BRITISH COLUMBIA “We're going to serve the people whether they’re senior citizens or child- ren, and no matter what area they live in .... | want to have an open government that listens to people.” Those were the words of mayor-elect Gordon Campbell and his seven- member-plus-one Non Partisan Associa- tion majority on Nov. 17, 1986, two days after the civic election. Now, only six months later, he and his NPA majority on city council, after a secret political “departmental priorities” budget review, have turned a deaf ear to the voice of the people. On May 26, in spite of tremendous opposition from the public, they rammed through budget and service cuts of close to $5 million. What Mayor Campbell and his NPA majority did was offensive; but how they did it was even more offen- sive. More than 70 delegations, represent- ing a broad cross-section of the commun- ity, showed up at the evening session of the council meeting at 7:30 p.m., and wound up staying until nearly 2 a.m. to make their presentations. Following that, the NPA majority forced a debate and vote on the cutbacks package, which finally ended after 3 a.m., on May 27. Committee of Progressive Electors aldermen Eriksen and Davies had repeatedly urged that the meeting be adjourned at a reasonable hour for con- sideration at the next meeting. But Campbell ignored the plea for fair demo- cratic procedure and rushed his cutbacks through. NPA chooses cops over prevention However, as the evening wore on, it became crystal clear that the NPA was determined to ignore public opinion and use their large majority to force the cuts through. Many city council members didn’t even bother, or have the guts, to stand up and defend their position. They sat silent and voted “tyes” to each cut- back. And then, after seven exhausting Libby Bruce Delegation. after delegation, to their credit, stayed until the very end. They told city council the cuts were unneces- sary and that they strongly supported the maintenance of civic jobs and services, In addition, hundreds of citizens took the time to personally write to the mayor and aldermen in opposition to the cuts. Nanaimo Free Press censoring critics Don Nordin, Gabriola Island, writes: One extremely valuable purpose of a community newspaper, often overlooked and under- rated, is to provide for expression of opin- ion by local people in its letters page. Letters to the editor also provide for criticism of fundamental or topical positions which a newspaper takes. Such a forum serves to make the publication accountable to the community it serves. But The Nanaimo Daily Free Press has made it abundantly clear that it considers freedom of expression a privilege, approp- riate only for certain people. ; ' Beginning in March, 1986, when specula- tion was building around rumors of an imminent provincial election, The Free Press imposed virtual total censorship on me, which has continued to this day. Dur- ing that period I sent 11 letters, of which only one was published. And that letter, containing a critique of capitalism and a chastisement of the provincial NDP, The Free Press published with over two thirds of its content edited. Even more insidious, the letter was presented out of context, as if the intent was to score political points against the NDP. Totally refused publication were letters mostly critical of the B.C. Socred party and general right-wing ideology. But also cen- sored was a deserved tribute to the recently- deceased labor activist, Walter Tickson, and some letters on the AIDS crisis. The Free Press has had a long-standing and heavy bias against organized workers and working people which has been extremely evident in the positions taken in its editorials, in the pro-big business slant of the paper, and in its letters-to-the-editor pol- icy. Granted, The Free Press does publish certain letters. It allows frequent access to the idiot right-wing fringe who red-bait any political party, social movement or person 2 e PACIFIC TRIBUNE, JUNE 10, 1987 left of Attila the Hun. It allows some criti- cism of our civic and municipal governmen- tal structures and of sloppy journalism or editorial content. However, The Free Press does not enter- tain criticism or comment, especially of an ongoing nature, which exposes the contra- dictions and immorality of its ideological and philosophical biases and practices. Writers to the editor of The Free Press or similar newspapers should not be discour- aged and censor themselves if their letters are refused publication. Freedom of speech is essential if we as citizens are to overcome the crucial problems and prejudices in our society. We should make it known that it is the prime responsibility of such community newspapers, not only to allow, but to encourage interchange of community opin- ion. To this end I have set up a monitor named “Gabriola Media Watch.” People who are interested in this activity can