eo Se RS: :

US. 0

| tankers will pose

pollution threat to B.C. coas

By 1975 a fleet of oil tankers
will be plying the waters close to

_ Our Coast if present plans of the
Nixon government and oil
monopolies materialize as
planned.

At this moment this question is
of sharp concern to B.C. citizens,
for within a two week period in
the past month four giant oil
tankers have cracked up, Spilling
millions of gallons of the
pollutant into the sea near the
English coast in one case, and
under the Golden Gate bridge
near San Francisco in another
Collision.

These are only the last of
dozens of accidents where oil

tankers have lost their cargoes
into waters bounding a variety of
nations from the far east to the
west and east coasts of America.

American oil companies plan
to bring oil from Prudhoe Bay to
Ports in Washington state via
Plpe line and tankers. They can
begin the haul within four years
if a Start is made at once on the
Pipeline through Alaska.

To date the only public protest
as come from Victoria M.P.

David Andersen who told a
meeting of.oil executives in
Washington that because of the
potential for damage to Canada,
the USA cannot argue it is solely
their concern.

Freedom of the seas is an
archaic concept in an age of
giant tankers that can pollute
countries from miles beyond the
traditional limits, he said.

In March of last year the
Pacific Tribune called attention
to these very dangers. ‘‘The U.S.

. 1s building three tankers of over

100,000 dead weight tons each to
carry oil from Alaska to a huge
oil refinery now being built at
Puget Bay in Washington
state’, the story said.

“‘The route which these
tankers will take down the
Pacific coast has not been
disclosed. Whether they will
come down outside Vancouver
Island, well out to sea, or
through the Inside Passage is not~
yet known — though there is
every reason to believe they will
take the latter with its calmer
waters and shorter trip. . .”’

In the months since the first

hint of the oil hauls was given
out, the provincial government
has expressed no word of
warning, nor has the federal
government.

‘The Liberal Party’s chief
apologist, The Vancouver Sun,
editorially reneged on any
chance of a principled stand on
the matter when it stated...
‘As Washington sees it, . . . the
whole national security of the
United States is at stake. . . itis
a major military, economic and
political problem by comparison
with which British Columbia’s
ecological fears are minimal.”

Obviously the federal and
provincial governments also put
the U.S. economy, its military
and its politics ahead of
“ecology” on Canada’s west
coast!

Canadians have no control
over the high seas. We do have
control over our coastal waters,
and undér no circumstance

should we allow oil for the boiler:

rooms of U.S. war factories
spread out over our beaches, our
fishing grounds, and our waters.

Poor people march on city hall

Vancouver’s poor people
_Staged a demonstration at city
hall Monday as part of nation-
Wide protests undertaken in
other major Canadian cities
directed against government
Maction to provide jobs and
Increased welfare aid.

Highlighting the plight of the
unemployed and those on
Welfare, the Vancouver
Protesters sifgled out low-rental

Ousing projects to provide jobs
and demanded improvements in
welfare policies.

Crowding onto the third floor
Of city hall the 300 mostly young
People with a sprinkling of the
elderly voiced their frustration

Y demanding immediate action
ofr om all levels of government.
_This was the gist of the discus-
S10n that was pointed up by
Speaker after speaker if one

omits the voicing of a number of
unrealistic demands that tended
to rough up the positive value of
other contributions.

The public media in its usual
slanted treatment in reporting
an affair of this kind, focussed
its attention on the far-out
unrealistic proposals of some
speakers. Those statements
which would be worthy of consid-
eration by the public the media
chose to ignore in its reportage.

Ignored by the press were the
remarks of an unemployed
carpenter, a member of Van-
couver Labor Councils’
Unemployed. Committee who
stated, ‘‘Pressure should be
applied to city council to open up
negotiations with the Federal
government to make jobs by
building low-rental housing on
city-owned land.”

what you demand.”’

Also blacked out in press
coverage and TV reports was the
statement by Alderman Harry
Rankin speaking to the demon-
strators: ‘‘There are 85 acres of
city owned land in the False
Creek area that could be used for
low-rental housing projects. The
city has $1 million from the 5-
year plan that could get this
project going. We could get aid
from the Federal government to
make mortgage money avail-
able through Central Mortgage &
Housing for this which I would
like to see as a senior citizens
housing development.”

