The Inherent Danger of Self-Importance.
At last, through some pressure from a number of different groups, including the Commercial Farmers Union (CFU), the Past Presidents Group, along with generous sponsors funding the legal review has been done on the Global Compensation Deed (GCD) and the proposed agreements to disburse a portion to those in dire need.
For many of us, it is something we felt should have been given priority.
“No agreement is worth the paper it is written on if it does not offer all parties signature to its protection both as a legal document and the good faith of all parties.” - Peter MacSporran
As we know in this cut-throat world, there is little will to offer personal, let alone collective comfort if it is seen that one party has an advantage in an agreement over the other in signing or delivery. It is a case of the powerful always taking advantage of the weak or desperate. Often, it can be a combination of both. When it is a deal offered by the party that created the problem illegally in the first place, the aggrieved party should always be suspicious that the agreement on the table will do little to right those wrongs. At best, it could be window dressing. At worst and more likely, it will further extend the hardship and prejudice despite undermining their own existing constitutional process. And so this agreement was proven. The GDC has no constitutional standing to be a legally recognised agreement, especially by its own sponsors and the signature, the Government. Further, there were no condition precedents, such as having parliamentary approval included before validation or resolution to dispute. Nor was there any clear separation within the agreements to allow payments to the needy while ensuring it would not impact on further negotiations nor prejudice against those still awaiting compensation. Interestingly, it was also stated that our representatives in the CSC no longer had the legal mandate to continue representing us.
It should be stated that members of the CFU council agreed to this review rather than the Presidency of the CFU and the CSC members who, up until its instigation under duress, actively opposed it as something that could be done in the future. A touch of convoluted thinking there. I am not sure if it is true, but one member of the CSC had trouble deciphering the content of the review and its importance.
Why did the CSC and CFU Presidency not immediately, as a duty of care, not ask for a review as a priority? I am saying the Presidency, as it would now appear some sensible members of the council are now being heard who's up until now concerns fell on deaf ears. That is, except for Cedric and Macs, whose personal courage and integrity made them vocal against the agreement from the time bonds were muted to be a possible form of payment. Bloody Matebeles, they have not changed since I was in the CFU, thank goodness. I also hear there is an increase in council in the form of some sensible ladies. I am sure they will let their views be heard.
For more than two years, the CSC has been trying to foist a worthless piece of paper onto us, that is, on to those whose good they are meant to represent and safeguard against a devious sponsor, the Government. That sponsor who caused the hardship by taking away our land, ignoring our legal rights to it, its improvements and our constitutional right to compensation. Shame on you, and double shame for using the desperate and needy as the lever. The strongest lever the Government had to coerce us into signing and still uses to get the farmers to sign the GCD is our age and desperation. There can only be two reasons: corruption through capture or arrogant self-importance in an attitude, ‘we know best.’ Perhaps a bit of both?
Their attitude could be mitigated except for the fact that, for whatever reason, they were happy to adopt an aggressive and threatening stance; “this is the only deal on the table, there will be no other.”
“Bullying, physical or mental, comes in many forms; the worst type is by those that offer false hope to the weak and vulnerable in promoting their own agenda which in every likelihood will cause further prejudice.” - Peter MacSporran
Do not underestimate the danger of those who obtain high office above their station or capabilities. That is, those in positions of power or representation in office without the knowledge and experience required. Rather, due to their self-importance, they see themselves above that office and even the rules pertaining to it. Just look at the lies and deceit coming out of the SNP, including my least favourite woman in the world, who, during the epidemic, publicly said all records would be kept in regard to the management of Covid-19. Today we learn, in contrast to what was said, some hundred odd Ministers and senior civil servants, including the First Minister, say they have, contrary to law, removed all their electronic records pertaining to decisions made during the Covid-19 pandemic. That is arrogance and self-importance brought about by believing their status allows them to work outside the rule of law on a grand scale. The CSC did similar to us. It is time for a change; voluntary resignation by both the Presidency of the CFU and membership of the CSC would be the honourable thing to do. The strongest argument for not having the GCD legally reviewed is that the CSC knew it was flawed and would have ended the ongoing charade long ago. There is little difference between telling lies and withholding the truth.
Going forward, we need a pragmatic team with integrity and, importantly, patience who have the majority of title deed holders in support. They have to have access to technical and legal support. They must have a clear mandate, be transparent and build on what has already been achieved. We certainly do not need zealots, hotheads or those who have previously been compromised. We must not expect miracles, but all forward steps should be built on solid agreement milestones between the parties, not worthless promises by one. It will also have to be holistic to the benefit of all, not just commercial farmers.
“The very worst reason for the present CSC to stay in place is if the Government says it will not talk to any other party.” - Peter MacSporran
Cosy Zone.
We have been honoured with a visit from henty Sommer and his son Alessandra this week. So good to catch up and chat about mutual friends and old shared events.
Since getting out of the hospital, I have been in the cosy zone. When I wake up, this was not entirely true as sleep had eluded me for the first three weeks; it is to Rozanne giving me my medicine and a cup of tea with a biscuit. Since I lost over ten kilograms, biscuits are allowed. She then goes about her chores, returning an hour later with my breakfast: porridge and yoghurt every day. Despite my pleadings, she refuses to serve me kippers or smoked haddock. I changed six times during the night, now reduced to three. Rozanne can now say she has known me since I was in nappies.
