ROADING TENDERS.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 50, Issue 124, 7 March 1930, Page 4

ROADING TENDERS.

COUNTY COUNCIL PROTEST. NOT CONSULTED BY THE BOARD. V At the meeting of the Ashburton County Council tins morning the chairman (Mr J. Carr) said a protest had been entered against the tenders for the Ashburton traffic* bridge being accepted by the Main Highways Board without referring the matter to the Council. A further tender for the pavement of the highway between Ashburton and Fairfield had been let without the Council’s'- sanction. The Council was bey.ng treated as a child. Mr W. T. Lijl agreed with the chairman that the Council should refuse to find money! for work within- the County unless' the Council was asked for its agreement. He moved that the Council enter a protest against the Main Highways Board accepting tenders without first submitting particulars to the Council to enable it to find the money. The Council should insist on the Board submitting particulars to the Council before taking action. The chairman said the information was hearsay and confirmation had to be obtained from the Government official. Mr R. Houston said that Mr Lill was the representative on the Board, yet he did not seem to know where the Council stood. The plans had been submitted only after persistent inquiries had been made. Mr H. E. Jessep said protests were no good. The Council should refuse to countenance such an action. Mr A. Horsey said the matter should be laid before* the Minister of Public Works, pointing out the unsatisfactory manner in which the business was being transacted as far as the Council was concerned. x Mr W. G. Gallagher said that when tenders were let for a contract at a price much higher than that submitted to the Council it was up to it. to see there was no recurrence. The practice was unprecedented. The Council should see this matter through. The cost of paving the road between Ashburton and Fairfield, which was double the amount submitted to Council, was a serious thing when the cost of the entire paying scheme was taken, into consideration. Mr Jessep said the Council should refuse to accept the tender. Mr Lill said this would do no good as the Board controlled the finance. It was decided that an emphatic protest against the action of the Board in accepting a tender without first consulting the Council, especially in face of the protest that was previously forwarded regarding the new traffic bridge and to which no reply had been made. Mr Jessep dissented, considering the Council should refuse to recognise the tender.