WEEK IN THE HOUSE

Social needs ignored
for social standing

By HAL GRIFFIN

HE signs of an election, like the first crocuses in the grounds of
the Parliament Buildings -heralding the spring, are unmistakable—

and equally welcome after the long

All the talk around the House is of an early election,
most generally favored. In fact, there is little talk of anything else.

Only the imminence of an elec-|
tion can explain why the Coalition!
is bringing in so few bills of,
major importance, in view of the |
major questions requiring atten-
tion, so that the session may not
be prolonged. Only an election can
explain why the CCF, with so
many issues to fight upon, should
occupy its time with verbal ex-
eursions into “socialist” Britain
and New Zealand, with propa-}
ganda side tours daily into Sas-
katchewan at no extra cost to the
taxpayers, MLAs being paid by
the session.

Absorbed in this time-consuming
process, government members this
week turned from their tasks of
perpetuating social injustice and
“were joined by the CCF group in
voicing their concern over the so-
cial indignity inflicted on their
wives.

The writer of the Vancouver
News-Herald’s diverting report
on the formal . luncheon for
members’ wives given by
. Mrs. Charles Banks, wife of
the Lieutenant-Governor, could
hardly have foreseen the furore
it would create. He said, in ef-
fect, that Mrs. Banks had been
so displeased by the “unforgiveable
social faux pas’ committed by
some members’ wives in neglecting
to reply to her invitatton that
she had been constrained to lec-
ture them on etiquette, a lecture,
if the report is to be credited,
which was given further point by
the late arrival of one member's,
wife “who had a cocktail or two)
too many... .” |

The .disruptive effect this had)
on Mrs. Banks’ lecture was noth-|
ing to the effect the report had |
on the House, which had more
important matters to talk about,
whatever its reluctance to discuss
them. Some MLAs, with the fine
wrath of those who never drink, |
much less get drunk or allow their
wives to, wanted to call the writer
before the bar of the House. Har-
old Winch, declating that he felt
“very intensely about this,” made
a dramatic reference to the “shad-
ow cast upon every one of our
wives.” In the end, the House un-
animously adopted the resolution
moved by Harold Winch affirming
its belief in freedem of the press
but refusing to condone “license
of the press” (excepting, of course,
where it concerns Communists, or
anyone supporting anything Com-
munists support, in which case
license becomes the foundation of
freedom itself, as several MLAs
have demonstrated at this session).

The reaction of ordinary men |

and women, working people who , wasted on Mrs. Banks’ luncheon. |

are agitated about such matters}

as unemployment, living costs and|common people, and the sales tax posals
legislative! is part of it.

housing, to all this

PROTON AON AGA

ia petition calling

included in the petition from resi-

—VICTORIA, B.C.

Silent on fascists

Drew seeks LPP ban

—OTTAWA

Silent on the admission to Canada of French Gestapo agents bearing false passports, tory boss
George Drew is demanding the suppression of the Labor-Progressive Party.
At ‘a press conference Drew side-stepped quzstions on the sheltering of Count Jacques de Bernon-

dreary winter of Coalition policies. ,
with June the month:

|

drivel, which in four weeks has;
produced only one noteworthy
measure—a long-sought bill to ex-
tend the franchise to Native In-
dians on reservations, and Japan-
ese—and no reduction at all in
taxation, may be gauged by con-
tinuing protest against the sales
tax.

An example of this came to the
attention of Nigel Morgan, LPP
provincial leader, who last week
presented to Premier Byron Johnson
for repeal of
the sales tax signed by 14,034 citi-
zens. Unlike the celebrated affair
of Mrs. Banks’ luncheon, to which
Vancouver dailies gave columns,
it was considered of any impor-
tance only by the News-Herald, |
and then only to the extent of
four paragraphs. The government
has not seen fit to mention it
at all, presumably because no
burning question of social etiquette |
is involved, but only a trifling |
matter of social grievance. |

On his return t6 Vancouver this
week, Morgan reported he had re-|

ceived ten names too late to ber

dents of Tatra Lake who wrote|
that they had heard the LPP was
sponsoring a petition against the
sales tax and they wanted to be
included.

The right-wing CCF leadership
is feeling this popular pressure and
its concern, not so much for car-
rying forward the public demand
but for winning the anti-sales
tax vote, is reflected in its man-
euvers in the House.

At the last session the entire
CCF group was uncompromising in
its opposition to the sales tax.

This week, when the issue came
to the floor of the House again,
the division was little changed.
Sam Guthrie stood by his charac-
terization of the tax as “iniqui-
tous.” Coalitionists Tillie Rolston
and J. J. Gillis reiterated the
sentiments they expressed last
year, that the sales tax was unfair
and a burden on low income
groups. But the issue on which
the House was divided had changed
considerably. Now the Coalition
wants to maintain the tax indefi-
nitely and the CCF is indefinite
about its desire to dispense with
the tax gradually.

“That will. have to be decided
at the party convention in April,”
Herbert Gargrave stated when
challenged by Coalitionist Arthur
Ash to. state the CCF’s stand
frankly.

If that convention is more ex-
pressive of popular sentiment than
its leaders it will agree that

Harold Winch’s histrionics were

The shadow is on the lives of the

Pender Auditorium Lower F

ville, exposed in the Commons as a brutal tourturer of French patriots. during the

Nazi occupation of |

France, and five other Vichy collaborators. :
But Drew rose in the Commons again this week to press his demand for the suppression of the

| Labor-Progressive Party.

