The Sunday News
THE news about the development of a livestock production policy document could not have come at an opportune time.
Infact the draft policy is said to have been in the pipeline for some time and it is my sincere hope that it will emerge from this very long pipeline soon and come into effect so as to bring sanity in this law-unto-themselves industry.
I must hasten to say that I have not had the opportunity to lay my hands on to this very instrumental piece of legislation but I am prayerful that it will address the challenges bedevilling this crucial sector.
I hope the policy will address thorny issues that are stifling the growth of the sector especially around marketing of livestock.
Issues to do with levies, taxes and permits that seem to be unleashed on farmers with reckless abandon to the point of duplicate tax collection should also be looked into.
A clear example of duplicate tax collection in the livestock value chain is that of abattoirs who are made to pay all kinds of fees, permits and taxes by various Government departments and parastatals so as to be allowed to operate resulting in our beef being the most expensive in the sub-region due to operational costs.
While I empathise with abattoir operators my sympathy is with the small-holder farmers because the former simply passes the cost to the consumer and we take the pain.
I have written extensively about unfair trade practices in livestock marketing which invariably affect the smallholder farmer more than other production spheres because this usually comprises old and less informed members of our population.
I am talking about our parents and grandparents who have all their life savings banked on four hooves — their cattle and when time to withdraw come, all kinds of trickery and chicanery are thrown at them by ruthless hyenas continuously prowling the field sniffing out limping and desperate prey!
Talking of chicanery and unfair practice, in one council organised cattle auction sale there were only two buyers who happened to be brothers. Honestly what competitive bidding can come out of two related buyers?
Is this not a clear recipe for conniving and colluding between the few buyers and the auctioneer at the detriment of farmers?
Shouldn’t the council call off such a sale where it is clear that principles of competitive bidding are going to be violated? Is it really an auction when you have one or two buyers? These are some of the things I hope the livestock policy will address.
This vital piece of legislation should protect farmers, for example by defining who can be a buyer? What is the minimum permissible number of buyers at a public livestock auction?
How does one qualify to be an auctioneer? These simple questions may seem trivial to a lay man but they are very important in an auction set up. I have no doubt in my mind that the criminal script to swindle smallholder farmers is written and acted out by some of the buyers and auctioneers with some councils providing a cheering audience.
How else can one explain a situation where some councils completely abrogate their taxing and levying mandate as provided for in the relevant Act, delegating that important local Government function to auctioneers?
I have witnessed in some districts auctioneers being left to run riot on farmers, thump sucking levy figures and employing arm twisting techniques to collect outrageous amounts which have no precedence of comparability within the region.
The core business of an auctioneer is to market livestock, period and council collect its levies. Since when did auctioneers become debt collectors for councils?
I stand to be schooled but this to me is what the livestock policy should address especially with regards to livestock marketing which seems littered with landmines and booby traps all targeting the vulnerable smallholder farmer.
Feedback [email protected] cell 0772851275
