VALUE FOR MONEY?

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 770, 17 September 1929, Page 7

VALUE FOR MONEY?

WARM DISCUSSION OVER BRIDGE COUNCIL AND ENGINEER (Special to THE SEX) TE AROIIA, Monday. The question of whether the Piako County Council had received value for money in connection with the Bailey Road Bridge led to a warm discussion at the meeting of tlia council today. A deputation requested the council to report as to whether the ratepayers had "received a value of 20s in the pound." The deputation also made a general drastic allegation of inefficient workmanship on the bridge, failure to lift a Government subsidy, and claimed that the bridge should have Deen built in concrete. UNFOUNDED ALLEGATIONS The engineer, Mr. B. H. Horner, stated that the allegations of inefficiency were highly exaggerated and quite unfounded. He asked the deputation to believe that the position of a county engineer was often difficult. He said he was always being told to cut the cost of certain works. When, against his better judgment, he presented a plan for a cheap bridge, he was even then not infrequently asked why he could not do it for half the cost. Councillors protested angrily at this assertion, and the engineer retorted: • You run your ears at a cost of anything up to £2OO a year over tile county roads and bridges, at all times of the day and night, and then come along full of complaints, begrudging your engineer the miserable few pounds you pay him.” Mr. Horner suggested the plan of the bridge should be submitted to an outside engineer, and the chairman, Mr W. R. Lowry, asked who would pay for the test. “ARMCHAIR ENGINEERS”. ' Let the armchair engineers pay 15 guineas for it.” ’answered someone in the room. Mr. Horner told Mr. Walters the bridge would carry 20 tons, and asked: "What is the use of the deputation talking technicalities it does not understand? It lias been blazing away with all sorts of allegations, but it forgets that an engineer has to bow and scrape to his council to get money to keep the roads and bridges in order.” The Chairman: Tut, tut. ARGUMENT CONTINUES When one of the deputation said the engineer was not treating the settlers fairly, the chairman said Mr. Horner would put 20 tons on the bridge if the deputation would pay for the test. The argument continued to the luncheon adjournment. I Later, the difference between the engineer’s figure for the cost of the bridge. £350. and the clerk’s, £440. started the discussion again. BRIDGE TO BE TESTED It was decided to test the bridge with a. load of 15 tons, in the presence of members, and to depute the clerk to report on the difference in the estimated costs. Another argument arose over the 5 per cent, rebate on promptly paid rates, also regarding work at the Wairakau Bridge. Mr. Horner said it was his opinion that Mr. Kennedy was simply out to raise trouble between him and a former engineer. Mr. Kennedy: Did the Public Works Department condemn the Wairakau piles? The Engineer: The piles were not up to the departmental standard. The Chairman: Perhaps I Mr. Kennedy: There is no need for you to answer for the engineer. We pay him £SOO a year end he should be competent to answer the question for himself. The matter was finally talked out.