Parliamentary Report on the public hearing on Chisumbanje Green Fuel ethanol project (11 July 2014)

On Tuesday, 17 October 2013, Mr Speaker announced that the Standing Rules and Orders Committee had nominated the following Members to serve on the Portfolio Committee on Youth, Indigenization and Economic Empowerment:

 Hon. Wadyajena (Chairperson); Hon. Chikuni; Hon. Nyamupinga; Hon. Dube S.; Hon. Hungwa; Hon. Chibaya; Hon. Mathe; Hon. Masuku; Hon. Matimba; Hon. Muzhavazhi; Hon. Madanha; Hon. Zhou T.; Hon Porusingazi; Hon. Simbanegavi;Hon. Madubeko; Hon. Dziva; Hon. Chiwetu; Hon Toffa; Hon. Madondo; Hon. Pedzisai; Hon. Mhlanga; Hon. Mahlangu; Hon. Matienga; Hon. Beremauro; Hon. Chikomba; Hon. Nyahwo; Hon. Chipanga; Hon. Madzore P.; Hon. Madzore S.; Hon Kadungure;. Hon. Sibanda; Hon. Chiwa

ORDERED IN TERMS OF STANDING ORDER No. 159 THAT:

1)     At the commencement of every session, there shall be as many committees to be designated according to government portfolios as the Standing Rules and Orders Committee may deem fit.

2)     It shall be the function of such committees to examine expenditure administration and policy of government departments and other matters falling under their jurisdictions as Parliament may, by resolution determine.

3)     The members of such committees shall be appointed by the Standing Rules and Orders Committee, from one or both Houses of Parliament, and such appointments shall take into account the expressed interests or expertise of the Members and Senators and the political and gender composition of Parliament.

TERMS OF REFERENCE OF PORTFOLIO COMMITTEES S.O. No. 160 

Subject to these Standing Orders, a portfolio committee shall-

a      consider and deal with all Bills and Statutory Instruments or other matters which are referred to it by or under a resolution of the House or by the Speaker;

b     consider or deal with an appropriation or money bill or any aspect of an appropriation or money bill referred to it by these Standing Orders or by or under resolution of this House;

    monitor, investigate, enquire into and make recommendations relating to any aspect of the legislative programme, budget, policy or any other matter it may consider relevant to the government department falling within the category of affairs assigned to it, and may for that purpose, consult and liaise with such a department; and

           consider or deal with all international treaties, conventions and agreements relevant to it, which are from time to time negotiated, entered into or agreed upon.

1. Introduction

1.1 In line with its oversight role as provided under Standing Order No. 160 (c), the Portfolio Committee on Youth, Indigenization and Economic Empowerment undertook an enquiry into the progress made in the implementation of the Indigenisation and Economic Empowerment Laws. The enquiry was occasioned by the Committee’s desire to fulfill the objectives of the Zimbabwe Agenda for Sustainable Socio-Economic Transformation (ZIM-ASSET) Social Services and Poverty Eradication Cluster. TheZIM-ASSET economic Blueprint states in chapter 3 that, “By coming up with the ZIMASSET, Government seeks to address on a sustainable basis, the numerous challenges affecting quality service delivery and economic growth. The plan is expected to consolidate the gains brought about by the Land Reform, Indigenisation and Economic Empowerment and Employment Creation Programmes, which have empowered the communities through Land Redistribution, Community Share Ownership Trusts and Employee Share Ownership Schemes, among others”. In this regard, the Committee noted that the realization of sustainable development and social equity anchored on indigenization, empowerment and employment creation lies in compliance with and full implementation of the indigenisation and economic empowerment laws.

2.0 Objectives

2.1 In its inquiry the Committee was guided by the following objectives;

         i.            To assess the levels of compliance to the Indigenisation policy by qualifying businesses;

       ii.            To assess the extent to which the indigenous have benefitted from the programme;

      iii.       To verify and ascertain the situation on the ground in the wake of conflicting and contradictory statements about developments in Chisumbanje; and

     iv.            To proffer recommendations on the achievement of community empowerment.

3.0 Methodology

In undertaking this inquiry the Committee adopted the following methodology.

3.1 Oral Evidence Sessions

The Committee held oral evidence sessions with the management of Macdom and Green Fuel on the level of compliance with the Indigenisation policy as well as their corporate social responsibilities on community empowerment.  The Committee also accepted a request for interface made by the Platform for Youth Development (PYD) to appear before the Committee on Chisumbanje Ethanol Project. The Committee also received evidence from the Chisumbanje and Chinyamukwakwa Traditional leaders as well as the Enivironmental Management Agency (EMA).

3.2 Written Submissions

      The Committee received written submissions from PYD, Chief Garahwa, Headman Musuki     Matambanadzo and Green Fuel Pvt Ltd Workers.

3.3 Fact Finding Visit

The Committee undertook a fact finding visit to the Ethanol Project in Chisumbanje on 11 July 2014 with the main aim of verifying the existence of community projects that Green Fuel claimed to have initiated for the community.

3.4 Public Hearing

The Committee conducted a public hearing at Chisumbanje Primary School on 11 July 2014 to gather the views of the community on the Ethanol Project and its impact on their livelihoods.

4.0 Background

4.1 In early 2008, Green Fuel represented by Macdom Investments, acquired the right to lease land measuring 5 112 hectares from ARDA, where it built an ethanol plant. The land has since increased to 9, 375 ha and is under sugarcane. The project was initially welcomed as it was anticipated that it would lead to the employment of people in the area and uplift the quality of life of households in Chisumbanje. 

4.2 Based on the geography of the area, most of the land came from adjacent land owned by communal small holder farmers. This was to be done through progressive accrual until the fully acquisition of the proposed 45 000 ha of cane by 2020. 

4.3 In the process, the company started to encroach into surrounding communal land in Chisumbanje, Chinyamukwakwa and Matikwa villages without adequate consultation with the community, as the said land was not vacant but was used by the villagers for their crop production, livestock grazing and for other cultural uses. 

4.4 An Inter Ministerial Cabinet Task Force headed by the then Deputy Prime Minister, Professor A.G.O. Mutambara, was dispatched to Chisumbanje in 2012 to help solve the simmering crisis besetting the Green Fuel Ethanol Plant and the community. The Task Force made several recommendations, one of which was the need to expand the District Ethanol Project Implementation Committee (DEPIC) to include other stakeholders.

