It's just after 8 on a crisp morning outside Besters, a farming village in South Africa's KwaZulu-Natal province, and Mhle Msimanga is wading through his herd of cattle in a wire pen, calling out directions to his sons and nephews standing outside it. "The cows can't get out if you're all crowded at the gate!" the 48-year-old farmer yells, speaking the local isiZulu language. The boys move aside, and a few cattle trot out, meandering onto a dirt road that leads toward the low-slung mountains that spread out behind Msimanga's property. It wasn't always his land. In 2005, the post-apartheid South African government bought about 1,112 acres from his former boss—a white farmer—and transferred the title deed to Msimanga and his fellow workers. It was part of a larger transaction in Besters that year: The government acquired over 34,590 acres from white South African farmers and transferred the ownership to nearly 200 black South African families, who, like Msimanga, had lived and worked on the land for years. The deal changed Msimanga's life and rewrote the future of his children. In 1991, he went from earning roughly $18 a month on this land to owning it, as well as a large herd of cattle. "There is no money in being a worker," he says. "It's only now I see money for all the work I put in." 'Wake Up, My Friend. Our People Want The Land' Land Ownership was supposed to be the reality for hundreds of thousands of black South Africans by now. But 24 years after the nation's first free elections, the country is still struggling to correct the gross injustices of colonialism and apartheid, the system of white minority rule and racial segregation. European colonizers arrived at the southern tip of the continent in the 17th century and for the next 200 years drove Africans off their homeland. A policy in 1913 allowed the white-run government to further strip away black-owned property. Those policies continued under apartheid, which began in 1948 and ended with the multiracial vote on April 27, 1994. But the stark reality is that inequality remains. Black South Africans, who make up 80 percent of the population, own just 4 percent of the nation's agricultural land, according to the government. The nation's white minority owns 72 percent. The architects of South Africa's transition to democracy in the 1990s envisioned a much different outcome: The post-apartheid constitution says the government must help citizens get better access to land. The African National Congress, which has been in power since 1994, now wants to transfer 30 percent of the country's agricultural land from white to black ownership. In addition to buying it from white owners and redistributing to black ones, the ANC runs programs to help people claim territory and firm up the rights of those whose tenure is insecure. But apartheid's legacy has been difficult to dislodge, and many think land reform has been a disaster. To date, only 9 percent of commercial farmland has been transferred to black owners through claims and redistribution. The backlog to settle existing claims is 35 years; for new ones, there's a wait of well over a century. Many large agricultural reform projects have failed; success stories like Msimanga's are the exception. "You can move as many hectares of land as you want, but if you don't get them to be productive, then society's problems will remain," says Wandile Sihlobo, an agricultural economist for South Africa's Agricultural Business Chamber. The slow pace of change has made land one of the most polarizing issues in South Africa today. With national elections looming in 2019, the small but influential Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) opposition group has tapped into popular frustration over the ANC's failure to address the problem. The party has been pushing the government to seize white-owned property without paying landowners, as former President Robert Mugabe did in Zimbabwe, which borders South Africa to the north. Critics of Mugabe's policy point to the period of economic collapse that followed: Food production dropped, due in part to a lack of equipment and training, and unemployment soared as thousands of evicted white Zimbabwean employers left the country. The ANC, whose popularity plummeted under the controversial tenure of former President Jacob Zuma, declared in December it would use "land expropriation without compensation," as the process is known, to speed up reform. The party promised to do it without compromising the economy, food security or jobs. President Cyril Ramaphosa, who replaced Zuma this year, has repeatedly said the taking of land from the indigenous people was South Africa's "original sin," and that its return to its rightful owners will unlock the country's economic potential. In February, Parliament overwhelmingly voted in favor of a resolution to pursue the expropriation policy and appointed a committee to investigate whether the constitution needs to be amended to do it. The committee is due to report back on its findings later this year, before the 2019 elections. Unsurprisingly, the prospect of state-sanctioned land seizures has spooked white landowners in South Africa. Media coverage of "land invasions" has increased across the country, where black South Africans have moved onto unused, privately owned property and claimed the right to live there. "Once it becomes a free-for-all, how are you going to stop millions of people from lawlessness?" says Louise Rossouw, former regional chairperson of the Transvaal Agricultural Union of South Africa in Eastern Cape province. "It's crazy. People are already starting to talk of civil war. " The ANC has tried to stamp out fears that South Africa's economy is going to crash like Zimbabwe's. It has emphasized that unused land would be targeted first, but party leaders have also doubled down on their original pledge. "For people who think that the issue of land in South Africa will be swept under the carpet, I say, 'Wake up, my friend,'" Ramaphosa recently said in Parliament. "Our people want the land." 