Tribble wrote:Well it has been put on hold - so we shall see what happens.
Yes that they have, apparently because not enough people have bought a tag. It is almost as if everybody is part of some sort of rebel alliance because they refuse to get a tag .....and I am one of them, but then again the R59 is not part of this system
Pretoria - In a bid to contribute to a reducing the burden on consumers for the Gauteng Freeway Improvement Programme, the government has proposed a special appropriation of R5.8bn to be included in the 2011/12 expenditure.
Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan said this would reduce the debt to be repaid through the toll system and would make a steeper discount possible for regular road users. The total debt associated with the project is R20bn.
“Mr Speaker, I am mindful that the introduction of tolling to finance the Gauteng Freeway Improvement Programme has caused considerable public reaction,” Gordhan admitted.
“We have listened carefully to the various suggestions and appreciate the difficulties that might be faced.”
He said it was important to remember that road user charges also served an important “demand management function” on roads that were heavily congested.
Users benefited through lower vehicle operating costs, time savings and improved safety.
In addition, improved maintenance of regional and provincial roads was made possible by the additional revenue that SA toll roads generated.
“Going forward, government will carefully evaluate future road infrastructure funding. In addition, the further development of efficient and cost effective public transport systems will receive the urgent attention of the department of transport,” Gordhan said.
MOOD - Thirsty
A surprising amount of modern pseudoscience is coming out of the environmental sector. Perhaps it should not be so surprising given that environmentalism is political rather than scientific.
Timothy Casey
Hman wrote:Great, so the are taking my tax money to pay for roads in a province I rarely visit?
I still dont see why they must toll us when we pay tax for this sort of thing already . I hope that the cable thieves suddenly take a liking to the e-toll gantries
Hman wrote:Great, so the are taking my tax money to pay for roads in a province I rarely visit?
I still dont see why they must toll us when we pay tax for this sort of thing already . I hope that the cable thieves suddenly take a liking to the e-toll gantries
I have it on good auth that connectivity on those gateways are done with optic fibre.
The bit of copper used is not worth it for the thieves.
Get used to it - it is a fact of life. I am not happy about paying for the roads but I am happy with the improvements they have made. It now takes 30 mins to get to the Woodmead interchange again - now if only they could work on the traffic from that point. Traffic in Randburg and Sandton is ridiculous.
Tribble those improvements you enjoy would not have pushed them into any kind of debt if they actually used what we pay them in any case in terms of fuel levies.
In 2005 we sat at 11 000 000 000 liters of petrol consumed per annum. In that same year the amount of tax paid per liter was 151.5 c/l a whopping 31% of what you paid for fuel at that time. So do the calculations... R16 665 000 000 of taxes on fuel... that is 16.6 Billion.... and exactly how much did it take to resurface these roads... oh and note that those figures are from 2005. Currently we consume about 4 035 021 959 liters of petrol in Gauteng alone. Add on top of that the 150 c/l of tax then you get R6 052 532 938 a year that they are supposed to spend on improving our roads. Don't tell me they can't maintain our roads in Gauteng with a budget like that. Oh and before I forget that is not even taking into account the 2 288 314 281 liters of Diesel consumed in 2011.
Conclusing GFIP is a sham so they can pocket that R6 Billion instead of using it to better our roads.
@RRF. I agree. If they stopped using the tax money for JZ's weddings, expensive cars, shopping trips in that mine dump called Dubai.........then we would not need this evil and ridiculous e-toll system. In fact all the e-toll system is, is a way for the government to get even more money for their back pockets.
I will rather go on the congested and pot-hole filled back roads(which if the money was being used correctly would not be like this) then fund their <insert variable> greed
Just did Wierda Park to Sasolburg in 1:15 in a KIA LDV.
Oh joy!
MOOD - Thirsty
A surprising amount of modern pseudoscience is coming out of the environmental sector. Perhaps it should not be so surprising given that environmentalism is political rather than scientific.
Timothy Casey
Anyway. Here's my payment option for the foreseeable future.
Users who did not register would be invoiced with a due date for payment.
Meaning their cameras have to actually see and read my registration number.
Sterkte vir hulle.
MOOD - Thirsty
A surprising amount of modern pseudoscience is coming out of the environmental sector. Perhaps it should not be so surprising given that environmentalism is political rather than scientific.
Timothy Casey
SykomantiS wrote:I don't see how the DA are being the daft ones?
I'm curious though as to what exactly the revised T&C's are. It hasn't been published yet?
Do you have to re-register your copy of windows every time they change their darn T&C's?
There is no compulsion on SANRAL to do so.
MOOD - Thirsty
A surprising amount of modern pseudoscience is coming out of the environmental sector. Perhaps it should not be so surprising given that environmentalism is political rather than scientific.
Timothy Casey
It does if it impacts billing and you gave them banking details etc? Or even if you did not, I would wager.
You don't pay every time MS changes their T&C's (though I wouldn't be surprised if Apple fanbois did)
The New Age wrote:Road users who have registered for e-tolls will not have to do so again, the SA National Roads Agency Limited (Sanral) said on Thursday.
A surprising amount of modern pseudoscience is coming out of the environmental sector. Perhaps it should not be so surprising given that environmentalism is political rather than scientific.
Timothy Casey
A surprising amount of modern pseudoscience is coming out of the environmental sector. Perhaps it should not be so surprising given that environmentalism is political rather than scientific.
Timothy Casey
THE_STIG wrote:What's this rubbish about us who have not registered for e-toll having to pay more than those who have. Is it true?
Go do the sum of your projected cost (with and without e-tag) here.
There is a real cost saving for regular users in getting one. Me, myself and I will refrain from doing so until we are either compelled to do so by law; or if the 'bills' start streaming in. I have my doubts as to the effectiveness of the gantry cameras...
MOOD - Thirsty
A surprising amount of modern pseudoscience is coming out of the environmental sector. Perhaps it should not be so surprising given that environmentalism is political rather than scientific.
Timothy Casey
I heard about a spray that makes your registration plate difficult to read with cameras. Makes it fluorescent or something, showing as white. Not sure if it is true and would of course never, ever use such a thing...
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle Intel i5 2500; AsRock Z77 Extreme 4; Asus GTX580; 4x 2GB DDR3 1333; Intel 520 240GB SSD + 2x WD 3TB + 2TB Samsung; Samsung 22X DVD/RW; 23" LG W2343T-PF; Huntkey 700W
.....and I am one of them, but then again the R59 is not part of this system 
. I hope that the cable thieves suddenly take a liking to the e-toll gantries 
