HEAVY TRAFFIC ON ROADS.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19317, 1 November 1924, Page 16

HEAVY TRAFFIC ON ROADS.

CARRIERS WANT TO GIVE EVIDENCE. (Feom Otjb Own Coheespondent.) WELLINGTON, October 30. In the House of Representatives to-day Mr Wilford asked on behalf of the Wellington Branch of the Dominion Carriers’ Federation whether the Government would refer the heavy traffic clauses of the Public Works Amendment Bill to a committee to take evidence. The Minister of Public Works said that he did not think that the Bill should be sacrificed because the Carriers Federation was unable to call evidence. Ho could only say that in his opinion nothing was more urgent in the interests of the dominion—the farmers, the ratepayers, and the local bodies, than the provisions suggested in the Bill. He knew that the Bill had come down late and no one regretted it more than ho did. The Crown Law draftsman had been working on it for months, and it was a difficult and highly technical Bill to draft. Regulations had to be drafted before the Bill could come into operation. It was hoped that by nest session they would be able to design something that would more or less meet the situation. He thought that everybody recognised the urgency of the matter. If the Bill were sent to a committee the most they could do would bo to take evidence for half a day. A committee had already heard considerable evidence on the subject, and the master carriers had made it clear that any change in legislation with regard to heavy traffic would meet with their opposition. He hoped that the House would pass the clauses of the 81l more or less as they stood, but he was afraid that to send the Bill to committee would mean killing it this year, and would mean a hopeless waste of public money for another year so far as the roads were concerned. Mr Wilford said that lie understood the House was going to sit on Saturday as it was not going to sit on Monday till 7.50 p.m. He suggested that the Minister should send it out through the Press Association that the committee would receive evidence from 9 to 11, or from 10 to 12 on Saturday morning. Ho could set up a small sub-committee representing the three parties in the House to hear the evidence. Ho was not objecting to anything in the Bill. He knew nothing about it. The Prime Minister said that the Bill was a very good one and was very urgently required. Nobody who had been through the country during the winter months would come to any other conclusion. He did not think there would bo much opposition to the Bill. So far as the business of the House was concerned the House would sit on Monday night as usual, and it was proposed to sit on Saturday morning or on Saturday some time to take the WashingUp Bill. Ho suggested that the carriers would find that no injustice would bo done them, and they need not worry. In any case if any hardship resulted from the Bill it would be dealt with early next session. PUBLIC WORKS AMENDMENT BILL. DUNEDIN MASTER CARRIERS’ PROTEST. At a special meeting of the Dunedin Master Carriers’ Association held yesterday morning it was unanimously resolved that telegrams be sent to the Prime Minister and to every local member of Parliament strongly protesting against the Public Works Amendment Bill having been rushed through before carriers were given an opportunity of having their views laid before the Parliamentary Committee, Among other things (he Bill provides for a charge of up to £73 under the heading of “License Fees on Heavy Traffic Vehicles.” In the opinion of the meeting this figure is excessive in the extreme. In accordance with the foregoing resolution copies of the following wire have been despatched to the Prime Minister the Hons. W. Downie Stewart.. C. E. Statham, and Messrs J. M‘C. Dickson, J. W. Munro, T. K. Sidey:—“Unanimous resolution of Dunedin Master Carriers’ Association emphatically protests against Public Works Amendment Bill regarding the heavy traffic fees going through in its present form. Association considers carriers throughout dominion should have been given an opportunity of discussing conditions before third reading. Essential that committee should have heard our views.—Cookson, secretary.”