| _the land. The Act has now — | hb Ll |Ra Hi dinette ae ead —_——_—__—_—- “il Ae ime acl ll Cincets uy (! i. alli “HE national Executive Committee of the Communist Party of Canada submitted a brief recently to the _ Federal Committee of Inquiry into the Unemployment Insurance Act. Because of the wide public- ity being given to the employ- er attacks on the UIC Act, and their intensive campaign to whittle down its scope, the Communist: brief is of particu- lar importance. The Pacific Tribune is pleas- ed to print this abridged ac- count of the brief. We are glad to avail our- selves of the opportunity to present our views on what is, in many respects, the most im- portant piece of social security legislation for the wage and salary earners of this country. It may be well to recall that it took many years of agitation and public pressure in face of stubborn opposition by corpor-| ~ ate interests and governments before the Unemployment In- surance Act became the law of been in operation for 20 years, ample time to draw conclu- sions from its results, to note its defects and to estimate what is required to improve it in light of today’s situation and needs. In our view the Unemploy- ment Insurance Act, notwith- standing its beneficial effects for those who were within its scope, has not stood the test of time, mainly because from its very inception it was based on-a wrong \and in our view, narrow concept. The underly- ing idea behind the Act was that unemployment would be temporary and seasonal and would affect a relatively small group of employed workers. e i The events of the past few - years, however with continu- ing high unemployment of a | seasonal as well as a chronic nature, have challenged this concept and exposed its limita- tions and weaknesses. Unem- ployment, rather than being _ only of a temporary and sea- sonal character, has tended long-lasting and chronic for a growing body of Canadians. In short, the problem of un- employment has changed basic- ally since the Act was first enacted. These basic changes correspond with changes in the Canadian economy. They have to do not only with the operation of what is called the business cycle but with struc- tural changes in the Canadian economy. ‘These are not transient de- velopments that are likely to pass away tomorrow or the next day, notwithstanding the pious statements of the prime minister and the government. They are deep-rooted and have become accentuated by tech-| nological developments, by the ‘beginnings of automation which will undoubtedly be- come wide-spread, by the de- cline in a number of industries and under-capacity production in others, by the constant growth of the labor force as young people complete their schooling and enter the labour market, and not least by the changing pattern of world trade. It is argued in some quarters that the reason for the virtual depletion of the Fund is that it has ceased to be based on the insurance principle;; that it has ceased to be actuarially sound, and that it has become transformed into some kind of welfare fund. Those who ad- vance such views claim that the Act has become too exten- sive in its coverage; that those who operate it are too lax, that some of the unemployed are abusing or misusing the Fund. > This is a completely false argument. If the Fund is low it is due to the fact that un- employment is high. Converse- ly were employment at a high the Fund does not arise from looseness or laxity or from its too extensive coverage. In fact it is not extensive enough and we shall deal with that later. The basic fact is that the virtual bankruptcy of the Fund arises from the inability of the ‘government’ and corporate in- terests to pursue policies of full employment. -Those who argue for an “actuarially sound” Unemploy- ment Insurance Act take the narrow and harmful view that it should cover mainly those who have permanent employ- ment. In that case one might have an actuarially sound Un- employment Insurance Act but it would be meaningless to the unemployment. Nor should one ignore the fact that among those who want to restrict the scope of the Act, there is the desire to build up a substantial ireserve of unemployed with which to depress living stand- ards. What is needed is not to re- strict the Act but to change its basic concept and enlarge its scope in line with the realities of today’s situation. This is really the nub of the problem confronting the commission of inquiry into the principles and generality of the Act. What then should be the un- derlying principles guiding the scope of the Act? It must be all-embracing in that it covers all wage and salary earners. It must ensure adequate maintenance for the unemployed for the entire period of unemployment. This. is both a sound and realistic approach to the prob- lem of unemployment. It is based on the fact that the government by its policies must ensure full employment or adequate maintenance for those who are unemployed. e The unemployed do not choose to be unemployed. They do not create unemployment although they are its immedi- level the Fund likewise would more and more to become be solvent. The depletion of ate and long-term victims. They do not own the plants, How should the Unemployment Insurance Act be changed? mines and mills, nor are they responsible for closing them down. That decision is made by employers. They do not automate plants with its and displacement of manpower. The employers do that because it is highly profitable for them. They do not, as yet, decide those economic, legislative and social policies which may de- termine in large. measure whether they will work