KEPT IN THE DARK

Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 2, Issue 281, 22 July 1932, Page 3

KEPT IN THE DARK

CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE PROTEST AT SECRECY OF STORES CONTROL L BOARD. ; PRICES CONFIDENTIAL. L With economy as the watehword • in national affairs, it is disturbing l to find the Government Stores Con- ■ trol Board persisting in its policy of ' withholding the prices of successful : tenders whenever it pleases (says a statement by the Associated Chambers of Commerce). The general public is being kept in the dark as to how thpir money is being expended on stores, and with whom. The explanation given the | association by the board in Septemj ber, 1930, was that a number of - tenderers stipulate that their ppices are confidential, and that they give reasons for so qualifying thefr tenders. The representations made in such cases were based on substantial grounds, and the board would be unwise to vary its policy. A somewhat similar reply to further representations was given a ysar later. In this case it was stated that inquiries made as to the policy of British Government Department showed that prices paid for stores were treated as confidential by all departments, and the information was disclosed only in those cases where publication was required by statute. Competition Reduced That is all; a most extraordinary way of transacting public business, and an incomprehensible policy of secrecy to pursue in the expenditure of public money. The principle is wrong, and as for the practice of British departments, two wrongs do ' no make a right. What does the board gai'n by its policy of suppression? What are the mysterious reasons given by these fortunate tenderers for the treating of their prices as confidential? What advantage ' do they seek to obtain — if any — over other tenderers, who tender in a straightforward manner, and leave their prices, the quality of their goods", and their commercial reputation to do the rest? If successful tenderers have nothing to hide, why do they, in ceftain cases, wish to hide the fact that they have secured certain contracts with the Government at certain prices? i Are not the people entitled to lcnow into whose hands the extensive supply of Government stores is being placed, and at what cost? Is true economy being pursued by the Stores I Control Board behind this wall of silence? Since competition makes for low prices, is the board buying at the best prices when competition is being reduced through the known refusal of many overseas firms to | tender unless they may be informed of the prices of successful tenderers? 1 These and other question must be asked by the public in the complete absence of any proper explanation ; by the board as to the reason for its ! determination not to reveal the prices in every case. Of course, no aspersion is cast upon the integrity of | the board, but many discomfiting refiections in the public mind would be • dispelled, and a more complete sense | of confidence and well-being engend- i i ered, by a reversal of policy by the | board whereby not only names, but $ also the prices, of all successful tend- I erers would be published. | This information is supplied in I other countries, by local bodies in § New Zealand, and even by our own ? Public Works Department; why not | by the board? The board considers | there are good reasons for its pre- t sent attitude, but the Associated ? j Chambers of Commerce, composed of | 5000 businesses — many of them tend- \ erers for Government stores — kndws f of none. '