REMOVAL TENDER

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22733, 20 May 1937, Page 12

REMOVAL TENDER

TEACHER'S FURNITURE HIGH COST BY RAIL INSTRUCTION TO ACCEPT STRONG OBJECTION BY BOARD Strong objection to an instruction from the Education Department that it must accept the tender of the Railway Department for the removal of a teacher's furniture was expressed at a meeting of the Auckland Education Board yesterday. It was pointed out that the tender was considerably in excess of others received from private firms.

Information before the board showed that a teacher had been transferred from Howick District High School to Waihi District High School. The teacher wrote stating that three tenders had been received for the removal of his furniture. Those from private firms were for £lO 5s and £lO 10s, and that of the Railway Department £22. A memorandum from the Education Department stated that the teacher would have to accept the Railway Department's tender. The Education Department had been in touch with the Railway Department about the amount of the tender, and that office was in touch with its Auckland branch with a view to reconsidering the quotation. Tt was therefore possible that the amount would bo reduced. In the meantime the teacher should advise the Railway Department to proceed with the removal. The board's secretary, Mr. D. \\. Dunlop, said another tender had since been received from a private firm for £7.

"The position," said the chairman. Air. T. U. Wells,' "is that we have a tender from a carrying firm for £7. one-third of that of the Railway Department, and yet wo are told wo cannot do anything about tho matter. As a taxpayer to this country's finances, I do object to paying the department three times as much." A number of members* expressed surprise at the Education Department's instruction, and it was pointed out that the board was supposed to administer education funds prudently and not extravagantly. SERIOUS COMPETITION

CARRIERS ENTER PROTEST " INIQUITOUS INTERFERENCE" [_»Y TELEGRAPH —PRESS ASSOCIATION] DUNEDIN, Wednesday The question of Government interference with private enterprise, as exemplified by the activities of the Railway Department in undertaking the cartage of furniture and perishable freight which was contended to be the legitimate business of carrying firms, was made the subject of a lengthy discussion at the annual conference of the New Zealand Master Carriers and Customhouse Agents' Association today. Five remits, one from Otago and four from Christchurch, all bearing on the same subjects, were discussed by flip flplpfyjitps The Otago' remit was introduced by Air. J. Henderson, who said that the federation would have to devise ways and means to bring pressure to bear on the Government to prevent the encroachment of the Railway Department bn the livelihood of cartage firms. In the field of furniture removing the Government interference was iniquitous, and now that there was a proposal to stabilise the transport industry it would seem that the Railway Department's fear of competition would bo removed. It should be requested to discontinue its interference with town carriers in this respect. The Christchurch remits were supported by Air. T. 12. Wiltshire, who outlined what he considered to be the unfair competition of the Railway Department in furniture removals and in customs work in that city. Air. L. Pearson (Masterton) suggested that a deputation from the federation should meet the Alinister of Railways and make strong representations for the cessation of the department's encroachment on the field of furniture removals. Air. J. H. Kirkwood (Dunedin) said that several deputations from the local association had met the Alinister, and although thev had not received as much as they would have liked, the position in Dunedin had been to some extent improved. It was decided that a deputation wait upon the Ministers of Transport, Customs and Railways and make strong representations to have interference by the Railway Department in furniture and customshouse cartage removed.