MAIN HIGHWAYS

Te Awamutu Courier, Volume 53, Issue 3818, 7 October 1936, Page 5

MAIN HIGHWAYS

AMENDMENT BILL CONSIDERED. COUNTIES’ ASSOCIATION REPRESENTATIONS. On Saturday, 3rd Octobqr, 1936, a delegation front the executive of the Co-unties’ Association, consisting ot Messrs A. E. Jull, W. Marshall, F. H. Hudson and Col. Pow, waited upon the Minister of Public Works to discuss tne Highways Amendment Bill just introduced in the House. The interview elicited from the Minister his intention first to create some 4000 miles of the most important arterial roads to be called state highways, as ’a first instalment with the desire to continue than policy until even 12,000 miles oi' State Highways were created, making, as the Minister said, a national roading system and with the Public Works Department co-operating with the counties in respect of me remaining roads. The intention is that the Highways Board shall on the State Highways do the actual work of construction, reconstruction and maintenance quite independently of the county councils, only using the county personnel and equipment until the Department can gather its own either by taking over plant that the board considers suitable pr by purchasing its own. An important provision in the Bill is that the Minister’s consent must first be obtained before any construction work on any main highway can be started. Another provision is that the Minister is also to be the final appeal authority in cases of disagreement between the board and councils. The Minister admitted the difficulty of dealing with the cases where counties have raised loans to cover the cost of construction on roads to be now declared State highways, and said he would endeavour later on to try and solve that problem. Many counties, particularly in the South Island, had not played the game in respect of road improvement. In fact the Minister, stated that if the gaps in the road system, particularly in the South Island, had not existed there would have been no necessity for tha Bill. The delegation pointed out to the Minister that although the counties through w’hose area the present Stalte highways run would be relieved of the annual cost of maintenance, many counties would, because of their geographical position, get no benefit at all. There are counties which had interest on loans for their road construction up to eight or ten times the amount of the proposed maintenance benefit. The counties which had done the least on the proposed State highways would receive the greatest share, of benefit. That there was ample power under the present Act to revoke the control of any portion of a highway in any county and do the work of construction, making the country stand up to its reasonable share and so close the gaps in the road system.

The Minister was reminded that he has repeatedly stated that the Highways Board in conjunction with the counties had done most excellent work, yet the Bill proposed to take away from, the Board its power and discretion 'and vest them in the Minister, thus introducing political control. That when the State Highways control and administration is taken over by the Department many counties will lose the community interest between the different parts, the State highways being in many cases the backbone of the country and such counties will tend to disintegrate into road boards and as the policy of State highways proceeds so the country system must give way to centralised bureaucratic control with groups of small road boards administering the by-laws under Department supervision. The counties delegation was not opposed to the creation of a set of reads the full cost of which would be borne by the Highway fund. There are such roads now and more could be created under present legislation. There is ample power in the present Act to insist that all counties be made to contribute to the closing of gaps in their area if the Minister will exercise it rather than penalise the counties that have faced their obligations, and still further assist those who have not. If the Minister’s intdntion of introducing Departmental administration of the main roads is carried out the dual control of authority which existed when road boards and country councils were operating together will be reviewed to the great disadvantage of efficiency and economy. The Minister was reminded of his previous statement to assist counties by a subsidy on roads other than main highways, and he assured the delegation that he still intended to do that later; on. In the Minister’s explanation in the House on the introduction of the Bill he said it was intended to make a distinction between those counties that had played the game regarding road improvement and those which had not, but according to the Bill this intention is to be carried out by granting greater benefit to the counties that, as the the Minister says, have not played the. game, and making conditions relatively harder and more irksome for those who have played the g'ame. The abolition of the active cooperation by the counties in doing the road work under the supervision of the Highways Board for construction and maintenance of the highways with their own plant or by contract has brought about the great road improvement to the satisfaction cf all parties, and should not be curtailed as proposed by a system of dual control. That the gaps in the completion of the main road surfacing are rapidly diminishing and now that funds are available can be totally eliminated by invoking the powers of the present Act. The counties delegation was opposed to the, emasculating of the powers of the Highways Board by the introduction of political conti 01. It will be remembered that the Minister stated some time ago that it was his desire; to pool all motor taxation including heavy traffic fees. If thiS is brought about there will be a loss of about £138,000 to ail counties, while some counties will benefit from the maintenance by the State of 4,C00 miles of State highways by £BO,OOO per annum in road maintenance. The Counties delegation are insistent th'at the proposals as explained by the Minister are without

doubt, whether intentional or not, a violent attack on the, country system of local government and the substitution therefor of centralised bureaucratic control. The county authorities are likely to be bewildte-ed at what appears to be the conflicting policies regarding local government. On one hand the Minister of Internal Affairs is urging and encouraging counties to amalgamate to ensure, as he thinks, greater efficiency and economy, while the Minister of Public Works in his Highways Bill is proposing legislation that must result in less efficiency and ultimately complete disintegration of counties.