{LILI | | |

BY NORMAN FREED

Liberals’ record of betrayal --
St. Laurent glosses over facts

HE election campaign is in
full swing. Louis St. Laurent
opened the Liberal party’s cam-
paign in Windsor — which,’ of
course was no accident. Windsor
is mainly an auto city where
Ford of Canada is the largest
monopoly. The Liberals have
been. very kind to the U.S. Ford
family who control Fords.

On the eve of St. Laurent’s
visit the Ford Motor Company
announced it was preparing to
celebrate its 50th anniversary.
W. L. Clark, Windsor Daily Star
columnist, gave some startling
facts and figures showing how
Ford has fared under both Lib-
eral and Tory governments. Here
are a few of them:

One share of Ford of Canada
worth $100 in 1905 has been in-
creased by 1953 to 1,120 shares,
at $60 a share or to a total worth
of $67,200. This is not all. In
addition, the shareholder re-
ceived over the years on his or-
iginal hundred dollar investment
$47:744 sin dividends. So, for a
$100 investment in 1905, one re-
ceived a total of $114,944. Not
bad at all!

Here is a striking example of
how U.S.-controlled industry in
Canada is coining fantastic pro-
fits at the expense of Canadian
labor and the public.

No wonder Hon. Paul Martin,
MP from Windsor, is held in such
high esteem by Rhys Sale, presi-
dent of the Ford Motor Company.
Martin has looked after the in-
terests of Fords very well indeed
as a cabinet minister in the St.
Laurent government.

Good reason why St. Laurent
chose Windsor to open his cam-
paign. In his speech there he
assured Fords, and through it all
other U.S.-controlled trusts, that
they can expect the same serv-
ic from his government in the
future as they received in the
past.

St. Laurent appealed for a
return to power on the record
of his government since 1949. He
talked about “expanding pros-
perity.” Yes, his government has
done very well indeed for the
Fords, the Duponts of General
Motors, and the other U.S. and
Canadian economic royalists.

But, what about the working
people who produce all the real
wealth of our country? Did they
fare as well as the Fords and
the Duponts? St. Laurent had no
onswer. to this question.

+ He had nothing to say about
the mass unemployment in
_ Brantford. Its of no concern to
‘his government that Brantford
is becoming a ghost town.

+ He had nothing to say about
the lavoffs in Massey-Harris and
the 1,500 laid off by the Canadair
plant in Montreal.

+ He was silent about the over
500 million bushels of wheat still
left over from the last crop year
—and a new crop is coming.

+ He ignored the fact that the
tomato crop in the Windsor area
had to be destroyed. because
there is no market and said not
a word about the restriction of
tobacco growing in the district.

+ He bypassed the fact that
the apple crop in B.C. was left
rotting because of the loss of the
British market. Nor did he men-
tion the surplus of canned sal-
mon, cheese and eggs, caused by

lowered living standards among

_ the Canadian people, the loss of
Commonwealth markets, and the
' trade restriction imposed against

Canada by his masters in the U.S.

While St. Laurent spoke about
“expanding prosperity,” for
which he claimed credit for his
government, he ignored the de-
clining living standards of the
very people who produce the

t

fantastic profits for big business.

Take milk consumption. It had
reached its highest point in 1945.
Consumption per person had
reached 479.1 lbs. per year. By
1952 it had declined to 424.6.
This is only two percent above
the depression years.

St. Laurent asked the people
to remember the Hungry Thirties
and claimed to have _ brought
about “expanding prosperity” af-
ter the Liberals came to power
following the Conservative ad-
ministration of R. B. “Iron Heel”
Bennett. Yes, he brought about
“prosperity” for the rich; but no

real prosperity for the working -

and toiling Canadians.

Take meat consumption. In
1947 it was 145.2 lbs. per person.
With the advent of the cold war
and the hot war in Korea, for
which the -St. Laurent govern-
ment bears its full share of re-
sponsibility, consumption drop-
ped to 128.2 in 1952, only 10 lbs.
above the depression years.

