nn Tee

UNDER PRESENT FOREST
POLICIES millions of acres of our

St’ Crown-owned lands have

en turned over to a few giant
Monopolies, most of them U.S.
Owned. Tree Farm Licences are
Glven for 21 years at one cent an
acre per year. It’s time these
Policies were changed.

LATEST REPORT SHOWS

Present forestry policies
avor large corporations

ByMAURICE RUSH

Present forest tenure policies
favor the big forest companies in
B.C. and ‘‘give them an un-
balanced advantage’ says the
latest policy background paper
prepared by the Task Force on
Crown Timber Disposal, headed by
Dr. Peter Pearse. The report was
tabled in the legislature by
resources minister Bob Williams
recently.

Headed ‘‘Forest Tenures in
B.C.,” the report will be used as a
background paper in a further
inquiry into forest policy to be
carried out later this year.

The report says that the ex-
tensive tracts of forest lands that
are licenced to large companies —
such as Pulp Leases, Tree Farm
Licences and Pulpwood Har-
vesting Agreements ‘‘provide
rights to Crown timber on
generally more favorable terms
than the tenures held by smaller
operators.”

It adds that the giant forest
companies under these licences
have longer terms of exclusive
rights without competitive bidding,
and that these terms have
“provided better timber at con-
siderably lower prices’ for the

giant companies, many of which
are U.S. owned.

The report points out that under
the Tree Farm Licences and other
forms of tenures the “‘large firms
acquired a large proportion of the
Crown-granted timberlands which
carry little or no royalty”’ and are
subject to much less demanding
regulatory controls by the
provincial government.

The present forest tenure system
is a carryover from the earlier
Liberal-Tory Coalition government
and 20 years of the Socreds. Under
these governments forest
legislation was adopted which
handed over to a handful of big
corporations the bulk of B.C.’s best
Crown-owned forest lands running
into many millions of acres.

In a brief submitted by the
Communist Party to the last Royal
Commission on Forestry it
charged that under legislation
setting out forest tenure policy a
few corporations were handed
control over B.C.’s forests and that
the legislation favored the giant
monopolies. The statements in the
latest Pearse Report appear to
confirm that charge in the Com-
munist Party brief.

The report deals extensively

TEACHERS SHOW HOW
Making our schools run

By FRED WILSON

The education system is the most
©ostly public service in the
Province of British Columbia. The
jumate in the provincial budget
or 1975-1976 is a staggering
374,200,000. Yet even this is a sum
&r below the actual] needs of a
Modern educational system.
ducation financing, where the
Money comes from, and how it will
Spent, is consequently a priority
Matter that the provincial
povernment must decide upon
its the very beginning in setting
Course as a government.
he aking our schools run is a task
i immense proportions. Not only
S it the largest spending item in
f © government’s budget, it is also
‘ € main determinant of
Sidential taxes and a major

_ Source of the financial crisis in

Municipalities.
: Above all, education financing is
Political issue. It figured large

_ “ough to be a major contributing

factor to the defeat of Social

| Credit. For the present NDP

evernment, even after
fp winating the regressive features
the Socred approach to
Ucation, it remains a hot issue.
a“ 1s the case in many areas, the
ticism directed at the provincial
S0vernment is not a matter of
licy, But rather, implementing
mle? and living up to’ election
. Ses is the sore point that has
een fire from the labor
Vement and from the B.C.
“achers Federation in particular.
hile reduction of the pupil-

‘ cher ratio is the issue that has
Tabbed most headline space,

followed by the failure of the

80vernment to remove schools and

the, family farm, these in
€mselves do not tell the story.

yond the: immediate issues of

the day there is the general

rogram of the government. for
Perating the schools in the
pevinee. At this level the issues
volved are more complex.
To this date, the most thorough

investigation into what makes our
schools run, and what should make
them run, has been provided by the
B.C. Teachers Federation. Barely
weeks old, the policies adopted by
the BCTF at their annual general
meeting updates and extends
previous policy and gives us some
insight as to where the continued
progressive development of
education financing will lead us.

* * *

First, some general principles.
Under the BNA Act, the provincial
government is responsible for
education. The government
delegates responsibility to operate
the school system to local school
boards, elected at the municipal
level. :

The money to do this comes from
two sources. The provincial
government provides a system of
grants to the boards (which as
noted above will total over $700
million this year) and this in turn is
supplemented by local school taxes
on real property. In other words,
the money comes from a provincial
grant and a municipal tax. ;

It is’ here that the problem
begins. In 1973 the provincial
government’s share of the total
cost was 45%, and it is estimated
that the provincial share could be
reduced to 42% by the end of 1975.
While the provincial government
commands tremendous resources
and ability to tax, the greater part
of the burden of education is placed
onthe municipality — that level of
government which has the
narrowest tax base. It is also at
that level where taxes are most
visible — on the residential home.

