IOMIMOTOAT NANO) TN

DORR DAM -
oo omen we

COLUMBIA “SCANDAL” AT A GLANCE. These two drawings from the cur-
rent issue of Engineering and Contract Record shows what the McNAUGH-
TON PLAN (above) would do — store our water for downstream power
generation in B.C: Below, the TREATY PLAN would store our water on the
U.S. border or in the U.S. for hydro develo; ment there.

A real struggle to save the vast natural resources of the Columbia River for
the people of Canada is taking place before the External Affairs Commitee
Parliament. This struggle can be won, especially if sufficient public pressure
be generated to force the debate into the the public arena. It is not too late

The role of the monopoly press
(wire-services, daily news-
papers, etc.) in reporting this
struggle is such a shocking be-
trayal oftheir function as to prove
beyond a shadow of a doubt that
they are active accomplices in
what is turning out to be the big-
gest scandal in Canadian history.

Reporters covering thehear-
ings freely admit that the op-
ponents of the draft Columbia
River Treaty and latest proto-
col have effectively shot the gov-
ernment case full of holes; they
have just as freely and just as
correctly predicted that this
story would be suppressed from
the Canadian public.

The first week of May saw
testimony from representatives

of the United Electrical Work--
ers union, Mine Mill, the Fish- ~

ermen’s union, Richard Deane,
chief electrical engineer for the
Consolidated Mining & Smelting
Co. (speaking for himself and
24 other professional engineers
in the Kootenays), the Columbia
River For Canada Committee,
and the Communist Party of Can-
ada, represented by Leslie Mor-
ris.

Previously Gen. A.G. Mc-
Naughton, Ontario Hydro econo-
mist Larratt Higgins, and the
dean of B.C.’s consulting eng-
ineers—F. J. Bartholomew—had
appeared before the 35-member
committee whose instructions
are, as handed down by External
Affairs Minister Martin: ‘*Take
it or leave it. Either accept or
reject the treaty, but don’t amend
itt

All of these witnesses denoun-
ced the draft treaty and, point
by point, demolished the govern-
ment’s case,

To date, not one single wit-
ness has appeared to defend the
treaty. who is not on the govern-
ment payroll in one form or an-
other, either directly as a
goyernment official or indirect-
ly as consultants to the govern-
ment or as paid witnesses—at $50
a day plus travelling expenses,
Not one!)

The writers ofthis article par-
ticipated in the hearings during
the first week in May. Bruce
Yorke was on the witness stand
for four hours, representing Mine
Mill and Tom Parkin for two
hours, representing the UFAWU,

The conduct of the committee,

the utter ‘lack of democracy, is

so glaring that finally even the
press could keep silent no longer,
when, in utter desperation, Con-
servative members rose and de-
nounced the committee’s activity.

VIEWS SUPPRESSED

In a tumultuous scene during
the course of the testimony of
Richard Deane, Tory committee
members Lawrence Kindt andDr.
Willoughby charged that the func-
tion of the committee, which nom-
inally was to hear the views
of the Canadian people, had been
transformed into one of active
suppression of vital information
and views.

VITAL INFORMATION SUPPRESSED

Inside story of Columbia hearings

By BRUCE’YORKE and TOM PARKIN

The PT invited Tom Parkin
of the United Fishermen and
Allied Workers Union, and
Bruce Yorke of the Trade
Union Research, both of
whom recently participated
in the Ottawa hearings, to
present their views to our |
readers.

In this article they outline
what is happening at these
vital hearings, in which the
future of the Columbia River
is at stake.

To cite some specific ex-
amples, The committee refused
to allow the names of the 24
resident engineers in the Koot-
enays who oppose the High Ar-
row Dam to go into the record.

The chairman (a Liberal) went
through a series of ‘‘explana-
tions’’ of his reasons for this
ruling; explanations which served
to expose the kangaroo court that
has been set up. This court is

‘now reeling from the battering it

has taken,

First of all, he said he could
not allow these names to go on
the record because all he had
was a typewritten list of them
and they could not be authenti-
cated. When Bert Herridge point-
ed out that he had also been sent
a photostatic copy of the actual
signatures he denied ever seeing
them. The clerk of the commit-
tee promptly produced them.

Communist leader testifies

LESLIE MORRIS, national leader of the Communist Party, is show
introduced to the External Affairs hearing by chairman John R. Mo

“May 15, 1964—PACIFIC TRIBUNE—Pod?

Then the chairman offered
treat

explanation that he couldn
the handwriting and tried # oe |
this as an excuse. But wil 4s
was pointed out that that We
the reason for the typed list, 4
switched tactics again and § zi
how could he tell that there ‘he
actual relationship betwee?
signatures and typed list
names?

This actually happened ®
Hansard, when it becomes # i
able, will probably show the
tent of his panic. 3

The chairman, who is oa
worst offender by any me
then again changed tactics ia
said if the engineers’ names
to be put in the record
them would have to be a¥v ine
for cross-examination
committee,

And yet, the committee ue
so far refused to hold near
Vancouver and the Kooten® f
where witnesses who be.
been bought and paid for ¢4?

a real opportunity to appeat
state their views.
inal

The whole farce was * a
brought to*> a conclusion ee
combination Liberal -
motion, against all reas0® |.
democracy, which enforce
suppression,

Such were the goings-0? oe,
ing the sitting of a Parliam
tary committee, involvine |
lions of dollars and the fu
of Canada.

vm