Organisations opposed to e-tolling this morning reacted strongly to the South African National Roads Agency's (Sanral's) statement yesterday, explaining why it is not participating in the ongoing e-toll review process.
Sanral, which previously came in for criticism for its refusal to present before the 15-member assessment panel, appointed by Gauteng premier David Makhura, explained it informed the premier why it would not be able to take part in the process. Sanral says its board sent "an eight-page communique" to the premier, prior to the commencement of the panel's hearings.
The agency also stated it could not present before the panel, as its board is guided by the Sanral and National Roads Acts, and is ultimately accountable and responsible to the minister of transport for the affairs of the agency.
In addition, Sanral defended the current user-pays principle, saying it is a fair system and describing the argument that the Gauteng Freeway Improvement Project (GFIP) should be funded through a fuel levy as "misdirected".
"Sanral does not collect the fuel levy. Besides, treasury has explained why it does not ring-fence the fuel levy and why, from an equity point of view, a decision was taken to fund the GFIP through tolling," said Sanral acting chairperson Dudu Nyamane.
The Opposition to Urban Tolling Alliance (Outa) rubbished Sanral's statement. "We are astounded at the extent of propaganda and continuous misinformation expressed by Sanral in their media statements," says Outa chairperson Wayne Duvenage.
He argues that Nyamane's statement implies government does not fund Sanral's road-building activity through the use of fuel levies. However, Duvenage points out, the Sanral Act clearly states:"The agency [Sanral] is funded and provided with capital from the levies on petrol and distillate fuel to be paid to the agency, in compliance with or in terms of any law by or in terms of which that levy is imposed."
The fact that the fuel levy was not considered as an alternative to fund the upgrade and that Gauteng's freeways were declared toll roads following a dismal and meaningless public engagement programme, makes the scheme unjustified and a farce, says Duvenage.
"To add further insult and misinformation to the people, Ms Nyamane says the e-toll network falls on only 1% of Sanral's total portfolio. However, it is not the road surface that matters but rather, the extent of traffic thereon that is the issue.
"It's precisely that 1% of road surface on which over 20% of the nation's road users drive and generate massive fuel levies, making it a super concentrated and lucrative space to apply a new 'double' tax to motorists in this region," says Duvenage.
'Disrespectful propaganda'
Similarly, Justice Project South Africa (JPSA) says it is "not impressed" by "Sanral's latest disrespectful propaganda stunt".
JPSA chairperson Howard Dembovsky points out: "Sanral again chooses to use words like 'misinformation', 'propaganda' and 'belligerence' in its media release, while it is the one guilty of engaging in misinformation, propaganda and belligerence.
"Sanral seems to continually forget that, despite it not being a government department, it is a state-owned enterprise and is, therefore, accountable to the people - not the other way around.
"Sanral has already been found to be engaging in false advertising by the Advertising Standards Authority, its claims have been refuted in parliamentary answers provided by the minister of transport, and it and its spokespeople have used insulting and defamatory language by calling their opponents 'hustlers' and telling people to 'raise their IQs', etc. There can be nothing more 'belligerent' than state employees insulting members of the public [and] threatening them with criminal records."
Dembovsky also accused Sanral of showing its contempt for "due democratic processes and the public it claims to serve" by once again attempting to hijack the process by addressing the Gauteng e-tolls review panel through the media, instead of having the guts to make its representations to the panel itself.
"Sanral is again referring to the outright lie that 'the fuel levy cannot be ring-fenced' that it and treasury has been perpetrating since this debate began. The Road Accident Fund (RAF) levy is completely separate to the 'fuel levy' and has been more than successful in financing the RAF. The RAF does not collect the fuel levy for the RAF either; the fuel wholesalers and treasury do and it is then allocated to the RAF."
Share