By ALAIN PATRIE

The Confederation of Na-
tional Trade Unions in Quebec
held its national congress in
Montreal last month. Some
1,300 delegates representing
250,000 organized workers list-
ened and debated the course of
action the union leadership
would feel mandated to take.
The congress was particularly
timely insofar as the crisis of
Quebec is concerned and as a
summing up of the first year of
the Seventies. Setting off the
tone and direction the congress
would take was a massive key-
note speech delivered by Mar-
cel Pepin, CNTU president.

It is highly instructive to ex-
amine the anatomy of Mr.
Pepin’s speech as it serves to
highlight the current situation
in Quebec and the general ide-
ological flow of labor leader-
ship in French Canada. The
contents permit us to deduce
intentions and to sense the
pulse of the grass roots move-
ments and desires of Quebeck-
ers themselves.

Mr. Pepin launched his speech
by rightly pointing out that
Quebec , unionism is_ being
threatened, that all democratic
rights are in jeopardy. He point-
ed out the recent course of po-
litical reaction with the imple-
mentation of Bill 290, Bill 38
and many others up to and in-
cluding the proclamation of the
War Measures Act and the sub-
sequent Public Order Act,

In no uncertain terms he ca-
tegorically described the Cana-
dian and Quebec ‘bourgeoisie
as repressive. He stated: “But
in high places, the power of
money and a new breed of poli-
ticians . . . decided that the de-
mocratization of social respon-
sibilities was incompatible with
the free development of the
modern economy.”

Mr. Pepin minced no words

when he charged that the gov-

ernment, “deaf to all appeals
for level-headedness and ele-
mentary respect for civil liber-
ties, (arrested) men, women
and children, political enemies,
journalists, artists’ and union-
ists. Lacking those responsible
for the crime committed, they
jumped on those who were
talking loudest. An emergency
law was brought in placing
Quebec almost in the category
of the police states which dot
the world at the present time.

“The Minister of Justice
tells us he wants to fingerprint
and photograph the population

. . a secret system of inspec-
tion and surveillance of 80,000
teachers in this province has
been started (so) as to end, we
are told, the diffusion of revo-
lutionary ideas.”

Pepin views. society as a plu-
ralistic one, structured in three
broad layers, the working
class, the bourgeoisie and the
government. It is with this es-
timation of the forces in Que-
bec that the leader of the
CNTU takes measure.

“The state will continue to
pretend officially and the laws
to say that all workers enjoy
their fundamental rights but
these rights will be suspended
each time the political authori-
ties decide that union action is
threatening . . . this shows how
management (and the govern-
ment) have set up a commun-
ity of thought.”

Marcel Pepin illuminated his
speech with some of the in-
equities and injustices perpe-
trated against the working
class. His survey covered the
ground from exploitation, alie-

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—FRIDAY, JANUARY 8, 1971—PAGE 10 f

nantion and a seeking after na-
tional dignity. As he exposed
these ills he again came ir-
revocably back to the nub: of
all this dispair, what he euphe-
mistically characterized as the

tyranny of a “politico-econo-
mic” power.
But what is this ‘“politico-

economic” power if not state
monopoly capitalism dressed
up in another guise?

The dominant error in Pep-
in’s long and arduous speech is
his continued interpolation of
the “politico-economic”  ap-
paratus—a unity—which he
treats as two distinct and sep-
arate entities. First he links
them and then he splits them
asunder, Such reasoning defies
logic.

He rushes on to tell the as-
sembled delegates that the
greatest folly would be to form
or join a political party since
political parties may or may
not defend the interests of the
workers. For this defense, he
states triumphantly, only
unions can wage the struggle.

Marcel Pepin is caught in
the agony of his own indeci-
sion. He clearly labels political
parties as creatures of capital.
He states in his speech: “Col-
lusion between economic power
and the political power has
grown.” He states further, and
this in recognition of state
monopoly capitalism: “In re-
cent years the financiers them-
selves have decided to defend
personally their interests on
the floor of the legislatures and
parliament. When we _ talk
about collusion of a politico-
economic power we are not
talking about a possibility but
a reality.”

