By SAMUEL WALSH President, Parti Communiste du-Quebec The ‘‘Committee of 11,”’ elected by the Parti Quebecois caucus of the Na- tional Assembly, courageously rendered a service not only to their party, but to the entire people of Quebec, when they denounced the budgetary cutbacks, especially in the fields of health care and education, which were featured in the pre-election budget of Jacques Parizeau, minister of finance. Perhaps Claude Ryan, Liberal Party leader, had some truth on his side when he called the committee’s members hypocrites because they had not de- nounced this budget just before the gen- eral election. But coming from Ryan, this “intellectual Reagan’’, who wanted to cut the standard of living of the working people to the bone, this epithet of hypo- crites applies far more to himself. It is interesting to note that the caucus of the Parti Quebecois Members of the National Assembly chose this Commit- tee of 11, knowing that within it there existed deep discontent with the pro- monopoly and anti-people orientation of the Parizeau budget. This shows that the of Quebec were not wrong in re- jecting the Liberal Party, a direct emana- tion precisely from these reactionary, monopolist -forces, in favor of PQ candidates. : On the other hand, the supplementary budget cutbacks announced, underline the necessity of recruiting very broad and united resistance in order to counteract the relentless pressure com- ing from the bankers and the multi- nationals. And, insofar as the left forces within the PQ identify themselves with this anti-monopoly movement, they will beable towintheconfidence ofthe people. « -The PQ-government gave. the green -—. light to their party activists to’spread the gospel of independence on condition that they.no longer interfere in the business of government, that is to say, in the government’s policy of tightening the belts of the working people and fattening the banks, the monopolies, and the multi-nationals. It is encouraging to see that there are those who have the cour- age to defend the interests of the working people. But, what should be said of the propaganda campaign for independence which the PQ leadership calls upon its activists to undertake? Again Special Status? This call to arms for independence seems destined to be the backdrop for a constitutional policy which is: very am- - biguous, to say the least. Premier Rene Levesque told journal- ists that his government is for patriation ‘pure and simple’’ of the British North America Act as a constitution for Cana- da. When the same journalists, stupified, questioned the minister of inter-govern- mental affairs, Claude Morin, the latter replied that formerly he had demanded that an amending formula acceptable to Quebec be introduced in the BNA Act by the British parliament, but now, when the western provinces are on the same wavelength as Quebec in insisting on provincial rights, one could rely on them for any amendment of the constitution to enlarge provincial rights which Quebec might devise, even if those provinces didn’t intend to make use of these ex- tended rights. Thus, he explained, Quebec would enjoy a sort of ‘‘special status”. Can you bear the ghost of | former Liberal premier Jean Lesage laughing? Why, that’s exactly, but word for word, the formula defended by Les- age, substituting for the right to self-° determination for Quebec — the en- largement of the rights of all the pro- vinces (which the other provinces would not use perhaps, thus according ‘‘special status’’ to Quebec). In face of the consternation created by this return to the past by Lesage’s former counsellor on constitutional affairs, Claude Morin, Levesque made haste to say that when he had declared himself in favor of patriation ‘‘pure and simple’’, he hadn’t completed: his thought, that he should have added, with an amending formula. The question arises inevitably: the last meeting of the eight “‘dissident’’ pre- miers was held in camera — was there a *‘deal’’ made at the expense of the na- tional rights of Quebec, conceding in the feeble defence that an amending formula might provide? The constitutional strategy of the PQ government, especially since its refer- CANADA Constitution plagues Levesque Did Levesque’s deal with the other premiers sell out Quebec’s national rights? endum defeat, consists of an anti-federal alliance with the most reactionary forces of English Canada, the main political spokesmen of the foreign multinationals, namely the western premiers and the federal Conservative Party. This explains the praise showered on _ Joe Clark as the best friend of Quebec! This explains the PQ’s help to Roch Lasalle. This explains in part the support given to Peter Lougheed, and behind him the oil multi-nationals. I repeat, in part. Because Quebec ministers are frank enough to admit that they are in favor of our paying three or four times as much for gasoline and for home heating oil. For, on the one hand, the Quebec Government has changed its tax on gaso- line from a fixed tax per gallon to 20% of the retail price. One Quebec minister _ said he .was. happy about the big. in- creases coming due in the Alberta- Ottawa agreement because the differ- ence in price paid by Quebecois and the world price would almost disappear, thus removing an obvious benefit from the federal system. On the other hand, the government will certainly steeply in- crease the price we pay for electricity (it has already been