“Tighten your belt!”

jtreated to a rare,

Housing issue ducked

Cont'd from pg. 1
Downtown, Kitsilano and West End
Community Resource Boards, the
UBC Alma Mater Society, the
United Church and even federal
MP in Vancouver East Art Lee, all
appeared before council.

“Our society is in transition,”
Rankin said in speaking to his
motion, ‘“‘And it is a transitional
period which requires the im-
position of obligations for the good
of society.

“The developer’s obligation is
that if he tears down good housing
he will have to put more of the
same in its place.

The graveness of the situation
was underscored by brief after
brief as they described the growing
incident rate of land assembly and
demolition by real estate interests,
replacing low and moderate in-
come level housing with high
priced condominiums.

Jim Cork of the Hastings Sunrise
Action Council who termed the
demolitions a “‘creeping sickness”’

_ brought to Council’s attention the
example of the 2500 block East
Pender. Cork noted how a large
sign reading ‘for sale or
development .— land assembly”
indicated the developers
unabashed intention of buying up
the land, evicting the tenants,
demolishing the housing and then
building high priced con-
dominiums. Briefs from the
Community Resource Boards told
similar stores of the destruction of
low cost housing all over the city.

“The demolition of low income
housing to make way for expensive

condominiums and office buildings °

~ with townhouses is not the

developer’s right,’’ DERA’s
president Bruce Eriksen insisted to
council, ‘‘All residents of this city
have the right to share in the social

,and economic benefits of
rezoning.”
Eriksen challenged Mayor

Phillips on his statements that the
preservation of old buildings would
create a slum. “That is nothing
short of moronic,’ he. charged,
“The motion put by Alderman
Rankin is quite clear. It deals with
the replacement of existing
housing in the event. of
demolition.”

The DERA brief, echoing the
sentiments of others, warned
council of “‘political manouvering”’
and ‘‘clouding the issue” so that
they could ‘“‘look good while
protecting your developer friend-
—

Council proceeded to do just that,
ignoring the content of the motion
and offering red _ herring
arguments about old housing
creating slums. Finally, after 19
briefs and a speech by each council
member, Volrich and Harcourt
moved deferral of the motion for

- one month.

The motion to defer excused the
TEAM-NPA members from voting
against Rankin’s motion. The
consequence of doing so weighed
heavily in the air, best summed up
by COPE’s Bruce Yorke who told
council, ‘‘This is the opening gun of
the 1976 elections. If any of you are
so. class conscious, from the
developers point of view, to vote
against this motion you can be sure
we will turf you out.”

Kashtan urges action

Cont'd from pg. 2

hours’ pay. All of this would create
conditions for maintaining pur-
chasing power. It would open the
door to jobs for a growing body of
young people who are among the
main victims of unemployment
today.

At the bottom, what is required is
a fundamental reorganization of
society.

Big publicity is given to the so-
called turn-around.in the economy,
but claims that we are now in the
period of recovery, need careful
examination.

There has been 0.3 of 1 percent
increase in the Gross National
Product in the latest quarter. The
news surrounding this reminds one
of the way in which the press spoke
in the 30s about “‘prosperity around
the corner.’’ The story about

recovery should be. taken with a
grain of salt.

The present situation calls for
working-class and democratic
unity. The Communist Party will
campaign for such unity and for
policies to protect the working
people from the twin evils of
capitalism.

Such policies must include
democratic control over the banks
and industry, the profiteers, the
rent gougers. They must include
public ownership of resources and
energy.

The Communist Party calls upon -

the Canadian Labor Congress to
undertake a Canada-wide cam-
paign for its 9-point program.

Such measures could transform
the situation and enable the
working class to defeat the aims of
monopoly.

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—SEPTEMBER 26, 1975—Page 12

-revealed

By JACK PHILLIPS
On Tuesday of this week we were
but tragic
spectacle.
On that day, the Canadian Paper
Workers’ Union and the Pulp,

Paper and Woodworkers of Canada :

revealed their scaled down
demands in Victoria.

The top leaders of the In-
ternational Woodworkers of
America rushed in to condemn the
proposals before the employers
had enough time to state their
collective position.

The key propositions of the Pulp
Unions were: a one-year
agreement in place of the rejected
two-year package; a meaningful
cost-of-living clause; pension and
welfare improvements; and bonus
pay for Saturday and Sunday work.

The Vancouver Province that

‘day quoted Syd Thompson of the

big Vancouver local as follows: “‘I
thought only God was up in the
clouds but it is obvious the pulp
unions are as well.”

The same paper quoted Regional
President Jack Munro: “I’m ut-
terly amazed.”

On Wednesday, it was announced
that the employers had rejected
the pulp proposals. Also, that the
pulp negotiations had been
recessed. Simultaneously, it was
that the ~ I.W.A.
negotiators would meet with the
employers on Thursday, ina bid to
settle their dispute separate and
apart from the pulp unions.

It is one thing, and defensible, for
I.W.A. leaders to weigh up a dif-
ficult strike situation and work for
a compromise’ because of
weaknesses in’ the workers’
position. It is another thing, and
indefensible, for union leaders to

‘fight. their membership on the

basis of the employers’ arguments,
and to publicly undercut the
possibility of achieving united
action by the workers. A defensive
battle should be fought with skill,
tenacity and courage. Sometimes,
the best way to defend a difficult
position is to consolidate and go
over to the offensive. The
proposals of the two pulp unions
offered such a possibility, in our
opinion, particularly if the
membership of all three unions had
been mobilized to demonstrate
their support.

