TOLL-GATES.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVIII, 19 June 1924, Page 10

TOLL-GATES.

ABOLITION RECOMMENDED, A conference of representatives of Taranaki County Councils interested in toll-gates was held at Stratford yesterday, when a lengthy discussion of th© question took place. Messrs. G. T. Murray and J. S. Connett, representing the Highways Board, and Mr. T. M. Ball, resident engineer of the Public Works Department, Stratford, and chairman of the Taranaki District Highways Council, also attended. Mr. Ball presided. Mr. Murray referred to th© 1921 commission, which had recommended that no more toll-gates be erected, and that after the Highways Board came into force existing gates should be abolished. In the Highways Bill no provision , had been made to abolish the tolls. The board had, however, sought legal advice and were informed that, where roads had been gazetted as main highways, the local authority ceased to have the right to collect tolls. The matter then. resolved itself into declaring roads and abolishing gates, or retaining the gates and not declaring those roads concerned. This was the hoard’s position, but they wished to have uniformity in the construction of all main roads. Tf the 75 miles of roads having toll-gates in Taranaki were omitted, the uniformity of continuous roads might be impaired. Consequently, the board would rather see the tolls abolished. He admitted the income from tolls was large, but pointed out that the districts concerned were large and wealthy. Toll-gates bad been in existence since 1915. The question to bo considered was how to get over the difficulty of placing the Egmont- and Waimate Counties, which bad no toll-gates, on an equitable footing with their neighbouring counties where tolls were collected. One way would be to. give toll-gate counties an increased subsidy, but this would be unfair to other counties. It could be done by citation, which was the common method, but the Highways Board did not favour this system. It could also be done by additional rating all over. For instance, it was a common thing to make a boundary bridge subject to mutual arrangement, and. the same system could be introduced with reference to a. road passing through two counties. The seven toll-gates in Taranaki produced £11,285 in 1920 and £11,451 in 1923. a ’ Mr- J. S. Connett (Taranaki) said that, tons had been erected for the special purpose of coping with foreign traffic. B a. d ' S. Tosland (Egmont) referred oo the position of his county, which was surrounded by toll-gates. The people of Egmont County felt keenly on the matter. ‘Traffic had altered since tolls were introduced. To-day there was far more traffic using the r °T»!r ° neighbouring counties. u- i . F *„ Ferguson (Egmont) spoke emphatically against the retention of tolls. He drew attention to the larger .subsidies required to build roads to .suit motor traffic. Was it fair, he asked, to impose a tax on tyres or benzine, and also require drivers of motors to pay a toll? ; , r - E. Long (Waimate West) said it had cost his county a large sum to put their roads m order. He strongly favoured the abolition of tolls, pointing t £ ey w uld ? et £3OO a year imm the hoard for their eight miles ° f ™ d *’ wjde. rl ghft on their boundary the Hawera County had a toll winch collected more than £I2OO a S’ On® county was thus "given bou^ rentla treatment over its neighTrisfwP° n:c . 0I 1 lsic J er ed that now the ®° a . r d had come into operashould ’ be! abolished, but some made f^+b y +b ia T a ” gement should he ' Vltb tb ® .losing counties so as to give them a fair deal MV. Cornett £* ?* kl Council was not prepared to come into the hishwav scheme as it now. stood. They St have some consideration over and offerA d bf °. f maintenance onereq by the board in return tk>n llShl b 8 t +?' ga tf s; In thi s connecMr. Walter said the Stratford coun tW the Mountain E „“‘ SS w n a%atel d us b h i ;f d * * ?St r ”l y iy s^ “f® tone of faTOUred tio"o? “’%**!? v* abolishing tolls had been considered long ago, and at that time it was posed to assess the cost of formin<Ahe’ loads in question and subsidise” the county councils in proportion. This •iggestiqn had been found unworkable iu practice because the constructionif various roads had been so gJadua i„c differed so widely that no equitable He held ° f aubsid y.«»ild be ?eached. ile held out no chance of receiving for past work. There wS-e 1200 miles of main roads declared in fiffuref e f, and + i alr€ady ’ aud . nguies fiom these works, he had a'ri'nnr at conc ‘kision that the Clifton County Council, had readied a very Salt de rn lßlon abolishing their toligatt faianaki Countv would 'lose slightly .Stratford had got the toll road hni T‘ i Jiat T fc t:ir " tolll< -d the load, hut had merely tar-sealed it. and therefore would not suffer greatly if the toll-gate wore abolished He thoue-hi the Waipuku toll-gate had had its day lng.ewoud was getting £ for £ subsidy t?,' tbo bmld,,, K of thoi '- main- road. 1 / th.un was to lie commended unon the hue roads they had kid down,* but it had to he remembered that they had The liUrV 1 * roads as a Jast resort, iiic Lit ham County engineer at that time had been the first in New Zealand to go m for tar work. Egmont and ShTthe hare tftat the Je Rot-i railway would relieve rheir roads to a great extent. Moreover, a Motor Vehicles Bill was going to regulate traffic by limiting the loads and speed of motor vehicles. A machine America, was being introduced which would weigh lorries on the road rapidly, and any excess loads would be dumped and the drivers penalised. ill* Murray assured the meeting that toll-gates would be abolished, ami the Government had power to do so. The Government had already taken over a P"f boll ° f the Main North road in the bounty, an d none of the cost rrr+ S /° ac l w £ uld be borne bv the Clifton County Council, but for obvious reasons a similar action could not be taken , with any of the Taranaki County s i-oads. He had listened careruily to the discussion, and so far no suggested remedy had been put forward. So far, he could see no alternative except for the Government simply to abolish toll-gates. 1 * °n the motion of Mr Tosland, seconded by Mr Ferguson, it was finally agreed to recommend the Highways Board to abolish all toll-gates, and the

meeting endorsed the principle that the Government bear half the cost of interest and sinking fund, until extinguished, of loans raised for the construction of permanent tar-sealed roads. Mr Murdoch pointed out that the meeting had been hurriedly called and that delegates had no authority .from their councils to commit themselves. He suggested that representatives of the Highways Board meet each county council having a toll-gate and go into the matter of arriving at a reasonabe compensation. On his motion, it was decided to ask the board to meet the various county councils where toll-gates existed to discuss the terms unon which they could bo abolished, and that other counties affected in any particular case be invited to attend. Mr Murray said that no local authority could raise a loan to meet its contribution to the Highways Board. This meant that all contributions had to be made out of revenue. He further mentioned that, following representaHon to the board to raise a large loan from which local bodies could finance loading projects, the board had sent on to Parliament a Bill, asking that steps be taken in this direction. A vote of thanks was accorded Messrs Murray and Connett for their attendance at the meeting.—News.