Fish
Sir,—Mr. Janies J. McDonald makes one wonder whether the actual sale of fish at the wharf is the real concern of a majority of those engaged in this controversy. The suggestion to call a public meeting to deal with this problem certainly has its merits, but what would the object of such a meeting be? Is it to try and secure an alteration in the regulations which have created this controversy, or . is the purpose to inflame public opinion against those legitimately engaged in the industry? I confess that I fail to see the need for a public meeting of workers when those same workers have such a potent means to secure recognition of their claims through their union affiliations in a collective sense. The Labour Representation Commit*ee has the power to direct the local member upon any issue, reached bv a majority, in the public welfare and interests. Action on these lines would probably lead to a more speedy result than a one-sided public meeting could be expected to. Both sides of the question must be heard in full. Would the suggested public meeting permit both'sides to- be--debated?■-I note Mr. McDonald’s plea that the boat concerned should be permitted to operate pending a departmental decision. 1 am given to understand that this particular boat may still operate under the fishing license if desired, and any catch made can be disposed of on the same basis as any other fishing licensee does his business. If so, why is the boat tied up? _ . A suggestion has been made during this controversy that frozen fish is being sold as fresh fish. Buyers should know that it is not permissible to sell frozen fish uncooked, and this fact explains why, during a fresh fish scarcity, the dealers can only supply fish already cooked. The marked difference in the flesh grain of frozen and fresh fish is so great that only the least obsei'vant buyer could fail to detect the difference. Perhaps Mr, McDonald would explain why he did not support the central fish maiket scheme I advocated when this same oroblem came before the Harbour Board some few years back, and the fishermen themselves appealed for a prohibition of wharf sales. SAM J. PF ARSON.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GISH19400213.2.104.2
Bibliographic details
Gisborne Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 20170, 13 February 1940, Page 10
Word Count
373Fish Gisborne Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 20170, 13 February 1940, Page 10
Using This Item
The Gisborne Herald Company is the copyright owner for the Gisborne Herald. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of the Gisborne Herald Company. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.