Unemployed.”

L2

e
. .
ities ete TGWU Record. London

“T always' said my Bert is one in a million — he is, he’s

|For justice at Western

Recently 350 workers were

iM 7, cemoniously fired by the
haw Western Hospital for
m "ting a provincial statute
“Inst strikes of hospital work-
Atay any conditions. The Hos-
“itty administration took the law
The their own hands, as it were.
Labor Relations Board has

ty turned down an application
mere union involved to. prose-
“hare Toronto Western on
hanes of failing to bargain in
‘the faith. The OLRB refused
' Union’s application even
‘ate “a primafacie case or
yelable point of law had in fact
|” established.” :

lye Sharply dissenting, Board
IQ nber P. J. O'Keeffe of the
Moyet Union of Public Em-
mis had a point when he
(i fe “For either party in this
o oly; Public interest dispute in-
Ng hospital patient care to
M justification for lawbreak-
because of the dirty hands of
ther is completely unaccep-
Here. to me” . . . “Our decision
: leary have wide-reaching im-
10ns not only in the instant
‘he 20d the eventual resolve of
Ji, Matter in dispute between
ve, Parties herein, but it has
tl fh far greater implications in
“0p, Uture industrial relations in
“Toy No concerning parties
Nd by the Hospital Act.”

‘| Hundreds of workers do not

. viglenly walk off their jobs,

1p pat good and sufficient rea-
et 80 doing. Nor can*they

‘1g. *Pected, when frustrated at
“4Biey turn in seeking redress of
. ‘8Mces to go to the law

books or consult a lawyer before
taking what to them seems the
only proper action to take.

In this situation too, the tac-
tics employed may have left a
great deal to be desired. But this
did not excuse the trade union
movement in this province for
ignoring the plight of these un-
derpaid and much overworked
hospital workers. Yet, but for
one or two unions who were
the honorable exceptions, the
Ontario labor movement ignored
these workers.

Perhaps if Mr. O’Keeffe’s view
of the situation were adopted by
other union Officials, something
could be done even at this late
date. “Better late than never”
still holds true. (B.M.)

West Coast editi

we, Pacific Iribune

THE GREAT LIE

Let us have done, then, with
the miserable deception of
anti-communism. It has served
Hitler and Mussolini well, but
not the enslaved German and |
and Italian peoples. It may
have a pleasing sound in Tory
ears, and salve the conscience
of some spinsterish British
labor leaders, but it is rank
dishonesty nevertheless. It is’
the great lie of our decade.
It is the last refuge of the re-
actionary whose political ar-
senal is empty, whose world is
bankrupt, and whose nations’
thirst for power is desperate
and undiminished. That is one
of the lessons of Spain. | hope
we will never forget it.

—Norman Bethune

Canadian Tribune:

Editor — MAURICE RUSH
Published weekly at Ford Bldg., Mezzanine No. 3, 193 E. Hastings St.,
Vancouver 4, B.C. Phone 685-5288.
: Circulation Manager, ERNIE CRIST
N Subscription Rate: Canada, $5.00 one year; $2.75 for six months.
7 rth and South America and Commonwealth countries, $6.00 one year.
All other countries, $7.00 one year

Editorial Comment...

New policies to serve people’s needs
challenging political task in 1972

The right-wing conspiracy grouped
around the Tories, now joined openly
by the Toronto Star, has the aim of
scuttling the social security measures
which Canadians have won over dec-
ades of struggle.

They are now stating for all:to hear
that they intend to emasculate unem-
ployment insurance and ban the right
to strike (the “icing” is that the ban
would be “temporary” and in “essen-
tial” services), in other words, force
workers’ living standards down by
threat of starvation on the one hand,
and legal restriction on their fight-back
on the other. And they’re out to slash
public services all around.

They are trying to drive Canada back
to the dark days of the Hungry Thir-
ties. And they have big money behind
their campaign.

The task for Canadians is not just
to hold the line; it is to.expand and im-
prove social security. We should extend
and improve public services. We must
make life better, not worse, for the
working people of our country.

