ROAD UPKEEP

Evening Post, Volume CVII, Issue 24, 29 January 1924, Page 6

ROAD UPKEEP

I\N IMPORTANT QUESTION

LEVIES ON LOCAL BODIES

(MINISTER STATES THE POSITION

; 'X matter of considerable importance Jo local bodies throughout the Dominion, namely, citations upon adjoining bodies •"for the upkeep of roads, was raised by • Motueka deputation which waited on . |he Minister of Public Works (the Hon. J. (Jr. Coates) this morning to protest Bgainist~;Motueka having to pay 7 per cent, of the cost of the upkeep of the "jßocks road, Nelson, 32 miles away, Jfhich allocation had been made by a Commission set up by the Governor-Gen-eral. The deputation comprised the "Mayor of Motueka (Mr. G. M'Glashan), Mr. 0. Jackson (Deputy-Mayor), and Major D. W. Talbot, one of the councillors." TheJ possibility of the main jbighways scheme having an ameliorative effect in regard to lifting the burden off local authorities compelled to contribute levies towards maintenance of Toads in other districts was remarked upon incidentally by the Minister, who also drew (jttention to the powers_ which local bodies now possesed to cite one another in the matter of road maintenance. ; "MOST EXTRAORDINARY : ; POLICY." 'i Mr. B. P. HucWi, M.P. for Motueka, ■who introduced the deputation, in criticising the decision of the Rocks Road Commission, said that if the policy of levying on local bodies lying such a distance away from Nelson as Motueka did was correct, theii it was most extraordinary. If Motueka had to contribute towards the upkeep of roads lying within the boundaries of Nelson, then why not call upon Westpqrt, Reeftpn, Takaka, and Collingwood to do the '.same? Where was such a policy going •to end throughout the Dominion? The [attitude taken up in respect to Motueka' (Tvas most absurd whichever way it ,-was looked at. So fai as the Rocks road was concerned he for one did not j'-use it, but travelled to Nelson via Bish- ■ opdale, which route was a mile shorter. Others did the same, yet they were to be called on to pay towards the upkeep .ox the Rocks road. » Mr.-- M'Glashan said that Motueka borough had the largest area for a borough W the Dominion, but had a population of only 350. Seeing that it was 32 -TOUes away from the Rocks road, Motueka could not understand why it should Jiave to contribute towards the cost of maintaining that road. Motueka should ■ ■not be called upon to pay a penny piece ,to the cost of a road in Nelson which ■v-fls deemed by the Commission to be dangerous. The council felt that Motu- ( Ska was Buffering from an injustice isnd Iqoked to the Minister to redress its ■grievance. 'ji^f'J,a rCl^P n, supPOTted the arguments df Mr. M'Glashan, and said he thought (that under the Act the Minister had power to step in and review the'findings oj a commission. The borough had four ana a half miles of main roads which ft maintained itself and did not ask for ■assistance from outside. If the prin- £ P ij »? ,the:; caSe under notice were upheld Motueka would be justified in calling on other bodies 4o contribute to the £1 °/, lt3 main roads. As a matter of i»ct 7i the.Motueka harbour was the borough s main outlet, and the council was *pdeavouring to divert traffic, from the road to the wharf. Councillor Talbot said a tally showed that on one day ,twelve mail cars passed through Motu«ka|,and none one of these used the Bocks road, but >the Bishopdale road which was a mile,: shorter. Twenty-four I Brivately-owned 'cars, not one of which belonged to Motueka. and 23 motor lornes also used the "Motueka/ roads in one cay. It was assumed that' Nelson car- ; owners were using Motueka roads- for their pleasure, but they did not contribute towards their upkeep *L Th xT , M™?ter : - "Why-don't you cite I the Nelson borough?" ; Major Talbot: ''That is what will happen. We will have to ask the surround- , ing _ local bodies to contribute to our loads. , Mr. Hudson: "But where is it co- . ing to end?" B | : POWER OF LOCAL BODIES. The Minister said that a borough in Buch a position as Motueka had just as nluch right to call on other districts •whose vehicles used its roads to pay to■wards "their'•upkeep. ■"Mr-Hudson: "But where is it. going to -"Where has it ended?" asked the Minister. "God bless my soul, this is not the only case. What about the Dannevirke road?" "Mr. Jackson: "Do you wish us to encourage it then?" -The- Minister: "I don't wish to encourage it,/but the- point is that the Act provides .'certain, powers for local bodies a.?^ lt.: 1.? °P en ; to them to exercise those, rights If you get the consent of the i Minister;of Public Works after com- | plying with the law, there-is no earthly | reason why you should not exercise those powers. I did not institute the system of; citing. The Act of 1909 gave the powers,- and there'the Act is. ft is only Tight, if you ,are paying to some other local body the", cost of maintenance of a road, and you find that its traffic is affecting your roads, that- you should have tJje same right to get something from them.-. All you have to do is to prove your case to a commissioner." X, Wrv,JacH,son: "We endeavour to avoid I that if possible:" The -Minister was asked whether the , Minister had power to order a rehear- , jug in a case like that of-the Motueka 1 fctfrough, and whether, if he had not, ■would he bring in the necessary legislation. i The Minister said he would ascertain , whether the right of appeal against an allocation existed. Mr. Hudson: "If there is no right of appeal, what of the future? Should power to appeal not be provided?" _ •-■■ I think one gets a lot of satisfaction out of protesting, you know," remarked the Minister in reply to a further I remark that the Motueka Council had 'protested against the allocation levied upon it. "Do you think that Parliment would give me the power you suggest? _ Parliament has not as much faith in me as you have." (Laughter.) Mr. Hudson said he thought that Parliament would be sympathetic. Mr. Coates stated that he thought the Act had worked out quite -well, but , there was a possibility—he did not say jtbat it would happen—whereby the declaration of what roads were main I highways might necessitate a review of , tlrpse cases where contributions were | paid towards the upkeep of other roads • iu-neighbouring districts. For instance, i Mdfcueka, which might not be able to I pay for the proper maintenance of its own roads, but had to contribute towards the upkeep of the Rocks road, might receive a contribution from the 'Highways Board which would be of assistance" in carrying out its own maintenance, and yet act as an offset against the amount it was finding for the Rocks road. In this way Motueka would- be getting "its own:'money back. The same thing'might arise in other boroughs. He did not think the position was altogether hopelsgi, for th« Highw»v» Bpird'i

opinions after Ist April might alter the whole aspect, not only for Motueka, but other local bodies who were similarly circumstanced. HIGHWAYS ACT NOT A STRAW. Mr. Jackson: i. We are clutching at a straw, then?" ■ . The Minister: "Thousands of people would like it (the Main Highways' Act) to be a straw, but, personally, I am not going to allow it to be a straw. I am going to make it a real live thing." In conclusion, the Minister said that the, Highways Board was now touring the country, and co-operation with the local bodies was what was sought. He would see whether he had the power to review the findings of a Commission, and would get into touch with the Highways Board to ascertain what the possibilities were In - connection with the Rocks road. He would also consider the question of legislation on the subject of the Minister, or a Commissioner, Reviewing contributions levied on local bodies, but he did not think that it would be wise to ask the Minister to review what a Commission did.