Given these forceful words
Mr. Pepin seems to expire into
a lamentable position in which
he cries out, “The devil take
them!” He finds old-line politi-
cal parties untrustworthy, filled
with lies and hypocrisy, and
rightly so. He claims that work-
ers should have nothing to do
with them so as not to stain
themselves. Again rightly so.
He even flirts with the idea of
a labor party and dismisses the
thought, since he allows how
the initial democracy that gives
a> political party its birth
always ‘peters out to a rigid
and arbitrary clique who will
again fail the working class.
Where then is hope? Mr. Pepin
claims: in unions alone.

“Unions,” he stated, “do not
meet once every four years.
The confederal bureau meets a
dozen times a year. Negotia-
tions and. strikes require work-
er participation.” Here is de-
mocracy in action! “In present
day society there does not ex-
ist an organization which urg-
es participation and which ob-
tains as much participation as
the union movement.” Again
well and good.

But why, in heaven’s name,
will a political party shaped by
and for working class be less
democratic?

Mr. Pepin shouts: “How
many organizations in the space
of a few days could bring to-
gether several thousands work-
ers from all over the province
to debate a problem? There are
none outside of the CNTU.”

But there should and could
be a political organization, a
mass labor political party of the
Quebec people, easily as demo-
cratic as the CNTU if only its
creation is undertaken by the
Quebec working class. Why
could not such a labor political

party call forth — thous-

Ea

ands of workers from all over
the province to debate a prob-
lem?

Pepin states: “Our move-
ment declines to commit itself
to the formation of a political
party or to give definite sup-
port to a party . . . The labor
movement follows its own in-
ternal logic, independently of
the political parties in power. It
has no allegiance to any party.”

What a travesty of thinking.
What an unpardonable crime
against the thousands and thou-
sands of toilers in Quebec who
are now undergoing the fierc-
est crisis of their history. Mr.
Pepin has vacated the working

‘class struggle and his speech,

when stripped of all the fancy
verbiage, submits to the slavish
posture of a court jester.

How long will unions be “‘in-

dependent” of political powers?
So long as they submit! Bill 190
proves it. Bill 38 proves it. The
government takes union pen-
sion funds and permits mono-
poly to use workers’ savings.
Is this independence? The gov-
ernment openly strikebreaks, as
in the Lapalme case, Is this in-
dependence? The government
perverts unionism by instituting
a trial form of corporatism. Is
this independence?
. Mr. Pepin would be well ad-
vised to join in the transcend-
ing struggle of forming a mass
political party of Quebec labor
rather than suggest a procedure
whereby he hopes to democra-
tize (!) present political parties.
In his speech he urged. the
members of the CNTU to strug-
gle for this cause. What a sad
resolution. By detouring the
thrust of labor’s proper needs
and desires, he forces the work-
ing class to expend energy on
useless patchworks of bour-
geois political parties that will
continue to deny and deceive.

Mr. Pepin is less than hon-
est. He does not put all his
cards on the table. It is really
as elementary as reminding the
reader of the river that separ-
ates workers from bosses. There
can be only two river banks.
Mr. Pepin wants to create a
third river bank. There is none.

In his speech he never once
mentioned the villain by his real
name. Nowhere can the word
monopoly be found. Nowhere
is there a suggestion of imper-
ialism and certainly no hint of
socialism. It remains for the
Quebec working class to bring

‘these features to his attention.

“ about how you feel. But a fellow doesn’t have to V

Song of the slave me :

“It was winter about 10 years ago, while standing |
outside of the old ‘slave market’ at Spadina and Questa
lines of verse were put to paper,” Jerry Hill told us.
that day well. The slush was ankle deep. Over 300 1
were waiting in line to get into the office in hopes of gé
The cop kept yelling at us to keep lined up against hi
ee we finally oe inside there were only more lined
Jobs |
“That day I was lucky enough to get an interview.
told me that there was a job that would start in a month}
job was washing pots in a kitchen car for the CPR. It}
be for the coming summer and paid $1.20 an hour. I toll
that I would take it. He asked me if I had experience. I
off my chair. Who needed experience to wash pots at a bl
an hour? The clerk mumbled something about how it wa
to know how to put the pots together and put them a¥
that I could learn that in no time at all. He sternly told 2
CPR wanted experienced help only.

