[May 2013..Dec 2013] The Gauteng E-tolling Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ol' Mean Bastid said:
it did, the rep from National Treasury at the public hearings said as much, she said that one of the primary reasons for implementing tolling was to reduce the number of cars on the highways
Click to expand...

By doubling the cost of driving on the road... Instead of improving the public infrastructure to such an extent that people will want to use it as it will be cheaper and more convenient. I've used lots of public transport in first world countries and the Gautrain is by far the most expensive one I've ever encountered.
 
Yeah, a good (affordable) public transport will never happen in GP so long as the taxis are around
 
Wyzak said:
By doubling the cost of driving on the road... Instead of improving the public infrastructure to such an extent that people will want to use it as it will be cheaper and more convenient. I've used lots of public transport in first world countries and the Gautrain is by far the most expensive one I've ever encountered.
Click to expand...

that was explained in no uncertain terms during the hearing :p
 
Will anybody in their right mind give SANRAL direct unfettered access to their bank account? Just imagine the fun and games where an 'error' on their side makes all your debit orders bounce.
 
Ol' Mean Bastid said:
it did, the rep from National Treasury at the public hearings said as much, she said that one of the primary reasons for implementing tolling was to reduce the number of cars on the highways
Click to expand...

That may be true although I am inclined to think the cANCer party's motivation was $$$ and not fewer cars on the road.

Applying the same reasoning, fewer cars on the road results in fewer people paying etrolling fees; fewer cars on the etrolled roads most likely results in an increased number of people using taxis and buses (that are already exempted from paying etrolling fees provided that those vehicles are etagged); an increased ratio of taxis and buses results in more fatal accidents on the etrolled roads with significant road infrastructure damage that cannot be recovered from taxi drivers who nearly all obtained a drivers licence by bribing someone; similar situation with bus drivers who mostly seem to have the same reckless driving habits as taxi, truck and tow truck drivers.

Does this really sound like a sustainable model where very few people are actually paying the etrolling fees required to feed back into road maintenance?

That might not be the most concrete contradiction to whatever rubbish the National Treasury was spouting at the public hearing, but it certainly suggests that the exemption of taxis and buses casts significant doubt on the sustainability of etrolling. It's also obvious that the most non-compliant group of motorists that would never pay etrolling fees and would be impossible to track down, are in fact taxi owners/drivers.
 
VJB 449 said:
Will anybody in their right mind give SANRAL direct unfettered access to their bank account? Just imagine the fun and games where an 'error' on their side makes all your debit orders bounce.
Click to expand...

I'm sure they'll reimburse you within seven days plus interest.
 
Wyzak said:
Yeah, once e-tolls have taken effect it will actually almost be cost effective for me to use the very expensive Gautrain instead of driving on the roads when going to the airport. No doubt that this influenced their decision.
Click to expand...

I actually did the maths a few weeks back.. right now petrol price for driving past +/- 2-3 gantries with an avg commute of 18km ~= 250-300 less than me taking Gautrain + Bus combo to work. With eTolls it breaks even without maintenance costs. Is it more efficient.. hell no, trip time with public transit on avg is about 1 - 1.1 hrs compared to 20-40 min (peak/off).

So eToll is what they need to tip it in their favor.. personally I'm moving to avoid this and reduce loss(transit) costs. I'd rather buy a place and spend more on mortgage.
 
JOHANNESBURG – The Department of Transport needs less than a month to finalise e-tolling regulations ahead of the project’s launch, Minister Dipuo Peters said on Tuesday.

But there is still no exact date for when the South African National Roads Agency Limited (Sanral) will switch on the gantries across Gauteng highways.
Peters says a launch date will be announced once everything is finalised.

“I believe that we need less than a month to get our ducks in a row and make sure that we start implementing.”
Click to expand...

http://ewn.co.za/2013/10/01/E-tolls-ready-in-one-month-Peters
 
She called on motorists to buy e-tags.

“I made that call long ago but now that it is law, I’m appealing once more; let us all register.”
Click to expand...

No


piss off
 
http://www.iol.co.za/the-star/e-tolls-cost-10-times-more-than-fuel-levy-1.1585291#.UkvMvIZmh8E

To find out the real difference, don’t trust Sanral – do the sums for yourself, says Brendan Seery.

