For whom does the road toll greedily?

Officials have justified the continued fees by claiming that investments for the building and operation of those roads have not yet been recovered, so it is reasonable to continue charging drivers.

While at first glance, the Ministry of Transport data seem to justify their stance, a closer look at the data might show otherwise.

For example, in 2013, the managerial costs exceeded that of road operation, which is difficult to understand, and many netizens have questioned whether the road companies are overstaffed and this is a core reason behind the bloated management costs.

The public questioning is not without cause. In a 2008 audit report released by the National Audit Office, it was found that a toll-collection agency in Central China's Hubei province budgeted to have 30 people in the payroll, but it actually employed 144 people. Likewise, a Shanxi road management agency was supposed to have 27 people on the payroll, but it was paying 156 people.

The auditing report also noted that the pay for these road managers was much higher than market levels in some places. Moreover, it said more irregularities, such as the bloating of debts and illegal exemption of toll charges, had been found, which also pushed up expenditures and reduced revenues.

This time, it is not clear yet whether the deficit has been caused by overstaffing, inflated salaries or other irregularities. So the ministry should disclose more detailed information regarding how many road managers it has hired and how much they have been paid, to respect the public's right to know.

Regarding the "other expenditures", the ministry also needs to clarify what these entail, so that the public can scrutinize whether there are any abnormal expenditures.

And even if the balance sheet provided by the ministry turns out to be all above board, the deficit should not be used to justify the prolonged charging of the expressway toll charges.

When a road starts operation with an explicitly set duration for collecting the fees, then it constitutes a de facto contract between the road management authorities and road users. The prolonging of the charges violates this contract and those doing so should be put under strict public scrutiny.

In reality, car users have little say in the decision-making process. This is against the spirit of rule of law and it is high time the transport authorities address the problem and show respect to the public. If they lean toward the commercial interests involved in road management, then it will risk triggering more public anger.

The author is a senior writer with China Daily. xinzhiming@chinadaily.com.cn