Avis supports e-toll, sees positive impact

JStrike said:
Nope. Look at the post right below yours. The majority of people are rabidly against etolls in general, not the specific implementation that is in GP
Click to expand...

I disagree. People are contextualising it within their own paradigm. We have no other context for it as it is a first here in SA. And the first implementation was corrupt, subject to inflated costs, resulted in shoddy work, hasn't eased traffic in any noticeable way, does not benefit us economically for the foreseeable future, should have been paid for with the road maintenance fund that has been squandered, and has no sustainable future at the price-points proposed, so will be subject to serious price-hikes in the coming years, just for Sanral to service its debt, and was funded and guaranteed by government without proper risk analysis, as well as being passed after pathetically poor excuses for consultation.

On that basis, even you should be opposed to the current implementation of e-tolls. Are you?
 
DJ... said:
I disagree. People are contextualising it within their own paradigm. We have no other context for it as it is a first here in SA. And the first implementation was corrupt, subject to inflated costs, resulted in shoddy work, hasn't eased traffic in any noticeable way, does not benefit us economically for the foreseeable future, should have been paid for with the road maintenance fund that has been squandered, and has no sustainable future at the price-points proposed, so will be subject to serious price-hikes in the coming years, just for Sanral to service its debt.

On that basis, even you should be opposed to the current implementation of e-tolls. Are you?
Click to expand...

In that context, I absolutely am against them.
I am not against etolling in general though, and I do believe they are the way forward.
 
JStrike said:
We are a Nett Contributor to the National Treasury. We don't get any of GP's money. The rest of the country however do :)
But that is bedsides the point.
Click to expand...

In terms of money flow you do. In terms of nett contribution, I'm not 100% sure that's correct, but you are right. It is besides the point...

I do agree that the scale of the disaster either requires the current etolling system to go ahead or National Gov to step in. However, I think it would be better for National Gov to provide a once of bailout of the system, rather than the fuel levy, which the rest of SA would be stuck paying in perpetuity.
But going forward we need etolls. Or a constitutional amendment allowing for Provincial Government to raise Provincial fuel levy's
Click to expand...

Provincial levy is identical to the tolling system. It's still the same number of vehicles paying the same amount in order to service Sanral's debt. It is not a viable option without it having serious localised, and subsequent macro-inflationary pressures.

And where did I agree that the scale of the disaster requires e-tolling to go ahead? I have not said that at all. That's disingenuous on your part. And where is national government going to "find" R30bn? If they do, they'll be printing it, and we're then subjected to immediate, and identical inflationary problems. The national levy spreads the cost across various demographics, which I'm sure many people have not factored in yet. The upper and middle classes will still pay the most, but it doesn't create provincial imbalances.

Remember that by supporting this, you're simply providing tacit support for the same implementation to be adopted over there in WC. People need to take a stand against it to show that such an implementation will not be tolerated again...
 
DJ... said:
In terms of money flow you do. In terms of nett contribution, I'm not 100% sure that's correct, but you are right. It is besides the point...



Provincial levy is identical to the tolling system. It's still the same number of vehicles paying the same amount in order to service Sanral's debt. It is not a viable option without it having serious localised, and subsequent macro-inflationary pressures.

And where did I agree that the scale of the disaster requires e-tolling to go ahead? I have not said that at all. That's disingenuous on your part. And where is national government going to "find" R30bn? If they do, they'll be printing it, and we're then subjected to immediate, and identical inflationary problems. The national levy spreads the cost across various demographics, which I'm sure many people have not factored in yet. The upper and middle classes will still pay the most, but it doesn't create provincial imbalances.

Remember that by supporting this, you're simply providing tacit support for the same implementation to be adopted over there in WC. People need to take a stand against it to show that such an implementation will not be tolerated again...
Click to expand...

Sorry, you didn't say that the scale of the disaster requires e-tolling to go ahead. That was me. I was agreeing with you on the second part where National Gov needs to step in. Gov could issue a bond to fund it.
 
DJ... said:
Remember that by supporting this, you're simply providing tacit support for the same implementation to be adopted over there in WC. People need to take a stand against it to show that such an implementation will not be tolerated again...
Click to expand...

