So+many+questions+with+Tony+Ehrenreich+,+Chris+Barron,+S+Times

Sunday Times, Johannesburg, 21 January 2007[[image:Ehrenreich.jpg align="right"]]
=So many questions with Tony Ehrenreich=


 * Chris Barron: So Many Questions**

The Western Cape leader of Cosatu, **//Tony Ehrenreich//**, has been criticised for inciting shack dwellers in Hout Bay to occupy state and privately owned land. **//Chris Barron//** asked him ...


 * Are you calling for land invasions?**

No. But what I have called for is land redistribution and expropriation.


 * According to reports you said land should be taken from whites and given to the residents of informal settlements.**

I said that unused land should be expropriated and used to accommodate the poor community living in overcrowded circumstances.


 * Is there much unused land in Hout Bay?**

Yes. Part of what caused the whole uproar in Hout Bay was the fact that the residents’ association had taken out an interdict to stop the government from using government land to ensure that there is adequate compensation for all the people who presently live there. That is what has brought about the great divide. That started all the problems because that was a real brutal attack against the aspirations of people who are just trying to make a decent living. And the only reason I can find why the interdict was taken out is because having more black people in the area may drive down the price of the properties.


 * That’s a fair concern isn’t it?**

I don’t think so. I think in South Africa, given its contesting interests ... so what if your land price goes down a couple of thousand rand, so long as it accommodates people in a reasonable way?


 * We’re not just talking a couple of thousand. We’re talking hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions.**

Sure, but people’s lives should have a greater bearing in our society than the difference in property prices.


 * But you can understand the feeling of people who will see the value of what in many cases is a lifetime investment plummet?**

Well, I understand that there’s a problem when just because black people — or poor people, because the colour is irrelevant — are moving in close to you, the property prices are going to go haywire. I think that in South Africa part of the compromises and accommodations we must make is that we’ve got to consider people’s humanity before the property- value question.


 * You don’t think you’re just exploiting a desperate situation for political gain?**

I hope not. I’ve said that I think the government and the ANC are as much to blame for the crisis that’s unfolding in Hout Bay because of the lack of urgent land reform and accommodation of people’s housing needs.


 * Would settling them on expropriated land solve overcrowding or would it just encourage more homeless people to come to the area?**

This is what I think many people’s concern is, but I don’t share that concern because I think there is an established community and it just has to be accommodated adequately. If there’s no more land then there’s no more space for other people. But at the moment, as a consequence of apartheid, people have moved in there, they’ve got settled, they’re overcrowded and we now need to provide them with decent housing. And a few people, because of their concerns around property values, are blocking that. So it’s not that the entire Eastern Cape is going to come down there.


 * If the authorities don’t agree to expropriation what action would you recommend to these people?**

The authorities have set a precedent with the Gautrain expropriations so they can’t not agree to it. That would be contradictory.


 * But if they do not agree to it?**

I hope there’ll never be a day when the government neglects its constituency in such an obvious way. It would be the saddest disappointment to ANC members and government supporters.


 * Isn’t it dangerous to raise the hopes of desperate people that land will be expropriated for them? If it doesn’t happen what will you tell them to do?**

I think it is raising people’s hopes but it’s a legitimate, fair hope. If I were saying, “We’re going to move you into the fancy, wealthy house of the Hout Bay doctor”, that would be an illegitimate hope. It’s not an unrealistic expectation to raise in someone.


 * But if it’s not met the consequences could be bloody.**

I don’t think so. The Constitution talks about those things in the section on socioeconomic rights ... providing security and comfort to people within the constraints of the resources we have.


 * It also talks about the protection of private property.**

In fairness to me, the majority of my argument is directed at the government land that is being denied for the use of poor people.


 * From****: http://www.sundaytimes.co.za/PrintEdition/Insight/Article.aspx?id=363231**

783 words