4.5 The recommendations carried in the Inter-Ministerial Cabinet Taskforce Report suggested that:

4.5.1 Land acquisitions to the project were supposed to be regularized by Chipinge Rural District Council in accordance with the Communal Lands Act (Chapter 24:04) and that Council decisions enabling this particular land acquisition be reviewed, harmonized and aligned according to the Inter-Ministerial report. 

4.5.2 The company should immediately compensate and resettle the 117 households that had offer letters and were displaced from ARDA estates. The farmers and the company were to engage directly to negotiate terms for the farmers to continue to live on the estates as out growers and producers to the Ethanol Project.

4.5.3 The company should immediately compensate households that lost crops in the process of developing the Project’s dams and canals in accordance with the assessments of crop damages that were carried out by the department of Agriculture Rural Extension (AREX) officials and further corroborated with information obtained directly from the affected communities.

4.5.4 There be an asset audit (i.e. land, livestock, crops, buildings, equipment and family size) for each displaced household so that compensation and resettlement is meaningful and that some of the displaced households must be accommodated as sugarcane out growers, and producers of other products and services, to the Ethanol Project. 

4.5.5 The grievance that not enough local people are being employed must be addressed.

4.5.6 In order to avoid future acrimonious community relations, Government and ARDA should maintain an effective oversight of the implementation of the project and that the District Joint Implementation Committee should be broadened to include the Council Chairperson, all local chiefs, the local Member of Parliament, two councilors, two workers union representatives and four representatives of the displaced and affected households, two being from Chisumbanje and two from Chinyamukwakwa.

4.6 It was against this background that the Portfolio Committee on Youth, Indigenization and Economic Empowerment visited Chisumbanje on 11 July 2014.

5. 0 Findings

5.1 Compliance Issues – Indigenization and Economic Empowerment Act

5.1.2 The Committee gathered that, whereas the Indigenization and Economic Empowerment Act (Chapter 14:33) as read with the Indigenization and Economic Empowerment (General Regulations, 2010) stated that investment should be 49/51% in favour of local investors, and that local communities should benefit from such investment through 10% share community ownership. This is not the case in Chisumbanje where the investment has a contentious 90% stake through Macdom Investments and the government owns the remaining 10% through ARDA.  ARDA has an irrevocable option to acquire up to 51% shareholding, but it is not yet clear how this is going to be achieved. It was also noted that Green Fuel was granted an ethanol blending license despite not fulfilling the 51/49% Joint Venture with government according to the spirit of S.I 17 of 2013 on Mandatory Blending.

5.2 Community Projects

5.2.1 The Committee was briefed by Green Fuel management on the Ethanol Project as well as community projects that the company claimed to have initiated for the benefit of the community. The Committee was informed that the Green Fuel was the first large-scale ethanol producing factory in Africa producing anhydrous ethanol from sugarcane. The Joint Venture partnership with the Agricultural Rural Development Authority (ARDA), saw 40 000 hectares of Chisumbanje land earmarked for the project. Currently, only 9 375ha of land is being utilized with a total production of 6 million litres of ethanol per month. The Committee heard that, at full capacity, the current plant can produce 120 million litres per annum, which translates to approximately US$120 million.

5.2.2 Green Fuel management informed the Committee that 10% of the project land was set aside for the community as part of its corporate social responsibility scheme. To this end, the Green Fuel officials told the Committee that the company had developed 1060 ha of land for farmers in the community at a total cost of $10.6 million. Of the above-mentioned hectarage, 660 ha was set aside for two groups of out-grower farmer; 250 ha for War Veterans, and 410 ha for “settlers”. The remaining 400 ha is under a community irrigation scheme.  The company claimed to be assisting these farmers with land preparations as well as provision of inputs such as irrigation water, fertilizers etc. 

5.2.3 The officials also indicated to the Committee that the company, through ‘Vimbo-hope of a better future‘ was also involved in social services infrastructural rehabilitation and development at schools, clinics, roads and boreholes. The Committee was also told that Vimbo was setting up of a Technology Centre, a Sewing workshop, training workshop, bee project and indigenous tree nursery project.

5.2.4 On its guided tour of the community projects, the Committee was only shown some plots in the plantation which the officials claimed had been set aside for out-grower farmers and War Veterans but there were no beneficiaries present to support the claims. The Committee did not see the other projects which were mentioned by officials to the Committee during the briefing meeting in the morning.

5.2.5 After the tour of the “community projects”, the Committee conducted a public hearing at Chisumbanje Primary School later in the day. The super-charged public hearing was well-attended by community members, amongst them youths, women, out-grower farmers, Green Fuel workers’ representatives, War Veterans and traditional leaders. The gathering did not mince their words to the Committee. They informed the Committee that while they did not object to the project per se, they had burning grievances which had remained unresolved despite several government delegations that had visited the area in the past dating back to the Government of National Unity (GNU) when government set up an Inter-Ministerial Committee to look into their grievances. 

5.3. Compensation

5.3.1 The community dispelled the claims by Green Fuel during the oral evidence session that it had compensated the community for land and livestock losses suffered due to the Ethanol Project. The Committee observed that the issue of non-compensation by Green Fuel to affected communities in Chisumbanje Village, Chinyamukwakwa Village and Matikwa Village became very emotive and thus captured the mood of the community regarding the Ethanol Project.

5.3.2 The Committee gathered that most villagers whose land was “swallowed” by the project have not been compensated up to this day despite undertakings by Green Fuel to do so when the project was first established. The affected villagers told the Committee that as a result of the expropriation of their land, they no longer had any source of income as their livelihood depended on small-scale farming, especially cotton.

5.3.3 The Committee heard that when the project was first established, displaced farmers were not given a chance to harvest their crops but instead they were promised compensation, which has not been forth-coming. The community pointed out that while Macdom had given them small pieces of land, measuring 0.5 ha, which are not adequate for the needs of each household and their livestock, it had not yet compensated them in monetary terms in accordance with the agreement they had made.

5.3.4 The Committee gathered that no compensation has been paid as yet to businesspersons who lost shops and grinding mills which had to make way for the project, for example, in Matikwa where ARDA had encouraged a businessman to erect a shop to service the area.

5.3.5 Members of the community are now in their sixth year without receiving any compensation. They are concerned that the company has not erected a fence between their grazing land and the small pieces of land they had been allocated for irrigation purposes, as promised.

5.4 Grievances of Out-Grower Farmers

5.4.1 The Committee noted that even those villagers who were accommodated in the Green Fuel project as out-grower farmers bemoaned the insufficient size of their plots, averaging 3 ha per family.