That^

But as long as the ANC are in power, they will do this over and over, in all spheres of society.

Pigs at the trough, they are never satisfied.
 
Last edited:
JStrike said:
Sorry, you didn't say that the scale of the disaster requires e-tolling to go ahead. That was me. I was agreeing with you on the second part where National Gov needs to step in. Gov could issue a bond to fund it.
Click to expand...

They cannot issue a bond to repay an existing bond - nobody would subscribe to that unless it was further guaranteed, and then we're sitting with a government Ponzi scheme. They've already funded it with a medium term note programme and the reasons for the rushed go-ahead is that Sanral have already burned through R7bn handed out to them this year alone, and some bonds are maturing soon/have matured. Government can no longer continue bailing them out without triggering a default, unless the events of default clause doesn't make provision for capital investment repayments not being considered in the cashflow of the various tranches - not sure here.

Bottom line is that they cannot simply find close on R30bn, and we need a solution, fast. The solution is not acceptance of a corrupt and inefficient system. It is a fuel levy at this stage of the game, and a national one. That's the reality that we face. We can talk in hypotheticals about the benefits of e-tolling 'till we're blue in the face, and you and I agree in principle, but within this context, we have to be able to find a middle ground that is not to the detriment of the economy, is sufficient to fund long-term cash flow requirements of the bond programme, and can be implemented immediately.

Show me a single, viable alternative to this other than a national fuel levy...
 
I am not aware of a single jurisdiction where a longstanding via publica - which had received public funding from general revenue funds for a considerable period of time and that serves as an economic corridor within an urban metropolis- has been tolled like this to back fund alleged upgrades
 
DJ... said:
They cannot issue a bond to repay an existing bond - nobody would subscribe to that unless it was further guaranteed, and then we're sitting with a government Ponzi scheme. They've already funded it with a medium term note programme and the reasons for the rushed go-ahead is that Sanral have already burned through R7bn handed out to them this year alone, and some bonds are maturing soon/have matured. Government can no longer continue bailing them out without triggering a default, unless the events of default clause doesn't make provision for capital investment repayments not being considered in the cashflow of the various tranches - not sure here.

Bottom line is that they cannot simply find close on R30bn, and we need a solution, fast. The solution is not acceptance of a corrupt and inefficient system. It is a fuel levy at this stage of the game, and a national one. That's the reality that we face. We can talk in hypotheticals about the benefits of e-tolling 'till we're blue in the face, and you and I agree in principle, but within this context, we have to be able to find a middle ground that is not to the detriment of the economy, is sufficient to fund long-term cash flow requirements of the bond programme, and can be implemented immediately.

Show me a single, viable alternative to this other than a national fuel levy...
Click to expand...

You have raised good arguments. I must agree with you in the end :)
 
Last edited:
Paul Hjul said:
I am not aware of a single jurisdiction where a longstanding via publica - which had received public funding from general revenue funds for a considerable period of time and that serves as an economic corridor within an urban metropolis- has been tolled like this to back fund alleged upgrades
Click to expand...

Was the massively important highway between Milan and Turin not there before they started etolls. I'm pretty sure it was. It was just upgraded if I remember correctly
 
DJ... said:
They cannot issue a bond to repay an existing bond - nobody would subscribe to that unless it was further guaranteed, and then we're sitting with a government Ponzi scheme. They've already funded it with a medium term note programme and the reasons for the rushed go-ahead is that Sanral have already burned through R7bn handed out to them this year alone, and some bonds are maturing soon/have matured. Government can no longer continue bailing them out without triggering a default, unless the events of default clause doesn't make provision for capital investment repayments not being considered in the cashflow of the various tranches - not sure here.

Bottom line is that they cannot simply find close on R30bn, and we need a solution, fast. The solution is not acceptance of a corrupt and inefficient system. It is a fuel levy at this stage of the game, and a national one. That's the reality that we face. We can talk in hypotheticals about the benefits of e-tolling 'till we're blue in the face, and you and I agree in principle, but within this context, we have to be able to find a middle ground that is not to the detriment of the economy, is sufficient to fund long-term cash flow requirements of the bond programme, and can be implemented immediately.

