The Press MONDAY, NOVEMBER 30, 1953. National Roads Act

Press, Volume LXXXIX, Issue 27210, 30 November 1953, Page 10

The Press MONDAY, NOVEMBER 30, 1953. National Roads Act

The National Roads Act follows closely the announcement of Government policy made earlier by the Minister of Works (Mr Goosmanl, and, in principle, the report of the Reading Investigation Committee. The act has apparently been drafted with an eye to overcoming the original opposition of the county councils. As previously stated by the Minister, the counties are to have two members on the National Roads Board to the municipalities’ one; and this proportion is preserved in the district roads councils established by the act. These replace the district highways councils, with wider powers to cover all roads. Each county council or road board has one member, but the municipalities in each district are entitled to only half the number of members appointed by counties. General roading subsidies are to be paid from the National Roads Fund on highway as well as county road expenditure, making a double subsidy on highways. The provision that the general subsidy is to be calculated on rates collected and not on roading expenditure means that the counties will collect subsidy on the interest they pay on loans raised before the passing of the act. This may be a good provision, although it is directly contrary to the recommendation of the Roading Investigation Committee. The committee’s view was that to pay subsidies on interest would be unfair to those counties which had heavily rated themselves in the past to provide good roads out of revenue.

Though some injustice would arise from whichever course was adopted, experience with the introduction of the main highways scheme 30 years ago suggests that the unfairness will be less if interest is subsidised. The double subsidy on highways is a more questionable provision. It is being financed in part by reducing the rate of the general subsidy from the 10s recommended

by the committee to Bs, the benefit to counties with great stretches of main highway will be obtained at the expense of counties with short stretches. Presumably, the reasons why the counties have gteater representation on the National Roads Board and the district roads councils are that more money is spent on roads and highways in the counties, and, more significantly, - that the board and district councils will have more direct control of roading in the counties than they will have in the municipalities, where subsidies are related not to roading expenditure but to population. And that is the weakness of the act Though the board’s authority over the counties is a little uncertain, its authority in the municipalities is, to say the least, remote. Road users may well feel that supervision of the spending of their major contribution to roading costs will be inadequate. However, the weakness is not as serious as it seems. The new board will necessarily take some time to settle down and to get a full understanding of its work. In this period its lack of authority in some directions will not matter greatly; and it will have this opportunity to ask for the legislative amendments necessary for the proper discharge of its responsibilities.