MOTOR VEHICLES.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVIII, 15 October 1924, Page 4

MOTOR VEHICLES.

FLAT RAX ARRANGEMENT.- , BILL DISCUSSED. (By Telegraph.—Special to the Star.) WELLINGTON, Oct, 14. ' It became obvious in the early stages of the committee consideration of the- Motor A 7 ehicles Bill that the House would attempt to revise the flat tax arrangement. Mr. AVilford remarked that since the Bill had passed the second reading he had receiver! a sheaf of protests from local authorities. The Bill was not based on any principle of use. Had it that principle there would be a petrol or tyre tax. It was anticipated th'at the Bill would raise £IOO,OOO, but that sum could'be raised without the measure. Last year 20,000 cars were imported, and as each " had four tyres and a spare there were 100,000 tyres imported on which no tyre tax was paid. The Hon. J. G. Coates: Nonsense. Mr. \\ r ilford': I hope you will get up and explain it. Air. Coates: 1 can explain it sitting down. Mr. AVilford said that he had been assured by two of the biggest, dealers m motor cars that there was no tax on these five tyres. , ’ Mr. Coates: There is. Mr. AVilford added that these dealers suggested a. tax of 8s per tyre or £2 per car, which would not be felt on the cost of the car, but which would raise £40,000. The Hon. Mr. Coates said tsia.t there was certainly a charge of 5s on each of the five tyres on imported cars. Mr. AATlford: Not a, tyre tax. Air. Coates: If not a tyre tax, then it was Customs duty. The Afinister said that the Bill could be divided into two portions—first, the regulation and control of motor traffic, Mr. AVilford: There is no question . about that. Air. Coates: That is so. " Then there is the licensing portion which provided the revenue. He did not think the method adopted was scientific, but rather than jeopardise the Bill the committee had decided not to raise this big question at present, as the whole question of motor taxation could he considered later. 0 Another interesting speaker was the Premier, who said that no taxation system was perfect. There was' no more difficult tax to ; arrange than a motor Vehicle, tax. There were differences of speed, weight, horse-power and loads carried, and these matters had to be considered in arriving at the amount of damage to roads, which was the main matter for consideration. There was only a. choice between a tax on the vehicle itself or a petrol tax. No other method of taxation- was possible. Air. AYilford: Tyre tax. Mr. Alassey: AYe have that already. He agreed that if it were possible to get all the revenue required by means of a. tyre tax that would be satisfactory, as it was ail equitable tax. Tf petrol were taxed there would he difficulty in discriminating between petrol used for motor vehicles and petrol used for other purposes, for they knew human nature. AVe undoubtedly required better roads. Those we .now had were no credit to us. The roads of Taranaki were, of course, excellent, and the Canterbury roads were good, although lie did not think they were as good as they had been. The Hon. H. D. Buddo announced his intention to move to amend the flat tax levy, including recognition of weight and speed. The chairman of the Select Committee which considered the Motor A T e hides Bill ''Mr. 0. J. Hawken, member for Egmont) summed up by suggesting that members were in the same frame of mind as the witnesses. Everybody had a different idea, but they had ultimately decided that the Bill must go forward. No. one was satisfied with a flat tax, hut nobody could suggest a better system. Dairymen wore against a petrol tax; others objected to a tyre tax. The committee had therefore decided that the Bill should go forward. The evidence submitted was well considered and valuable. The Highways Board considered that at present an effort should he directed to outside districts where roads were not so good, but a niain road through a borough could be .subsidised in the same way as a county road. Unquestionably there was great waste through bad roads. The counties where good roads existed had large numbers of motorists. There were 3000 in the two counties he represented, and it -was one of the problems that those counties with the best roads would contribute most taxation but get the least expenditure. It was a problem which could not he smoothed over at- once, and doubtless the Bill, if accepted, would need amendment. He favoured the Bill simply because those objecting to it had no better scheme to propound.