ALD. HARRY ’ RANKIN, who received the highest votes won by any civic candidate for office. —Sean Griffin photos Rankin, Yorke score gains By ALD. HARRY RANKIN First of all I would like to thank the many people who worked for and voted for COPE in the November 17 civic elections. And I would like to particularly thank the over 49,000 people who voted for me. That was an expression of confidence for which I am deeply grateful. I interpret that to be Support for the kind of policies I fight for and argue for on city council. I intend to keep on fighting for those same policies. My approach to issues is relatively simple. I just ask myself, “‘Will this help the people of Vancouver or will its benefits be limited to private in- terests?’’ With that guide rule, and without any ties with or obligations to private interests, it usually isn’t too hard for me to decide where I stand. _ COPE candidates did very well, I’ thought. Bruce Yorke, running for. mayor, received 15 per cent of the’ total vote and that’s a substantial advance for COPE. The alder- manic candidates won 20 per cent of the total vote, up from 12 per cent two years ago. I think COPE is pretty well established now in the eyes of citizens as a genuine reform organization with an issue- oriented program that starts with’ people’s needs. Not only that, COPE which now has branches in many areas of the city, has evolved into a community based organization, in addition it has strong labor backing. Bruce Yorke’s vote would probably have been higher if it were not for the red-baiting campaign against him in the media. Bruce, by his outstanding ‘work on behalf of the citizens of OK labor hits pollution The pollution committee of the Okanagan Labor Council has urged the launching of a broad based community campaign to pressure the provincial and_ federal governments into taking action to combat the spread of Eurasian Mil Foil weeds which threaten the recreational use of Lake Okanagan. The committee, chaired by council secretary Bert Nilsson, said in an open letter to delegates the cost of controlling the Mil Foil weed is too great for municipal authorities to handle, and as all lakes are provincial government property, it is incumbent upon the provincial government to take action to preserve the environment of these lakes. “The most important step that must be taken at this time is to raise the demand that the Quebec, cornflakes, and Da provincial government accept the leading responsibility for the condition of the lakes,’’ the com- mittee said and added that ‘“‘it (the provincial government) can request help from Ottawa as well.” Originally, the weeds were restricted to Lake Okanagan, but the committee said that the most recent meeting of the Okanagan Basin water board revealed that the weeds have also appeared in. Shuswap Lake and in lakes near 100 Mile House. ‘‘This means that the weeds will’ soon spread down the Thompson River to the lower mainland, and, of course they will, soon be in the states of Washington and Oregon as they are already in Lake Osoyoos. “The weeds are no longer just a local problem.” The labor council committee pointed out that a number of pilot projects designed to combat the spread of the weeds have been carried out, including the use of herbicides, harvesting the weeds, and removal of the weed roots, yet none have been effective. The need now, the committee stated, is to “develop a long range program that will be adequate to maintain the recreational potential of our lakes in spite of the fact that there is no known way to eliminate the weeds completely from our lakes.” The labour council committee Said that the only way any meaningful action will be taken on the pollution problem in the Okanagan lakes is if a broad based community committee, including local governments, act to pressure the provincial and _ federal governments to commit: large. amounts of money to tackling the problem COPE now major civic alternative Vancouver, has earned the right to run and to be judged on the merits of his record. The media, however, drew a red herring across the trail by making his personal political beliefs an issue. That was not by any means unexpected. Any genuine reform moveiment invariably has to face up to some form of red-baiting. When reac- tionary right wing forces can’t win their way by any other means they always resort to the Communist bogey. This is a fact of life and people will have to learn to recognize it for what it is — an effort to falsify issues before voters. COPE has been getting stronger every election; growth is maintained (and I am completely confident it will be) there is no doubt in my mind that_ next time round COPE will elect several aldermen, school trustees and park commissioners. The election of Jack Volrich, a hardnosed right winger, with 45 per cent of the vote was due to an under-the-counter coalition bet- ween TEAM and NPA business interests, who deserted Ed Sweeney in the belief that Volrich- would be able to do a better job for them. In that they were probably right. But TEAM and the NPA, who now differ little in their policies, have no place to go but down. Under the impact of events and a growing citizen involvement on issues, they will be exposed for what they are — agencies of the developers and other big private business interests. In council it is likely that on many. issues there will develop a like-minded approach between aldermen Harcourt, Mazari and myself. If the same kind of unity can be developed outside of council between labor, COPE, the NDP and community groups, then come if this rate of * ve Barrett if i i BRUCE YORKE, running for mayor polled 15 per cent of total vote and led COPE to major gains. 