HARBOUR SCHEME

Timaru Herald, Volume CXLIV, Issue 21001, 1 April 1938, Page 8

HARBOUR SCHEME

Preliminary Work BOARD DISCUSSION Tenders for Rails and Sleepers The question of the acceptance of tenders for sleepers and rails provoked considerable discussion at yesterday's meeting of the Timaru Harbour Board, some members contending that as both were required for preliminary work in connection with the harbour improvement scheme, the tenders should be held over until the Board had some loan money in hand. At the conclusion of the discussion, tenders for both rails and sleepers were accepted. When the question of tenders for sleepers came up for discussion, Mr H. M. Whatman said that he did not think the Board should purchase any rails until they had some loan money in sight. Mr R. S. Goodman said that the rails would be required, and they could be purchased if necessary, out of revenue. The chairman (Mr W. T. Ritchie) said that he was going to suggest, in spite of what had been said about tendering, that the opening up of the quarry and the work on the Eastern Extension, and possibly all the quarrying work be done by the Board. He knew that what was exercising- their minds and the minds of those who were opposed to the loan was the difficulty of assessing the value of lifting the North Mole. That he thought, should be tendered for, or the opportunity to tender should be given, but so far as the Eastern Extension was concerned ard even pushing on with the North Mole, in the light of past experience, should be done by the Board. They knew ’ > a penny what it would cost them and the Board should decide to push ahead. He knew it was to an extent going back on what was said during the loan poll campaign, but the main point about calling for tenders was the inability of tenderers to specify the price for the lifting of the mole and replacing it. That was entirely a shot in the dark. He saw no reason why, when the Board issued its prospectus, that they should not get their first year’s requirements. Must Start Some Time Mr Whatman said that the smaller they made the contract, the less likely would they be to get a tender. Mr Garrick: You now propose buying the machinery for the quarry work? The chairman: No, not before we call for tenders. Mr Garrick: The machinery up there is going to cost a lot of money. The chairman: If we decide to go on with the quarry we will certainly call for tenders. Mr Goodman: We have to start some time. Mr W. H. Orbell: What was our experience in the past in regard to bringing down stone from th- quarry and tipping it? Mr Garrick: We had to do it ourselves in the finish. Mr Orbell said that it was going to be hard to get tenders, and the Board would have to do it in the end. If there was going to be delay, they would never get started. Mr Garrick: A lot of people voted for the loan on the assumption that we were going to call for tenders. Mr Orbell. Yes. But not for the quarry. Mr Garrick: You said so at the time. The chairman: Yes, but I never for a moment dreamed that we would get one. Why Queensland had a £1,000,090 scheme, and they did not get a single tender. It is going to be a long process if we call for tenders for the whole vork. The quarry work is mainly a question of labour, and if we call tenders for that we will be held up for months. Mr D. C. Turnbull said that he would like to hear the engineer express an opinion. Mr Orbell: Will the engineer say who is going to lay the lines in the quarry and get it ready?

More Economical Tire chairman: That is another point. It would be far more economical for us to have everything ready and then call tenders. If you call for tenders for the laying of the rails and everything, it will .iot be done any more cheaply, and it will taxc very much longer. Mr A. F. Campbell: I think we are putting the cart before the horse in doing work before we have any money in hand. At this ; tage Mr Whatman moved that the tenders be deferred until after the money was assured, but there was no seconder to the motion. Tire engineer (Mr W. B. Charman) said that he took it that the Board would call for tenders for all the work excepting the bucket dredging. The tenderer for the quarry work wou’-i be tied down to a certain quarry and the Board would have to lay the track. That was the idea of calling for tenders for the rails. Actually they visualised » delay.

“You may get tenders for the quarry werk, but not for the North Mole, because there is not the plant in the country to do it,” said the engineer. L. we do not get tenders we will have lo sack some of our staff. We have 10 men on the engineering staff, and eight of them will have to go off unless we go aheaj with the train line, and then we an employ them, and save money on the contractor's esti-

mates.” Mr Charman added that if the Board carried on, they would be able to hand over the track in good condition. If they did not get any tenders, the track would be ready, an I the Board could then carry on itself.

Mr Goodman said that if they looked up the history of the Board they would find that they had never had a successful tender lor the quarry. He quoted several cases where contracts had failed, and the Board had dune the work more cheaply itself. The quarry work was largely a question of labour and he could not see how a

tenderer could provide for everything and make a margin of profit on the work.

In reply to Mr Lindsay, Mr Goodman said that the rails it was proposed to purchase would cover all the work. After further brief discussion the engineer’s recommendations in regard to the tenders for rails and sleepers were carried by nine votes to three, those against being Messrs Whatman, Campbell and Lindsay. The successful tenderer for rails was the Wellington Structural and Reinforced Steel Co., who quoted at schedule rates. The successful tenderer for hardwood sleepers was the Timber, voal and Box Co., of Christchurch, at £1458/6/8,