Much Talk About Motors and Fees

Sun (Auckland), Volume I, Issue 179, 19 October 1927, Page 12

Much Talk About Motors and Fees

AMENDMENT DISCUSSED

ROAD-ROLLER” BILL

(THE SUN’S Parliamentary Reporter.) W ELLIXGTOX, Tuesday. TT appears that the principal objection to the Motor Vehicles Amendment Bill, introduced in the House of Representatives yesterday, will be in regard to the clause providing for the payment of licence fees for vehicles owned by the State and by local bodies. The Minister, however, pointed out that road machinery is not subject to registration.

In moving the second reading of the Bill in the House this afternoon, the Minister of Public Works, the 1-lon. K. S. Williams, explained that in view of the number of motor accidents which were occurring, it was considered advisable to increase the fines payable for breaches of the present Act,, in the hope that it would be effective in making drivers more careful. He added that when the Bill reached the committee stage, he would move the addition of another clause which would have the effect of bringing the issue of driving licences into line with the issue of car licences, so that all would come in on May 31. Air. D. G. Sullivan, Avon, said that it seemed fairly clear that the purpose of the Bill was to get additional money for the Main Highways Board. If the Bill became law, it meant that a tax would be levied on local bodies in regard to the cars they were using l'or doing the work of the city or county. Air. A. Harris, Waitemata, could see no sound reason why State-owned vehicles should not pay the same licence fees as those privately owned, and he did not think it had ever been intended that they should be exempted.

The Leader of the Opposition, Air. It. B. Holland, said that there were two sides to the question, but he thought the Minister would agree that the Bill had been brought down hurriedly, and local bodies had not had an opportunity of knowing anything about it. He urged that the Minister should allow the Bill to go before a committee, so that the bodies affected could make what representations they wished. If the Bill were put straight through, it would look like panic legislation. Sir John Luke, Wellington North, expressed the view that road-rollers would be subject to licence taxation similar to other vehicles. He thought that the Bill would lead to all sorts of difficulties, and later would divide people into sections of thought regarding different liabilities and responsibilities. BURDEN ON CITIES Air. J. A. Lee, Auckland Bast, said that the Bill aimed at the most drastic revision of taxation which had in the past been levied, to provide the roads of the country. It compelled cities to aid in maintaining roads outside their areas, and imposed a burden on small city ratepayers. In addition to road-rollers, road-sweepers, watercarts, and all sorts of community conveyances would have to be licensed. Air. H. G. R. Alason, Bden, referred to the nuisance created by noisy motorcycles, and suggested that the deputyregistrar should decline to issue licences for motor-cycles not fitted with proper silencers. A number of other members urged the need for stringent legislation to deal with reckless motorists, and several members supported the advocacy of a petrol tax, but there was very little discussion of the provisions of the Bill. NO HURRY Air. Williams, in reply, promised that ho would not hurry the Bill through till the local bodies interested had an opportunity of stating their views. He believed, however, that this discussion would be fruitful, and give the local authorities an idea of what was pending. Road machinery was not classed as motor vehicles, and was not subject to registration. At the present time there wa sa number of unregistered cars running about. There should not be, and the Bill would shut down on these. Proposals respecting the speed limits shortly would bo submitted to motoring interests, continued Air. Williams, and later legislation will be framed. It would be impossible to fix a definate speed for the whole of the Dominion. He thought it unfair that through service cars should be at the mercy of every local authority through whoso territory they passed, and the Bill would relieve licensing hardships in this respect. He was prepared to accept suggestions for the protection of the public against unscrupulous drivers, but the checking of registrations was a costly business. The system of registration in England was so cumbersome that a car had to be stopped in order to discover the owner. The Bill was read a second time at 11.10.