Quebec workers in struggle
move to united labor part

MONTREAL—The Parti Com-
muniste du Quebec, which field-
ed only one candidate in the
previous federal election, is run-
ning three in the coming poll as
its contribution to the fight to
elect a large bloc of progressives
to Parliament. The convention
of. the party, which is part of
the Communist Party of Can-
ada, on March 25-26 warmly up-
held the election policy as pre-
sented by Sam Walsh in the
resolution on behalf of the na-
tional executive of the PCQ.

The coming election will have
the question of Canadian inde-
pendence as the central issue,
the resolution states, relating
this issue to politics in Quebec.

Summarizing political devel-
Opments during the past two
years, the resolution declares
that Quebec is undergoing poli-
tical polarization “as the class
Struggle asserts itself and
breaks out into the open.”

“There are important political
forces to the right of Trudeau
on this key question, despite
the hesitations and the flagrant
contradictions in his policy on
this very question. That is why
the Party cannot accept the idea
Suggested by Claude Ryan,
editor-in-chief of the Devoir,
among others, that an alliance
should be formed among Credi-
tistes and Conservatives as well
as with the separatists and the
NDP to defeat Trudeau! Which
does not mean at all that Tru-
deau and the section of the
monopolist bourgeoisie which he
represents has the will or the
ability to lead a consistent fight
for genuine Canadian indepen-
dence.

“This task can only be accom-
plished under the leadership of
the united working class.”

“The Union Nationale was
smashed in the last provincial
elections, for the big bour-
geoisie had selected the Liberal
party as its party, in view of
the inability of the UN to rid it-
self of its petty bourgeois, na-
tionalist wing,” it stated. ‘The
efforts of its new leader, Gabriel
-Loucier, to regain the confi-
dence of St. James St. by chang-
ing the name -of the party to
Unite-Quebec, and removing
those who controlled the party’s
treasury, have only revealed the
crisis of impotence in this party
which only a short while ago
ruled Quebec.”

As to the Liberal party, after
criticizing the federal Trudeau
government’s moves to the
right, it dealt with the provin-
cial Liberals:

“Mr. Bourassa promised us -

100,000 new jobs, but the num-

ber of unemployed has risen to
300,000 in the past two years,

an increase of 50% ...
“Desperate, in the wake of
the October 1970 crisis, the
Bourassa. government theatrical-
ly announced his notorious
James Bay project. This project
demonstrates again that the
government still orients on the
exploitation of our natural re-
sources for the development of
US industries. _ Behind the
smokescreen thrown up by
Bourassa we can easily discern
the fact that he is looking for
the capital for this tremendous-

ly costly project to the David »

Rockefellers, accepting the con-
dition that the electricity thus

‘generated will be delivered to

Consolidated Edison of New
York to feed power to the
manufacturing industry there.
Not only will this cost us $10
billion, but the jobs created will
be minimal and for the most
part temporary. Not to speak of
the ruination of the Indian lands
of the region and of the ecolog-
ical dangers.

“To meet the demands of our

industry we can construct nuc-

lear power plants enormously
cheaper. without contracting to
furnish electricity to U.S. in-
dustry in long term contracts.

“If we are prepared to invest
up to $10 billion, the remainder
can be invested in the manufac-
turing industry, which really
creates jobs not only in this
sector of the economy, but also
in primary and in tertiary (ser-
vice) industry.

“But the Bourassa govern-
ment is busy running down pub-
lic investment in the processing
and manufacturing industry —
closing doors of wood product
plants in which the General In-
vestment Corporation holds 50%
of the shares, or selling them to
U.S. companies — while throw-
ing hundreds of workers on the
street in many parts of Quebec.
And all this while unemploy-

ment is rising, and despite his.

electoral, or rather, ephemeral,
promise of 100,000 jobs. The
large subsidies granted by the
federal minister of regional de-
velopment, Jean Marchand, to
such huge monopolies as the
ITT in order to help them to
automate, have had the effect
of throwing additional thou-
sands of workers on the street.

“The Liberal party is divided
because of the perpetual dilem-
ma confronting this party: how
to be loyal to St. James St. and
to the federal Liberal party and
at the same time pretend to de-
fend the interests of the people
of Quebec.”

After dealing with the split
among the Creditistes, the reso-
lution turned to the separatist
Parti Quebecois and the NDP:

“The Parti Quebecois has not
escaped division either. The Oct.
29 demonstration revealed a
serious crisis in its leadership
between those, clearly in the
minority, who wanted the PQ to
be the vehicle for and the sup-

Ses SARTRE

banners on ‘Dorchester Street. ”

PACIFIG. TRIBUNE—FRIDAY, APRIL 7, 1972—PAGE 6

300 James Bay Indians protestin

SAM WALSH

porter of the demands of the
working class (and to whom
Rene Levesque bruskly showed
the door) and the petty bour-

geois nationalist majority who.

will never relinquish the reins
of this party.

