CONCRETING COSTS

Sun (Auckland), Volume IV, Issue 1023, 14 July 1930, Page 10

CONCRETING COSTS

COUNCIL PETITIONS FOR, HIGHWAYS SUBSIDY WORK ON GREAT SOUTH ROAD A petition asking that legislation be provided to set up a Royal Commission to inquire into the claim of the Otaliuhu Borough Council for a subsidy from the Main Highways Boaxd on the cost of concreting portion of the Great South Road is to be presented to Parliament by Mr. A. W. Hall. M.P. for Jdauraki. The council constructed one section fcf the road at a cost of £24,300 before fhe road was declared a main highway, but the plans and specifications for the jvork were first passed by the Main ilighways Board. The petition further asks that the proposed commission consist of a judge of the Supreme Court or a magistrate and two engineers, one nominated by the board, the other by the claimants or the council of the Municipal Associations. All boroughs who would be entitled to a subsidy under the proposed legislation would be required to lodge their claims with the Minister of Public Works by a date to be fixed, after which no further claims would be recognised. Legislation would be required to enable the board to pay amounts decided jt»n by the commission. The petition points out that the road >as formed in 1925-2(1. before the section had been declared a main highway under the Act of 1924. Plans jhad been approved by the board, with In in or alterations, and the council, before beginning work, had been assured a subsidy, but this had never been paid. Repeated applications have met with refusals, as the board maintains fa. had no statutory power to grant a pubsidy when the work was carried f>ut. It is pointed out in the petition tliat the Avondale Borough Council, svhich carried out similar works at approximately the same time as the OtaIduhu Council, has received a subsidy. Repeated applications have been jrnade to successive Ministers of Public Works to have legislation passed enabling the board to deal with such cases, and to subsidise works constructed under similar conditions, but j .without avail. The reason advanced .is that, if the council was granted a | subsidy on permanent work carried put before the road was declared a llmain highway, a precedent would be 'Established, and other local bodies/ ’>voul<l demand a similar subsidy. Ti*h ibpinion is expressed that this camybt pe a valid reason for refusing a sxib•ddv, and that each case should be treated on its merits. I