Johannesburg - Sanral is contradicting itself in trying to justify e-tolling as a better source of revenue than a national fuel levy, the Opposition to Urban Tolling Alliance (Outa) said on Thursday.
Outa regards statements by SA National Roads Agency (Sanral) spokesperson Vusi Mona about this issue as "extraordinarily incoherent".
“Mona’s arguments about the supposed 'unfairness' of using the fuel levy fund for road construction reveals a great deal more than Mona intended. He clearly does not understand fiscal budgeting and long term financial planning,” said Outa chair Wayne Duvenage.
“In Mona’s attempt to talk down the fuel levy as a funding mechanism for road infrastructure he was quoted as saying that about R42bn was collected (annually) by the Treasury from the fuel levy nationally."
Sanral receives an allocation from that.
According to Duvenage Mona also said that "because the Gauteng Freeway Improvement Project (GFIP) cost R20bn, it would be unfair to the rest of the country for 50% of fuel levy to be spent on Gauteng".
Duvenage said no one ever expected that the entire cost of the GFIP should be paid for in a single year.
"The loan amount only needs to be paid off over a period of twenty years, which works out at R1.9bn per year, including interest," Duvenage said.
This is less than 5% of the annual income from the fuel levy.
"Bonds for capital infrastructure development are not the same as borrowing money to pay for annual school fees,” Duvenage said.
Income from fuel levy
Outa spokesperson John Clarke questions the logic of statements by Mona and Sanral CEO Nazir Alli about revenue from designated fuel levies declining worldwide, because of improved engine technology and fuel efficiency.
“What extraordinary logic is that?" asked Clarke.
"While the quality of engine technology may be improving, the ever increasing quantity of motor vehicles using the roads continues to push the fuel levy yield up.”
He said in the past three years, since the completion of the GFIP, Treasury has increased the fuel levy by 31% to R2.34 per litre, thereby accumulating another R12bn per year for government coffers.
"This is enough to effectively finance five new freeway improvement projects of R20bn each, without the need for the added costs of e-toll collections," said Clarke.
“The best that can be said of Alli’s and Mona's utterances...is that Sanral has helped to alert KZN and Western Cape residents to the national implications of Gauteng e-tolling."
Sanral's 'national ambition'
Outa said a reliable source has confirmed speculation that Sanral’s ambition has always been to extend e-tolling throughout the country.
“We have learned that the Midrand Central Operations Centre was planned and built to cater for thousands of kilometres of roads, not just the 187km of the GFIP," said Outa.
“This completely contradicts Sanral's recent argument in the Cape High Court that ‘the type of e-tolling facilitated by the collection method envisaged by the amendment bill is, and remains, highly unusual and only appropriate in very confined circumstances’," said Clarke.
Outa regards statements by SA National Roads Agency (Sanral) spokesperson Vusi Mona about this issue as "extraordinarily incoherent".
“Mona’s arguments about the supposed 'unfairness' of using the fuel levy fund for road construction reveals a great deal more than Mona intended. He clearly does not understand fiscal budgeting and long term financial planning,” said Outa chair Wayne Duvenage.
“In Mona’s attempt to talk down the fuel levy as a funding mechanism for road infrastructure he was quoted as saying that about R42bn was collected (annually) by the Treasury from the fuel levy nationally."
Sanral receives an allocation from that.
According to Duvenage Mona also said that "because the Gauteng Freeway Improvement Project (GFIP) cost R20bn, it would be unfair to the rest of the country for 50% of fuel levy to be spent on Gauteng".
Duvenage said no one ever expected that the entire cost of the GFIP should be paid for in a single year.
"The loan amount only needs to be paid off over a period of twenty years, which works out at R1.9bn per year, including interest," Duvenage said.
This is less than 5% of the annual income from the fuel levy.
"Bonds for capital infrastructure development are not the same as borrowing money to pay for annual school fees,” Duvenage said.
Income from fuel levy
Outa spokesperson John Clarke questions the logic of statements by Mona and Sanral CEO Nazir Alli about revenue from designated fuel levies declining worldwide, because of improved engine technology and fuel efficiency.
“What extraordinary logic is that?" asked Clarke.
"While the quality of engine technology may be improving, the ever increasing quantity of motor vehicles using the roads continues to push the fuel levy yield up.”
He said in the past three years, since the completion of the GFIP, Treasury has increased the fuel levy by 31% to R2.34 per litre, thereby accumulating another R12bn per year for government coffers.
"This is enough to effectively finance five new freeway improvement projects of R20bn each, without the need for the added costs of e-toll collections," said Clarke.
“The best that can be said of Alli’s and Mona's utterances...is that Sanral has helped to alert KZN and Western Cape residents to the national implications of Gauteng e-tolling."
Sanral's 'national ambition'
Outa said a reliable source has confirmed speculation that Sanral’s ambition has always been to extend e-tolling throughout the country.
“We have learned that the Midrand Central Operations Centre was planned and built to cater for thousands of kilometres of roads, not just the 187km of the GFIP," said Outa.
“This completely contradicts Sanral's recent argument in the Cape High Court that ‘the type of e-tolling facilitated by the collection method envisaged by the amendment bill is, and remains, highly unusual and only appropriate in very confined circumstances’," said Clarke.