iy
: the or in deciding the date of the general election
pt ihevitapen ent government adopted the course which

€ that the answer to the question would

*

iN) .

lig’ *étion which impelled the St. Laurent govern-
soe woh Y Cut the prairie farmers off from the British
mien, 4, «20d the motives which impelled the British
Aeron *efuse to commit itself to the International
Noni len\ illustrate the inter-play, of political aims
ted to frests and the manner in which the one is
stem € other in this all-perVasive crisis of the

thy ne €xample, the St. Laurent government's sacri-
i, tt eave Market for Canadian wheat. The Churchill

io as its reason for not committing Britain to
“ heat Agreement the price that the Agree-
Y leade, lish. But, St. Laurent and the three
ge; “ts knew quite well that Britain’s need to
Was Bre of wheat one end of advantageous two-
em, Ore Important to the Churchill government
,  netary Price of the wheat.

Ts aa N8dom needs to pay for the wheat and flour
Bitoni by exporting British products. Thus,
leq i ° Stay Out of the International Wheat Agree-
ley Bk Choice of trade on the terms open to her
ine, vould trade with her in sterling; as her
latren: easing dependence upon the United States.:
“ls sup e°Vernment rejected that alternative and
the he Port of United States aims even though it
S of Canada’s biggest overseas market for

Heo

3 ah mated On August 10 without the above and
a. droy “cts before them. Where one or another
t We 1€ conspiracy of silence it was dealt with
my iSolated phenomenon.

lay a the question of trade: Colonel Drew of-
all, w orters “a Commonwealth Trade Conference,”
™aking had Started his election campaign with the
a eg Stat, Canadian economy complementary to that
iti, oe ducked the sharpening question, “What
in Da arket?” by subtle double-talk about “accept-
aewiannent for part of Britain’s purchases from
*Ommj rd confusion of the issue. Both of them
Prog *mselves to the one policy that would re-
‘ely. t Ucts to their traditional place in the British
eeay Put Canada’s trade with Britain on a
PE Can Ng both of them support the St. Laurent
May "dian economy, including foreign gtrade, to

eng Tory, CCF nor Social Credit leaders offer-
this ation to the electorate about the -relation-
of intestion of the British market and the: St.
iS Westie ation” with the United States policies,
‘ attituas. of the British market and Canada’s
: © towards the question of, Peace or War?
ether Canada’s future is to be one of
e Ce and all-sided development, or one of
ce and reduction to a raw material hinter-
ates, committed .in advance to involve-
Imperialist war.
‘ Progressive party brought forward those
Lp their inseparable relationship to each
its Beene the 100 candidates contesting the

Ree ’ :
Canad €r brought forward the vital question

4 and the two nations which constitute
n, only the LPP and its candidates put
* Deo: Policy, based squarely upon our country’s
Needs and interests, and the alternatives -

SONAR

‘The Canadian people reject Toryism as such; its official and
acknowledged party is a spent force. More and more of the
millions who did not vote will, in future, vote against both
old parties. Slowly, painfully, despite confusion, Canadian
democracy is seeking the path forward. The parliamentry
monoply of the two old line parties is doomed.’’

AIAG

that confront us. Our -slogan, Put Canada First! expressed
the awakening national resistance to the policy of sell-out
upon which all other parties are agreed. The unity of all four
of the other parties in support of the main aim of the policy
of subordination to the United States, explains their conspiracy
to prevent the election platform of the Labor-Progressive party
from becoming known to the widest circles of the people.

Labor-Progressive candidates were subjected to discrimina-
tion, misrepresentation, intimidation of their supporters and
in some cases open violence. The LPP campaign as a whole
was subjected to misrepresentation, to lies, to brazen discrim-
ination in the matter of the use of radio facilities, including
outright exclusion in several cases and to outright exclusion
from the television program that the CBC made available to

- other parties. The national leaders of the Liberal, Tory, CCF,

and Social Credit parties each share the direct responsibility
for that systematic discrimination. Fearful of the strengthen-
ing prospects for peace they sought to delay wide public realiz-
ation that they have been supporting an anti-Canadian adven-
ture solely on the basis of their mutual- anti-Communism.
Regardless of what their different excuses may be, the effect
of the conspiracy was to prevent wide circles of Canadian
electors from learning the content of the democratic alternative
to their betrayal of Canada.

*

The light vote on August 10 was the planned result of the
timing of the election and the framework within which the
Liberal, Tory and CCF leaders kept the campaign. In the
circumstances it would have been very remarkable if the vote
had been heavier. Without condoning political passivity it
must be emphasized that the three million electors who stayed
away from the polls registered, thereby, unmistakable evidence
that the crucial questions confronting Canada were not dealt
with in the campaign.

The Liberal victory and the superficial illusion of stability
that it encouraged were not in any way the basic features of
the election; on the contrary, the distribution of the popular
vote showed that “prosperity and the cold war” notwithstand-
ing, the masses of the people are continuing to turn away
from the parties that they identify with the interests and aims
of capitalist big business. That trend was maintained in the
vote on August 10, it is the basic trend in Canadian politics.

