Editorial

_ Tories can be beaten

That the polls indicate a Tory win on Nov. 21, even a Tory majority, should
be cause for alarm and for renewed determination by all progressive-minded
Canadians.

Canada is in danger.

Five more years of Tory majority government would bring a dramatic
acceleration of the economic and political sellout of Canadian sovereignty and
independence through the Mulroney-Reagan trade deal.

It would mean an across-the-board Tory assault on hard-won social services,
including health care and pensions.

It would mean a Tory-declared open season on the labour movement-—
Thatcher-style — as the Americanization of the Canadian workplace, com-
plete with reactionary U.S. labour practices, takes hold.

During its first four years, the Tory majority designed and built the coffin for
Canadian sovereignty; they now want a second term in office to conduct the
funeral.

A Tory majority until 1993 would mean further tying Canada militarily to the
U.S. war-fighting strategy by implementing the White Paper, boosting arms
spending, including acquisition of nuclear-powered submarines.

A top PC financial adviser has let slip that Mulroney’s new national sales tax
will hit Canadians with a smack: a whopping 16 per cent on most goods and
services.

We would see the fraudulent and retrogressive Tory legislation on child care
come into being. We would witness privatization with a vengeance as the Tories
lay open every aspect of Canada to unregulated pillage by their U.S. and
domestic corporate pals.

The so-called trade deal a new Tory government intends to impose must be
described by its actual name: a continental economic integration plan. Tory
strategists know this. That’s why they refuse to discuss its details in this election.
They admitted three years ago that the more Canadians knew it, the less they
would like it.

But Mulroney’s deal is more: it’s an assault on the very foundations of
Canada. It’s a blueprint for industrial and financial integration; for an energy,
raw materials and natural resources take-over and, inexorably, for the political,
military and cultural absorption of our country into a U.S.-controlled Fortress

~ America.

This is the “future with promise” Mulroney promises Canada.

This is why the Tories must be stopped on Nov. 21.

And they can be defeated!

Added together, the Tory agenda hurts millions of Canadians in many ways.
Added together, these millions, from all walks of life, representing many
political, religious and social interests form the vast majority of Canadians.

Workers, farmers, artists, students, youth, seniors; the millions concerned
about peace, the environment, Canadian sovereignty; the women’s movement,
tenants, small business-people — are all targeted by this right-wing Tory
agenda.

And as such, our millions represent a powerful potential force to reverse the
steamroller, to prevent a Tory government, to protect Canada from sellout.

As the Communist Party election platform, printed on pages 6 and 7, says
loudly and clearly: “The best possible result on Nov. 21 would be the election of
a majority of MPs, including Communists, committed to Canadian independ-
ence, the improvement of our living standards, a clean and healthy environment
and to a world free from the threat of nuclear disaster .... “

These goals are the very opposite of what Mulroney and his U.S. and
Canadian corporate friends plan for our country.

With the widest mobilization, the Tories can be defeated — and these next
few weeks are crucial to denying them a majority. In this way we would not only
be protecting Canada, but also leaving the door open in our country to
progressive advance.

FRIBUNE

EDITOR Published weekly at
2681 East Hastings Street
Sean Griffin Vancouver, B.C., V5K 1Z5
ASSISTANT EDITOR Phone: (604) 251-1186
Dan Keeton Fax: (604) 251-4232
CIRCULA MANAGER Subscription rate:
BUSINESS ‘Mike Proniuk Canada: @ $20 one year ® $35
two years @ Foreign $32 one year
GRAPHICS Second class mail
Angela Kenyon registration number 1560

THE OTHER PARTIES ARE AFRAID OF CHANGE!
..-, BUT WE IN THE PROGRESIVE CONSERVATIVE

PARTY... WE CAN MANAGE THE CHANGE

mace i CANADA

Givora 88

EF Ss] gq

More money
for sports:

Gaetan Trudel, Montreal, writes: Can-
ada ended its Olympic saga with a grand
total of three gold, two silver and five
bronze medals. These 10 medals.are an
accurate reflection of Canada’s strength
in the sporting world.

Many were disappointed because they
based Canada’s medal hopes in Seoul on
what Canada did four years ago in Los
Angeles. But too easily forgotten was
that the countries absent from those 1984
‘Games captured 58 per cent of the
medals at the 1976 Montreal Games (the
last Summer Olympics before Seoul in
which all the sports powers competed).
Also, Canada’s results in the major com-
petitions leading up to the Seoul Olym-
pics should have given some idea of just
how many medals we could have
expected.

Olympic success, however, must not
be calculated only in medals won. We
should look at how we have improved —
or regressed — in each sport. Canada
won medals in more sports in Seoul than
we did in 1976: boxing, track and field,
dressage, swimming and synchronized
swimming. In Montreal in 1976 we did
not capture a single gold.

But if we examine our overall standing
in all sports, we find Canada did not do
as well as we did in 1976.

It is absolutely clear that the govern-
ment has to increase its funding of sports
development. Also, many athletes say
the criteria in certain sports are set too
high by our amateur federations, so that
some are prevented from qualifying; cer-
tain criteria are above the international
standards.

Even though fewer athletes were
found to have taken illegal drugs than
was the case in Los Angeles (and there
were more participants in Seoul), the
International Olympic Committee (IOC)
and the national federations have to
unite to combat drug abuse. The Soviet
and American Olympic committees have
already declared war on drugs; in sus-
pending Ben Johnson, the IOC dis-
played great courage. As its president
confessed, the IOC found this a very
difficult decision to make. Difficult yes,
but brave, and the only way to deal with
the problem.

‘result of the election is already decided,

But we shouldn’t rush to the stupid [a
extremes. of some reporters and com- re
mentators who would make us believe ¢
that most of the Seoul Olympic medalists b
are on drugs. Frustrated by the suspen- W
sion of Ben Johnson, these professional C
scandal-mongers disparage our athletes h
and propose nothing that would rid
sport of this malady. To the contrary; h
some go as far as to suggest that certain ai
drugs be made legal. (

No, no, and again no. We cannot
permit athletes to endanger their lives j — |
just to win an Olympic gold. The athletes | —
themselves have some interesting things

to say about this. I believe there is a real b
desire to end drug use and make sport as ¢
clean as possible. C
Polls labelled

‘ 45) t
undemocratic

Bill Campbell, Kamloops, writes: In the D
bad old days, the so-called parliamentary 1
democracy was totally in the power of a
the rich and the privileged. At first, only D
they were allowed to be elected and only a
their own kind could elect them.

When public pressure broke through
to win universal voting rights, the rich oS
and the privileged took one step back but ¢
two forward. Now they used their posi- I
tion to gather votes by buying them with | I
cash or liquor. When these crude i
methods were outlawed, and the electo- I
rate became literate, they used more (
sophisticated methods. This brings us to l
the recent times of widespread election | —
promises and lies.

It must have worked, we wouldn’t |,
have had such political monstrosities aS | |
the Bennetts, the Vander Zalms and the ©
Mulroneys. But it wasn’t working too
well and since the rich and the privileged 1
never give up, a new and more subtle .
swindle was devised.

Along came the so-called “opinion |
poll.” Exactly what was needed, sound-
ing so impersonal, so scientific and,
above all, so final. The first, and calcu- ,
lated, effect on the voters is that since the 3

there’s not much point in voting. The
second is that, since these polls always
seem to favour the establishment, you
might as well vote for the winners. :

Just as our forefathers cleared away
the evil of votes only for the wealthy, so
we must insist for an end to this new
attack on democracy.

4 « Pacific Tribune, October 31, 1988

———