Prevent further delays in Party Funding Act promulgation, President Ramaphosa
21 May 2019
This morning My Vote Counts (MVC) wrote to President Cyril Ramaphosa to urge His Excellency to prevent further delays in the promulgation of the Political Party Funding Act (the Act). This was in response to an article published in the Mail & Guardian on 10 May that relayed the most recent positions of the two largest political parties, the Democratic Alliance (DA) and the African National Congress (ANC), in relation to the Act.
High-ranking officials from both parties expressed the intention to call for the Act’s review in the sixth Parliament. The then Political Party Funding Bill has already been before the National Assembly and the National Council of Provinces. Thereafter it was signed by the President in January 2019 without a date gazetted for promulgation. The Act should now be at the final stage as civil society anticipates a date for the public hearings before the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) on the Act’s regulations. However, if the Act is once again brought before Parliament, civil society and the public will witness what is clearly an intentional delay in promulgating legislation which would deliver continuous and systematic private funding transparency legislation that South Africa’s Constitution entitles the public to access.
The M&G report highlighted the deceptive reasoning these party officials used to justify a delay in the Act’s implementation. Both officials stated that the need to review the Act is based on its supposed direct and negative impact on political parties’ ability to raise funds for their election campaigns. However, the collective spending of all 48 political parties who contested the recent general elections has reportedly cost an estimated R2 billion. The ANC reportedly spent around R1 billion on their campaign, the DA reportedly spent R600 million and the other 46 parties reportedly spent a combined total of R400 million. These numbers show how both the two largest parties enjoyed a huge amount of private funding to boost their election campaigns.
MVC’s letter also challenged arguments made by the relevant party officials who placed emphasis on how smaller parties, in particular, suffered to raise funds as a result of the Act. Firstly, it is dangerously misleading to direct blame on any parties’ ability to raise private funding on an Act that is yet to be implemented. Secondly, the election results also showed how, new and older, small parties were able to gain seats in Parliament. Thirdly, if the Act is implemented, smaller parties would significantly benefit from a new provision which would increase their share in private funding.