6 y WILLIAM KASHTAN “neral Secretary, Communist Party of Canada ~ How ; i Conventgpcn® £0 estimate the 6th NDP eee In light of the problems ; Moctatne the working class: and Pets: i¢ Movement. ‘and the pros- *onomic sharpening struggle in the eng» Political and parliamentary From ; Conve, the Standpoint of policy the tight. a Moved the NDP to the Hy Stived 4 y, Same time the vote re- 4 consolig Mr. Laxer would. indicate | Wing, aA ation and growth of the left yh it foug ee ough the policy positions Some . Or were defeated. i] teny tye PKesmen of the NDP either that j pce to the right, or claim | Raingt the Merely a majority reaction i) Waffles 4 Policies pushed for by the #) *sertion, © iS little truth in these © fact ; : E fh Culati Is that the - - y right ely shifted NDP See fied lectins j an eye to the provincial Alber, Ontario, Saskatchewan and HW) Spects af 'S year, including the pro- ; poueh a Snap federal election, YY in 1979 an election is more like- Compare Resolutions On | tion ® has Only to compare the resolu- d at this convention with d in 1969 to see the ex- a a. a. °WRership did not come up tt Eo! resources the con- tenet if iteac Position of “national- Ornilization sary but not necessarily s : top ne Canada, the convention ne On “ty Previous position of the Position,“ Nations” and adopted a -geetship periicy, leaving it to the Ould be. decide what that policy Nfgeee Withee” affairs, the NDP position VS drop ve fom NATO and NORAD inde while its position on ty listener Wont a change. The un- listen; Might get the impression hg to Tommy Douglas 1€tnam in front of Par- & for the U.S. to get this was NDP policy, Solution had no relationship to pation, actually adopted at the The shi gether it to the right in policy went Ted-baiting and anti- thing which one would disappeared from the Son > Som ped hag 8 The. SAM WALSH come overwhelmingly public re- sistance both | enamel n the NDP convention NDP lexicon. David Lewis’ attack on the “Kremlin and the Pentagon,” John Harney’s attack on “monopoly and communist totalitarianism,” Tommy Douglas’ attack on the big powers in which he lumped U.S. imperialism and ‘ the Soviet Union together, all have something in common—an equation of imperialism and socialism, an attempt to create the impression of a third way out, the way of social reformism, which in fact is in deep crisis on a world scale. What was the purpose of all this? Obviously one edge of this was direct- ed against the Waffles and the left wing generally, while the other edge was directed to show monopoly that it has nothing to fear from the NDP under right-wing leadership, and that it can be trusted with power. — The Waffle Vote Simultaneously with this shift to the right in NDP policies, the contest for leadership brought to light that a size- able number of delegates—612 (37%) to be exact—voted for the Waffle can- didate, Mr. Laxer. This was the sur- prise. of the convention and brought consternation into the camp of the NDP right wing, and one should add, of monopoly and its mass media. Mr, David Lewis and some other NDP spokesmen tried to play down that vote and spoke of it as a personal vote against him and the NDP estab- lishment, in ‘this way trying to mini- mize its significance. Taking Mr. Lewis’ argument that the increased vote for Mr. Laxer on the 4th ballot was a vote against him and the establishment, the question could be put — was it against Mr. Lewis personally, or against policies of the NDP right-wing leadership? The fact that the evolution of the voting, shifted to the Waffle candidate and not to’Mr. Léwis suggests that those who voted that way preferred the Waffle policy to that of right wing policy. Left Wing Defined It is therefore safe to conclude that the leadership vote showed a consoli- dation and growth of the left wing in the NDP and its crystallization around the Waffles and their candidate. What it brought to light is the growing de- mand within the NDP for more radical policies, policies which are directed not to embellish capitalism, but to chal- lenge monopoly power. : This is a rather important conclu- in French and ral New Democratic Party mem- bers of Parliament had voted sion to draw, both for the NDP and for the left generally. Some argue that the vote for the Waffle candidate came mainly from young delegates, with the older NDP delegates, farmer and trade unionists supporting Mr. Lewis, that in essence the conflict at the NDP convention was a conflict of the generations. This of course is not so. The shift- ing of the vote from ballot to ballot showed that the left wing included young and old, trade unionists and farmers as well as intellectuals and students. - The Trade Unions | However, the main bulk of trade union representation threw its weight behind Mr. Lewis. This was made pos- sible, at this stage by virtue of the fact of right-wing domination and con- trol of the trade unions affiliated to the NDP. This control was used to influ- ence the selection of delegates from union locals to the convention. ‘Nevertheless it would be wrong from this to assume that the trade union representation was a “right wing mass.” The. shift in votes from Broadbent to Laxer shows this. Nevertheless the Lewis forces were able to maintain their base in the trade union movement because the Waffies have not yet formulated economic and social policies which could be linked to the broad political issues they were raising, nor united with the Commun- ists in and outside the trade union movement in the battle to help shift . the trade unions to the left. Key Questions The weakness of the Waffles lies precisely here, in its lack of a solid base in the working class. All the les- sons of history show that no meaning- ful changes can be effected in society without or against the working class. Recent history has also underscored the fact that no meaningful change in the relationship of political forces can take place without unity of Commun- ists and Socialists as the nucleus around which to forge a broad demo- cratic coalition. The lessons of history also make clear that it is not enough to win “all power to the people.” Once that is won, how will it be used, step by step, to curb the power of monopoly? In addi- tion, once power is won, how will it be kept in face of the power of U.S. imperialism and