DRAINAGE BOARD.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 12639, 17 April 1903, Page 3

DRAINAGE BOARD.

FREDERICK .STREET SEWER, The adjourned meeting of the Drainago Board was hold yesterday afternoon; present —Messrs R. Glendining (chairman), J. Hazlett, G. L. Donniston, W. Burnett, J. H. Hancock, J. Goto, Hem. H. Gourley, and Dr C-nughtrey. On the 24th February the following motion by Dr Coughtrey was carried:—"That, with a view of preventing a recurrence of such things in future, this board set up a committee of inquiry to investigate and report on the irregularities connected with the signing of contract B 6chedulo (Frederick street sewer contract); such committee to report an who is to blamo (a) for the wrong date being affixed, (b) who tampered with the quantities, (c) to consider the pricce affixed to oach class 'of work enumerated in that schedule and tho bearing those prices have on the total sum the board might ultimately havo to pay in the event of extras or deductions, (d) the errors of calculations in oa-rrying out the extensions, (e) the various discrenanoics of that schedule thus cigned, amd (f) what is the best method of protecting the board's interests in such tilings in future; tho committee to consist of the whole board."

Dr Coughtrey now moved that there be added to the motion re the Frederick street sower the following queries:—"The same committee to inquire whether the tender that was accepted by the Works Committee was valid or invalid because of the time at which it was handed in? Also, if in reality it was the lowest tender for (hat type of sewer presented to the Works Committee? Whether the Works Committee or the engineer suppressed any facts or letters that ought properly to have been brought before the board when the matter was under discussion? Lsfitly, did the Works Committee ignore in detail or in general. tho_ various protests of tho board's expert adviser and chief executive oflio&r on the points that have been enumerated for inquiry?" Mr Ilazictt seconded the moticm,

Mr Dennfeton objected to the motion. It was an utter waste of time, with all the work before (hem, to go into matters that had been settled in the past. The board had plenty to do without raking up the dead. The motion was carried, Mr Dennistou objecting. Dr Coughtrey then proceeded to speak cm the matters remitted to the committee, referring in detail to the headings of- his motion, and read lengthy correspondence from tho engineer in reply to queries forwarded to him by the speaker with regard to points in connection with the sewer. It was necessary that mistakes of the kind should be avoided in the future, and with the view of protecting the board's interosts he would suggest that in all future contracts accepted by the board, or any committee to which it may have delegated its powers under the act, the signing of the contracts on behalf of the board be left in the hands of the principal executive officers of the board, the board's engineer and the secretary of the board pro tcm, and that those two officers be held responsible for seeing that the various documents, and schedules of those contracts were correct before affixing their signatures and the board's ee.il to them. Mr Gore said this was simply a storm in a teapot, raised by Dr Coughtrey with the view of remitting tenders to tho engineer. It was not right that th,e board should part with its right to open the tenders. No ether public body did it. It was right that the engineer should see the tenders, but the board should first see them. After answering a number of Dr Coughtrey's statements, he said he felt that the Works Committee were accused of having altered the schedule of the contract, of accepting a tender that wan not the lowest, and of other things of which they wero not guilty, and it was a pity that the other members of the committee wero not present lo answer for themselves. If anything had ben wrongly done it was not the work of the committee.

Dr Coughtrey said his desire was that the tenders should 'be opened by the hoard or by the Works Committee, and that the rweplaince of tenders should bo with the fioard. but that the actual signing afterwards should be carried out by tho executive officers aftor everything had been found to be correct. He had never accused the Works Committee of altering tho schedule, and his motion did not bear tliat construction. What he wanted to know was who was to blame for the alteration, and his whole object in moving in the matter at all was to prevent errors or discrepanoic-3 of. the kind occuring again. Mr Denniston thought tho motion was quite unnecessary. Mr Goiirley hoped the practice of other publio bodies in the acceptance of tenders would lie followed, and moved—"That in future nil tenders be opened by Use board and be referred to the engineer to report to the proper committee, who shall report to the board." Mr Burnett seconded the motion. The Secretary said there was a resolution to that effect on the books already, and it was decided to adjourn consideration of the motion until next meeting, to allow tho secretary in the meantime to look up the exact terms of the resolution.