So, as I sit writing this on Monday, I look forward to tomorrow's farmers’ demonstration in Westminster on Tuesday almost with as much anticipation as I did the past weekend's rugby matches. Unlike rugby, where we were assured of some result, it is unlikely that any result will come out of tomorrow's demonstration. If those who relied on the farmers' produce and those who benefited from them as suppliers came out in support, the Government perhaps would take more cognition. As for those that claim to worry about the environment they are completely silent. Who do they think has been caring for the countryside over the centuries?
It takes me back to the time before and during the implementation of ‘Land Designations’ in Zimbabwe. While I was president of the Commercial Farmers Union (CFU), I would often visit the corporate sector including mining, informing them of our concerns and what the government's action in regard to land would have on the economy as a whole. It should be said they remained silent, perhaps it was the fear of a hostile government turning its attention on them. Those who represented industries that served us directly were invited to a monthly briefing in the CFU Board Room bar, where beers and snacks were served. I was never sure what the bigger attraction was, our briefing or the beer. Much more time was spent on the beer than the briefing, if that is any indication. I suppose they could only sympathise with us, which they did. But if it came to openly supporting anything political, such as land, we would always get a rebuff saying their boards or corporation rules did not allow them to participate. The one exception was Isaac Takawira, CEO of Barclays Bank and later Chairman of the Bankers Association. Isaac was a friend of mine, and before and after the land debacle, we often shared notes. Because of his stance, he eventually had to leave Zimbabwe to practise his trade elsewhere where at one time we discussed how compensation could be raised. Unfortunately the plan he hatched from the international community required the existence of legal title at a time when the government had claimed to have cancelled them all. It never got beyond a number of meetings in Johanesburg before it died a death at the embryo stage.
Farmers and miners were never friends, and I was to find their Association over the years gave me the coldest reception. Perhaps it did not help when one of our Matabeleland farmers said legal miners were oftentimes worse than illegal miners in their destruction of the environment. I silently had to sort of agree with him and more recently was shocked when I passed through one of the oldest mines in Europe, Rio Tinto in south eastern Spain. It says mining has taken place there for over five thousand years. In fairness they are trying to address some of the environmental devastion from previous operations but the highly polluted river remains toxic. Another group that benefited from farmers on a daily basis were the large retailers. They had no interest in voicing how important our industry was in feeding the country, a strange and selfish attitude. I will be surprised if the supermarket chains or the large agricultural processing industries will come out in support. They have however come out claiming the 1.2% increase will cost them seven billion pounds, increasing prices and costing jobs. I wonder why they do not state what the impact is. Due to shortages of food, this inheritance tax could cost them and the nation if farmers go out of business.
“Solar panels, houses, butterflies and flowers will not feed a nation. Protein and cereals will and you need farmers to produce them.” - Peter Mcsporran
In saying this, even the farmers may divide themselves. I remember that, with the designations in Zimbabwe, it was suggested at many farmers’ meetings that we should withhold our produce to pressure the government into a rethink. I remember the day it was discussed at our local Farmers Association meeting at Nyabira when no sooner had the farmer who had suggested it sat down than the dairy farmers and the horticultural producers loudly countered they would be most impacted, incurring losses within the first day of implementation. Some of them suggested they would do it if those farmers producing non-perishables shared the loss. That went down like a lead balloon, reducing the enthusiasm of the promoters of the mooted boycott. However, the main reason was fear that if the farmers became militant, they would find their properties in the published designation in the Friday newspaper.
"Throughout the process of land confiscation in Zimbabwe, the Government used fear as a tool. During the early designations, the fear of being put onto the list of farms identified for confiscation in the Friday newspapers. With hindsight, this was a misconception as we would all end up on the lists. Later on, with the advent of the farm invasions, any resistance would be met with violence, including murder, as we witnessed. At least the rule of law still protects British farmers from such actions by a hostile Government." - Peter McSporran
So my interest, in truth, is not so much about Tuesday's events but the farmers' following actions. Will the farmers hold together and stop food deliveries or disrupt deliveries by means of blockades? I notice the French are spreading shit in Paris again. Is this a step too far for the law-abiding Brits?
