NEW SCHOOLS

Taranaki Daily News, 28 January 1921, Page 7

NEW SCHOOLS

HIGH COST OF BUILDING. MINISTER SEEKS ECONOMY, ‘ (From Our Own Correspondent.) Wellington, Jan. 25. A conference called by the Minister for Education to consider problems connected with school buildings was opened in Wellington to-day. The cost of erecting schools has increased greatly in recent years, and the prices are still rising. The Education Department provides the money, but the Education Boards, nine in number, are responsible for the actual work in their own districts. 'Some of the Boards employ their own building staffs and erect schools by day labor; other Boards let contracts to private builders. The conference had before it departmental statistics as to relative costs, showing that the Boards which did their own work generally got better results than the Boards that called for tenders. The Minister for Education and the Department’s architect stressed this point during the discussion.

All the Education Boards were represented at the conference, most of them by the chairman the secretary and the architect. Officers of the Education Department were also present. The Minister (Hon. C. J. Parr) was in the chair. The Minister for Education, after welcoming the delegates, said that the Dominion was spending more money than ever before on the erection of schools. Very large grants had been made by the Government during the last twelve months, and the expenditure under this' heading for the period would be found. ■ he believed, to exceed the expenditure of any two years, or possibly any three years, in the past. But he was not sure that the best value was being secured for the money, and it was on that point that he wished to confer with the representatives of the Education Boards. He found that in some districts the Boards were inviting tenders for their works and were really competing against themselves. When tenders were received they generally were exorbitantly high He did not think that any of the Boards wn.i’d say that the tender system was operating in a satisfactory manner. The system was. not getting adequate results, and it was responsible for prolonged delays. The Government, to quote an example, had granted the money for an urgently needed school, and had found a year later that the work had not been started, owing to lack of a tender from a private builder. The Government architect and the Railway Department’s architect would meet the conference and give some information concerning the experience of other State Departments. Another difficulty, continued the Minister, was that he could not place reliance upon the estimates of the Board’s architects under the tender system. A Board asked for so much money for the erection of a school. The Government granted the money, and then the Board almost invariably came back for more, because the lowest tender received was higher than the estimate. He was getting tired of this, and' Cabinet was getting tired of it. In illustration of his point, he could quote the following figures relating to four schools: —

The Government in each case made a grant on the basis of the estimate, and then was asked by the Board for additional money. He had noticed that in the case of the school estimated to cost £1983, the builder who tendered at £2956 was willing to take the work at his original price after a. delay of four months, although prices of materials had advanced materially in the interval. That fact suggested that the tender had been excessive in the first instance. A better method of building schools was required. Four of the Boards, Taranaki, Wanganui, Canterbury, and Southland, erected their schools with their own staffs under the supervision of their own architects, and the experience of these Boards had confirmed them in their opinion that this arrangement was preferable to the tender system on the scores of cheapness and efficiency. The other Boards were still using the tender system. He hoped that the delegates would exchange views on the subject. Something had to be done to check the ever-mounting cost of school buildings. It was not sufficient for the Boards to send along the lowest tender, whatever it might be, and then leave the responsibility on the shoulders of the Minister. He wanted the help of the Boards in reducing the cost of buildings. Mr. Parr proceeded to suggest that if the tender system were retained a better form of contract might be evolved. A new system was being employed in America with great advantage. The builder showed in his tender the estimated cost of the work and the amount of his intended profit. The contract then contained a provision that if the estimate was exceeded, the profit should be reduced while on the other hand if the cost was lower than the estimate, the builder had his profit increased. This arrangement gave the builder a financial interest in keeping the cost down. The Minister said that he believed each of the Boards ought to have a building staff and a workshop, if only as a check ■ upon tenderers. The boards would then be in a position to undertake urgent works, for which tenders could not be secured. The existing position could not be maintained without alteration. He was loth to make any drastic change in the system of control, although it certainly was an anomalous system. He knew of no other country where nine different authorities controlled the work of erecting schools. He could tell the conference frankly that when the Education Department’s architect was appointed recently—an appointment that had been too long delayed —the Public Service Commissioner, in a stronglyworded minute, suggested that the building of schools should be done by a branch of the Public Works Department, acting through its own architects and engineers. The minute pointed out that where the State found the money it would be better for the State to do the work. “I did not yield to that argument and I do not yield now,” added Mr. Parr. ‘T think that a change like that would be very radical, and I am not disposed to support it unless it be found that a much better and more efficient system can be secured by.the State undertaking all the work itself. I am not going to say that as years go on we will not have to consider this question, but for the present I am here to take counsel with you with the object of making the : present system a little more effective

