When Parliament reconvenes at
the end of October one of the most
important issues facing it will be
the Alaska natural gas pipeline
agreement. The government has
given public assurance that the
terms of the recently negotiated
agreement with the U.S. will be
placed before Canada’s elected
representatives for debate. In our
opinion this agreement constitutes
a gross betraval of the interests of
B.C. and Canada and should be
rejected by Parliament.

The terms of the agreement do
nothing to solve B.C. and Canada’s
energy problems. All the benefits
of the proposed pipeline go to the
United States. It will not bring any
natural gas to Canadians. On the
contrary it opens the way for a vast
expansion of Canadian gas exports
to the U.S. to the detriment of
present and future generations of
Canadians.

Granting the U.S. a corridor
through Canada is a serious
violation of Canada’s sovereignty
and represents a major step
towards the continental deve-
lopment of resources which is
against Canada’s interest. The
rush to build the pipeline before
native rights and land claims are
dealt with represents a betrayal of
our nothern peoples.

A most serious aspect of the
pipeline is that it will further in-
crease the already substantial
exports of Canadian gas to the U.S.
U.S. energy secretary James
‘Schlesinger said as much following
the signing of the agreement by
prime minister Pierre Trudeau

and president Jimmy Carter, when -

he stated that the U.S. expects a
substantial increase in Canadian
gas for the U.S. as a result of the
pipeline. The fact that the federal
government agreed to step up
expports to the U.S. was confirmed
by energy minister Alastair
Gillespie on September 12, 1977,
when he said he supported an in-
crease in natural gas shipments to
the U.S. This will come on top of
the one trillion cubic feet of natural
gas exported annually to the U-S.;
which is 45 percent of Canada’s
present production.

The vast expansion of gas
drilling in the northeast corner of
B.C. through which the pipeline
will run, and the application by
Westcoast Transmission before the
National Energy Board for per-
mission to build a gas gathering
pipeline system through the area,
indicates that the major oil and gas
corporations, which are U/S.
owned, are seeking to bring into
production vast quantities of
natural gas inthe near future. This
gas would be surplus to present
Canadian needs and can only be
brought into production for export
to the U.S.

@

What we are obviously wit-
nessing is the wholesale rape of our
most important and irreplaceable
energy resources for the benefit of
the US.

The Communist Party believes
that Canada should develop and
bring into production its natural
gas resources only when needed
for Canadian growth and
development and at a time that
suits Canadian national interests
and needs, and then only after the
rights and claims of the native
peoples have been met and
satisfied.

A major argument used by the
federal government in support of
the pipleine is that by the mid-
1980’s Canada will need Mackenzie
River delta gas which, it is
proposed, would be brought to the
Canadian market through a spur
linking up with the Alcan line. This
argument is a hoax and fraud. In
the first place there is no
assurance that such a line can be
satisfactorily built: along the
Dempster highway. Secondly, if
Canada were to cut back on its
excessive exports to the U.S. And
bring into production gas fields

:

Communist Party
issues open letter

to MP’s in ribo

i constitutes a major step towards:

__.NO PIPELINE NOW —

Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau:
Parliament euiicings:
- Ottawa, Canada. —

The Alcan ual gas ie i eecie rae approved by) your government and still to be
= ratified by parliament, is against the best interests of Canada,

_ This agreement, which would give the U.S. the right to build a cae a on ee to the US. :
ontinentalism, threatens Canada’s Ss sover gnt and will lead t to a
: 1 massive sellout of Canada’ 5 natural gas resources.

i 1 strongly vee? that Canada reject the , resent. ssreement No o pipeline is needed now.

ween ee

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—OCTOBER 14, 1977—Page 12 ‘ r

when needed such as those in”

northeast B.C. and Alberta,
Canada will not require Mackenzie
gas for a long time to come. The
aim of bringing that gas into
production by the 1980’s is in large
measure to meet export com-
mitments to the U.S. and
are not in Canada’s interests.
C)

The argument that the pipeline
would bring great economic
benefits to Canada and create
thousands of jobs represents 4
blatant attempt to mislead the
Canadian people and aims 0
present the Alcan line in the best
possible light. It is true that during
the construction period it will
stimulate the economy for about

three years. Canada’s economy”

would also be stimulated if a way
was found to slice up Canada and
export it piece by piece. The end
result of this, however, would be
that we would be left without 4
country. Likewise, the building of
the Alcan pipeline will bring no
lasting change to Canada’s
economy nor will it provide a
broader economic and production
base in Canada. In the end; it will
deprive present and_ future
generations of Canadians of a
valuable resource which, if used in
Canada’s interests, could spur 4
major expansion of the economy

and provide tens of thousands of

permanent jobs for Canadians.

Experts already tell us that
although the pipeline will provide a
few thousand jobs for about three
years during the. construction
period, once the line is built it will
provide about 300 permanent jobs
for Canadians, and only about 80 in
B.C. What a massive sellout. of
Canada’s vital gas resource for

such a meagre return for the

future.
e

The huge outlay of capital
required to build such a pipeline
would divert Canadian financial
resources to a project which would
in the end provide very few per-

manent jobs, and deprive Canada |

of the capital needed for job-
producing national projects, such
as housing, manufacturing in-
dustries, schools, hospitals and
other vitally needed public ser-
vices for Canadians. It is a short-
sighted use of capital which would
produce a few new millionaires,
but deprive Canada of the capital
needed for expansion and
development. In the end it will
starve and set back Canada’s
economy, not lead to its expansion.

The Communist Party believes
that no pipeline is needed now. We
support the building of pipelines
when they will serve Canadian
interests and not U.S. interests.
These should be undertaken only
as part of an overall Canada-first
energy program under public
ownership and control.

The Communist Party regrets
that every political party in
Parliament, including the New
Democratic Party, has so far in-
dicated support for this ill-
conceived and anti-Canadian
project. We strongly urge that you
reconsider your stand and vote
against the Alcan
agreement. Let us not have 4

repeat of the Columbia River
-Treaty which was

sold to
Canadians on the same empty
arguments, but which now turns
out to have been a betrayal of
Canada’s best interests.

As -an elected member of
Parliament, you have a grave
responsibility before your elec-
torate. You will be judged and held
responsible by them for the stand
you take now.

Urging most serious con:
sideration of the viewpoint ex
pressed in this letter, we call upo?
you to speak out and vote against
the Alcan pipeline agreement.

Maurice Rush,
B.C. Provincial Leadet

Communist Party of Canada

pipeline