ADMINISTRATION OF ROADS

Press, Volume LXXXIX, Issue 27047, 23 May 1953, Page 8

ADMINISTRATION OF ROADS

REPLY TO “THE PRESS” STATEMENT BY COUNTIES’ WARD CHAIRMAN "It is surprising to find The Press,’ which so consistently advocates the removal of controls, rather than their increase, supporting a policy of reading administration which it is feared will ultimately result in a central body completely controlling the reading system of the country with the consequent proposals, estimates, delays and increased administrative costs to all local bodies," said the chairman of Ward H of the New Zealand Counties' Association (Mr W. F. McArthur) in a Statement yesterday. "I feel that it is my duty to reply to the leading article in 'The Press’ this morning on the subject of the reading investigation committee’s report. “It is not suggested that the Main Highways Act has not proved advantageous to reading progress, but the increasingly detailed costing and subsidy claims required by the department add greatly to local body administrative work and costs, and counties are naturally concerned lest a Similar system of control is brought about in respect of even the minor roads.

“Your article is incorrect in stating that a county receives heavy traffic fees regardless of the amount it spends on roads. The apportionment of heavy traffic fees in each heavy traffic district is based on the expenditure on roads by each of the local bodies in that district,” said Mr McArthur. “The report of the investigation committee is a valuable one, supplying much useful information on the reading set-up in New Zealand, but it is the considered opinion of county representatives throughout the country that more autonomy and not less is needed by local bodies if they are to continue to provide the services expected of them. This, too, is the stated policy of the present Government.”