What I can do on my own is showering which for the first ten days was just too much. I am just like a baby, Rozanne dries my toes which drives me mad for some reason, but she insists on doing this as if I am a child. From the shower to the chair to watch World Cup Cricket and up to now at weekends World Cup rugby, which was made all the more pleasant by watching the Springboks progress and finally win. There was so much drama this year, not least caused by the actions of that maestro Rassie.
So yes, I am living in a cosy zone. I do wonder how far can I extend this before Rozanne says enough is enough? At least we can now spend some time in the garden together, I walk a bit further each day, spending more time up than in bed.
In our days back on the farm on a club evening, having consumed copious amounts of courage in the form of alcohol, one would casually say to your male friends at the bar:
“Our wives live in the cosy zone; they just do not realise how hard we work to keep them there.” - Fearless drunken male farmer in the county club
The reaction of the women, generally sitting together away from the bar, was instantaneous and vitriolic. Some said the words were spoken just to bring excitement into a dull rural evening. Despite it being totally untrue and used purely for entertainment, it never failed to take our minds off the lack of rain or other farming problems for a while. Mind you, today it could possibly be classified by many as being abusive misogyny.
The truth was our women looked after our home, garden and children. Being a farmer's wife meant long drives early on a Monday morning, taking kids to weekly boarding school when in primary school and equally in senior school, although some schools were what was known as full-time boarding, with rare weekends at home. These trips were just not half an hour, often taking four hours or more round trips on hazardous roads, especially during the war. The return trip was repeated every Friday. Oh, and since you are in town, we farmers would say, “Could you please do the farm shopping?” This could be anything from picking up veterinary products to a reconditioned tractor engine. The hardest part of that was convincing the vendor to give you thirty days' credit. Meanwhile, fit the weekly shopping for the house in as well, along with licensing the vehicles and deliver that outstanding insurance claim.
On returning to the farm, act as the farm health worker, ferry the sick and those in labour to the clinic, run the farm store and help with the livestock. Finally, the most arduous with the little time that is left to do the farm accounts ensuring you can answer both the accountant and taxman in regard to some of your husband's questionable spending allocation. Especially when there is a blank cheque stub and no invoice to prove what the purchase was and the amount involved. No online banking, then.
“Zimbabwean farmer's wives lived far from the cosy zone. They were the anchor that allowed the farmer to get on with his business of growing crops and rearing livestock.” - Peter MacSporran.
The Drought.
The trouble with the 1992 drought was that it followed on from the 1991 drought. Two consecutive droughts of such severity were unheard of in Southern Africa. 1992 was the worst on record.
On our farm, we were still allowed limited access to water from the now near-empty Darwendale Dam. This allowed us to grow irrigated tobacco at least and supplement our rainfed crop, ensuring an income although the quality of the tobacco was inferior due to the lack of humidity. Roofing slates would have been a better description rather than our targeted mature-flavoured tobacco leaf. With Darwendale Dam now at its lowest, almost back to the river bed, it meant we recovered nearly a thousand hectares of the original farm before the dam inundated it. Over the years, organic sediment had built up and helped hold moisture and even at the height of the drought, there was some green for our cattle. A totally unplanned windfall.
This allowed us to keep our cattle herd intact, although we did not buy in any cattle to fatten. It was hard enough to find maize for our staff, let alone that for cows. On Mede Farm, the river on that farm dried up, which prompted me to get Jimmy Goddard to come and build a dam after we had obtained a complicated water right from the Biri Dam, which was planned downstream. The water we had on the Mazowe farm, Rydal, was enough to grow a seed maize crop and surprisingly enough for winter wheat. So personally, unlike many we were able to survive the drought, even show a small profit.
In my new role at the CFU, finding the means to raise morale to ensure farmers stayed on their farms and had access to the tools to rebuild was our focus. Anthony and I decided we should visit all, more especially those farming areas worst affected by the drought, and better understand the impact on them.
For the Government itself, it had inadvertently reduced the impact of drought on commercial farmers in the traditional cropping areas. The post-independence Government was convinced that the smallholder could grow maize cheaper than the commercial farmer. Why? Because they did not account for his or his family's labour in growing the crop. It is strange that someone in the Government did not reflect on why those wonderful grain storage silos belonging to the Grain Marketing Board (GMB) were empty. Surely they must have been built for a reason? As maize was a controlled crop, with the maize price being fixed by the Government on the back of the false belief that the smallholder could produce cheap food, the maize price made it unviable for commercial farmers who were fast diversifying into wheat, soya and any other high-value crops including horticulture to plantations. All of this required irrigation, and to this end, few commercial farmers had not built or gained access to stored water in the form of dams to produce these crops. That is not to say that there was not huge debt, especially amongst those who built dams and invested in irrigation, only to find the rains had not filled their dams. These would require serious support, and one of our many tasks was to find a solution.
But the more serious implication of the Government looking after the consumer at the expense of the farmer was that those silos, which always held a year's supply of grain, two million tonnes, were empty, and the country now was required to use precious foreign currency to import two million tonnes. For the first time, Rhodesia or Zimbabwe, the bread basket of Southern Africa, would have to rely on food aid to feed its people.
Despite the problems of the crop growing highveld, the more serious problems were in the drier cattle ranching areas in the south of the country. Anthony and I made a number of trips to those areas to see the hardships ourselves and to help figure out how to mitigate the long-term effects of the drought. Some farm visits I remember vividly and will write about them next week.
Disclaimer: Copyright Peter McSporran. The content in this blog represents my personal views and does not reflect corporate entities.
Comments