Increased Motor Fees ‘Warranted’

Press, Volume CVII, Issue 31378, 25 May 1967, Page 14

Increased Motor Fees ‘Warranted’

(New Zealand Press Association)

WELLINGTON, May 24.

The Minister of Transport (Mr Gordon) said in Parliament tonight that the Transport Amendment Bill was designed to spread the burden of increased registration fees and petrol prices equitably over the population.

He was moving the second reading of the bill.

He said the motor registration fee under the bill would still mean that New Zealand motorists enjoyed cheaper motoring than motorists overseas.

Mr Gordon said the increases were warranted both because of the Government's need to dampen expenditure and because of increased administrative costs of the Transport Department.

The Minister said more effort must be put into the road safety campaigns and more money must be found for increased publicity and for instruction to drivers. He said that in 1951 there were 121 traffic enforcement officers, whereas today there were 407. Since 1951 there had been a 147 per cent increase in the number of registered motor-vehicles. Mr Gordon said that the increases in registration fees were equitable because less would be paid for smaller cars than for larger ones. The Minister announced that in the committee stages of the bill the Government would introduce an amendment making the registration fee for vintage cars £5 if first registered before 1919. This was because these cars would be used on the road only occasionally. “EFFECT NOT GREAT”

He said the total effect of the measures in the bill were not great on the motorist. An average car which did 6000 miles a year at an average of 20 miles to the gallon would only face a petrol increase of .23d a mile. The cost of petrol for such a car would be no greater than £5B 15s, he said. Comparative costs in London would be about £B5. Mr J. Matbison (Lab., Avon) said it was apparent that these measures were in-

tended to be permanent, unlike the emergency measures brought down by the Labour Government of 1958. “I would be failing in my duty as a senior member of this House if I did not point out the detrimental effects of these measures,” he said. The transport industry was alarmed about the measures and had approached the Prime Minister (Mr Holyoake) and Mr Gordon, but had received a disappointing response. “I suggest that this Government by its actions has completely lost the faith and confidence of the people of this country,” he said. Mr Mathison renewed Labour’s challenge for the Government to go back to the country. He said this bill was controversial and should go back to a select committee so that evidence could be heard on detrimental effects it would have.

Mr Mathison said the Government was following the pracices of the “worst type of dictatorship” in what was supposed to be a democratic country by taking more taxation in this way. He said that because of the phraseology of the bill the Government had made provision for further increasing petrol taxation without having to pass further legislation through Parliament “Uusually when an increase in taxation is imposed we express that in monetary terms but this has not been done in this case,” he said. The member said that it was quite likely that petrol taxation would be raised again when the Budget was announced on June 22. “That is a cunning move and typical of this Government,” he said. “They were

hoping to conceal it but it is sticking out a mile."

“AGREEMENT BROKEN” The Deputy Leader of the Opposition (Mr Watt) said that the National Government had set up a special committee to investigate the reading system. As a result of the committee's findings, revenue which had gone to local bodies was transferred to the National Roads Board. An assurance was given that this revenue would be used for reading purposes. Mr Watt said the Government was dishonouring its commitment to reading authorities.

The Government’s .move meant the total reduction of estimated expenditure of the board would be 14 per cent this year. A most serious situation could arise. Mr Watt moved an amendment that the House deny a second reading of the bill until

The Minister of Works (Mr Allen—-at present in the United States— advised the effect the reduction in Roads Board revenue would have on the board’s planned reading programme and on employment throughout the country.

The Roads Board reported to the House its revised reading programme based on reduced income.

The Minister of Works could assure the House that reading and transport authorities agreed that the proposals were not a breach of the agreement between the Government and themselves when the board was established in 1953.

The Minister of Finance (Mr Muldoon) said Mr Watt was following the Opposition pattern of delaying the legislation. The Opposition would waste a great deal of time—but would put forward no constructive suggestion or remedy. “TOO MUCH SPENT” Mr Muldoon said the Roads Board’s December estimates were too high and cuts made by the Government were related to this. Reading was important but too much money was being spent. “The National Roads Board is doing a magnificent job, but the Government cannot justify a greater and greater proportion of the country’s income being spent on roads,” he said. The Minister said that in the last 11 years New Zealand’s gross national product had risen by 100 per cent whereas the National Roads Board’s expenditure had increased by 150 per cent. If this proportion was allowed to continue some other field of national development would suffer. The Government’s aim was to restore a balance.

New Cotton Industry—An American company, Auscott Pty, Ltd., is planning a $2 million cotton industry on 10,000 acres near Warren, western New South Wales.