‘Two nations, one country’

ANY persons in English
Canada have tended to re-
gard demands for a new

constitution as being something
in the way of a favor requested
by French Canadians.

But English Canadians also
have a big stake in a new con-
stitution. This rather surprising
other side of the question is put
forward by Nelson Clarke, exe-
cutive secretary of the Commu-
nist Party, in a recent pamph-
let, “Two Nations, One Coun-

try.”

At this moment Canada’s pro--

. vincial premiers are being asked
to push legislation to bring the
British North America Act —
Canada’s constitution — to this
country so that it can be amend-
ed here and changes will no
longer have to be adopted by
the British Parliament.

Clarke suggests that bringing
the BNA Act to Canada will not
meet the need to recognize
French Canada’s demands for
equality in a two-nation state,
nor will it solve the problems of
the rest of Canada.

The biggest flaw of the BNA
Act is its failure to recognize
the existence of the French-
Canadian nation. But it also has
another big flaw, writes Clarke,
which affects the welfare of
English Canadians.

“It was written in the horse-
and-buggy era of 100 years ago
when there was little. govern-
ment spending on anything.”

In those days “children got
their education in the ‘little red
schoolhouse;’ hospitals were run
by charity; if a person couldn’t

work he was put in the poor
house.”

Little money was spent on
schools, hospitals or welfare.
Meeting the costs was left up to

NEEDED:

ANEW
CONSTITUTION

the provinces. But they were
left with quite limited taxation
powers to meet these costs.

“What vast changes have
taken place over the past 100
years,” continues Clarke, “and
how rapidly is the pace of
change being stepped up. Today
the need to equip our children
to meet the changes of this
modern age makes _ necessary

vast expenditures on _ schools

and on teaching staff.

“Today, modern medical
science is conquering one dis-
ease after another; but great,
modern, well-equipped hospitals
must be built to enable people
to benefit from these wonderful
achievements.

“Today, society is no longer
prepared to accept poverty as

inevitable. Demands grow for
the consistent expansion of -wel- ©

fare measures.”

What cost the provinces very
little in 1867, when the BNA
Act was adopted, now puts an
“almost intolerable” financial
burden on the provincial-gov-
ernments and on municipal
governments.

On top of this, the past 100

years have seen more and more
wealth concentrated in the
hands of a smaller and smaller
number of great corporations
centred in Ontario and Quebec.
These corporations cannot be
taxed by the provincial govern-
ments of the Atlantic Seaboard
or in the west, and these prov-
inces therefore have an even
more difficult time in meeting
the costs of. education, health
and welfare.

Clarke argues that to meet
the needs of the 1960’s
most necessary to bring about
the modernization as well as the
democratization of our Bish sheds =
tion.

“Much of the cost of educa-
tion, health, social services and
so on need to be placed upon
the central government,” which

_can tax the big corporations.

But this need for greater cen-
tralization comes into conflict
with the need to protect the
national rights of Quebec. The
“national” rights of Quebec,
which must be safeguarded, are
mixed up with “provincial”
rights which “can and should be

it is F

\

adjusted to meet the needs of »

the people in fast- cphanging con-
ditions.”

A néw Galtstitution ‘which
recognizes the two _ nations
would enable English Canada to

é organize the financing of educa-

tion centrally. The children of
Newfoundland and the children
of Ontario could then enjoy
equal opportunities and the
municipal education taxes on
people’s homes could be dras-
tically cut everywhere.

And this is what cannot be
done within the framework of
the BNA Act.

At the same time it is obvious
that “powerful business inter-
ests. prefer to maintain that
framework. largely as it is” and
to take advantage of decentrali-
zation of government responsi-
bilities “to avoid carrying their
proper share of the costs of run-
ning the country and providing

for the needs of the people
Clarke’s pamphlet, one 0
most popularly-written on
Communist viewpoint to apf
in some time, also discuss)
definition of a nation an¢
reasons for the growing
in Quebec now.
Arguing for the unity 0)
two nations for a Cdl
“from sea to sea,” Clarke

examines Liberal and To’

icy on this question a
some suggestions on the
sibilities of the labor movél

The five-cent pamphlet
ceiving widespread distriblty
across Canada. A second P
ing is under way.

Rising costs cancel
efficiency on farms

ARMERS’ cost of production
between 1949 and 1963 in-

creased by .43.9 percent,
but farm prices dropped 22.8

percent from 1951 to 1961, the

Ontario Farmers. Union stated
in a brief to the Ontario~ gov-
ernment.

