HAMILTON'S ROADS.

Auckland Star, Volume LVII, Issue 129, 2 June 1926, Page 10

HAMILTON'S ROADS.

• ■ PROBLEMS FACING COUNCIL DEPUTATION TO PRIME* MINISTER. MOTORISTS MUST PAY FOR USE. (By Telegraph.—Special to "Star."?) HAMILTON, this day. ' Amongst the several and varied deputations which waited on the Prune Minister (Rt. Hon. J. G. Coates) when he was in Hamilton, was one from the Hamilton Borough Council concerninz its roading problems. * The deputation, which - consisted of Mr. J. K. Fow (Mayor), and Mr. F. Snell (chairman of the Works Commitl tee), was introduced by the member for Hamilton, the Hon. A. J. Young. Mr. Fow said that in order to maintain roads, and meet the amount of motor traffic, the council would have to face a recurring expenditure of £1000 per year. It was felt that the present conditions were not equitable. He thought that those who used the roads should be made to pay for them. Mr. Fow suggested that a petrol charge ba made, or else a flat rate and petrol tax would meet the position. Mr. F. Snell, chairman of the Works. Committee, stated that the council had spent nearly £400,000 in loans for constructing streets and drains, on which it was called upon to pay approximately f20,000 in interest and sinking funds. , This had been latgely due to the great demands made by motor transport, the total increased expenditure of which amounted to £17,000 per annum. In. order to maintain what the town had, the Borough Council was called upon to,pay in addition to maintenance another £70,000 for streets and £65,000' for further drainage of them. The annual charges thus amounted to over £39,000. All the borough was receiving in motor license fees was £600, and it was -expected that heavy motor fees would make up aother £400. Even at the best the motor owners to-day contributed not more than £1000 towards the cost of works in the borough. There wert approximately 1000 vehicles in Hamilton, and Mr. Snell believed the owners of these should bear the greater part of ' the council charges for the works which the advent of motors had rendered necessary. While the chairman of the Works Committee suggested various ways in which this expense could be met by taxation on these vehicles, the council wai not so much concerned as to how it wa« paid so long as the money waa obtained, In reply the Hon. Mr. Coates said he was not going to pretend to give anj; opinion just then. He would- say, however,, that the motor traffic realised the position generally. Parliament was not likely to deal with the motor tax this year. The petrol tax, to him, was a perfectly fair one, but he would not like to commit his- colleagues on the matter. The question of these yearly increasing amounts would have to be considered. If users of the road desired the highest standard then the Prime Minister thougrht they would asree to the expense. ■ One thing was quite clear: if these roads had to be maintained then users must he prepared to pay. There was no doubt local ratepayers could not carry the burden.