HIGHWAY FINANCE

Hokitika Guardian, 20 August 1930, Page 3

HIGHWAY FINANCE

EXPENDITURE ON ROADS MTNINSTER DEALS WITH CRITICS. WELLINGTON, August 18; ■ ■ A vigorous defence of the alteration in highways finance as proposed m tlie Finance Bill was made by the Hon. E. A. Ransom, Minister of Lauds, in a righting .speech in the House to-niglit. The Alinister trenchantly dealt with criticisms made by Air Coates, and claimed that the time had arrived when the user of the road should pay for the expenditure on it. The Alinister said that Mr Coates during his ■speech in the aiternoon had described that part of the Bill dealing with highways finance as a repudiation of an honourable agreement. Mr Ransom pointed out that Parliament was not governed by agreements other than those enacted by; legislation. Whatever agreement might have been, entered into by the then Prime . Alinister with the Highways Board, ;! only? those portions set out in-an Act of Parliament were binding upon anybody. 6 “We know tliat tlie Alain Highways Act was the baby of the present leader of the Opposition,” continued Air Ransom, “hut by gross feeding it has become so heavy that the Consolidated Fund can no longer carry it. Highways expenditure has grown to such an extent that the time lias arrived when the Government has to take thi position into serious consideration and, place the responsibility on the roaduser, as should have been done yearsago.” Replying to another point raised by Air Coates, the Alinister said that smc; the time the £200,000 from the Public Works Fund had been transferred ti ‘ the Main Highways Construction Fund the Government had been paymp i £600.000 a year on road works in conj nection with relief expenditure. The . ! Governhient was parrying ; its respond bility for rbadiri'g tb-a greater extern [ than it should. ■ j ' , j Tracing tlie history bf the hoard, M ! Ransom said tliat in addition to tb £200,000 the board had received £35.000 from the Consolidated Fund for il■: ,revenue, fund, togther with tyre ta: -and license fees.;,Later the petrol tax was introduced and its proceeds, which ■ ,ast year amounted to approximatel; ' tO.OOO, were added to the revenue o the board. Had the Government of tb. . day acted wisely they would have re- . lieved the Consolidated Fund of thosilieavy charges being made on it, and actually the. Highways Board wouk liave been placed in a stronger position The fact that so much money was made available to the board resulted in : an expenditure quite beyond what tht / country could afford. It had led to exi travagant expenditure. Notwithstarid- - ing ,that New Zealand lnjd some excellent roads, the general, taxpayer and ; ratepayer found themselves- in lid ? easier position regarding county rate's.

Air Alartin (Raglan) : They are worse off.

The Minister said it must be agreed that the user, who obtained greater advantages from . the . expenditure should be held liable for it. The unscientific method followed in the past had resulted in no material benefit to the primary producer, either respecting his rates for maintenance or roads or the prices he paid for the carriage of his produce. Regarding the subsidy payable to local bodies; the Minister said it had been contended that under the provisions of the Bill local bodies were going to suffer some disadvantage, but such was not the case. The subsidies would be . paid, in . the same proportion as previously, but through the Highways, Revenue Fund and not from the Consolidated Fund. Provision would he made in the extra two-pence , put on petrol. Mr Poison (Stratford): Will the Consolidated Fund pay anything to the Highways Fund? Mr Coates: Not a penny. To Mr Coates’s suggestion that twenty-six United members, with the aid of tthe Ldbour Party, were altering legislation of forty years’ standing, the Minister’s rejoinder was that the question of party had nothing to ao with it. It was a question of a majority of members of the House elected to frame the laws deciding that in die interest of New Zealand the system should be altered. Mr Coates: Did you put it before the electors? Ignoring the interjection, the Minister said the question was one of principle and not of party. “It should be put before the country,” persisted Mr Coates. Mr Speaker : Order! Order!