EDITORIAL: Reports that the NHA (National Highway Authority) would increase toll rates by 100 percent on a quarterly basis has raised significant concern among the public, and rightly so. The decision has brought to light critical issues related to the timing, transparency, and communication of such policy measures. While the adjustment may align with operational and financial requirements, the manner of its execution has been far from ideal.
NHA has cited rising inflation and increased maintenance costs as key factors necessitating the toll rate hike. Infrastructure projects, particularly motorways, require continuous funding to maintain quality and safety standards.
However, such adjustments need to be implemented in a way that minimises disruptions and public backlash. The abrupt nature of this increase, which reportedly saw rates double, has created unnecessary strain on commuters and businesses relying on these routes.
Toll revenues play an essential role in financing road infrastructure and ensuring its upkeep. Yet, the absence of a clear and gradual mechanism for adjusting these rates has amplified the impact on those who use these roads daily.
Logistic companies, transport operators, and individual travelers now face significantly higher costs, with ripple effects expected across various sectors. This issue underscores the need for a well-structured approach to toll rate management, where adjustments are made incrementally and in line with economic conditions.
Public frustration has been further fueled by the lack of adequate communication regarding the decision. Policy changes of this magnitude demand transparency and engagement with stakeholders. Citizens deserve to know not only why these measures are being taken but also how the additional revenue will be utilised. A proactive approach in this regard could have mitigated much of the backlash and fostered a sense of shared responsibility.
The toll rate hike also raises broader concerns about governance and decision-making processes. It reflects a pattern of addressing issues reactively rather than proactively. Similar challenges have been observed in other areas such as fuel pricing and utility tariffs, where delays in decision-making lead to sudden and steep increases. This reactive approach often exacerbates public discontent and undermines confidence in institutions.
To address these challenges, several steps are necessary. First, toll rate adjustments should be planned and executed in a phased manner. Smaller, periodic increases would allow users to adapt and reduce the shock of sudden hikes. Second, transparency in the allocation of toll revenues must be prioritised. Publishing detailed reports on how funds are spent—whether on maintenance, expansion, or safety improvements—would enhance accountability and public trust.
Third, the government must consider alternative methods of funding infrastructure projects to reduce the financial burden on road users. Public-private partnerships, targeted taxes, or even subsidies for essential routes could diversify revenue streams and ensure more equitable cost distribution. Exploring these options would not only ease the pressure on frequent motorway users but also create a more sustainable model for infrastructure financing.
No doubt the toll rate increase may address financial and operational needs, but its implementation highlights significant flaws in policy execution. Timely, transparent, and well-communicated adjustments are essential to avoiding unnecessary public dissatisfaction. By adopting a more structured and inclusive approach, the government can ensure that such measures achieve their intended goals without alienating the citizens they are meant to serve.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Comments