THE PRESS TUESDAY, JANUARY 17, 1989. Traffic control and fines

Press, 17 January 1989, Page 20

THE PRESS TUESDAY, JANUARY 17, 1989. Traffic control and fines

Arguments can be advanced in favour of both centralised and local agencies for traffic control. Those local authorities which have retained their own traffic departments — Auckland, Tamaki, Mount Albert, Napier, and Invercargill — would argue that centralised administration is rarely as good as the best local administration can be, and certainly not as responsive to local needs. The Minister of Transport, Mr Jeffries, seems to be saying that it is better to opt for uniformity of policing and avoid the possibility of pockets of lax or inadequate traffic control by having all traffic control in the hands of a national agency. If this is indeed the burden of Mr Jeffries’ reasoning for stopping local bodies collecting a share of revenue from traffic fines, it is logical enough. The logic of national control is likely to become even more persuasive after the reorganisation of local body boundaries. The localised traffic enforcement agencies will either disappear in mergers and the abolition of pocket boroughs, or become the hubs of much larger areas that are beyond their capabilities to police. Mr Jeffries, however, supplies no reason for hastening the gradual evolution of national control of traffic enforcement other than capturing about $6 million a year from local body coffers. The fact that only a handful of local bodies continue to police the traffic on their streets shows how insistent the swing has been to a national authority. Christchurch City handed over traffic control to the Ministry of Transport almost 20 years ago, but took back responsibility for parking in April, 1983. Mr Jeffries has not shown the remaining parochial enforcement to be inept or substandard. Indeed, Invercargill’s record of a very low accident rate by comparison with conurbations under Ministry of Transport control suggests the opposite may be true, and could explain Mr Jeffries’s reluctance to draw comparisons. If it could be shown that the outstanding authorities were not making a fair

contribution to national road safety campaigns, or were not helping to bear the cost of patrols in rural areas with high traffic flows but relatively small populations, the Ministry of Transport could reasonably call for an appropriate levy; but Mr Jeffries says that the move is not for budgetary reasons. Indeed, he assures opponents of the move that the $6 million or so a year that will be taken from these local authorities will not even go to the Ministry of Transport, but will find its way to Justice Department coffers. No doubt the Government will be glad of the revenue, whichever pocket it finds its way into. Other local bodies that do not have their own traffic departments nonetheless contribute to Government coffers and are also waiting to learn by how much their tribute will increase. Successful prosecutions of static offences such as having an unregistered vehicle, or not having a current warrant of fitness, when brought by local authority parking wardens net the Government 10 per cent of the fine. Local bodies generally expect this to be increased to as much as 50 per cent, and some expect that the review just completed will recommend that 10 per cent of parking fines also be remitted by local authorities to the Government. Should this happen, the Government will have tapped in to another lucrative source of revenue. For the most part, however, Mr Jeffries’s latest manoeuvring seems more like a way to apply back-door pressure to the five independently minded local bodies that have refused to succumb to the Ministry’s blandishments. The loss of income that Mr Jeffries intends for them almost certainly will wither their ability to continue on their independent course. Instead of persuasion and sound argument, Mr Jeffries has chosen a crude bludgeon to eliminate local traffic control. He cannot be surprised if most people view his methods more as a raid on local body income than aserious attempt at reducing road accidents.