This time,he distorted state-
ments by leaders of the British,
French and Italian Communist
Parties that people in their coun-
tries would welcome the Red Army
as liberators in event their coun-
tries were
occupation forces.

He called this a “pattern of
treason”—a term which by, Drew
reasoning would also have to -be
applied to the resistance of all
patriots during the recent Nazi
occupation of Europe, whether
they co-operated with Soviet, Brit-
ish or American forces—and a
term which relates to his comfort
for the French fascists sheltering
in Canada.

Into his mythical “pattern of
treason” he strove to fit Labor-
Progressive Party leader Tim Buck
on the ,basis of a statement Drew
falsely claimed had been made in
Vancouver that Buck would not
“defend Ganada against Russia.”

Buck’s actual position was that

lhe would not support a war of
aggression against the Soviet
Union.

It’s a fair question to ask,
what Canadian democrat would
support aggression anywhere? —
Hence, the warmonger, Drew,
pushes for police state measures
to silence opposition to the aggres-
sion being planned under the At-

lantic Pact.

Prime! Minister St. Laurent, in.
reply to Drew, stated that the
Justice Department was giving

careful study to proposals to tight-
en “controls on communist activ-
ity in Canada,” and that the “LPP
under constant surveillance.”
Drew is forging an axis with the
Quebec’s “Padlock Law” Duplessis
to capture the government of Can-
ada. As prime advocate of anti-
Soviet war and budding Canadian
fuehrer, he is No. 1 danger to
Canadian democracy.

Success for his plans would gag
all labor, endanger peace, carry
fascism a long stride forward.

Drew and St. Laurent share
eagerness to exploit the Sam Carr
trial to screen their aid to Nazi
collaborators, their subservience to
Wall Street, and their anti-Can-
adian program cf insecurity and
war, 5 i

Unity of labor and the people
against Drew and St. Laurent
is realizable and potentially all-
powerful. Canadians voted out
of office the Bennett government
and its Section_98 ban on Com-
munists. They made the LaCroix
Bill—ban on the LPP proposed
by Arcand-supporter Wilfred La-
Croix—a bad political risk in the
1947 and 1948 sessions.

The same bill and similar pro-
can be licked by united

is

action now.

invaded by American

Tim Buck’s statement on danger
of war and occupation of Canada

I have been asked by the Canadian Press for a statement
setting forth the attitude of the Labor-Progressive Party towards
the danger of war and particularly concerning our attitude to-
wards foreign troops on Canadian soil.

‘The position of the Labor-Progressive Party is that there
is no danger or sign of danger of a hostile invasion of our
country. Some United States forces are at present in Canada
and they enjoy immunity from Canadian laws but they are in
Canada with the formal consent of the Dominion government.

There is no excues for the pretence that any other country
threatens Canada, or will threaten Canada or any part of North
America.

, The United States is ‘the only power in the world equipped

witk the ships of war and transport necessary to carry war

’ across the oceans, and United States imperialism is the source
and driving force of all the agitation in favor of war.

The Labor-Progressive Party is opposing and will continue to
oppose the Dominion government’s proposal to commit Canada
in,advance to participation in the war that the United States
imperialists are planning to start. ¢

We are fighting to keep Canada out of war. That is why
we “oppose Canada’s signing of the Atlantic War Pact. That is
why we urge that all United ‘States troops be withdrawn from
Canada, ; :

The Labor-Progressive Party is opposed to an imperialist
attempt to destroy Socialism by war.

: TIM BUCK,
National Leader,
Labor-Progressive Party.

TLC lays case against AFL
diktat before membership

The Trades and Labor Congress; demands and says any attempt to
execuive was not fooling when it; pull internationals out of the Con-
took a stand on the grounds that, gress will be met by issuing Con-_
as TLC vice-president Birt Showler | gress charters to cover their juris-
put it, “the majority of our mem- | diction. : ; ;
bers _ will never agree to! The letter provides the basis
Yankee | domination.” for the rank and file and local

It has backed up its rejection of , leaders to swing into the active

an AFL ultimatum by a letter car-| Support decisive to sustaining the
executive in its stand.

rying its stand to the membership. , i
The AFL had demanded: With the full weight of war-bent
ft the Canadi Sea-| Wall Street behind the bureau-
iG shia ae ae ae niaced py | crate’ drive for subservience, there
ee _2Y is no’ hope that the AFL-Hall-boss
the Seafarers’ International Union. | group will rest content with the
—that all other federal unions [LLC's gesture of “advising” unions
be turned over to international: not to elect Communists.
unions. Development of the present cru-
ae i ee caer oP ere se gst Houneen noe
pointe internatio p -| Ww it a firm stand against eve? -
tives command the voting strength morsel of concessions to labors |
of TLC affiliates. ~ !unappeasable enemy.
that the Congress turn Vancouver’s Trade Council, reP-
energies against “Communism.” resenting locals of internation
that the decisions of the 1948,and national unions, has already

its

(Victoria) Congress for unity,| solidly backed Showler’s report
autonomy and democracy be tornjand the issue is being carried tO —
up. the membership.

The TLC letter rejects all AFL (See page 9.)

BOOKS - PAINTINGS - MUSIC - REFRESHMENTS |

Review of “Canada: The Communist Viewpoint”

SPRING ARTS BAZAAR

LA

BOTOMOMEN

loor

TAnAnAnAMAMAMaMaL

FRI, MARCH 11 at 8:30 p.m.
SAT., MARCH 12 at 3-7 p.m.

- CHALK TALKS >

ADMISSION 25c¢
eee 2 re

wy

PACIFIC TRIBUNE — MARCH 11, 1919 — PAGE|