CLOSING THE GAP

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LV, Issue 17099, 4 November 1929, Page 7

CLOSING THE GAP

HABBOR TRAINING WALL CONTRACTOR'S explanation ■SPECIAL MEETTING OF BOARD * Matters in connection with the progress of the harbor training wall were discussed at a special meeting df the Gisbornc Harbor Board to day, tjie nieeting having been called to obtain from the contractor, Mr. F. H. Cfoodman, an explanation of his alleged delay in closing the gap in the Trail. Discussion of the matter lirst hjej*an at the monthly meeting of the board last Monday, when a report in connection with the training wall was submitted by the. resident engineer, Mri C. F. Marshall Smith, and after lengthly deliberation, a motion by Mr TT Todd that' the chairman should bo authorised, after consultation with the board's solicitors, to do anything possible to compel the contractor to complete the closing of the gap, was Trithdrawn, and it was resolved that Mr. Goodman should be invited to attend a special nieeting to-day with an explanation. •'At to-day's meeting there were present: The chairman, Mr. J. Tonv bleson, and Messrs. A. H. Wallis, J. B.Broadhurst, T. Corson, A. A. Fraser, H. J. F, Tombleson, T. Todd, W. D. Bruce, A. J. Nicol, A. Wade, C. H. Williams, A. C. Steele, T. Quirk, 0. Smith, and Dr. J. C. Collins. Mr. Ooodipan attended with his solicitor, Mr. G. Bradley Smith, and the board's solicitor, Mr. H. D. Ohrisp, was also present.

PUBLISHING OF REPORT , The board first considered whether 'the matter should be taken in comMiittee or in open board. Mr. Quirk held that it was a delicate matter, and«he moved that it should be taken in> committee. Mr. Broadhurst seconded motion. .. Dr. Collins pointed out the board's position in regard to the engineer's ■, report/which had been published. The engineer never had any intention that the report should be published. "When, was the report handed to the boJiTd? asked Dr. Collins. The secretary, Mr. H. A. Barton: Before the meeting started, according to*the usual practice. Dr Collins said that the board ha|i made definite charges against the man and now was not going to let him give an explanation to the public. Three definite charges were made against the contractor, and had been made public./If the board followed ate advice of its engineer it nuist take action against Mr. Goodman for damages, and fine him heavily. If "the'board took the matter in committee the speaker would leave the meeting. It was neither fair, equitable, nor just that charges should be made, and that the proceedings should then be.taken in committee. "NOT A COURT OF LAW" • Mr. Williams pointed out that the board was not a court of law. The meeting had been called for the purpose of coming to an amibacle agreement with Mr. Goodman. Members could not speak as freely if their remarks were to be published, and the xesult of the conference would be .made public. ..." jThe.chairmnn said the gentlemen of r, the press had a pretty hard row to ' hrie, and a mistake had crept into the Herald report of the last meeting. The speaker had not said that members would not agree with the engineer's remarks, but that he considered his statements reasonable, and - was quite in accord with the report. The reports were handed to the reporters before the meeting to save time.and if the board had given instructions the paragraph would have been cut out. . Mr. Steele held that because the report had been published and the board s side Had been heard, it would be unfair that the contractor's explanation should not be made public. Dr. Collins: Will you give an assur'.i ance that in future when any conten- ' tious matter is to come before the board in the reports you will give it careful consideration before the meeting.' The chairman: I will. Mr. Wallis said that ever since the board started the engineer's reports had been published, but in this case the report was referred to to-days meet- • ing) and in that case should really not have been published last week. Dr. Collins moved an amendment that the question of whether the matter ' should be taken in committee or not Bhould be decided by Mr. Goodmans answer, and the amendment was carMr. Goodman was then admitted to the meeting,-and expressed a wish that the matter should be taken in open Kflftjfdb Dr.' Collins intimated that he would question the contractor. CONTRACTOR'S STATEMENT.

In reply to Dr. Collins, ilr. Goodman * said he Kept time sheets, and he produced a statement of his hours of working from April 1 to October 31. The average number of men employed per -week was 20£, apart from three men on flat rate. They worked from April 4 to October 31/ 20,697 hours, apart from work done in the shop. Overtime totalling 254? i hours had been worked, and ibia did not apply to men on a flat rate. That overtime cost him somewhere about £6OO. From April 18 he had three floods, and 10 weeks had been spent in diving. On October 24 he had a fourth flood, and started diving again. The average number of hours overtime per week was 82. * „ Dr. Collins; You haw been dilatory? '■ Mr. Goodman: 1 have not! Dr. Collins: How could you have been dilatory when you worked 20,i)07 hours, and 2547 \ hours overtime, which'cost about £000? I don't see how .that charge can be laid at Mr. Goodman's door. You are charged With'dawdling and ignoring representations made to you, and we are recommended to show you no further consideration. Have you had every facility-and assistance! Mr. Goodman: No. Give mc one or two examples of •Where'y*ou have not had adequate assistance—l bad a great deal' of difficulty in getting space for my gravel, and for casting. Since you met tho works committee have you, had assistance?—Other than wharfage, no. .Before you went to the committee you had JiOne?—No. Did you try .to'build that wall according to! your own ideas or others? J—l ashf d (permission to build from the totf "mi, but I*was stopped by the engineer and the harbormaster, on the terras of tho contrnct, and had I been allowed to do that the work would have been finished, even with the bad Ittfik .we have had. -,. r ■■■■■■■ • Gould you have put more men on to §' the work?—No, It would not have been practicable. ','.'', , Was .the work under your direct supervision?—Yes. '.■.-'•'■ •* f nder wMw *uj?enwioo was *t

when you went away?—My foreman, who has had ,50 years' experience, and my nephew. Would you consider your experience much greater than the foreman?—No, not in pile-driving. Wo want the public to know that when you went away you had a man as good as yourself in charge. Was the weather favorable to a contractor? —lt wasn't bad; it was ordinary weather.

Mr. Goodman stated that the report said pressure had been brought to bear upon him, but this.was not so. He had never received a complaint from the engineer. The chairman: I have heard the engineer speak to your nephew about the piles. Mr. Goodman: All .the piles were ready to go on with the work.

Mr. Goodman added that in connection with retrieving the piles he had been up against a very difficult job, and had had to wait until .the flood had subsided. In,'the last flood it giltedhip very quickly, and he cleared the first portion, but could do nothing until the water cleared, as they could not run the.risk of one pile having been left. Two divers were working at once, and the work could.not have been done any quicker. All the piles were made, and on the Saturday before the flood the present gap was the last dash to completion, and everything was ready On the Saturday for the work to commence on Tuesday. There was a statement that he-had interfered with Mr. Kirk's contract, hut he did not soe how that could be, for he had helped Mr. Kirk. In his contract, which he had also tendered for, it was stated that none of the board's plant would be available. '' Do you think that I would have delayed the work in my own interests'?" asked Mr. Goodman . "My men are capable, and we have worked all hours." Dr. Collins: Do you conscientiously believe that you have done your very best for the board? Mr. Goodman: Certainly. (Proceeding.)