'We Haven't Been Able to Recover' Msimanga's homestead in Besters sits off an unpaved road. His property includes five modest buildings, homes to a dozen members of his extended family. Sitting in his living room, on a couch covered in plastic, Msimanga looks slightly ill at ease in his ripped jeans and dusty work boots, as if he'd rather get back to his cattle. Above his head, an embroidered mat hanging from the ceiling reads, "All I Have Is a Gift From God." He says he supports the government's revived commitment to make more black South Africans landowners. In the country's bleak job market—about 30 percent of black South Africans are unemployed, compared with 7 percent of whites—farming would provide more security for his kids than sending them to university. "I can spend my money investing in the land that will help my children and their children," he says. "This is what a black man can do with this opportunity." But the land reform project that Msimanga and his family took part in 13 years ago was different from the seizures being debated today. Back then, after several farmworkers lodged claims in the area, all the parties—20 white landowners and 199 black households—reached an agreement to transfer ownership of more than 20 percent of the land in Besters. The government bought that property from the white farmers at market value—some 14 million rand, or $2.5 million at the time. Nearly 80 percent of the area remained under white landownership, and it still does today. The deal also provided government funds to help the new farmers get started. Msimanga, for instance, received a few dozen cows to go with the one he already owned, which have grown into a herd of 380. Not all the black workers involved in the deal have fared so well. A few miles away, on a collectively controlled farm, one of the owners explains that a lot of their cows died in a drought a few years back. "We haven't been able to recover," says Jabulani Mavimbela. The business is "progressing," he adds. "I can't say I'm totally satisfied, but it's progressing." To supplement his income, Mavimbela still works on the sprawling farm of Roland Henderson, a white farmer in Besters.<doc-sep>More than 200 farmers from South Africa have applied for humanitarian visas in Australia after allegedly suffering attacks for being white, according to the Australian Home Affairs Ministry. “The type of criteria they of course have to meet – or the key one – is evidence of persecution, so that's exactly what we will be looking at,” Home Affairs Deputy Secretary Malisa Golightly said. Home Affairs said 89 refugee visa applications relating to 213 people had been received, although they did not specify their ethnicity or any other details. Read more News reports emerged earlier this year revealing that white farmers in South Africa had faced persecution after the country's government approved a new law allowing for the confiscation of their lands, which would be transferred to black citizens. Following the reports, Australian Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton announced his willingness to start fast-tracking humanitarian visas for South Africans who had endured violent rural crime at home and wished to move Down Under. The step was slammed by the South African opposition, which called Australia, and those willing to escape there, ‘racist.’ The controversial legislation was endorsed by South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, who pledged to hand the lands owned by white farmers since the 1600s to black citizens of the country without compensation for the owners. South Africa’s 50 million citizens are predominantly black, but 72 percent of farmland reportedly belongs to whites. The legislation evoked strong disapproval both in the country and internationally, with a reported upsurge in violence against white farmers. Last year, some 82 people were killed in a record 423 farm attacks, and there have been 109 attacks and more than 15 murders in 2018, Afriforum, a South African civil rights group reported in March. Australia calls for emergency visas for white farmers facing violent attacks in South Africa https://t.co/V2F7Kp8YCb — RT (@RT_com) March 16, 2018 The controversial reform may jeopardize commercial farming in the country, according to the Transvaal Agricultural Union of South Africa. Experts say that the South African government may repeat the mistake made by the government of Zimbabwe, which had passed through a state-sanctioned purge of white farmers in 1999-2000. The measure plunged the country into famine. For more stories on economy & finance visit RT's business section<doc-sep>Liberal party members who attempted to have white South African farmers singled out for special treatment when applying for asylum in Australia have been defeated after an emotional interjection from a former immigration minister. In a policy motion put forward to the federal council, where members attempt to influence Coalition policy, they attempted to amend a motion changing “South African minorities targeted by hate crimes” to “European farmers”, to ensure white farmers were given particular attention. But after a flurry of debate, Philip Ruddock addressed the crowd, saying singling out whites for special humanitarian visa attention went against what Australia stood for. Sign up to receive the top stories in Australia every day at noon Sign up to receive the top stories in Australia every day at noon “The problem is that we have something in the order of 65 million people around the world displaced, 22 and a half million of them refugees,” he said. “Now, I hate to say it, as much as I might like – we can’t help them all. The question is who do you help? And that is always the question. “And I am not saying you shouldn’t help South African farmers if they are being discriminated against, any more than I would argue that there are others that should not be helped. “My view is, at the moment, our arrangements enable all minorities targeted, to be able to seek asylum in Australia, by way of an appropriate application and they have to be considered objectively by Australian officials.” The motion was carried, but as originally put forward, with South African minorities standing in place of Europeans. The policy motions only show the direction members would like the government to take on particular issues, but remain non-binding for the government to pick up. However, the issue of the South African farmers proved the first flashpoint in a conference where party divides, between moderates and conservatives, are expected to feature. Peter Dutton had laid the groundwork for the South African farmer issue in March, after which Tony Abbott