Much has been written by proponents and antagonists of the tolls on the Gauteng Freeways. I have only seen support from the Minister of Transport and SANRAL whilst every other article I have read opposes the system. Recently the Minister became quite irascible and stated that people will just have to pay.

Such outbursts are usually forthcoming when people have their backs to the wall and have no logical alternative arguments to offer. In fact the very documents presented by the steering committee and the Minister to those who had made inputs regarding the tolls, acknowledged that the most effective way of paying for these improvements was via a small increase on the fuel levy.

The only problem with this is that SANRAL has bought an extremely costly open road tolling (ORT) system which made several Austrians extremely happy. The Austrians doubled their stake in the venture thereby making a mockery of any BEE or local empowerment attempts and rubbed their hands in glee.

In an effort to justify the purchase of this very costly ORT system (we have not been given a real costing but estimates vary from R6.22 to R14 billion) the phrase ‘user pays' became the mantra of SANRAL. This seems to be a rather sane approach except for a few nasty facts that seem to have been overlooked.

Firstly, there is an obligation on government to provide citizens with roads but these roads had been ignored for decades and the basic infrastructure had already been paid for by taxpayers.

Secondly, why does the ‘user pays' principle only apply to roads? The tax payer funds clinics, hospitals, houses, schools and many other items which he or she never uses and where the ‘user pays' dogma is never mentioned.

Thirdly, the motorist would in any event pay via the fuel levy because we must never forget that it is government's intention to roll these tolls out across the whole country and Gauteng is just the guinea pig. Finally, the Minister lost the ‘user pays' argument when he exempted taxis and busses from tolls for they too are users. How will cars from neighbouring countries be tolled I wonder?

These tolls are most punitive against small businesses and the private motorist. The former's cash flow is prejudiced and the latter pays the most pro-rata and can claim no tax relief for the tolls he or she pays. SANRAL is at pains to state that road safety will improve with these toll roads. They postulate that less congestion will translate to safer roads. But is this true?

If the upgraded freeways improve traffic flow the average speed of the traffic will increase and we are continually being informed that speed kills. It is just as likely that traffic accidents will increase as decrease, so SANRAL's thesis must be proven before that argument can be used. In any event SANRAL cannot guarantee that the upgraded roads will be adequate to ensure free-flowing traffic. In fact there are already areas where the newly upgraded roads are congested.

SANRAL states that the freeways will improve Gauteng's productivity and hence its economy. Even if we assume this to be true one must never forget that a third of our national GDP is generated by Gauteng and thus this increase will benefit the whole country. The reason that the toll was considered for Gauteng was because the small size of the province and the large motoring population provided low hanging fruit in rapid toll collection.

The economic cordon that it is intended to throw around the financial heart of South Africa via these tolls flies in the face of international norms where the main thoroughfares around cities are seldom tolled to allow traffic to avoid congested urban areas. SANRAL claims that vehicle cost will be reduced by the toll roads.

This statement is based on dated work done in 2007 by a researcher at the University of Cape Town and must be questioned as the economic realities of 2007 were far different to today. The crash of 2008 and its possible second dip that some economists believe lies just around the corner had not yet happened and money was plentiful while economies were in a high growth phase.

SANRAL claims that times will be reduced for journeys. In certain areas this will be the case for a while but as vehicle numbers increase and congestion again raises its head will the tolls be discontinued? One must also realise that time is wasted on entering and exiting the freeways, when accidents occur and when going to buy or top up your e-tag.

The complexity of toll collection and the permutations of possible toll rates are far too complex. Vehicle hire companies have to pay their client's tolls within 7 days which is against normal business practice which extends 30 days credit for such companies to do the necessary administrative functions to establish exactly what tolls are owed by their clients. Having to have an e-tag for each vehicle -even those only used irregularly- means that money that is not yet owed for tolls is accumulating interest for the concessionaire while the vehicle owner is cash deprived.

Alternatives to the toll roads are non-existent in certain instances and the toll becomes a forced purchase which is probably unconstitutional and certainly unfair. In areas where there are alternate routes those who cannot afford the toll fees will be forced onto provincial and municipal roads which will deteriorate even faster. This will lead to increases in property rates and the user pays principle again falls flat because the municipal tax payer will cover these costs even if he or she does not own a vehicle. Public transport alternatives are to a large extent confined to taxis which are often dangerous and unsafe.

Enforcement of toll infringements is not controlled through AARTO but through the SANRAL Act. With fine payment currently running at 20% how is compliance going to be effected? The SANRAL Act allows for a fine of R1000 or 6 months in jail or both but does not stipulate how infringements will be adjudicated. Surely it is our constitutional right to defend each and every infringement?

SANRAL should not be allowed to ‘batch' 5 or 10 toll gantry offences as this takes away our rights to defend each infringement. This means that our already hopelessly overburdened justice system would be clogged into being unable to function. If the offences are not controlled under AARTO demerits will not apply and one can only imagine how huge the cost to the toller will be to collect from toll infringers.

The increased fuel levy is the most cost effective simple and logical way to go. For years government has raked in fuel levies and states that last year it paid out more than double what the levy brought in on Roads and Transport. What has not been taken into account is the fact that the fuel levy has been collected for many years as have provincial licence fees and VAT on fuel.

If the levy, provincial licence fees and VAT were to be ring fenced, then we would start to be able to talk about a user pays principle. Government says that it is not part of its policy to ring fence funds but it certainly finds it possible with the Road Accident Fund and the fuel pipeline fees.

Government has made much of bringing down the toll rates but their initial ‘largesse' - which is hopelessly too little, will soon be made up by high annual toll fee increases. This ‘decrease' is only a temporary respite and once the principle of paying ‘urban' tolls is established the fees will be increased at will.

It is time that government realised that the small group of people who form the tax base in South Africa are really feeling the squeeze. The public has spoken out loud and clear against this iniquitous toll tax but the government has chosen to close its ears. The time has come to stand up against these tolls.

Neil Campbell is DA Gauteng spokesperson on Roads and Transport

Click here to sign up to receive our free daily headline email newsletter