TLU SA recently deplored the poor quality of the government’s impact study on expropriation without compensation made public by Sakeliga this week. According to TLU SA, it is an excellent example of the lack of knowledge in state departments to compile and report critical information.
The document, compiled at the instruction of the Department of Public Works, forms the foundation on which the government based the costs and benefits of the Expropriation act. Sakeliga received the document through a Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA) application.
“We have a dichotomous (divided) concern with the so-called impact study,” said Henry Geldenhuys, the president of TLU SA.
“In the first instance, the content of the document is of unacceptably poor quality. It looks like the compiler simply copied and pasted a generic answer with no relevance in some places. In the second place, it refers to some organisations approving the act. This is definitely untrue.”
TLU SA thanked Sakeliga for publishing the impact study document. The document refers to the input of only one agricultural organisation, Agri SA, which shows that they support the amendments (with some conditions) cautiously.
“How can the government try to amend an important act which will have such a big impact on the economy, based on this document?”
Agri SA reiterated immediately that they are opposed to expropriation at a nil compensation and indirect expropriation.
“Even if it was true, the cautious inputs of just one agricultural organisation are not representative of all the role players in the agricultural value chain, and TLU SA would never accept that,” said Geldenhuys.
“This document proves once again that the future of the country bears no weight in the government’s decisions. It is about the implementation of an ideology beneficial to only some people, namely cadres, while the rest must suffer in misery.”