MOTORISTS’ PROTEST

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 761, 6 September 1929, Page 11

MOTORISTS’ PROTEST

UNION’S BULLETIN EXPLAINS MINISTER’S INTENTIONS “HISTORY OF THE THUNDEREOLT” **THe History of the Thunderbolt.” This is the title of a bui- J ietin which was issued by the North Island Motor Union today as an explanation of the Prime Minister’s intentions concerning the finances of the Highways Board. “Whatever terms may be used to explain the position the simple result is that the Government proposes to cancel its annual grants, amounting in all to £235,000 a year, which, as a necessary corollary, must be borne by the motorist, who will then be the sole contributor to the Highways Board’s funds,” states the bulletin. It Is also explained that the Government will contribute nothing and the funds of the board must be reduced, presently or ultimately, by the sum total of this annual contribution, and the activities of the board and its assistance to local bodies limited accordingly. It is stated that the Main Highways Act provided for a sum not less than £35,000 a year out of the Consolidated Fund for the highways revenue fund, and not less than £200,000 a year from the Public Works Fund for the board’s construction fund. Previous to the passing of the Main Highways Act, in 1922, it was agreed that there were three parties to the financing, construction and maintenance of the roads. The counties and other local bodies were interested as representatives of lands to which access was given by main roads. Motorists were concerned as advocates of improved surfaces, and lastly the Government was interested, representing society in general benefiting by increased transport facilities and lower freights. Then there was also the national aspect of roading as an influence in defence, postal services, public health and education. CURTAILING OF WORK

“The plain meaning to the layman was that Parliament must appropriate annually the minimum sums mentioned for the funds of the board. This was also the clear intention of the parties and formed part of the completed contract or understanding on which the Act was accepted by local bodies and motorists. The power to withhold the annual grants is the result of legal interpretation of these clauses, which, shortly put, is that as an appropriation is needed each year a formal appropriation must be made, and if Parliament omits or declines to make the appropriation the plain intention of the Act can be defeated, notwithstanding the moral obligation and apparently mandatory direction ju the Statute," reads the bulletin. It is also mentioned that if the grants are withheld the work of the board must suffer. Its present allocations are this year insufficient to meet all demands, and many works are to be held over. Next year the position is likely to be much worse. The reducing revenue fund will be bled white, or works curtailed or subsidies to local bodies reduced. On secondary highways it is anticipated expenditure this year will be double that of last year.

The check that will be given to the board’s activities wilt be a national calamity reflected on the country ratepayer, the road user and the country at large. “The result of your decision, in brief, would mean that the Government is departing from what the people consider to be prima the statutory obligation,” reads a joint letter which was forwarded to the Prime Minister by Mr. M. H. Wynyard, motorists’ representative on the Highways Board, and Messrs. A. E. Jull and C. J. Talbot, county representatives. “But in any case there is a moral obligation, with regard to State assistance in main highways, but the Government proposes to absolve itself from all liability in respect to the construction of oyer 10,000 miles of roads, the further improvement of hundreds of miles of which is necessary for the normal development of the country, continues the letter.