HOME BUILDING SCHEME

Press, Volume LXXXIX, Issue 27192, 9 November 1953, Page 3

HOME BUILDING SCHEME

CRITICISM OF MASTER BUILDERS

DOUBTS EXPRESSED ON COST REDUCTIONS . (New Zealand Press Association) DUNEDIN, November 8. The proposed national scheme for classes for home builders next year did not receive the support of Oamaru and Dunedin master builders at a meeting in Oamaru on Saturday. One of the main reasons advanced, against the proposal was that it would create a further drain on the already limited timber supplies. .The builders said they doubted whether any great saving could be made in the price of homes by the conducting of such classes. A builder could put up a home in six to eight weeks, thus minimising fluctuations in prices. A home builder would take up to five years to complete his own 'house. During this period, fluctuations in cost could bear heavily on,the home builder. y , They said that finance could be a stumbling block in the scheme because many home-financing concerns would not make any advances until the last nail had been driven and the house painted.

The suggested period for the classes was also criticised. It was claimed that the suggested one-day-a-week 12week course would not give students sufficient knowledge of house building for them to complete a home. The meeting considered that those wishing to build homes could do a great deal of work to reduce contract prices by excavating, fencing and pathing. The builders aldo expressed reluctance to enter a scheme of erecting shells of houses, as proposed under the scheme. They claimed that they were entitled to do inside as well as outside work on houses. It was also claimed that employers would have difficulty in retaining employees continually employed on the rough work entailed in putting up houses to build shells only. Builders would have to allow for a bigger margin of profit to offset any wet days which might prevent work. The home builders, in addition, would be burdened with the expense ofe equipping themselves with tools. The meeting also considered that such home builders could not possibly give' full service to the'ir own particular employers as their interests would be in the building of their homes.