'Consider the effects' - Marsay

There’s been lively debate on the e-toll saga following comments by transport economist Andrew Marsay in favour of e-tolling which he believes will ultimately create jobs. Marsay writes: Many of the reactions to my comments about the benefits of e-tolling confuse concerns about the e-tolling system as such, with the effects that tolling of the freeways will have on the use of this important economic infrastructure. When any utility that we use is cheap at the point of use, we tend to use it inefficiently. By pricing the use of the freeways, we will all begin to adapt our use of the infrastructure and, over time, begin to make more efficient use of it. This will happen in many ways: some of us will change our hours of travel to take advantage of lower off-peak charges; others will combine two our more journey functions into one journey. Overall, traffic volumes will be lower than they otherwise would be as people begin to make more rational choices. And even the majority of us who may have no choice but to travel at peak periods will gain the benefit of lower levels of congestion – and hence have shorter and more predictable journey times than we would if the freeways were to remain ‘free at the point of use’. This is what I mean when I say that e-tolling will lead to more efficient road use. One of the main consequences of this more efficient use of the highway utility is that businesses, especially freight distribution businesses and commercial travellers, will be able to complete more deliveries and business calls per week than they would in the absence of tolling. These same businesses will also be able to plan their transport schedules better because travel times will be more predictable with priced infrastructure than with ‘free’ infrastructure. Over time, almost all such businesses will generate greater turnover at lower average costs than before. This in turn will translate into higher economic growth rates and greater business confidence, which is the essential ingredient that allows firms to start taking on new employees. Yes, immediate financial costs will be higher; but the economic benefits of greater efficiency in the use of the infrastructure will be far, far greater than the financial costs. CAPTION The gantries at the centre of the controversy ... who will ultimately foot the bill? Readers wrote: Is he serious? Is he serious? Is that the aim of the e-toll project or is it supposed to earn revenue for road maintenance? We hear stories of huge sums needed to pay for the installation of the system and are told that most of the money raised by the gantries will go to a company in Austria which has nothing to do with local road maintenance. Maybe e-toll will have to employ a big staff to collect the massive number of fees which will not be paid by most of the estimated 250 000 motorists who travel on the target highways every day. Then it does become a job creator, but would the public at large be privy to information of the income collected (ie, the public’s money) and its distribution in the e-tolling set-up? . Scrap the system. It will rob the poor and enrich the connected minority Ray Earl Andrew McKenzie Who are they trying to kid? E-tolling in itself will not create jobs. Better roads will. South Africans are not against paying for those roads, just against the corrupt and wasteful e-tolling system. Use the fuel tax for the purpose for which it was instituted – to maintain and upgrade existing roads which were long ago paid for and to create new roads. The user pays principle is flawed. Any infrastructural development anywhere in the country results in economic growth which benefits all South Africans. Alan Uzzell