QUESTIONS BY FARMERS

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXIX, Issue 5229, 20 January 1928, Page 3

QUESTIONS BY FARMERS

HIGHWAYS BOARD MATTERS,

VIEWS OF COUNTY COUNCIL.

A questionnaire was received by the Matamata Countv Counted on Friday fra.m the Auckland branch of, the N.Z. Farmers’ Union relative to Highways Board aind other matters. The council replied as indicated, after an interesting discussion. .The questions asiked were :—

(1) Does the Council consider it in the national interest to adhere to the Higways Act with slight amendments, or to hand over all national highways to the Main Highways Board.

(2) Would it be am advantage if the chairman of the Counties’ Association was chairman of the Highways Board, and also if chairmen of district councils were county representatives ?

(3) Would a fresh classification of counties and road boards be advisable, grouping them with a view to .economy in the matter of, overhead expense.; in such matters as transport facilities, loans, and community of interest being taken into consideration, standardised accounts to be kept and the unlit to be of sufficient size to allow l of. a competejit engineer, surfaceman, and economically engaged clerical staff in duties of Main High-ways-Board being confined to' allocation of funds, policy matters, and oversight of District Council ? (4) Would one direct audit by Audit Department on highways account, covering subsidy, grant, loan, and county fund contributions, be advantageous ? ■' (5) Would the adoption of practical standards in reading, metalling,and bridging matters be approved ?

(6) Would the appointment of ah inspecting and advisory engineer to advise with regard to all roads be an advantage, such engineer tpi be always on that job only ?

(7) Is there at present duplication in work done by bodies dealinlg with roads which could bp cut out, in preparation of plans and specifications, in survey, or in any other* respect ?

(8) What percentage would you Suggest to cover all engineering arid supervision in the case of adoption of a general scheme ? The letter stated that the fanners* executive felt there was a risk of too hasty centralisation, and that although tihe principle of “users of roads to pay for roads” wais a right one, there might be, a danger of roads being handed over to a body which would have a tendency to dpi everything regardless of expense. It was desired to investigate the possibilities of a middle course, eliminating waste and duplication of, staff. \ The council decided to deal with each question in turn, and supplied the following answers :— 1. The Council considered it would be a. big mistake to hand over all roads to the Main Highways Board. -2. Public Works engineers malde the best chairmen, as they were in touch with all work going on. 3. The council decided that this question was not explicit, and that further information was desirable. Cr. Judd held that it referred to counties, many of which he thought were too small. Questions 4 and 5 were also treated in the* same manner, the counc’l declining. to commit itself without further inforriiatiqn. 7. The council decided there was duplication, and that the bettqr method was for all moneys to be handed over to Councils which would then do the work, whether road-making or surveys.