5.4.2 The out-grower farmers also expressed fears regarding lack of security of tenure over their allocated plots in the plantation. They said there was no clarity as to who the land belongs to. Hence they recommended that they be given permits or some form of security of tenure.

5.4.3The out-grower farmers accused Green Fuel of exposing them to harmful toxic substances, which has a taken toll on their health.EMA provided the committee with evidence (backed by an independent expert) that Green Fuel is illegally discharging millions of litres daily of harmful and acidic effluent (vinasse) from its plant into the environment. Vinasse is very acidic due to high concentrations of potassium and sulfur among other substances. They also said the company was releasing these toxic substances into the river system, thus affecting their livestock and the ecosystem.

5.4.4 The farmers complained about the pricing model of their sugarcane, which they described as day-light robbery. They bemoaned lack of transparency with the scheme since Macdom controls the whole process from land preparation. The absence of a weigh bridge to weigh the cane made them feel shortchanged. The Settler farmers were concerned that the current price of US$4.00 per ton which Macdom is buying their cane at is not realistic, even after factoring in improvements and other costs. Green Fuel did not allow them to sell their sugarcane to other buyers offering better prices. The out-grower farmers told the Committee that Hippo Valley was buying sugarcane, for sugar production, at prices up to $70 per tonne. 

5.4.5 The out-grower farmers also informed the Committee that they had not been fully paid for their sugarcane by Green Fuel since 2010. Farmers have been negatively affected by the non-payment of their sugar cane. The company owes farmers US$300 000-00 according to a valid contract they signed with the company at the rate of US$4.00/tonne. Farmers prefer to get one-off payments instead of part payments as is currently obtaining. The reason they were given was that they owed the company $2.4 million from contractual arrangements, a debt they did not agree with.  

5.4.6The Committee gathered that land sizes have remained stagnant since 1967 when the settler program was introduced. The farmers feel that they should be allocated more land size for sugar cane out growing as part of the process of empowering black people. They have been farming 3 hectares since 1967 and feel that cane growing needs to be done on larger pieces of land for it to be profitable.  

5.5 Limited alternative Land for People Displaced by the Investment

5.5.1 The Committee noted that there is limited alternative land for the people who were displaced, as the 0.5 hectares have not been allocated to all those whose land was taken up by the investment. Some of the beneficiaries of the 0.5 ha travel long distances of between 10-15 kilometers to the allocated land. The Communal Land Act [Chapter 20:04], Section 12 requires that those who suffered dispossession or diminution of their right to occupy or use the land be provided with alternative land or be compensated. This has not been the case with the Chisumbanje community.

5.5.2 The Committee observed with concern the resettlement problem faced by Mr William Mhlanga of Chinyamukwakwa Village under Chief Garahwa, who was negatively affected by the introduction of the Chisumbanje Ethanol Plant which took the greater part of Ndooyo Communal Lands for sugar cane plantation fields.  He has a family of 58 children, 600 cattle, 70 goats, 6 donkeys and 24 sheep. His homestead is about ten (10) meters away from the sugar cane plantation fields and as such, his livestock has nowhere to graze. He was ploughing 30 hectares which have been engulfed by the project and his wish is to get another piece of land anywhere in Chipinge as he is having challenges securing pastures for the livestock. The situation has not improved in spite of appeals made on his behalf by Headman Chinyamukwakwa to the DA Chipinge and various letters from Mr Mhlanga himself to the DA. 

5.5.3 The Committee gathered that those displaced by the project should be allocated at least two (02) hectares per household to grow sugar cane for sale to the project as a source of income. The community stressed that further displacements from the land they had been living on historically should be stopped forthwith as land for resettlement is no longer available.

5.5.4 Chief Garahwa informed the Committee that families are now running short of food and occasionally going hungry as they no longer cultivate the larger pieces of land that they used to. The current 0.5 ha is so inadequate that the harvest cannot satisfy the nutritional requirements of an average household. Hence, he advocated for chiefs and other traditional leaders to be allocated an additional four (04) hectares for ‘zunde ramambo’ to augment food security and fulfill their cultural obligations to the community.

5.5.5 The community also informed the Committee that the Ethanol Project had taken up grazing land for their animals. Livestock farmers said they had no alternative pastures to graze their cattle and as a result they were forced to sell their cattle at give-away prices. They also have not received any compensation for livestock lost due to the chemicals in the effluent water discharged from the plant which they are exposed to.

5.5.6 It emerged that due to this land challenge villagers now preferred to return to the previous status quo where they would go back to their original homesteads and continue farming on their land as before, while the ethanol plant uses ARDA’s land only.

5.6 Lack of Genuine and Inclusive Consultations

5.6.1 Members of the community were also riled by lack of adequate consultation by the company of all stakeholders in the affected community. They bemoaned the lack of genuine consultations and accused the company of selective consultation which they said was done just for window-dressing purposes. The Committee noted that the designing and implementation of the land deal lacked transparency and accountability. It was further worried about the lack of a clearly shared implementation plan of the investment.

5.6.2 The Committee learnt that the community was greatly concerned about the disbandment of DEPIC which had been set up in line with recommendations of the Inter-Ministerial Cabinet Taskforce led by the then Deputy Prime Minister Professor A.G.O. Mutambara in 2012. The Committee gathered that DEPIC has been disbanded by the former Minister of Energy and Power Development, Hon Dzikamai Mavhaire, acting in cahoots with the Member of the National Assembly for Chipinge South Constituency, Hon Enock Porusingazi, and the Company, principally to safeguard and advance the interests of Green Fuel at the expense of the communities in the general area of Chisumbanje. It emerged that the community suspected that money and/or other inducements had changed hands between the trio an allegation disputed by the former Minister in a letter he wrote to the committee. As a result, this has deprived the community of a platform through which to raise their grievances and share ideas on how best the company should serve the interests of the local community.

5.6.3 It was felt that DEPIC was better able to represent the interests of all stakeholders, and thereby help avert any potential source of conflict but that since its disbandment, relations between the company and the community had deteriorated.

5.6.4 Some of the villagers at the public hearing accused Government of siding with white capital and of having lost interest in their welfare. The company owners and management were also accused of arrogance and lack of respect to traditional leaders as well as lack of appreciation of cultural customs and values. A case in point is the alleged assault of Headman Chinyamukwakwa by a white Green Fuel senior employee.

