‘We’ve put land matter behind us’, CFU President writes on US3.5bn compensation*
HARARE, Zimbabwe. (News of the South)-The Zimbabwe government and white former farmers recently reached an agreement for compensation for improvements on land taken over for resettlement.
By Karen Mhlanga
The deal has raised controversy, everywhere even among farmers.
While a vast majority of displaced farmers voted for the deal, a smaller group has opposed it, saying farmers should be compensated for the land itself, and not just improvements.
President of the CFU, Andrew Pascoe explains why the main white farmers’ union supported the deal, and why it’s time to move on.
During the land reforms by Former President Robert Mugabe thousands of Zimbabwean farmers were robbed of their land, and of their livelihoods.
What was presented as an attempt to right the wrongs of colonialisation, turned into a politicised, corrupt land grab.
It has taken twenty years for the injustices and illegalities to have been recognised.
On the 29th of July 2020, Zimbabwe finally made the headlines for the right reasons.
The government, led by President Emmerson Mnangagwa, and the white farmers, represented by the Commercial Farmers Union (CFU), signed a compensation deal worth $3.5 Billion, described by President Mnangagwa as a “new beginning of the land discourse in Zimbabwe”.
“We’ve put land matter behind us, we ask others to do the same,” says CFU
The deal has set many a tongue wagging. It is thus crucial to lay out all the facts on the table.
One of the commentators on Facebook said, “We should not pay for both the land and the improvents. They improved the land using the proceeds from that very land, so we do not have any obligation to pay them.”
Others did not see any sense in the compensation at all. The anonymous commentator said, “Events:
1. He kidnaps your child.
2. He feeds and buys new clothes for the child.
3. He is caught and you get your child back.
4. You pay him for the food and new clothes.”
Most of the citizens do not think that the white farmers had any reason to be compensated since they had stolen the land in the first place.
Comments
About Author
