x ut is following article, trans- lated by the Canadian Tribune, is to appear in the next issue of Combat as the regular column, “Sur la scéne québecoise” (On the Quebec Scene), written by Sam Walsh, president of the Communist Party of Quebec: Yes, it’s an affront to Quebec society—that is, the shameful conduct of Messrs. Bertrand and Cardinal! Let’s review the state- ments and counter-statements concerning the decision of the Protestant School Board of Greater Montreal (PSBGM) to accept the first and second year pupils for whom instruction in the English language had been refused by the Catholic School Commission of Saint Léonard. Mr. Luc Beauregard, the prin- cipal and official spokesman of Mr. Jean-Guy Cardinal, Quebec’s Minister of Education, cites his chief to the effect that this ges- ture made by the PSBGM is an affront to French-Canadian so- ciety, One week later, with Mr. Car- dinal at his side, Premier Jac- ques Bertrand declared flatly that. neither Mr. Cardinal nor anyone in his department hyd made or authorised any such statement. Mr. Cardinal vigor- ously indicated that Mr. Ber- trand was correct. : _The following day the same spokesman repeated that this gesture is a kind of affront to Quebec society, and that Mr. Bertrand had been mistaken, _ that Mr. Cardinal had indeed authorised such a statement. It was now Bertrand’s bid, he chose to believe his minister himself rather than his spokes- man. He passed. What a sorry spectacle of an unprincipled, spineless govern- ment! Let’s. recall that what’s at stake is the acquired right of parents to have their children taught in English. In the specific case of St. Léonard, the major- ity of these parents are of Ital- ian origin, workers, often in the construction trades, a seasonal industry. Why do they wish to continue tvuaaceecteeeanteeaeeugccsqegeeeceocueeenaeeeceneanceccceatacaeezuaccaceecceuocecenugcenutnusuuaaacasy | Quebec govt at fault © to have their children taught in English when for an Italian it is easier to learn French? Because the principal lan- guage of work, above all in Montreal, is English, the result of the fact that the main em- ployers, the big bourgeoisie, are in the majority Anglo-Canadian or American. Secondly, if you have to move away because there’s no work, English is obligatory. : Is it right that English should be the main language of work in Quebec? No. The roots of this flagrant injustice go back to the British conquest over two hundred years ago, and the dis- placement of French employers by English ones. There is only one just and lasting solution to this problem —the nationalisation of all key industries. Quebecers would then become truly masters in their own house, and would be assured of the possibility of working in the national lan- guage. To attempt to reduce this problem to a question of lan- guage, of the survival of the French language, leads to er- rors, to chauvinism, even to racism. Let’s take the case of the Italians. According to the report of the Royal Commission of En- quiry into Bilingualism and ‘Bi- culturalism (a section unpublish- ed, but revealed by a Montreal newspaper), Quebecers of Ital- ian origin are, with the Indians and Eskimos, the only ethnic group with an annual. income lower than that of French- Canadians. Is it against these people that French-Canadians should fight to reclaim their heritage? Is it into the areas where these heavily- exploited workers live that French - Canadian nationalists should march in provocation, smashing windows, following the despicable example of the Protestant fanatics of Belfast? And with what chauvinistic and insulting slogans! (Here the writer quotes the inciting remarks of Mme. An- Ukraine Dr drée Ferretti, the titular head of the Front de Libération Popu- laire, made in a speech a few days before “this shameful march.” These were reported in the Canadian Tribune of Sep- tember 17 last. They concluded with these two statements of Mme. Ferretti: “And the immi- grants who seek to integrate in- to the society of Quebec, let them learn French, the language of Quebecers. The others have no rights and our duty is to fight them.’’) Happily, the majority of French-Canadians do not want to inflict on a minority the na- tional oppression they them- selves have suffered. And Ferretti calls herself a “Marxist’! As for Michel Chartrand, pre- sident of the Montreal Central Council of the Confederation of . National Trade Unions, what is there to be said about his anar- chist-nationalistic gestures in supporting this demonstration (ed. note: the Sep. 10 march of the Ligue pour Il’intégration sco- laire in Saint Léonard) because it involved the right to demon- strate? Has he also sent a gift to the