Harare (New Ziana) – Mechanisation support rendered to farmers who benefited under the land reform programme was a necessary process to ensure the success of the historic land reform programme, the ruling Zanu PF party has said.
The party said this in light of allegations by opposition MDC party activist Alex Magaisa that only senior government officials corruptly benefited from the farm mechanisation programme and that the beneficiaries were yet to pay back for the equipment.
This is inspite of clarification by then Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe (RBZ) governor, Gideon Gono, who spearheaded the programme, that beneficiaries were not expected to pay back as the programme was meant to capacitate them.
Zanu PF initiated the land reform programme at the turn of the millennium to correct colonial land ownership imbalance which favoured the white minority over the black majority.
And because most of the beneficiaries lacked capacity both monetary and equipment wise, it became necessary for government to initiate various support programmes to capacitate the new farmers.
Under the RBZ farm mechanisation programme, thousands of farmers, who held different farm sizes, benefited from farm machinery including tractors, combine harvesters and planters.
Zanu PF acting spokesperson Patrick Chinamasa said the agricultural revolution had necessitated the extraordinary interventions by government, for example in the form of the farm mechanisation programme.
He said the farm mechanisation programme was undertaken as an empowerment tool and was a subsidy not a loan.
“Governments the world over subsidise farmers, the key ingredient is agricultural policies the world over is to produce food and raw materials to feed into the manufacturing sector more cheaply,” he said in a statement.
“Programmes of subsidy include mechanization, fertilisers, farm infrastructure such as irrigation. This is a major policy in most countries including China, USA, Australia, Russia and India. Zimbabwe should not be an exception, more so in an evolving situation where the country had a new crop of farmers previously discriminated against. The need for subsidies was and is more imperative.”
Chinamasa said the land reform programme benefited more than 350 000 households under the A1 scheme while more than 19 000 households benefited under the A2 scheme.
“These government interventions were intended to develop capacity for all categories of farmers in order to render the land reform programme a success. Zanu PF is of the same view that the interventions have been largely successful and has kept the country afloat for the past 20 years notwithstanding the sanctions and the general isolation of the country. The interventions have kept the country afloat thus far.”
Chinamasa said the allegations by Magaisa were an attack on the land reform programme and other empowerment programmes that have been carried out since independence.
“The attack on capacity development interventions by government aimed at enhancing productive farming as well as keeping the economy afloat is an attack on the general Zimbabwean population. The empowerment programmes or initiatives were not confined to agriculture but encompassed the health services sector through a programme named the health sector skills retention scheme, support given to Parliamentarians across the political divide, chiefs, headmen and rural people who benefited from the mechanization programme and were provided with animal drawn implements. The list is endless,” he said.
“Zanu PF has no apologies to make for the revolutionary land redistribution programme embarked upon from 2000, it makes no apologies for the government interventions in the various sectors of the economy including the farm mechanisation programme to empower its new farmers in order to render the land reform successful. Zanu PF is proud that over the past 20 years, under very difficult circumstances, it has managed to keep the revolution on course and it will not be distracted by the machinations of the opposition founded and funded by foreign interests to oppose the land reform programme and the political and economic empowerment of the population.”
New Ziana
