Property ownership in South Africa is hugely skewed and there is major asset inequality in the country, Public Works Deputy Minister Jeremy Cronin stated at the Rode-REIM Property Conference 2016 late last month.

Making the case for the implementation of the Expropriation Bill, which sets out the legislative requirements for the State to lay claim to land, he emphasised that land in South Africa was radically racialised.

The Bill was approved by Cabinet in February but sent back for review by President Jacob Zuma in July.

“The Bill should not be seen as some kind of silver bullet that’s going to solve all problems with regard to land reform . . . Property needs to be protected, but [government] needs to ensure that there is transformation in the property space, and expropriation is one avenue that can help that,” he said.

He added that the property clause in South Africa’s Constitution recognised expropriation as a right of government and was therefore protected.

“Our Constitution uniquely adds that it is the nation’s commitment to reform land to redress past racial inequality.”

Noting that the Bill had been widely contested and had come under fire by opposition groups and organisations such as AgriSA, Cronin said : “There can’t be arbitrary expropriation of property; we don’t want what happened in Zimbabwe to happen in South Africa.

“Farmer’s don’t want their land to be expropriated, but it might happen,” he said.

He highlighted that it was important for the President to sign the new Bill because the Expropriation Act of 1975 was draconian and inadequate.

“We need to dispense of this Act because it is unconstitutional.”

The review of the Expropriation Act of 1975 became necessary to ensure consistency in the provisions of the Constitution, in particular for the equality clause, the property clause, administrative action and extension of the purpose for expropriation to include public interest.

Cronin noted that the current Act determines compensation in terms of market value and, according to the Constitution, it must also include other factors, such as the history of public investment in a particular location.

“Under the new Bill, the reality is that people might be compensated less than what the market value of their property is. We are trying to ensure consistency and uniformity in the procedure,” he said.