AFTER SOVIET DEAL WHAT?

Less tension ca

CANADIAN Communists see the
recent $500 million Soviet
Purchase of wheat trom Canada as
Making it obvious that the well-
being of our country is linked to
€asing international tensions.

The wheat deal, they say, puts
the government ‘‘under extra
Pressure to begin to work for
disarmament and not to do those
things which run counter to this
heed — such as accepting nu-
Clear arms,”*

The views of the Communist
Party were outlined by the party’s
National organizer, Nelson
Clarke,

While the wheat sale ‘‘certain-
ly does not mean we've solved
Our economic problems, or even
the problem of our need to trade
With socialist countries,” said
Clarke, ‘it does create a better
Situation in Canada.”

* * *

In the sense that Canadian
trade with socialist countries has
been expanded, and our trade
has therefore become more di-

Versified, he explained, the wheat _

deal ‘helps to make Canada more
Mdependent of the U.S.’’

, But Clarke also warned that

We cannot count on a perman-
ent market for wheat in the
Soviet Union or Ghina, since
they are capable of great agri-
Cultural production of their own
Over a long-term period.

“What is needed is rounded
Out trade, which should include
the export of Canadian indus-
trial and agricultural products.”

Ih this connection, he hoped:

that rumors about an increased
Import of Soviet goods to Can-
ada were also true, and empha-

Hal

‘

sized that ‘‘long-term trade with
any socialist country must be
based on mutual advantage.”’

The Communist Party spokes-
man noted that the wheat sale
is going to force the Canadian
government to face up to some
transportation problems.

* * *

A recent newspaper report that
shipping companies in countries
such as England, Norway, France
and Belgium will likely benefit
most from the shipping end ofthe
deal, focuses attention on the
need to re-establish a Canadi-
an merchant fleet.

It also ’ calls into grave ques-
tion the policy of closing down
the branch railway lines on the
prairies. This short- sighted pol-
icy of the railway companies,
condoned by the federal govern-
ment, will deprive many farmers
of the full benefits of the wheat
sale because of the increased
costs of hauling grain to more
distant elevator points.”’

The Communist Party, said
Clarke, has a long record of

struggle for the sale of grain to

the socialist countries.

‘<at one time we fought alone
on this question. Then it was
taken up widely by farm unions,
farm co-ops, labor unions.”’

The grain deal, Clarke felt,
was an expression both of the
kind of independent policies ad-
vocated for Canada by Commu-

nists, and the policy of peaceful:

coexistence.

The easing of international re-
lations, reflected in the test-ban
treaty, contributed to the
achievement of this particular
wheat sale. It would not have
been possible, he underlined,

NO WHEAT GLUT ON THE PRAIRIES THIS
YEAR. If Canada follows up this breakthrough

in trade with socialist countries it can lead to.

during the Cuban crisis last Oct-
ober.

‘after all, the only other
course is to deny the possibility
of peaceful coexistence and its
corollary of peaceful trade and
to visualize world thermonuclear
war as the only solution to the
problems before the world. This
course, we Communists com-
pletely reject.”’

* * *

The wheat sale will put an es-
timated $2,000 into the hands of
the average prairie farmer,
which will influence the wel-
being of all Canadians.

‘It should be a great source
of pride,’’ suggested Clarke,
*¢that our farmers have develop-
ed such a technologically ad-
vanced agriculture in which less
than 10 percent of the popula-

tion is able to supply the main
food needs of all Canada.’’
Clarke noted that press reports

spoke of poor harvest in the
Soviet Union and all Europe, and
this was undoubedly why such
a large purchase was made here.
The agreement was an example
of how trade can assist countries
in times of climatic difficulties,
inevitable in agriculture.

The $500 million sale to the
Soviet Union, with part of the
wheat going to Cuba, ‘‘ runs coun-
ter to the opinions of the U.S.
government as to what Canada
should be doing.

This could be explained,
Clarke felt, by the fact that
*‘there are powerful economic
factors in operation impelling
the Canadian capitalist class to
undertake new economic’ meas-
ures leading in the direction of
greater economic independ-
ence.’’

Besides that there are divi-
sions within the Canadian ruling

Ma gazine Section

N lead to more trade

vast expansion of- trade between our two
countries.

circles between those who see
their profit interests in being
completely tied to economic
subordination to the U.S. and
those who feel the need of seek-'
ing more independent policies.