I have become a great user of toilets. Let me get this straight: I have always been a user of toilets, but following my medical procedures, I have to visit the toilet more frequently, in fact, on an hourly basis. Some countries give you better access than others. Here in Portugal, in all large stores, shopping centres, beaches and recreational areas, there are good clean toilets. Every restaurant and cafe has to permit you to use the toilet by law, customer or not. You are never turned away on request. It is possible to restrict this by displaying rules that are contrary, which I have yet to see. Tap water is also to be provided free. There is one issue with Portuguese toilets; nearly all have a motion sensor light on a timer, which seems to last for about ten seconds. All right for a man at a urinal as he can raise an arm to relight, not so for a woman sitting on the seat who, if she needs light no matter what stage of the procedure she is in, will have to lift herself from the seat.
“In this modern world, why would toilet motion switches not be set to the average, rather than the fastest pissers in the world? It is another example in this modern world of how logic and practicality have no place.” - Peter McSporran
I remember as a child, we had to pay a penny to go to a public toilet. Hence the saying,”I have to spend a penny.” It then became a threepence, and before I left the UK this had inflated to a sixpence. Now the charge is fifty pence. That price is more like a means of revenue collection than cost recovery. I hope they are cleaner now as when I had to pay sixpence in the sixties they were filthy only to be used in extreme emergencies. Talking of filth, public toilets in Africa were even filthier. More than once in some remote town, I would find myself searching for half bricks to use as stepping stones to ensure my feet stayed clean in reaching the urinal. The toilet bowl would be a step too far, more often than not just a hole in the ground. Much better to carry toilet paper at all times and make use of the bush. This would never be a private event as inevitably when you pulled up your ‘breek’s’ there would be at least one happy smiling face looking on.
I am reluctant to fly currently mainly because time and customer service are unimportant to airlines. I can just imagine myself being called to board and finding myself desperate for relief, standing in a gangway, stairwell, or bus with no toilet in sight or any chance of being allowed to find one. Perhaps if my internal examinations of my waterworks indicate that my problems can be fixed or at least mitigated, then I will risk flying again.
This week in my life story, I will just wind up on 1995, which seems to have gone on forever. I just remembered that I should mention that year, the Farming Oscar was awarded to David Smith. As president of the CFU, the Oscar award committee had nothing to do with me, and it was just a coincidence the committee awarded it to David, who, being a school friend of my father’s back in Kintyre, was my first farming contact in Zimbabwe. David had held many ministerial posts in Rhodesia, ending up as deputy Prime Minister to Ian Smith, no relation. It was rumoured David was one of those within his party which convinced him to end the struggle to keep Rhodesia independent. I am sure he himself could see by then he had lost, but was not a man to give up. David also served in the Zimbabwe Government for a short while. Through him, I went and worked for his brother Hamish, and the Smith family became very close friends and mentors to me. David’s wife Jean was a lifelong friend to my aunt Elizabeth who despite remaining in Campbeltown stayed in touch until Jean’s death.
Another thing we did that year at the CFU, in conjunction with Standard Bank, was to launch a CFU credit card, allowing farmers to access credit to pay their farmer's licences and for use in private and business purchases. With their introduction and the tiered licence fees, we were able to keep our membership up. I may have mentioned it before, but in September, Blackfordby College opened at Klein Kopje, accepting the first farm management students. Meanwhile unfortunately, I was involved in another battle for soft funding for some six hundred farmers affected by that year's drought. While not as devastating as the national drought of 1992, it was disastrous to some.
Kangai, the Minister of Lands, was attacked by Mugabe’s evil sister, Sabina Mugabe, in Parliament in the late part of the year. She demanded to know why more farms were not being designated and made available for resettlement. For ‘resettlement’ read ‘for personal gain’. He bravely answered her that they had done a limited number, but went on to say that there was little point in designating more if there were not the funds to actually resettle the people. No doubt this logic was of little interest to her in her political demands. In later life Kangai suffered extended illness with rumours of poisoning. Poisoning and car crashes being the main way of getting rid of any internal party opposition, less subtle means were used on those deemed as enemies outside the party.
Finally, to demonstrate the failure of land resettlement in our battle on the land issue, the Farmer Magazine started publishing examples of the lack of production on resettlement farms, especially featuring those with water in the form of dams. It had come to our attention in some of the worst drought-stricken areas of the country that year, many resettlement farms remained with full dams with the stored water unused despite access to irrigation equipment. This was meant to highlight that more than access to land and water was required to sustain production. Expertise, training and capital were also required. The worst case we came across was in the Karoi district where the excuse by the settlers for the water not being used was that they had sold the irrigation equipment for social infrastructure. They had in fact used the money on a community beer hall. I think that is enough said about 1995.
Disclaimer: Copyright Peter McSporran. The content in this blog represents my personal views and does not reflect corporate entities.
Comentarios