sachanism,

heh

Y fto

9 GAME AND WE pay iig
Your, MONE.

ME (5 FIVE CARD FREE TRADE POKER....
FAL, MY CARDS .MY RU ULES,

As axioneed Auto Pact
now on U.S.’ agenda

By MARK SYDNEY

The fears of many Canadians
ant the Reagan administration
a U.S. big business want our

Untry body and soul seem to
ae been confirmed. From what
is Me out of the seven-hour meet-
in Ottawa September 14 be-
Bak Prime Minister Mulroney

the provincial premiers, a free
trade deal with the United States
4S encountered ‘‘many_ im-
Portant stumbling blocks’’.

hose stumbling blocks are
“Onditions proposed by the
_ rican side that even the most

Vid supporters of free trade find
atd to swallow.
ra new development — which

Ould have surprised no one — is

at the United States has now

Ormally, requested that the Auto

Fact be included in the talks.

Ong other outstanding prob-
Ms are a dispute settling
agricultural sub-
dies, government procurements
Canada’ s investment screen-
48 rules.
i Washington has always wanted
oo the pact on the table. How-
€r, it adroitly waited officially
Until after the Ontario election,
Ught basically on the free trade
‘Sue, to make the pitch.
chi he government, along with
lef Canadian negotiator Simon
€isman, had been able for a year
9 tell Canadians with a straight
th aCe that the auto pact was not on
€ table. Now, with the latest

h €rican demand, the bubble
48 burst.
Ost Canadians, and ‘espe-

“ially residents of Ontario, where
me Pact has its greatest impact,
ant no changes to the agree-
Ment,
. Lhe daily press used the words
Pessimistic and subdued”’ to de-
Scribe the PM as he left Langevin
Suse following the marathon
pe poeether.
th One might speculate whether
€ latest American demands
€re too outrageous even for the
Time minister to put to the Cana-
lian people. A man who made his
‘Ning prior to being elected to
Ce as a Canadian corporate er-
d boy for American business,
th has since, , as PM, tried to run
b © country like an American
ranch plant in just the same way.
et even he realizes, it appears
M stories coming out of the

meeting, that Canadians won't
stomach a total sell-out to the
Reagan administration. ““Cana-
diai: concerns’ ’, he told the press,
‘*have not been, in our judge-
ment, appropriately addressed in
some important matters’’.

The provincial premiers were
also somewhat disappointed. On-
tario’s David Peterson, riding the
crest of an election triumph that
won him an unprecedented 95
seats in the 130 seat Ontario legis-
lature, said that if a deal is made,
‘it won't be as big as anti-
cipated’’.

The October 5 deadline has also
loomed large as a negotiating obs-
tacle. Manitoba’s NDP premier
Howard Pawley said that he
doesn’t think the deadline can be
met. ‘‘If there is a deal’’, he said,
it has to be reached through care-
ful analysis, “‘not a pressure-
cooker kind of situation, not a
desperate agreement’’.

What was presented to the pro-
vincial premiers by the PM and
Simon Reisman as the outlines of
a potential deal must have been
more horrific than imagined. As
New Brunswick’s pro-free trade
premier Richard Hatfield said,
‘‘we would not sign what we were
shown today, nobody would’.

One wonders whether the
Prime Minister, left to his own
devices, without the threat of hos-
tile public opinion, would be quite
as categorical. According to him,
the 10 premiers, despite what
they themselves said, “believe an
acceptable agreement remains
achievable’’.

The door is still wide open. Al
though an agreement must be in-
itialled before October 5, accord-
ing to the Congressional guide-

lines imposed on President _

Reagan and his negotiators, the
document has until January Sk
1988, to be amended. That is the
date Reagan must present a final
version to Congress. Within 60
legislative days after that, Con-
gress, following discussion, must
vote yes or no.

The PM has also promised that
parliament would have a chance
to debate any free trade deal, al-
though he did not say when that
might be.

A possible rescue senario could
well proceed as follows: the PM.

just prior to the October 5 dead-
line, announces that the USA has
agreed to ‘‘bow to some Canadian
concerns’. A compromise has
been struck — the Americans

agree to a binding dispute-settling —

mechanism in one area, the ser-
vices, even though they have in
public been vociferously opposed
to any binding provisions what-
soever.

Such a “‘compromise”’ is not
out of the question. Canadians
who went to Washington this
summer to talk to American legis-
lators say the Americans would
accept — and even welcome —
such a solution.

Economist Marjorie Cohen of
the National Action Committee
on the Status of Women, who was
on the trip, says the Americans
want a binding mechanism in the
services to ensure American
companies ‘‘national treatment’’
in Canada, and immunity from
‘‘unfair practices’, such as public
subsidies for services like health
care and day care.