or not. The government does that. In these circumstances to equate unemployment insur- ance as some kind of personal insurance policy, as if it were a private matter which could be resolved by the individual, begs the question, penalizes the unemployed and does incalcul- able harm to the Canadian economy. Unemployment insurance must not be considered narrow- ly but in its broadest concept as a form and part of a social security system; that part which guarantees adequate maintenance for the unemploy- ed for the entire period of un- employment. It is social insur- ance and ought to become a basic right for all wage and salary earners, young people coming out of schools and colleges who have been unable to find work. S To sum up. Approaching the Act as a form of social secur- ity, as social insurance to pro- tect the workers and salary earners from the ravages of unemployment for which they are not responsible, holding to Not in Heaven The minister had been giv- ing his congregation a thum- nail sketch of the glories of Heaven, winding up with the reminder that “there will be no buying and selling in Heaven,” to which a portly gentleman in one of the back pews was heard to mutter: “That’s not where business has consequent lay-offs) including all | the view that government policy must be directed to en- suring work or adequate main- tenance for the unemployed, we make the following recom- mendations: : (1) The scope of the Act shall be enlarged to include all persons working for wages or salaries. (2) Unemployment Insurance . should be paid to the amount of two-thirds of a person’s weekly wage or salary at which he or she was last em- ployed. (3) Such payments should start from the first day of un- employment and continue for the entire period of unemploy- ment. : (4) The Act should include the right of an unemployed person to. an allowable income equal to that of his or her wage or salary at last place of employment. (5) Benefits should continu- ally be reviewed and increased as living costs rise. (6) All young people coming out of schools or colleges or — having reached the working age and who have been unable to find work should be cover- ed by the Act. | (7) Unemployment Insurance benefits should not be condi- tional upon the acceptance of a job which does not corres- pond to the qualifications of the person concerned; nor should the NES refer appli- cants to employers whose reg- ular employees are on strike. (8) There shall be no dis- qualification from the benefits of the Act due to illness. (9) There shall be no disqual- ification from the benefits of the Act resulting from unem- ployment due to work stop- page, either because of a lock-. out by employers or respect for a picket line. (10) The present division of contributions to the Fund should be ehanged. Govern- ment and .employers should contribute 40-40 each and em- ployees 20 percent with the government assuming full cost gone to anyway.” of administration. q housands of Canadian bus- a inessmen and _household- _ ers recently received a sucker ' sheet, showing how to make $86,968.00 on an investment of $500.00. All that is necessary, it Seems, is to have known in 1945, that the Gunnar Mines shares which you could buy ‘| at that time for twelve cents _ a share, would, sixteen years _ later be worth $21.00 a share. i Apparently if you had sub- _ Scribed to the financial ser- vice of the Argus Securities Limited, they would have been able to make that remark- able forecast for you, and you’d have had it made. Not only that, but your pro- s how to turn $500 into fit would be tax-free. Canada, says this sucker sheet, “fis one of the few countries in the world’ where millions of dol- lars can be made in the stock market WITHOUT PAYING A: CENT in Capital Gains Tax’. ‘ This is said to be one of the reasons for the “flood of American investment capital, estimated at over $15 billion.” This is an exact quote. The capitalization of the words “billions and dollars” is cour- tesy of Argus Securities, thank you, e 1t.45 comforting to know that those widows and crph- ans who took the advice of the investment dealers and bought Gunnar Gold in 1945 are now rich. This knowledge is temp- ered only a little bit by the fact that those widows who took the equally cogent ad- vice of the dealers and bought, for example, Congress Gold that year for thirty cents, or Norpick for forty-four cents, ended up with a piece of paper good only for lighting your pipe. i The theme of the brochure is that anybody can make tax- free capital gains by making small. investments under the guidance of their broker. The fact is that most of such invest- ors lose money. This is partic- ularly true in mining, where a a there are several mining com- panies that go bankrupt for every one that succeeds. The tax-free aspect of the capital gains works equally well, however, for the Wall Street investors who rarely take much risk. Take for ex- ample, the West Coast:Trans- mission pipeline. iat When its stock was first is- sued, the Sunray Oil Company of Tulsa, Oklahoma was giv- en 148,438 shares at five cents per share, a total investment of less than $7,500. The cer- tainty of profit was guaran- teed by contracts with the B.C. ‘Electric monopoly, and with the owners of the oilfields plus orders of the Public Util- ities Commission conferring a monopoly on the company ‘and fixing prices on the gas. Today those five cent shares are worth $17.00 each and there is not one cent of tax paid out on the thirty-four thousand percent capital gain realized. . =. Capital gains do not mater- ialize out of thin air. There is no magic in the stock market