EDITORIAL

Only words? Or deeds?

One of the most interested observers of Prime Minister Mulroney’s visit to
Africa must have been Stephen Lewis, Canada’s enfant terrible United Nations

ambassador. Lewis, we recall, has been in the front lines at the UN opposing ,

mandatory sanctions againt apartheid.

But there was Lewis’ boss last week, arm-in-arm with Zambia’s Kenneth
Kuanda and Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe. There was Mulroney warning Preto-
ria of more sanctions by Canada. There was our Prime Miniser listening as
Kuanda and Mugabe spoke of the right of the South African people to use all
forms of struggle to destroy apartheid.

Lewis must be wondering what to do with his “sanctions-will-only-hurt-
Blacks” speech. But we’re sure he’ll manage. If a so-called socialist can front for
a Tory government and if he can sell Reagan’s line on apartheid and Afghanis-
tan, he can certainly muster enough energy to do another political backflip to
keep his pay cheque coming. ; :

But salvaging Lewis’ tattered credibility isn’t the problem. Having met
directly with leaders of the front line states, having visited Africa and listened to
the issues being advanced, will the Mulroney government now, finally, come out
in favor of totally mandatory sanctions against Pretoria?

Will it break diplomatic and economic ties with the racist gang running
rampant in that country. Will it offer material assistance to the people’s
liberation movement, the African National Congress?

Will Mulroney press his allies to do the same? Will he press Ronald Reagan,
who will be here in April, to bring his thinking into the 20th century on this issue?

Will Mulroney order Canadian firms to stop trading with apartheid, stop all
imports and exports, all credits?

Will Canada now support the UN call for South Africa’s immediate with-
drawal from Namibia, condemn its repeated invasions of Angola and publicly
tell Washington to stop backing the CIA-supported criminal army of Jonas
Savimbi?

Now that he’s reaped the benefits of statesmanship and peered deeply into the
television cameras from Harare and Victoria Falls, will Mulroney back his
words with actions?

Everyone is waiting.

People and Issues

a guT oie. alee
) INNO TIME

Editor — SEAN GRIFFIN
Assistant Editor — DAN KEETON
Business & Circulation Manager — MIKE PRONIUK
Graphics — ANGELA KENYON

Published weekly at 2681 East Hastings Street
Vancouver, B.C. V5K 1Z5
Phone (604) 251-1186
ISSN 0030-896X

Subscription Rate: Canada — $16 one year; $10 six months

Foreign — $25 one year;
Second class mail registration number 1560

D eregulation and social service spend-
ing cuts go, as we know, hand in
hand. The former term is used as a buz-
zword for privatization, that process by
which right-wing governments around
the capitalist world facilitate the plunder
of what once was a public service.

We were pondering this, and the
numerous articles we’ve written on the
threat to public services or publicly regu-
lated services, when we chanced upon an
article in the Highland Echo the other

day. The Vancouver east side neighbor- ~

hood weekly was praising the services of
the new, privately owned Care Point
Medical Centre recently established in
the area.

The author of the article made it clear
why she waxed enthusiastic over Care
Point’s services. At 8 p.m. on a Friday '
evening, her husband was refused treat-
ment for an injured, and painfully
throbbing, thumb. Even though the hos-
pital he phoned had provided the initial
treatment, he was told hospital policy
forbade further treatment on the grounds
that there was no longer an “emer-
gency.” But the receptionist at the hospi- '
tal had a suggestion — the local Care
Point clinic.

At Care Point — which the author
notes was incorporated in British
Columbia in 1984 and is listed on the
Vancouver Stock Exchange — the hus-
band received prompt service, having his
thumb rebandaged and x-rayed within
15 minutes. The couple checked into the
clinic at shortly after 8 p.m. and were
home by 9 p.m., which the author rightly
termed “amazing.” (The Echo article
notes, as background information, that
some 20,000 Care Point type clinics are
operating in the United States and the
prairie provinces.)

