Sanral hits out at latest e-toll criticism

The economic analysis of e-tolling by the Democratic Alliance’s Mmusi Maimane is short-sighted and displays a lack of understanding of the economics around road infrastructure and development. The South African National Road Agency SOC Limited (SANRAL) in implementing e-tolling to fund the Gauteng Freeway Improvement Project (GFIP) considered all viable funding models and decided on the most sustainable and equitable one, according to spokesman Vusi Mona. “Mr Maimane’s assessment of the economic impact of improved roads is in direct contrast with accepted economics around the matter,” Mona said. “It is disingenuous to say that improving roads will be detrimental to small and medium enterprises. On the contrary improved roads will have a positive effect on these businesses. Mr Maimane seems to have forgotten to weigh the cost of congestion in his economic assessment.” In a 2007 (before the implementation of GFIP) Automobile Association (AA) study, it was reported that, because of congestion, a 1 600cc vehicle travelling between Pretoria and Johannesburg spends an additional 122 minutes on the road each day. This added up to a whopping 40 additional hours in the traffic every month and amounted to about 705l of fuel wasted, as a result of 469 hours of idling. At only R11.00 per litre of fuel that is an additional fuel bill of R7 775. In 2010 the South African Chamber of Commerce and Industry raised concerns about the cost of congestion on the Gauteng freeway network. At the time it was estimated that the cost of congestion on the Ben Schoeman Highway alone amounted to R15 million an hour. Mona said Maimane’ case study around Mr Mashapo and Mr Ngcobo, and the R21 was deeply flawed. “These business owners need an improved R21 otherwise deliveries to their businesses will always be late due to congestion on the R21. Mr Maimane probably does not know that there is an economic cost to congestion. We would argue that both these SMME operators are better off with an improved R21 than a congested one.” He cited an economic study by the University of Cape Town’s Graduate School of Business which showed that, in fact, effects on businesses would generally be strongly positive because of the improved accessibility. “Although the UCT study shows that the impact on food prices will range from 0.12% to 0.77% (all below one per cent) as a result of e-tolling, Mr Maimane, again displaying his ignorance about road infrastructure and its funding, commits a fatal flaw in his argument by not linking cost to benefit. This project has a benefit cost ratio of 8.4 which means for every one R1 spent on the project society would benefit R8.40c.” Mona once again questioned the DA’s opposition to using tolling to fund road infrastructure in Gauteng when it endorsed the principle in Western Cape where Chapman’s Peak is tolled. He added that the DA’s call for a fuel levy in order to fund GFIP was also flawed. “Critically, the fuel levy imposes a tax on all motorists across the country whether or not they will use the GFIP. The DA must tell the other provinces how fair that is. Finally Mona dismissed Maimane’s claim that Sanral knew that 48% of road users in Gauteng would not pay for e-tolls. “This info is used for planning purposes, to develop enforcement strategies. The document states an expected pay rate of 90% for steady state operations (after the ramp up period). The survey results were not unexpected as the payment for any services is never a popular choice.”