TRAFFIC CONTROL.

Putaruru Press, Volume VI, Issue 250, 16 August 1928, Page 4

TRAFFIC CONTROL.

MATAMATA PROPOSAL. Rejected by Putaruru. In. a letter to the Putaruru Town Board the clerk to the Matamata County Council forwarded a suggestion that several local bodies should join together and appoint a fullyqualified man as traffic inspector. The writer stated that the statutes governing the use of ' motor vehicles were numerous and intricate, and traffic inspectors should have knowledge of motor mechanics and be capable of conducting prosecutions. The appointment of inspectors by each local body was unnecessary and expensive, but the appointment of an energetic inspector for a large area would result in a considerable proportion of his salary being received in fines. The Highways Board might also contribute towards the cost of such control. Mx-. Barr Brown thought it was scandalous for a local body to suggest that fines should be looked upon in such a manner. There was not a motorist who set out who did not commit errors.

Mr. Neal thought the traffic on all highways should be handled by the Highways Board. Mr. Tomalin agreed and stated that some motorists appeared to think no one had a right on the road but themselves. (Laughter.) The chairman thought it would not do any harm to meet the council in conference. Mr. Yandle supported this view. Mr. McDermott asked what the position of the police was. The chairman said the police took action if an accident happened. There was plenty of scope in the Police Offences Act for all manner of things but headquarters preferred to know how many fowls and pigs a farmer had. (Laughter.) Eventually it was decided to reply that the board felt it was not in a position at the moment to support the proposal.