Show me a single, viable alternative to this other than a national fuel levy...
Click to expand...
SANRAL defaulting and government paying the applicable creditors to the extent of the guarantee. Then charge the applicable officials with whatever offenses arise. I don't see SANRAL having zero credit or name to be a calamity it simply will have to auction off some of its assets.
 
JStrike said:
Was the massively important highway between Milan and Turin not there before they started etolls. I'm pretty sure it was. It was just upgraded if I remember correctly
Click to expand...

Milan and Turin has been a privately funded road since the time of the Romans - and that is exactly the point. It has always been a turnpike funded on a user pay for usage principle.

The history of putting new tolls on old roads has generally been a leading to violence: Consider the Rebecca Riots
 
Paul Hjul said:
Milan and Turin has been a privately funded road since the time of the Romans - and that is exactly the point. It has always been a turnpike funded on a user pay for usage principle.

The history of putting new tolls on old roads has generally been a leading to violence: Consider the Rebecca Riots
Click to expand...

It does seem like a very odd thing to do. Why did they not build new highways and toll that? Do you know the arguments given?
 
JStrike said:
It does seem like a very odd thing to do. Why did they not build new highways and toll that? Do you know the arguments given?
Click to expand...

because e-tolling is all about trying to milk a perceived cash cow it is an attempt to extort an unjust tax

In fact I am damn sure back when I was little and living in Joburg the current gantry route was being looked at with consideration to impose a tariff for trucks which would fund the outlying ring roads which would be perfectly acceptable. I've put out on this forum (IIRC correctly anyway) that one of the two roads between Krugersdorp and Pretoria could comfortably be turned into an expressway and the same could be done on the R21 and N14 into Pretoria.
 
hmm...it seems the Constitution does allow for Provincial Gov to create a fuel levy, so maybe Provincial Government could start creating big etolled highways (Without SANRAL and done properly). Paul am I correct in this? (Chapter 13, section 228)
Hopefully this will happen in the WC
 
JStrike said:
hmm...it seems the Constitution does allow for Provincial Gov to create a fuel levy, so maybe Provincial Government could start creating big etolled highways (Without SANRAL and done properly). Paul am I correct in this? (Chapter 13, section 228)
Hopefully this happen in the WC
Click to expand...

except that the really useful routes are already national roads and getting pass down to provinces is unlikely but yes it would be perfectly sensible for provinces to establish their own Surface Transport Utilities companies and use either fuel levies or empower collection. The Western Cape and Gauteng are well served by fuel levy on fuel sold in the province the Free State would do better on tolls. Of course if the WC does impose a fuel levy people will buy fuel in a neighboring province if convenient and you might run into the economic detriment argument.
 
Paul Hjul said:
SANRAL defaulting and government paying the applicable creditors to the extent of the guarantee.
Click to expand...

Where do we find R17bn in the budget to pay? All debt and coupons become due upon default, and it would destroy their ability to raise finance at a reasonable cost moving forward, so we'd pay an exorbitant cot of capital again. If you think this cost of capital was high (83% of revenue goes to servicing the debt according to Vusi Moaner), imagine what it will be after a default. Not a pretty picture, and they manage national infrastructure, so this isn't a viable option.

it simply will have to auction off some of its assets.
Click to expand...

It doesn't have sufficient short-term assets to liquidate to even make a dent, so they would have to auction off land and existing tolls. To who? They can't hand it over to another private company, and if the government purchase it then we're left with the same problem...
 
JStrike said:
hmm...it seems the Constitution does allow for Provincial Gov to create a fuel levy, so maybe Provincial Government could start creating big etolled highways (Without SANRAL and done properly). Paul am I correct in this? (Chapter 13, section 228)
Hopefully this will happen in the WC
Click to expand...

I believe they must work with Sanral on such projects. It is Sanral's mandate...
 
DJ... said:
I believe they must work with Sanral on such projects. It is Sanral's mandate...
Click to expand...

Provincial Government has authority on Provincial Roads, and they may raise Provincial Levys. SANRAL is for National Roads

EDIT : Just realised that was a lot of capitalisation. I do apologise :)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X