The result of such a system is
that education suffers. Each year
school boards must plead with
provincial and civic governments
for more money. Programs are
dropped, schools become crowded,
teachers and other school board
employees are denied decent pay
increases. Right wing demagogues
play on the emotions of the tax-
payer, relating increased spending

local

for education to the annual tax on
his home. |

What would seem to be the most
reasonable solution — that the
provincial government assume a
larger portion of education costs —
is just what the BCTF concluded.
“The very nature of education
financing is a function of the will of
the provincial government,” the
BCTF report states, ‘difficulties
faced by boards in raising the local
share of financing education could
be overcome if the provincial
government provided a
significantly greater share of the
cost.”

How much more? The teacher’s
organization says the provincial
share should rise to 80% by 1980.
That would amount to nearly
double the present contribution.

Lest such a development toward
provincial financing would erode
control over school
operations, the teachers went on to
insist that the all important local
control ‘‘be guaranteed in
legislation.”

Also a matter of local control is
the question of authority. ‘‘With
responsibility must
authority,’ they point out. In the
ease of financing from the local
level it would mean the ability to
raise a proper sum of money at the
civic level through a majority
decision of the local school board.

a ks ae

Another major problem in the
financing system is what the
teachers term
sacrifice.”’ Actually it is the
inequality of sacrifice stemming
from the unequal tax assessment
throughout the province. At
present school boards in low in-
come areas are required to levy
higher taxes to maintain the level
of education offered in the
wealthier areas.

The BCTF offers two methods to
ameliorate this problem. The first
is to expand the application of the
property tax to all property in-

See TEACHERS, pg. 12

come —

“equality of »

with Tree Farm Licenses which
cover some of B.C.’s best timber
areas. A map accompanying the
report shows that these licences
have parcelled out nearly all of
Vancouver Island, most. of the
Queen Charlottes, the best blocks
of forest lands up and down the
coast of B.C., and large blocks in
the Kootenays.

The Tree Farm Licence
legislation has come under the
most severe public criticism every
since it was first introduced by the
Coalition government as an
amendment to the Forestry Act.
They. were first called Forest
Management Licences and were
granted in perpetuity for one cent
an acre per year.

Because of the public outcry
against the wholesale giveaway of
Crown forest lands under these
ripoff arrangements, the name of
the licences were changed to Tree

Farm Licences and they were

limited to 21 years. They are still
required to pay only one cent an
acre per year and enjoy special
privileges on stumpage royalties.

The report shows that the timber
taken from lands under Tree Farm
Licences increased by 103 per cent
between 1961 and 1973. At the same
time the 41 licences originally
granted have now been reduced to
34 as a result of the larger licen-
cees (meaning corporations)
taking over the smaller ones.

For many years the Communist
Party in B.C. has been urging that
the present Tree Farm Licences be
phased out and that B.C.’s Forest
Service be expanded to farm these
Crown-owned lands on a sustained
yield basis, and sell the mature
timber by auction to the highest
bidder, thus ensuring public
control of these forest lands. At the
same time this would guarantee
the largest possible return to the
public from its own forest
resources.

The possibilities for carrying out
a policy of phasing out the Tree
Farm Licences is now appearing.

CONS

The Pearse Report points out that

- of the 34 licences, 20 of them expire

in 1979. This constitutes the
majority of them. The rest of the 14
licences expire at the rate of one or
two a year until the year 1992.

If a decision is to be made to

cancel the Tree Farm Licences
and replace them by a form of
tenure more in keeping with the
interests of the people of B.C., it
will have to come within the next
three to four years.

The Pearse Report points out
that tracts of forest land held by
these licences is immense. Five of
them exceed a million acres and
one licence covers 6.6 million
acres. '

Another aspect of the report
which merits some attention is a
chart showing the major uses of
timber. This is particularly im-
portant in light of the recom-
mendation made by the late Chief
Justice Sloan in his original report
over 20 years ago, that more
manufacturing be developed from
B.C.’s forest resources in order to
strengthen the province’s economy
and provide a wider base for
employment in B.C.

The report shows that despite
that recommendation, the
province is making no significant
headway in processing and
developing industries based on our
forest resource. The chart shows
that the turning of logs into lumber
still accounts for 53 per cent of total
forest production; plywood for only
seven per cent; and pulp and
newsprint 40 per cent (more than
half of the latter from sawmill
residues. )

The more the true facts are
revealed about the state of affairs
in B.C.’s forest industry the more
they point to the urgent need for
the provincial government to
initiate a complete overhaul of the
industry, which must include not
only forest tenure and royalties,
but also policies to promote
manufacturing.

TL
MILK
— KINDNE So
(OK A
IPALED:

ee

of WN

Rupert /

STILL FIGHTING for money for education. Photo shows Surrey
teachers demonstrating in Victoria, February 15, 1974 asking for more
money for education. At the recent teachers’ convention a plan for

this page.

‘education financing was outlined, which is explained in the article on

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—FRIDAY, APRIL 11, 1975—Page 3