The brief, presented to Pre-
mier Robarts and the cabinet
and later to NDP members and
the Liberals by OFU President
John Dolmer, said: “The rising
efficiency of production, as a re-
sult of the agricultural revolu-

_ tion currently in ‘progress, still

has not provided a correspond-
ing increase in security or sta-
bility of income to the farm
family.”

CLC must act on Vietnam

HE AFL-CIO executive coun-
cil has pledged full support
to the Johnson administra-
tion’s “energetic retaliatory
measures” in Vietnam. And

President Meany of the AFL-.

CIO asks the American people
not to pressure President John-
son for negotiations.

Fortunately, other Americans
take a different position. They
‘are exemplified by the 1,400
educators who « affixed their
names to ads published in the
New York Times calling for ne-
Botiations before it is too late.

~~ Many Canadians are demand-
ing that Canada press the Unit-
ed States for negotiations now.
The Hamilton and Vancouver
labor councils, many local

unions and unionists have re- °

quested CLC action along these
lines.

How long do they have to
~ wait for action from the Cana-
dian Labor Congress? Until the
H-bombs drop? Or does the CLC
executive go along with. the
views of the AFL-CIO executive
council and George Meany?

It is high time that unionists
~ and the general public see some
action from the Canadian Labor
Congress to help stop the dan-

gerous game of death being
played with our lives by the
Johnson administration.

It is also high time that the
Pearson government
whitewashing U.S. aggression in
Vietnam under. the guise that
the United States must get in a
position of strength before it
can negotiate.

“Strength to negotiate” is a
new pretense which covers up
the aim of the U.S. to pave the
way, by saturation bombings of

‘of North Vietnam and Laos, for

penetration by U.S. monopolists

‘in Southeast Asia and to allow

them the freedom to exploit
that rich territory and its peo-
ples.

These monopolists are part-
and-parcel of the same U.S. in-
dustrial and financial interests
which force Canadian workers
onto picketlines in order to se-

stopped

-

cure their own just rights.

The peoples of Indochina are

carrying through a change in

their way of life. That is their
right. And they are doing it
themselves, just as the. Ameri-
can people exercised this right
when they carried through their
revolution against the British
crown.

It is the suppression of this
right of a people to decide their
own destiny that the AFL-CIO
executive council aligns itself
with when it endorses Johnson’s
application ‘of the Goldwater
saturation bombing policy of
North Vietnam and Laos. Gold-
water’s plan included the use of
atom bombs! Remember?

Do those who commit acts of
aggression against North Viet-
nam forget that North Vietnam
is a socialist country? Do they
think that North Vietnam’s so-

cialist allies will not come to
her defense?

Does the AFL-CIO executive
council think the same thing?
Does the Pearson government?

If they do, they are living ina
fool’s paradise. And the hor-
rible ending of their fool’s para-
dise could be a nuclear hell for
all of us.

The forebearance of the gov-
ernment of North Vietnam is a
tribute to that government’s
sense of responsibility to the
whole world and of its human-
ism. The needs of human dig-
nity and national survival, how-
ever, place urgent limits on
such patience.

By their actions, the officers
of the CLC can dissociate them-
selves from the cowardly, in-
human position taken by the
‘AFL-CIO executive council.
.They can mount, at once, a
massive campaign by the labor
movement to convince the Pear-
son government and all mem-
bers of Parliament to demand
that the United States end its
bombings of North Vietnam and
Laos and enter into fegotiahons
now.

Now is the hour. Tomorrow
could be too late!

In 1941, one farm workél
ported 12 persons. Output
risen to where one workel
supplies the needs of 31 2)
sons. At the same time, %
population declined from 4)
percent of the total popul
to something close to. 1!
cent now.

“In the past year,” the if
continued, “farmers have ?)
encouraged to expand, get”
ger, become more efficient
a suggested solution to i
income. Those offering
tions, however, too often
take into account the al
terest of the farmers. Z

Planners at top levels it
ent a solution in the nam@®
the farmer, but their inte™
and that of the grassroots!”
ducer are by no means @!!
the same.

The OFU presentation
the government to pay a P
ium of 25 cents per cwl
grades one and two milk t0#
ducers of cheese, factory ”
cream producers, and .to *,
pers of milk for other mt
factured products, until 14

_marketing legislation is ©,

lished to provide a satisfa®
price return to the produce

The brief also urged:

@ Full cooperation 0
provincial government in
ranging protective duties
fruit and vegetable growe!®
pecially during the time
Ontario’s crop is bei
vested.

@ Legislation, if not a
provided, that would allo
keting boards to set price
farm produce.

@ Certification of bom
farmers.

@ Making available to *
boards a standardized ty?
building plan to reduce
building costs. :

March 19, 1965—PACIFIC TRIBUNE—Page