1978 I think the reform forces will have it made. In the meantime, the issues we faced before the election — housing, tax reform, rapid transit, a ward system, containing the ~ developers, are all still with us: With the kind of mixed bag we have in council now, these issues are bound to surface and some royal battles develop around them. COPE has every intention not” only of maintaining its emphasis on community action and citizen involvement, but intends to in-” tensify it. So you'll hear a lot from COPE as well as from me in the coming months. ° Personally I look forward with optimism to the period ahead. | By MAURICE RUSH t never fails to amaze me how the stand taken by someone on the “‘left’’ ends up objectively having the Same end result as that advocated by someone on the political right. A case in point last week was the Quebec elections. : Strange as it may seem, two people who are as far apart in the B.C. political spectrum as the NDP’s Dave Barrett and Socred minister of human resources Bill Vander Zalm, made public statements on the Quebec elections which could only serve to worsen an already serious crisis facing Canada. There’s no doubt that Canada has never faced a more serious crisis. We are at a new stage in which Canadians must either resolve the crisis of Confederation with new policies or stand by and watch the break-up of Canada. At the heart of our problem is the basic historical fact on which Canada was founded: that we are a country in which two founding peoples live — French and English- speaking Canadians. Confederation and the BNA Act established the dominance of English Canada over French Canada. It did that by ignoring the national rights of the French-Canadian people who make up a majority in Quebec, and by writing into the constitution that Quebec is a province like any other province with only the same rights as other provinces. For more than a hundred years the people of French Canada struggled to retain their national language and culture and their continued existence: as a national people in their homeland, Quebec. Despite the fact that they won many improvements in their economic and social conditions, these gains did not eliminate their basic inequality, nor did it give them any assurar~ss that they held the levers of power in their hands with which to determine their destiny. ‘ The solution of the crisis Canada faces depends on how we resolve the relationship between the two founding peoples, French and English-speaking Canadians. We havereached the point in our histery where Confederation and the present constitution are an inadequate framework - for our survival. A new framework is needed which will ensure the full, free and voluntary union of Canada’s two PACIFIC TRIBUNE—NOVEMBER 26, 1976—Page 2 founding people in a new constitutional pact drawn up by and for Canadians. This means recognizing the rights of French Canada, scrapping the BNA Act, and adopting a new constitution based on the equal rights of Canada’s two nations. It is no longer adequate to leave constitutional arrangements as they are today. Obviously that will not solve our problem of survival. The vast majority of Canadians of both French and English-speaking . majorities do not want to break up Canada, which separatism will do. Only U.S. imperialism will gain by that because it will be able to dominate more completely the two weakened parts of Canada. The only solution is to recognize that a new framework is needed to keep our two national peoples united. That framework is possible if it will provide complete equality for Canada’s two national peoples. : How did Vander Zalm respond to this crisis we face? “Certainly I wouldn’t lose any sleep if Quebec separates. I doubt, frankly, if there are too many people who will lose very much sleep if they were to separate. I don’t think it matters much. I don’t think the people frankly are all that concerned about what happens in Quebec . . . The decision they separate. I don’t think it is all that bad. For one thing, I’m sure there will be con- siderable savings to the populace generally, that we won’t have to have two printings on every cornflakes box, or whatever it may be.” So there you have it: the national survival of our ~ country is equated by this nugglehead to what’s printed on your morning cornflakes box. But what of Dave Barrett in this hour of crisis when the - legitimate rights of the French Canadian people should find understanding and support among progressive Canadians everywhere? : His is a different approach. No direct attack here on the French Canadian people or their aspirations. Oh no. His approach is to ignore completely the inequality of French “ Canada, or even that there exists any such thing as a problem of relations between our two peoples. Speaking at a rally in Vancouver East he said the average Canadian doesn’t care about French-English language disputes. “They don’t give a damn about. whether their cheque is in French, Chinese, Ukrainian oF English.” He said talk about the constitution and language disputes are ‘“smokescreens’ that few Canadians are concerned about. There is no need to bring the BNA Act to Canada ‘“‘just leave it where it is.”” ; Is it any wonder that with this kind of attitude to the -aspirations of the French Canadian people that the NDP has made no headway whatsoever among French Canadians, including French-Canadian workers? I would _ agree with him there is no need to bring the BNA Act. home. But if we are to solve the serious crisis Canada faces, and if we are to preserve the unity of our tw - peoples, the BNA Act should not only be left in England. It should be scrapped and replaced by a new made-in- Canada constitution ensuring the continued unity of ' Canada based on the full recognition of the rights of both peoples. ; To reduce this broad, major issue facing Canada with facetious remarks that it doesn’t matter what language 4 paycheck is written in is pure demogogy. It matters t0 French Canadian workers, and progressives want very much to keep French and English-speaking workers united in one country instead of seeing them divided and placedat the mercy of U.S. and foreign corporations in.4 much weakened position. Think it over, Davie. ~ JIRIBOUNE Editor - MAURICE RUSH Assistant Editor SEAN GRIFFIN Business and Circulation Manager — MIKE GIDORA Published weekly at Ford Bldg., Mezzanine No.