REOPENING OF PORT

Press, Volume XCVII, Issue 28746, 18 November 1958, Page 7

REOPENING OF PORT

Kaiapoi Council

Discussion

Congratulations on the reopening of Kaiapoi as a port were extended to the harbour committee of the Kaiapoi Borough Council by councillors at last evening’s meeting. Before the council’s meeting got under way, the Deputy-Mayor (Mr K. Sinclalre) said he wanted to refer to “an event of great importance to the town” —the reopening of Kaiapoi as a port. On behalf of councillors not members of the harbour committee he extended congratulations to the Mayor and committee members who reintroduced the shipping trade to the town. Cr. xl. L. Oram said: “We have seen a successful start. It only remains for the business people of North Canterbury and Christchurch to take full advantage of the service being provided for them.” He paid a special tribute to the Mayor (Mr C. T. Williams) as being “mainly instrumental in interesting this shipping company in reopening the port.’’ “Before Sunday a large number of people had no doubts in their minds that the whole thing would fall through. After seeing the ease with which the boat came in, carrying a full cargo, most A those people have now changed their minds,” he said. Cr. Oram said, while the council as a whole was the Harbour Board, it was the harbour committee which had to run the harbour and see that it was a financial success. The Mayor said there was no d.)ubt the reopening of the port had excited an extraordinary amount of interest throughout the country. He had received letters from many old residents of Kaiapoi expressing “interest and satisfaction.” “The service has got away to a good start. The ship is ideally suited for the port. We could not have had a better ship for the trade,’’ he added. Cr. L. R. Peachey said the first cargo was taken off the Paroto at 8.45 a.m. It was delivered in Christchurch and the truck was back at the wharf by 11 a.m. Complaint About Tender The council decided to write to a firm of contractors explaining the need for urgency in reconstructing the wharf. The firm, Messrs G. W. Pearson and Sons, Ltd., had written to the council complaining that a day or two after discussing technical details in preparation for a tender, it learned the contract had been let. The letter added: “As no closing date had been advertised or •mentioned; and no warning given |us that the price was urgently I required, we feel the business was loot conducted in a very appropriate manner.’' ! The Mayor (Cr. C. T. Williams) said that matters of the tenders had been verbal. “Mr Pearson knew the work was very urgent and that speed was the essence jof the matter.”

He added that Mr Pearson must have been under a misapprehension. He had been told verbally speed was necessary.

Cr. T. C. C. Ross said: “Perhaps there was some misunderstanding because there was no closing date."