5.7 Employment Opportunities

5.7.1 The other bone of contention regarding the Ethanol Project was the issue regarding employment opportunities for the locals. Chief Garahwa informed the Committee that, the people of Chisumbanje, which hosts the project, should be given priority when it comes to employment at the project. The community expressed disappointment at the investor for failing to employ them since most of the employees at the company, especially general-hand workers, were from other provinces at the expense of the unemployed youths in the Chisumbanje community. 

5.8 Unfair Labour Practices

5.8.1 Green Fuel’s labour relations are less than satisfactory as workers are not allowed to have a worker’s committee and those who try are victimized and often end up losing their jobs. The responsible union, Zimbabwe Energy Workers Union (ZEWU), is not allowed to intervene on behalf of the workers. The Committee gathered during the public hearing that the workers were not affiliated to a relevant NEC, in breach of existing labour regulations and statutes. It also emerged that the company does not have a job grading structure. In addition, the workers go for months without being paid.

5.8.2 The Committee was further told that seasonal workers were made to work for long hours from 6 AM to 6 PM for a daily rate of $2.50. Ill-treatment of workers was also cited as rampant at the company.

5.9 Unfulfilled Community Projects

5.9.1 The Community was not amused by Green Fuel’s failure to fulfill promises that it made at the establishment of the project, especially those projects meant to benefit the community by alleviating poverty. Hence the community members questioned the government’s sincerity on its Indigenization and Economic Empowerment Policy and its current economic blue print, ZIMASSET, which both stipulate that investors should plough back 10% equity to the communities they operate from.

5.9.2 The Committee gathered that, the company has not fulfilled the promises it made to the villagers and as a result, their quality of life has deteriorated as they are no longer earning the income they used to get from cotton prior to the coming on-board of the company. Some children have stopped attending school as the parents’ source of income has been removed.

5.10 Pollution & Health Issues

5.10.1 As gathered from the community and EMA, Green Fuel has been discharging toxic effluent into Jerawachera stream, Musazvi River and eventually Save River. Livestock and aquatic deaths have been recorded due to contact with polluted water downstream. This was in contravention of the Environmental Management Act (Section 57) which stipulates that it is an offence for any person to discharge or apply poisonous or toxic, noxious or obstructing matter, radio-active waste or other pollutants into the aquatic environment.

5.10.2 In its defence, the company asserts that it carried out the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report and submitted it to EMA on 22 February 2011 and that in terms of Section 100 of the Environmental Management Act (Chapter 20:27), in the event that EMA does not respond within 60 days after the submission, the EIA report shall be deemed approved.  Green Fuel argues that EMA did not respond within the requisite time frame and thus the EIA was deemed to be approved.

5.10.3  Upon further investigations, the committee on 23 September 2014, heard from Environmental Management Agency (EMA). EMA verified that the ethanol plant is a prescribed project in terms of section 97 (1) of the EMA Act, and therefore should only be implemented upon granting of an EIA certificate. The committee was informed that at the onset of the project in June 2010, Green Fuel was required to do a full EIA study, but they proceeded to implement the project without, thereby contravening the law. The agency informed the committee that during a couple of inspection visits in February 2011 and September 2012, they issued Green Fuel tickets for violating the law, and issued an order to cease operations and regularise, which the company received but refused to sign and continued operating. In between these visits, on 22 June 2011, Green Fuel partially submitted an EIA document to EMA, which to date has not been processed since the company doesn’t want to complete the submission procedures, among them payment of a fee. Despite receiving of tickets and instructions on what to do to safely handle effluent, Green Fuel has to date not complied but argues that it is expensive implying that they find it cheaper to continue polluting the environment and paying fines. EMA, on 24 September 2012 opened a docket for operating without and EIA. The matter is yet to be finalized after the company had got away with a $20 fine, before EMA applied for the docket to be re-opened. 

5.10.4 The Committee gathered from Mr Dhliwayo that his younger brother, Robert Chivaura, had been affected by ‘dhanda’ water on his legs, which has vinasse, potash and other chemicals from the plant, as a result of which he has wounds and could no longer walk properly. The victim, Robert Chivaura, was present at the public hearing and the Committee was able to physically witness his state and even took photographs of him. Since he was affected, he had been failing to secure money for medical treatment as the investor did not want to help him. It emerged that many other people in the village had fallen ill due to the contaminated water coming from the plant, pointing out that there is need for urgent health intervention for everyone in the village.

5.11 Inadequate Consideration of the Balance between the Investment and Food Security

5.11.1 The relationship between the investment and food security and vulnerability was not given adequate analytical attention. The community was concerned that, in the absence of a clear set of operational guidelines on investment, land use, access to market and credit, land transfers under the investment could have tremendous implications for livelihoods, food security and social justice.

5.12 Traffic Accidents

5.12.1 The Committee gathered that the community was up in arms against the company for     its reckless drivers who have caused 15 fatal accidents of children in the area. Members of the community said that the company did not even have the courtesy to assist with burial costs but arrogantly referred parents of the victims to its lawyers. As a result, the community has now developed an aversion to the employment of unlicensed drivers by the company.

 5.13 Preference for an Alternative Model

5.13.1 The Committee learnt that, in light of the problems currently facing the people, there is preference for a model where resettled households themselves are given inputs to grow sugar cane and sell it to a company of their choice, just like the model used by cotton companies where farmers are given seed, fertilizers and pesticides and sell the cotton to the contractors.  It was felt that the envisaged model would be more effective in empowering farmers than the one Macdom was using.

5.14 Insensitivity to Local Culture and Customs

5.14.1 The community was concerned about the insensitivity and disrespect shown by the company to local culture and traditional practices, for example, when it tempered with graves and burial places during excavations.    

6.0 Recommendations

6.1 In view of the above findings, the Committee recommends:

6.1.1. That the decision to disband DEPIC be immediately reversed and that the role of the former Minister of Energy and Power Development, Hon Dzikamai Mavhaire and the Member of the National Assembly for Chipinge South Constituency, Hon Enock Porusingazi, be investigated to establish the truth of what transpired.

6.1.2. That the ARDA Board Chairman, Mr Basil Nyabadza, clarifies the issue of land ownership between ARDA, Green Fuel and the community.

6.1.3.That land sizes allotted to farmers resettled in 1967 be reviewed upwards in line with their needs.

6.1.4.That the audit on land, buildings, livestock, crops, family sizes and business enterprises lost to make way for the project be expedited to facilitate meaningful and realistic compensation before the 2015 farming season.

