MENACE TO TRAFFIC.

Auckland Star, Volume LXIII, Issue 209, 3 September 1932, Page 10

MENACE TO TRAFFIC.

PAPAKURA-BOMBAY ROAD. urgent work delayed. (boards' rules and regulations. Hope that provisions will be made in ; next year's estimates for the reconstruction of the 17 miles of bad road between Papakura and Mercer was expressed to-day by Mr. J. N. Massey, M.P., chairman of the Franklin County Council. It is estimated that the cost of reconstruction will be in the vicinity of £100,000. With full knowledge of the present bad condition of the stretch of main road from Papakura to Bombay, the Main Highways Board recently launched a scheme for -maintenance which involved an outlay of £2900 and the establishment of a single men's camp. This proposal to ?arry out temporary improvements was put before the Franklin County Council, which was asked to contribute £725 towards the cost. In his letter to the council, Mr. F. S. Dyson, representative of the Main Highways Board in Auckland, said that owing to the existing financial conditions it was extremely unlikely that any permanent work could be done on the road for some time. It would be agreed that in many places the road was so badly out of ehape as to be dangerous to modern motor cars travelling at their designed speeds. In fact, it could be stated that in parts the road was dangerous at any reasonable speed. "To remedy this," Mr. Dyson stated, "the Main Highways Board is agreeable to take in hand the necessary improvements by means of a single men's camp, provided" the Franklin County pays a quarter of the total cost of the work." County's Counter-offer. "We considered the board's proposals, and in return made a counter-offer,' said Mr. Massey. "We recognised that it is essential to carry out improvements, but in view of the fact that we have such a large number of married men in the locality, we considered that we should be given permission to use local married men on the job. That proposal was turned down." Mr. Massey said he made representations to the Minister of Employment, and also discussed the matter with Mr. W. Slaughter, officer in charge of unemployment in the Auckland Province. It was recommended that provision should be made for the work by the Unemployment Board, but before an agreement could be reached, Mr. Coates left for Ottawa. However, soon after Mr. Coates had left, Mr. Massey received a letter from the acting-Minister of Public Works, stating that the Franklin County's proposal to use married men on the road had been referred to the Unemployment Board, buj; the board had refused to waive its regulations. As the Highways Board was bound to observe the rules of the Unemployment Board, it was not possible to approve of the alternative terms of the Franklin County Council. On top of these negotiations, a further letter was received by the Franklin County Council from Mr. Dyson, Main Highways Board representative, which read:— Unemployment Board's View. "With reference to my letter of May 23, I understand that your chairman subsequently interviewed the Minister of Public Works, stating that your council could not afford to contribute the amount of approximately £700 which it will be called upon to pay under thi> board's proposal, and it was suggested to the Minister that the Unemployment Board's regulation governing the No. o scheme be waived so that married unemployed from Pukekohe could be transported to the work daily from their homes, the labour charges to be met by the Unemployment Board and the Highways Board, and the county to pay the cost of materials, lorry hire, and. supervision on a £3 for £1 basis. "This proposition was at the Minister's request referred to the Unemployment Board, which replied that it could not agree to the suggestion. As the Main Highways Board is also bound by the Unemployment Board's rules it is not possible, of course, to entertain youi county chairman's proposal. The Main Highways Board considers the condition of this section of highway as being serious, and is most anxious that the proposed improvements be undertaken without delay. I have therefore been instructed to again ask you to place the position before your council for further consideration of the board's offer." Negotiations Reviewed. "The council considered this matter carefully, and decided the work is not a suitable one for a single men's camp, and it could be more cheaply and suitably arranged for by the employment of No. 5 scheme married men living in Papakura and Drury districts who could be conveyed to and from the work daily," said Mr. Massey in reviewing the negotiations. "The council could also carry out the work in conjunction with its maintenance work under the county engineer and have the benefit of the council's road foremen for supervision. The council could also provide the plant required. The cost of establishing a camp would also be saved. "Between the regulations of the Unemployment Board and the action of the Main Highways Board in refusing to subsidise what is admittedly useful and necessary, and, in some cases urgent, work on the main highways, the council's ratepayers are being most unfairly treated, and there is on the part of the Unemployment Board and the Main Highways Board a most lamentable lack of co-operation with the council in its efforts to get the unemployed on to the most useful work to be found for them, and at the same time to assist the country in keeping down production costs by reducing rates in every possible direction," declared Mr. Massey. Mr. Massey said that the Franklin County Council suggests the Main Highways Board and the Unemployment Board should review the whole question again and authorise the council to get on with the work suggested, utilising No. 5 scheme workers wherever it is possible to do so, and the Main Highways Board subsidising out of ordinary maintenance votes in the usual way on a basis of £3 to £1 all costs outside of relief wages. The council has definitely decided it will not contribute one-fourth of the estimated cost of carrying out the work by means of a single men's camp. _______^__