COUNTIES NOT ATTACKED

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXX, 8 October 1936, Page 10

COUNTIES NOT ATTACKED

v MINISTER REPLIES ALLEGATIONS DENIED (From "The Mail's” Parliamentary *! Hj'-i'?!';'-/--)' '• Reporter) s. •• pri’ ' • WELLINGTON, 7th October. 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 £BO,OOO in maintenance alone, and : probably the equivalent of a further £40,090 in. a'.year in construction. Bill does not in any sense,constitute a violent attack on the'county system of local government,’’{sairivMr Semple, “and if, in the opinion'of.;tlie: Counties’ Association', there ispto be centralised bureaucratic control, it would anpear that the association;con- - aiders 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 diffe|ence. of opinion as to the wisdom “of; haying State-controlled arterial roads, but transport: ' ahrL traffic. conditions, bas well as roading requirements, - have changed considerably: even since the main highways legislation was first introduced about fourteen years ago. There is riot much room for argument agdinst having one controlling authori-. ty for the main artefial roading- system of the Dominicsif and as .a matter of fact the milage, tentatively proposed tQ be taken over—peri cbnt.—i<i already controlled dir : ectl|‘ by the Mam Highways Board.’’- ’ : • It was iriterestirig to know, the Minister added, 'within-a short time of the anriouriceriiefit of a pi‘o-

• posed State highways svstein for New ! Zealand the’British Minister of Transfport had introduced a similar scheme. The arterial roads of the Dominion j carried 60 per cent, of the traffic, and lit would be reasonable to expect ! county councils to welcome relief : rather than to criticise the means by which it was to be given. ’ a /-v-in/i-n Tr'TO-r>v’i\,TT.’Tvr r r

A COMMENCEMENT

“ Although the extent of the relief to local bodies may not be as much as the Government would Tike'.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. “Although such a view may not be acceptable to the Counties’ Association, it is the policy of, the Govern-

ment that the elected representatives of the people should accept direct responsibility for the control and expenditure of public money. In accordance with 1 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 apriorities. Since the first announcement some months ago of the Government’s intention to introduce a 1 State system of highways control, the proposal had been warmly commended by manypublic bodies in New Zealand, including localauthorities affected by the Bill. The only regret actually ex-, pressed had been that loan liabilities were not being taken over by the Government, but that was a mattei that might receivb 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 theii roacling .obligations without borrowing, and it would be manifestly unfair to "i*'elieye a local authority which ha,(f, borrowed v/hile 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 frcim 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.