Let’s accept we’re in for the long haul

THIS week we have, once again, been subjected to rotational load shedding, and it’s hard not to get annoyed when you know the origin of Eskom’s challenges – years of mismanagement, corruption and state capture.

The powers-that-be are working on a solution but, as we heard in a media briefing yesterday, Eskom needs “crisis reaction” as well as time to fix the load shedding situation.

We heard that there are seven generating units which have broken down, and that a contract to detect faults early was never renewed. We heard that Eskom had burnt millions of litres of diesel and now there are no more bulk stocks available. And, we heard, about the loss of 1 150 megawatts of power from the Cahora Bassa hydroelectric station as a result of Tropical Cyclone Idai.

Technical inspections at power stations continue, as unfortunately does load shedding. For many small businesses the consequence is dire; they have to shut up shop every time the lights go off.

For many residents load shedding is inconvenient, especially when it happens twice in a day, with the power off at a time they need to cook and take care of children.

There is also the fear of increased crime as criminals take advantage of entire areas plunged into darkness and the knowledge that security systems are compromised when the power is off.

The situation is unprecedented and there is no end in sight. Public Enterprises Minister Pravin Gordhan admitted yesterday there was no magic formula to solve the problem, and while they continued to figure out the technical problems, we have to accept that we are in for the long haul.

The only consolation is that government has finally realised the need to communicate better, and not leave us in the dark, both literally and figuratively. THE AUTOMOBILE Association (AA) has expressed concern regarding the Administrative Adjudication of Road Traffic Offences (Aarto) Bill, which was passed by the National Assembly recently and sent to President Cyril Ramaphosa to be signed into law.

The AA said in a statement yesterday that, in its current form, the bill is a cause for concern.

“In principle the AA is in favour of a demerit system for drivers, it is something we have always backed and supported even as far back as the 1960s when such a system was first mooted, and as recently as the late 1990s and early 2000s when it was again on the table. This punishes frequent road traffic offenders while those who obey the rules of the road have nothing to fear. However, many of the proposed amendments to the bill, now before the president, are worrisome and raise questions about the practicality of the system’s implementation,” the Association said yesterday.

For instance, the AA pointed out, the provisions around demerit points appear to be geared more towards revenue collection than dealing with road safety, which, it stated, should be a central theme of such a system.

“A good example is the low rand value and points demerit for not wearing a seatbelt which are the same as driving an unregistered vehicle. In our view not wearing a seatbelt should carry a much stiffer monetary punishment and accompanying high value points demerit. If making our roads safer is the objective let’s start here,” the AA said.

Another area of concern raised was the constitutionality of certain amendments in relation to the issuing of fines via electronic mail instead of through traditional mail.

“But by far the most egregious components of the amendment bill relate to the rights of infringers and fleet owners. In terms of challenging an infringement, a person must use the channels of the Road Traffic Infringement Agency (RTIA), the very body which is reliant on the revenue from fines for its very existence. This, in our opinion, violates the infringer’s rights to a fair hearing and places it with an organ of state it doesn’t believe can be impartial in this matter.

“As for fleet owners or managers, the burden the amendment bill places on them is immense, especially as any demerits earned on these vehicles will go directly against their personal names. This is wholly unfair and, again, does not address what should be a predominant feature of this system: road safety.”

According to the AA the piloted roll-out of Aarto in Tshwane and Johannesburg was not implemented properly as only fines and no demerit points were issued. “This means amendments to the Aarto Bill are being made without proper testing of the system,” it stated.

“The existing system as it was implemented has also proven to be largely unsuccessful, especially when measured against fatal road crashes in the province. In 2014 there were 2 136 fatal road crashes in Gauteng, in 2015 there were 2

171, 2 385 in 2016 and 2 398 in 2017. Instead of declining, these crashes have increased, all while the limited Aarto implementation was in force in the province,” stated the AA.

The Association added that despite the public consultation around Aarto, it seemed little consideration was given to the many submissions which raised these and other issues, including those from the AA. It noted that road safety had to be the priority of any infringement system introduced into South Africa, which in this amendment bill it isn’t.

“Our overall impression, though, is that any system which tinkers with the punishment of offenders instead of dealing with the more important issues of stopping offenders, is not going to work. Essentially, unless people fear getting caught in the first place, there is no usefulness to a demerit system. This means there must be increased investment and focus on providing appropriately resourced and deployed traffic law enforcement around the country,” the AA concluded. – Staff Reporter