of Canadian monopoly, both of whom are not likely to be inno- pressive legislation, and a whole campaign was launched to that cent and peaceful bystanders in such a situation? A government which is not prepared for this contingency is not worth its salt, nor is a government which does not establish close relations with all revolutionary, democratic and progres- sive forces in the world, so as to en- sure it has allies in its effort at build- ing a new society. We invite the Wafflers and other genuine left elements to participate in the Program discussions the Commun- ist Party is presently undertaking on these and other fundamental questions aimed at bringing into being a demo- cratic anti-monopoly coalition, headed by the working class and its Marxist- Leninist Party, as a transition to the building of a socialist Canada. What Lies Ahead? What next, now that the NDP con- vention is over? The right wing in the NDP is obvi- ously taken aback by the.vote of Mr. Laxer and by the determination of the Waffies to continue pressing for their policies within the NDP. Some of these right wing elements demand a policy of “off with their heads”. In this they are being joined by some editorial advice from the mon- opoly press and by some columnists like Lubor. J. Zink of the Toronto Telegram. Monopoly would relish this kind of surgery which could decimate the NDP and make it impotent in the coming provincial and federal elec- tions. If Mr. Lewis takes this course he will be committing political harikari. It would be equally harmful to the cause of democratic progress were some elements in the Waffle to take a~ course of breaking with the NDP and forming a separate political party. The real need is the continued strug- gle for policies of genuine alternative to those of the old-line parties, for the forging of unity of the left in the struggle for such policies which could effectively curb the power of monopoly, advance the struggle to regain Cana- dian independence and a genuinely in- dependent foreign policy, unite the democratic and national forces in Eng- lish and French Canada to win a New Canadian Constitution. The NDP convention turned to the right and did not come to grips with these basic questions. This is why the process of differentiation will continue and deepen within that party. Party Québecois, Dr. Camille Laurin, who in _ ll _ self- © Try orig pat Bovernment has © (lemaac’ the Public (H Ag. f ate, 9 Jap ey Measures) ( ( Eaiout immedi- Moja! ’Pressiyg 2 big aim “sive legislation or oh ter Wa again the block- by Unquest; fasures Act. This No ‘ONably a major (if lete) victor Beetic forces. : ia Clear if we re- e on stages of E Of resist s ance €Ssive legislation. he Quebec aa ument and the ¥s pee administra- Proclai’ 1970 Trudeau tal wee the shock- t fie Measures Act Ueber al law, Particu- additional, Bi Owing da Canada mount- IC protest — a * Parliament Was +. Prophesyin ' me Only the eae at would be- English Canada. Shortly afterwards, the three central bodies of Quebec in an unprecedented joint emergency conference formed a “Common Front” to denounce the WMA. This stiffened the backbone of René Lévesque, leader of the independist Parti Québecois, who had’ supported Bourassa s request to bring in the army. It had a similar effect on Claude Ryan, editor of Le Devoir, and both joined forces with the “Common Front.” With the arrest of the alleged kidnappers and “executioners of Laporte, public pressure turned onto the struggle to reé- lease the purely political pri- soners, those charged solely on the basis of political dissent. Large demonstrations took place in Montreal and Quebec City, one of them organized by the Montreal Central Council of the Confederation of Na- tional Trade Unions. Meanwhile 16 of the 20 fede- against the War Measures ‘Act. Then after some unprincipled public wobbling, the whole NDP caucus voted against the sub- stitute Public Order (Tempora- ry Measures) Act. Protest meet- ings began to be organized all over Canada, expressing solid- arity with the people of Quebec. A decisive turning point was the powerful position which the~ Canadian Labor Congress finally adopted when it confronted Trudeau and his cabinet and de- manded repeal of the repressive legislation. - It appears that from then on some members of his cabinet began to question Trudeau’s determination to bring in per- manent repressive legislation before the expiration on April 30 of the Public Order Act. A panicky Prime Minister Bourassa of Quebec and an equally panicky Mayor Drapeau of Montreal sent telegrams to Trudeau to bolster his demand for immediate permanent re- end. When the government finally decided to let the Public Order Act lapse, Bourassa shrieked with fright. In his rage he ac- cused federal Justice Minister Turner (not Trudeau, please note) with cowardice. But his tirade against his fellow Liberal will not fool the people of Quebec. We have correctly judged him as a contemptible weakling -—in a panic because all his frantic showmanship and inter- national junkets will not pro- duce the 100,000 jobs in 1971 that -he promised the work- hungry of Quebec. And now the federal government, under growing public pressure, has taken one big club he was re- lying on to keep the deceived and angry working class in line. Hence his. unseemly public tantrum. A revealing; curious aside has been provided by the National Assembly House Leader of the righteousness evidently wants Quebec to stifle demoracy “in- dependently.” He asked Bou- rassa in the National Assembly the following question: “Has the government the intention to arrange to put on the agenda of the next constitutional con- ferences in June, the repatria- tion of the penal code, so that Quebec can -adopt whatever means it considers adequate for the protection of public ar- der (1!!!) > The battle is far from over, for Turner has announced that — a joint Senate-Commons com- mittee will be set up to study permanent repressive _ legisla- tion. : The working ‘class and all de- mocratic forces in English and French Canada must unite even more solidly to warn of the fate at the polls of any elected re- presentatives that try to find another way to throttle demo- cracy in Canada or to keep French Canada from fighting for its national rights. : PACIFIC TRIBUNE—FRIDAY, MAY 7, 1971—PAGE7 -