write meat R.R. 2, Site 57, Box 6, Gabriola, B.C. VOR IXO, or phone 247-9233. Davies Eriksen hours of addresses and debate, the public watched in amazement and horror as so-called “independent” Ald. Carole Taylor — who had voted for all the cutbacks — moved a motion to increase the police department by 75 officers. Even the rest of the NPA couldn’t stomach that kind of outrageous legislation. increase. They settled for 35 extra officers instead, showing that they stand for more law and order in our neighbor- hoods at the expense of firefighters and preventative social programs. The budget cuts at city hall revealed the true face of the NPA: they intend to implement a program of reduced services to the general public to lighten the tax load of their business backers. The mayor’s “positively Campbell” image is very tarnished. Loss of jobs and services are opposed by a vast majority of the public, and many taxpayers feel sold out by the NPA, who have joined with the Socreds in an all-out attack on the rights and services of working people. Campbell will be remembered only as the mayor who raised his own pay, installed a personal shower in his office, and demanded cutbacks and restraints for the people. There is more to come on the NPA political agenda and for the next 18 months we have to work harder to unify community opposition and work for the election of a progressive city government that truly represents, involves and listens to the voters. Recent labor protest of Bills 19 and 20. National Citizens Coalition defends Socred . NCC is manipulative Steve Gidora, Surrey, writes: Citizens should be aware of the contradiction if not the conspiracy contained within the cam- paign of the National Citizens’ Coalition. They are attempting to direct the public against the labor movement’s opposition to Bills 19 and 20. What is totally ludicrous is the coalition’s assertion that they stand for freedom through less government. Ironically, the labor movement and teachers are essentially telling the govern- ment not to intervene in the collective bar- gaining process. Apparently, the National Citizens’ Coalition does not support less government when it means government intervention on behalf of the employers. Their advertising campaign is dishonest and manipulative and can only be regarded as a part of the hidden agenda of Vander Zalm’s chief supporters, the Fraser Institute and the Business Council of B.C. The deceit is even more obvious when one considers that only 50 per cent of the popular vote went to the Socreds and that the content of the legislation was never debated during the election. It should also be remembered that the governments elected in Germany in the 1930s and Italy during the 1920s eventually became dictatorships not because they were — elected to be totalitarian but because they legislated themselves into that position. They did not attack the power of the corpo- rations, they dismantled the rights of organ- ized labor. Perhaps this is why the employers agree with Bills 19 and 20. I suggest that the National Citizens’ Coa- lition is an ideological representative of cor- porate state power, espousing policy and supporting legislation that is anti-working people. When one considers the facts, the stakes become very high. Therefore, we should strengthen our resolve to have these two bills withdrawn. McMurphy a joy for facing Socreds A.C.L. Hughes, Vancouver, writes: With the present provincial and civic governments before us, it becomes clear that no one who cares about his present or future life should ever accept as truth the campaign promises of politicians. With few exceptions, Premier Bill Vander Zalm and his ministers have done exactly the reverse of what they promised during the provincial election campaign. The (Vancouver Mayor Gordon) Camp- bell bunch has followed its leader, the Socred government in Victoria. Don’t wonder why charismatic Bill Vander Zalm refuses to demote (Intergo- vernmental Affairs) Minister (Stephen) Rogers for his “poor white trash” state- ment. It falls in line with how he and upper crust Socreds consider anyone who neither supports them financially nor at the polls. Mr. (former premier W.A.C.) Bennett used to say that the unemployed were “like a sore toe — always with us and incurable.” The idea hasn’t crossed their little minds that more truth and adherence to campaign promises might attract more votes to the Socred camp. Bills 19 and 20 are Vander Zalm’s way of retaliating for the antics of Pat Clarke and the two other male former presidents of the B.C. Teachers Federation who took an unholy delight in badgering the govern- ment. The present incumbent, Elsie McMurphy, is a joy to watch as she refuses to let Educa- tion Minister Tony Brummet bully her. We should be thankful that Vander Zalm is showing his true colors, because now it is clear why voters should defeat him next polling day.