“The NDP-Quebec finds itself
in a very equivocal situation
since the convention of the
NDP-Canada rejected the right
to self-determination for Que-
bec. Their ‘compromise’ at bot-
tom is an expression of classic
‘opportunism—that is, one pol-
icy in English Canada, another
in Quebec—until after the fed-
eral elections! The gesture of
David Lewis, in embracing Rene
Levesque publicly at the anti-
unemployment rally, illustrates
perfectly the unprincipled op-
portunism of both of them.”

Tremendous developments

have taken place in the labor -

movement:

“The October 1971 crisis gave
birth to the Common Frent of
the trade union centres, which
in turn won the support of the
NDP and of the Canadian Labor
Congress. It was the unity of the
working class of Canada which
obliged the federal govern-
ment, despite the pressure com-
ing from the Quebec govern-
ment and the Montreal city ad-
ministration, to set aside the
repressive laws.

.“It was the need to unite
against the hardening policy of
the bosses and of the state who
seek unrestrained exploitation
free from all trade union con-
trol, coupled with their policy
of discrimination against and
non-recognition of the French-

3

Canadian nation, which produc-
ed a rapid deepening of class-
consciousness in the trade
union movement in Quebec.
Without doubt this is the most
remarkable social phenomenon
of the 1970’s in Quebec.

“Instead of carrying on fratri-
cidal warfare, which was the
norm not long before, the trade
union centres, including the
Quebec Corporation of Teach-
ers, are becoming accustomed
to work in a Common Front. In-
stead of accepting the capitalist
system as the undisputed frame-
work for their existence and of
their activity, all the trade
union centres denounce this sys-
tem and declare for socialism.
Instead of preaching class col-
laboration, which was general
two years ago, it is the class
struggle which is now the main
doctrine. Instead of docilely ac-
cepting discrimination . against
the French-Canadian nation, we
have declarations and struggles
for national self-determination
and equality. Instead of politi-
cal neutrality, which in practise
means leaving the workers to
the mercy of the bourgeois and
petty bourgeois parties, we are
beginning to hear loud talk of
the necessity for the working
class to become politicized in-
dependently of these parties. ..

“Having experienced this
rapid deepening of class politi-
cal consciousness, an important
section of the labor movement
stands at a crossroad. Should the
politicization of the working
class be expressed in the sup-
port of a petty bourgeois na-
tionalist party on the provincial
level, the PQ (in addition to
supporting a social-democratic,
reformist party on the federal
level, the NDP)? Or should it
be expressed in the creation of
a mass federated party of labor
independent of the parties of
the big and of the petty bour-
geoisie in Quebec?”

Pointing out that some lead-
ers still insist that the workers
should limit themselves to the
formation of political action
committees, pressure committees
on the elected representatives,
discouraging the working class
from forming its pwn mass
party, the Communist policy
Statement continues:

“But what shall we say of
those who preach support for
the PQ provincially (and less
strongly for the NDP federally)?

9 in Montreal last week against the James Bay project ‘burn their

_shows the danger of letting ®

How can they knowingly ®
the workers to place thell
tical fate in the hands of a
such as the PQ, which ™
to consider itself a party @
working class (for fear of
bourgeois votes) and whitlt
one either by composition ®
its policies. The very fach
the leadership of the trade ™
movement took the bait
lingualism dangled by Ref’;
vesque immediately aftel
Oct. 29 demonstration whittg
condemned, and just befolt

confrontation bet weet le
210,000 public service Wl,
and the government of QU”)

th

~

self be taken in tow °
nationalist petty bourge?
a policy which is divisive

“As for the NDP, it is 0m
just to underline their Oia.
tion to the War Measures
but it is also only just 10 Fg
to their opposition to thé
to .self-determination f0F
bec.” ie
Pointing to the matu
conditions for the formé? is ;
a mass federated party of # i
which the Communists hag,
vocated for many yeals, “y
solution discusses this P®
tive:

“Evidently such @ aos
should be able to and shov i
to unite all unions, coopel
parties of the Left and
left groups which are
to work out a program 0)
gle tngether, while pre’
their own maximum PP
For example our Party WY
abandon its Marxistl®) ji
program, but we will ad
participate actively in 4 “oh
ted mass party of labor © yj
a minimum program atl
struggle decided upon JO”

“Such a program can
clude an orientation tow?" iW
transformation of the ah 8
monopoly capitalist sya eh
a socialist system, withoUr og
too detailed either om
tent of or on the path t
ism. But such a mas
should be based on
struggle and not on clas
boration. of

“It should stand for ¥ 4
control over automation
moving of plants; for thé oni
ing of contracts with ™ |
lies. d
“Such a party should ©
for the right to sale .
tion for Quebec withou
way removing language "4 :
tural rights, in a word not i
ratic rights, from the me

“Such a party shoult .
all nationalist, exclusivis
bourgeois tendencies, iby t
solidarity and unity sish ‘
working class of Engl “i :
ada, as a condition for
of the struggle for 5
national emancipation. sf

“In short, we ted 6,

5

i

of labor, . to
seat the cooperatives, f
political parties of the oad f
citizens’ committees a :
ate, around a program (
gle against state-m' {ot uy!
talism, for peace |
right to national self-det®
tion. Each organization tag
its identity and its prob” 4 |
vided it remains loy ett”
the program decided * 8

t

a

\
creation of a federa wi ,
(

|