STATE HOUSES

Otago Daily Times, Issue 23331, 25 October 1937, Page 6

STATE HOUSES

DIFFICULTIES OF BUILDERS SMALL CONTRACTOR PENALISED UNFAVOURABLE CONDITIONS (Special to Daily Times) AUCKLAND, Oct. 24. “Now that Mr J. A. Lee, Parliamentary Under-secretary in Charge of Housing, has admitted that the smaller builder can quote competitively for the building of Government houses and hold his own with large firms, it is to be hoped that the Government will make it possible for small builders to take their , proper share of the work under the housing scheme,” said Mr V. A. Coyle, president of the Auckland Master Builders’ Association. “The conditions imposed are still unfavourable to small builders.” Mr Coyle said that the majority of members of his association were small builders. They were of the type who worked with their men, kept their own books and prepared their own estimates and costings. They had practically no overhead, and they seldom had more than one or two house contracts on hand. Moreover, they had specialised for years in the building of small houses and really knew much more about the requirements than the big firms which had taken up house construction in order to get the benefit of the Government work. He would say definitely that invariably this type of builder could quote aalower price than many large firms. Unfortunately, the conditions imposed by the Government under the housing scheme precluded the small builder. It was no use expecting him to quote for 20 houses, such as was a condition in the Casey estate. If quotations were asked for single houses and the small builder was not expected to put up a large deposit as well as to supply a bond, there was no doubt that large numbers of small builders would be able to take advantage of the housing scheme and assist the Government by employing apprentices and trainees in the, recognised proportion to journeymen. Apart from the housing scheme, builders now looked forward hopefully to a more generous policy by the State Advances Corporation as a means of stimulating private building. In practice the corporation had demanded just as wide a margin in its loans as any private lending concern. If the Government would be much more liberal in its margins and give long-date table mortgages at low rates of interest, there was every prospect that private building would be revived. An official announcement on the question had been promised, and to many bidders their livelihoods depended on the terms that would be offered to encourage private building. _ Other builders, discussing the housing scheme, expressed the opinion that mass production had not proved quite the success that was expected of it, and if tenders were invited on the one or twohouse principle and a change was made in the* system of retaining deposits for long periods, builders generally would become active again. In addition to requiring a bond, large deposits were often held tor six to 10 months. The small builder could not be expected to have his capital tied up in that way. The Housing Department should pursue the same plan as the Education Department, which had proved satisfactory in practice. A much smaller deposit was demanded by the Education Department, and it was refunded immediately the successful tenderer had put up his bond.