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

Status
Not open for further replies.
E-toll Bill faces legal challenge

While the Department of Transport (DOT) and SA National Roads Agency (Sanral) seem dead set to implement e-tolls in the very near future, toll opponents are intent on foiling their plans.

Although the Transport and Related Matters Amendment Bill (e-toll Bill), giving e-tolls the green light, was signed by president Jacob Zuma on 21 September, the piece of legislation is still being debated. The Freedom Front Plus maintains it is not constitutionally sound and plans to take legal action by approaching the North Gauteng High Court to send the Bill back to Parliament.

The party sent a written appeal to Zuma four months ago, urging him not to sign the Bill, which it said had "certain shortcomings". Anton Alberts, FF Plus Parliamentary spokesperson on transport, said at the time that the Bill was classified incorrectly as a Section 75 Bill, which does not affect provinces.

SA's Constitution distinguishes between four categories of Bills: Section 74 Bills (Bills amending the Constitution); Section 75 Bills (ordinary Bills not affecting the provinces); Section 76 Bills (ordinary Bills affecting the provinces); and Section 77 Bills (money Bills dealing with appropriations, taxes, levies or duties).

Alberts says it appears the e-toll Bill should actually have been classified as a section 76 Bill, and "in all probability" also classified as a partial section 77 Bill.

The DOT maintains the legal standing of the Bill is sound and that Gauteng motorists should realise e-tolling is now law and get tagged.

Meanwhile, transport minister Dipuo Peters' claim this week that e-tolling would kick off within the next month has been met with scepticism.

Chairman of Justice Project SA (JPSA), Howard Dembovsky, says there are just too many formalities for the DOT and Sanral to plough through before the system can go live. The DOT still has to publish e-toll regulations, e-toll tariffs, exemption regulations and the final date of commencement notice before e-tolling can kick off.

He says while it is doable, it is unlikely. "Let's see how much notice is given and then let's see how many people are sold on the idea, as has been claimed.

"Peters is new in her job as minister of transport and achieving many wondrous things. I don't believe that e-tolls is one of those things, and I will await the publication of the government gazettes announcing [the said e-toll formalities]."

Noting that government's e-toll system has already seen five false starts, Opposition to Urban Tolling Alliance (Outa) chairperson Wayne Duvenage says if history is anything to go by, he doubts Gauteng will see an e-toll launch this year.

"On 10 April this year, Sanral announced they would start tolling within two months, making this the fifth announced launch period missed. They are nearing three years after their initial launch date in April 2011."


Even if the powers that be do get it right to implement e-tolls by November, says Duvenage, "launching is one thing; however, running a successful e-toll collection process on a sustainable basis is something else and will be almost impossible amidst an environment of widespread public rejection".

http://www.itweb.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=67835
 
Letter in The Star Newspaper: Sanral, could doesn’t mean should

There are a lot of instances where one legally could do X, but whether one should do X is a different question entirely, says Sugan Naidu.

Johannesburg -

The court decision recently awarded in favour of the South African National Roads Agency (Sanral) may well seal the fate of many, whether pro- or anti-Sanral. In short, the court decided that Sanral could legally implement e-tolls. This begs the question of whether legally “could” amounts to “should?” There are a lot of instances where one legally could do X – but whether one should do X is a different question entirely.

A fairly recent analogy of this would be the mass destruction of homes erected on land illegally acquired by the homeowner. The City Council of Johannesburg embarked on a hasty and self-righteous destruction of earmarked properties on the understanding that they “legally could”. However, an interdict was successfully granted against them on the grounds of this not being what they “should” have done.

The benchmark of what one should do is often of a higher moral and ethical construct, requiring decisions to be conscientious and standing up to tests of social justice and not merely legal justice. It is in governments’ consistent overlooking of “should”, and their bias to its distant, corrupt and confused cousin “could” that causes so much political distress and upheaval.

Governments are the custodians of public interest, not the determinants of public interest. If the majority of the country is against the tolling of Gauteng’s national roads, should a government have a right to veto such public sentiment? The very principle of public interest is undermined by the e-tolling rationale. Sanral has spent much time and effort in convincing us to the benefits of e-tolling. Let’s critically examine the public benefit over time.

