MAIN HIGHWAYS

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXIX, Issue 80, 9 August 1923, Page 5

MAIN HIGHWAYS

OPERATION OF THE ACT. VIEWS OF COUNTY COUNCILS. Per Prens Association. "Wellington, August 8. The twelfth couforeute of the Counties' Association c\ cued t -day with the' largest attendanye on record. . The president, Mr A. E. Jul!, in his opening address, referred specially to the question of main highways, and the hisioijy of the legislation, which he regretted was rudied at the end of the session. The recommendation of the executive of the Counties' Association was accepted in regard to the appointment of the board.

Mr Jull criticised the Highways Act on the ground of vagueness, which might be cleared up in practice, in respect of the board's function of the grouping of .counties int'highway districts and the creation of highway councils, which were most important from the of view of the local authorities. Representation on these councils in the executive was a difficult problem, as some districts comprised from ten to seventeen counties, with disparity in size and valuation. Loans for providing the various counties' contribution to the capital cost of the work should be raised by the Government. It was desirable that a clear lino should be followed in determining what works were reconstructive and whafc maintenance. The success of the Act depended largely upon the working of the District Highway Councils, which might bring about the amalgamation oi many present counties in proportion to the willingness the district councils evinced to administer the Act. The general desire was to throw more of the activities of the Act on the local authorities, leaving the Highways Board to be more or less an advisory body. Reluctance to shoulder the administration would result in the very centralisation the Counties' Association always desired to jivoid.,

The Hon: R. F. Bollard, Minister for Internal Affairs, said the obstacle to merging counties would be relieved by legislation providing that there be, no decrease in the Government subsidy to the district in consequence of merging, as there would be if the counties merged to-day. There would be no compulsion to merge, but legislation would enable merging by voluntary agreement <>r by petition of the one or more counties concerned. A commission was set up to inquire into the proposal.

The Hon. J. G. Coates, Minister of Public Works, made a frank plea for greater co-operation between counties and the department, better organisation of constructive works, and more expedious allocation oJ public money, doing away with red tape as far as possible. The counties should appoint the most competent engineers to enable the Public Works engineers to devote themselves to more important work. Politics had nothing to do with, the matter. The conference was most favourably impressed with Mr' Coates' statement of the position.

THE REMITS. Mr A. H. Lang (Mangonui) moved that provision be maue by the Gov eminent to subsidise local bodies on loan expenditure on road works. He stated that what Mas wanted was a £1 for £l subsidy on loans fo r road work. Several members considered the Government would not authorise loans if they were compelled to pay £1 for £1 subsidies. The mover replied that such a full sibsidy might not be asked for. The chairman said the county which was moving would defo t its own claims by putting every county on the same footing. i The remit was withdrawn. The conference affirmed the prin ciple of auctioneers' fees going to Hospital Boards instead of to local bodies. Rangitikei brought forward a remit suggesting the sotting up of a "om mittee bv the executive to scrutinise al! proposed legislation and regulations. Mr B. P. Lethbridge (Marlon) said a large amount of legislation passed had been somewhat crude. He pointed out that the real difficulty was that legislation was before the blouse before anyone outside knew anything about it. The matter was left to the executive.

Tn •connection -with county boundaries, Waimairi (Mr R. W. Hawke) forwarded a remit that altera I ions slmuld not be made except at definite periods of five years, and that where boundaries were altered they should extend along some road, watercourse o ( other natural boundary. Tlie remit was eventually withdrawn and replaced by a motion a-king the Government to remove tbe disabilities under which local bodies at. present surfer. The principle of making a road boundary was objected to on the ground that it made tile dual control of a road necessary and this was undesirable.