TIMBER ROYALTIES

Evening Star, Issue 18700, 31 July 1924, Page 9

TIMBER ROYALTIES

COUNTY COUNCIL DEPUTATION. (Pen United Press Association.] • WELLINGTON, July 31. Thu question of Umber royalties for the maintenance of county roads was tho subject of. a deputation to members of _ the Government this morning. Some thirtytour county councils were represented, and thirty members of Parliament were associated with tho deputation. _ The deputation was received by Sir Francis Poll, in the absence of Mr Massey, and oilier Ministers-present were Sir Heaton Rhodes and the Hon. A. I). M’Lcod. . Tho point of view of the local bodies was that ever since 1905, when the Act regarding royalties going to local bodies for road maintenance was passed, the local bodies have considered that thev had a claim to royalties, which many of them had been unable to get. Tho deputation desired that local bodies should he paid back royalties. It was also asked that an advisory board should 1 be set up, as provided in the Forestry Act, 1921. In many portions of New Zealand where there is heavy timber country land was said not to ho as valuable as in other parts; consequently when timber was removed tho local bodies could not collect rates sufficient to maintain the roads. If the royalties were not forthcoming local bodies would have to fall bade on the Consolidated Fund. _ Sir Francis Pell, in replying, said that Cabinet had not yet considered the report of the Timber Royalties Commission, and when doing so it would be of great advantage to have before it the criticism of local bodies. Those bodies would have just as full consideration as the report of tho Commission. The question was a difficult .one, but speaking ns a former Commissioner of State Forests, lie asked them to remember that it was a matter for the Treasury entirely, because the revenue derived from State forests now passed into tho Treasury. With regard to the revenue derived from the forests by the legitimate operations of the Forestry Department, he said that the counties should have a portion of it. They must not regard it as a fact that the State forest policy was itself in effect depriving the local authorities of revenue, except to a minor extent. Tho matter would' bo considered fully when Cabinet came to deal with the question as to how the revenue derived from the department’s operations was to be disposed of.