LazyLion
King of de Jungle
The Democratic Alliance (DA) has labelled yesterday’s discussion of the e-tolling Bill – by the National Council of Provinces (NCOP) Select Committee on Public Services – a “disgrace”.
Herman Groenewald, DA member of Parliament in the NCOP, says the manner in which the Transport Laws and Related Matters Amendment Bill was dealt with by the chairperson of the committee, Mtikeni Sibande, was an “utter disgrace” and that the Bill is being rushed through, without following the proper procedures.
This follows the committee’s approval of changes to the Bill, as proposed by ANC MP Raseriti Tau. Groenewald says changes were made to a section stating that when the transport minister makes a regulation in terms of the law, it will be submitted to Parliament for “consideration” and not “discussion”.
Due to the amendment, the Bill will head back to the National Assembly portfolio committee.
“None of the conventions required for the legislative process in the NCOP were followed. It would, therefore, appear that the ANC is attempting to rush the e-tolling Bill through the NCOP, without adhering to the conventions required,” adds Groenewald.
See also
The DA says it will write to NCOP chairperson Mninwa Mahlangu to request the meeting be reconvened.
Groenewald says according to Parliamentary conventions, a Bill that has been referred to an NCOP committee must be debated in detail. “If there is great public interest in a Bill, the committee should organise public hearings. None of this happened in yesterday’s meeting, and in fact, our request for public hearings was denied.”
Last month, the SA National Road Agency (Sanral) caused public outrage by stating that e-tolling was set to commence in Gauteng within the next two months.
But opposition factions believe that with characteristically lengthy legal and Parliamentary processes wedged between now and the final implementation of e-tolling in the province, this timeframe is unrealistic, if not impossible.
Added opposition
Chairman of the Opposition to Urban Tolling Alliance (Outa) Wayne Duvenhage says it would take only one person to take the matter to the Constitutional Court to bring down the e-tolling house of cards.
“It has been our view right from the beginning that the right regulations were not in place and that the system is illegal. Now, they are trying to correct the legal framework. Sanral wants to change the system so that the owner of the vehicle pays for e-tolling and not the user or driver,” he adds.
Duvenhage says traffic fines are not processed in this way. “So, according to Sanral, it doesn’t matter who is driving as long as someone pays.”
He adds that there could be constitutional challenges against this amendment, if it is passed. ”Until such time as these amendments have, however, been passed, Sanral could never have implemented e-tolling, which was one of the issues we pointed out in the court challenge.”
He says Outa is interested in why Sanral has repeatedly told the courts it was ready to implement e-tolling virtually on a whim. It is now eight months after the Constitutional Court set aside the temporary interdict, allowing Sanral to begin implementing e-tolling, which it argued could and would commence within two weeks, if the court found in its favour.”
Automobile Association spokesperson Gary Ronald adds the tolling saga still has a long way to go. “It is really inopportune to start thinking about implementing the system now.”
After Outa’s High Court application to scrap e-tolling was dismissed in December, the alliance applied for leave to appeal the judgment that deemed e-tolls legal. Leave to appeal was granted in January.
Outa’s appeal will be taken to the Supreme Court of Appeal, in Bloemfontein. “We expect the matter to be heard in the third quarter of the year,” says Duvenhage.
The Department of Transport did not comment at the time of publication.
Source: http://www.itweb.co.za/index.php?op...0:E-toll-Bill-being-rushed-through-&catid=105
Herman Groenewald, DA member of Parliament in the NCOP, says the manner in which the Transport Laws and Related Matters Amendment Bill was dealt with by the chairperson of the committee, Mtikeni Sibande, was an “utter disgrace” and that the Bill is being rushed through, without following the proper procedures.
This follows the committee’s approval of changes to the Bill, as proposed by ANC MP Raseriti Tau. Groenewald says changes were made to a section stating that when the transport minister makes a regulation in terms of the law, it will be submitted to Parliament for “consideration” and not “discussion”.
Due to the amendment, the Bill will head back to the National Assembly portfolio committee.
“None of the conventions required for the legislative process in the NCOP were followed. It would, therefore, appear that the ANC is attempting to rush the e-tolling Bill through the NCOP, without adhering to the conventions required,” adds Groenewald.
See also
The DA says it will write to NCOP chairperson Mninwa Mahlangu to request the meeting be reconvened.
Groenewald says according to Parliamentary conventions, a Bill that has been referred to an NCOP committee must be debated in detail. “If there is great public interest in a Bill, the committee should organise public hearings. None of this happened in yesterday’s meeting, and in fact, our request for public hearings was denied.”
Last month, the SA National Road Agency (Sanral) caused public outrage by stating that e-tolling was set to commence in Gauteng within the next two months.
But opposition factions believe that with characteristically lengthy legal and Parliamentary processes wedged between now and the final implementation of e-tolling in the province, this timeframe is unrealistic, if not impossible.
Added opposition
Chairman of the Opposition to Urban Tolling Alliance (Outa) Wayne Duvenhage says it would take only one person to take the matter to the Constitutional Court to bring down the e-tolling house of cards.
“It has been our view right from the beginning that the right regulations were not in place and that the system is illegal. Now, they are trying to correct the legal framework. Sanral wants to change the system so that the owner of the vehicle pays for e-tolling and not the user or driver,” he adds.
Duvenhage says traffic fines are not processed in this way. “So, according to Sanral, it doesn’t matter who is driving as long as someone pays.”
He adds that there could be constitutional challenges against this amendment, if it is passed. ”Until such time as these amendments have, however, been passed, Sanral could never have implemented e-tolling, which was one of the issues we pointed out in the court challenge.”
He says Outa is interested in why Sanral has repeatedly told the courts it was ready to implement e-tolling virtually on a whim. It is now eight months after the Constitutional Court set aside the temporary interdict, allowing Sanral to begin implementing e-tolling, which it argued could and would commence within two weeks, if the court found in its favour.”
Automobile Association spokesperson Gary Ronald adds the tolling saga still has a long way to go. “It is really inopportune to start thinking about implementing the system now.”
After Outa’s High Court application to scrap e-tolling was dismissed in December, the alliance applied for leave to appeal the judgment that deemed e-tolls legal. Leave to appeal was granted in January.
Outa’s appeal will be taken to the Supreme Court of Appeal, in Bloemfontein. “We expect the matter to be heard in the third quarter of the year,” says Duvenhage.
The Department of Transport did not comment at the time of publication.
Source: http://www.itweb.co.za/index.php?op...0:E-toll-Bill-being-rushed-through-&catid=105
