The Portfolio Committee on Transport has received a briefing on the National Land Transport Amendment Bill. The Department of Transport’s Acting Director-General, Mr Mokonyama Mathabatha, told the Committee the Act was promulgated in December 2009 for the purpose of the Fifa World Cup 2010 but that there were developments that necessitated changes in order to improve service delivery.
“Three years when we started implementing, we realised there was a need for changes. There are unintended consequences that we want to correct. But also we want to tighten and clean up the legislation. The world is constantly moving, there are innovations that require we change,” Mr Mathabatha said.
The Committee was then taken through the intended amendments – and they include catering for the non-motorised transport, allowing municipalities to take contracts with transport companies, and for national government to enter into new contracts for public transport services.
Members sought clarity on the kind of impact this piece of legislation would have on the strife that is currently gripping the taxi industry involving Uber, colour coding, regulations regarding transportation of farm workers, and the level of involvement for the Road Traffic Infringement Agency. They also wanted to know why was it that a big chunk of the budget is still given to few bus operators and nothing towards minibus taxis.
Committee member Mr Leornard Ramatlakane sought clarity on whether the inter-model planning committee (IPC) sought to replace the integratedness of the transport services.
“It sounds nice but I am not sure what this concept is as contained in the proposed legislation. Are we not falling into silo-ism (working in silos). Where is it borrowed from, and what is the authority of it?” Mr Ramatlakane asked.
He said he thought the country was talking about integrated public transport and said he was concerned about the eviction of the traditional taxi operators from the industry. “Is there a provision in the Act that if this occurs, then the rights of permit holders may be protected?” he asked.
Committee member, Mr Pat Sibande, wanted to know why was Uber included in the list of stakeholders who had been consulted, and clarified that Uber only provided a network.
The Chairperson, Ms Dikeledi Magadzi, said the industry has got elements of violence but also has limitless opportunities for the radical economic transformation.
She asked if the legislation will be able to deal with the challenge that is there of over-subscription.
“How do you see the Act assisting in terms of the Bus Rapid Transport concept. We anticipate a holistic integrated public transport in the country,” Ms Magadzi said.
She also sought clarity on the constitutionality of the amendments, especially where it relates to forbidding public servants from doing business with the government.
Mr Mathabatha said legal opinion was sought on the matter and reassurance was given that the amendments pass the constitutionality test.
“We have a problem of resources. If we had enough money there was never going to be any need for us to be in the situation we are in, where there still exist monopolies in the provinces. The study done indicated that if we were to cover the entire public transport sector, we needed to invest two times more than we are doing,” he said. “We are stuck with these old order contracts held by companies such as Putco, Golden Arrow, Great North Transport, and so on.
He reassured the Committee that the department was not making legislating to benefit Uber.
“We will never do that, but we are making legislation to accommodate for e-hailing services. The definition of taxi services includes e-hailing services. The bitter taxi operators are encouraged to modernise so that they enter the space, but we will never make special conditions for Uber.”
Mr Mathabatha said the amendment Bill has been supported by stakeholders and approved by Cabinet.
By Sibongile Maputi
22 August 2017
Arrange a tour