MAIN HIGHWAYS FINANCE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 20366, 21 September 1929, Page 10

MAIN HIGHWAYS FINANCE.

Very little satisfaction was got by the deputation of motoring interests which interviewed the Prime Minister in an effort to defend the main highways funds from the contemplated ?aids in eupport of the ordinary Budget. Sir Joseph Ward pretended to be mightily indignant at the deliberate circulation of "misleading and unreliable statements," but such melodramatic methods have always been part of his political > stock-in-trade. Whenever he finds difficulty in answering criticism he complains of misrepresentation, and the violence of his indignation is usually a fair measure of the weakness of his case. In this matter, the criticism has been based entirely on his own statements made in precise terras in letters and telegrams and in speeches in Parliament. In brief, his proposals wero to discontinue the annual grant of £35,000 from the Consolidated Fund ; to discontinue the annual transfer Of £200,000 from the Public Works Fund; to collect interest on the amount of previous transfers from that account; and to limit the finance of the scheme, supplementary to the proceeds of special taxation, to money borrowed under the authority of the Main Highways Act and consequently a charge *on the highways funds. These decisions have been so frequently repeated by the Prime Minister that it is absurd for him now to say that there has been misrepresentation. His policy was expressed most positively on August 27 in a telegram to the North Island Motor Union, in which he asserted that it was "unnecessary to continue additional grant of £35,000 or provide £200,000 free capital out of Public Works Fund." Even now, the Prime Minister has not undertaken to ask Parliament to vote the £35,000 grant, his avoiding of that point permitting only one conclusion. He appears to suggest that £200,000 will bo transferred from the Public Works Fund, but interest will be charged if the money has to bo borrowed. The reservation is absurd, since the previous grants have been drawn from borrowed money, and have been paid over as "free capital" in terms of the original agreement and in compliance with the legislation which, in fact, does not allow the board to pay interest on these grants. On only one point was any concession made — the proposal to charge interest on previous grants, which was set forth in the Budget as well as in other official statements, has been abandoned. The protests have been effective to tho extent of saving the annual levy of £50,000 or more for interest on the £1,000,000 of "free capital"; they have not yet succeeded in preventing the raid upon the two annual grants of £35,000 and £200,000. The Prime Minister's excuse to the deputation was that, in case of financial need, "surely the motorists were not to be inviolate." Whati he is apparently, determined not to understand is that motorists, who are not exempt from other taxation, submitted to heavy extra taxation for a special purpose under a clearly defined contract that the proceeds would be inviolate. Hiu proposals constitute a deliberate breach of faith, which can be repaired only by unqualified adherence to the terms of the contract and an explicit recognition that the proceeds of the special taxation will not be diverted to any other purpose. <