With this really big ‘‘com-
promise’’ as bait, Mulroney pre-
sents an agreement — even
though flawed from their perspec-
tives — to the premiers and tells
them to accept it. Then he holds
out further bait. There are three
more months to get it straightened
out before the Jan. 3 deadline.
Better to sign a mediocre deal
now and get those 90 days to iron
out the wrinkles than forfeit the
possibility of a deal altogether.

Acceptance would be suicidal.
By signing, the premiers would be
bound. Under law, the federal
parliament has the sole authority
to sign treaties. There is no
agreement on how the provinces
may — or will even be asked to —
ratify the final deal once they’ ve
committed themselves to the ear-
lier document.

Coupled with this, a whopping
210 Tory seats in Ottawa would
make a mockery of any attempt at
a genuine parlimentary debate or

‘public hearings. The farce of the

Meech Lake proceedings and
futile attempts to change it even
minutely, let alone substantially,
so far make this patently obvious.

The premiers meet with Mul-
roney and Reisman once more be-
fore October 5. What they decide
then will be decisive for the
future.

Labour in sions :

GEORGE HEWISON

feta — ;
outnumbered a their eeeuee in Region 19, hoee Tradions
and structure are at complete variance with the meatcutters.

The task force’s initial recommendation throws caution to the .
wind and calls for immediate merger proceedings for the two”

regions, with one director and one executive for Canada, oe

~ UFCW tackles
oes woes |

It is only natural that labour activists would take more than

passing interest in the internal affairs ofthe United-Food-and —
“Commercial Workers Union. Its fractious history was highlight- —

ed again this year when 40 per cent of the delegates at a January
special convention walked out. This was followed in March by
the dramatic announcement by one of the Union’s main leaders
that he was taking his section over to the Canadian Auto Work-

ers.
No doubt labour’s eyes will be on the Region 18 convention of

the union which started Sept. 1S in Vancouver. That meeting will

be voting on the long-awaited final report ofthe Task Force on
Canadian Structure. It was this task force, comprising represen-
tatives of both Region 18 (Meatcutters) and Region 19 (Clerks),
which caused the January walk-out.

The minority, who angrily stormed out of the Region 18 meet-

ing, favoured the establishment of the task force. Those in the

' majority supported strong immediate pressure on the Interna-

tional to come forward with major structural reforms.

Meeting Canadian Needs

Since then, the defection of the Newfoundland fishermen has
tipped the balance in Region 18 considerably. The task force and
its recommendations are now likely to succeed. Whether they
nate up to the needs of Canadian foodworkers, only time can
te

The report does contain proposals on all the key contentious
issues raised at the January convention and its general principles
appear to move in a positive direction — more Canadian auton-
omy and more rank and file participation in the union.

However as the task force points out, “there were different _

ideas on how to embody these (general) principles. Some were
diametrically opposed to one another.”’ This indicates no major

break from the past when both factions in Region 18 postured as —

champions of more autonomy and unity.
A key conce
oe ut

process to be completed by the spring of 1988.

A second concern centered around perceived unwarranted and

unwelcome interference by the International in the affairs of the
Canadian membership. The principle, ostensibly designed to
cover this matter, and enunciated by the task force appears open
to interpretation: ‘decisions affecting only Canadian members to
be made by Canadians, consistent with the principles of inter-
national trade union solidarity.’

This could be construed to include concessions to the employ-
er in Canada to avoid difficulties for the union in the U.S. which
operates in a totally different climate. Such an interpretation is

not ncouelvabie given the International's track record here.

No Action Program
One serious omission is the absence of any mention of the
corporate onslaught, its drive for concessions and union-busting.
Organizational structure does not exist in a vacuum. The more
the rank and file feel they have real input and the power to change
their organization to meet the challenge of the corporate attack,

_ the more food industry workers will rally to the UFCW.

The reverse is also true. If workers feel they are being held

back by bureaucracy and constitutional and organizational ham-

‘strings, nothing will stop them from casting glances at one
options. :

‘The principle enunciated by the task force of “more rank and
file participation in our union’s policy and decision-making” i

laudable particularly given the tough times facing trade naga:

Unfortunately the Fecommmen stations ‘Covering this area are

_ both weak and vague.

While the task force points out that * ee are many nets left

out which will have to be settled by elected representatives in the

near future. Other details should be left to evolve after a period of

: experience rather than ‘written in stone’ at the beginning’’; sucha
_ postponement of profound but necessary changes toan indefinite
: future: may cause the merged union some difficulty.

When all is said and done, the real value of the recommenda-

~ tions will be determined in the crucible of the trade union =

struggle for survival.

ly want more unity | and auto

mendations move in the directing? of sfitying

PACIFIC TRIBUNE, SEPTEMBER 23, 1987 e 7