Transport committee apologises to Outa
The Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Transport on Wednesday apologised to the Opposition to Urban Tolling Alliance (OUTA) chairman, Wayne Duvenage, and admitted that it had “erroneously” stated the anti-e-toll organisation had come out in support of e-tolls.
The committee said it wished to “rectify an error” in its statement issued on Tuesday saying: “It was erroneously stated that OUTA was not opposed to e-tolling.
“The Committee acknowledges and regrets this error. OUTA is not opposed to the user-pay principle, but has issue with the method of collection which in this case is e-tolling,” said the committee in its latest statement released on Wednesday and attributed to its Chairperson Leonard Ramatlakane.
The “correction of the mistake” comes in the wake of Duvenage’s threat to lodge a formal complaint with Ramatlakane as well as the Parliamentary Ethics Committee.
OUTA, which has repeatedly called for the scrapping of the e-toll system, made a presentation to the Committee reiterating their stance on Tuesday.
Duvenage said what incensed him the most, was Ramatlakane’s sanctioning of the misconstrued statement which read that OUTA was not opposed to e-tolling as people need to pay in order to have good infrastructure.
It also said that OUTA “supported the user-pay principle but there was a lack of consultation when the e-toll system was introducted”.
Duvenage said he had stated at the outset that OUTA was not opposed to the fact that all infrastructure must ultimately be paid for by society.
“I made this point so as to dispel the myth and comments often directed at us, that OUTA wants the roads for free,” said Duvenage, who went on to explain why the fuel levy made sense as an alternative to fund the Gauteng Freeway Improvement Project (GFIP).
Ramatlakane had told Duvenage that he had contradicted himself by saying OUTA isn’t opposed to paying for roads, yet they want the e-toll scheme scrapped.
According to OUTA, the fuel levy makes complete sense and that it was hypocritical of the government to say that it was not a favoured mechanism because it impacts the poor harder, when they have increased the levy by 92% over the past eight years.
“In our opinion, the logic and rationale of the anti-fuel levy argument for urban roads, in favour of the failed e-toll scheme, is a very weak one,” said Duvenage.
He also expressed his concerns about the recently proposed amendments to the Aarto regulations which will attempt to include e-toll non-payments as a traffic infringement with which to withhold vehicle license renewals. - ANA
(File photo: Gallo Images)