[ad_1]
Judging by early debate, it does not sound as though the motoring public is going to welcome the latest proposal to introduce “toll” roads. What is the reasoning of both sides? Crispus.
Every motorist already pays a road tax to help fund the construction and maintenance of the national road network infrastructure.
For many decades this took the form of an annually renewable “Excise Licence”, paid for at a government counter and stuck to the windscreen. The price depended on the class and weight of the vehicle. At the time, the vehicle population was about 300,000.
The cost of administering this process swallowed quite a lot of the revenue and, anyway, the “uniform” charge was anomalous. A vehicle owner who used the roads for only 5,000km per year paid the same as an owner who drove 50,000km!
The system finally saw sense, and the road tax element was eventually added to the price of fuel. Fuel consumption levels inherently tallied with the class of vehicle, the wear-and-tear it inflicted on road surfaces (and foundations), and the distances it travelled.
The more you used the more you paid. Fair. And the additional collection cost was zero, even more significant now that the vehicle population is heading towards 3,000,000.
Those proposing an additional toll charge are saying that if you want more and better roads then we need to collect more money to build and maintain them.
Those opposing tolls might argue that they are already paying (plenty!) within the tax element of fuel (not forgetting import duty and VAT on their vehicles). An additional toll amounts to a “double” charge.
Both sides have a point. And in such cases the answer usually lies somewhere in between. The “Excise” tax element in fuel applies to all roads. The “toll” would only apply to a select few – presumably major arterial highways.
This distinction is universal practice worldwide! Tolls are “additional,” but they are also “optional”. You can avoid them altogether by using minor roads to get to your destination. Or you can pay the toll and get real and direct benefit for what you spend – usually a high-speed dual carriage clearway that reduces your cost in time, distance and fuel consumption.
A clear example is our “Expressway”. You pay to use it, but in the space of 20km you save half an hour, avoid 100 brakings and gear changes, probably save at least a litre of fuel, and escape that most severe penalty of all – jams and angst!
Personally, I would deem that cheap at twice the price! And I believe a high proportion of motorists would welcome tolls – on any and every arterial highway, especially anywhere between Mombasa and Busia, if it meant a swift, smooth and completely relaxed cruise on a multi-lane dual carriageway.
The savings in time, fuel consumption, wear-and-tear, risk and frustration would be a wholeheartedly welcomed no-brainer.
So, the question is not whether tolls are right or wrong, fair or unfair. It is not primarily a question of how the money is collected.
It is a question of how it is spent! And in that respect, there is another certainty: that almost anything that delivers swift, smooth and safe traffic flow will bring more benefit than cost to individual motorists and the national economy.
There’s a win-win in waiting and tolls could help deliver it. But, mismanaged, it is also a loophole for more plunder.
[ad_2]