demonstrators organized by the reactionary Protestants who almost provoked a civil war in Northern Ireland? Has he for- gotten that the struggle for de- mocratic rights is part of the class struggle, and that it should never seek to divide workers ac- cording to nationality, color, or religion? To return to our pitiful gov- ernment which hides behind tha Gendron Commission on the Survival of the French Language as the excuse for doing nothing either to defend the rights of the English-speaking minority, whatever its national origin. There is nothing to prevent this government from adopting such legislation, instead of throwing the blame for its para- ‘lysis, now on Mr. Cardinal, now on Mr. Bertrand, while await- ing the Gendron Report which cold drag out for five years. To permit the situation thus to rot- ten, this is the real affront to Quebec society! The truth and the lie Recently the Winnipeg Free Press carried an item that the World Congress of Free Ukraini- ans is organizing a relief com- mittee, supposedly to provide aid for the people in the “flood distressed areas in the Ukraine.” Dr. Michael Sosnowsky, exec- utive director of the Congress, said that he had received reliable information that a recent flood had devastated four provinces in the Ukraine and, he said, that efforts to send assistance are being frustrated by Moscow. This is old stuff, of course. We've had these kind of stories from the same sources for a long time. A recent story in Moscow News (20.9.69) carries informa- tion that gives the lie to the World Congress of Free Ukraini- ans. Under the title “The 1969 Harvest” Mr. P. Zabazny, Deputy Head of the U.S.S.R. Ministry of Agriculture’s Chief Grain Ad- ministration, said: “Harvesting has ended in the Ukraine, Moldavia, the Central Asian Republic and Transcauca- sia .. . Not only individual farms, but many districts and regions and a number of Union Repub- lics have completed their quotas for selling grain to the state and are now delivering it over and above the plan. This is advanta- geous for the farms, because the state pays 50 percent more for grain purchased in excess of the planned amount... “From the very start of the year weather has posed serious problems to the farmers, espe- cially in the growing of grain crops. Dust storms, bitter frosts without snow, and a.coating of ice on the ground during the winter in most of the southern areas, all inflicted great damage on the winter grain crops. The prolonged and cold spring, cou- pled with the re-sowing of the perished winter crops over con- siderable areas created addition- al problems for the spring sow- ing campaign. In some areas of the country hot weather prevail- ed at the most important period of grain-formation, while in most of the other areas cold and rainy weather checked the ripening of PACIFIC RENE eee 3; Aner ae 4 agricultural crops. “Such weather conditions could have led to the ruin of many farms, if they had been individual farms. But that, na- turally, did not happen in the U.S.S.R. with its large-scale planned socialist farming’ “A number of state and col- lective farms suffered material loss, which is to be made up to them, mainly at the expense of the state. The state gave much assistance to the areas. which were hit by unfavorable weather. For example, spring crop seeds were supplied to replace the win- ter crops which had perished, as well as additional machinery, mineral fertilizers and other things. Thanks to this aid, the collective and state farms ful- filled the plan for spring sowing, re-sowed the perished winter crops with the highest yield grain crops and cultivated the sown crops well . “There has been a good har- vest of grain crops in many Re- publics—The Ukraine, Moldavia, Byelorussia. . . .” Super profits —the magnet of the North As the demand grows for the Canadian government to force- fully affirm our sovereignty over the Northwest Passage, the Tri- bune publishes the following article from our London corres- pondent John Williamson deal- ing with the great U.S. oil mono- polies who are behind the voy- age of the Manhattan. @ By JOHN WILLIAMSON The saga of the North West Passage has at last been trans- formed from a dream to a reality. The reconstructed super- tanker. ‘Manhattan,’ - 150,000 tons and 1,000 feet long, became the first commercial vessel to ‘negotiate the trip from the At- lantic to Alaska via’ the North West Passage. Starting in 1553 with the ef- fort of Sir Hugh Willoughby to pioneer this waterway, each of the succeeding years was dot- ted with heroic but unsuccess- ful efforts. The names of Davis, Barents, Carlson, Hudson, Mac- kenzie, Barrow, Franklin, Parry, Ross, Collinson, Belcher and. Amundsen — mostly