PAYING FOR ROADS

Evening Post, Issue 122, 26 May 1933, Page 6

PAYING FOR ROADS

At numerous meetings of farmers nowadays there is reference to derating and a demand that this shall be brought into operation. It appears almost as if a mass attack were being prepared to carry this proposal by the weight of sectional agitation, as the high exchange proposal was carried. If so the results may be nearly as disastrous. There are strong arguments in favour of certain aspects of derating, but the subject must be approached, not with a set determination solely to give the rural landowner relief, but to distribute the cost of roading on a plan in keeping with the new transport situation. Road transport competes with rail and sea, and should not be subsidised from the public purse. To avoid this it is reasonable that the user of the road should pay for his permanent way, as the; railway pays for its track and the ship pays for its port. But when assessing the fair charge for this purpose the authority must have some guide other than the amount that rural ratepayers wish to take off rates and put on motors. For example, it cannot be said that the construction cost of a road which serves two or three farms (and by providing access adds to the.value of those farms) is fairly chargeable wholly to motor transport when the traffic is small and local. This raises another,issue. If the road-constructing and maintenance authority represented the road-user the funds would be spent oh the roads which gave the best transport business return. The routes which did not offer this return would be neglected. If construction is to be determined partly by transport de-, mand and partly, by landowner der fnand there must obviously be a similar sharing of cost and a similar sharing of authority. The system of leaving the spending almost wholly to the ratepayer?' representatives cannot be maintained if the ratepayers provide less-and less of the money. This has an important bearing on the distribution of motorist-subscribed funds. Clearly these funds should be allocated with greater regard than at present for road-use. This means that the borough and city roads—used day and night by motor —must be more a charge on motors and less on rates equally with, the rural roads. Thus in any measure pf derating there are three factors to be taken into account: (1) representation of the new contributor of .funds; (2) determination of the fair charge for road-making and maintenance service; (3) allocation of the money collected according to the measure of use. If derating is introduced after full consideration of these factors it will be fair and, therefore, economically beneficial to the whole community; but if, through failure of municipalities and motorists to realise the danger, it is made merely another form of farm subsidy there will be inequity and endless trouble.