GHALEB CACHALIA | Lobbying register needed, not an influence scandal

Nigel Farage and Tony Leon inhabit different political universes. Yet the controversies now surrounding both men illuminate the same uncomfortable truth — in modern democracies, secrecy is often more corrosive than corruption itself.

Farage’s latest political theatre was vintage populism. Rather than await the outcome of a parliamentary standards investigation into an allegedly undeclared £5m donation, he seized the initiative, resigning his seat and forcing a by-election framed as a battle between “the people” and “the establishment”. The strategy allowed him to dictate the narrative before parliament could.

The spectacle became even more surreal when Britain’s major parties declined to contest the seat, leaving his principal challenger as Count Binface — the bin-helmeted satirical candidate whose mock campaigns have become an unlikely fixture of British democracy. In Britain’s first-past-the-post electoral system, such absurdity serves a purpose. Binface has become the vessel through which voters can register disillusionment without endorsing an established rival.

South Africa has no equivalent. We certainly have no shortage of fringe parties, but our proportional representation system already provides numerous outlets for protest votes. Political dissatisfaction finds expression through myriad parties rather than through recurring satirical candidatures.

Whether that represents democratic maturity or something more troubling is another question. As voter turnout continues to decline, one wonders whether South African disillusionment has fewer constructive outlets, increasingly manifesting instead as disengagement or social resentment.

But it is the second story, one that is much closer to home, that deserves greater attention. Allegations regarding Resolve Communications have generated a debate that extends far beyond one consultancy or one former politician. Leon vigorously rejects suggestions of impropriety, describing Resolve’s activities as entirely legitimate public affairs work. No wrongdoing has been established. Yet that is precisely the point.

Neither the public nor investigators can easily distinguish where legitimate lobbying ends and undue influence begins because South Africa has almost no transparency about lobbying itself.

The Political Party Funding Act was a landmark reform. It hugely improved disclosure about donations to political parties and has positioned South Africa ahead of many comparable democracies. But it addresses only one side of political influence: money flowing into parties. It says virtually nothing about money spent seeking to influence government decisions after elections.

Unlike Canada, Ireland and the US, South Africa has no comprehensive lobbying register requiring consultants and lobbyists to disclose their clients, record meetings with ministers or senior officials, or report expenditure aimed at influencing policy. Consequently, influence remains largely invisible until allegations emerge.

That is what links the Leon and Farage controversies. Farage’s difficulty is not that political donations are unlawful but that transparency rules may have been breached. Likewise, the Resolve debate is not primarily about whether lobbying is legitimate — democracies need informed engagement between business, civil society and government. It is about whether the public can see who is seeking access, on whose behalf, and for what purpose.

Unlike Canada, Ireland and the US, South Africa has no comprehensive lobbying register requiring consultants and lobbyists to disclose their clients.

Opacity breeds suspicion. Transparency allows legitimate advocacy to distinguish itself from influence-peddling.

And to President Cyril Ramaphosa’s point: state capture flourished not simply because individuals were corrupt, but because relationships remained hidden until enormous damage had already been done.

South Africa now has an opportunity to move beyond scandal-driven reform.

It could become one of the first African democracies to establish a comprehensive, publicly searchable lobbying register, drawing particularly on Ireland’s internationally respected model. Every meeting between lobbyists and public office-bearers would be logged. Clients would be disclosed. The public would know who was seeking to shape policy before decisions were made rather than discovering it months or years later.

That would not criminalise lobbying. It would legitimise it.

If influence is legitimate, it should also be visible.

• Cachalia, a business person and management consultant, is a former DA MP and public enterprises spokesperson and chaired De Beers Namibia.