MOTOR TAXATION

Southland Times, Issue 21661, 24 March 1932, Page 7

MOTOR TAXATION

DISPOSAL OF FUNDS ECONOMY COMMISSION’S REPORT RESOLUTION OF PROTEST As the outcome of a conference held yesterday morning to discuss motor taxation, the following resolution will be forwarded to the Prime Minister, to Mr Coates and to the Southland Members of Parliament : “That this meeting of representatives of the Southland County Council, the Wallace County Council and the Southland Motor Association strongly protests against the recommendation of the Economy Commission in connection with the Main Highways Board and its funds.” The conference, which was convened by the Southland Motor Association, was attended by the following: Mr W. J. Wesney (president of the Southland Motor Association), chairman; Messrs F. G. O’Beirne and J. R. Haigh (Southland Motor Association) ; Messrs .1. McNeill and W. Baird (Southland County Council) ; and Messrs W. B. Hopcroft, W. J. A. McGregor and H. F. Blatch (Wallace County Council). Mr McNeill said he wished it to be clearly understood that as there had been no meeting of the Southland County Council since notification of the conference was received, he and Mr Baird could not commit the council to any line of action on which it had not been consulted. Mr Hopcroft said the question was somewhat similar with regard to the Wallace County Council. A letter was read from the South Island Motor Union asking the Southland Association to urge the Prime Minister and members of Parliament not to adopt the Economy Commission’s proposals regarding the highways funds—that the Main High- ] ways Revenue Fund and Construction Fund be abolished and that all motor taxation be paid direct to the Consolidated Fund. . Motorists Concerned. Mr Wesney said it had been considered wise to call the conference since the counties were affected and immediate action was deemed to be necessary. “The motorists,” he said, “are feeling very concerned about the National Economy Commission’s report, as it affects motor taxation. Annually New Zealand motorists provide £2,500,000 of motor taxation revenue. Now, not only is a £500,000 raid on the funds proposed, but the abolition of the Main Highways Fund is suggested. Despite Sir Otto Niemeyer’s statement against earmarking taxation for specific purposes, there is strong support for the view that money should be devoted to the purposes for which it is raised. The International Roads Congress at Washington at which Mr A. Tyndall, Main Highways Board engineer, represented New Zealand, affirmed the principle and it was attended by 380 delegates from all parts of the world. Last year, a Parliamentary Select Committee advocated the principle and now a committee outside Parliament is taking the opposite stand,” stated Mr Wesney, who added that if the report did not ‘contain a request actually to abolish the Main Highways Board, it proposed to emasculate it, either of which proposals, if carried out, would amount to a national calamity. It was only a few months ago that the railways were taken out of political control, yet this committee put itself in conflict with the opinions of the best brains of the world, which, in itself, was sufficient condemnation of its proposal. Out of a total taxation of £2,500,000 from motorists it was proposed to devote no less a sum than £1,500,000 towards amelioration of the budgetary' position. It seemed to be the view of the commission that if there was one section of the community which could be plundered it should be so treated. High Petrol Tax. In the discussion which followed reference was made to the fact that the New Zealand petrol taxation of 8.4 d per gallon was the highest in the w'orld. Mr Haigh recalled that at a previous similar meeting here and at a meeting in Wellington, strong protests had been registered against interference with the Main Highways Board, which, free from political control, had accomplished excellent work towards the improvement of roads throughout the Dominion. He referred also to the fact that ’ approximately £400,000 to restore earthquake damage to roads had been paid entirely out of the highways funds, despite the Government’s undertaking that, as the earthquakes were national disasters, a fair proportion of the cost of restoration would be met by the Government. "Motorists must realize that either directly or indirectly an enormous amount of road revenue is paid by the farming community,” said Mr McNeill, who urged that the petrol tax should be cut down by at least half. The petrol tax, however, was a very easy' way of collecting a large amount of money. De-rating, at any rate to a certain extent, had also been aimed at. He maintained that with the Highways Board there was too much over-lapping with the counties, with the result that costs were increased. Roads could be constructed so comparatively cheaply in Southland that Southland was not getting the full advantage from the Main Highways subsidies as other parts of the country were. He considered the counties, if they had charge of the funds, could administer them more economically.

Messrs McGregor and Hopcroft agreed with this view.

Mr Haigh said that all motorists must agree that since the Main Highways Board had functioned there had been a great improvement in the main roads. He submitted that there was nothing unfair in the attitude of the motor unions. At the conference in Wellington last year the motorists’ delegates, when the position was explained to them, cheerfully agreed to a proportion of the money raised in motor taxation being paid into the Consolidated Fund. Move to Increase Licenses. Following a remark by Mr McNeill that smokers were being as heavily taxed as motorists, the chairman said that the motorists were not complaining, but they felt that they had done their share. “There is a move on to increase the license fees as well,’’ said Mr Wesney. “If this is done the motorists will be very hard hit. I take it that the principal business before us this morning,” he continued, “is to press the Government to retain the Highways Board and to press the Government not to commandeer the whole of the motorists’ moneys.” Mr Haigh submitted that the motorists should have some say in the way their money was expended. Several county council representatives argued that their councils could have made better use of the money than the Highways Board. Bad turns on certain new roads were cited in support of this argument.

“Give the counties the same money to handle as they have been receiving in recent years and I contend , that better use will be made of this money than under the Highways Board system,” said Mr McNeill. “Would the counties be better off if the Public Works Department took- over control instead of the Highways Board?” asked the chairman.

There was an emphatic “no” from the county representatives. The chairman suggested that a resolution on the following lines might be car-

ried: “That this meeting confirms the good work of the Main Highways Board and emphatically protests against any effort to abolish the board.” Mr McNeill said it would be better if the resolution were submitted to local bodies for their consideration.

Mr Haigh suggested the substitution of the following motion: “That this meeting of representatives of the Southland County Council, the Wallace County Council and the Southland Motor Association strongly protests against the recommendation of the Economy Commission in connection with the Main Highways Board and its funds.” He moved accordingly. Mr McNeill seconded the motion, which was carried. It was decided to send a copy of the resolution to the Prime Minister, to the Rt. Hon. J. G. Coates and to the Southland Members of Parliament. Copies of the resolution will also be sent to the local bodies interested.