edge

mats announce terms of treaty.

Salmon treaty opposed

Continued from page 1

own rivers produce, But any im-
balance which may presently exist
will be eliminated not by re-
distributing present quotas, but
- through distribution of new fish
stocks to be created through a step-
ped up salmon enhancement pro-
amie Canadian side “‘has just
written off our salmon,” charged
Hewison. Since 1970 Canada has
argued in the talks with the US.
that the U.S. was intercepting
about five million Canadian
salmon as opposed to about two

MIKE SHEPHARD (L), LEE ALVERSON. . . deliberately vague diplo-

million U.S. salmon being in-
tercepted by Canada. “‘But while
we have been talking, the U.S. has
mounted new fisheries and the im-
balance is now about six and a half
million of our fish going to them,
while our fishermen are taking
about one and a half million of
theirs,” he said.

The proposed treaty will never
achieve equality, Hewison added,
because the Americans have not
dropped their claim to ‘“‘historic
fisheries’? on the Fraser River and
other northern rivers. The treaty, if
signed, will cede 42 per cent of all
Fraser River salmon to the U.S.

TRIBUNE PHOTO—FRED WILSON

Nearly $1 billion subsidy
in coal deal ‘outrageous’

By MAURICE RUSH

The deal being put together to
export huge quantities of high
grade metallurgical coal from nor-
theastern B.C. to Japan via Prince
Rupert is shaping up as a massive
giveaway of B.C.’s resources. ‘It
should be stopped before it goes
any further.

Despite all the confusion sur-
rounding the details, and charges
and countercharges between Vic-
toria and Ottawa, one thing is
clear: premier Bill Bennett is trying
to rush through a deal to use vast
amounts of public funds to subsi-
dize the mining corporations and
Japanese steel companies and facil-
itate the export of millions of tons
of high grade coal from the Su-
kunka area to fire the steel mills of
Japan.

The haste with which Bennett is
trying to conclude the deal is shown
by the announcement following a
10-hour secret cabinet meeting last
Saturday that B.C. ‘‘will go it
alone’’ in paying for a $300 million
rail line to get the coal out of the Su-
kunka area to the main BCR line
north of Prince George. This is on-
ly one part of the subsidy involved
in this deal.

In addition to that rail line, it is
reported that special coal trains will
cost at least $200 million. Upgrad-
ing of the CNR tracks between
Prince George and Prince Rupert is
expected to run at another $90 mil.
lion. The federal government is ex-
pected to put another $70 million to
build a coal port at Ridley Island
near Prince Rupert. On top of this,
an estimated $10 million is now be-
ing spent on roads in the region,
and the cost of establishing and fi-

swans’. 5;

BULLMOOSE

-
-
Pia QUINTETTE

aw

vidat

? os

=f,

<< 2 a ;

AN S, BELCOURT
\.

Ss

> <A
SAXON

*

Proposed $300 million rail link will bring Sukunka coal to BCR main
line. The line will serve the coal companies exclusively as there are
no communities located on or near the route.

nancing a townsite is still to come.

Intotal, we are looking at a poss-
ible subsidy of $700 million to $1
billion dollars which will be paid
by the public to enable Denison
Mines and Teck Corporation, to-
gether with Japanese mining and
steel interests to conclude a deal to
export B.C.’s high grade coal to
Japan for the cheapest possible
price. This is outrageous. It is a
gross betrayal of the public interest.

The Socred government is offer-
ing this subsidy to the mining cor-
porations and Japanese steel inter-
ests at the very same time that it is
increasing medicare premiums,
and cutting back on social services;
when it is denying funds for hous-
ing, and refusing, to. increase pay-
ments to tens of thousands of social
welfare recipients, forced to live be-

\

~ Socred legislation which erodes
tenants’ rights in B.C. passed the
legislature this week — to the dis-
may of tenants’ spokesmen, un-

opposed.

Ppl 21, the amendments to the
Residential Tenancy Act, has
been termed “‘housekeeping”’ by
the government, but according to
Greater Vancouver Renters’ As-
sociation president Tom La-
londe, it is a “‘landlord’s bill”
which strips tenants of many long
standing rights.

The main provisions of the Act
add sections including permanent
residents of hotels and rooming
houses and making decontrolled
rental units and new rental units
subject to a form of rent review,
and amend a series of existing Sec-
tions, in most cases eliminating
tenant rights and giving the Rent-
alsman greater powers of discre-
tion.

“There is absolutely nothing in
this legislation for tenants to ap-
plaud,” Lalonde said, with the
‘possible exception” of the sec-
tions granting some protection to
permanent hotel residents.

The much lauded ‘‘review”’ of
rents In post 1974 and decontroll-
ed units is largely meaningless, he
said, as the minister responsible,
Jim Neilson, has said that rent in-
creases will only be reviewed if the
increase is “‘exorbitant.”

‘We asked what ‘exorbitant’
meant, and he replied anything

over 60 percent,’’ Lalonde re-
ported.

The tenants’ group also
criticized the form of ‘“‘rent re-
view”? to be employed. Termed
‘fixed point arbitration,’’ it
would force tenants to propose a
different rent increase than that
asked by the landlord. The Rent-
alsman would then arbitrate by
picking either figure, and not
selecting a medium or compro-

mise.

