Economist Dr Roelof Botha came under heavy fire from e-toll opponents, when he said yesterday the e-toll system is an "engineering masterpiece", and that users utilising public transport - who are exempt from e-tolling - should "shut up" and not take part in the debate.
Appearing before the e-toll review panel, appointed earlier this year by Gauteng premier David Makhura to assess the socio-economic impact of e-tolling in the province, Botha described the Gauteng Freeway Improvement Project as "an engineering masterpiece, without parallel on the continent".
Botha stated his research focused on the economic value of time, as a result of the easing of traffic congestion, with users reaping significant economic benefits. He added that for every R1 spent on e-tolls, R13.70 is saved in time, for the average user travelling in a light vehicle.
The award-winning economist said he was perplexed by people who reject e-tolls, because their understanding was fundamentally flawed and did not take broader economic issues into consideration.
Furthermore, Botha argued government's revenue base was "very limited" - consisting mostly of VAT, company tax and individual tax. In addition, government was servicing a huge public debt of about R1.6 trillion.
"E-tolling is, therefore, the most viable route to follow," he said. He identified several primary e-tolling benefits, including a situation where the South African National Roads Agency (Sanral) was enabled to secure an international credit rating and raise loans for purposes of engaging in private-public partnerships.
"Significantly, a fuel levy increase would impact most negatively on the poorer groups. In this context, bear in mind it is the highest income quintile that pay 94% of e-tolls for passenger cars. Equally significant is the fact that public transport is exempt from e-tolls."
However, Botha unleashed a storm of criticism when he stated low-income bracket users utilising public transport, and who are exempt from e-tolling, should "shut up" and not take part in the e-toll debate.
"So, if you are in the bottom income quota and using public transport, then you should not actually participate in the debate. You should actually shut up and not participate."
Not impressed
Neither Botha's approach to the poor, nor his arguments about the economic benefits of e-tolling, were well received by e-toll critics.
Justice Project SA chairperson Howard Dembovsky was scathing in his response. "Dr Roelof Botha may have won many awards, but I'm not too sure how many of them would have been for tact. How can anyone say 'public transport is exempted, [users of this type of transport] should shut up and not take part in this debate?' Well, quite easily it would appear."
Dembovsky claims almost all of Botha's argument stands and falls on the notion that one can "attach economic benefit to time and, of course, on introducing the notion that e-tolling as a funding model saves you time".
He accuses Botha of being under the impression that "everyone in Gauteng is paid an hourly consulting fee, like he gets paid by Sanral, when he says 'for every R1 spent on e-tolls, R13.70 is saved in time'. If this claim is true, then will Mr Botha please be so kind as to provide us with whom all Gauteng residents may invoice for their R13.70 benefit per R1 spent on e-tolls?"
Meanwhile, the Opposition to Urban Tolling Alliance (Outa) has challenged Botha to a public debate over his assertion that e-tolling is "pro-poor".
"Outa believes that before any reconciliation can take place between Dr Botha and those he offended by his contemptuous choice of words, he needs to commit himself to a process of engagement with his critics in the hope that we can turn down the heat, and redirect the energy to generating light instead.
"Dr Botha has recharged the debate with emotion, projecting his frustration in a grossly misdirected manner. Quite frankly, he has done Sanral's case for e-tolling more harm than their critics ever could," says Outa spokesman John Clarke.
Botha also raised the ire of the official opposition, the Democratic Alliance (DA), which accused the economist of "deliberately misleading" the e-toll review panel by insisting low-income bracket users utilising public transport are exempt from e-tolling.
"E-tolls affect every resident of Gauteng, as the cost of tolls are borne by every consumer - irrespective of their income bracket," says DA Gauteng provincial chairperson Mike Moriarty.
"Vehicles belonging to farmers, manufacturers and retailers are not exempt from e-tolls - and not only do they have pay higher tariffs than light motor vehicles, but pass on the costs of those tariffs to consumers."
Moriarty also points out Botha's argument that 94% of all tolls are paid by the "richest 20%" of the province's population warrants closer investigation, as it is quite unlikely that only 6% of the province's more than two million vehicles comprise commercial vehicles.
Share