TRANSPORT BOARD.

Putaruru Press, Volume VII, Issue 314, 14 November 1929, Page 5

TRANSPORT BOARD.

£ CAUS TIC COMMENT. . By County Chairman. The vie the counties executive on the Trail ,port Bill was given by Gr. J. W. erson, chairman of the Matamata bounty Council, during the November meeting of the latter body. Cr. Anderson stated that there were two contentious clauses, one was the proposal to form what amounted to two bodies—one for each Island—and the other was the proposal to earmark portion of the highways funds. The present proposal was. to only have one body, but that North members would not vote on South Island grants and South Island members would not vote on North Island

matters. This would mean that half the members of the board would be sitting as dummies, as they would naturally take no interest in matters concerning which they had no vote. The counties’ executive, which consisted of seven North Island members and five South Island members, was unanimously against the idea. Similarly they were against increasing the membership, holding that six members could do the work as efficiently as a dozen or so.

It had been stated in the press that 1 a lot of opposition to the Government proposals was inspired for political reasons. People who Spoke like that did not know what they were talking about, as the president of the Counties’ Association, two vice-presi-dents and two other members that he knew of were Liberals. Further, the two representatives of the Counties’ Association on the Main Highways Board, Messrs. Joll and Talbot, were Liberals, sc such statements were absolute bunkum.

Another contentious clause was No. 54, which gave the Transport Board authority to take £150,000 from the highways fund and hand the amount over to Ideal authorities. The clause stated u to''local authorities having control of fbads or streets and for maintenance purposes.” It was understood the origin of this clause was the desire of the Minister of Public Works to allocate some portion of the petrol .tax to backr blocks roads, but the wording of the clause included and there were no streets in the. back-blocks. Again, the clause referred to maintenance, but what they wanted was money for construction purposes in the back-blocks, as it was no good putting maintenance on mud.'

When hearing evidence on the Bill members of the Transport Committee had stated there was no chance of town authorities claiming any portion of the money, and pooh-hoohed the idea. However, when Mr. Melville gave evidence on behalf of the Mt. Eden Borough Council he was asked if he thought it likely that Mt. Eden would apply for a share of the money, and he replied “ Too right, if there was any chance of getting any.”

Some of the South Island members were strongly for the two highway boards, and it appeared in the present proposal the Prime Minister was simply carrying out his election promise, but in another form.

Another matter the counties were strong on wasi the inclusion of the chief engineer of the Public Works Department as a member of the Transport Board. A jot of the work was carried out in conjunction with the Public Works Department through local Public Works engineers, some of which were not as competent as they might be. The proper person to oversee such and to give a rap over the knuckles was the chief engineer of the Public Works Department, as they would take no notice of outsiders. The Counties’ Association felt strongly that the chief engineer of the Public Works Department should be a member of the Transport Board, and that no money should be taken away else the towns would get it. Another point they favoured was the collection of heavy traffic fees by the post office, when the licenses were issued, so that a man could not get a license for his vehicles unless the traffic license was paid. There was no question but that a lot of heavy traffic licenses were not paid, and that some counties were dilatory in the matter of collecting same. A deduction would naturally be made for the cost of collection, but a deduction was now made for the same work by "the counties. They felt, however, that the extra amount collected would more than offset the cost.