Chair, the additional appropriation of R5,75 billion in the current year, to be used to subsidise the Gauteng Freeway Improvement Project, is supported with reservation.
The DA is concerned about the ad hoc way in which the funding of this project is being handled and the general lack of a clear policy on the balance between user-funded roads and general, fiscus-funded roads.
The fuel levy is, in fact, a user-pays source of funds just as much as a toll road is a user-pays source of funds. Essentially, motorists are being asked to pay twice for the Gauteng Freeway Improvement Project. It is our view that this is double-dipping.
There needs to be a serious debate on the source of funds for road construction and maintenance that takes into account both the responsibility of the state to provide for the infrastructure best possible as well as the user-pays principle.
The DA is concerned about the very high costs associated with the collection of the toll fees on the Gauteng project as compared with the income to be generated.
Will the collection costs for vehicles without e-tags actually be 30% or less of the revenue collected? Will the sheriff's offices be able to cope if the mass disobedience campaign proposed by Cosatu and others is successful?
The funding of the Gauteng Freeway Improvement Project has been badly handled and surely has taught the lesson that a clear policy on the funding of capital road projects as well as the maintenance of roads is required.
Urgent action is required in order to stem the rapid and very expensive deterioration of the country's extensive road network. I invite hon members to take a drive from Vrede to Memel in the Free State to see an example of an excellent road that has become a pothole nightmare as a result of neglect and a lack of funds for maintenance. Thank you, Chairperson.