The Sunday News
By His Excellency President ED Mnangagwa
Basis for Anxieties and Misperceptions
Lately, there has been some anxiety over our Nation’s food situation. A perception of food insecurity traceable to the late, poor start to the 2021/22 season. Then followed by a severe early-to-mid-season drought which hit five of our provinces: Manicaland, Masvingo, Bulawayo, Matabeleland North and South. The anxiety is thus understandable. Yet the truth is our Nation is food secure in spite of all those natural calamities.
Poorly contextualised announcement by the Grain Millers Association of Zimbabwe (GMAZ) has not assuaged these anxieties. GMAZ announced that it intends to import some 400 000 tonnes to meet its own grain shortfall. That was misconstrued to mean Government is importing grain to meet a national deficit.
different grains
Then there was a raft of measures which Government took to pre-empt fraudulent side-marketing of grain by contracted farmers. That, too, added to the confusion, seemingly giving credence to this misperception of grain scarcity in the country. I wish, through this piece, to clarify both matters, and then to place on public record facts relating the state we are in, food-wise.
Clarifying GMAZ imports
In respect of GMAZ, it is Government policy that grain users in the private sector, grouped as GMAZ, should meet 40 percent of their grain needs. The policy is meant to nudge them towards playing their part in supporting local farmers through contract growing. These farmers, after all, are prime producers of the raw materials which drive their milling business. GMAZ must thus play a part through such backward linkages.
Where such arrangements fall short of 40 percent of their grain requirements, GMAZ is expected to meet the shortfall through purchases or imports paid from own funds. That measure protects our Strategic Grain Reserves, while also ensuring Government has enough grain from the crop it will have wholly funded to meet needs of the vulnerable in our society. Above all, the policy ensures millers share the burden of funding grain production in the country. As private players, Government cannot subsidise them through the Government-guaranteed contract growing scheme.
The announcement of grain imports by GMAZ is thus meant to plug the shortfall which GMAZ faces, for its members to meet 40 percent of their grain requirements, in line with the aforementioned policy. This is not a Government grain import programme. For the record and for the avoidance of any doubt, Government is yet to take a decision to import grain. As I will show later, our grain stocks are enough to meet national food requirements.
Measures to avert side-marketing of grain
With regards to measures we have announced in respect of grain movements in the country this marketing season, the goal is to ensure all farmers contracted by Government through selected banks to produce grains, do deliver their harvests to our Grain Marketing Board (GMB), which is the sole agency for collecting all grain funded by Government under that contract scheme. Inputs supplied to farmers under this scheme are guaranteed by Government. That means any defaults by contracted farmers make Government liable as the sole guarantor. In reality, this means the taxpayer ends up assuming an undeserved debt burden. This must be avoided.
Past experience has revealed that a number of farmers deliberately default by circumventing terms of their contract. Instead of delivering produce to GMB, they side-market their produce to private buyers, both directly, or through third parties to beat traceability. That way the stop-order facility put in place for cost recovery, and managed through GMB, is rendered nugatory.
The other trick is stocking up harvests on the farm until the end of marketing season, to then dispose stocks through side marketing after the marketing season. All these tricks are fraudulent, and expectedly invite the harsh hand of the law. Worse, they spoil things for genuine farmers who abide by terms of their contracts. For Government, the unhappy result is high default rate, often amid a glut in grain supply to GMB. This means the burden shifts to the taxpayer.
What of self-sponsored farmers?
I am aware that farmers who self-sponsor feel hard done because of these restrictive marketing measures we have adopted, which are designed to curtail and stop side-marketing. Yet Government has provided a way out for such self-sponsored farmers. Farmers falling outside Government-guaranteed producer contracts can retain or freely market their grain to markets of their choice by getting exemption permits from GMB. Such permits clear them to move grain as they see fit, but within the country.
Government expects everyone to appreciate that grains which are at the heart of our national food security, are controlled products. Government, too, expects everyone to appreciate that grain produced under Government-guaranteed contracts, must go through GMB to minimise Government liability. It is in everyone’s interest that the input cost recovery process is efficient and tight enough to allow no loopholes. I hope this clarifies the second matter, thus putting it to rest.
