Mail Contract.

Star (Christchurch), Volume LXIV, Issue 934, 2 December 1933, Page 10

Mail Contract.

No Itregularities;

, Leader of Opposition Inspects File. (“ Star ” Parliamentary Reporter.) WELLINGTON, December 2. of irregularities in the letting of a rural mail contract in the Wairarapa district were refuted in the House yesterday, when the Leader of the Opposition, Mr Savage, said that he had been shown the file and saw nothing in it to argue about. The case was one in which it was suggested that the Post and Telegraph Department had shown unfair preference in letting a contract, and an opportunity to answer the charges was given during consideration of the Estimates yesterday afternoon. The Hon A. D. M’Leod (Wairarapa) raised the question by asking the Minister if he would make a statement on the subject. “ I am personally involved, and I desire to have it cleared up at the earliest possible moment,” he added. The Hon A. Hamilton remarked that a deputation had questioned whether he had done the right thing in letting a certain mail contract in the Wairarapa and he had allowed the Leader of the Opposition to see the file, therefore Mr Savage could express his own opinion about it. In placing these contracts responsible officers of the Department had to be satisfied that both tenderer and guarantors were satisfactory and that the price was in accord with what they thought was a fair thing. Reports Not Satisfactory. The reports they received regarding one tenderer were not satisfactory, both as to the tenderer and guarantor aspects. This was the only challenge in respect to all the North Island services, and he would like to indicate the guiding factors in placing these contracts. There must be some serious factor which would guide them away from the lowest tenderer, but they had to be satisfied that he was a satisfactory person and that his guarantee was in order, as the guarantor would have to provide the service if the tenderer defaulted. The Department had also to consider the existing contractor, and if his service had been satisfactory they liked to give him a certain amount of preference, while they had also to consider the point that his plant might be rendered valueless if the contract was lost. It was also a matter for consideration whether one tender was a single man and another a married returned soldier who was maimed. Sometimes they made an offer to the second lowest tenderer and he accepted it. This was the case in the Wairarapa contract. “ And .1 have no hesitation in saying.” concluded the Minister, “that w’e did the right thing.” Nothing to Argue About. Mr Savage stated that he had seen the file and saw nothing to argue about. He saw indications of the human element, by which he meant that in the case of one contractor he was a married man with a family and had only one arm with which to earn his living. He was given preference over a ''single man, the amount of whose tender was slightly lower. “ I would do w'hat the Postmaster-General has done,” declared Mr Savage. “As regards any irregularity I saw- nothing there as to any undue influence having been brought to bear on the Department. The contracts were let on the basis of legitimate reports that were in the hands of the Department. I am not prepared to drag names on the floor of the House, and I would ask members to accept my word and that of the Postmaster-General that things are not irregular in any shape, and that if any member sees the file he will see very little to argue about.” (Hear, hear.)