ROAD WORK SUBSIDIES

Taranaki Daily News, 7 November 1935, Page 4

ROAD WORK SUBSIDIES

COUNTIES’ SUGGESTION £1 FOR £1 ON ALL DISTRICT ROADS HIGHWAYS BOARD CRITICISM. DOUBTS ABOUT PRACTICABILITY. A scheme formulated by the County Councils’ Association of New Zealand for subsidies for the development and mamtenance of roads othei than Main Highways in their areas has recently been the subject of discussion by the North Island Motor Union. At a meeting of the Automobile Association (Taranaki) last night it was reported that the union, while not opposing the development of secondary roads, considered that the counties would be better served if the whole of the petrol tax funds were administered by the Main Highways Board. The feasibility of the Counties’ Association’s suggestion that an over-all subsidy of £1 for £1 for road development and maintenance work was criticised by Mr. M. H. Wynyard, a member of the Main Highways Board, in a circular received by the Taranaki Association last night. , Mr. Wynyard said that the Counties Association had made representations vo have the principle of the subsidy formerly paid from the Consolidated Fund but now a charge on highways revenue varied by substituting an all-round £1 for £1 subsidy on expenditure on roads other than main highways. Last year the present subsidy amounted to £181,105. He was of the opinion that a subsidy on construction as proposed would not be entertained as the liability would be unknown and might extend to a very large sum annually. In 1934 Government grants to counties for roads and bridges amounted to £570,000, so why not* leave well alone.

An unrestricted subsidy ofi maintenance would also be an unknown annual charge and it would be impossible for the Main Highways Board to budget for main highways as it would not know what its commitments were regarding other roads. There were 10,957 miles of main highways, 45,611 miles of other formed roads and 16,888 miles of unformed roads in the counties. The counties would probably seek a higher standard of maintenance, so that on the £1 for £1 basis the liability of the board would be increased. Mr. Wynyard considered that in the scheme construction should be excluded and that any subsidy on maintenance should be restricted to a definite sum annually, based on the present rates subsidy and divided pro rata among the counties in proportion to the maintenance expenditure on local roads. Should the counties’ proposals be accepted, very little relief would be obtained by motorists from the present high, special taxations. The funds would be required to meet the subsidies on roads other than highways under the scheme. Municipalities of over 6000 would claim more on the grounds that, providing most of the traffic and revenue, they were entitled to more than the present 8 per cent, of the petrol tax.. The correct direction was the obtaining of the full restoration of Main Highways Board finance.