By PHYLLIS CLARKE TTAWA may have been fog- bound. Parliament Hill might have been tied up by its ‘Usual fog of confusion. But in a | Small hotel in the center of our Nation’s capital something new iS born. As one of the found- “ts said, “We think that people ‘Will say this was a great his- toric event.” About fifty women had come together from as far east as alifax and west as Winnipeg. : legates from further west ened to be lost somewhere in grounding of planes that aS going on that day.) They established a new Cana- ‘Man organization, the Canadian Sumer Protest Association. j llr president, Mrs, Lawrence Nilson of -.Ottawa described a aim .as follows: ie’ objective of this new t “Canadian group is to improve eee level of living of Canadians ; a Coordinating consumer ef- ate and opinions across Can- as In the immediate future ats will be concentrated to pace food prices. To achieve these objectives AN 8roup agreed to use all their ever to pressure all our insti- tions, government, industrial ae especially the retail out- 8, and, in general, influence Ublic opinion.” ey agreed to start off with Country-wide boycott on pack- i dry cereals, to run from €c. 15 to Jan. 5. The women eo they picked this item first Cause of the high profits and aa Continual gimmickry associ- €d with the product. Reise were women with ex- ae already in this fight. N Some important victories. ica. of them were the leading . res in their own area in the : a pickets, petitions on aa paced prices that have stirr- 4 € Canadian scene over the couple of months. ene know that some prices ie come down because of . efforts. They know that a moved the members of the ing te-House Committee study- "8 prices, 7 ad the first session in Ottawa Y were told by Reid Scott, WOMEN MEET IN OTTAWA MP, member of this committee, that a decision had been made for the Senators and members of the House of Commons to go on the road early next year to hear in all centres of Canada what people have to say about the price situation. The women knew that it was their demand that the committee come to them, because they couldn’t af- ford to go to Ottawa, that had brought this decision. Along with Mr. Scott at this Ottawa conference were two other members of the commit- tee, Warren Allmand and Mac T. McCutcheon. These parliamentarians dis- covered very quickly that the women were no slouches when it came to questioning. Why not put a profit limit on companies involved with basic foods? How can you talk about food short- ages when tomatoes and other vegetables are ploughed under? Why do you suggest we do re- search on why prices are high— what are we paying you so much money for? Haven’t you heard enough already to know that something should be done right now? How come you say the workers wages have kept up when all the figures show that even for the organized workers this isn’t the case? The only relief for the MPs came when the chairman cut off the questioning so that the wo- men could get to the business of what they were going to do in the future. This discussion went on until almost one in the morning and all through the next morning, with the press excluded. By the time of the press con- ference’ the next afternoon, an organization was in being. A brief to the joint Senate-House Committee had been prepared. What does it ask for? Truth in marketing, truth in packag- ing. “Standards must be set for package sizes, weights and measures, eliminating fractional ounce sizes making statements easily read and there must be enforcement of these standards.” They recommended a depart- ment of Consumer Aflairs with a minister directly responsible to Parliament with power to in- vestigate any rise in prices to take action to protect the con- sumer. “This,” they say, “could consist of a Prices Review Board made up of a cross section of Canadians.” : “The food industry,” the brief continues, “by its performance, deliberately not giving consum- ers what they want, continually acting to reduce competition, by making excess profits from star- vation and deprivation cannot be allowed to pursue this in- creasingly destructive course. Unfortunately the food selling industry, through its actions has aroused the suspicion and mis- trust of the Canadian public and has forfeited any right to our sympathy.” How did they feel after their meeting? Well, these are some of their comments. From Brantford, Mrs. Royce Woolerton said that she felt they needed a national voice, to mob- ilize the talents, opinions and energy of all those protesting. She said they had started a pe- tition in her area and that. they already had 3,000 signatures. Mrs. L. F. Anderson from Ke- nora spoke on how pleased she was with the meeting. Now, she felt they will organize consum- ers all through north west On- tario. Her group had also been petitioning and had 3,590 names. Mrs. Sue Hammond from the Hamilton and District Consum- ers Protest Association spoke of the support their group had got from the Hamilton Labor Coun- Launch country-wide boycott on packaged dry cereals cil, the Oakville Labor Council, the Teamsters Union and the United Electrical workers