The Paremata Bridge

Dominion, Volume 28, Issue 113, 6 February 1935, Page 11

The Paremata Bridge

Sir.—The Paremata bridge controversy has evidently taken a new lease of life with the formation of the Taupo Riding Vigilance Committee. This Vigilance Committee states that it is of the opinion that the whole scheme is a national one, but it obviously ignores the fact that the Government dare not set up a precedent by giving a district a free gift, lest all the other districts make similar demand. The Government realised that it had made a mistake in giving the right of a toll bridge and thereby creating a precedent for other districts to follow. The Government has retracted and has given, what amounts to a subsidy of £3 to £l, which it gives to all such local schemes which are not of the tourist traffic type such as the Milford Sound track. Further, the Main Highways Board. will supply 75 per cent, of the annual maintenance cost of the whole scheme, which will eventually include a new road to Pukerua Bay. The toll bridge was going to cost close on £15,000 and would have been a wooden one. This style would mean a heavy annual maintenance charge, and the new loan is only for £7OOO, with a farthing in the £ rate. The County Council is not wholly to blame for £7OO charges, because each time its engineers drew up the plans for the requirements of the Public Works Department, this Department wanted something else, and in order to overcome its objections, first the suspension bridge had to be dropped for a wooden bridge, and this is now to be dropped for plans for a concrete bridge. Why blame the Hutt County Council for the increased costs—rather blame the Public Works Department. In any case its decision is going to turn out the best and cheapest solution of the problem from the ratepayers’ point of view. The fact of no toll will further increase the values of property in the Taupo riding. When the numbers go up on February 13, one will see the vigilance balloon burst and vanish in hot air.—-I am, etc., COMMON SENSE. Wellington, February 5.

Sir.—ln “The Dominion” of January 19, there appeared a statement by Mr. Hoggard (chairman, Hutt County Council) and Councillor Button, It is somewhat puzzling that after having assured us that the toll bridge would cost us nothing Councillor Button and Mr. Hoggard admit that it meant a loan of £15,000, and that they seem very doubtful of any profit from collecting tolls. Now, Messrs. Hoggard and Button assure us that a debt of £7OOO for . the bridge will be better than the toll bridge, which Councillor Button assured us would pay its own way and be no charge on the ratepayers. The present proposal means a rate of one farthing in the £ for the bridge and road to Plimmerton only. The Highways Board will stand 75 per cent, of the maintenance cost of this new road only (approximately one mile). If the vehicle traffic increases when the bridge and road is built, as Councillor Button assured us it would, it means that our road maintenance cost will correspondingly increase and we can reasonably expect a halfpenny in the £ increase to pay for this. This will be paid by the whole riding to provide a luxury bridge for Plimmerton only. There is no provision in this loan for the construction of a new road to Pukerua Bay. I supported the toll bridge because I foolishly thought we would get something for nothing. If tiiis poll is carried we will have one farthing in the £ for the loan, one halfpenny in the £ for increased road maintenance —in all an additional three farthings in the £ on our rates. The bridge and road will suit Councillor Button excellently. His business is in Wellington and his home is at Plimmerton. It will be splendid for week-end motorists who are probably in the less than 5/- per year class of payer. Clearly, if the vehicle traffic increases as claimed, there must be an enormous increase in maintenance cost to meet this.

If there is no increase in the maintenance cost then there is no need for us to shoulder a £7OOO debt, to build a luxury bridge for a few motorists. We who do not own cars will pay for this if we are foolish enough to vote for the proposal. Even if the proposed work is put in hand in the near future, the electric railway system will be available just as soon. It will be the new railway system that will bring new ratepayers and development to this district without any increase in our rates or liability. The increased rates required if this poll is carried would pay for a water scheme for Plimmerton. We cannot afford both bridge and water. We will be better off with water for the many than a luxury bridge for a few. This proposal should never have been put to the ratepayers of Taupo riding. A national road from Paremata via Plimmerton to Paekakariki rniist come very soon. There is no need for us to take on a £7OOO debt to get it. I will not be “assured” again. I will insure against increased rates by voting against the proposal.—l am, etc., 1 INSURED. Wellington, February 5.