The Automobile Association (AA) wants to stop the planned expansion of the Gautrain dead in its tracks, labelling the idea as a “financial train wreck.”
This follows an announcement by Gauteng Premier Panyaza Lesufi in September which revealed that the province will be investing R120 billion into upgrading the commuter-rail service from its original 80km to a massive 230km over the coming years.
“Any expansion of the current Gautrain service is wasteful expenditure on a service that doesn’t service the needs of most of Gauteng’s citizens,” said the AA.
“The Automobile Association (AA) says spending billions of Rands on extending the service must seriously be reconsidered and stopped before it’s too late.”
Gauteng’s White Elephant
In 2021, the AA submitted a detailed report on the extension of the Gautrain to the provincial government, urging it to reject any extensions of the service which to called a “White Elephant.”
The report indicated that the Gautrain benefits a small minority of citizens with the financial means to make use of a rather pricey service, but comes at the expense of better public transport for the majority who need it most.
One of the biggest issues facing the extension is the so-called Patronage Guarantee, which AA contends must be properly addressed before any further work on the Gautrain is done.
The Patronage Guarantee is a mechanism whereby Bombela – the private concessionaire which operates Gautrain – is compensated for low ridership levels on its trains by the Gauteng Department of Roads and Transport (GDRT).
According to the Gautrain Management Agency’s 2024 Integrated Annual Report, the GDRT paid Bombela R2.79 billion in the 2023-2024 financial year, and R2.37 billion in the 2022-2023 financial year in the form of the Patronage Guarantee.
This was supposedly due to the “actual revenue and ridership being significantly below the minimum required total revenue projections,” said the AA.
Extrapolate these numbers back to 2012 and it’s clear that billions of rands of Gauteng taxpayers’ money have been paid to Bombela to compensate for an under-performing service.
“The AA questions whether figures provided now for the justification of further extensions can be trusted given that the current revenue projections already fall way short of the mark – and have done for many years – and result in huge pay outs to Bombela,” said te AA.
“It is quite clear that Gautrain failed to deliver on its ridership projections from the outset and now the burden of funding falls on taxpayers – the majority of whom don’t even use the system because it’s too expensive to do so. They are, in effect, subsidising a system that caters to the elite who are already mobile.”
The AA highlights the fact that Gautrain stations have among the biggest parking lots in the province for vehicles of those who use the system, standing in stark contrast to those who have no transport solutions at all.
Additionally, there is a lack of reliable, sustainable, affordable, and safe public transport for the majority of the province’s citizens, many of whom must walk to their destinations because they have no alternative.
“Of equal concern is the fact that the MEC for Finance and Economic Development, Lebogang Maile, only last week warned that the province is on the brink of potential bankruptcy because of its commitments, among other things, to e-toll debt,” said the AA.
“This sentiment does not correlate with the sentiment of the Premier to invest billions of Rands into what is clearly a financial train wreck for the province.”
The AA contends that withdrawing money from the Gauteng Roads and Infrastructure budget to compensate Bombela for its poor performance means other transport options are not being properly funded, again disadvantaging the majority of Gauteng’s citizens who need it most.
“We stand firm in our opposition to the extension of the Gautrain network, and the continued funding of the system through the Patronage Guarantee,” concluded the AA.
“A serious rethink of the expansion of the system is needed, particularly since it has shown that it cannot deliver on the numbers it projects and is, therefore, more of a liability than an asset.”
Loading ...
