Presented to the Select Committee on 04/12/2012

PresentationPresentation OutlineOutline1. Purpose2. Critical Processes to take place Prior to

Implementation3. Consultative Framework4. Update on Consultative Sessions with

Stakeholders5. Rules for successful implementation6. Summary

PURPOSEPURPOSE

• To brief Select Committee on results of Consultations held with various stakeholders

• To present the recommended way-forward,

CRITICALCRITICAL PROCESSESPROCESSES TOTO TAKETAKE PLACEPLACE PRIORPRIOR TOTO IMPLEMENTATIONIMPLEMENTATION

• To consult key stakeholders • To develop an action plan based on stakeholder input,• CBRTA to participate in all stakeholder engagement process,• National Consultation will be led by Cross Border, and is

supposed to include operators, DIRCO, Municipal Authorities , Presidency, The Kingdom of Lesotho,

• To present proposed model to Select Committee, • To address legal compliance process (streamline law

enforcement processes),• To present model to MEC ,• To pilot the model,• To present the Model to Presidency.

CONSULTATIVECONSULTATIVE FRAMEWORKFRAMEWORK

• Office of the Presidency.• Ministry of Transport (RSA).• Ministry of Transport and Traffic (Lesotho).• SA High Commission• National Department of Transport.• National Department of Public Works.• Department of International Relations and

Cooperation.• MEC for Transport: Free State.

CONSULTATIVECONSULTATIVE FRAMEWORKFRAMEWORK cont./…cont./…

• Cross-Border Road Transport Agency (Regulatory Committee).

• SA National Roads Agency Limited.• Free State Department of Transport and Public Safety.• South African Police Services.• Municipal authorities (Mantsopa, Naledi, Setsoto and

Dihlabeng)• RSA cross-border passenger carriers.• Lesotho cross-border passenger carriers.• RSA inter- and intra-provincial operators operating

from border ranking facilities.

OUTCOMESOUTCOMES OFOF CONSULTATIONCONSULTATION WITHWITH CROSSCROSS BORDERBORDER TAXITAXI OPERATORSOPERATORS

CONSULTATION WITH CROSS BORDER OPERATORS HELD ON 18th OCTOBER 2012

Concerns and Comments•A concern that the Task Team did not including SADC Protocol as it supersedes inter alia SACU MOU was raised.•Even though cross border operators are not certain with the way the dispensation model will unfold, operationally, they are willing to give it a chance as it is a two year pilot. •There is lack of details on how the inter & intra provincial as well as the cross border operators will be operating collectively. •An appeal was made to the Task Team to look at the remaining stumbling blocks by consulting with the operators for a way forward.

Questions Raised•What is it the difference with the proposed model dispensation as compared to the MoU signed in 2005?•Why want Inter & Intra provincial operators to cater for cross border operators and not cross border catering for them?•Why condone the contravention of Cross Border Act instead of enforcing it?

• Was the safety of commuters and operators considered prior the development of the dispensation model?

• Why contemplate on establishing a centralised ranking facility that is meant to cater for both Inter & Intra and cross border operators? The initiative will fuel violence as it has been proven in the past.

• Why can’t cross border operators be part of the team addressing the Inter Provincial fears, this could assist in alleviating their fears.

• Why not enforce the law and still want to negotiate after series of meetings?

OUTCOMESOUTCOMES OFOF CONSULTATIONCONSULTATION WITHWITH CROSSCROSS BORDERBORDER TAXITAXI OPERATORSOPERATORS cont…/.cont…/.

COMMENTS, CONCERNS AND QUESTIONS RAISED•CBRTA permit is too expensive – provincial operators pay R50 for a 5 year permit whilst cross border operators pay R500 for a 3 month permit. •The other agreement was that a taxi rank facility will be build but Lesotho did not comply with the agreement. •Challenges should be resolved before festive season as demand for public transport will be high and Lesotho and Gauteng operators will be advantaged,•Challenge of the 2009 agreement between RSA and Lesotho does not appear in the presentation,•Presentation addressed all the challenges that were raised by the Free State operators •Lesotho operators will still not comply with the proposals that were made because they will still load and offload anywhere they want. •The other issue that CBRTA should consider is the fact that the geographical specifications of the Free state are not the same as other provinces “towns are close to the border gate”. •Lesotho operators should stop with the illegal taxi ranks.•The task team has done a lot of work. •The operations between the two countries should be normalized in order for all operators to benefit.

