HIGHWAYS FUND.

Press, Volume LXV, Issue 19715, 4 September 1929, Page 6

HIGHWAYS FUND.

WITHDRAWAL OF GRANTS. (PBSSS ABBOUATIOX rBLEGRAM.) WELLINGTON, September 3. In a telegraphed reply to the secretary of the Wellington Automobile Club, Sir Joseph Ward says the position regarding highway finance has changed considerably since the Act was passed in 1922. The taxation earmarked for the highways is now providing ample revenue, so that it is unnecessary to continue the additional grant of £35,000 or to provide £200,000 free capital out of the Public Works fund, which additional assistance L not justified in view of the general financial position, to which all Government accounts must be subject. All the capital considered necessary for highway construction will be provided, but by direct borrowing for the highways account. The Gov ernment's policy in respect to all such matters cannot be regarded as being fixed regardless of changing circumstances, and no breach of faith can arise in dealing with the public funds in the best interests of the Dominion as a whole.

HON. MR RANSOM'S STATEMENT. (PBKSS ASSOCIATION TBLBOHAM.) WELLINGTON, September 3. In regard to the protest meeting of Canterbury motorists over highway finance the Hon. Mr Ransom said, in an interview, that so many incorrect assumptions were placed before those present that he felt obliged to correct several of the speakers. It was impossible to allow to go unchallenged such an inaccurate statement as that made by Mr J. A. Flesher, to the effect that the South Island had hitherto suffered under the administration of the Board. The Minister quoted figures to show that, both for maintenance and construction, the rate of subsidy had been higher in the South Island than in the North. The Minister dealt also with the remarks of other speakers with a view to putting the true position as regards what were termed curtailments, but which in reality were merely adjustments, where the Board was asked for larger sums than it could provide. The Board had had to cut down North Island requests totalling millions'

PROGRESS LEAGUE'S REJOINDER A reply to the Minister's statement has been made by the Canterbury Progress League: To what extent the drastic curtailment of the Canterbury programme is due to the Government or Highwavs Board's policy cannot be accurately determined until definite figures are obtainable. But the Minister's reply hardly touches the main issue. "Motorists counties, the Press, and the public are generally agreed that the Government contributing to highway funds amounting to £235,000 a year, are payments made as a return to the' Highways Board for that body's service in taking over from the Public "Writs Department the construction and maintenance of Government roads, which are mainly developmental roads in which motorists are but little interested. Th-3 withholding of these grants, which

the Act regards as grants, not loans, or the charging of interest on these grants, is equivalent to throwing the whole burden of Government roads on to motor taxation. During the last four years the Highways Board has spent £1,748,873 on Government roads, whereas the Board has received only £940.000 from the Government. Thus motorists have already contributed £808,873 towards the support of roads they were never intended to finance. Now it appears that the burden is to be increased. It is surely obvious that if more of the Highway Board's funds arc Bpent on Government roads, or on interest, less will be available for eounty highways*