By Gavin Kelly, CEO of the Road Freight Association
The Road Freight Association (RFA) notes the decision by Cabinet to “finally close the historical e-toll debt” which involves both the “close-out” of historical debt and the “resolution of all outstanding litigation matters”.
The Minister of Transport has “welcomed the Cabinet decision”. Strange, didn’t the Department of Transport push this from the very beginning – a “ringfenced toll revenue collection system to fund the vital routes in and around Gauteng”? Remember when this was referred to as the “Gauteng Freeway Improvement Programme (GFIP)”?
Recently, the Minister of Transport noted that “widespread tolling may become necessary to maintain South Africa’s road network” as SANRAL is given responsibility of (read that as “saddled with”) over 13 000km of roads due to the inability of provincial and local authorities to maintain, develop or repair the existing network of roads?
More toll roads rely on the “user-pay principle” – and we have just seen how well that worked with e-tolls.
Further, “road-users who lawfully paid e-tolls while the system was legally in force will not be refunded”. That means those who refused to pay performed illegal acts. No punishment for them – but punishment for those who comply.
A lesson is to be learned here – and it’s not the type of lesson any government should be teaching the very citizens it counts to keep it afloat through taxes and levies. The questions that could arise from any logically thinking taxpayer (or any other form of “service levy”) are: why should I pay (as others don’t and there is no deterrent) and what is the next levy / tax that we as citizens should “just oppose and refuse to pay”?
It is very sad that, despite promises from the Gauteng Premier that there would be reimbursement (swiftly followed by a retraction), Gauteng citizens are still going to pay off the Gauteng e-Toll portion of the “debt” as agreed to by the self-same Premier. That means: those who abided by the law and paid e-tolls will inevitably “pay a second time” through other levies and taxes.
The Association was very clear at the outset of e-tolls: that it would support the system subject to the government ensuring that all who used the tolled routes would pay, and that those who did not, would be properly delt with. Turns out – that was another empty promise.
Our members abided by the law. Many citizens abided by the law. The Association proposed alternatives before the very first e-toll gantry began operating, but these fell on deaf ears.
Are the u-turns and detours seen over the last number of years an indication of what will happen in the future regarding road development and maintenance, rail and port operations and the greater logistics network? One hopes not.
At least the uncertainty of looming legal action has been dealt a death-blow.
A great “victory” for those who opposed e-tolls? Perhaps a sobering moment regarding the transient nature of government policy built on the foundation of popularist notions.
Now for the halt of anything of an AARTO nature.