Johannesburg - Now that the president has given the go-ahead for e-tolling, the SA National Roads Agency Ltd (Sanral) and its cronies are going all out to convince the public that electronic collection is so much better than applying a fuel levy to pay for Gauteng’s improved highways.

Sanral is running a campaign to trash the fuel levy idea, much of which is misleading or inaccurate. At the same time, it accuses critics of spreading misinformation and getting their facts wrong.

So, let’s play the numbers game – something few people have done.

Let’s compare the real-world impact of a fuel levy versus e-tolling on the pockets of ordinary motorists.

The latest Sanral ads cite research done last year by economist Mike Schussler on behalf of the Road Freight Association. Schussler calculated that the industry would be better off paying the toll fees than a fuel levy.

He said a levy would cost an additional R700 million, whereas toll fees would cost R400m.

Schussler’s research apparently related to a national fuel levy. Given that Gauteng accounts for 60 percent of the country’s economic activity and that, reasonably, freight operators would pay 60 percent of that national levy in Gauteng, a Gauteng-only levy would cost them R420m. This brings the real difference between a fuel levy and e-tolling a lot closer than Sanral would have you believe.

The government’s budget revenue for 2013/14 is R985.7 billion (according to economist Kevin Lings, who analysed the annual budget earlier this year for Stanlib). Of that amount, the fuel levy accounts for 5.2 percent or about R51.2bn.

The fuel levy is currently R2.12 a litre for petrol and R1.97 for diesel. Raising that by 10 percent, roughly 20c per litre (much higher than the level Schussler calculated would be necessary), will bring in an additional R5bn a year, if applied nationally.

If applied only in Gauteng (in a “user pays” scenario), the fuel levy would still generate an extra R3.1bn (60 percent of the national figure). Assuming a generous 5 percent loss to administration expenses, a Gauteng-only extra fuel levy of 20c a litre will still generate R2.95bn in revenue, more than enough to pay off the exorbitant R20bn cost of the roads in 10 years.

Remember that this money could be applied directly to the debt owed, rather than being sent abroad to pay for the cost of collection of the tolls.

Now, how will e-tolling affect you and how might you be affected through a fuel levy of 20c a litre? At first glance, Sanral’s e-toll charges (with an e-tag) look reasonable: about 15c a kilometre after discounts.

That compares fabulously well with the outrageous charges on the N3. For example, you will pay R50 to travel between Villiers and Warden – a saving of 9km over the alternative route. But when you look at the e-tolls in direct comparison to the fuel levy, Sanral’s Gauteng charges don’t seem too reasonable at all.

Using the example of someone who commutes from Joburg to Pretoria to work (N1 14th Avenue to N1 Lynnwood in Pretoria), e-tolling will cost R450 a month, because that is the cap for light vehicles.

(You can calculate your own costs by using Sanral’s website – www.sanral.co.za/e-toll/.)

Travelling that route, 130km a day return, five days a week, 20 days a month, a typical light car will use 208 litres of fuel at an average 8 litres/100km. Paying 20c a litre extra as a fuel levy, the motorist will therefore pay an extra R41.60 on the fuel used to make those journeys.

That’s a difference of over R400. The e-toll will cost you 10 times what a fuel levy would. You would have to adjust the fuel levy upwards to more than double the current levy to make e-tolling cheaper.

That’s something Sanral probably doesn’t want you to think about.

* Brendan Seery is executive editor at the Saturday Star.

The Star
Click to expand...
 
eTOLL ‘DUCKS WON’T FLY’ SOON

The unexpected signing by President Zuma of the Transport Related Amendment Matters Bill last month on Saturday 21 September and the subsequent announcement of this only several days later in the afternoon of the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA), has given fertile grounds to the realization that the Government and SANRAL appear intent on challenging the country’s financially stressed road users by forcing eTolls into place, despite overwhelming opposition to their plan.

In yet a further development, the Minister of Transport, Ms Dipou Peters was reported by the media on Tuesday as requiring less than a month to ‘get their ducks in a row’ prior to their launch of eTolls in Gauteng. This again confirms that SANRAL were never ready to launch within “two weeks” as they often claimed in their legal arguments over the past year. On the 10th April this year, SANRAL announced they would start tolling within two months, making this the fifth announced launch period missed. When asked if we see eTolls launched by November this year, Wayne Duvenage, Chairman of OUTA replied “If the history of their launch dates is anything to go by, I very much doubt they will launch this year. They are nearing three years after their initial launch date in April 2011. But even if they do, launching is one thing, however, running a successful eToll collection process on a sustainable basis is something else and will be almost impossible amidst an environment of widespread public rejection.”

