WAWAN

a , . =

ey ~<a “s] a
M ‘

r/. a

Zo ZZ :

re CSE ge : hae

wie

— eat. oe tO

SF

This cartoon from The Dispatcher, organ of the International Longshore-
men's and Warehousemen’s Union in San Francisco, was accompanied by a
special editorial pledging support to B.C. longshoremen in their current

dispute with the shipping companies.

Resource giveaways
to Japan monopolies

Cont'd from pg. 1

What he meant by that is that
Japanese industrialists consider
that the B.C. and federal govern-
ments can. be counted on to resist
pressure from the public against
the sellout of our resources, and
that labor will be kept in its
place not to endanger Japanese
mineral needs.

In what was a vieled invita-
tion to B.C. businessmen to join
in the profits to be made in joint
ventures with Japanese mono-
polies, Haseo said that the
expansion of the purchase of
materials in Canada ‘‘will
provide many opportunities for
joint ventures.”

Haseo held out the prospect
that Japan is also interested in a
considerable expansion of
purchases of other raw material
commodities. This process has
already proceeded quite far with
Japanese capital moving into
pulp and other mineral fields,
such as copper.

As if to underline the increas-
ing takeover of B.C.’s mining
industry by Japanese and U.S.

monopolies, the giant Utah
Mining Co., announced this
week that it had reached an
agreement with the Mitsui
Mining and Smelting Co., under
which the Japanese company
will smelt 60 percent of the
copper concentrates from its
copper mine near Port Hardy,
BC;

Under this arrangement Mit-
sui will process about 140,000
tous, of B.C. <copper<con-
centrates annually which will be
mined by the U.S. company in
B.C. for export to Japan. Produc-

tion at the giant Port Hardy
mine is expected to start in the
fall of 1971, and will be at the
rate of 33,000 tons a day.

- The Utah Mining Co. operation
is only one of many in B.C. in
which U.S. capital and Canadian
capital have joined in deals with
Japanese monopolies to export
vast quantities of copper con-
centrates to Japan, under-
mining the prospects for a
copper smelting industry in B.C.

Middle East conflict
subject of city rally

The B.C. Peace Council plans
to hold a meeting on the Arab-
Israeli conflict, Sunday, Sept.
21, 8 p.m. at Pender Audi-
torium, 339 West Pender (top
floor). -

Speaker will be Dr. Hanna
Kassis of the Department of
Religious Studies, UBC.

Beaver Transfer
* Moving
* Packing
* Storage

573 East Hastings St.

This meeting is in response to
a call by the World Peace Coun-
cil for an international day of
support for Arab refugees.

The position of both councils is
that once Israel had been estab-
lished by the U.N., the Arab
world should recognize its exist-
ence and that Israel has a re-
sponsibility for thousands of
Arab refugees it has displaced.
Israel must accept U.N. resolu-
tions and return to a position
inside its own borders.

D HARRI
757 East Hastings St.
Vancouver 4. B.C.
Painters’ and Poperhangers’
Supplies
Sunworthy Wallpaper

Reg. 45c—Now 19c a Roll |

~ Phone 254-3711
So econ steam

| 969—PAGE

‘“‘The Weston and New England power grab of the B.C. fishing industry continu
unabated with the Minister of Fisheries Jack Davis aiding the foreign monopoli
through his salmon licence control program,’’ charged Jack Nichol, business agent fal

With You—All the Way! (FAWU leader hits Davis
ase fish vessel licensing plan

the United Fishermen and Allied Workers Union.

In a statement this week
dealing with Davis’ recent pro-
posals, Nichol said:

“With the two fishing industry
giants already controlling at
least 70 percent of the salmon
processing and marketing side
of the industry the Minister has
framed the means by which the
companies will seize effective
control of the primary produc-
tion section.

“Despite vigorous protests by
the United Fishermen and
Allied Workers Union, Davis
persists in his scheme to licence
salmon fishing vessels rather
than — as the salmon fishermen
demand — the individual fisher
men.

“The union contends that
salmon fishermen of long
standing will be deprived of their
rights while ownership of a
licenced vessel will determine
the right to fish: Ownership will
naturally fall into the hands of
those able to afford the cost of a
licence, e.g. the fishing com
panies.

“Following the Davis Plan’s
inception in September 1968, the
UFAWU demanded and received
a hearing in west coast centres
before the House of Commons
Standing Committee on
Forestry and Fisheries. The
union’s appeal for a full Parlia-
mentary airing of the Davis plan
apparently was to no avail.

“Davis has recently an-
nounced phase 2 of the licencing
program which fails to meet the
objections of the union. Vessels
will continue to be licenced and
to hell with the rights of the
imdividual.

‘Phase I created two classes
of vessels with Class ‘A’ licences
going to vessels that landed
$1,250 worth of fish in either 1967
or 1968. Those with less than the
required production were
labelled class ‘B’ and denied the
privilege of licence transferral
to another vessel.

‘Davis’ latest move requires a
four year landed value totalling
$20,000 in order to maintain the
class ‘A’ licence. Vessels failing
to meet the minimum production
figure will slip to class ‘B’ and
can never be upgraded even if
production improves.

