THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY. THURSDAY, AUGUST 7, 1930. ROADS AND TAXATION.

Wairarapa Age, 7 August 1930, Page 4

THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY. THURSDAY, AUGUST 7, 1930. ROADS AND TAXATION.

To most of the submissions on the subject of taxation made by the deputation representing farmers and town employers which interviewed him on Tuesday, the Prime Minister gave the usual noneommital reply, promising consideration. On one question, however, Mr. Forbes was quite definite. Sitting previously in conference, the representatives of town and country interests who constituted the deputation had passed the following resolution:— That as the time has arrived when the users of roads should construct and maintain them, this meeting ap« proves of the imposition of the proposed increased tax on petrol, provided that the proceeds of such taxation are used for relieving the burden of rates in the maintenance and formation of roads, and not for directly or indirectly relieving the Consolidated Fund. To this, the Prime Minister made a surprising reply. He said that the present financial position demanded things being done that would not have been done in ordinary circumstances, and added: The petrol tax of fourpence was allowed to the Highways Board. That was not to say that any additional taxation on petrol was the property of the board. To say that there was a vested right in any system of taxation was unsound. It was necessary that relief should fee given to the Consolidated Fund. The Highways Fund would not be affected. Except in the uncertain extent to which it is qualified by the vague remark about the financial position demanding things being done that would not have been done in ordinary circumstances, this reads as the expression of an opinion by Mr. Forbes that the special taxation of road users is a fair and just means of raising general revenue. At a minimum he is committed, as he is reported, to the view that it is fair in existing circumstances to tax road users to obtain genera] revenue. This, of course, is what the United Government is proposing to do in its present raid on the Highways Fund, but it is truly astonishing to find Mr. Forbes attempting to justify this most unfair and inequitable discrimination on grounds of principle. The view to which the Prime Minister stands committed is that it is right and just that road users, either as a matter of temporary or permanent policy, should not only be required to pay in taxation the cost of roads, but should be required in addition to pay penal taxation merely because they are road users. The only difficulty in dealing with this extraordinary contention is that there is nothing whatever to support it. It. is, of course, right that road users should meet the cost of constructing and maintaining roads, but why on earth, just because they are road users, should they be deprived of the rights of ordinary citizens and subjected to special penal taxation? Nothing more glaringly unjust than the position Mr. Forbes has taken up on this question could be imagined.