No citizen should mobilise against e-tolling
NOT so long ago, President Jacob Zuma was criticised and ridiculed for what some perceived as a “sarcastic comment” for comparing the road infrastructure of Johannesburg with that of Malawi.
Too much emphasis, at least in the mainstream media, was put on how “reckless” the president had been regarding bilateral relations between the two countries. But the critical point the president raised — the centrality of roads infrastructure to Africa’s development — was lost in the process.
Underlying the president’s comment is that the advancement of many successful economies around the world is based on efficient and effective road, rail and sea transportation. The comment was never about degrading Malawi, but about the emphasis on roads’ importance. This information was particularly crucial given the pending implementation of the e-tolling system in Gauteng.
The system, despite all its good intentions, has been portrayed by its detractors as antipoor and likely to fail. And some have resorted to the courts to frustrate the process in a dubious way that seeks to juxtapose the government’s good intentions with the plight of a needy majority.
E-tolling, at least as conceived by the government and its implementing agency, the South African National Roads Agency Limited (Sanral), is about making South Africa accessible,
It is foolish to portray e-tolls as the privatisation of social infrastructure
functional and growing. The intention of the e-tolls is to contribute meaningfully to the upgrading and maintenance of the roads.
The government’s view, correctly so, is that well-managed and maintained roads would result in free-flowing traffic as well as a significant drop in the individual usage of private cars. Second, a reduction in the individual usage of private cars would result in the reduced output of unwanted gas emissions. Third, road users would reasonably contribute to the maintenance of the road.
The portfolio committee on transport welcomes the announcement that e-tolling will finally be implemented on December 3. We note the persistent obstructionist opposition to the implementation of the programme. There surely cannot be a contending view that a well-looked-after road infrastructure is not critical.
This is even more so because other infrastructural cabling such as electricity and telecommunications tend to follow the roads. The obstructionist nature of the opposition to e-tolling needs to take into consideration this fact, as well as the contribution such a project brings to the country by way of employment opportunities, engineering skills and opportunity for the manufacturing sector.
Understanding ought to be that the e-tolling system is about investment opportunities, infrastructure maintenance and upgrades, good use of public transport, and that it generally contributes to the upkeep of the environment. It is plain foolish to portray e-tolls as the privatisation of social infrastruc- ture; far from it, this is to ensure the roads are well maintained to the benefit of the poor.
The members of the Southern African Development Community should spare no effort in ensuring that road infrastructure is central to the economy and that it is used to benefit the broader public. Infrastructural programmes in the region should be geared towards integrated service provision and aimed at benefiting the poor — that is, adopting a developmental approach. The perception that e-tolls will further impoverish the poor is unfounded and based on lies; the opposite is true. Poor people hardly own vehicles and often they opt for rail transportation because of the unreasonable fares they pay to commute on the roads.
South Africans ought to move away from the culture of not paying for services. This was a tool, successfully used during the apartheid era, when the mass democratic movement encouraged people not to pay to bring down the apartheid administration. What motivation could there be now for anyone, across the spectrum, to encourage the culture of not paying? The answer to this is simple: it is that the rich continue to exploit the poor to protest against the e-tolls in order for them not to pay.
This is directly in conflict with the government’s cross-subsidisation policy, by which the rich are required and encouraged to subsidise the poor. What the opponents are failing to educate the poor about is all the gov-
It is ill-advised of anyone to be anticipatory of the potential impact on the poor
ernment indigent programmes aimed at improving the lives of the poor, including, but not limited to, free basic services (electricity and water) and houses, and the subsidisation of bus services throughout South Africa. How, then, could the government become a monster so fast and make the poor pay for simply using a road?
It is irrational for anyone to argue that e-tolling will fail in South Africa simply because it had failed elsewhere in the world, and equally ill-advised of anyone to be anticipatory of the potential impact on the poor.
The right information ought to be communicated to the people and tolerance should be exercised by dissidents. No citizen should mobilise South Africans into rebelling against the rollout of the e-tolling system, because that would be in violation of the law. The government will not shy away from its responsibility and commitment to protect the poor from further exploitation by those who have. Why is it that, for example, the residents of the luxurious suburbs of Sandton, Woodmead and Sunninghill do not form part of the protests? Cosatu has been, wrongly, mobilising minibus taxi commuters.
The good maintenance of roads will contribute to economic growth, and a growing economy will positively benefit the country and the region. The e-tolling system, as announced by Transport Minister Dipuo Peters last week, shall be implemented on December 3 to avoid further financial risks to Sanral.
ANC MP Bhengu is chairwoman of parliament’s portfolio committee on transport