THE LOWEST TENDER

Southland Times, Issue 18078, 3 May 1919, Page 5

THE LOWEST TENDER

DISCUSSION BY TECHNICAL-COLLEGE BOARD. NEW ENGINEERING WORKSHOPS. EDUCATION BOARD TO BUILD BY DAY LABOUR. As the successful tender for the erection of additions to the Technical College engineering workshpps amounted to £BSU above the £2OOO allocated by the Government for the work, the Technical College Board applied for a further grant to cover the extra expense. Replies from the Education Board and from the Education Department in regard to this application came up for consideration at last night’s meeting of the Technical College Board, and created a fair amount of discussion. The letter from the Department stated that the estimated cost as revealed by the tenders appeared to be unreasonably high, and suggested that the Education Board should carry out the work by day labour with its own staff, under the supervision of the Board’s architect as in the case of the Don Street Manual Training Centre. The Department would be glad to have an expression of the Board’s opinion in the matter before considering further the application for an increase to the grant already approved. The letter from the Education Board stated that after consideration of the Department’s reply, it was of opinion that the work could be carried out at a less cost by day labour than by the lowest tender received, and was prepared to allow the work to be carried out by its own workmen under the supervision o I the Board’s Architect.

Mr R. G. Speirs said that the committee appointed by the College Board had considered the specifications carefully, and had deleted items which reduced the cost of the work by £3OO or £4OO. Although they might be able to reduce the cost still more, he did not think that the work could be completed for £2OOO. It was only to be expected that the tenders would be a little high as everything had been provided for and since the Education Board’s Manual Centre building had been erected, the cost of materials had increased by about twothirds. The Board received the same discount as builders for material and he thought that the tender was a very fair one.

Mr A. le H. Hoyles said that unless the Education Board’s proposal to erect the building by day labour was accepted, there was a likelihood of the College Board not getting the building at all. The Director stated that he understood from the letter that the Department was willing to accept the cost of erecting the buildings by day labour. Mr le Hoyles moved the following resolution:—That this Board agrees to the suggestion of the Education Board that the erection of the new building be carried out by day labour, provided that no part of the cost be levied on the funds of the Technical College Board, and that the work be completed within the specified time of three months and carried out in accordance with the plans and specifications of the Education Board’s architect. Mr J. Gilkison seconded the motion.

Mr Gresham said that he placed the same construction on the letter as the Director, and if further correspondence were started it might cause considerable delay. Mr W. Ashley said that the suggestion to have the work done by day labour did not appear to him as being very fair to the builders. At' a meeting of the Technical College Board it had been resolved to have it done under the contract system. In good faith the builders had spent a lot of time in preparing accounts. A special committee of practical men had been appointed by the Board to consider the contracts and the Board had expressed its satisfaction with their work. The successful tenderer had been led to understand that he was to do the work, and now without any reference to him the Board was going to take another course. If the work by day labour was going to cost anything like the contract price, it.was unfair for the builder to be overlooked.

Mr W. Couser said that he sympathised with the previous speaker, and did not feel satisfied with the proposal, but it seemed to be the only course for them to adopt. He did not believe in being made .a catspaw by anyone, even if they were in a superior position.

Mr Gilkison submitted that neither of the two speakers had put forward any solution as to how the difference between the £2OOO and £2850 was to be made up. Mr Ashley said that the work, as he understood it when first discussed, could have been done for a little over £ISOO and £2OOO would have left a margin. Now the specifications surprised him and stipulated for work and material, which would greatly add to the cost of the building. The specifications included four or five steel girders which would cost about £2OO alone. A third flat had been added, also a stairway and more windows. The present contract was nothing at all like what the original proposal. Mr Gresham said that he did not believe the Department was making a catspaw of anyone. It was entitled to its opinion, which was that the work would cost less by day labour. Mr Ashley said that in case any of them were under a misapprehension, he would like to disabuse their minds. The system of tendering had been criticised, but it was a straight-out fair deal. A letter which had appeared in a local paper had given the lowest tender as £2OOO, but that was not so. ' The lowest tender was £3OO or £4OO above that, while a builder who recently came' to Invercargill to compete with the local builders, had put' in his tender at £2900. He moved an amendment as follows: That in, the opinion of this Board, considering that we do not believe that the work can be carried out more cheaply by day labour than by contract, the woric should be done by contract." The amendment lapsed for want of a seconder, and on being put to the meeting the motion was carried.

Mr Ashley asked if the usual quarter per cent, on the deposit of “the successful tenderer would be allowed, and members of the Board expressed the opinion that the best course to adopt, would be for the builder to apply to the Technical College Board for the amount.