In addition, neither SANRAL nor the Department of Transport have published any details of their legal plans to enforce the non-payment of eTolls. Earlier this year the public were also asked to comment on the proposed changes to the SANRAL Act which would have seen the creation of a separate police force to enforce eToll non-compliance. OUTA is not surprised that feedback on the updates to this bill have not as yet been provided.

The absence of such important details about the legal and enforcement process to be followed, in a transparent and widely published manner, is yet further evidence that Government and SANRAL intend to keep the public poorly appraised and informed of information that is vital to the full understanding of this rather complex system. OUTA believes that a sufficient volume of people will exercise their legal right not to purchase an eTag and to test the robustness of this cumbersome system and eventually render it unworkable.
- See more at: http://www.outa.co.za/site/etoll-ducks-wont-fly-soon/#sthash.Gs3PRC7t.dpuf
 
OUTA believes that a sufficient volume of people will exercise their legal right not to purchase an eTag and to test the robustness of this cumbersome system and eventually render it unworkable.
Click to expand...

Damn right. This is my new favourite quote: Thomas Jefferson: "If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so."
 
I'm going to have fun trying to break their system by not buying an etag and making sure I do one short stint on a highway at least once a week.
 
"it would be nice to have but we couldn't afford it"

****ing revelations the ANC will never understand.... Can't wait for the DA to win the national elections - one day is one day.
 
FF Plans to launch constitutional legal challenge to E-tolling Act if OUTA case fails

Dear Petitioner,

I hereby provide more information on the status of the e-toll matter:

2. As far as the e-toll matter is concerned, we have explained in our last e-mail why we think the president had signed the e-toll bill after all. We have been informed by the President's liaison officer that the President's legal counsel did agree with our legal opinion that the e-toll bill (now known as the E-Toll Act) is unconstitutional. However, the President still went ahead to sign it into law.

3. Based on the Presidential legal opinion we reasonably expected the President to send the E-Toll Bill back to parliament, but also devised a Plan B in case this does not happen.

4. Plan B is to challenge the constitutionality of the E-Toll Bill in the High Court. At the moment our advocates are studying the matter in preparation for a High Court application. We can thus far report that the legal team at first glance does concur with our own legal opinion. We will also apply to have access to the President's legal report as it apparently concurs with ours and this will provide proof that the President ignored his own legal counsel.

5. In all probability we will wait until we hear the verdict in the OUTA case before we launch our court application. Should OUTA win and government decides not to appeal to the Constitutional Court, then our court application will not be necessary as the victory will be final. However, should OUTA lose this round, or win but with government deciding to appeal to the Constitutional Court, then we will launch our case as well to declare the E-Toll Act unconstitutional. We will also launch the court application earlier in the event that SANRAL tries to implement the e-tolls before the OUTA-case's verdict.

6. The effect of our successful application would be to halt any interim switch-on of the e-tolls. As mentioned before, we are also hard at work to devise a plan to stop the e-tolls permanently should OUTA's case in the end not be successful. We all, however, pray that OUTA is successful.

7. The successful court application will result in the declaring of the E-Toll Act as unconstitutional after which it will have no force and effect. Parliament will then have to deal with the Act from the start. As parliament's deadline to finalise new Bills in 2013 have already passed, parliament will only be able to deal with it by early next year. With general elections looming in April/May/June 2014 it is very well possible that parliament will only be able to process the new Bill in the second half of 2014. Furthermore, as it will be a newly constituted parliament processing the new Bill that will need to get its own affairs in order, it might even happen that the finalisation is pushed out to the beginning of 2015. Time will learn, but we will adjust our strategy as the process unfolds.

We will, as always, keep you updated on the unfolding process to stop the e-tolls.

Lastly, we have received questions regarding our website that is currently only available in Afrikaans. Kindly take note that the current website is merely an interim one and will soon be replaced by a brand new English and Afrikaans version. We will advise on the launch date.

Best wishes
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X