union. She said that around Hamilton people were used to picketing and that they knew that strength would come from unity and that this would force the government and the food monopolies to lis- ten to the women. A Laval resident, Mrs. Morri- sette, said she was very impress- ed by the development in Ottawa and she is out to build up in Laval an organization that will have the support of all the con- sumers. League des Femmes, Montreal representative Mrs. Blanche Gelinas, spoke of the picketing that her group had already done and their 3,000 names on a peti- tion. She spoke of the support received from the unions in Montreal. ‘We have the public behind us,’ she added, “when they see us on the picket line, they clap their hands.” The St. John Consumer Pro- test Committee had its represen- tative too. Mr. Raymond Roy, speaking on their behalf also reported on the advantage there would be on having a national body so that all the groups could keep in touch. He said their group too had strong labor support. Mrs. Margaret Rouble, spokes- man for WASP in Toronto spoke of how good the conference was and welcomed the unity that would now exist across the country. ——— as ne + SecA SUE SMARTS cee dO OS EE Sa aaah aaeeeeee . ———— - oo ee From Windsor there was Mrs. Jean Dearing who spoke on be- half of the trade union auxiliary of which she is presidént (Local 444 UAW), the Essex local 374 of the Farmers Union and the Consumer-Producer Association of Essex county. “We can’t em- phasize too much,” she said, - “the importance of this occa- sion.” Mrs.. James Palmer, coming from as she said a low wage area in Halifax, was highly pleased with the conference. She went after the government on the contrast between what hap- pens to companies convicted un- der the Combines Investigation Act, who receive only small fines, and the imprisonment of trade unionists as for example in British Columbia recently. The delegate from Winnipeg, Mrs. Gail Pearase, said, “I’ve certainly got good news to bring back to Manitoba. Now we are united all across Canada.” She said her group now had 38,800 names on a petition and had been endorsed by labor,_ farmers and a number of the city councils in the greater Win- nipeg municipalities. The enthusiasm that this Ot- tawa meeting generated was perhaps best expressed by Mrs. Wilson, who when asked how many people this new organiza- tion spoke for, answered, quietly and firmly, twenty million. We'll certainly be hearing from the Canadian Consumer — Protest Association. Labor-backed candidates score gains in Hamilton Special to the Tribune The results of Hamilton’s Dec. 7 civic elections were a step ahead for labor and a setback for the big monopolies. The number of candidates elected who had been backed by the Hamilton Labor Council jumped from four aldermen in the out- going city council to five alder- men and one controller — SIX out of a total of 2] on the council. Hamilton’s one and only news- paper, the Spectator, pushed for a board of control slate with two big money mouthpieces on it. Only one made it. The push by labor and other democratic people showed a growing Sup- port for the candidates of the Left, including the Communists. The latter was evident in the 7,124 votes received by board of control candidate Harry Hunter — one vote out of every 10 cast. While he did not run as a Com- munist candidate, the press, Ta dio and TV kept talking that "way. Don Stewart, running for al- derman in Ward 4, received over 1,400 votes — 200 more than two years ago — and came in third, with two to be elected. Alderman Pdwell, a steelwork- er, who was endorsed by the labor council and took a very strong position in the fight against pollution, headed the polls. In Ward 7, James Stowe, im- mediate past president of the Hamilton Labor Council, was elected alderman. Brian O’Don- nell, a Westinghouse worker and an NDP member, although not endorsed by the labor coun- cil, ran a very close third among five candidates. During the election campaign the powers that be tried to make it look as though there was a spirited battle going on, while they sat on the lid so that the real issues would not come through. But the big question of December 23, 1966—PACIFIC TRIBUNE—Page 3 whether there will be planning for the people of the community or for big business kept popping up. The mass publicity media blew up the importance of such issues as the early closing of stores, the attraction or loss of indus- try and its alleged effects on city revenue, fluoridation of the city’s water supply, etc. In spite of this, two elected controllers made the question of reforming _ the city’s outdated tax system a> major issue in their campaign. The strong stand taken by Hunter and Stewart that the big profits of industry should be the | chief source of the city’s income proved to be popular and forced the issue out into public debate. However, the mayoralty candi- daies scrupulously avoided this issue and engaged in safe battle. The elections’ showed the © growing influence of the pro- gressives within the labor move- ment and the effects of thei proposals in the community, = =