Publications
Partners
Cape Town - Fin24 has been inundated with emails from users in response to South African Roads Agency (Sanral) spokesperson Vusi Mona's defence of Gauteng's e-toll system.
READ: Sanral hits back: Vusi Mona debunks Outa numbers
Mona launched a stinging attack on the Opposition to Urban Tolling Alliance (Outa), which said on the second anniversary of the controversial e-toll system that it has been a failure and was "doomed from the outset".
READ: Two years on: Outa lists 5 reasons why e-tolls flopped
Fin24 user Arnold Pollak says: "As with most empty arguments it sounds to me like Vusi (Mona) is trying to 'wag the dog', focusing on Outa rather than being honest or doing anything to instill trust in (the system)."
Paul de Beer says the e-toll system of recovering costs is blatantly unfair and simply a way for some people to enrich themselves. "It cannot be fair to the users to pay for a recovery system that cost as much as the improvement of the roads themselves. That is blatantly inappropriate and... the main reason why this e-tolling system is unfair and cannot and should not be codoned."
De Beer says a modest fuel levy would be a much better way of financing upgrades to Gauteng's highways.
Colin Kerrigan concurs. "The system is massively expensive for funding what was essentially a structure that was existing, save for some maintenance that should have been recovered over the period of use from the fuel tax. This tax is easy and cheap to implement and fair."
All South African roads benefit from a fuel tax, says Kerrigan: "The fact that VAT is charged on a tax is if not criminal, then morally wrong and should be stopped immediately." Some road users' "reluctant" payment of their e-toll bills should in no way be construed as agreeing with the system, says Kerrigan.
Hendri keeps his response short and to the point: "I never had a say. I will not pay e-toll, ever. Even if it is R1- corruption is SA's downfall."
"Sanral aims to get us to pay twice for use of the highways... fuel levy once and e-tolling twice. Their plan is flawed and we don't trust them!" is Gordon & Joao's comment.
Willie Viljoen says that far from Mona's claim that Outa breaks down without building, it is contesting a system which is so unfair that it has even accepted a 60% drop in fees.
Instead, he says, these words should be applicable "to all the violent protesters we see and read about every day".
"The idea that all principles of a democratic constitution should be respected is a glimpse of sober thought, but should be applied across the board. Perhaps these words are the beginning, which may be a saving grace for the country."
Democracy also demands that when an institution like Sanral wants to implement a system that would cost the public a great deal of money, it should be open about its objectives and cost structure and with proper consultation beforehand, says Viljoen.
"It is the underhand dealings of Sanral that has caused the unprecedented public revolt". The high court toll judgment in Cape to set aside the Winelands toll project proved that Sanral was not complying with basic principles. "They also refused to be open about the costs involved, because it might jeopardise contracts. What more could they do wrong?"
READ: Cape toll judgment 'saved the economy' - Winde
John provides a lone dissenting voice. He says: "The roads are well maintained, the roads' lighting system is great, the roads are kept clean."
John says he lives in Meyerton and works in Pretoria, and mostly uses a motorcycle to get around. He contrasts e-tolled highways with the "dangerous" two-lane R59, which has no lights and is not kept clean. "Once I hit the tolls it's like new world 4 lanes. In closing, my life is worth far more than R225 per month."
Disclaimer: All articles and letters published on Fin24 have been independently written by members of the Fin24 community. The views of users published on Fin24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent those of Fin24.
