Reading Programme

Press, Volume XC, Issue 27340, 4 May 1954, Page 10

Reading Programme

The vigorous, positive line taken by the National Roads Board at its opening meeting last week should have impressed all road users. It should be clearly recognised that the board is able to proceed in this way, in spite of its much wider responsibilities, because it has two great advantages over the old Main Highways Board. Briefly, these are more money, and assured money. The new board has an annual income estimated (probably conservatively) at £14,700,000. Against this, the Main Highways Board and the local authorities drew from the same sources rather less than £ 11,000,000 in the financial year just ended. Therefore, apart from local rates, the total amount spent on roads this ■ year will be roughly 30 per cent, higher. Just as important is the fact that on April 1 last the National Roads Board had a very fair idea of its revenue for this year. Last year, the Main Highways Board could not be certain until the presentation of the Budget in August just how much money would be voted by Parliament for its operations; and local authorities similarly had to wait for definite news of the amount of government

assistance they could expect. Further, the National Roads Board and the local authorities know now not only what they can spend this year but also what they will probably be able to spend for several years ahead. Because the Main Highways Board had restricted finance and because it had to wait until even that amount was known, there were delays in preparing programmes; and the proposals of local authorities had to be carefully examined to assess priorities. This led to justified complaints that county councils were not able to maintain continuity of work for their own staffs or district contractors, and that the detailed checking of plans and specifications wasted time and money. The National Roads Board is now able to tell the local authorities that it is planning ahead, that it expects them to do the same, and that it will accept the broad outline of their roading plans. This is no more than common sense, and any other procedure under the new act was never likely, in spite of the fears of county councils. The news that the National Roads

Board intends to push on quickly with the replacement of dangerous and inadequate bridges, which has been described as the most urgjnt public work in New Zealand, is welcome. So, too. is the assurance that sealing of important roads will not have to wait for reconstruction, which is presumably further evidence of the value of having an assured income. The arrangement made to assist local authorities with roads subject to extraordinary damage is only a minor result of the first meeting, although it was necessary to keep faith with transport operators. Formerly, the local authorities collected some extra payment in compensation from the 1 owners of heavy trucks using these 1 roads, which was not satisfactory

1 because of difficulties of assessment ! and collection. The new scale of : heavy traffic fees ensures that the ‘ owners of all heavy trucks make a : reasonable contribution to the national roads fund, from which 1 payments for exceptional damage '■ will be paid to local authorities. In ! 1951-52 local authorities received 1 £33,394 as contributions fqr extra- ’ ordinary damage, and this year the ! National Roads Board has a special 5 fund of £ 100,000 towards the main- * tenance cost of these “ industrial ” ’ roads' In itself, this is a good 1 example of the way in which the “ principle of conserving all user 1 payments for roading expenditure * will work. - •