ABOLITION OF RATES

Taranaki Daily News, 11 June 1930, Page 4

ABOLITION OF RATES

PETROL TAX TO PAY FOR ROADS. FARMERS IN FAVOUR OF CHANGE. ~ After'hearing Mr. W. J. Poison, M.P., give his views on the de-rating of farm lands, a meeting of farmers at Lepperton on Monday night unanimouslypassed a motion approving of the proposal to substitute petrol taxation for road rates. Mr. Polson attended, the meeting in the first place to deliver a lantern lecture on South America. On the conclusion of the lecture the president of the North Taranaki provincial executive of the Fanners’ Union (Mr. H.-.Blyde) asked Mr. Polson to address the meet-

ing on the de-rating of farm lands. Air. Polson said that the whole problem of rating had entirely changed in this gasoline era. Formerly in New Zealand the farmer rated himself to get access to hie local railway station. Today traffic was national and the farmer was still rating himself, to two and a-

half times the amount he had before

the war, to provide better roads for motor transport, which competed with the raiways. The result was an enormous loss on the railways, which the farmer had to make good, like everybody elec, by increased taxation. There was a further effect. The farmer owned practically half the ears and paid considerably more than half the petrol tax. Then he rated himself in order to obtain his own petrol tax as a subsidy to build roads to enable motor transport to increase taxation by cutting out the railways. The whole thing was ridiculous.

Great Britain had realised the change in the problem, as also had Southern Ireland. Lord Craigavon had told New Zealanders how Northern Ireland had followed her southern neighbour’s example, and the more progressive States in the United States had de-rated their farm lands for similar reasons. It was

just as reasonable to expect the farmer to provide the money for railways as to provide the money for roads. Both were carrying'the same traffic in competition with each other. The suggestion that the towns paid petrol tax and were entitled to the money for their benefit would not stand investigation. Seventy-five per cent, of the expenditure on these highways came actually out of the pockets of the farmers in rates and petrol tax. Hospital rating would have to be maintained; he was referring only to road rates.

He would administer the funde collected from petrol taxation much as they were administered through the Highway Board and the Highway Coun oils, but ho would consolidate local bodies, where community of interest rendered it possible, with the Highway Council, so that counties would be represented as they were to-day according to their area and rateable value. This would be a great saving in overhead expenses. One efficient staff of engineers and one efficient battery of machinery would do the whole work, instead of half a dozen engineers and clerks, and half a dozen sets of machinery, none of which worked full time. He estimated that ten to 12 per cent, could be saved in that way. Even if the petrol tax amounted to a shilling, if any farmer took paper and pencil lie would soon see that it would be less burdensome than the present system of. road, rates. Anyhow, the present was an age of efficiency. To face the present conditions there was need for thriftiness and prudence, and if it was possible to handle road transport along chose lines, and, there was no doubt of its possibility, it was something which the country should undertake to investigate. Air. Polson advocated land valuation, upon the productive basis. He pointed out that in Denmark the average production over a considerable period of years was the basis of valuation. The average production factor of a district was as•ortained and values based on proximity or the reverse to the market and on • luality of land were struck in relation I:.) that production factor. The present system in New Zealand was to find out the selling value of land, which might not be its true value, estimate the improvements, and what was left became the unimproved value, upon which the farmer was taxed.

It was impossible to estimate improvements .after a lapse of time. For instance, one could not say what amount of bush had been on the land, what drainage had been done and whether or not there were tiles in the ground. Consequently a great many improvements were not taken into account. He would challenge any man to put improvements oh the land for anything like the amount allowed by the taxation department. The production system was fairer, and prevented the extraordinary rises and falls in values which had occurred in New Zealand as a result of the Dominion’s system, tending to create continual disputes between individuals, and local bodies and the departments.