told Sydney radio 2GB that “something like 400 white farmers have been murdered, brutally murdered, over the last 12 months”. Despite several fact checkers debunking the claim, the idea the white South African farmers should be granted special attention, including fast-tracked visas, had persisted, particularly in Western Australia, where a large number of South Africans have settled. It was the West Australian branch that put the idea forward to the national council, calling on the government to “enable the South African minorities targeted by hate crimes to seek asylum in Australia”. Julie Bishop has already ruled that out as unnecessary, after Australia’s high commissioner was called in to Pretoria to explain the Coalition’s position following Dutton’s comments in March that the group deserves “special treatment”. “Australia does monitor the rate of violent crime in South Africa and there has been no dramatic increase in recent years,” she said in March. “We do have a humanitarian visa program if any person feels they are persecuted, then they can apply to Australia for a humanitarian visa, and that would be considered on its merits and I believe that is what Peter Dutton is referring to.” Each branch of the Liberal party, after consultation with its own state branches and members, can submit policy motions to the federal council for consideration. Western Australia also wants to put the GST back on the agenda, and has asked the government to include tax revenue from gambling operations when calculating GST allocations. WA has no pokie machines, which would set its revenue lower, compared with the big gambling states on the east coast. The federal women’s committee has called for voter identification laws to be established across the country, forcing “the presentation of an identification document that includes the voter’s photograph or voter’s name and residential address when voting in a federal election”, as well as to “properly fund and promote vocational education and training as an equal first choice career pathway for students”. The Young Liberals have called on the government to follow Donald Trump’s lead and move the Australian embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, and to “suspend aid to the Palestinian Authority until it terminates it’s ‘martyrs’ fund’”. They also want the government to “abstain from military intervention in Syria with an intention to oust its secular regime”. The ACT branch, in an attempt to rid the public service of all quota hirings, wants a public service recruitment process that would strip candidates’ applications of any and all identifying data to ensure gender, race and age are removed – “commonly known as blind recruitment”. Victoria is calling for the government to ban any drugs approved by the Therapeutic Goods Administration from being used for doctor-assisted euthanasia. The government is also being asked to implement the findings of a recent review and establish a minimum 90-day fuel supply for the country. The federal council will begin considering the policy motions late on Friday afternoon, and the main debates will kick off on Saturday, when Malcolm Turnbull will address the party faithful.<doc-sep>
Special visas for white South African farmers looking to enter Australia is back on the agenda for the Liberal Party, according to a new report in the UK Guardian newspaper. This follows the controversial announcement by Australian home affairs minister Peter Dutton in March, which called for white farmers from SA to get fast-tracked entry into Australia on humanitarian grounds. According to Dutton, white farmers face “horrific circumstances” in South Africa, and said that a ‘civil’ country like Australia should welcome the skills these farmers have. Former prime minister and Liberal Party member Tony Abbott told Sydney radio 2GB that “something like 400 white farmers have been murdered, brutally murdered, over the last 12 months”. Australia’s foreign affairs minister, Julie Bishop, however, said that the country’s humanitarian visa programme won’t change to fast-track local farmers’ entry into the country – adding that there are no plans to do so. The Guardian reported on Friday that Liberal Party members plan to make special treatment for asylum-seeking farmers an official party policy. This idea, according to the Guardian, was put forward by the West Australian branch of the party who called on the government to “enable the South African minorities targeted by hate crimes to seek asylum in Australia”. Perth in Western Australia has a particularly large and vocal South African expat community. There has been an big jump in the number of South Africans who have emigrated to Australia in the past few years, according to the most recent data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics. According to its 2016 report, as at June 2015, as many as 178,700 South Africans were living in Australia, up more than 33,000 (from 145,683) people from the 2011 data, and representing 0.8% of the total population. This number is likely to have increased even further in 2017 as many emigration experts pointed to a rise in the number of South Africans looking to leave the country under the troubled presidency of Jacob Zuma. A month ago, the Australian Department of Home Affairs revealed how many South Africans had applied for ‘humanitarian visas’ to move to the country. Despite the South African government’s uproar surrounding the visas, Australian Home Affairs deputy secretary Malisa Golightly said that more than 200 South Africans were in the process of applying for Australian humanitarian visas. “The type of criteria they of course have to meet – or the key one – is evidence of persecution, so that’s exactly what we will be looking at,” Golightly told a senate committee meeting on Tuesday (22 May). Golightly said the minister had not asked her to prioritise South Africans and, as far as the department was concerned, there was no special attention being given. “Basically, like anybody, South Africans can apply for any visa they wish and they’ll be assessed against the criterion set out in the law,” Golightly said. “In terms of processing, the normal arrangements apply where we assess the claims against whichever is the relevant criteria.” Read: Here’s how many South Africans are applying for Australia’s ‘humanitarian visas’: report