than it is to-day.’’ The Department could not make special grants for the erection of workshops, but in cases where Board's had not sufficient funds of their own for this purpose, he thought that advances could be made on the maintenance account on the understanding that the money could be devoted to the provision of workshops and that separate accounts would be kept. Mr. W. Spencer, officer in charge of school buildings and sites, addressed the conference regarding the designing of school buildings. He emphasised the importance of ample ventilation. The ideal condition was to teach the children in the open air, and the shelter made necessary by wind and weather ought not to be allowed to prevent the flow of air. Schools should be simple in design ' gnd pleasing in appearance. Experience had shown that economical construction was often the best form from the educational point of view, since costly and unnecessary accessories interfered with ventilation without giving increased efficiency. Mr. J. Mair, the Education Department’s architect, said that the fluctuation of prices and the rapid increase of wages had caused builders in New Zealand and elsewhere to refuse to accept contracts at fixed prices unless the prices were at an exorbitantly high level. Another difficulty from the point of view of the person wishing to build was that the method of contract usually gave no incentive to the builder to buy economically or keep down costs. The method of contracting that had been evolved lately in the United States, as mentioned by the Minister, had many advantages. Under this method a builder was asked to supply an estimate of the actual cost of the work, and to state at the same time what fee he would charge for carrying out the work. The fee usually was a I percentage in the cost, probably 71 or j 10 per cent. If the cost of the work exceeded the estimate, the fee was reduced by a corresponding percentage; if the estimate was not reached, the fee was increased similarly. The builder agreed sometimes to bear half of any fibst incurred over the estimate. This arrangement gave the builder a direct interest Jh efficient building, and it had been adopted widely and successfully in America. It was not usual to call for tenders when this form of contract was proposed. The ability and character if the builder were of great importance, and the architect usually preferred to invite a selected builder to furnish an estimate. A danger that had to be guarded against was the submission of inflated estimates with the object of securing an increased profit by completing the work under the estimate. Mr. Mair proceeded to suggest that the Education Boards were in a good position to make their own arrangements for the building of schools without the intervention of private builders. Their saving on joinery, if they had their own workshops would be twenty per cent, on output. The salaries of clerks of works would be merely a small part of the profits at present made’ by contractors on school buildings. The Boards would get better work if they employed their own labor, since there would be no inducement to scamp the jobs. He believed that the interests of the Boards and of the Department would be served by a system of direct employment of labor and sub-contracts.

Mr. T. Forysth, chairman of the Wellington Board, said that the members of the Boards that in Mr. Parr they had a friend. The Minister had shown that he was in earnest in the cause of education, and that he was determined to do the best with the means at his disposal. He congratulated Mr. Parr on his appointment to the Ministry and the good work he had done already. (Applause). The Minister, in reply, said that he had taken office in troublesome times. The work of education had suffered very much during the war and he was not sure that it had not been neglected before the war. He had succeeded to an inheritance of accumulated neglect, and he was doing his best, with the assistance of his Department and the Boards, to make up a vast amount of leeway. The first problem was to get more schools and better, schools. Parliament had decided that in a year’s time, if possible, the compulsory school age should be extended from fourteen to fifteen years. That meant an increase in the number of children in the schools. He was hoping that jn the centres the Department would be able to establish schools of special types. This would involve the erection of additional buildings. Then his effort to increase the number of certificated teachers would begin to bear fruit in a year’s time and that again would mean a demand for increased accommodation. . He had no hesitation in asking the Education Boards to join with him in discovering how best to secure the rapid and economical building of schools. , The conference proceeded to discuss in committee the matters that had been mentioned by the speakers.

Architect’s estimate. Lowest tender. £4096 £4998 £3638 £5089 £1983 £2956 £3528 £4558