EDITORIAL No place for children The House of Commons Special Task Force on Child Care spent over a year and $1-million to consult with Canadians about our collective vision for a country-wide child care strategy. Almost 600 individuals, child care activists, women’s, labor, church, farm and business groups met with the committee. An analysis of the committee transcripts compiled by researcher Martha Friendly of the Daycare Resource and Research Unit at the University of Toronto found that Canadians in their overwhelming majority (76 per cent) wanted public funding to go directly to providing child care services. Ignoring all this, the committee recommended tax credits. It was the opinion of 89 per cent of the respondents that quality child care outside the home would be beneficial for children. But the committee showed and obvious bias for stay-at-home mothers, even though 60 per | cent of women with children under five are in the workforce. Non-profit child care was the choice of 77 per cent of respondents (half of those who supported public funds for profit care were commercial operators). But the committee, ignoring its own research documenting the low quality of commercial care, recommends both capital and operat- ing grants for this sector. An overwhelming 86.5 per cent of Canadians want a universally- accessible child care system. But the committee comes in with a $700- million tax credit scheme, which will not create one new day care space. Ottawa again chose not to listen, leaving the day care movement to once again — in its own words — “meet, recruit, lobby, push, hound and badger.” The findings of the Tory majority committee were completely consist- ent with the government’s neo-conservative stance. Child care is a com- modity to be purchased in the market place which, they argue, is “stimulated” through tax cuts. But Canadians are obviously unwilling to buy this “free enterprise” scenario around child care. No one denies that a comprehensive, universal, child care system is going to be an expensive proposition. Yet despite the Tories’ carefully- nurtured right wing climate, there is a strong degree of unity among Canadians in support of this demand. The federal Conservatives should take note. The battle for adequate, accessible and affordable child care could well become another important mobilizing point in the fight against their neo-conservative agenda. SOCRED — ‘CO-OPERATION: D-CHKMAM EF 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 The response of the B.C. Federation of Labor to the assault on trade union rights in the Socred’s new Industrial Relations Reform Act won’t convince this government or big business to back up. The program of action enunciated at the emergency meeting of the federa- tion’s executive council Monday had four key components: a media campaign to explain the impact of the legislation; a round of public meetings with B.C. Fed officers as speakers; a meeting with the Business Council to make clear the implications of business support for the legislation; and the formation of an officers’ committee to work out further plans. The program pales in comparison to what was expected, especially after the comments of Cliff Andstein and John Shields to the overflow crowd at the emergency Vancouver Labor Council meeting Sunday evening. Andstein told that meeting that the federation officers had held three meetings to work out a response, with different levels of action according to the nature of the legislation. Shields told the meeting that he had alerted his union to be “ready for action this week.” But before releasing the program the federation officers were determined to have the meeting with Premier Vander Zalm to formally ask him to not proceed with second reading. “Whatever happens . will be on his head,” said Andstein. Vander Zalm’s answer was predictable, but the lack of an immediate demonstra- tive response from the labor movement was not. The prospect of an escalating action program should not yet be ruled out, Fred Wilson however. A committee of Ken Georgetti, Cliff Andstein, Roy Gautier, John Shields and Angela Schira have another week to develop an on-going action pro- gram. Even then it may not be too late to stop the legislation, although the absence of action this week may be fatal to any real effort to stop Bill 19. Certainly there are objective difficul- ties before the leadership. They have not prepared the membership for political job action, and nothing short of that will have any chance of forcing the govern- ment to withdraw Bill 19. In addition, the labor movement has been compromised by the strategy that the federation leadership developed in extending the hand of co-operation to the Socreds and business. Many left trade unionists who criticized that approach believe that the top leadership were actually surprised by the legislation, and in spite of what Andstein said, did not have a response prepared. “We held out our hand and they. cut it off,” said Andstein Sunday. “And now you only have one hand left,” was the obvious reply. Another complication is the percep- - tion held by a considerable section of the leadership that it is impossible to stop the legislation and that attention must be turned to dealing with the new Industrial Relations Act and super-cop Ed Peck. A Next week decisive in fight against Bill 19 boycott of the new Industrial Relations Council is proposed as an initial step. Harking back to the four year fight against the Mediation Commission in the late 60s is a part of this thinking. The point is that Bill 19 can be stopped, and the slogan “Stop the legis- lation” should become “Change the leg- islation” when and if it passes. Rather than remembering the fight against the Mediation Commission, it would be bet- ter to remember that the one concrete accomplishment of Operation Solidarity was that it forced the Socreds to amend Bill 3 before it became law. The key today, as it was in 1983, is to quickly put masses of people into action in a way that the government cannot ignore. That won’t be easy, given the lack of preparation. But all the experiences of 1983 and since indicate that if the mem- bership is given the facts, and if the lead- ership puts faith in the membership, tens of thousands will move into action. The fact that 600 people turned out on short notice to the VDLC meeting indi- cates that there is a mood for action that can be tapped. Faced with the choice of the problems of stopping Bill 19, or of trying to live under it, there really is no choice. Fred Wilson is chair of the labor commit- tee, B.C. Communist Party 4 e PACIFIC TRIBUNE, APRIL 8, 1987