Every year the amount of traffic on Gauteng’s national highways increase exponentially. It would be interesting to see if Sanral has taken the time to determine this exponent. This increase in traffic volume increases incrementally on a monthly, weekly and daily basis.

In principle and practically, every day after the first day of commissioning, driving on the newly revamped highways will take longer and longer. Over a period of twelve months you would probably be back to where it was before Sanral’s intervention.

The cost of maintaining the Gauteng network will increase every year. Lane closures during maintenance will further impact travel times. In essence, every year your journey time will increase significantly and you get the immense privilege of paying more for spending more time in traffic. Sanral should rather have called it the “more for more” principle. “Should” the natural inclination not have been to give increased public benefit for increasing cost to the public? Sanral is offering increasing cost to the public, but decreasing benefit.

Am I alone in my layman logic?

The networks of roads falling under the Minister of Transport’s jurisdiction that feed off from the tolled highways remain untouched. This further reduces any further possible benefit of reduced travel times. One would have thought that with government’s expenditure on national highways reduced, more funds would be available for alternative route maintenance. Is there anyone who is not aware of the sterling job performed by Dial Directs’ pothole brigade? Where were the surplus funds then to maintain roads… the road to Nkandla, maybe?

I wonder how many people are aware that the Minister of Transport is the sole shareholder in Sanral?

Furthermore, the majority of income generated by Gauteng’s Sanralnetwork is not retained within the SA economy.

Outa (Opposition To Urban Tolling Alliance) has highlighted many a flaw in government’s approach to implementing e-tolls. Their fight has been noble and in the public interest. The court’s decision to have Outa cover Sanral’s legal cost is nothing short of arrogance and intimidation. They should be applauded for their tenacity, their belief in our constitution and principles of democracy, and their commitment to public interest. There was a time in our not too distant past when we would have hailed such people as heroes and freedom fighters. What has changed?

Government fails when it fails to appreciate the difference between could vs should. Let’s assess two questions as if you and I were the government:

1. Could we do whatever we want to?

2. Should we do whatever we want to?

When we seek to exploit the boundaries of the former at the expense of the latter we have a government that fails on service delivery, produces unemployment, stifles economic growth and causes the massacre of miners. Government has become the primary antagonists in these symptoms and antagonists for a re-versioning of our democracy.

Citizens are frustrated and will seek to express these frustrations. Social justice is mother to legal justice, whom we seem to have sent into early retirement. When the political, legal, and social system of justice does not serve the needs of the people, there is only one solution – one that was used to achieve our now threatened fabric of democracy.

Politicians seek to achieve greatness for themselves. Leaders seek to achieve greatness for their country or greatness for their people. Which are you, Mr Zuma?

Sugan Naidu

Johannesburg

* The views expressed heer are not necessarily those of Independent Newspapers.

The Star
http://www.iol.co.za/the-star/lette...586715?utm_medium=facebook&utm_source=dlvr.it
 
RA5fQQ2.jpg
 
Ol' Mean Bastid said:
Our esteemed minister of transport reckons they need a month to get their ducks in a row, so that means sometime in November.
Click to expand...

Ok, so etolls aren't something visitors need to worry about for the upcoming mybb conference?
 
bwana said:
Ok, so etolls aren't something visitors need to worry about for the upcoming mybb conference?
Click to expand...

we the people will make the decision on e-tolls, not the friggen government

given SCAMRAL's track record, plus the legal process the DoT still needs to go through I really don't see it happening
 
Saw one on my way to work this morning - near Bayers. Pretty awesome and funny. But it won't hurt the ANC.
 
ANC spokesman Jackson Mthembu told the newspaper: “I can tell you it is definitely not us that is behind the billboards. The ANC would have branded it with the logo and ANC colours if it was us.”
Click to expand...

It's all gone past so far over Jacksons head it was in orbit!
:D
 
As a matter of interest, what does it cost to have an advert on these billboards. Someone has a lot of money to spare - and I say thank you :D
 
what i can tell you , is thats not cheap to put up , so to who ever did it, THANKS!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X