a ere Pe id

Labour

Labour action in coalitions urged

The federal budget, if it contains what is
widely expected, will be a hard blow to the
welfare of Canadians. More important, it
will be the concrete implementation of the
free trade agenda to Americanize Canada,
lower living standards and dismantle social
programs.

For tens of thousands of us, who gave it
our all before, during and in the months
since the federal election, this is no surprise.
The issue now is building a fightback, and
how to overcome the crisis of leadership in
the movement.

The clear answer is to win decisive sec-
tions of the labour movement into active
participation with the coalitions across
Canada that have become the main opposi-
tion to the Tory agenda.

The problem of leadership became visible
during the federal election, when the NDP
missed the boat on free trade. It then
appeared in sharp relief when Shirley Carr
withdrew her previous characterizations of
Brian Mulroney and offered Canadian
Labour Congress participation in “adjust-
ment programs.”

After a speech by CLC vice-president
Nancy Riche to a Vancouver conference at
the end of February on fighting the free
trade agenda, one rather cynical humourist
suggested that a button be printed with the
slogan, “prepare the general retraining pro-
gram.”

“Adjustment programs” were the main
message that Riche took away from the
CLC’s ranking officers’ conference earlier
that month in Toronto, in spite of the fact
that almost all the speakers at the confer-
ence called for stepping up the fight against
the government’s policies and warned of
co-option into the free trade agenda.

The program of action was supposed to
have been changed to reflect the discussion
when it went to the CLC executive council

for adoption. But there were no major.

changes made. That may be academic in
any event for the political action proposals
that were in the program have never the left
the paper they were written on.

The problems of leadership assumed cri-
sis proportions over the unemployment
insurance cuts announced three weeks ago.
As the opening shot on the federal budget,
the UI cuts were the federal Tories’ declara-
tion that the gloves were off, and that the
free trade economy was here.

The NDP federal caucus did a good job
in Parliament exposing the UI cuts and link-
ing them to the free trade agreement. But
other than effective use of question period
for about a week, no action whatsoever has
emanated from the -national NDP. I
remember well the response of the NDP
federal caucus four years ago when the
Tories attacked old age security. Within
days there was a petition circulating out of
NDP offices and pensioner groups were
being mobilized all across the country. That
kind of mobilization, at a minimum, is
expected now.

The role of the CLC leaves far more to be
desired. The CLC’s press statement after
McDougall’s attack on UI is the sum and
substance of their response to date, and the

statement itself balances its criticism of the -

cuts with approval of retraining programs.
The CLC’s response to McDougall was a
masterpiece in doublespeak, to ensure that
one message was sent to the labour move-
ment and another to the government.

A covering press release rapped the
Tories for “punitive and cynical manipula-
tion of the workforce...” But a backup
paper that gives a detailed CLC response to
each of the UI changes comments nega-
tively on four of the new provisions, and
positively on nine of the UI changes.

John MacLennan, in last week’s Tribune
demonstrated how McDougall’s cuts flowed
out of the recommendations of the Cana-
dian Labour Market and Productivity Cen-
tre report, “Business/Labour Task Force
on Adjustment”, which was big on busi-
ness/labour co-operation for retraining
programs. The CLMPC is co-chaired by

MAY DAY GREETINGS

from Local 701, Vancouver
United Transportation Union

| WITH A CABOOSE |

ee

Congratulations
Vancouver & District Labour Council
on 100 years

The UTU is proud to be in the forefront of the campaign for
safety and jobs on the railway. Our union is an active
participant in the CLC fight against deregulation of the
transportation industry.

32 e Pacific Tribune, May 1, 1989

Shirley Carr and fees Council president
Tom D’Aquino. MacLennan’s point, which
bears repeating, is that now that it is known
where the money is coming from to fund the
retraining programs, if the CLC partici-
pates it, too, will be cutting the throats of the
unemployed.

Another report this week is more dis-
quieting. The Financial Post’s Ottawa
bureau chief Hyman Solomon reported
that the CLC leadership knew about the
attack on UI in advance. Noting the two-
sided response to McDougall’s attack on UI
in the CLC press statement, he reports:
“The mixed reaction, designed to keep CLC
doors open, was no accident. Key CLC
officials were kept informed of government
thinking in the lead up to McDougall’s UI
changes. And the policy was structured as
much as possible to prevent surprises and
remain politically acceptable for both
labour and management.”

If that statement is true, it more than
explains the absence of any mobilization by
the CLC against the UI cuts. Even the sug-

- gestion of such collusion demands an
accounting from the CLC leadership.

As it was during the election, the leader-
ship vacuum is being filled by the Canada-
wide coalition, the Pro-Canada Network.
On April 17, the Pro Canada Network
issued the “‘people’s declaration”: “Cana-
da’s First Free Trade Budget — A Decla-
ration and Challenge” (printed in full on
page 12).

The declaration marks an important
advance for the coalition, because for the
first time it has put forward an alternative
political program. The program is limited

and intended to be an alternative to th
present federal budget, but its significance i
in the fact that the broad movement again]
free trade has now found common cause in”
support of a program of popular demand 5:
that provide the basis for ongoing action for
social change.

In Greater Vancouver, the B.C. affiliate”
to the Pro-Canada Network, the Coalition
Against “Free” Trade, with about 80 affili
ated groups, has provided badly needed lead-=
ership. Over the last two weeks, the coalition
has organized two demonstrations against ~
the UI cuts, and a “budget watch” on April ©
27 that intended to bring together a broad —
group of organizations for analysis and the -
development of a fight back program.

In Ottawa, where the Pro-Canada Net
work is based, and in the Lower Mainland
the coalitions are attracting the most tal
ented, far-sighted social activists. They have —
achieved a broad representation and a hi
degree of unity around policy and action.

‘The Victoria Coalition Against Free
Trade is also active, but there are no other
active coalitions I know of in the provin
The CLC and the B.C. Federation of
Labour each have programs calling for the _
building of coalitions, but the record shows
that labour’s official policy to support exist-
ing coalitions and to initiate coalitions —
where they do not exist, is for the most part
a formality without substance.

There is a crisis in leadership facing the
movement, but there is also inspiration
from the growing unity around alternatives
coming out of the still developing Pro- —
Canada coalitions. ia

Many more community organizations,
religious groups, environmental groups
student and women’s groups are still yet to
be brought into the coalition, to join the —
dozens already there. The coalitions unfor- —
tunately exclude political parties, and could ©
be stronger if the New Democratic Party, —
the Communist Party and other parties that
would endorse the PCN’s declaration were
involved directly. However, it is the mobili-
zation of the trade union movement, with
its-wealth of experience and its organiza-
tional power that could make the real dif-

» ference to transform the coalitions into a

genuine people’s majority outside of parli-—
ament. That would provide real leadership —
to block the free trade agenda and present
an alternative for Canada.

Ly OE ME LN, Cece he ne

BM

ce

eee