Die uitsprake van Pres. Cyril Ramaphosa dat die ANC nie ‘n beleid van nasionalisering voorstaan nie, stel TLU SA glad nie gerus dat alle grond (en ander eiendom) nie uiteindelik in staatsbesit sal wees nie.
Pres. Ramaphosa het na die repliek oor die presidensiële begroting gesê dat die ANC wil hê dat mense grond in Suid-Afrika moet besit en nie die staat nie. Dié kwessie het vandeesweek na vore getree nadat die ANC en EFF tydens ‘n sitting van die ad hoc-komitee oor die wysiging van art. 25 van die Grondwet nuwe wysigings voorgestel het. Die voorstelle handel oor die staatsvoogdyskap oor grond, die afsnydatum vir restitusie-eise en die rol van howe oor vergoeding.
“Wat is werklik die verskil tussen nasionalisering en onteiening sonder vergoeding,” vra Mnr. Henry Geldenhuys, die president van TLU SA. “Met nasionalisering word alle grond op een slag weggeneem van die wettige eienaars. Met onteiening sonder vergoeding – teen ‘n nul-koers – word alle grond stuk-stuk weggeneem van die wettige eienaars. Oor vyf of tien jaar gaan daar geen verskil wees in eienaarskap nie.”
Die staat het reeds bewys, met die voogdyskap oor waterbronne, dat dit nie opgewasse is om die taak verantwoordelik te bestuur en te beheer nie. Dit is duidelik in die besoedelde waterbronne, swak kwaliteit water en die tekortkominge in voorsiening van water vir menslike gebruik. Mense moet nou uit eie fondse water aankoop sonder enige verligting of bystand van die staat. Dit is verdoemend as die staat verder voogdyskap oor alles wil implementeer.
“Die nuwe wending van voogdyskap moet ernstig besin word,” sê mnr. Geldenhuys. “Kyk na die gevolge van sulke besluite. Die ekonomie taan en beleggersvertroue word geknou. Pas ‘n week gelede het S & P en Fitch die land se kredietgradering weer op BB-vlak gestel. Hoewel die onveranderd is, is dit beslis nie goed nie. Vandeesweek het Statistieke SA berig dat werkloosheid vir die derde agtereenvolgende kwartaal ‘n rekord hoogtepunt bereik het. Dit staan op 43%.
“Die regering versuim om die verpligting van die staat na te kom. Verdere wysigings steel die geleentheid vir groei en inderdaad elke burger in die land se toekoms.”
TLU SA not comforted by Ramaphosa's comments on nationalisation
Pres Cyril Ramaphosa's comments that the ANC does not endorse a nationalisation policy do not put TLU SA at ease that all land (and property) will not eventually be in the hands of the government.
After the reply on the presidential budget, Pres Ramaphosa said that the ANC wants people to own land and not the state. The issue came to light this week after the ANC and EFF suggested new amendments during a meeting of the ad hoc committee on the revision of Section 25 of the Constitution. They made suggestions about the guardianship of land, the cutoff date for restitution claims, and the courts' role in compensation.
"What is the difference between nationalisation and expropriation without compensation," says Mr Henry Geldenhuys, the president of TLU SA. "With nationalisation, the land is taken from the legal owners all at once. With expropriation without compensation – land is taken piece by piece from the legal owners at a nil rate. In five to ten years, there will be no difference in ownership."
With its guardianship over water resources, the state already proved that it is not adept at managing the responsibility properly. It is clear from our polluted water sources, poor quality of water and the shortcomings in providing water for human consumption. People now have to buy water out of their own pockets without support from the state. We are doomed if the state implements guardianship over everything.
"They should seriously rethink the notion of nationalisation," says Mr Geldenhuys. "Look at the consequences of such decisions. The economy dwindles, and investors trust is taking a knock. Just a week ago, S & P and Fitch set the country's credit rating at BB-. Even though it is unchanged, it is certainly not good. This week StatsSA reported that unemployment reached a record high for the third sequential quarter. It stands at 43%.
"The government neglects the responsibilities of the state. Further amendments steal the opportunity for growth and indeed, the future of each South African."