The situation is even worse
with beef. People are compelled
to substitute cheaper meats for
beef. In the depression period:
beef consumption was 54.7 Ibs.
per person and it rose to 69.3 Ibs.
in 1943. By 1952 it had declined

to 44.8 Ibs., a 35 percent decline

from its peak and an -absolute
decline of 20 percent as com-
pared to the depression years.
These are Dominion Bureau of
Statistics figures.

Here we can see one of the
voints of comparison as between
how Fords have fared and how
the average Canadian has fared
under Liberal administration. Bv
their deeds the Liberals stand

scondemned as the government of

the Yankee and Canadian econ-
omic royalists.
@

St. Laurent made some gen-
eral statements about peace and
of course justified the war policy
of his government under the
worn-out formula that has been
proven wrong, about “peace
through strength,” instead of the
policy that recent events are
proving to be the only sound
policy to: pursue, “strength
through peace.”

St.. Laurent experienced great ~
difficulties in justifying the en-

ormous war expenditures. He
went to great pains to justify the
enormous war expenditures the
Liberal government has made
since 1947. He went to great
pains to justify the aggresive
NATO war alliance which is cost-
ing the Canadian people hun-
dreds of millions a year.

Here are a few facts that
should be thrown in St. Lau-

.rent’s teeth: :
+ In 1947-48 the Liberal gov-

ernment spent $219 million for
defense. Today it spends ten
times as much (over $2 billion
this year).

+ From 1947 to 1954 the Lib-

eral government will have spent

for war the staggering sum of
over seven billion dollars ($7,-
055,510,000). St. Laurent would
like to hush up the fact that out
of every tax dollar, 50 cents goes
for war and one cent for the
health of the Canadian people.
We should remind the electors
that it was in 1919, 34 years ago,
that the Liberals made their first
promise to introduce health in-
surance. ‘

These huge expenditures did
not bring national security to
Canada. On the contrary, they
served to increase, the danger
of war. The only certain path to
Canadian security and peace lies:
in peaceful negotiation of world
differences. “
oe :
St. Laurent did not deal with
the anti-Canadian national policy
his minister of finance, Hon.
Douglas Abbott, announced by
radio in December, 1947—while
parliament was in session. Here
are Abbott’s words:

“Instead of using labor in- Can-
ada to convert the materials into
things our people consume, we
shall sell the raw materials, we
shall sell them for hard cur-
rencies.”

Nor did he deal with the un-
Canadian statement made by
Hon. C. D. Howe in the House of
Commons on June 3, 1952:

“T hope there will not be any
more talk of stopping export of
raw materials and concentrating
on finished goods. The idea is
fantastic. It is a ridiculous pro-
posal’ * © ;

The same suicidal national
policy was also advanced by Hon.
L. B. Pearson in his recent
speech at Cambridge, Mass.
Pearson ‘said:
to play second fiddle to the USA. Pe

St. Laurent has pursued a “na-
tional” policy which Has resulted.
in the subordination of Canada’s
interests to those of a foreign
power, the USA, and is trans-
forming our country into a raw
material producer for the Yankee
trusts. That is why Hon. Milton
Gregg, minister of labor, had ad-
vised the auto workers of Wind-
sor in 1950 during layoffs to go to
Detroit for jobs. And St. Laurent
has the gall to pick Windsor, the

great city of organized labor, to

open his election campaign and
talk about “expanding prosper-
ity!”

@

St. Laurent spoke about the
Liberals’ record of social se-
curity legislation, but he has yet
to repudiate his statement of
1949 made in the House of Com-
mons during the debate on low
rental housing: “No government.
of which I am the prime minister

ae immortal

N.P., Vancouver, B.C.: Ethel
and Julius Rosenberg are not
dead. Physically they are no
more, but spiritually they are
with us. History has placed its
stamp of immortality upon these
two truly human beings. Long
after the perpetrators of this
legal murder are forgotten and
a new society has replaced this
‘murderous system, Ethel and
Julius Rosenberg will be remem-
bered and revered as. heroes.