We are food secure
Let me now turn to the food security situation in the country. Zimbabwe requires 2,2 million tonnes of grain yearly to meet her needs. Our food security strategy also requires that we maintain stocks of about 500 000 tonnes as our Strategic Grain Reserves. This means we are comfortable with yearly grain stock levels of 2,7 million tonnes. All the investments we are doing in the food sector are aimed at meeting that goal.
The 2020/21 season was a very good one. We managed 2,7 million tonnes, making our Nation food secure without having to import grain. The last time we had enjoyed a comparable position was in the 1984/85 season. Thereafter, our food security was buttressed through supplementary food imports. This is the situation we seek to change through accelerated water harvesting and expanded irrigation programme, thus making ourselves less vulnerable to vagaries of the weather.
The just-ended 2021/22 season has not been that good. It was slow to start and characterised by poor and erratic rains. As if that was not bad enough, the country was hit by a severe early-to-mid-season drought which subjected most crops to severe moisture stress. As I indicated, five provinces were hit hardest and could not recover. Because of that, our harvest has come down to 1,8 million tonnes, 400 000 tonnes short of our yearly national requirement of 2,2 million tonnes.
Thankfully, our Strategic Grain Reserves (SGR) hold 500 000 tonnes from the 2020/21 season. That means we exceed our yearly national grain needs by some 100 000 tonnes, which we expect to remain in SGR until the next harvest.
We thus are food secure. Of course all this means our grain stocks under SGR will fall below our target of 500 000 tonnes. That situation should be addressed through the accelerated irrigation programmes we are implementing in readiness for 2022/23 season and beyond. It is the goal of the Second Republic to make our Nation is food-secure all the times, whatever the weather maybe in any one season.
Food relief to needy areas
I have since directed Government to start working on an efficient food distribution system nationally, so enough grain is quickly moved to all areas in need. This should not be very difficult given than most depots across the country still hold healthy stocks from the previous season. As before, no Zimbabwean need go hungry because of the season’s lean harvest; we have enough grain stocked up. Should it become necessary, our Security Arms will weigh in to ensure grain reaches needy, far-flung areas. Arguably more than any other country in our region, we have an efficient intervention system in times of national need or disasters. That system is already being activated.
Further producer price adjustments
Beyond food distribution, Government must ensure the Nation is ready for the 2022/23 season. In essence, this means Government must ensure the farmer is able to go back to the land with great expectation in the coming season. I am aware that we have already announced producer prices for the current season, including undertaking to pay 30 percent of early deliveries in United States dollars. Still, all that is not adequate to get the farmer back onto the land in the next season. I am keenly aware that there has been significant price movements all round since we announced producer prices for the season. These price movements were partly related to the unstable exchange rate; they have made those producer prices announced earlier on non-viable to the farmer. The farmer must be supported.
I have directed Government to revise grain producer prices so they are adjusted in the light of the aforesaid movements, and to ensure farmers are motivated to go back to the land in the coming season. Equally, in view of the conflict in Eastern Europe, I have directed Government to redirect resources towards localising production of key inputs so we edge towards agricultural input national self-sufficiency.
Government will also address prices of inputs so farming remains viable, making food both abundant and affordable. On my part, the Presidential Input Support Programme will be enhanced so our small farmers escape the ratchet effect from the bad 2021/22 season.
Pfumvudza
Distribution of inputs will start early, buttressed by more efficient tillage technologies which the responsible ministry is developing to support the Pfumvudza Programme.
Ensuring seed farmer viability
I am aware that our seed producers are also facing viability challenges. Yet seed is critical to our overall food security. I direct seed houses, Agriculture Ministry and the Ministry of Finance and Economic Development to look into this area urgently so our seed growing farmers find it worth their while to go back to seed production in the coming season. This is a costly, labour-intensive area which must be rewarded.
Towards wheat self-sufficiency
I am also confident that measures we have taken to promote wheat production this season should see us moving towards national wheat self-sufficiency. Areas in Manicaland where wheat production is popular with smallholder farmers must receive greater Government support, starting from the next wheat season.
On-farm value addition
Lastly Government is vigorously looking at several options towards encouraging on-farm value addition, in line with our Rural Industrialisation Policy which, in my view, must be farmer-led. Government will interrogate the whole gamut: from policy, incentive regime, technologies, funding right through to marketing of value-added products.
On-farm beneficiation, whether done singly or through farmer consortia, should be the way forward. It will enhance provincial Gross Domestic Products while creating dispersed employment opportunities in the country.