6.1.5. That human, animal or avian victims of ailments arising from contact with contaminated water be adequately compensated and that the company takes urgent measures to facilitate their treatment and rehabilitation.

6.1.6. That the local component in the entire investment by Macdom, Rating and Green Fuel be progressively increased in line with the Indigenization and Economic Empowerment Act (Chapter 14:33) and that a Community Share Ownership Trust for Chipinge South and Chipinge District, in general, be set up during this Second Parliament Session along the lines of the Zimunya-Marange Community Share Ownership Trust.

6.1.7. That Green Fuel fully complies with the requirements of the Environmental Impact Assessment process by December 2015, and that the penalties for non-compliance with provisions of the Environmental Management Act be immediately reviewed upwards.

6.1.8 That Green Fuel lives up to its undertaking to rehabilitate roads, schools, boreholes, clinics and animal health infrastructure, among other Corporate Social Responsibility activities.

6.1.9. That Green Fuel takes immediate, deliberate measures to reduce fatalities due to accidents caused by project vehicles around the plant, fields and access roads.

6.1.10. That Green Fuel respects the traditional leadership, as well as the norms, values and customs of the local people, including the allocation of an adequate number of hectares to each traditional leader for the ‘zunde ramambo’.

6.1.11. That for any further recruitment, Green Fuel gives priority to the employment of qualifying and trainable people from the local area and adheres to standard labour practices.

7.0 Conclusion

The Indigenization and Economic Empowerment (General) Regulations, 2010 (IEE), in its enshrined Community Share Ownership Trust (CSOT) scheme, offers a lucrative 'quick gain' in line with the Zimbabwe Agenda for Sustainable Socio-Economic Transformation (ZIM ASSET). The Committee appreciates that the ceding of 51% stake in foreign controlled entities is not an overnight fast-track task. However the 'sustainable economic empowerment and social transformation' of communities like Chisumbanje can be surely be done with immediate benchmark gains through more robust and evaluable social responsibility schemes like CSOT. It is high time government make a strong statement of intent and also review the shambolic way in which the IEE Act, especially its community empowerment objective is being implemented by entities like Green Fuel with whom it has Joint Ventures. It is sad to note that the state has not shown any urgency to bring to order the evident dis-empowered of the people of Chisumbanje, but has shown more concern to support the business side of the Ethanol Project.

Government of Zimbabwe Press statement on the Chisumbanje Ethanol Project

Getting the Chisumbanje Ethanol Project Back on Track

 Press Statement

Prof. Arthur G.O. Mutambara

Deputy Prime Minister, Republic of Zimbabwe

Chairman Inter-Ministerial Committee

19^th September 2012

1.  Introduction

1.1       The Chisumbanje Ethanol Project is a national project of great strategic importance where ethanol is produced from sugarcane. The project consists of sugarcane plantations in Chisumbanje and Middle Sabi, with the Ethanol plant being located in Chisumbanje. World class irrigation infrastructure has been put in place, and an outstanding ethanol producing plant constructed. The Project has potential to radically improve our fuel security and economics, introduce efficient irrigation schemes, support smallholder out-grower schemes, create jobs, generate large amounts of electric power, and stimulate major downstream industries.

1.2       However, several issues and problems at the Chisumbanje Ethanol Project have resulted in the stoppage of production activities at the ethanol plant. To address these matters, there is need for a common understanding of the challenges the project faces. It is within this context that this Inter-Ministerial Committee has done its work and produced the current report. The objective is to provide a holistic solution to the project’s challenges in a way that allows production to resume and for the project to realize its full potential in contributing to the economic development of Zimbabwe.

1.3       Committee members visited Chisumbanje on the 22^nd and 26^th of August, 2012 on a fact finding mission, and met in Harare on the 3^rd and 17^th of September 2012 to discuss their findings and to start the process of building a portfolio of solutions that will put the project back on its course.

1.4       The Chisumbanje Ethanol Project is an enterprise of strategic and national importance, which has the potential to be the nucleus for the development of an ethanol industrial cluster. The project currently has issues and problems in two broad areas, which are: social and community related, and, technical and business related. Long term and sustainable solutions should be found to these issues based on a thorough and technical analysis of the problems instead of politicizing the issue. The solutions should balance between three buckets of interests, that is, community, private and national. The solutions should provide a win-win scenario for these three potentially conflicting areas of interests. The resolution of the challenges should be proffered in ways that protect the integrity of the government while engaging all the stakeholders involved and affected.

Summary of Key Recommendations

There are two sets of problems that the project faces. Firstly, there are community and social issues that have emerged in the course of the establishment of the project and as a result of its operation. Secondly, there are technical and business related issues and problems which have led to low uptake of ethanol fuel blends. All these issues require immediate solutions and action in order for the Chisumbanje Ethanol Project to get back on track.

2.  Social and Community Issues: Recommendations

With regard to the Social and Community issues, the key suggestion is that all households that were displaced or mishandled must be compensated and resettled. Lessons must be learnt, and going forward an inclusive and consultative approach must be adopted. The following specific actions are recommended for the issues and problems that have been identified:

2.1       The Chipinge Rural District Council should immediately regularise all land acquisitions to the project in accordance with the law by completing the appropriate lease agreement with ARDA in compliance with the Communal Land Act (Chapter 20:04). Specifically, the outstanding lease agreement for 2663 hectares that have already been ceded to the Ethanol Project, together with Council decisions enabling this particular land acquisition, should be reviewed and harmonized in order to align them to the recommendations contained in this report. Thereafter, the lease agreement must be completed and signed.

2.2       Out of the total 1754 households displaced from their communal lands in Chisumbanje (1060) and Chinyamukwakwa (694) communal lands, only 516 have been resettled. The Company should immediately relocate the outstanding 1238 households who have not been relocated on irrigated land. The 0.5 ha one size fits all is inadequate. An asset audit (i.e., land, livestock, crops, buildings, equipment and family size) for each displaced household must be conducted so that the compensation and resettlement is meaningful. Consequently, the size of irrigated land provided must range from 0.5 ha to 2 ha. Where the household becomes an out-grower the irrigated land will be much more. In addition it must be ensured that each household has land for housing and livestock. Certainly 619 ha of irrigated land will be inadequate to accommodate the 1238 households. Furthermore some of the displaced households must be accommodated as sugarcane out-growers, and producers of other products and services, to the Ethanol Project. These adjustments to the resettlement strategy must be applied retroactively to the resettled 516 households. Other social safety nets and facilities designed to accord the displaced households sustainable means of livelihood must be developed and provided. These should include feedstock schemes, general infrastructure provision, schools, and clinics. The Ministry of Agriculture in consultation with other relevant ministries must develop a detailed smallholder resettlement model that takes into account the elements articulated above.  