“The next morning at the same place in the same sl0
man handed me a leaflet urging me to join the Unemple
and fight for the right to a job. After once again talk
clerk about that job at the CPR, trying to convince thi
I had brains enough to wash those blasted pots (he tu
again) I went down and joined the Unemployed Union
in some demonstrations and leafleting and felt bette
least I wasn’t sitting in my crumy room feeling alone 2
I was fighting.

“It wasn’t long after that, that I joined the Communi
do my bit for the real struggle, the struggle to free all P pe
the sickness of unemployment.

“If I were to try to write verse tcday about the unest
words would be a lot more militant and forward looking:
you’re not taking part in struggle and see no future. 4

verse to do something. But he does have to fight an
new. world, because like a great Scottish poet of the w
once wrote, ‘A man’s a man for a’ that’.” a

We Want to Live

The sky is getting greyer and winter’s coming on.
The air is getting colder; the frost is in the ground. —
The companies are laying off and men are in the streé
The mission lines are getting long with the men who ¥
We want to live .

We are the men whe toil for bread,

Who work our whole lives until we are dead,
Who wrack our bodies in Labor’s pains,

Who sweat our blood for the bosses gains.
We want to live .

Our hands are gnarled, our backs are bent,
Our faces are wrinkled and brown,
As’ we tramp the streets looking for jobs, all around th
Our eyes look vacant, but there is more,
Look closer and you will see.
The living-dead ee of the unemployed cry out in a
We want to live. 4

We must have jobs: we need io eat,
And feed our children and wives.
We need a home and warm clothes
And a little security for the rest of our lives.
We deserve this much, we men who work for ,the
Boss who sits on top.
But never fear, some day, some way, our agony
Will come to a sudden stop.
We will live. ’

But still:

The sky is getting greyer, and winter’s coming on.
The air is getting colder; the frost is in the ground. *

The companies are laying off and men are in the street® ©
The mission lines are getting long with the men who W

For:
We want to live...

What faces Saskatchewan in

REGINA — “I hope for last-
ing peace in the world and an
end to repression at home,”
W. Ross Hale, president of the
Saskatchewan Federation of
Labor stated in his New Year’s
message. “For all our wage and
salary earners, the restoration
of their long-established right to
free collective bargaining; for
the unemployed, decent jobs and
security; for our farmers, good
prices in a good market and the
preservation of rural life as we
have known it; for our native
peoples, equal rights and oppor-
tunity with dignity and purpose.
To our Saskatchewan business-
men, their rightful share of our
consumer market and _ finally,
for all our young people, real
education is a meaningful school
environment and unlimited pos-
sibilities for. the future.

.25% behind Manitoba and Al-
Se oe s > Je ¥ Ves

berta and our rates
every other provinc')
“While SaskatcheY
ers have been chast
and frustrated by ‘
ment in almost all a
ing the exercise a
bargaining rights, ®”
crete has been don®
price levels, or restft
high interest rates 4
in professional a
salaries. The Batte? ©
Commissions’ basi€ |
to help consumers *,
the gouging of farm"
machine companies
been implemented.
Saskatchewan
threats of more ba@
at the coming sess")
and added that “@
this kind can on
an already grave,
ation.”

“Present discriminatory and
sterile labor policies of the pro-
vincial government have produc-
ed disastrous economic results.
Thousands of employees — in-
cluding our most competent and
skilled workmen — have been
forced to leave Saskatchewan
which has caused average week-
ly earnings of wage earners to
drop far behind both national
averages and those of Manitoba
and Alberta. The widening earn-
ings’ gap is equivalent to a loss
in buying power for_Saskatch-
ewan employees of at least $112
million in 1970. Apart from
average rates, the lower-paid
employee .in Saskatchewan is
worse off because provincial
minimum wage protection is
miserably inadequate. Once
Saskatchewan had the highest
minimum wage. We now lag 20-

i

ee ee a =