OUTCOMESOUTCOMES OFOF CONSULTATIONCONSULTATION WITHWITH PROVINCIALPROVINCIAL TAXITAXI OPERATORSOPERATORS

• Presentation and proposal made is fully supported,• Challenges that Fouriesburg is facing should also be resolved,• Concern about the insurance & passenger liability also raised,• Recommendation made for CBRTA to issue permits that restrict

operators to only off load at taxi ranks.• Task team should look into the following issues;-

– Does a cross border permit allow an operator to load and off load anywhere, and

– Is an operator permitted to have 2 permits (cross border permit and provincial permit) on one vehicle.

• Lesotho operators who have dual citizenship are mainly the operators who use the cross border permits.

• High commissioner argued that the market should be shared.

OUTCOMESOUTCOMES OFOF CONSULTATIONCONSULTATION WITHWITH PROVINCIALPROVINCIAL TAXITAXI OPERATORSOPERATORS cont…/.cont…/.

The following three recommendations were raised by Cross Borders Operators as a way forward:

•To develop a mechanism that will enable cross border operators to transcend into the Kingdom of Lesotho;•Ensure Safety and Security of commuters and vehicles; and•Facilitate the meeting between the RSA cross border operators and Lesotho cross border operators with the view to find a mechanism to stabilise their operations.

WAY FORWARD

•The Free State Taxi Industry accepted the presentation with the necessary amendments as they believe to be workable.•It was advised that the taxi operators may meet on their own to further deal with the presentation and possibly the impasse.•The task team was to meet with Lesotho and other stakeholders.•The dry run to kick start from December 2012 for a period of two years.

OUTCOMESOUTCOMES OFOF CONSULTATIONCONSULTATION WITHWITH PROVINCIALPROVINCIAL TAXITAXI OPERATORSOPERATORS cont…/.cont…/.

Comments and Concerns of BCOCC

•Possible challenge of lack of manpower given that the proposed timing is December. - There was a concern that with the ANC

conference that is due in Mangaung in December. It already renders the SAPS not in a position to deploy any staff to monitor implementation of the Model.

OUTCOMESOUTCOMES OFOF CONSULTATIONCONSULTATION WITHWITH FREEFREE STATESTATE BCOCCBCOCC

Consultative workshop held with Government Stakeholders;-

Questions and Comments

•Is the Swaziland borders experiencing similar challenges as Lesotho borders?•What will happen after the Minister has implemented the 21 days special measure, what is the long lasting solution?•What will empower the Minister to declare the emergency measure, given the fact that the regulation still needs to be amended? •What if the operators accept the model as viable, and spread to other Provinces, contrary to implementing the C-BRT Act? •There is an assumption that the Lesotho authorities will accept the proposed model, which basically means the operators will be dropped outside the border, and not to their final destination points, which is contrary to the SACU MoU. •The fact that the proposed model is final from the RSA perspective, the intended approach will confirm to Lesotho that RSA like imposing things on countries as it is the perception from other countries.

OUTCOMESOUTCOMES OFOF CONSULTATIONCONSULTATION WITHWITH GOVERNMENTGOVERNMENT STAKEHOLDERSSTAKEHOLDERS

Consultative workshop held with Government Stakeholders;-

Recommendations made;-

•Sending of draft proposal to Lesotho to afford them an opportunity to make inputs as well as the consultation process,•Giving the Department of Trade and Industry a chance to advice the Task team of the implication of the proposed model to the SACU MoU,•Engaging the RSA High Commission in Lesotho for support and to assist in lobbying the model to Basotho •Solicit further inputs from all affected and key stakeholders.•A parallel consultation process should be implemented with the affected Municipalities regarding the management of the ranking facilities.•Take into account that there is no congruence between the model and the ultimate objective.•The Task team should wait for the advice from the DTI regarding the implications the model will have on the SACU MoU

OUTCOMESOUTCOMES OFOF CONSULTATIONCONSULTATION WITHWITH GOVERNMENTGOVERNMENT STAKEHOLDERSSTAKEHOLDERS cont…/.cont…/.

