The uMkonto weSizwe (MK) Party has strongly criticized the government’s decision to allocate R5 billion through the Special Appropriations Bill to settle the e-toll debt. The party views this bailout as a clear reflection of poor governance and a lack of strategic thinking in addressing South Africa’s infrastructure challenges. According to MK Party’s national spokesperson, Nhlamulo Ndhlela, the reliance on taxpayer funds to cover the debt highlights the leadership failures within the DA-led coalition, the ANC, and other government partners. The MK Party contends that this decision burdens an already overstretched national budget and fails to offer a sustainable, long-term solution to the e-toll crisis.
Had the MK Party been in charge, Ndhlela asserts, the situation would have been handled differently. The party believes in implementing bold and innovative solutions that focus on fiscal discipline while safeguarding public interests. “Instead of relying on a costly bailout, the MK Party would have explored more sustainable options, including public-private partnerships (PPPs), infrastructure bonds, and revenue-generating initiatives,” said Ndhlela. This approach would not only have addressed the debt but also ensured that the e-toll system was self-sustaining, without over-relying on the national fiscus. The party’s focus on people-centered policy would have prioritized long-term solutions over short-sighted fixes.
One key aspect of the MK Party’s alternative plan involves leveraging the private sector through public-private partnerships (PPPs). According to Ndhlela, these strategic partnerships could have been used to manage the e-toll debt, with private investors taking over the debt in exchange for long-term infrastructure management contracts. This would have relieved the government of its financial obligations while ensuring that the roads were efficiently maintained. The MK Party believes that engaging the private sector in public infrastructure management is a crucial step towards making South Africa’s infrastructure projects both sustainable and effective.
Another element of the MK Party’s proposed solution is the issuance of infrastructure bonds. These bonds, aimed at institutional investors such as pension funds, would have offered competitive returns while allowing the public to contribute to the country’s infrastructure development. This innovative approach would align with the MK Party’s ethos of shared responsibility, where both the public and private sectors invest in the future of the nation’s infrastructure. Ndhlela highlighted that these bonds would have provided a much-needed alternative to the reliance on state funding, which ultimately places a heavy burden on taxpayers.
In addition to financial solutions, the MK Party would have introduced dynamic tolling and congestion charging as a way to fairly generate revenue from the e-toll system. Instead of the flat-rate tolling system that has sparked widespread public resistance, the MK Party would have implemented a system based on distance traveled or congestion charges in high-traffic areas, similar to models used in cities like London and Singapore. Ndhlela believes that these measures would have struck a balance between generating revenue and ensuring public acceptance, as they would have been perceived as more equitable and transparent.
Lastly, the MK Party proposed a fuel levy as a temporary measure to help address the e-toll debt, but with transparency and a clear timeline for its removal once the debt is repaid. The party emphasizes that any increase in the fuel levy would have been ring-fenced specifically for the e-toll debt, unlike the current government’s indiscriminate approach to fiscal spending. The MK Party’s commitment to transparency and fiscal discipline contrasts with the current administration’s reliance on reactive measures such as the R5 billion bailout, which the party argues has set a dangerous precedent. According to Ndhlela, had the MK Party been in charge, South Africa would not be in this position, and the e-toll system would have been restructured or replaced with a more sustainable, fair solution.