Making a point of appealing to
common-sense, Alderman
Rankin advised the crowd: ‘“‘Let
me Say you have to be organized
in what you want and realistic in

INGE
= EEGISUATURE

By NIGEL MORGAN

The Throne Speech (read by Lieutenant-Governor
Nicholson but written by Premier Bennett, and intended to
inform the Legislature and the public of the government’s
intentions,) was more noteable for what it ommitted than for
what it contained. It mentioned only eleven minor legislative
enactments out of 70 to 80 that undoubtedly will appear on the
Order Paper before the House progogues eight or nine weeks
hence.

In thirty years coverage of the B.C. Legislature, I cannot
recall a speech that was so long, yet projected so little. It was
devoid of even a suggestion as to what the government intends
to do about the major problems of mounting unemployment;
the acute financial crisis faced by B.C. municipalities, schools
and hospitals; the threatened hike in telephone utility charges
and compulsory auto insurance rates.

And while it promised environmental and ecological
protection, the Socred’s credibility gap was strained by the
fact that on the very eve of the Legislature’s opening permits
were allowed Utah Development for ‘‘controlled”’ pollution of
Rupert’s Arm by the dumping of 9.3 million gallons of mine
tailings.

The Throne Speech referred to exerting ‘‘efforts to expand
international trade.”’ But it ignored the necessity of controlling
rising exports of raw resources (wood, ores, coal, gas and oil)
to encourage development of secondary industries which could
create a hundred thousand new jobs in B.C., and provide
substantially increased government revenues to increase
pensions and meet health, housing and _ educational
requirements.

* * *

After, what has been the worst year of employer-lockouts
in B.C.’s history and a serious deterioration in labor-
management relations — all the government had to say was
that it had found it necessary ‘‘To invoke final and binding
provisions of the Mediation Commission Act,’ although “‘it is
convinced that free collective bargaining is the best means of
achieving peaceful and harmonious relations.’’ Quite a
contradiction. ! -

Indicating that the Socred’s have learnt little from their
unsuccessful attempt to impose foced labor last summer, and
that they have no intention as yet to make any significant
change in their anti-labor laws, the Speech declared: ‘‘Where
the public interest . . . are seriously affected, that interest
must be paramount and take precedence over the desires of
any particular segment.”

Startling, and no doubt not unconnected, was the
acknowledgement in the maze of statistics quoted that,
“approximately 19,000 patients were cared- for by mental
health facilities, increase of 19 per cent over 1969.” With the
government’s callous neglect of the hopeless plight of
thousands of unemployed; welfare, and tax problems; and the
magnificent 42¢ per month recently handed Old Age
Pensioners (while MPs voted themselves several thousand

dollars more per year), that figure will climb further.
* * *

Meanwhile, outside the Legislative Buildings a massive
demonstration of trade unionist and unemployed gathered to
demand jobs, a large-scale expansion of low-cost housing and
policies to achieve industrial development in B.C.

After the demonstration (which packed three successive
ferries with buses and private autos) had dispersed with B.C.
Federation of Labor officers moving to support picketing
hospital workers at Sandringham Private Hospital two miles
away — a handful of misguided ‘‘confrontationists” gained
ready accesss to the Legislative corridors.

Identifying themselves by screaming ‘‘Yippie —
revolution” they attempted to rush the visitor’s gallery,
clambering over dozens of ordinary working people, waiting in
line to observe the Legislature in session. This was the same
couple of dozen who had falsely announced in the press that it
was “‘their demonstration’; who attempted and were blocked
by Haynes and other Fed. officers from ‘“‘taking over’’ the
Crystal Gardens meeting and march; and who heckled and

heaped abuse on Fed speakers, including Alderman Rankin and ~

NDP leader Dave Barrett as well as senseless obscenities at
the Establishment.

Result, the government got off the hooks despite the
overall positive and strong support given the labor lobby. The
plight of the unemployed got lost somewhat in the dramatics of
the demonstration.

The B.C. Federation deserves full marks for the fine effort
they made to bring the plight of the unemployed to public
attention.

The main lesson to be drawn is the need for labor and all
progressive forces to do much more to provide leadership in
the growing unemployment crisis; to direct energies into
positive channels around programatic proposals: and to
develop a discipline that will shut out those alien provocateurs
who if they are not, are scabbing, in their obvious attempts to
bring discredit on the labor movement. They must not be
allowed to distract from the real issue — solution of the
unemployed crisis.

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—FRIDAY, JANUARY

ciate cS

ei!