By Takura Zhangazha*
The revolutionary impact of the Fast Track Land Reform Programme
(FTLRP) was already appearing ambiguous when it was declared to have come to an end in February 2016 by the Minister of Lands, Douglas Mombeshora. Not in principle. But by way of any further redistribution
of land until the long awaited national land audit is done.
The quest for post-colonial social and economic justice initially
having been politicized via radical Black Nationalism and continually analysed
through research studies of varying ideological inclinations has now come full
circle. Even if it does not appear so.
What was not declared to be over were envisioned changes in land
use from agricultural to urban development.
And the reasons for this are now increasingly apparent.
Late last year (2016), the central government announced that it
will pay civil servants bonuses (both outstanding and backdated ones) by
offering urban residential stands to them. The offer of land in lieu of bonuses
was initially rejected by the civil service associations but appears still set
to be implemented.
Recently, the Harare City Council also sort of announced that it
will be paying its workers backdated salaries by offering again, residential
stands to them.
And who doesn’t want urban land, also to be read as urban capital?
A greater number of younger urban residents, living on the edge
due to high rents and astronomical city council charges in the major cities of
Zimbabwe are only keen to have security of tenure. Or put in another way, they
simply want to get rid of that monthly problematic cost that is also referred
to as ‘rent’. Even if at great cost that includes not having immediate
access to electricity, poor road systems and distant schools for their very
young children.
There will however be few questions asked about where this land is
coming from. Even if its being administered by suspicious cooperatives or
individuals that are rumoured to be closely linked to cabinet ministers or even
higher up the power ladder.
Or a mayor who is also looking to have a blind eye turned toward
his or her pursuit of publicly owned land as capital in the more lucrative
suburbs of a city.
This is mainly because of the desperation for housing (even if its not decent) in all our major urban areas.
For the state and now also some city councils, the central and all
important commodity to dispense of what it owes employees is land.
Wherever it can be found. Whether its on a wetland or a site designated
for industrial or fast track agricultural use does not really matter. As long as it can somewhat credibly be turned
to residential use and offered as political carrot to civil servants and local government
workers that are already desperate to own a piece of land to build their own home. It would therefore be fair to argue that state or public land has
become a currency in and of itself.
In the first place and with the current ruling party, land was
presented to the Zimbabwean public as a social and economic justice
issue. It has since morphed into a sharing of the spoils process in which
hapless villagers tend to be herded from one acquired farm to the next in the
more fertile regions of the country or in favour of either mining or bio-fuel
projects.
More recently it has also become about a rapid and haphazard urbanization
process that serves more ‘land barons/oligarchs’ who are motivated by the ridiculously
huge sums of personal profit that they will acquire. These haphazard urbanisation processes are
accompanied by odd claims at relocating capitals or central government
functions to the periphery of already murkily run urban capitals.
Hence we have an odd intention to rebuild a new parliament on the
outskirts of Harare and establish a new center of geo-political power in Mazowe
and Mt Hampden as reported by the mainstream media.
The emerging habit of making land replace financial capital is the
new land grab in Zimbabwe. Not least because its conveniently dovetailed
into the FTLRP but also because it has come to represent opportunities at a new
private wealth acquisition process for the politically connected. For the politically vulnerable it is more a
take it or stay without property that you would never have been able to afford
without the patronage that is now the hallmark of the ruling party.
The end effect of these moves to make land replace salaries is to
reinforce a system of patronage and a continued indebtedness of civil servants
and council workers to the state and local government. In the beginning it may appear rosy and
progressive for those that work for the state and local government but
invariably they shall face numerous challenges in relation to repayment and
will fall victim to land barons in their various forms (loan sharks, banks,
political leaders). But then again, who
is thinking beyond their immediate concerns these days? A regrettable development
and evidence of pitfalls in our national consciousness.
No comments:
Post a Comment