RAILWAY TENDERS

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXIII, Issue 18987, 11 April 1936, Page 15

RAILWAY TENDERS

MORE EXPLANATIONS CRITICISM BY MINISTER BOARD MEM BEK’S REPLY ALL A MISUNDERSTANDING (Par Press Association.) CHRISTCHURCH, this day. A tint her reply was nlade by -Mr. D. Reese, a member of the Railways Board, to-day, following the Hon. I). G. Sullivan's statement published on Thursday. “it appeared to me that enough had been said,’’ said Mr. Reese. “Mr. Sullivan's latest, statement, however, has two effects. First, it gives me ground for dealing briefly with two points. I have had examined the whole of the records covering the last live years operations of the New forest Sawmilling Company. L now find that, notwithstanding my care that no business should lie done‘with the railways, there was one instance of tendering—the instance quoted by the, Minister, and that was for a local inquiry for the Addington workshops. That tender was not accepted. Neither Mr. Sullivan nor myself had any knowledge of this tender when we. first spoke. “The second point, is that the West Coast, Sawinillers’ Association is alleged to have tendered against the Maniaku mill. It. never did. It. may be upon one happening that Mr. Sullivans original statement was based. ASSOCIATION’S TENDER “During my absence Iron) Christchurch with the Railway Board on an extended tour of inspection, a departmental inquiry for 1.01)0,00011. ot timber, which had been circulated among millers on the West Coast, was submitted by several of them to the secretary of the association. Mr. A. O. Wilkinson. These millers suggested that as (hi.-, was a specification which no one mill could handle, whatever could be handled should he divided amongst these mills. Even them only half ol the original I.OOO,OCOft. was tendered for—unsuccessfully. On my return to Christchurch. Mr. W ilkinson told me ol what lie had done. I pointed out that I had always insisted that the association should, while I was a member of the Railways Board, refrain from business dealings with the Railway Department-. "At ihe next meeting of the association, my point, of view was accepted and a, resolution passed that the association would not tender. The secretary had considered that it, was not really an association matter, as lie’ was acting for only a small group of association mills who were interested in the tender. Mr. Wilkinson interviewed the general manager of railways for the purpose ol explaining to him that his (Mr. Wilkinson’s) action had been without my knowledge, and asked that this information be reported to the board in order to make my position quite clear. Mr. Wilkinson informs me that shorthand notes of his interview with the general manager were taken. RFC RET EXPRESSED “In oiks way, and in one way only, could the Maniaku mill he mentioned in connection with the tendering—the cost at wiiieii the department said the Maniaku mill, if operating, could have cut the limber was used for purposes of comparison with the tenders. AH this happened nearly 12 mouths alter; ihe Maniaku mill had ceased operation, and nearlv a vear ago. “As to the other effect of Mr. Sullivans statement, quoted fully from Hansard, it- adds sufficient lo make it clear to me that Mr. Sullivan originally intended, as lie says he intended, to condemn the method of control, and not to attack individuals. He obviously could not have realised that, despite ids assurance of his speaking impersonally. |,is mode of attack was hound to he'regarded as reflecting on members of the board personally. Misunderstanding is at the root of the controversy. That, more than Mr. Sullivan. I regret.'