FISH SUPPLIES

Otago Daily Times, Issue 24698, 29 August 1941, Page 8

FISH SUPPLIES

QUANTITY AND PRICE CONTROL POLICY ATTACKED GOVERNMENT MEMBER IN DEFENCE I ' (0.C.) WELLINGTON, Aug. 28. The quantity and the price of the fish that is available to the people of the Dominion at the present time were the subject of criticism in the House of Representatives to-day by Mr W. A. Bodkin (Opposition, Central Otago), when speaking in "he debate on the

Imprest Supply Bill. Mr Bodkin alleged that fish was virtually unprocurable by people with small incomes. He was later replied to by Mr J. Thorn (Govt.. Thames), who said he considered that fish was as plentiful on the average as it had been at any time during the last 11 years, and that the price was substantially the same as it was before the outbreak of war. Unprocurable in Some Districts “It is a fact that since the Government interfered with the fish industry fish is absolutely unprocurable in some districts,” Mr Bodkin said, “and it is regrettable that with the sea teeming with fish it should be practically unknown as an article of diet in many homes. This will have a serious effect on the people of the Dominion. In many parts of the country there is a deficiency in the soil, and as a result we have an unusually large number of cases of goitre. One of the best protective foods is fish ” The Minister of Internal Affairs, Mr W. E. Parry: Medical men are not too sure about that. Some medical men advocated the

use of fish in the diet, Mr Bodkin said, and the Food Value League, which was doing good work, attached great importance to it as a protective food. Replying to Mr Bodkin, Mr Thorn said that it had been cunningly imputed that everything was the result of the Government’s policy of regulating the .industry and the result of the recommendations of the Sea Fisheries Investigation Committee of 1937. Volume of Catch “I would like to say,” Mr Thorn continued, "that the amount of fish available to the people of the Dominion during the year ended March 31 last was substantially the same as the average over the last 11 years. In 1931 the total catch was 369,000 cwt and last year it was 329,000 cwt. I admit a drop of 34,000 cwt over the 1939 figure, but the chief cause of that was the fact that three of the best vessels in the fishing fleet were with-

drawn for naval purposes. Those vessels were responsible for the biggest catches of terakihi from the Bay of Islands grounds and the remaining vessels of the Auckland fleet are not capable of catching the quantity of terakihi previously caught.” Mr Thorn said that although last year’s catch showed a decline compared with the total of 1939, a substantial reduction had been effected in the amount of fish exported to Australia. Since 1937 the exports to the Commonwealth had decreased steadily from 50,700 cwt to 35,378 cwt in 1941. It was true to say that the volume of fish available to the Dominion was as great to-day as at ,any time since 1930. ■ Mr W. J. Poison (Opposition, Stratford): Is that the reason why the price is up? j Mr Thorn said that, generally speaking, the price of fish to-day was no higher than it was at the outbreak of war. He'quoted figures relating to the price in Auckland, which, he said, consumed two-thirds of the Dominion’s total catch, and added that except in the case of filleted fish there had been no increase in price since the beginning of 1939. Filleted fish was slightly dearer because of the large amount of waste that had to be taken into account.

Limitation of Catches The Leader of the Opposition, Mr S. G. Holland, said he thought that one of the reasons for the short supply of fish was the limitation of catches. If a number of trawlers had been withdrawn, as they had been, to supply naval needs, why should the amount of fish that could be caught by the remaining trawlers be limited, he asked?