OUTCOMESOUTCOMES OFOF CONSULTATIONSCONSULTATIONS WITHWITH LESOTHOLESOTHO TRANSPORTTRANSPORT MINISTRYMINISTRY

Questions and concerns raised:

•Shouldn’t we be looking at crossing the border seeing that we are in cross border business?•Ranking facility must be a designated facility.•RSA can legislate, however, will be violating the SACU MoU which defines point A and B in respective countries.•Lesotho requested to be afforded an opportunity to first consult internally with revenue services, home affairs, foreign affairs amongst other stakeholders.•Who are the legitimate representatives of cross border operators in Lesotho? Issues of recognition of two other associations being addressed by the Minister and the Permanent Secretary after meeting with LPTCA.•The other two associations are free to enter into joint venture partnerships with counterparts in other neighbouring countries.•On the donation of the Cross Border Permits System by CBRTA to lesotho, the challenge for Basotho is that the amounts involved are quite huge and require budgeting, e.g. R600 000.•Regarding the development of the cross border transport policy, they find the task to be a mammoth one.•Concerns raised regarding visibility of DOT to guard against information gaps and inconsistencies between CBRTA and DOT when engaging Lesotho, e.g. infrastructure development projects, Kroonstad to Maseru connection / road link.

OUTCOMESOUTCOMES OFOF CONSULTATIONSCONSULTATIONS WITHWITH LESOTHOLESOTHO TRANSPORTTRANSPORT MINISTRYMINISTRY

Way Forward:

•Lesotho committed to finalizing consultations by end of December.•They requested a week to internally discuss and report back even on way forward during December or peak periods, to include issuing of a joint circular to law enforcement agencies regarding the arrangements on the ground.•That there are currently 3 associations on cross border business but LPTCA should be the only one recognized in the interim until structures are put in place on cross border permits.•That the other two associations have to apply for their cross border permits through LPTCA.•Facilitation of a meeting between South African operators and Lesotho operators…..where government will form part of the consultation to immediately get a sense of the outcome for possible implementation.•To guard against fraudulent hand written permits, they have engaged two interns to develop a web based system to print new permits while exploring implementation of the CBRTA donated system.•Busy consulting all stakeholders including SACU seeing that they are developing an integrated cross border policy, and that South Africa will be consulted in the next 3 months on finalizing the policy.•CBRTA was invited to conduct workshops on cross border policy and regulations for all stakeholders for all border towns similar to the one done in Wepenaar .

RULESRULES TOTO BEBE EFFECTEDEFFECTED FORFOR SUCCESSFUL SUCCESSFUL IMPLEMENTATIONIMPLEMENTATION

•Inter – and intra provincial operators to acquire cross border permits.•All operators that fall within definition of cross-border road transport to apply for cross-border permits.•Rules exclude cross-border bus carriers.•Development of Section 46A Regulations (Special Emergency Measures).•Development of legislative instrument to provide for window period.•Availability of ranking facilities at point of departure and destination.•Conclusion of joint venture agreements with foreign counterparts.

SUMMARYSUMMARY

Some of the challenges identified by the Task Team for successful implementation of the proposed solution include:•Time needed for promulgation of bill;•Lack of buy-in from other SA stakeholders;•Lack of buy-in from Lesotho.

To mitigate the situation:•The Task Team visited Lesotho on 16 November to ensure that they are briefed and given an opportunity to consult internally as we calibrate the proposal to a practical solution.•Agreed with Lesotho that for the Peak Period, a joint circular should be issued to all affected law enforcement agencies regarding arrangements on the ground, seeing that Lesotho requested until end of December to finalize their consultations.