Highway Policy

Press, Volume LXXXV, Issue 25737, 24 February 1949, Page 4

Highway Policy

At the annual conference of the Institution of Engineers on Tuesday, Mr F. M. H. Hanson, chief engineer of the Main Highways Board, reminded the public and (it is to be hoped) the Government of the country’s mounting transport difficulties, due mainly to the demand of transport operators to be allowed to use larger and heavier vehicles than New Zealand roads were designed and built to carry. Mr Hanson suggested that out of the current conferences of county councils, engineers, the Transport Department, road users, and others “ clarification ” may come; but while their counsel may be helpful, the problem remains one of Government policy, which must be settled by the Government. And it should be settled without any further delay.

There should be no difficulty in laying ’down general principles. The first is that New Zealand’s highway system, in which many millions of pounds have been invested, must be protected from unreasonable wear and tear, at least until men and materials can be spared for a programme of reconstruction on a higher—and more expensive—standard. In the meantime the country must lose any benefit that is to be obtained from larger transport units. Over the long term as well as over the short, the advantages of these . giant vehicles must be weighed against the enormous increases in highway costs which their use entails, whether in maintenance of the present lightly-built roads or in the capital cost of new and heavier ones. The inescapable conclusion is that for some years, at least, New Zealand will not be able to afford “ super-heavy ” road transport. That should be no great cause for regret. The present highway system and the railways between them should be able to handle the internal carriage of goods efficiently and at reasonable economic cost, once it is decided what the maximum axle-loadings of road vehicles shall be. For all its years of talk about transport co-ordina-tion, the Government has so far failed to take this fundamental decision.

Mr Hanson has already drawn protests from organised motorists by his forecast that “ road users ” would be called on to pay more for the use of roads; but it is by no means certain that he was referring to private motor-car owners as well as to commercial transport operators. Unquestionably, much more will have to be spent very soon both to overtake arrears of construction and maintenance which piled up during the war and also to strengthen the roads sufficiently to carry the present traffic. Taxation already bears so heavily—and in some respects so unfairly—on private motorists that the president of the Auckland Automobile Association may be justified in doubting whether they could meet higher taxation. At least there is reason to doubt whether higher motor taxation would yield a bigger collection of tax.