South African land grab isn’t about equality

SIR – The conclusions reached by Matthew Lynn (“South Africa’s land grab will end in economic disaster”, Business, November 21) are quite right, but it is only partially true that “farmland remains very unequally distributed” in South Africa.

Moreover, the African National Congress’s plan to expropriate land without offering compensation has nothing to do with evening out distribution. It has been driven by political expediency, and recalls the actions of Zimbabwe’s “war veterans”, who destroyed the country’s farming economy. They had no intention of farming, even if they had the capacity.

Zimbabwe was saved from starvation in 2017 by imports of maize grown in Zambia by ex-zimbabwean farmers forced to flee in 2000-2001. In South Africa, what has to be borne in mind is where white-owned land and black-owned land is situated.

Much of the old Cape Province, which is white-owned, is semi-desert, with low and erratic rainfall. Meanwhile, the great bulk of the Eastern Cape Province, which remains tribally owned, is an area of high and dependable rainfall. In fact, the latter area, if properly farmed, could play a major role in feeding South Africa.

As for the idea that there is “land hunger” in South Africa, the great majority of people have no wish to be on the land as farmers. They prefer the easier, more stable existence to be found in towns and cities. The same is true in Britain.

Salem, Eastern Cape, South Africa