The Hawera Star. SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 1927. TWO MAIN HIGHWAYS BOARDS.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVI, 5 February 1927, Page 4

The Hawera Star.

SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 1927. TWO MAIN HIGHWAYS BOARDS.

delivered every evening by 5 o’clock in Hawera, Manaia, Normanby. Okaiawa Eltlram, Mangatoki. Kaponga, Altm Hurley ville, Patea. Waveriey, Mokoia. Whakamara, Ohangai, Mertmere, Fra«ei Hoad and Ararata.

In the South Island there has been a revival of public interest in main highways, and endeavours are being made to obtain support to the claim that there should be a Highways Board for each island —a claim that was made the basis of a very strong campaign in the South when the Main Highways Act was before Parliament as a Bill. The agitation for two separate boards did not succeed at the time, although At was indicated by the Minister in charge of the Bill that the passing of the measure into legislation would not necessarily mean that the Act could not be amended. Members of the Board and officers of the Public Works Department asked the South Island county council and motor organisations to do nothing to obstruct the working of the Act in its infancy, and stated that when it had been given a fair trial the Government would give South Island representations- regarding the amendments deemed necessary proper consideration. The Act has been tried and apparently it has 'been found wanting by the South Island. The state of main roads has been described by public speakers and writers in the Press as “shocking” and “deplorable,” and the Act “an utter and complete failure so far as the South Island is concerned.” 9*Home Rule” is the latest slogan coined by those who have interested themselves in the question, but “home rule” is demanded only so far as the administration of the Act is concerned; North Islanders will be relieved to learn that there is r.o indication that the proposal made by a Mayor of Christchurch in all seriousness a few years ago that a South Island Parliament should be constituted has gained any more supporters than it had at the time it was made. In the course of a long newspaper article a member of the Canterbury Progress League examines the Act and the results of its working in some detail, and he finds that, while it would be going a little too far to state that the A<ft was the direct outcome of a wicked desire on the part of the North Island members of Parliament to get better roads for their constituencies at. the expense of the South Island, it was the product “of North Island minds and formulated essentially to meet North Island conditions. He finds that the amount spent on North Island main roads at the end of the Board’s second year of office was £6504)08, the expenditure in the South Island for the same period being only £193,088. His figures do not conceal the amounts contributed to these -totals by the respective local bodies. It is quite openly .shown that the North Island local bodies contributed £132,658 and those in the South only £10,103! He does not, accuse the southern, counties of apathy nor of lack of business foresight, but- holds them entirely blameless for the preponderance of expenditure in favour of the North Island. Neither does he give the North Island local bodies any credit for seizing the opportunity to help themselves when it, was presented to -them by the Act. The North Island had bad roads; the South Island had metal roads quite capable of carrying the county ratepayers’ traffic. Therefore, it is contended, it was to be expected that the farming community of the North Island would be willing to allow themselves to be rated for better roads, in order to .get their produce to the markets, and it was equally to be expected that the South Island farmers would be averse to incurring heavy

expenditure in making their roads, which were quite capable of carrying produce market-wards, fit to carry the heavy and increasing “through” motor traffic. Now, apparently, the South is suffering because the through motor traffic lias worn pot-holes in its main highways. Their roads no longer give them the same cause for satisfaction when they contemplate the facilities t.hev offer to purely local traffic, for the simple reason that the through traffic, which they chose to ignore, proved to be a factor which they could not afford to ignore, even in relation to the counties’ own requirements of the road. Those now agitating in the South for a separate board may excuse their local bodies if they wish and it is politic for the Progress League to do so, for it is dependent for the financial support of the local bodies for its existence, but they cannot disguise the fact that they have been shortsighted, nor can the South Island minimise the courage shown by the ratepayers in North Island counties in entering upon a bold programme of road construction and maintenance which, while it imposes heavy burdens, is calculated to save money in the long run and assist them in the development of the country from its inception.