“The first year of record is”

1968 with production in any four
year period after 1972 deter-

mining a vessel’s status.
*_* *

“Salmon fishermen for more
than 25 years have demanded a
limit on salmon licences to
reduce the size of the fleet and
eliminate congestion on the
fishing grounds. Davis’ claims as
one of his objectives a reduction
in the size of the salmon fleet
‘and thereby increasing the fish-
ermen’s income. . .’ And yet his
programme fails to provide a
concrete proposal for reducing
the number of boats.

‘Whatever their annual
production, both class A‘ and
class ‘B’ vessels are free to
continue fishing and perpetuate
the fact that too many boats and
fishermen are employed catch-
ing a limited- number of salmon.

_ ‘His stated objective is a plati-

e
e

tude designed to obscure the
sellout to the fishing monopolies.

“Department of Fisheries fig-
ures showing a reduction of
more than 500 vessels since the
programs introduction are
meaningless statistics.
Registered vessels, these boats
did not report any commercial
salmon landings in 1967-68. Thus
they are not a factor in over-
crowding or in the competition
for the available salmon.

“Tnitially, Davis attempted to
make his plan palatable to
fishermen with the suggestion
that their class ‘A’ licence would
be valuable and an asset they
could sell when retiring from the
industry. The four year, $20,000
production requirements wipes
out this little nest egg for 50
percent of the fishermen, the
estimated number of vessels
that will be relegated to class ‘B’
in four years time. This would
leave between 2,000 and 2,500

vessels which would qualify for
an ‘A’ licence on the basis of the

new production criteria. (There
are ,800 class ‘A’ vessels
presently)’ the Minister claims
. . , these vessels produce well
over 80 percent of total landings’
Davis states.

“And. so nothing really has
changed! The same number of
boats will chase the same
number of salmon and the com-
petition will be more fierce than
ever.

‘However, Mr. Davis believes
that fishermen should pay, and
pay well, for his mythical

' benefits. His phase II proposes a

minimum fee for a _ salmon
licence of $25.00.

“In addition, beginning in 1970,
fishermen will pay a fee of one
percent of the landed value of
their catch, with a further one
percent yearly to a maximum of
five percent by 1974.

“This measure. will surely
meet with stiff opposition from
the already hard pressed salmon
fishermen. Imposed on landed
value this tax applies on that
considerable portion of income
allocated to pay operating
expenses. Promises of increased
earnings from the ‘Davis Plan’
become a hollow joke.

‘Moreover, fishermen could
well become gear poor by
investing in nets and other equip-
ment — which they might
otherwise not purchase — in the
struggle to maintain production
requirements. Expenses would
increase substantially and take
home pay would be reduced
proportionately. Fishermen
driven ever deeper into debt
become likely victims of fore-
closure by the fishing companies
via the highly prevalent, condi-

tional sales agreement.
* * *

“These is evidence to support
the claim of increased invest-
ment in vessel and gear. Another
of the stated objectives of the
Davis plan is to reduce capital
investment in boats which now
stands at more than two dollars

for every dollar of the landed |

September 19th, to considet

value of salmon. That the P
has been a marked falur
regard is demonstrated by
fact that capital investme
vessels has increased by
million dollars since 1968.

“The only likely success
Davis plan will have is to ens
company domination ~
fishermen and control over the
means of primary production.
Regardless of any exceP™
individual fishermen might tak
to either stage of the program
on this issue alone
organized fishermen must fig oe
to defeat the scheme. ee,

“The General
Board of the UFAWU wi
jointly with the union’s fi
regulations committee
Fraser River District CU

‘in

an
neil

proposed phase II.
thoroughly. When policy
formulated and after coms
the union’s locals,
submission will likely )€
to the Minister prior
suggested deadline of
aE

POLLUTION

Cont'd from pg. |

happen when offshore oil
age gets out of hand. At pres
there are no firm guarant
government restrictions
can prevent such a disasté ea
B.C. and federal governme ;
have largely been engage “of
squabble over offshore rig
which has not yet been set”

In the meantime, both 80M
ments are collaboratiNe
opening up the B.C. coast ©
tensive exploration act
by foreign oil monopolies ' yi
the past have shown that
main concern is to find 0! ch
make profits, and not we
the public interest is harm®
the process.

The public should
from both Ottawa and
that they take steps now,
the situation gets out of I
adopt strict policies which
ensure that the public’s 1?
is placed before the profits
oil monopolies, and that 10
tions are adopted which Woy
tect the B.C. coast —
catastrophe.

Ivan Birchard
in Hospital

Ivan Birchard, former bu
manager of the Pacific oe
and for many years a7
fighter in the working class ry rch
ment, is in the Peacé
Hospital, White Rock.

A veteran of World
Birchard came to Bie
Saskatchewan where he P
a leading role in the farm ™
ment during the Thirties: roe
years he played an activé P i
the trade union and Cou
movement in B.C. é
problems compelled hits
become less active. a

The PT joins with h
friends and comrades !" ©
ing their greetings tO
wishing him a speedy re¢

sin