Letter to Eisenhower

BEN SWANKEY, Edmonton:’

My seven-year-old daughter who
is in Grade 2 showed. great con-
cern for the Rosenbergs and
their children. When I suggested
a short time ago that she write
President Eisenhower she _ sat
down and wrote this letter (the
only thing that I helped her with
was the spelling—the formula-
tions are all her own): .-

“T think it is not fair to kill

“Tt is no disgrace’

4 Se ate

the Rosenberg parents because
the children will not have anyone

will,ever spend one cent on sub-
sidized housing.”

St. Laurent spoke about the
efficiency of his government

against the charges of graft and

corruption in the defense depart-
ment, but he did not - recall
Howe’s reply in the House of
charges of waste and inefficiency.
This is what Howe said: “Why
make so much fuss... A million
dollars is nothing to us.” You and
I are saddled with back-breaking
taxes and a million dollars is
nothing to Howe-

St. Laurent spoke about Can-
ada’s parliament as a great de-
mocratic institution, but he did
not remind the electors that, in
1950 when he was condemned for
ruling by order-in-council he de-
clared contemptuously: “This
government derives its authority
from the Crown and not from
parliament and the people.” Un-
der the Liberal regime, four cab-
inet ministers constitute a quo-
rum that can rule the country.

- We should remind the electors
that the Liberal government at-
tempted to deliver a blow to civil
liberties by introducing Bill 93
at the direct behest of the U‘S.,
and failed to carry through this
sinister legislation because the
democratic wrath of the people
compelled the government to re-

‘treat.

C)
This is only a glimpse of the
shameful record of the St. Lau-

rent government on some of
most important issues before a
triotie Canadians in this eet
In deeds and words the Libé a
party has been and remains
the main war party, the party & :
big business and’ national
trayal.

While we condemn the ben
government on _ its record the
must, however, recognize
hollowness of the Tory,
Credit’ and CCF righty
double talk, which tries tou the
ize the growing opposition t0 “of
subservience and_ betray:
Canada’s interests to the U-»: let
confuse and hoodwink the &
tors into believing that.
parties are opposed to the
icies pursued by the Liberaye
fact is, all four parties repre
ed in the last parliament ™
in fundamental agreement 0?
major issues.

Those people who are
away from the Liberals
think carefully before they /
from the“frying pan into th¢

The most important ss retio®
this election is the introdu for
of a new national policy :
Canada. The patriotic answe i
all questions of economic. tic.
tical, cultural and dem ate
advance in a world at peace
embodied in the Labor:
‘sive party election platform C
der the great slogan: pie
ada _ First-”

movin
a

Our Dep witinent

to take care of them. I think
that you would not like anyone
to kill you on the electric chair
so why kill them? So let them
free. I am seven years old. I
think all the children in the
world feel the same way as I do.
When you were little you did not
want your mother and father to
die. So let them live.” -

But Eisenhower did not let
them live; my daughter June’s
plea, along with thousands of
pleas from all parts of the world,
went unheeded.

Protests treatment

H.K., Vancouver, B.C.: I would
like to relate to readers of the

Pacific Tribune my experiences

arising from an accident receiv-
ed in the course of my work,
and the treatment I received fol-
lowing this accident.

In November of last year I had

my shoulder badly fractured in

a truck and automobile collision.

What ie Pleate.

I was taken from the scene of
accident to the hospital PY 4,
bulance, and this is W
lowed.

I received an injection
the pain, and my arm W

to

in a sling. Several X-ray$
taken but no attempt WS ©

to set the shoulder. spittl

After 28 hours in ‘

was ordered home, 4 a
was not yet able to get ‘in
of bed without assistance: _ of
Friends took me to ™Y |,

’ whete for more than @

was fully dependent on “of |

’ Since I was ordered out Bes,
pital el have had to have *y,
taken twice, and after ea”,
I was ordered to do vario
cises at home.

It is now over six pon
the accident and still 1
able to do light work.

It has been brought 0

tion.
How long can this cont

PACIFIC TRIBUNE — JULY 10, 1953 Te

x