UPKEEP OF ROADS

Waipa Post, Volume 32, Issue 1785, 22 July 1926, Page 5

UPKEEP OF ROADS

PROBLEM OF THE COUNTIES. GREATER SUBSIDY ASKED FOR. (By Telegraph. Press Association.) WELLINGTON, Wednesday. A discussion with regard to the allocation of maintenance charges for main highways, which took place at the Counties’ Conference, ended in a decision to ask for a greater general subsidy instead of trying to provide special grants to counties for main highways that little serve the county itself.- • f ■

Mr Dalrymple (Rangitikei) "moved .the following remit: — “That the rate of subsidy from the ■Main Highways Board for the maintenance of main highways be based, on the principle that a highway that greater percentage of foreign traffic shall receive a greater percentage of subsidy, with a minimum subsidy of 50 per cent of the cost in respect of any main highway.” Instances were given by delegates of the remarkable increase in the cost of maintenance due to motor traffic, especially holiday traffic. Costs were shown as having increased over varying short period's from £25 a mile to £l5O, and from. £4O ! to £144. An Ashburton delegate said that of 139 miles of road in his district 80 miles ‘were north and south, carrying chiefly traffic. The other 59 miles were of use only to the county. Mr Jull: It has been said that the tendency' of the Board is to be 'tender ■to motorists, and to disregard, ratepayers. 'He wanted to assure them that that was not so. With the exception of £25,000 contributied by the State and intended to he devoted to maintenance to make good roads, the whole revenue of the ‘Board came from the motor tax. Therefore it was tessenial that motorists, as well as counties, be taken into consideration He asked them to consider the enormous amount of continuous reclassification of 6000 miles of road. If the remit were given effect to, would it not give more benefit to the counties generally to have a uniform increase in contribution on all roads than that the Board should, iseleict a few miles of roads on the outside edges of countiels for consideration? Was thei-ie not a county responsibility and a Government responsibility? Mr Bowman /(Southland) said the Act, when framed, made it mandatory to classify highways, but it was soon seen to he impossible. The true principle was that the Users should pay. What would he plain, fair, and reasonable would be to ask the Board for a greater subsidy than £ for £ for all highways. Mr Bowman moved accordingly, and ‘the motion was carried practically unanimously.