Flawed board loaded the odds against Magwa tea

I REMEMBER as a youngster in the mid-’80s to early ’90s, seeing the big 18-wheeler trucks going past my village 20km north of Flagstaff towards Bizana along the R61. The trucks were carrying tea from Magwa Estate.

Noting their frequency, it was clear to me that the estate was generally doing well and there were markets for the product.

It all changed sometime in the mid-’90s. The frequency of the trucks slowed down noticeably. Either production had been curtailed or the markets had changed or demand had shrunk.

This coincided with the advent of democracy in the country. The estate would be affected as other industries were for one or other reason.

Whatever the reason at Magwa, clearly something was wrong that needed to be addressed – particularly since the estate provided much-needed employment in an area that had historically been a labour sending area. Most young men were either sent to the mines on the Reef and the Free State or to the sugarcane fields in KwaZulu-Natal (then Natal).

The tea estate played a pivotal role in creating local employment, albeit an insufficient amount.

But something was amiss – it had to do with the ownership of the tea estate and the land the estate was on.

The estate was owned by Mr Goss and his family. It was not clear how Goss had acquired the land or the rights to use it. But the intention of this article is not to deal with the issue of land ownership; suffice it to say that when the democratic government legislated its land reform programme, which included restitution, Magwa Tea Estate was found to be within the Lambasi land claim area.

This was one of the biggest land claims in the Eastern Cape, and probably in the country too. This meant that the owner had to relinquish ownership of the land.

In this case the owner relinquished the land and operations.

The land then fell under the Communal Property Association (CPA) chaired by a very respected and reasonable man, Mr Mnyaka. It was supposed to be under the management and ownership of the CPA. But this matter remains unclear to many.

The operations were taken over by the provincial government through the Eastern Cape Development Corporation (ECDC).

The withdrawal of the previous owner and operators did not happen smoothly.

The tea estate went into a shock which wasn’t easy to recover from.

The provincial government tried various means to resuscitate the estate.

Some things worked, others did not work that well.

There were years in which the estate reported a healthy financial performance and others where performance was dismal.

From 2001 poor performance became perennial with a few intermittent years of good performance between.

This indeed worried the locals and local leaders in particular.

There was hope when the controversial arms deal was linked to the resuscitation of the tea estate. It was reported that one of the successful bidders would inject some capital into the estate as part of their community/social responsibility. In any event that is all history now – this never happened for reasons that are not important for the purpose of this article.

There were attempts to get experienced tea estate managers in from other countries like Sri Lanka to come and mentor the locals.

But this period – from the 2000s to date – has generally been characterised by labour unrest which at times turned violent because of the anxiety of employees who were at times not paid their salaries.

The non-payment of salaries affected production. Tea harvest season is a very specific period. Tea must be picked at its prime. This led to losses but we can’t blame the workers.

The problem lay elsewhere.

From where I sit, and having served briefly in the board of the tea estate, the problem had little to do with the labour and technical issues of running a tea estate. I am convinced the wheels came off at governance level.

I sat on a board that never had a sitting at Magwa or anywhere near Magwa – we held board meetings in East London.

This is surely wrong.

I had to go all by myself at times to meet with the union and workers at the tea estate with no other board members.

A board is critical. But there was a management that did not account to anyone. At some point there was an estate CEO but he was mostly in London, you would hardly him find in South Africa.

How was the estate expected to run with the board dysfunctional and the CEO absent?

It was not possible.

It is alleged that I was the first known board member from the area close to the tea estate to be appointed by the then MEC. Why was this? It can never be argued that there were no other individuals in close proximity to the estate who could serve on the board.

Yet the absence of board members from the locality remains a mystery.

To get the tea estate working again the following must be considered:

lAppoint a credible board with a reasonable number of members from the local community who are skilled and knowledgeable and who qualify – there are many of them. Some may not reside in the area but are elsewhere in the country;

lRecruit a credible chief executive officer who must be prepared to work full-time in Lusikisiki or at the estate and along with the rest of the management;

lA marketing plan has to be re-looked into to ensure that the product is properly positioned in the market;

lThe relevant Seta must be roped in to ensure continued training of the workers to improve efficiency;

lBuild partnerships with other tea estates for mentoring purposes;

lDefine the role of the CPA as land owner and community beneficiation; and

lExplore diversification of economic activities at the tea estate to generate new streams of income.

I am convinced the estate will work. The workers are reasonable people who are concerned about the future.

I say this because I have engaged them in person and the union seems very interested in finding a solution.

Rural development and agrarian reform MEC Mlibo Qoboshiyane and his department are heading in the right direction but have to be assisted and supported by all to ensure the success of this flagship tea estate.

The DA, seeking to score political points, was reckless and irresponsible.

The government has to take ownership of the process and operations through a properly constituted vehicle designed around peoples’ participation. If that is done we can’t fail.

Simphiwe Thobela is from Flagstaff