COST OF OUR ROADS.

Auckland Star, Volume LXIII, Issue 252, 24 October 1932, Page 12

COST OF OUR ROADS.

DISTRIBUTION OF BURDEN.

"HAMSTRINGING THE FARMERS."

Challenging the contentions of the automobile clubs and motor associations, Mr. D. R. Hoggard, chairman of the Hutt County Council, expressed the opinion at a meeting of his council that motor vehicle users were not carrying their share of the road bill. On Mr. Hoggard's motion it was decided to forward a remit to the Counties' Association urging the transference of a larger share of roading expenses from the, ratepayer to the road user. The meeting had before it a remit for which the Waitotara County Council sought support. It advocated an immediate reduction in the present land valuations and suggested that county councils should be empowered to classify lands into three groups —agricultural, dairying and lamb fattening; store lamb and cattle country; and dry sheep country. With this classification effected, it "was suggested that the counties should then be authorised to reduce the valuations by various degrees. Mr. Hoggard said he did not think revaluation would' achieve much. A neighbouring connty had spent £700 on a revaluation, and the sum might have been better spent on roads. Rating relief to the farmer could only be achieved bv transferring a larger share of road upkeep on to the shoulders of road users In 1930-31, although motor taxation had yielded £2,018,813, the maintenance, interest and sinking fund cliarges on roads had totalled £6,001,938. "In this country three-quarters of the roads receive no subsidy from petrol tax, and the other fourth is only in pai t maintained by the motorists," said Mr. Hoggard. "In this struggle for survival we are hamstringing our farmers with oppressive rates and other costs, and if it is our farmers and not their competitors who lose in the struggle, then f!od help New Zealand," he concluded.