We need policies that would build,
instead of selling Canada. We need
policies that would benefit the Canadian
people, not the domestic and foreign
monopolies. We need jobs as a right, a
guaranteed annual income as a right.
We need policies that lead forward, not
drag Canada backward.

The Communist Party candidates

have, despite limited facilities, brought

the alternatives squarely to the atten-
tion of the people. They have broken
through the blackout and compelled the
politicians and editors to deal with the

real issues, at least touch on them, in-.

stead of sweeping them under the rug
as they started out to do.

Those issues should stand foremost
in our thoughts when voting, and they
will remain and grow more grave after
the elections, whatever the outcome.
The election results will only determine
whether the endeavor to provide solu-
tions in favor of the people will be con-
ducted under worse or easier condi-
tions. With the election of a large bloc
of anti-monopoly MPs, especially with
a high vote for the Communist candi-
dates and the election of Communists,
the people’s struggle would have the
best chances.

In previous issues we have dealt at

length and in detail with the proposal _

for a 10-year plan to build Canada and
provide the 2,500,000 new jobs needed
by 1980, and also with how this plan
can be realistically carried out by bring-
ing our energy and natural resources
under public ownership, and how it
would be financed without inflation.
Here we want to mention the highlights
of the Communist candidates’ proposals
for social security and public welfare:

e A 32-hour work week with no re-
duction in take-home pay.

e Unemployment insurance at 80%
of wages for the full period of unem-
ployment.

e Income security and old age pen-
sions with a minimum of $3,000 a year
for single persons and $5,000 for a
married couple.

e Price and rent review boards to roll
back prices and rents.

e Extension of Medicare to take in
dental care.

e Drugs and medicines at cost (even-
tually free) by taking over manufac-
ture of them by public ownership.

e Day care for children: of working
mothers.

e Free higher education with sti-
pends to students of low-income circum-
stances.

e Tax reform, basing taxes on ability
to pay.

Our vast country, bountifully endow-
ed by nature, with high production
capacity created by generations of our
industrious workers, farmers, profes-
sional people, with a highly qualified
labor force need not trail at the tail of
human progress.

There is no reason why so many of
our workers, our youth should be job-
less, without opportunity or perspective
in our favored land. —

There is no reason why we couldn’t
build this country up to the highest
level in the world, providing all our
people with a secure and decent life,
with meaningful and ever broadening
perspectives.

These are the horizons for Canada in
the 1970s, that the Communist Party
and the Communist candidates place
before the Canadian people in the fed-
eral election campaign, this is what we
mm! gies to strive for in the years
ahead.

The hard facts

Some of the facts of life, as distinct
from politicians’ election mumbo-
jumbo, are dealt with in the current

. issue of The Financial Post. Here’s how

the wealthy size up among themselves
“some of the hard facts that will face
whoever may be in power next month”:

“Protectionism is rampant in the U.S.
which, for better.or for worse, now
takes 70% of our exports as against
65% as recently as 1970,” says the Post
in a front-page article. “The on-going
trade war brought about a year ago
August by President Nixon’s temporary
10% surcharge on imports has only
been postponed to allow the two gov-

ernments to get their election out of -

the way ... If the intensely protection-
ist Burke-Hartke bill on the U.S. Sen-
ate’s books ever sees the light of day,
it would mean the loss of about 360,000
jobs in Canada...”

- Those are the hard facts. The jackal-

like nature of the Canadian capitalists,
their grab for a fast buck and to hell

-with the country, is exemplified in the

Post’s main editorial in the same issue,
gloatingly headed, “Profitable prospect
for Canadians”—hoping that Canadian
monopolies will get a higher price for
oil export to the U.S.

The hard facts are that the prospects
for Canadians (people, not monopolies)
are not at all “profitable.” The “fast
buck” sell-out gang and their Tory and
Liberal mouthpieces should be told so
at the polls.

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—FRIDAY, OCTOBER 27, 1972—PAGE 3

‘4 Cs AEDS SACHS - Shih OID AS