THE OTIRA TUNNEL CONTRACT.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1602, 20 November 1912, Page 5

THE OTIRA TUNNEL CONTRACT.

Sir,—lt was refreshing to read • your sub-leader under the heading of "The Olira Bungle." You have! voiced tho sentiments of nil vrhii have watched the progress of this large' undertaking. One may sympathise- with the ll'Lean Bros, and others who go to form this company who undertook ■ to carry out this work. But, setting sentiment on one side, it appeal's that the matter should be approached from a purely business standpoint. ;lf public contracts are taken, the letter of the specifications" and conditions should bo strictly cariTed out. There can bo no stronger argument in favour of carrying out by day labour or the doubtful method of co-operation all public works in this or any other country, if when a contractor linds in his ambition to aequiro wealth he has bitten olf more than lie can chew, all ho has to do is to apply to a paternal. Government aud Ret them to take over the works, and make themi n present of a few thousands of public money (for to release the bonds and return the deposit is the samo thing). How are t.h» public to know, how a contractor has spent, or whether what has been spent vyas judiciously spent? Indeed, it is not their business to know 01 inquire. The business of the N Department of l'ublic Works and the Minister in charge is to closely watch and see that the SO per cent, payable according to tho conditions ot contract are not exceeded, and to insist on tho contract being carried out. If 1 am not rftistakon a similar trouble arbse in connection with a similar under-, taking by this same firm some years ago, and a sum running into thousands was granted to them. The dock contract was another instance of misfortune, but with this we have no concern except that" we can use it as an example of the only proper way to deal with such matters when a contractor fails to carry out his. work. Tins tunnel business is another matter entirely, and one in which every taxpayer is interested. I venture to say .the Government are treading on''very tendei ground if tliey ullow to be dragged into a settlement in which tht taxpayers come off second best. Thft M'Lean's names only appear. It would be interesting indeed to have a full list of names publisWd wjio are now direct!} interested or involved in this tunnel un dcrtaking. IVom a political and party point of view ono limy ask: Why .did not the con tractors make ..such an application to. lit released from their contract to the 'lat<. Government? Would they ,havo petition ed for release had the late Government remained'ill power?... Are any of our to preseutativo men in .any way interested m this undertaking ?. Has the late Government, assisted so far by any excess of liberality (I notice the contractors in their petition express tho gratitude , for the assistance they have.; revived at the hands of the late Government) in payments or otherwise, beyond the power given in tho general conditions? Theso are. all questions-which should closely engage tho. attention of: the' present Administration of our public affairs. As your leading article points out, it is a case of "Heads I win and tails you lose!" "If tho contract pays us, well and good. If wo make, fifty or sixty, thousand out of it, you will not hear from us. if during the conrsc of carrying out the work wo find we have blundered in our estimates of the value of the work,- well we will appeal to your generosity to let ns and ,our bondsmen off." Any playing or tinkering''with a contractxpiic® it is let is absolutely contrary to good public policy, and, moreover, establishes a very dangerous precedent.- It opens aiv avenue for intrigue and corruption; involves the Government in. suspicion,. and is generally a bad business. The both legal and moral, is' thisT If the contractors are unable; to carry "Out- the-work themselves, their 'sureties''sli6ul'<.T' theu to called upon,' and, failing their response, then the Government .should complete the work in their behalf and charge any deficiency to the contractors and those who entered into the bond with them.' Their conditions of contract give them this power. This case will no doubt ba watched with deep interest, and any tampering with conditions of contract will, most likely lead to some very leading questions being asked at fee next election.—l am, etc., CONTRACT.