With privately-owned hospital chains
looming on the horizon, it’s not difficult
to imagine an almost completely privat-
ized medical care system — and we
wonder what would happen to public
medical insurance plans then — ina few
years. The posting of public medical care
on the critical list, along with the Post
Office and other public corporations,
shows we have to fight the double bar-
relled threat of privatization and social
service cuts all that much harder.

* * *

ccording to a member of the organi-

zation, the participation of the
Association of United Ukrainian Canadi-
ans in the annual winter carnival dates
back to the time when an AUUC
member sat on municipal council. At
any rate, 1987 marks the 12th year that a
chapter of the progressive ethnic organi-
zation has participated in the yearly
event in Vernon, B.C.

In fact, this year the Vancouver chap-
ter heads to Vernon with three acts to
perform at the carnival’s “Ukrainian
night” on Feb. 12. It replaces the
Edmonton chapter, which last year won
the carnival trophy for the most success-
ful night of entertainment.

The Vancouver contingent takes to
Vernon some 30 people who perform as
members of the Dovbush Group —
dancers — the AUUC Jubilee Choir and
the Vancouver Folk Orchestra. It will do
so through the auspices of the Vernon
chapter, which last year celebrated in the
interior city 95 years of Ukrainian Immi-
gration to Canada.

We wish our friends in the Vancouver
AUUC all the best in their performances,
and add the wish that they “bring the
trophy home” to Vancouver.

Letters

Stuart Crombie, Our Times Co-op,
Toronto, writes: George Hewison’s dis-
missive swipe at worker co-operatives
(Tribune, Jan. 28 issue) is regrettable and
wrong-headed. He mixes up genuine co-
operatives — where the employees own
and manage the enterprise, each holding
an equal number of voting shares — with
other schemes that involve taking
workers’ money to keep a faltering busi-
ness going while the power remains in
management hands, i.e., a new form of
concessions.

I’m sure a lot of people would wel-
come a critical examination of pseudo-
co-operatives, and a clarification of the
situation surrounding real worker co-
ops. But, having mixed apples and
oranges, the column presents worker co-
ops as a threat to the labor movement.
That’s certainly not the case in other
parts of the world, like Western Europe,
the Soviet Union, or Nicaragua. And in
Canada where there are only about 350
worker co-ops, most with less than 10
employees, it’s just sinister speculation.

Contrary to the column’s assertions,
workers co-ops share the same basic
objectives as the labor movement —
useful work, reasonable pay and work-
ing conditions, and worker control. In
recognition of this, and as a way to safe-
guard and create some jobs, the Canadian
Labor Congress has included the explo-
ration and limited promotion of worker
co-operatives in its alternative economic

strategy that was adopted at the April |

1986 convention.

The relationship between worker co-
ops and the labor movement is still pretty
tentative and in transition. In many
ways, it’s dialogue that hasn’t yet taken
place. Unions do have, however, a very
important role to play, and all of our
experiences haven’t been negative. The
column refers to the Victoria Plywood

Co-op, but what about the [WA andthe —

Lamford Cedar Products, or the UFCW’s
supermarket in Philadelphia, or even the

1

Toronto labor council’s sponsorship of —

Our Times? This whole topic is well

covered in a new book by Constance —

Mungall, More Than Just a Job (Steel
Rail 1986).

Finally, attacking worker co-opera- |

tives because they don’t challenge
monopoly capitalist control of the
market is a pretty infantile diatribe.
Organizing a local union, like at
Michelin for example, doesn’t challenge
monopoly control of the tire maker
either, but you wouldn’t suggest the
CAW-Canada forget it. In general, this

column doesn’t help co-operative acti- |

vists to understand the union movement,

and it doesn’t help unionists to under- —

stand worker co-operatives — which is -

something they have to do in order to
carry out one part of the CLC’s pro-
gram. And neither does it do anything
for the credibility of your paper.

4 e PACIFIC TRIBUNE, FEBRUARY 11, 1987