There are also divisions within ~

the ruling circles in Canada, as
in the United States, bétween
those who regard war as inevi-
table, and those who are begin-
ning to see the necessity for
peaceful coexistence.

These divisions also cut across
both the old capitalist parties.
The various factors operate, ‘‘no
matter what party is in power
‘in Ottawa.”’

The fact that Pearson’s gov-
ernment compels it totake public
opinion into account in a way it
might not have done, concluded
Clarke, if Pearson had obtained
in.April the majority he sought.

Exodus

By KENNETH YOUNGER

hew crop of inteliigent and
aspiring young Canadians is
now enrolling in our universi-
les for their final year of studies
They are bidding farewell to
their Parents as they settle into
a last big effort in academic
training But many of them will
be orphans a year from now fol-
Owing graduation next spring
They will still have their parents
but they will have lost their
Country
It’s the United States that is
Making the best use of the thou-
Sands of trained professionals
Sur higher educational system
Produces each year. Canada
reeds children who emerge as
4dvanced people in their fields
M the US,
What a conglomeration. of
talent we have lost.
_There are now over 3.25 mil-
‘on people in the U.S. who came
there from Canada. This figure
'S being augmented daily by a
Continuous flow across our south-
€rn border. But what is doubly
damaging is that an ever higher
Proportion of Canadian emigrants
ts Composed of precisely those
People we can least afford to lose

* * *

The drain of our brainpower
Will skim off close to 7,000 pro-
€Ssionals — scientists, doctors,
“ngineers, economists, manag-
Ts, businessmen — if current

Rather it

of brains and talent to

trends continue next year. And
in this category, it isnt the

laggards and dullards who go
is those with some

gumption and spirit, those who
are best qualified in their re-
spective fields, who are forced

_to decide that a greater outlet

Are our scientists, doctors, engineers, teachers to be trained in
Canada for the U.S. to use? Creation of manufacturing industries

fro

m our raw materials can create new opportunities to keep them

working in Canada and for Canada.

for their talents and a greater
challenge to tackle will be theirs
if they apply themselves in the
United States. —

From high up this problem
might seem to be statistical.
From the heart of a conscient-
ious student completing his
course it must be turmoil and
a tearing at loyalties—to his
professional knowledge on the one
hand, and to his national con-
science on the other.

W. Stewart Geddes, writing in
The Independent Business-
man, puts the question this way:

* * *

**To someone who has just gra-
duated from one of our universi-
ties and who is on the threshold
of their professional career, what
single factor is probably more
important than any other? Is it
not that of extending the fron-
tiers and working onthe develop-
ment of new ideas in their field?
Surveying the prospects, what
climate or environment exists to-
day in Canada for work of this
nature?

*T would suggest it is rather
similar to that of the Yukon for
growing orchids — it is chilling
and soul-destroying. There is on
the part of both government and
industry a complete lack of in-
terest in research and develop-
ment.’’

The urge to flee from our stifl-
ing atmosphere is quite strong.
And many do quite well for them-
selves personally. A Pulitzer
prize this year anda recent Nobel

U.S.

prize were captured in the U.S,
by Canadians. The medical fac-
ulty of John Hopkins University
has over 50 ex-Canadians en it
and 20 more work at the Mayo
Clinic in important research and
teaching positions.
* * *

Every area of intellectual act-
ivity in the U.S. has been stim-
ulated by the presence of skilled
professionals who have found no
outlet for their skills in this
country and were forced to leave.
One of them said recently, ‘I
didn’t abandon Canada; Canada
abandoned me’’.

It would be naive to think they
will ever return after becoming
established in their chosen field.
We have, in the main, lost them.
We will continue to lose them as
long as government policy does
nothing to provide for creative
outlets and stimulate opportuni-
ties in Canada.

Take two simple facts where
government action has been
wanting—nothing is spent in this
country for research in the fron-
tier fields in science; U.S. subsi-
diaries in Canada spend $20 mil-
lion each year on research at
their parent plants in the U.S.

A little adjustment here would

go a long way towards laying a
base for facilities for our skilled
people at home.
. More challenge to creative and
imaginative minds and better re-
turns for their efforts would soon
follow. The process of border
osmosis would stop.

October 4, 1963—PACIFIC TRIBUNE—Page 5