RESP Ee ARNIS CLES oT 8 2 i 3 d REVISED COLUMBIA PACT ANALYSED Treaty changes aim to mask sellout On January 22, 1964, the gov- ernments of Canada and British Columbia issued a joint press release in connection with the signing of a protocol to the draft Columbia River Treaty. In it they state: ‘*The achieve- ment of today’s agreement is an example of co-operative federal- ism effectively at work. It was founded on the two governments’ common determination to secure maximun benefit to the national and provincial interest. This ob- jective has now been met.”’ This is a lie, plain and sim- ple! The protocol in no funda- mental way alter the basic na- ture of the draft Treaty which has been described by General McNaughton as a ‘‘disaster for Canada’’ and by the chief Ca- nadian negotiator Davie Fulton as, ‘‘the greatest wind fall to the Americans since the pur- chase of Manhattan Island.”’ The press release is such a series of calculated dishonesties, figure juggling and vital omis- sions that it would make Madison Avenue blush with shame, Itis the culmination of a very carefully prepared campaign to mask the biggest sell-out in B.C, history and to make it appear that we are getting a good deal. What then does the protocol actually provide that wasn't spelled out in the draft Treaty itself? The main point is the agree- AT STAKE. Photo shows the Kootenay River (fore- ground). In the background is Columbia Lake, source of the Columbia River. At this point near Canal Flats the twe are separated by a narrow stretch of land. m proposed diversion of the Gen. A. G. L. Mc ment to. sell Canada’s so-called half-share for thirty years to the United States. Very large figures are mentioned — $50] millions by .1973. But when all the figure juggling is said and done this sum will just barely cover the cost of the storage dams, and IF CONSTRUCTION COSTS RISE BY MORE THAN 10% IN THE NEXT NINE YEARS IT WILL COST US MONEY TO PROVIDE THE ENORMOUS BENEFITS WHICH RESULT IN THE UNITED STATES. Very early in the two page detailed press release the state- ECONOMY Cont'd from pg. 7 An alternative policy has to be discussed now, Buck em- phasized, because the world hasn’t developed the way St. Laurent thought it would. Labor had to undertake the struggle for a shorter work week because shorter hours were the only real gains it had made under capitalism. The value of a wage increase can be wiped out by higher prices. € Vast markets for Canadian goods are unrealized at the pre- sent. The socialist countries wanted to buy fertilizer, but Canada refused its sale toChina. The government could use cre- dits to aid the underdeveloped countries raise their own econ- omies. MEETING, SOCIAL and DANCE ‘in aid of U.S. McCarran Act Victims Speaker — Jack Phillips Sat. - Feb. 15th - 8 p.m. Dreamland Hall Church St. (opp. Eatons) New Westminster EVERYONE WELCOME Auspices: Delta-New West. Regional Committee—C.P.C. Buck compared the introduc- tion of automation by private ‘firms with a development of an atom bomb by a private firm. It would be unthinkable. ‘‘If it is true that automation will bring revolutionary changes in society then now is the time to start the battle to bring it under public control.’’ He compared this struggle to the battle waged by the labor movement in the ’30s to organ- ize industrial unions. ‘‘At that time, some people told us it was impossible,’’ said Buck. Some people claimed Canada’s home market was too small to develop a manufacturing indus- try here. But Canada is the ‘*second biggest market in the world for autos and refrigera- tors,’’ said Buck—‘“‘the first for pulp and paper machinery, one of the biggest for agricultural implements.’’ For the Canadian marketalone, he stressed, we could produce some goods in larger quantities than are produced by other countries which sell them to us. Canada imports $3} to $4 billion worth of manufactured goods -every year. Even if one-third the money being spent on war preparation were used on housing construc- tion, Buck said, it would go a long way to eliminating unem- ployment in Canada. -Buck suggested that the new economic policy proposed by the Communist Party could be won if the labor movement carries on a struggle to regain control of the Canadian economy. ‘We have the alternative of change or chaos,’’ he concluded. HEAR — in B.C.’s boundary. ment is made that the total pro- ceeds ‘‘are the equivalent of a | price of 5.3 mills per K.W.H. for the estimated Canadian share of the downstream power bene- disse This statement is a very good example of the treachery involved in the whole operation. It is false and the authors know it is false. This statement makes it appear that the U.S. has paid a high price for ‘‘our’’ power. Nothing could be further from the truth. In the first place this figure is inflated by expressing it in Canadian rather than American money. In the second place it is further inflated by including flood control benefits which are quite substantial. And most im- portant, ittakes NOaccount what- ever of the American half-share which results from our _ stor- age. This so-called half-share is very cheap, under one mill per kilowatt hour. Bargain for U.S. Hence, if all these pertinent factors are taken. together it can be easily shown that the Un- ited States gets a 20% increase in their supply of ‘‘firm energy’’ at a rate of 2.35 millsper K.W.H., a rate unmatched anywhere else in the world for the large quan- tity involved. : This in itself indicates, but only indicates, the nature of the sell-out. The protocol makes no provision at all for other than flood control and ‘‘firm energy’’ benefits. It takes no cognizance of the peaking power benefits which result in thermal genera- tion savings of $121 millions an- nually in the United States and of the large volume of regulated water which can be used as such for irrigation, industrial and con- sumptive uses. From Canada’s point of view nothing of real substance is changed by the protocol. The same storage dams are to be built, particularly High Arrow and Libby. Sometime in the very distant future Canada MAY get some power itself but it is NOT a condition of the draft Treaty LESLIE MORRIS SUNDAY, FEB. 9 — 8 P.M. PENDER AUDITORIUM ‘‘PARLIAMENT MUST ACT TO GET THE BOMBS OUT OF CANADA” February 7, 1964—IPACIIFIC Te /RLINIE—lPanle 1 Kootenay into the Columbia for maximum Canadian benefit. Under the revised treaty 80 percent of the Kootenay flow for diversion would be lost for all time, as well as diversion of the Columbia itself with- or the protocol. Furthermore, Canada abandons 80% of the Koot- enay River flow for immensely beneficial diversion purposes for ALL time as well as diversion of the Columbia itself within our own boundary. “The protocol also contains some ‘‘verbal’’ concessions to- wards Canadian control but these are essentially meaningless since the physical fact of Libby and High Arrow Dams, for geo- graphical and hydrological rea- sons, assures effective Ameri- can control. . Public action The signing of the protocol is a very sharp warning that the Liberal minority government in- tends to bring the discredited Treaty before the External Af- fairs Committee, three years after its signing. The squabbling over the PRICE of the sellout has been brought to a halt for the primary reason that continua- tion of this threathens to further expose the betrayal of Canada’s interests. Diverse groups of people across Canada have in recent times become aware of the stakes involved and have started to take action to block ratification. In the time that is still left a gigantic battle must be waged! Decisive to this is the role of the provincial N.D.P. Unless they act in a united campaign, prepared to arouse the public on the issue, Premier Bennett will appear as a hero to British Columbians and the fortunes of the working people of this prov- ince will be set backa generation at least. This sell-out will only be stopped if it becomes the over-riding concern of the N.D.P., labor and all democratic movements in B.C. and Canada, Complex though it may be the fundamental issue is plain — it is a ‘‘sell-out’’ of a vast natural resource to a foreign power, which guarantees our continued subordination to it. Canadians will not voluntarily reduce themselves to American ‘‘water-boys.’’ Canadians will resist and their efforts can yet be crowned with success, tional liberation struggle of # National Leader, Communist Party — The analysis of the revised Columbia Treaty on this pag? was prepared and issued by the B.C. Communist Party. It rips away the mask from the pre tense that Canada and B.C have won a big victory. Instead it shows that the Liberals in Ottawa and thé Socreds in Victoria are attempt |) ing to perpetrate a shameful hoax on the public. . While there is still time, thé} Communist Party urges the wid-| est protests against signing this] treaty of betrayal. 4h CUBA Cont'd from pg. 10 of the Soviet Union, that if Cull is attacked in violation of © United States commitments © to invade it, the Soviet Uni® would fulfil its international dul] “and render the necessary assis" ance to defend the freedom aa independence of the fratern!) Republic of Cuba with all meal at its disposal. * * * The two parties again stress the need for an early solutid! of the problem of restoring © legitimate rights of the People® Republic of China in the Unit Nations. : The Soviet and Cuban parti? expressed their full solidaril and support for the nation liberation movements in colonies and firm confidence their victory over the forces imperialism. The Soviet Union and the R@ public of Cuba back up # Asian, African and Latin Amer ican countries fighting for co” solidation of their independent and for the final abolition ° colonialism and neo-colonialis™ in all its forms and manifest® tions, * * * The Soviet and Cuban sid@! are convinced that the gré? achievements of the sociali® countries, the ever wider s¢ of the Communist and workin class movement in the capital? countries, the might of the 2% peoples of Africa, Asia al Latin America will ensure t final victory of the forces ? peace, democracy and socialis™ * * * The CPSU Central Committ® and the PURC National Leade! ship emphasize that today unit and cohesion in the ranks of § international communist mow ment on the basis of the gene? line charted in the Declaratl and Statement of the Mosc® meetings of the Communist 4 Workers’ Parties is more ! perative than iver before. Fidel Castro has approved steps taken by the CPSU Cé tral Committee to eliminate um obtaining differences and to ca solidate unity and cohesioM 4” the ranks of the internati? communist movement. = 0 _- = JSP RRIF a Ree eae”