2.3       The Company should immediately compensate and resettle the 117 households that had offer letters and were displaced from ARDA estates. With Government and ARDA supervision, the Company should engage the farmers directly and pay the compensation in lieu of the land user rights that were lost, and negotiate terms for the farmers to continue to live on the estates as out-growers and producers to the Ethanol Project. Of the 117 farmers who held sub-leases in ARDA estates, 116 have stayed on as out-growers of sugarcane to the Project. Their major grievances have been non-payment of compensation for land user rights and slow payment for cane delivered to the project in the 2010/2011 season. Of the total, US$196,800 due to the farmers for that season, US$161,800.00 had been paid and US $35,000 was outstanding and was only paid on 14th September, 2012. All payments to these farmers are effected through ARDA. With Government and ARDA supervision, the Company should go into direct arrangements for payment of these farmers, and should avoid delays in paying for crop deliveries.

2.4       In addition to enabling displaced households to be sugar cane out-growers and producers of subsistence crops on irrigated land, they must also be enabled to grow other cash crops such as cotton and wheat, which were the bed-rock of commercial agriculture in Chisumbanje area. The Company must play a facilitative role in this extra endeavor, which is not part of the sugarcane out-grower scheme, but rather an effort to address the broader social and commercial concerns of the community.

2.5       The company should immediately compensate households that lost crops in the process of developing the Project’s dams and canals in accordance with the assessments of crop damages that were carried out by Agritex officials and further enhanced and adjusted by information obtained directly from the affected communities. It is unfortunate that some of these crops were insensitively ploughed down by the Company. This is completely unacceptable. A total of US$80 500.00 is due to these households according to the combined reports from Agritex, traditional leaders and the victims. This compensation must be paid immediately. So far, only US$39,142 has been paid as compensation for crop damages broken down follows: (1) US$19,419 for crop damages to number of households whose land was taken from an area under Headman Chisumbanje known as DRC. (2) US$9,690 that has been paid in lieu of crops that were destroyed from among another set of households  displaced from Headman Chisumbanje’s area, and (3) US$10,033 for crops destroyed from a few  village households displaced from Chinyamukwakwa communal lands. The rest of the compensation that has not been provided must be paid immediately.

2.6       Verified reports from the displaced communities indicate that livestock was lost through being shot, drinking contaminated water, or by the levying of undue and oppressive fees for trespassing. A total compensation of US20 000.00 must be advanced to the affected communities.

2.7       There are few individuals who were victims of violence, contaminated water, and unsafe working conditions. Rehabilitation of, and compensation to, these people amounts to about US15 500.00 must be immediately effected. The Company must swiftly install a water purification system for the contaminated water from the plant before it is recycled for human and livestock consumption. Care must be taken that drinking sources for people and livestock are not linked or exposed to the fertilizer rich by-product water from the ethanol plant, which is recycled for irrigation. The Project must take cognizance of the fact that households will have livestock and thus mechanism of coexistence with this reality must be put in place.

2.8        In order to avoid future acrimonious community relations, Government and ARDA should maintain an effective oversight of the implementation of the Project. Specifically, the current Inter-Ministerial committee should continue to supervise and monitor the process assisted by its Working Party of officials. At the local level, the District Joint Implementation Committee should be broadened to include the Council Chairperson, all local chiefs, the local Member of Parliament, two Councilors, two workers union representatives and four representatives of the displaced and affected households (two from Chisumbanje and two from Chinyamukwakwa).

2.9       The grievance that not enough local people are being employed must be addressed. As illustration Greenfuels employs a total of 975 workers. Out of that number 202 workers are from the Chipinge District translating into 20.7 %. This is too low. Out of an overall employment of 3237 people only 1099 are from the Chipinge District, meaning 34%, which is clearly unacceptable. The company must strive to raise their overall local employment equity. In particular, all the low skill jobs must go to locals. Of course we need to balance our resolution of this grievance with desire to promote national cohesion and integration.

2.10     The allegations of racism at the Company were not fully substantiated. However, the fact that they were made by a number of stakeholders is sufficient basis to encourage the Company to improve its racial harmony by treating all employees with equality and dignity, irrespective of race. This must be reflected in all employment and management practices including hiring, pay, benefits, appraisals, promotion, and shop-floor treatment   

2.11     The disputed figures on the numbers of workers (4500 vs. 3237) that the project employs notwithstanding, it is clear that the project has a substantial number of employees and has a potential to employ even more as it expands. Going by the minimum number as reflected in NSSA records, the 3237 jobs at stake requires that Government takes urgent action to save the Project.

3.  Technical and Business Issues: Recommendations

In terms of the technical and business related issues and problems, the solution matrix consists of converting the entire project into a JV, making the pricing of ethanol competitive, engaging in comprehensive marketing of ethanol blends, while gradually adopting mandatory blending. The following specific solutions and actions are recommended in order to enable resumption of the Ethanol plant operations in as short a period as possible:

3.1       The Cabinet decision to convert the Project from a BOT to a JV must be upheld and implemented within the proposed timeline of two months. It must be noted that Ethanol plant is not on ARDA land, and was not part of the BOT, which means this BOT arrangement was actually detrimental to the national interest. In doing the BOT conversion to JV due diligence and investment/project valuation there is need for rigour and creativity. The veracity of the claim that US$600m has been invested must be established, including the source of the financing. There must be robust and creative valuation of the State’s asset contributions to the Project, such as the land (40 000ha), equipment, intellectual property, institutional memory, other state assets usable as security for loans, the partnership with government as an asset, and value enhancing instruments such as mandatory blending. In fact, the State can easily bring to the Project assets that will enable it to achieve 51% ownership of if not higher. The work on converting the Project from a BOT to a JV must proceed speedily. In fact once concluded this conversion to a JV will make most of the other technical and business issues easily resolvable.

3.2       Mandatory blending should only be considered within the context of a JV. We cannot have mandatory blending for one private producer of ethanol. If there were several producers it might make sense. As a starting point, the mandatory blending should be at the 5% level. This should be implemented immediately, on the assumption that the conversion from the BOT to a JV is now irreversible. The legal instrument required and other supportive measures must be put in place. This mandatory E5 fuel specification would increase the uptake of ethanol fourfold to 2.3 million from the current 0.6 million litres and result in 3% lower carbon emissions. E5 is also the ideal starting point because none of the car manufacturers and sellers has a problem with that level of ethanol, whereas there were complaints about certain vehicles’s compatibility with E10. For the abundance of caution, Greenfuels design an acceptable insurance policy framework that will compensate motorists in the event of any damage to vehicles due to the use of E5.

