WALL OF SILENCE

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XXII, Issue 174, 8 July 1932, Page 4

WALL OF SILENCE

TENDERS FOR STORES AT WHAT PRICES? THE CONTROL BOARD'S POLICY With economy as the watchward u> our national affairs, it is disturbing to find the Government Stores Control Board persisting in its policy of withholding the prices of successful tenders whenever it pleases (says a statement by the Associated Chamber of Commerce). The general public is being kept ui the dark as to how their money is being expended on stores, and with whom. The explanation given this as sociation by the board in September 1930, was that a number of tenderers stipulate that their prices are confidential and that they give reasons for so qualifying their tenders The representations made in such cases were based on substantial grounds and the board would be unwise to vary its policy. A somewhat similar reply to further representations was given a yeai later. In this case it was stated that inquiries made as to the policy of the British Government departments show ed that prices paid for stores were treated as confidential by all departments, and the information was dis closed only in those cases where publication was required by statute. COMPETITION REDUCED. That is all, a most extraordinary way of transacting public business, and an incomprehensible policy of secrecy t< pursue in the expenditure of public money. The principle is wrong, and as for the practice of British departments two wrongs do not make a right. Whai does the board gain by its policy of suppression!' What are the mysterious reasons given by these fortunate tend erers for the treating of then onces as confidential P What advantage do they seek to obtain —if any—over othei tenderers, who tender in a straightforward manner, and leave their prices the quality of their goods and then commercial reputation to do the estIf successful tenderers have nothing to hide, why do they, in certain cases wish to hide the fact that they have secured certain contracts with the Government at certain prices? Are not the people entitled to know into whose hands the extensive' supply of Govern ment stores is being placed, and at what cost? Is true economy being pur sued by the Stores Control Board behind this wall of silence? Since com petition makes for low prices, is the board buying at the best prices when competition is being reduced through the known refusal, of many overseas firms to tender unless they may be in formed of the prices of successful tend erers ? REVERSAL OF POLICY NEEDED. These and other questions must be asked by the public in the complete absence of any proper explanation by the board as to the reason for its determination not to reveal the prices m every case. Of course, no aspersion is cast upon the integrity of the board, but many discomforting reflections in the public mind would be dispelled, and a more complete sense of confidence and well-being engendered, by a reversal of policy by the board whereby not only names, but also prices, of all successful tenderers would be published. This information is supplied in other countries, by local bodies in New Zealand and even by our own Public Works Department; why not by the board? The board considers that there are good reasons for its present at titude, but the Associated Chambers of Commerce, composed of 5000 businesses —many of them tenderers for Government stores—know of none.