Chairperson, I want to express my appreciation to all parties for their support for this piece of legislation. It is a very necessary piece of legislation and a necessary set of amendments, as hon members have indicated.
I think part of what we have is a situation that, since 2001, different regulations have been applied differently. What we need to be able to do is to ensure that all the accountable institutions will respond in the appropriate manner and for that reason there needs to be some ability to lean on them because those responsibilities should not be taken too lightly.
The hon Marais made reference to the presence of some regulators and I think it is necessary for us to distinguish between regulators and what, in some instances, are industry associations. If you look at banks in South Africa, it is actually quite highly regulated. The Registrar of Banks located at the Reserve Bank has a very good and strong relationship and would be the regulator. That does not change the fact that the banking association has an important role to play as an industry association and they are not an accountable institution in the same sense of the word.
However, in respect of the legal profession, it is very difficult because the reach of the Law Society of South Africa is actually quite limited. And the ability to deal with that very necessary distinction between privilege and abuse is something that we have to work at continuously. I think we are persuaded that the National Law Society doesn't quite exist and that there needs to be a different set of relationship structures within the provincial law societies, and hopefully these would not just follow the norms of the four provinces of the past.
I do want to give hon members the assurance that the idea is not to set up the FIC as a super regulator. It would cost an enormous amount of money and the systems to try and do that would just be an overwhelming task. We do want the FIC to have close relations with regulators.
I hope that part of what they would be able to do in the future is to also raise, in the context of Parliament, some naming and shaming of those accountable institutions that don't want to perform their role. Then we have to get to the bottom of that. Then we would have a sense of who they are and where the abuse is. But I think we need to bring those issues into the open because it is one thing to pat the banks on the back for they know you as clients and all of the other things that they do but I think, by the same token, we must bring into the open those who don't actually want to comply or play a role and some of them are state institutions. So, we need take some of those issues forward.
In respect of the cost that the hon Singh raised, I am assured that the cost at the Financial Intelligence Centre will be marginal. In the industry, by and large, accountable institutions should be already doing the things that the amendments require of them to do. So, I can't really see save to try and duck and dive past the amendment proposed here. While the issue of costs have been raised as strongly as it has been in the course of the parliamentary hearings, clearly it is something that we will keep an eye on.
Again, Chairperson, I express appreciation for this Bill. Thank you.
Debate concluded.
Bill read a second time.