FARMERS AND PETROL

Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 1, Issue 141, 6 February 1932, Page 2

FARMERS AND PETROL

The Farmers' Union and the motoring organisations are renewing consideration of rural de-rating and petrol tax questions. The farmers hold that further de-rating can be effected and the lost revenue recouped from petrol taxation, and this without adding to the cost of petrol. With the price question we cannot deal. It was fcefore Parliament and an investigation was made by the Industries and Commerce Department. It is, however, advisable to remind the farmers that when they advocate price-control without the warrant of abnormal conditions they are supporting something of which they do not generaliy approve. But that is not the main point. The chief issue is whether the cost of rural roading should be transferred in greater measure than at present from the ratepayer to the motorist. It is necessary to point out that there is already a substantial measure of de-rating. One of the farmers admitted this in recalling the subsidy of £3 for £1 from the Main Highways Funds and the grant made for the purpose of a 12U=per cent. reduction in county rates. Before this is carried further there should be more investigation of the principles 011 which the relief is based. The de-rating agitation here, has arisen principally because of the rural de-rating carried through by the British Government. But the cases are.by no means parallel. In England there was an anomalous system which placed upon ratepayers many charges not covered by rates in New Zealand. Education and various health charges were thus provided, and also poor law relief for crowded industrial centres. New Zealand conditions are different and should be separately considered. Two points that should be remembered are these: If de-rating is justifiable in the country it should not be withheld from the towns. If the motorist is expected to pay for country roads why should ratepayers pay for city roads? There should be an apportionment of motoring revenue more in keeping with motoring use of roads. At present the country receives a great part of the tax from motors which run mainly on city streets. The second point is this : If county or other local government funds are to be derived largely i'rom a source other than rates there must be some change in the constitution of local g.overning bodies. It would be anomalous for ratepayers who pay no rates to elect councils which spend funds supplied by the General Government. Such possible anomalies may not be heeded when the main purpose is to give temporary relief — as with the grant from the Iiighways Fund last year; but temporary measures may become permanent and the anomalies be thus aggravated.