TRAFFIC AND FEES

Evening Post, Volume CIX, Issue 6, 8 January 1925, Page 6

TRAFFIC AND FEES

Our system of collecting fees from mqtqrists is by no means definite or free from anomalies. The general license fee, which is practically on a flat rate, goes, through the , Government, to' the Main Highways Account. In this fee the only differences made are as between motor-cars and motor-lorries and motor-coaches or' omnibuses, and the extra charge is not such as to make good the extra damage caused by the heavier vehicles. This is an unavoidable result of the adoption of a flat-rate tax. The use which a vehicle makes of the roads is not considered' in the license: fee, though this is met to some extent by the tire tax. The fees thus collected come from motor-owners in all parts of New Zealand, but they are returned in service only to those owners who use highways in the counties or through the smaller boroughs, because, the Highways Board has stated that its funds do not permit the payment of subsidies to larger boroughs. These boroughs, then, can obtain motor revenue only from drivers' licenses (4000 must be collected to yield £1000) and by heavy traffic fees. Wellington,, wrth its surrounding district, is an exception, because it has power to collect a special fee. for a special purpose. " ',

Generally, the larger boroughs are m the unfortunate position of having to provide good rqads for motorists without collecting any of the cost from the' average carowner, beyond the, trifling driver's license fee of ss. Yet these motor-. ists are paying for other roads .which' many of them 'seldom or never use. ;Jt is not surprising that the boroughs are inclined, therefore, to use to the utmost their powers of collecting revenue under heavy traffic, bylaws, Hveii so, they cannot touch the small car-owner. The heavy; traffic" bylaw in Auckland is being applied to a twofold purpose: (1) to regulate charges, according to^weight (which is one factor in causing road-dam-age), though the second factor in damage, use of the roads; is not considered; (2) to compensate the borough for the loss sustained through the Highways Board's allocation of its own motor revenue to the counties, and'smaller boroughs. The heavy traffic bylaw is not a perfect instrument, and its imperfection is,shown by the pro^ tests reported from Auckland. But the fault lies not so much with the borqugh as in the system which leaves the larger boroughs with no other means of collecting from the motorist. Last year's^ legislation was an experimental beginning, and perfection could not be hoped for; but operation is revealing defects clearly. The law is bound to come under review again shortly, and an attempt must then be made tq apply more fairly the principle that motorists shall be tared according to their' use of the roads, and shall receive a return for that taxation. At present the city motorist is taxed, but no part of the tax comes back'to the body charged with maintaining the streets which he. uses consta,nt]y. •. ' ' • '' r