As the LPP press statement on the election results
pointed out: “The Canadian people reject Toryism as such;
its official and acknowledged party is a spent force. More
and more of the millions who did not vote will, in future,
vote against both old parties. Slowly, painfully, despite
confusion, Canadian democracy is seeking the path for-
ward. The parliamentary monopoly of the two old parties
aig te hat estimation is confirmed as the

of that estim :
siaeh wee cae ae They reveal that even the disparity
between the Liberal and Tory votes is an outgrowth of that
trend, not of increasing confidence in the Liberals. In ta
to the fact that 52 percent of all those who voted, erent
their ballots against the ae rapa nant ae ar
ive: parties total only a

a ae aoe Objectively, the disparity between ue
Liberal and Conservative votes represents only the Sued
tion of those who support the political domination of cane ist
big business around its. Liberal party. St. pagiacean =
tion that the vote demonstrated confidence in his party, wa

from the reality. : :
= The Prime Minister’s statement that the election oa i
vote for national unity was also quite contrary to po ; ica
reality. The plain truth is that the popular ree Beek
capitalist big business Aaah Hi sere gen sta
the two central provinces, the s he

italist i sts, for its control of the political . life of
bar : ce they have to exploit the ne s Be
to avoid a Tory government. The political merger o ; wee
and Tory politics is far advanced already, the organizationa
merger, starting with coalition, is not far away.

*

hy and tremendously significant feature of the
ey oS oe fact that in turning away from the sats
old parties that they. identify with the interests of pe y-
capital the masses of the people did not turn to the ors a
The striking increase in the number of CCF candidates
elected, from 13 to 23, is an expression of the peculiar ete
of election by plurality. The popular vote for the CCF eer
both in absolute numbers and as a percentage of t e ei ?
Furthermore, the CCF vote ‘declined most drastically in t a
more highly industrial parts of the country. : Only we iz
candidates were elected east of Winnipeg, in spite S Ae
energetic, I might say extreme, measures resorted to = : e
top officials of big unions in Auto, Steel, Packing, CBRE, etc.,

to gear the administration of their unions to the CCF election
campaign and literally foist the CCF upon their members.

The right wing leadership of the CCF played a confusing
and anti-working class role. Supporting the war policy of the
St. Laurent government without any reservations, the leaders
of the CCF sought deliberately to provide the political fig
leaf of social-reformist “justification” for that policy. On the
issues of Korea, the militarization of Western Germany, the
International Wheat Agreement, recognition of People’s China,
Churchill’s proposal for a Great Power Conference and the
subordination of Canada’s national interests to United States
imperialism, they supported the aims of- the St. Laurent
government—always providing the necessary amount of con-
fusion to prevent the workers from having a clear choice be-
tween the imperialists and the democratic Canadian interests.

*

One of the lessons of the election campaign is that of the
need for more and more concretization in the exposure and
refutation of social-democratic confusion. The popular vote
shows that the workers have not yet fully broken away from
the old capitalist parties. It shows also that the break is
hindered by the fact that workers and middle class people’ are
not yet seized with a vision of the path ahead by which they
can achieve national progress within the political limits that
they, for the present at least, tend to set for themselves.

The Labor-Progressive party’s campaign and the votes
cast for our party candidates marked the beginning of the
crystallization of popular opinion in support of a new national
policy. We have cause to be proud of the 60,000 votes that
were cast for LPP candidates in the circumstances under which
their campaigns had to be fought. The intensity of the
hysterical campaign of. intimidation, lies and misrepresentation
of the LPP program is reflected in the extend to which it re-
duced the vote cast for our candidates in constituencies where
the party has polled very substantial votes for years and in
which it still enjoys wide mass support. But, that makes the
significant votes given to the LPP candidates all over the coun-
try, in many constituencies that we have never contested
before, all the more encouraging, notably in Quebec. Every
one of those votes has meaning; it is a force for the develop-
mnt of a great national movement to Put Canada First. *

At the beginning of our campaign we set ourselves the
task of making the question of the aims of our national
policy a central issue in the elections. We succeeded in that.
In addition we saw several of the proposals that were put
forward only by the LPP at the beginning of the campaign,

taken up, albeit in a distorted form, by the other parties ‘as:

the force of our proposals started to register. One outstanding

example of that process is to be seen in the haste with which-
federal Libérals and the Tory government of Ontario have-

now agreed upon the need for an all-Can
line. Several other examples of the
campaign could be cited.

Thus, the campaign witnessed a basic. and. far-
change in the role of our party. In the process of o
strengthened itself very substantially (in member
its ability to carry on public work, in the extendin
improved role of its press, indeed of the progressive press in
general, in reaching the youth, in strengthening its relation-
ship to the masses generally). The conception of the Canada
\that could be, which was the essence of the new platform and
program of the LPP, made it clear that new campaign methods
—hbased on taking the platform to the people in a special
form of canvassing—were necessary. A beginning was made
,in this direction, which will have profound meaning and
lessons for the future public work of the LPP with the slogan,
Put Canada First.

No member of the LPP could have participated in our
campaign, particularly in those concluding meetings, without
experiencing the thrill of joy at the increasing role played
by the youth. Young Canada found its voice in this election
campaign, in propagating the program of A National Policy

adian natural gas pipe-
effect. of our Party’s

reaching
ur party
ship, in
g of and

to Put Canada First.

One of the areas in which the increased LPP vote was
noticeable is among the farming population, and isolated in-
dustrial areas, where campaigning is most difficult, physically,
and where the party has extended its base for future work.

These and numerous other examples justify our declara-
tion that the fight for'‘Canada has just begun. .

The task confronting the LPP now, everywhere, is to cen-

_ tinue the wonderful work that marked our campaign. The

party’s election platform is in fact our program of action, for
a long time ahead. The full fruits of our election campaign
will be reaped though to the coming winter to the extent that
we continue and further improve our public activity to arouse
the democratic national consciousness of all Canadians and
unite them in support of the crusade for ‘a New National
Policy to Put Canada First. *

PACIFIC TRIBUNE — AUGUST 21, 1953 — pace 7

—— ——

pyrene