ENCROACHMENT ON HIGHWAYS’ FINANCE.

Shannon News, 20 September 1929, Page 4

ENCROACHMENT ON HIGHWAYS’ FINANCE.

HOROWHENUA COUNTY COUNCIL SUPPORTS A PROTEST. A vigorous protest against the threat of the Government to withhold the statutory grants to the Main Highways funds was urged in a circular received by the Horowhenua County Couneil on Saturday from the Canterbury Progress League, -which suggested that the Council write immediately to the members of Parliament for its district asking them to oppose the proposals. The circular was' accompanied by a letter setting out the position fully. In the course of this it was pointed out that it was apparent that there was no provision in the Budget either for the statutory minimum payment of £200,000 a year from the Public Works Fund to the Highways Construction Fund or for the statutory minimum payment of £35,000 a year, to the Highways Revenue Fund. There had been a suggestion that past grants made under Section 16 of the Main Highways Act, 1922, from the Public Works Fund to the Main Highways Construction account should be regarded as loans on the total of which the Board should pay interest. The letter stressed the point that, the motor-us-ing public already pay their full share of general taxation for the general purposes of Government. They pay also heavy Customs taxation on motor vehicles and parts, estimated to amount to well over £1,250,000 a year, which is used as general taxation for general purposes. In addition to this general taxation, they .are paying special taxation in license fees, tyre tax, petrol tax, etc., estimated to amount now. to well over £1,250,000 a year, and this, taxation was imposed and accepted on the express understanding that it would be used only for the one specific purpose, as a means whereby, the motorusing public might render substantial financial assistance to the counties in constructing and maintaining highways fit to carry present-day motor traffic* The chairman said he understood that the £35,000 grant from the Consolidated Fund would be renewed, because the Government had no statutory authority to do otherwise. There was nothing in the Act, however, to stop them from charging interest on the £200,000. The Prime Minister told the .Board that it would have to cut down its expenditure, and it did so, reducing the allocations from £750,000 to £550,000. Then he informed the Board that it would have to pay interest on the £200,000, not only this year, but i» respect of such.grants in the past. Mr Field, M.P., had moved in the matter in the House by tabling a question, and he (the Chairman) had been in touch with him. The Chairman added that he did not see any reason why the Council should not, on general lines, support the attitude of the Canterbury Progress League. •. . Or. Gimblett expressed the opinion that if various bodies had not protested, the Prime Minister, would have endeavoured to deprive the Highways Board of the £200,000 grant. On the motion of Cr. Catley, seconded by Cr. Gimblett, it was decided to : support the action of - the Progress League. OPPOSITION TO PROPOSAL FOR TWO HIGHWAYS BOARDS. A circular was received from the Counties’ Association conveying the opinion of the executive, after a meeting at which representatives iof both Islands were present, that the creation of a separate Highways Board for the South Island would be neither necessary nor desirable, nor would any benefit accrue to the South Island or to the iadniinistration of the iHjjghw\ay policy of the Dominion. It was hoped that Council would support this view. The Chairman stated that, as this Council’s representative at the meeting, he had supported that view. Another Highways Board would simply add to the cost of administration. He did not know that the proposal had the whole-hearted support of the motorists. It was purely a motorists’ move.nieut in the South Island and did not have the support of the whole of the Counties in that Island. The Prime Minister had promised legislation. It would not affect the North Island much, but there would be two costs of. administration, and if the system were broken down by two Boards it Might.-weaken the Highways Act. The position Avas that the South Island counties had been sloA\ r er to move in the matter of liiglnvays than those of the North, and noAv that they were prepared to take,full advantage of the Act they found that the amount which blight h§,ve been available for capital expenditure this year Avas someAvhat curtailed.

Cr. Catley moved and Cr. Ryder seconded, that the action of the executive in opposing the creation of another Eighvvays Board be approved. “Have they an allocation for the South Island?” asked Cr. Jensen.

The Chairman: Yes; in proportion to the number of motor vehicles registered. •'

The motion Avas carried,