3.3       For now blending at 10%, i.e., E10 should continue as voluntary and optional until measures to mitigate adverse impact on non-compatible vehicles are in place. Once this is achieved, the mandatory blending can graduate to 10%.

3.4       As mentioned in the National Energy Policy launched recently the government targets to reach levels of mandatory blending of 20% by 2015. To achieve this, research work should start now. Government, through its various agencies, can start engaging experts on bio-fuels to look into the best ways to achieve the 20% level of blending. In summary we are proposing a gradual adoption of mandatory blending from 5%, through 10%, right up to 20%.

3.5       For now, the blends E10, E20, E85 and E100 must continue as optional products on the market for vehicles that are compatible with them.

3.6       The logistics and infrastructure for all the blending levels must be developed quickly. Blending should be done from Msasa and at oil companies’ outlets until alternative sights are in place, in particular modifications at Feruka. In fact, blending logistics must be rapidly developed for fuel coming through all the different entrance points into the country, be it by road, rail or pipeline.

3.7       The government should direct car manufacturers/ assemblers/ dealers/ agencies to immediately start importing vehicles which take ethanol blends. Policies should be developed that encourage individuals to import vehicles which take ethanol blends. Such policies can take different forms but Government should be the main driver of the efforts to increase the fleet size so that there will be increased uptake of ethanol blends. In addition, where feasible, gadgets which adjust vehicles and make them compatible with high levels of ethanol must be procured.

3.8       The issue of pricing of ethanol should be based on the best practice formulae and be regulated. It must reflect regional and global pricing of ethanol, and take cognizance of the low caloric value of ethanol. It must take into the cost build up involved in producing  a litre of ethanol in Zimbabwe (Greenfuels and Triangle) and the landed cost build of landed fossil fuel (unleaded petrol). On the basis of the analysis done, with the motivation to encourage consumers to use ethanol blends, while jump-starting the Company, the generous price of 85 cents per litre of ethanol is suggested. The actual price should be 69.2 cents per litre. The price of 85 cents a litre, will mean the prices of the blends will be as follows; E5 (US1.47), E10 (US$1.43), E20 (US$1.37), E85 (US$0.95), E100 (US$0.85), as compared to unleaded fuel going at the rate of US1.50 a litre.

3.9       From the analysis of the impact of the price of ethanol on the price of the blends it is clear that only competitive pricing will make the blends attractive. In fact, with the correct pricing of ethanol and effective marketing there might be no need for mandatory blending. Consequently, the price of 85c a litre of ethanol being suggested is just a starting point. The objective is to eventually adjust the price to 70c a litre. This will be possible as the company will now be enjoying volume driven economics, while the different ethanol blends will be very attractive at E5 (US1.46), E10 (US$1.42), E20 (US$1.34), E85 (US$0.82), E100 (US$0.7) compared to unleaded fuel going at the rate of US1.50 per litre.

3.10     Fuel prices will not remain at the current levels.  They could rise, in which case the ethanol company would have a windfall in profits; but prices could equally fall and that would make the production of ethanol uneconomic and hurt sugarcane farmers. There is need to consider the idea of a 'cushion fund'/other mechanism to take advantage of high crude oil prices and to establish a floor price/other mechanism for ethanol prices were international crude oil prices to drop drastically. This would require the involvement of Treasury in these discussions given the linkage with duties and other taxes that can be used as incentives.

3.11     Once all these technical and business decisions are made and the community issues are resolved, it is important for the Company and the government to carry massive marketing campaigns for Ethanol fuel blends. Some of the consumers’ negative attitudes to ethanol are based on sheer ignorance and fear of the unknown. In fact, from a review of the history of fuel blending before independence up to 1992, there is no evidence of vehicle damage due to the use of ethanol blends. Furthermore ethanol technology and quality has improved since then, and so has car technology towards compatibility with ethanol blends. The benefits of ethanol blends and the associated personal, community, national and environmental advantages must be clearly articulated in a massive branding and marketing campaign.

4.   Concluding Remarks

4.1       The two sets of recommendations must be implemented concurrently and immediately. All the recommendations to resolve the social and community issues must be implemented with urgency. The Committee rejects the conditional approach that says these challenges can only be addressed when the plant is running, after the business and technical issues are resolved. This is completely unacceptable. In fact, some of the community issues were supposed to have been addressed before the Project started. Furthermore, the quantum of resources required to address these concerns are quite insignificant compared to the financial scale of the project. While we appreciate that resolving the business issues leading to the running of the plant will make it easier, and less financially burdensome for the Company to address the social concerns, it is our unyielding conviction that not only has the company got the requisite resources, it has a legal and moral obligation to address the concerns of the communities, immediately. Community buy-in and ownership are critical for such an important national and strategic project.

4.2       In embracing the redress to communities, beyond compensation for assets/land lost, it is important to leave them with an arrangement that secures their incomes as out-growers and sellers of produce to the company. It is also possible here to revisit the BOT so that its terms are reworked/revised in such a way that the company hands over the assets to a Community Trust rather than to ARDA, and it should be possible for the Community Trust to enter into management contract with the Company or any other competent management entity.

4.3       The government must quickly mobilise all the concerned stakeholders in order to expeditiously implement the technical and business recommendations presented in this report. This will enable the Chisumbanje Ethanol Project, a national and strategic project to start running.

4.4       Once the issues raised in this report are addressed, and the plant is fully operational it might be possible for Government to explore the possibility of a motor manufacturing plant using Brazilian technology so that a few models that use high ethanol content can be assembled locally. In fact, we can think in terms of an ethanol industrial cluster, with many products and services driven by ethanol. As we address the problems that have led to the derailment of the Ethanol Project, we must not miss the forest for the trees. This Project is a national and strategic asset with a potentially huge impact on our economy, through radically changing our fuel economics, power generation (supplying the entirety of Manicaland), multiple downstream industries, new dependent projects such as Kondo Dam, and a potential car manufacturing industry, alluded to above.

