ROADS AND RATES.

Waikato Times, Volume 102, Issue 17223, 5 October 1927, Page 6

ROADS AND RATES.

Motor transport has completely altered the basis of road-control. . In the days of horse and trap the country ratepayer had no cause to fear that the traffic from other districts would ruin the roads for which he had paid. But now that daily motor services with a run of hundreds of miles are common and tourists in thousands drive wherever the spirit leads them, local rating for roads has taken on a new aspect. The present boundaries are largely meaningless, and the whole question of payment for roads calls for reconsideration. It is generally agreed that the cost should now be met more by a charge on motor traffic and less by rates on land, which have been raised to an unreasonable height. The question then arises: Who is to collect and control the revenue from the motors? Mr P. A. Snell, a Hamilton ex-councillor, has spoken strongly for local collection of the funds; Mr M. E. Fitzgerald, engineer of Matamata County, opposes the suggestion. In an interview published in this paper on Monday he argued that a national tax, preferably through the CusLums, would be more economical. On general principles most people will appreciate Mr Snell's concern to keep the watchful eye of the local bodies upon the new expenditure. Undoubtedly a department at Wellington tends to be less careful of economy and efficiency than a local authority whose extravagances are sure to be severely criticised. On the other hand, Mr Filzgeralcl is undoubtedly correct in showing the difficulty of devising a system of local collection of motor fees that would tax the actual road-users. Tolls would achieve this, but it is generally admitted that their collection is too cumbersome a process. If, as Mr Snell suggests, the local bodies should collect petrol taxes through the bowsers and heavier license fees on cars domiciled in their respective districts, then it seems that wider road-control areas, comprising towns and counties, would have to be constituted. In any case a considerable share of the revenue from motors would have to go to the central Government for the construction and upkeep of main high- ; ways.

We can do no more than point out the cliange that has come and the problems to be faced. The obvious need of the moment is to place upon motor traffic its fair share of roading costs. In the meantime the proposal to leave it entirely to the Government to collect petrol or tyre or ear taxes and hand over as much as it chooses to local bodies for roads will be viewed with misgivings, especially at a lime when the Prime Minister is proposing State control of motor transport. Centralisation still has an unpleasant sound. An old proverb, and a wise one, says that that state is best governed which is least governed.