ALLEGATION DENIED

Evening Post, Volume CXXII, Issue 85, 7 October 1936, Page 13

ALLEGATION DENIED

MINISTER REPLIES

MAIN HIGHWAYS BILL

COUNTIES NOT ATTACKED

A denial that the Main Highways Amendment Bill, which was introduced in the House of Representatives last week, represented a violent attack on the county system of local government was made by the Minister of Transport (the Hon. R. Semple) in.a statement issued last night. It was pointed out by the Minister that one of the main features of the Bill which the Counties' Association did not fully appreciate was the provision of a measure of relief to local authorities, estimated to be approximately £80,000 in maintenance alone, and probably the equivalent of a further £40,000 in a year in construction.

"The Bill does not in any sense constitute a violent attack on the county system of local government," said Mr. Semple, "and if, in the opinion of the Counties' Association, there is to be centralised bureaucratic control, it would appear that the association considers the Main Highways Board a bureaucratic body. It is known, however, that the association has never had cause to regard the board in that light. There may be a difference of opinion as to the wisdom of having State-con-trolled arterial roads, but transport and traffic conditions, as well as roading requirements, have changed considerably even since the main highways legislation was first introduced about fourteen years ago. There is not much room for argument against having one controlling authority for the main arterial roading system of the Dominion, and as a matter of fact the milage tentatively proposed to be taken over— 40 per cent.—is already controlled directly by the Main Highways Board." It was interesting to know, the Minister added, that within a short time of the announcement of a proposed State highways system for New Zealand the British Minister of Transport had introduced a similar scheme. The arterial roads of the Dominion carried 60 per cent, of the traffic, and it would be reasonable to expect' county councils to welcome relief rather .than to criticise the,means by which it was to be given. A COMMENCEMENT. "Although the extent of the relief to local bodies may not be as much as the Government would like to give," continued Mr. Semple, "it is at least a commencement, and the question of loan liability does not really enter into the matter at this stage. The Bill is not designed comprehensively to review and readjust roading finance as a whole, as its principal objective is to place the arterial highways under a form of control which will be in the best interests of the country. If the Bill is brought into effect, there is no reason why counties should lose their interest in a .particular portion of the area they control simply because the main road of the county is administered by a national authority. There is glaring evidence throughout the country that some counties hardly know a main arterial road exists, and their lack of interest in the improvement and maintenance of arterial sections has not displayed very much concern for a matter which is now represented to be of vital importance. ■ r "Although such a view may not be acceptable to the Counties' Association, it is the policy of the Government that the elected representatives of the people should accept direct responsibility for the control and expenditure of public money. In accordance with this policy, the constructional activities of the Main Highways Board will in future be subject to review by the Minister who, in turn, is answerable to Parliament and the people." NO CONFLICT OF POLICY. The Minister added that the provisions of the main highways legislation did not in any way conflict with the policy of the Minister of Internal Affairs regarding local government amalgamation, and there was nothing in the Bill which would hinder or retard the amalgamation of local authorities. Since the first announcement some months ago of the Government's intention to introduce a State system of highways control, the proposal had been warmly commended by many public bodies in New Zealand, including local authorities affected by the Bill. The only regret actually expressed had been that loan liabilities were not being taken over by the Government, but that was a matter that might receive consideration with a view to improvements being effected if possible. There were cases, Mr. Semple said, where local authorities had rated themselves for a period to meet their roading obligations without borrowing, and it would be manifestly unfair to relieve a local authority which had borrowed while doing nothing to help one which had made, sacrifices. Although the Counties' Association sought to make a strong case against the Bill, it would appear from communications received from individual sources that the views advanced by the association's representatives were not shared by the majority of' the local road-controlling authorities.