4.5       This full report outlining the work and recommendations of the Inter-Ministerial Committee was adopted by Cabinet on the 18^th of September 2012. This presentation encapsulates the collective and considered position of an inclusive set of Ministers who set out to address some tough matters. In doing its work the Committee consulted and involved all the stakeholders and engaged the entire ethanol ecosystem. The two sets of recommendations, seek to balance between community, private and national interests, as we strive to bring this strategic project back on course.

Deceptive hope for Chisumbanje communities

After years of economic plunder, pillaging coupled with an uncontrollable economic meltdown, Agricultural Rural Development Authority (ARDA) finally collapsed. The main business entity that brought life to the sleepy Checheche Growth Point and the surrounding areas could no longer operate causing so much suffering to the locals who had become dependent on it for survival.

In the process, vast employment and business opportunities were lost plunging hundreds of people back into the village without alternative source of living. The grief was not to last long as rumours of a new gigantic investor started filtering the whole community like wind sending screams of joy for the restoration of survival means.

The new investor only discovered later to be Macdom Investments under the banner of Green Fuel entered into an agreement with the ailing ARDA to construct an ethanol plant at the latter’s premises. The harsh landing of ARDA had resulted in tragic loss of so many opportunities that came with the presence of a key economic driving company.

The new investor was oozing with promises of economic recovery, employment and community development which the locals been deprived of since the demise of ARDA. The locals never took time to accept that the government had done a fairly good job in awarding Chisumbanje with a big investment of that magnitude. In the midst of joy, news spread like a virus, ‘Macdom Investments wanted to take over all the community land since the 5000ha from ARDA was not enough to match the capacity of the built machine.’

Confusion become rife in the community with some accepting that big projects like bio-fuel business will bring more benefits that the small pieces of land lost. Some were convinced that they were being treated unfairly. Cheap fuel to the community and the country at large, eco-friendliness and ability to generate employment formed part of the strong points scored against the vulnerable locals who started seeing perennial hunger and poverty looming.

Promises of small irrigation plots were heard but no clear communication from the company or any of its representatives were available to substantiate the fact. The idea appeared noble since drought and hunger had taken deep roots in the community. Many thought a saviour had come in the form of Green Fuel and no reasonable human being would turn down such a God given privilege.

Pressure was coming from all angles for the locals to accept the coming of Green Fuel as a key development in the area. Determination to remain masters of their own destiny won the contest and the locals continued to fight for their land. They were resolved to fight for justice and never to accept something that is not mutually beneficial. The company and former land owners ARDA were communication differently further complicating and reducing the whole issue into some episodic drama.

The project scored reasonable points against a hostile community but along the way lost some valuable marks because in the midst of proving their worthiness, tragic scenes never stopped happening in the community. After the machine started operating, villagers woke to the news that livestock, fish and frogs had died in one of the local rivers where the wastes from the machine were being disposed into. 

Firstly the company prioritized people from other districts ahead of locals in employment opportunities. This angered the locals who lost trust in the capacity of the investor to help them overcome an almost looming poverty. The company had promised that in return for lost land locals were prioritized for employment opportunities and this proved that the company was preaching the gospel they were not willing to live.

In addition the investor was not forthcoming in terms of helping resolve some of the community problems like helping social service providers like schools and clinics in meeting their goals in the face of limited resources. This portrayed an investor who was only concerned in amassing wealth without giving back to the community.

No proper consultations were made between the company and the community leadership inclusive of chiefs, headman, Member of Parliament and Councillors and this has led to confrontational scenarios and for a company as big Green Fuel and serious as much as portray, lack of basic communication procedures shrouds the whole investment into clouds of suspicion and up to date no one from the local community and Zimbabwe at large really understands what the company intends to do and how it operates.

This has reduced the value and trust local communities had on the investor giving the latter a mountainous task to make sure that they convince the locals to share the same goal and agenda so that they work together to ensure that the relationship is mutually beneficial typical of the time ARDA was in operational.

Statement on the International Day of Peace

"As we forge ahead let us continue to exert our energy in fostering unity, peace, development and equality of opportunity of all our people," President Mugabe at the official opening of the 4^th session of the 7^th parliament.

Platform for Youth Development PYD joins the rest of the world in commemorating the International Day of Peace. We salute all individuals, organisations and governments that have committed resources and effort towards ensuring that peace prevails in the world. We are also indebted to our local organisations and movements that subscribe to the global message of peace.

As a youth organisation, we feel honoured by our involvement in peace campaigns. We are very cognisant of the value of peace in national development and democratic processes. We therefore wish to challenge all Zimbabweans to respect and honour President Mugabe’s message of peace in the country. The only question that remain unanswered is the President’s level of commitment to peace when his own party is unrepentant and responsible for the recent spate of violence at Parliament building, Fourth Street bus terminus and Mbare suburb.

As we approach the referendum, we call upon the people of Zimbabwe to respect and make a pledge for peace in the country. Zimbabweans should now begin to see elections as a democratic necessity and not a battle zone. Elections provide citizens with freedom and right to choose a political party that present the best opportunities for them. This is something that can be done in a peaceful manner without fighting and killing one another.

PYD believes peace is a critical element if Zimbabwe is to develop itself into a mature democracy that meets regional and international emulation. This clarion call demand concerted effort towards creating a peaceful environment for every citizen. It is thus imperative that messages of peace be reinforced and amplified for Zimbabwe to gain faith from its citizenry.

We wish to raise concern over the lackadaisical manner in which COPAC is conducting its business at the Rainbow Towers. We believe the new constitution is a critical foundation of peace hence should be properly handled. We become worried when politicking and partisan tendencies become the order of the day even at the uploading stage.

PYD is increasingly worried that the organ on National Healing and Reconciliation and Integration has already thrown the towel and accepted failure when it was everyone’s hope that they were going to be engine for a once more peaceful Zimbabwe.

Lastly we feel betrayed by the current Indigenization and Empowerment drive which is being handled in a partisan manner by Minister Kasukuwere. Just recently the nation woke up to the news that marauding Zanu PF youths were grabbing buildings and businesses in Masvingo and Chiredzi in total defiance of the principles of peace. The biggest question from young people is whether the Empowerment drive is genuine and if so how does Chisumbanje ethanol project fare noting that Billy Rautenbauch and Graeme Smith are all controversial investors.

Compiled by Information and Communications Department

P Bag 5004 Checheche

Email: platformtrust@gmail.com, clarismadhuku78@gmail.com

Cell: +263773010331, 0773011599

CLICK ON THE LINK BELOW

PYD Day of the African Child commemorations on Africa TV