subsidized by Britain — are written into Arctic history in this effort. After the turn of the century, U.S. imperialism joined in. The final success of the “‘Man- hattan,” reconstructed and out- fitted at a cost of $41,600,000 to the Humble Oil and Refining Co., was spurred on by the opening of a new expected El- dorado — but this time of “Black Gold.” Ifthe Humble Oil Co. was not so successful in bidding for the choice tracts of potential oil lands in the North Slope of Alaska earlier this month, it can hope by cornering the transport of oil to the East Coast of the U.S.A. at substan- tially reduced cost to provide itself with handsome profits. Both British and American oil companies are fighting to be on the inside of this expected new bonanza. The Observer com- ments that “No one company seems better placed . . . than British Petroleum ... It has a fistful of aces.” With the aver- ‘age U.S. oil well producing 15 to 20 barrels a day, the predicted eventual 15,000 barrels a day per well in Alaska have made the already avaricious oil mil- lionaires stark, raving mad. It is predicted that the cost per barrel at well-head will be 3.9 cents and profits could be 9.7 cents a barrel in Los Angeles and 8.9 cents in Chicago. This is considerably below present U.S. figures. ; In the 37-mile stretch along the Beaufort Sea, America’s 49th state of Alaska sold at auc- tion in mid-September 450,000 acres of permanently frozen land for $975. million. This averaged $2,158 an acre al- though the single highest price was $31,200 per acre, paid by the Paul Getty interests. British Petroleum (BP) jointly with Gulf Oil, bought six of the choicest locations for $104 mil- lion and a second tract for $20.8 million. But Paul Getty in com- bination with the Amerado-Hess interests topped all others by paying $78 million for a single tract of land. Standard Oil, Shell, Texaco, Atlantic-Richfield, Continental, Humble, Mobil and Phillips — some in combinations — were the other principal buy- ers. What lay behind this new ‘successful discovery of oil ‘member of Eisenhower" e feverish competition was we year ago at Prudhoe Bay byt American companies —Atlan athe Richfield and Humble — and his big find by BP in March of t year. BP expects producti’ 450,000 barrels a day eatly | the ’70s: It is estimated that these reserves hold 10,000 ™ lion barrels of oil and that pn total reserves of the Arctic may go as high as 330,000 ™ 3 lion barrels. The contrast between a Klondike Gold Rush 10 196) | Yukon in 1898 and the ne | Alaska Oil Rush _ reflects ae present-day dominance of mis ist poly power in the capita world. In the 1890's, it was 0 individual gold miners val fought with tooth and © 8. against the elements and ae themselves to establish ne claims. To persevere they BY ed not only skill but plete brawn and muscle and ' ff good with their six-shoote ‘and well as with their pick shovel. Today there descended % Anchorage the homburg bowler-hat brigade of the o dustry. The Times despatch § “Hotel registration books 3 like a ‘Who's Who’ of the ° industry.” President Nixon’s secretary ® wel Interior, Walter Hickel, 0 Governor of Alaska, trie ii laugh off the charge of Big Bu a ness exploitation of Alaské sled saying, “We have our so-cal robber barons. They are a ones who get things done he kept quiet on the fact. was one of these ‘robber bar? i Robert Anderson of the Atlant Richfield Oil Co. and a fo ms Es s ie net, who recommended it Nixon to be Secretary % — terior. nf | These modern robber sr ‘ with the connivance of °* and federal governments, J gleeful at the opportuni eo loot the public domain of : This’ land, on which the Alaskans — the Eskimos, and Indians — had live ing years and were now ke ; driven from, brought the Ala si state treasury in one day 7 times its entire annual bude’ Representatives of the Alase Federation of Natives Feil the auction with signs re4 : “$2 Billion Native Land we bery.” This protest dates b ico 102 years to the time AM@M bought Alaska from Russia for $7 million. constr 1 at that time undertook to put pensate the local population" nothing ever happened. re In 1959 when Alaska hot made a state, Congress aut Oe ized them to exploit as they She fit 103 million acres, whilé wuld rest of the public domain V remain legally frozen unti land claims of the 60,000 population were settled. ae then Governor Hickel chos¢ cle: oil lands in the Arctic cir é Today, even the U.S. New mits that the winter rate ° employment among the ® population is 50 to 60 pe nde ie The Telegraph correspon said the demonstrations ‘ tized the social and econ qhe problems facing the state. ted stench of oil, long associ with super profits ‘and wal, again in the Arctic Circle. vat a.