GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS.

Auckland Star, Volume XXII, Issue 88, 15 April 1891, Page 5

GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS.

(BY TELEGRAPH.—PRESS ASSOCIATION.)

Wellington, this day. A deputation from the Wellington Builders' Association waited on the Hon. R. Seddon yesterday to point oub bheir objections to the conditions of Government contracts. They asked that in case of building contracts the quantities should bo supplied by the Government instead of leaving each contractor to calculate them for himself.

Mr Hales, Engineer-in-Chief, who was present, »aid as a matter of tact no tender had been rejected on account of faulby schedule, and after somo discussion this subjecb was dropped.

In reply to a question pub 'by a member of the deputation Mr Seddon said he objected to the principle of paying interest upon deposits made by way of security, and on those retained for undue time before being returned to unsuccessful tenderers, because if this was conceded interest would be asked for on other kinds of securities.

Mr Hales remarked that it had lately been the practice of the Department to pay at schedule rates for extra work.

The deputation asked that an arbitration clause should be inserted in contracts to decide disputes as to additions or deviations from plans instead of leaving the matter to the Engineer in-Chief, but the Minister objected to the proposal on the ground of the cost, and also because, as a rulo, in an arbitration case the Government musb go bex the wall.

Ib was suggested that contractors should be allowed to tender in a lump sum, and send in schedules afterwards. but Mr Seddon was strongly against this. As a workman he would nob be doing himself justice unless he had everything well calculated before tendering.

The deputation offered strong objection to a clause in last year's Lien Bill which enabled people to override the provisions of the Bill by a special agreement. They contended this virtually defeated the whole purpose of the Bill. The Minisber said the Government had not yet decided what to do about the Bill, but promised to take the matter into consideration.

The Minister asked the opinion of the deputation in regard to new sub-letting contracts.

Mr Carmichael said he did not object bo new conditions so long as they were made general. Mr Seddon contended ib was certain thab if the clause were strictly adhered to it was in the interest of bona fide contractors, because' it prevented others coming in and bringing down the work to unreasonable prices. In the course of further discussion, the Minister pointed out that if arbibration were allowed to building contracbors, ib would have to be extended to larger works, such as railway contracts. Once the principle were admitted, scarcely one contract let by Government would he completed without an arbitration. With the number of contracts let by Government the trouble would be interminable, and the expense enormous. The Minister was firm upon the point that he could not put Government contracts on bhe same footing in bhis respect as those let by private architects. Mr Carmichael suggested bhab the conditions for building bhould be made differenb from those for general works.

The Minister said he would not be unwilling to classify the conditions ■by removing such as were unsuited to the building trad©, and he promised to conBider the mutter and see. what could be