The ManicaPost
Stephen Ephraem in Checheche
CHINYAMUKWAKWA Business Centre is approximately 26km south-east of Checheche Growth Point. The area which is under Chief Garahwa in Chipinge south is a hub of cotton growing in the Lowveld region. Chinyamukwakwa falls under Checheche warehouse following the implementation of Statutory Instrument 142 of 2009 (amended Statutory Instrument 63 of 2011) which stipulates that cotton companies finance certain minimum requirements to farmers in an area one intends to buy cotton.
This financing is done through common distribution points and common warehouses for the storage of agricultural inputs according to Article 14 (2) (a) of the Instrument. The same common distribution points eventually became CBPs (common buying points) by the time of cotton buying according to Article 15 (2) (a) of the same law.
Both the inputs distribution and cotton buying processes are supervised by CGA (Cotton Ginners Association).
In Checheche warehouse, this current cotton marketing season, Chinyamukwakwa CBP is expected to produce above 3 000 tonnes of seed cotton (unprocessed cotton) putting it in second place after Checheche Central. For the eight companies that were licensed by AMA (Agricultural Marketing Authority) to operate in the area, no one wants to be left behind in the rush to have a share of the cake.
Since the inception of CGA, cotton merchants are expected to operate transparently and buying using the same producer price. This year, the producer price was pegged at 40 cents per kg. But as cotton buying business came into life late May, Cotton Producers and Marketers’ Association of Zimbabwe armed with a Competition and Tariff Commission order that was granted in High Court (HC1655 /14) moved to challenge the buying of cotton at a uniform price and grouping companies in CBPs. The farmers demanded a minimum of 60 cents, not the 40 cents that had been pegged by CGA. Part of the order reads: “Now therefore it is hereby ordered: 1. That members of the CGA forthwith cease and desist from engaging in the restrictive practice of setting uniform prices of seed cotton bought from cotton farmers, and that the members individually negotiate such prices with their contracted farmers, and 2. That the CGA desists from recommending to its members prices for inputs cotton (planting) seed, and prices of seed cotton to cotton farmers.”
Cotton Producers and Marketers’ Association of Zimbabwe’s entry point in the Lowveld was at Chinyamukwakwa CBP. Its vice-national chairman, Mr Morris Mukwe, addressed farmers, cotton companies and traditional leaders on the new Competition and Tariff Commission order emphasising the need of companies going to farmers’ homesteads and negotiate business from there. From there the farmers’ association held similar addresses in Chiredzi, Jerera, Ngundu and Rutenga.
Although farmers in other parts of the Lowveld endorsed the order, it was at Chinyamukwakwa that the situation became wild. On June 2, farmers disrupted business and pressured cotton companies to move out of the common buying point grouping and establish separate points at least 50 metres away from each other or risk loss of the seed cotton they had already purchased.
A CGA clerk at the CBP was forced to relocate to Checheche.
To avoid an ugly situation, cotton companies resorted to establishing separate buying points. But this was met with yet another blow. An AMA inspector, a Miss Jane Takombwa, became hard on the cotton companies.
She penalised them for non-compliance of Article 16 (3) of SI 142 of 2009 which states that, “No grower or buyer shall sell or buy seed cotton outside a committee -approved common buying point.” Despite the farmers’ pressure, drama unfolding in its full view and even an attempt on Miss Takombwa’s life by angry farmers, AMA still insists on companies regrouping in the disbanded common buying point.
Companies were fined $100 per bale. One merchant was fined more than $5 000 for such a case.
On June 15, the Director-General of CGA, Mr Godfrey Buka, wrote to AMA to reverse the fines.
Part of the memo reads: “Local farmers have forced cotton companies to buy away from the CBP and meanwhile the local AMA inspector is adamant that the buyers are operating outside the (designated) buying point and she will keep penalising the companies participating there . . . We therefore seek your intervention in this matter and reverse these penalties which were not as a result of deliberate action.”
At a meeting held on June 20 between AMA and the farmers at its Harare offices, AMA made it very clear that it would not recognise the orders, the reason being that AMA as a regulatory body was above the Competition and Tariff Commission. So the penalties still stand! When contacted for comment, Mr Mukwe said: “AMA should stop penalising companies. I thought it was clear to them that they are the farmers who are refusing the idea of common buying points, not companies. The affected cotton companies should seek redress in courts.”
Member of National Assembly for Chipinge South, Cde Enock Porusingazi, added his voice on the same issue.
Said Cde Porusingazi: “We respect AMA as a regulatory body and we feel it is there to protect farmers. But how it is conducting its business in Chinyamukwakwa leaves a lot of questions than answers. Farmers are already burdened with costs and stopping companies to operate independently or doing mobile buying is indeed worsening the farmer’s situation. I received reports that AMA went into farmers’ homesteads and penalised companies for bales still at farmers’ homesteads. Now, it is not clear whether company X is influencing AMA to punish company Y. AMA’s existence should benefit the farmers not the other way round.”