decided to considerably increase its revenue from Hydro-Quebec projects). “Canada in the constitutional struggle: Thus, more and more the call to activ ists of the PQ to pick up the pilgrim’s walking stick for independence appeals to be a smoke-screen, or rather a way o giving them a “‘high’’, while abandoning the struggle for national self-determina tion and the economic and social intel ests of Quebecois. We Quebecois need allies in English But they should be sought not among thé political forces which represent thé multi-nationals who don’teven recogniZé the existence of the French Canadian na tion in Quebec. No, they should bé sought among the democratic forces, 8 the first place in the labor movement, who regard the struggle for the right t0 national ‘self-determination for Quebec as an integral and indispensable part of the struggle against the multi-nationals — and U.S. imperialism. It is for this reason that the Central Committee of the Communist Party Canada, in its last meeting, declared that, whatever the decision of the Supremé Court and the British parliament, in th? constitutional field, all over Canada, thé accent should be placed on the right 0 self-determination. Don’t cave-in to Reagan, CP tells Trudeau In a statement by its Central Executive Committee, the Communist Party of Canada, on September 14, expressed its strong opposition to United States pressure on Canada, and the urgent need for Cana- da’s government to take an independent stand. The Reagan administration has undertaken a well orchestrated campaign against the sovereignty and independence of Canada. In effect it has declared that Canada does not have the right to own its own resources and develop them as it sees fit. This is the meaning of the demand that the Trudeau government amend the National Energy Program which aims at achieving 50% Canadian control over Canada’s energy resources by 1990. Ithas coupled this demand with another — that the proposed amendments to the Foreign Investment Review Act (FIRA) which would enable parliament and the government to decide whether U.S. and other branch plants in Canada oper- ate in the national interests of Canada, be annulled. As with energy, the Reagan administration de- mands that the Canadian people accept the view that what is good for the U.S. transnationais and for U.S. imperialism, is good for Canada. The Reagan administration treats Canada as if it were a colony, a banana republic it can push around any way it sees fit. itis pressuring the Trudeau government to capitu- late to its demands. It threatens to use the big stick if the Trudeau govemment does not comply. The PACIFIC TRIBUNE—SEPT. 25, 1981—Page 8 threat includes the use of sanctions against Canada. This from a government which refuses to impose sanctions against the racist and apartheid govern- ment of South Africa! Unfortunately, instead of standing up for Canada, big business, the monopoly-owned media, Tories, and some Liberal politicians are quite prepared to continue the sell-out of Canada. Only an aroused public opinion, headed by labor and the democratic forces can prevent such a sell- out at the expense of-the best interests of Canada and her people. U.S. aggression against Canada goes beyond energy, natural resources and U.S. branch plants in Canada. The Reagan administration refuses to act regarding the evil effects of acid rain on Canadian territory. It rejected the fisheries treaty. It refuses to amend the auto pact. Indeed it wants more such pacts which would subordinate Canadian interests to those of U.S. imperialism. President Reagan’s ob- jectives include pressuring Canada and Mexico into a “common market’, a continental accord which " would tighten U.S. control over the resources of Canada and Mexico. Instead of a good neighbor we have the big bully and the big stick. To top it all Canadians are paying a heavy price due to the high interest rate policy of the Reagan Administration. Through these high interest rates the U.S. administration has exported its crisis into Canada. The loss of jobs, the loss of homes and farms, the closing down of plants in Canada are the direct responsibility of the Reagan administration, as well as monopoly in Canada, and of a compliant Trudeau government. And now with the decision to produce the neutron bomb, U.S. imperialism and its agency, the Reagan adminsitration, is pushing the world ever closer to 4 nuclear catastrophe. The Reagan administration is a menace to the people of the USA, to the Canadian people, and other allies of the USA, to world peace. : : itis more than time to tell the Reagan administra- tion and U.S. imperialism that the Canadian people will decide for themselves what is good for Canada. This includes the right to nationalize energy and natural resources and the U.S. branch plants and have them operate in the interests of Canada and her people, not in the interests of the transnationals. It includes the right to have a truly independent foreign policy dedicated to peace, détente and dis- armament, free from the pressures of U.S. imperial- ism. - Patriotic Canadians, all who genuinely cherish the sovereignty and independence of Canada must tell the U.S. administration, and its ambassador in Canada, to keep their noses out of Canadian affairs. They must also keep their eyes open against any further retreats or capitulation by the Trudeau government. _ ie Canadian independence ana sovereignty are not expendable.