EDITORIAL

Get Canada out of NORAD

The one way Canada’s government
should not begin its relationship with the
right-wing Reagan administration in the
USA, is by servilely bowing to
‘Washington and Pentagon pressure.

President Reagan is due in Ottawa ina
few days, and inside reports have it that
one of the “concrete” achievements will
be the signing of a five-year renewal of
the odious North American Air Defence
agreement, over the heads of the Cana-
dian people, who have had no say in the
matter. ee

There was so much public pressure
last May against what amounts to signing
our sovereignty over the USA, that the
deal was renewed for only one year.
Now, apparently, the U.S. hawks, feeling
a surge of power under Reagan, con-
sider the time ripe to force Canada into a
sae commitment. And, if it is to be
settled during Reagan’s visit that means
it has been pushed ahead two months to
snuff out public protest. That protest
should proceed at once, demanding:
Canada out of NORAD!

Some years back, a lengthy editorial”
pointed out the inequities of NORAD,
and how it could be used by the USA to

commit Canada to war without Canadian

approval or even knowledge. The final

paragraph read:

“Withdrawal from NORAD would
certainly save us a great deal of money. It
might teach the U.S. Government that if
it wants partners to share the burden of
mutual defence, it must treat them as
partners and not as vassals.”

That editorial in Toronto's Globe and
Mail, Jan. 3, 1963, had no quarrel with
U.S. policy, but it correctly made the
point about Canada’s independence.

If it was costing us “a great deal of
money” in 1963 it’s costing a fortune
now. And what has NORAD defended
us against in all those years of wasted
Spenauig? On the contrary, it has more
than once come close to launching us,
unquestioningly, into a war because of a
faulty computer — or was it hawk gener-
als testing “limits”.

Ask Canadians, “Would you put your

life in the hands of Ronald Reagan or.

General Haig?” Surely no one would be
so foolish. Yet, that is what Ottawa is
committing us to if it renews the deadly
NORAD pact.

The time to cry “stop!” is right now.

Protect consumer rights.

Working-class consumers across
Canada are expressing renewed anger
and a readiness to fight back against un-
controlled price increases for necessities.

No one has to be told that prices are
soaring and that the basic of basics, food,
is a pace-setter. Already a great many
people have found the Roll Back Prices
on Food postcard addressed to the prime
minister, a means of rallying a multitude
of consumers eager to protest. (The
cards are circulated by Women Against
Rising Prices, and in French Canada by
FOLI — femmes organisées luttent con-
tre l’inflation.)

But a new element has appeared,
which serves not only to heat up con-
sumer anger and spur determination,
but to provide the basis of ironic com-
parison. A recent Financial Post Study
sums up our anguish of the 10 years,
1970-80, with the unbelievable true
figures on price increases during that
period.

Ofcourse the daily needs of every fam-
ily are where the profiteers raked in their
biggest hauls: food, housing, transporta-
tion, health and personal care, reading,
education and clothing. A quick sam-
pler: sugar prices jumped 443%; honey
and syrup, 263%; powdered skim milk,
259%; apples, 241%; fish, 232%;

potatoes, 216%. In other fields, housing

and furnishings rose 110%; home-
owners’ insurance premiums, 354%;
tenants’ insurance premiums, 216%;
transportation costs on average, 109%;
but gasoline for cars and trucks, 149%;
health and personal care, 103%; but de-
ntal work, 145%; recreation, reading
and education, 79%; and clothing 81%.

Simply put, the corporations have the
right to carry on this daylight robbery,
and the consumers have the right to pay.
That’s known as human rights. Capitalist
institutions and apologists continually
PACIFIC TRIBUNE—MARCH 13, 1981—Page 4

harp on such rights, and shake a finger at
the rights of Soviet people. '

However, the human rights song and
dance are brought to you by the same
people who brought you a 163% increase
in the overall price of foods in the past
decade.

Yet, as Canadians recently learned, if
they didn’t rely on the “managed” media
for information, medical care and edu-

cation in the USSR are free; public —

transport remains at approximately its
1930s level; rents (averaging $20-$30 a
month) have not risen since 1928; food
and clothing are maintained at low

. prices.

The question is: whose rights are_
being trampled, and whose upheld?
Who is being controlled, and who is

doing the controlling? Good questions to

ask as more and more profiteers are ex-_

posed in Canada.

Nationalize
— the lot!

The question of how to reimburse citi-
zens who have been systematically rob-
bed by the multi-national oil corpora-
tions — above and beyond the call of
ordinary super-profits (i.e.; through -
price-fixing) — is sure to elicit many
proposals. The most even-handed solu-
tion, instead of confronting the impossi-

_ ble task of rebates to buyers, whould be

to nationalize the whole lot, so that ever
after, the returns on oil which rightfully
belongs to the Canadian people, can be
shared by all. Never has there been a
stronger argument for nationalization of
these monopolies, under democratic
control.

“Don’t MESS it! YES it!” Ss |

Uh.

Flashbacks

25 years ago... 50 years ago... :

MEN-WOMEN WAGE
GAP STARTLING

Women working in manufac-
turing receive an average $25
less per week than men. The ac-
tual spread (Oct. 1954 figures)
show that men earned an aver-
age of $63.98 a week compared
to $53.90 for women.

The same relationship held
true for office and_ salaried
workers which showed an aver-
age of $28 a week difference.

Lowest average manufactur-
ing wages for women were in
Newfoundland — $21 per week
for women, $61 for men —a $40
spread. ;

Winnipeg has the lowest:

wages of the large centres at

$33.70 with Montreal next at Sq

$35.30 and Hamilton and Van-

couver at $40. Waitresses in To-

ronto with 20 years’ experience
are offered $19 a week.

Tribune,

March 5, 1956

Profiteer of the week |

TRICKS TOSTOP —
MEETING FAILED —

Just as in all other cities, Re
gina workers prepared for mas*
demonstrations Feb. 25th. The
bosses also prepared by bringing
in police reserves to terrorize thé
workers. a

In an effort to cripple the dé
monstration employers’ distil
buted theatre tickets for pel
formances on the day of thé
meeting to all unemploye®
workers. All leading people ™
the unemployed organizatio?
were given jobs for that day. Thé
British Workers’ Associatio!
and Ukrainian fascists serve?
the bosses well trying to keep
workers away from Markel
uare. ee !
All these attempts failed and
about 4,00 workers gathered of
the square at a meeting whic)
lasted two hours.

The Workeh
March 7, 193!

Loblaw Companies Ltd., which owns Loblaws Ltd., which owns Food
Markets Holdings Ltd., which owns or controls Power stores, Nation@!
Grocers, York Trading, etc., had an after-tax profit for the year end ; |
Jan. 3, 1981, of $34,081,000. Somewhat better than the previous year
$22,866,000. That’s a lot of food dollars caught between the consume!
and the producer. :

Editor — SEAN GRIFFIN
Associate Editor — FRED WILSON
Business and Circulation Manager — PAT O'CONNOR

Published weekly at Suite 101 — 1416 Commercial Drive,
Vancouver, B.C. V5L 3X9. Phone 251-1186

Subscription Rate: Canada $12 one year; $7 for six months.
All other countries, $15 one year.

Second class mail registration number 1560