It would appear at this time that
the majority of the IWA leaders
have made up their minds that
acceptance of the Hutcheon report

Bal Divisions at top level 4
menace wood negotiations}

is inevitable. This despite the fact
that it was rejected by the two pulp
unions by an 84 per cent majority.
This despite the fact that the IWA
membership. in the fac& of a
recommendation for acceptance,
rejected it by 51 per cent.

As we understand collective
bargaining under present con-

ditions, the proposals from the pulp ~

unions would have been negotiable.
What was needed was a common
position by the three unions.
However, the IWA leadership was
not prepared to seriously discuss
the propositions of the other
unions. That was the logical out-
come of a situation in which the
liaison committee established by
the three unions was not func-
tioning.

Officers of the British Columbia

Federation of Labor were also in
Victoria, as unofficial participants
in the talks initiated by the
premier. They tried hard, but they
were unable to get the three unions
to adopt a common position with
which to confront the employers.

Reports from certain IWA cir-
cles indicate that a major problem

was the refusal of one of the pull)
committees to agree to a M0)
raiding clause in the propose?)
memorandum, drawn up by :
Federation. If this is true, it is tim?) _
for the members of all three union
to speak up and put their lea
back on course.

According to a number of wood 5
and pulp workers, there is 4)
growing realization that the]
membership of all three unions
must speak up and instruct theif |
leaders to hammer out a commol |
position. Failure to do so i:
inevitably bring a worsening
situation and a defeat for
workers. It would also fan
flames of division, recriminatiO? |
and destructive raiding. ,

The membership should voic? |
their opinion inno uncertain te i
Get together at the top! Adopt one
bargaining position! Present |
employers with a common front :
Work closely with the Bw
Federation of Labor! Mobilize
entire trade union movement -
win this crucial battle! oe wal

Any other road will lead fo}
shameful defeat!

Takeover B.C. Tel

Cont'd from pg. 1

The present application for a 20
per cent rate increase is designed
to shift the cost of this monopoly-
rigged system onto the backs of
B.C. phone users. This will not be
the last increase the public will be
called upon to pay for these
monopoly practices unless action
is taken to end the phone monopoly
and bring this vital utility under
public ownership.

Another issue surfaced at the
hearings this week which indicates
the danger of allowing the present

monopoly setup to continue. It was -

revealed at the hearing that the
New York-based GTE corporation
had set up an incentive plan to
reward executives of affiliated
companies, such as B.C. Tel, who
help increase the earnings of the
company.

The president of B.C. Tel, Basil
Beneteau, admitted at the hearing
that 11 or 12 top B.C. Tel executives
have been paidin shares under this
GTE plan for the obvious reason
that they had contributed to the
earnings of this world-wide

A word of explanation

{

about the postal code —

‘Some readers may be wondering why the Tribune has been mailed

to them bearing the postal code.

We have not abandoned the boycott campaign of the Canadian Union
of Postal Workers. Their boycott of the code to force the post office
officials into meaningful negotiations on the effect of technological
change is a just action that has won the support of the entire Canadian
labor movement. It also has our support.

However, the post office has many small newspapers over a barrel.
They can legally cancel our second class mailing rights if we do not
comply with the new reeManons for mailing that were introduced with

the postal code. -

‘In fact, the post. office has daca that any ‘newspaper or
publication who are not on the code by. October i 1905 will nove their

rights cancelled.

Cancelling our second class mailing rights is tantamount * putting:

us out of business.

Under these circumstances and with the agreement of the Gane dian
Union of Postal Workers we have decided it best to comply with the .

regulations. —

Our subscription Yist will therefore bear the code. We ask our r sub-
scribers to understand the necessity of our decision and to co-operate

change addresses.

- with us by noting the code when filling out sub forms and when you :

We will continue to boycott the code in ay other ‘way possible. Our

readers are urged to do likewise.

There will be no justice for cae workers unless an of us pee in

ey with their demands,

hooks

Gould see nothing wrong with it-

monopoly. Officers of B.C. rel
defended the plan and argued they |

Since B.C. Tel executive office!
are enriched under the GTE plan”
the extent that they contribulé
greater earnings of the paren
company is it not likely to exP' val
that they will continue the policy ® | —
purchasing phone and electromié :
equipment ‘from affiliated com |
panies, whether or not this is to C a
advantage of phone users in BY’)
rather than shop around . uf
similar equipment which coul
purchased at less cost from ot
manufacturing companies? NDP. I

“tia

It’s to the credit of the B.C.
government that it is opposing
application by B.C. Tel for a 20
cent rate hike, and that they © |
questioning some of the meh :
practises of B.C. Tel. Howevel,
there is no way this }
monopoly, which exercises alm0s" ;
100 per cent control of this det
portant utility in B.C., can be Bie OQ
to serve the public adequately |
without completely breaking ic |
monopoly through the publif
takeover of the company.

For many years the be :
movement, Communist Party, cl
the NDP itself, have advocal® |
public ownership of B.C. Tel. In
last provincial election campaié!
this was one of the major arms j
in the NDP’s platform. Since th sp
it has retreated from this prom”,
to the point where premier “hs
Barrett announced a few mo? is
ago that the takeover of B.C. Tel is
not a priority issue with A :
government, and may not be i a
government is returned
another term. Fi

However, this issue cannot 1°
be long delayed. of

B.C. Tel is now at the poinl ial
embarking on a major capilt wl
expansion program which of
tighten the grip of this monopoly i
the province and make the pub
pay hundreds of millions of dol a
in the next few years throuee 3
higher rates .to finance t a
program.

The issue of the takeover of B 7
Tel has now become a pri? ot 4
issue and a test of NDP g0V
ment sincerity in defending fi
public’s interests from pr
greedy corporations such aS
Tel.

AS Es