affiliasies. Agri SA het twee studies ter ondersteuning van die kommentaar laat doen, naamlik ’n studie oor die ekonomiese uitwerking van ’n benadering van nulvergoeding of minimale vergoeding asook ’n studie oor die uitwerking van die Covid-19-pandemie op die landbousektor.
“Die organisasie het verder ook regsadvies oor die aangeleentheid ingewin, wat gebruik is in die opstel van die skriftelike voorlegging.” Agri SA se voorlegging behels kortliks die volgende hoofpunte: • Agri SA verteenwoordig die grootste groep landelike grondeienaars en wil ’n volhoubare, lewensvatbare sektor verseker.
• Die landbouers van vandag kan nie alleen aanspreeklik gehou word vir historiese gebeure nie en daar kan nie van hulle verwag word om die las van die apartheid-era se ontnemings te dra nie. • Agri SA se ondersteuning van vryemarkbeginsels bly onveranderd.
• Grondeienaars wie se grond onteien word, moet altyd die reg hê om hulle tot die howe te wend.
• Verwysing word gemaak na die ekonomiese studie oor die potensiële ekonomiese gevolge van nulvergoeding of minimale vergoeding en spesifiek die uitwerking op kapitaal-vorming asook van die studie oor die uitwerking van die pandemie op die landbousektor.
• Die internasionale perspektief word gestel dat die meeste lande se grondwette vergoeding vereis en daar word verwys na die Verenigde Nasies se Voedsel en Landbou-organisasie se studie oor beste praktyk vir verpligte verkryging van eiendom. • Lesse geleer uit Zimbabwe en Venezuela word gedeel en illustreer die rampspoedige gevolge van hul grondbeleid vir hul onderskeie ekonomieë.
• Die belastingimplikasies in terme van ’n potensiële verlies aan belastinginkomste vir die regering word ook beklemtoon asook die potensiële nadelige uitwerking op voedselsekerheid.
• Kommentaar op spesifieke definisies en klousules, soos die omskrywing van ‘onteiening’ en ‘openbare belang’ en die R0-vergoedingklousules.
• Agri SA voel sterk daaroor dat grondeienaars onmiddellik genoegsame en effektiewe vergoeding behoort te ontvang, wat hulle dan in staat sal stel om elders weer te begin, en hulle moet nie swakker daaraan toe wees as gevolg van die onteiening nie.
Agri SA submits commentary on Expropriation Bill
Agri SA submitted its commentary on the Expropriation Bill electronically to the Portfolio Committee on Public Works and Infrastructure on 22 February 2021, says Annelize Crosby, head of the organisation’s Land Affairs.
This was mandated by all the organisation’s affiliates. Agri SA had commissioned two studies in support of its commentary, namely a study on the economic impact of an approach of zero compensation or minimal compensation, as well as a study on the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the agricultural sector.
“Agri SA also sought legal advice on the matter, which was used in compiling the written submission.” Briefly, Agri SA’s submission entails the following highlights:
• Agri SA represents the largest group of rural landowners and wishes to ensure a sustainable, viable sector.
• The farmers of today cannot alone be held liable for historic events and cannot be expected to carry the burden of Apartheid-era dispossessions. • Agri SA remains firm in its support for free market principles.
• Landowners whose land is expropriated should always have the right to approach the courts. • Reference is made to the study on the potential economic impact of zero compensation or minimal compensation, specifically the impact on capital formation, as well as the study on the impact of the pandemic on the agricultural sector.
• An international perspective is provided, namely that the constitutions of most countries require that compensation be paid. Reference is made to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation’s study on best practice for compulsory acquisition of property.
• The lessons learnt from Zimbabwe and Venezuela are shared to illustrate the disastrous effect that their land policies had on the respective economies.
• The implications in terms of potential loss of tax income for the government, as well as the potential negative impact on food security, are also highlighted.
• Commentary is provided on specific definitions and clauses, such as the definition of ‘expropriation’ and ‘public interest’ and the zero-compensation clauses.
• Agri SA believes strongly that landowners should immediately receive adequate and effective compensation, which will enable them to start again elsewhere, and that they should not be worse off as a result of expropriation.
