HOME BUILDERS’ COURSE

Press, Volume LXXXIX, Issue 27191, 7 November 1953, Page 6

HOME BUILDERS’ COURSE

“FARCE AND PIPE DREAM”

CRITICISM BY COLLEGE BOARD MEMBERS

Describing the scheme to “student home builders” as a “farce,” “a pipe dream,” and a negation of the principles for which technical colleges stood, several members of the Christchurch Technical College Board of Managers last evening claimed that the proposal was impracticable. After a disussion in which most members took part, the principal (Mr D. W. Lyall) was instructed to write to the Director of Edacation (Mr C. E. Beeby), who has asked principals of schools conducting technical classes to accept enrolments for classes next year. Mr Lyall is to convey the arguments raised in the discussion to Mr Beeby. The outline of the scheme contained in a circular letter from Mr Beeby was first criticised by Mr J. E. Jones. “The whole thing is a joke in the building trade,” he said. The scheme envisaged the erection of houses to the “covered-in” stage. The houses were then to be handed over to the appropriate schools for completion by student home builders enrolled in a special class. It was precisely this “finishing-off” stage which required the skilled tradesmen, said Mr Jones. Empty Houses in Christchurch He saw the suggested Saturday classes as an infringement of the 40faour week. The carpenters, he knew, were not in support of the scheme. There were “dozens” of empty houses in Christchurch, which seemed to indicate that the demand for housing was not as great as it was made out to be.

The course was to take about 12 weeks, said Mr J. O. Thompson. It was ridiculous to suppose that men could be trained in such skills as plastering and papering in 12 weeks, but he had no doubt that some of the students who completed the course would later try to get into the trade. It was a “hare-brained scheme” which could, at most, only fit a man for the work of finishing a house, said Mr J. A. Calder. It took about 1000 man-hours to build a house, but only a third of that time to finish it. ' ‘‘l don’t go to a tailor and ask him to make a suit, but hot to put the buttons on because I can do that myself.”

“This makes a farce of all the principles for which we, as a technical college, stand,” said Mr R. Jones. Technical colleges should provide sound, basic training to enable men to produce craftsmen’s work. “This is a pipe dream of people with no knowlege of the trades,” he said.

Support for Scheme Mr A. E. G. Lyttle disagreed with the previous speakers. Anything which would help young men to get possession of their own homes should be attempted; if the course enabled men to complete a house from the “coveredin” stage he thought it would be worth while. As for the 40-hour week, that was introduaed to cure unemployment and was not applicable in the present state of over-full employment. Mr F. H. Dephoff -said the scheme had been formulated, after a conference at which builders and other tradesmen were represented. The college should support the scheme, he considered.

The chairman (Mr M. E. Lyons): It appears there is not enough scope for the home builder to make a real saving by just doing the finishing work, How much does this inside work amount to? Mr Calder: About £lOO.

Mr Dephoff quoted a report printed ip “The Press” on October 31 which said that approval of a plan “suggested by the Christchurch Technical College JSoard” for the courses had been given to Mr Beeby. Several members denied that the scheme, as outlined, was the suggestion of the board. Members discussed whether the board had to accept as a directive the sentence in Mr Beeby’s letter, “principals are asked to accept enrolments now for classes to begin in Febrr-»» , y or March next year.” It was finnlly decided that Mr Lyall should wri'e to Mr Beeby expressing the objections raised by members.