I rise in this debate to support the notion that we as Parliament continue to have the responsibility to give input on international fora about how this Parliament sees the matter of accountability. As we know, the Inter-Parliamentary Union, IPU, continues to be an important forum for over 155 countries in the world to interact on the critical matters and questions that face the nation state.
The IPU engages with various challenges that continue to face the nation state. These matters range from the assassination of political party leaders elsewhere in the country and the continent. Therefore as Parliament we continue to be an important body to engage with and give input on those processes around how the IPU and that interaction continue to function.
We know the challenge we are currently faced with is to deal with the discussion around the mandating by Parliament of matters of transparency and accountability in the funding of political parties. The previous speaker already mentioned the committees that are dealing with these particular matters. South Africa is regarded highly in the IPU, and we have already indicated earlier that South Africans have been given the responsibility to draft the resolution around the issue of the funding of political parties and accountability.
Therefore it means that as Parliament we need to understand the responsibility we have, including the responsibility of capacity and the capacitation of Members of Parliament in order to perform that particular oversight function. To continue to do this, of course, we as Parliament need to begin to build the capacity of MPs and the oversight role that we need to play as Parliament - without fear or favour, of course.
The current debate, as we already indicated, is about how we regulate the funding of political parties for elections. That is the topic the IPU is currently engaged with. Our position: and it has been highlighted - is that there is unevenness across the countries of the world in how this particular question is addressed.
Those who argue and advocate for an immediate legislative process may be missing the point of what we actually need. What we need is regulation, transparency and accountability. These are the measures that we need to put in place. We need to understand that both public funding and private funding are critical in elections for maintaining democracy. We need a balancing act. We need to find a uniform mechanism, one that could even introduce a sunset clause, taking us from voluntary self-regulation towards an actual legislative process. After all, if funding is not regulated, you will of course continue to find challenges in that a vote means less when those who take power are indebted to the people who funded a particular election. Therefore it is important to make sure that regulation happens. It continues to be our view that there must be a balancing act. It is important for the public purse to fund and help maintain democracy. It is also important that the private sector comes to the party, but that must be regulated so that we are able to see the value of our democracy. We don't want to vote when the people who are pulling the strings are not necessarily in Parliament, but are outside - the ones who have the money.
I want to end by saying that if we look at the IPU's comments in their publication on accountability, it says:
Parliament is supposed to be the grand inquisitor of the nation. Yet in their operation parliaments all over the world are steadily losing ground to the executive.
This is what the publication says and this phenomenon needs to be changed. The intervention we are debating here basically has to make sure that Parliament plays the role of mandating those who participate in international fora on behalf of our nation. Thank you. [Applause.]