‘We're opposed in principle to
that kind of arbitration,”’ he said,
because tenants are at a disad-
vantage in attempting to select a
figure when they have no access
‘to landlords’ books. The Rentals-
man may choose between two un-
just figures, he added.

The amendments to the Act in-
cluding permanent hotel residents
have also been sharply criticized.
Downtown Eastside Residents
Association spokesman and
COPE aldermanic candidate in
Vancouver Jean Swanson termed
the provision ‘“‘totally inade-
q uate.”

Previously, permanent res-
jdents in hotels had to be ‘“‘desig-
nated’’ by the Rentalsman to be
protected by the Act. The amend-
ments to the Act includes hotels
and rooming houses with perma-

nent residents outright, but then

proceeds to deny those tenants
rights enjoyed by other tenants.

‘ Pro-landlord changes in Tenancy Act
pass legislature without opposition

Amendments to Section 64 of
the Act exempts hotels and room-
ing houses from the 10 percent
ceiling on rent increases and al-
lows more than one increase in a
year.

Other sections allow hotel
Owners to apply to the Rentals-
man to be exempted from provi-
sions requiring landlords to meet
health and safety bylaws, and
allows landlords to restrict access
to residents’ rooms by guests.

Among other amendments to
the Act which adversely affect
tenants are:

@ Removal of the obligation
to post the legal name and address
of the landlord in rental units.
Many tenants, particularly those
in large complexes, will never
know who the landlord is.

@ Removal of provisions re-
quiring all rules and regulations to
be written. Now non-written rules
established by landlords will be
valid.

@ Removal of the require-
ment that a landlord must pay
compensation for eviction if the
tenant was evicted so the landlord
could take personal possession of
the unit, and fails to live in the
unit for at least 12 months. Now
landlords can apply to the Rent-
alsman to shorten the 12-month
period. This section will be used
to evict tenants who cannot other-
wise be legally evicted.

@ Removal of protection for

* return a deposit has been increas-

new units.

caretakers. Caretakers who lose
their jobs no longer have to. be
given 30 days’ notice to vacate
their premises.

@ Removal of the require-
ment that security deposits must
be returned within 15 days. The
allowable time for a landlord to

ed to 30 days. This discriminates
against low income tenants who
need the deposit to give to the next
landlord.

@ Removal of the right of ten-
ants to refuse to pay a rent in-
crease while it is in dispute before
the Rentalsman. Now tenants
have to pay increases, even if il-
legal and later overturned.

Lalonde said he was ‘‘very up-
set’’ by the actions of the NDP
opposition which voted for the
bill in second reading and sup-
ported it in committee.

The NDP caucus rationalized
its stand by arguing that it had to
support the whole bill in order to
get hotels included in the Act, and
rent review for decontrolled and

“J disagree,’’ Lalonde said,
“we hoped that there would be
some strong opposition. As a
New Democrat, I am very up-
set.’’

The amendments to the resi-
dential Tenancy Act will become
law when proclaimed by the lieu-
tenant-governor in council, ex-

pected soon. ae,

low the poverty line; and when it is
cutting back on the pensions of tens
of thousands of public employees.
It shows how out of line this gov-
ernment’s priorities are.

The promise of economic expan-
sion and jobs involved in the deal
are exaggerated and largely ficti-
tious. Once the mining of the coal,
with new modern equipment is
under way, few jobs will be provid-
ed along the rail line and at the port
in Prince Rupert. Apart from ex-
porting one of our most important
resources at heavily subsidized fire

sale prices, the pollution associated -

with this project at the mining site,
along the rail line, and in the Prince
Rupert harbor will also prove very
costly. And the B.C. government is
completely ignoring the interests of
the Native peoples, whose land
claims in Northeast B.C. have not
been settled.

The rich resources of coal, na-
tural gas, minerals and forests in
the Northeast should be utilized to
develop large scale manufacturing
and processing in B.C., including a
modern steel mill. This would pro-
vide genuine expansion of the
economy and create thousands of
new permanent jobs. The hund-
reds of millions of dollars Victoria
and Ottawa are proposing to pour
into the present sellout deal will
benefit Japan’s steel industry and
the mining. corporations — not
B.C. Instead of joint Victoria-Ot-
tawa action to sell out our coal re-
sources to Japan, the two levels of
government should set up a joint
task force to develop the vast re-
sources of the region to serve B.C.
and Canadian interests under a
Crown corporation.

Judging from developments in
recent days, the deal with Japan is
moving ahead very rapidly. Talks
are going on between Victoria, Ot-
tawa and Japan without any public
involvement. The fact is that most
British Columbians know very lit-
tle about the deal being worked out
in secret negotiations and in the
board rooms of the big corpora-
tions.

There is no time to lose. The
public should demand a stop to the
sellout of B.C.’s coal resources.
They should demand that no deal
be signed by the provincial govern-
ment until the details have been
placed before the B.C. legislature

~ for debate, and before hearings of

legislative committees have been
held which should be open to the
public.

Maurice Rush is B.C. provincial
leader of the Communist Party.

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—JUNE 20, 1980—Page 3