The noose

T he nuclear arms noose is be-
ing drawn tighter on the necks of
the Canadian people by a pro-U.S.
minority Liberal government. Its
boasted ‘‘60-day of decision” has li-
terally become for Canada, 60-days
of repeated betrayal.

On top of this sorry record now
comes the revelation of af 7-million
“appropriation” to build five nu-
clear-bomb storage dumps in Cana-
da. These to be situated at Chat-
ham N.B., Bagotville, Que., Ottawa
and North Bay, Ont. and one in Co-
mox. B.C.

‘Without even the semblance of
a mandate from the Canadian peo-
ple to bring U.S. nuclear weapons
to Canada or put these horror-weap-
ons in the hands of Canadian armed
forces abroad, that crime is already
being committed.

“No nuclear Arms in Canada or
in the hands of Canadian forces ov-
erseas,” the almost universal will
and demand of millions of Canad-
ians during the April 8 general elec-
tion, is now cynically tossed aside by
the Pearson government at the in-
sistence of Washington.

On this central demand of “No
Nuclear Arms” the Canadian people
elected 17 New Democratic Party
MP’s and cut across other partisan
lines in the election of anti-nuclear
Tory and Liberal MP’s.

- Yet, on top of this five projected
nuclear-bomb dumps in Canada,

EDITORIAL
COMMENT

© livedee” over in Merrie, Eng-
land isn’t exactly a “‘tourist attrac-
tion” although it does “reek” with
tradition.

The Tory treachery of Munich
was hatched at Cliveden. There too,
the Tory elite swap wive over week-
end discussion on “free world” strat-
egy. The Cliveden “procurer” (pimp)
now in durance vile, does royal
“portraits” in his spare time.

Happily we have the London
Daily Mirror’s assurance that there
was nothing “Profumo” in the ro-
yal daubs. All of which shows that
a good pimp can also be a good “art-
ist” or vice versa—if he has the right
connections?

¥ -¥ *

West Germany’s Konrad Aden-
auer speech of “welcome” to U.S.
President Kennedy showed “the old
fox” as determined as ever in his op-
position to any peaceful co-existence
with the Soviet Union.

Adenauer referred to Kennedy’s
June 10th speech, which called for
seeing the Soviet’s viewpoint as well
as one’s own, interpreting this to
mean that there would be no change
in U.S. policy towards the problem
of Germany and Berlin. _

Pacific Tribune

Editor — TOM McEWEN <
Associate Editor—MAURICE RUSE
Business Mgr.—OXANA BIGELOW

Published weekly at:

Room & — 426 Main Street

ancouver 4, B.C...
Phone MUtual 5-5288
Subscription Rates:

Canadian and Commonwealth coun:-

tries (except Australia): $4.00 ong
year. Australia, United States a
all other countries: $5.00 one year:

Authorized as: second class mail by

-y
‘.
'
the Post Office Department, Ottawa |

and for payment of Postage in ‘tash

June 28, 1963—PACIFIC TRIBUNE—Page 4

tightens

with one on our Comox doorstep,
we are informedthat already a nu-
clear ammunition dump for the Can
adian army brigadein West Ger-
man has been completed at Hemer,
while two similar dumps for the
Canadian air division have been “‘ap
proved” and construction started
at Zweibruecken and Baden—Soel-
lingen, West Germany.

Shall this monstrous betrayal of
the Canadian people by a U.S.-dom-
inated Liberal government pass in
silence, without challenge? Is this
Liberal art of political blackmail
and betrayal to continue unopposed
—to the point where it transforms
Canadian communities into a smok-
ing ruin? Into an “‘expendable” in
U.S. nuclear madness?

Where is the strong NDP voice
in B.C. for ““No Nuclear Arms in
Canada’’—in Parliament, in the con-
stituencies, in the communities now
“on target.”

The nuclear noose is tightening
—and the time for fine speeches
about “giving this government a
chance” is running out. Those pro-
jected bases and the spread of these
horror weapons constitute a threat
to every Canadian; a threat unre-

solved in the election, now standing

out in sharper focus than ever. A
threat which must be met, not by
“good statements and appeals” as
Nikita Khrushchev said of Presi-
dent Kennedy’s June 10 speech, but
“sealed by practical deeds.”

With a nuclear dump at Comox,
even with an American holding the
key, the time for “‘practical deeds”
(mass political united action) is
here. To act NOW is to win survival
The penalty for failure is-mass an-
nihilation.

Remember NDP comrades, ‘““No
Nuclear Arms” is still the issue.
That’s what the bulk of the people
voted for. There’s still time—with
a mighty united effort and action—
to win it.

Fite Minister Walter Gordon
has survived his budget, for the time
being at least. So has the minority
Pearson government. But the Liber-
al “image,” so extravangantly built
up by U.S. dollars, has been badly
shattered.

This minority government and
its finance minister survived the
budget crisis by what is now becom-
ing standard procedure—political
blackmail. Either vote to keep us
in office regardless, or accept the
responsibility of another federal
election?

The Gordon budget has no pre-
cedent in Canadian parliamentary
history. Representatives from “‘out-
side” financial concerns were “‘draft-
ed” by Gordon to assist in its prep-
aration. These outsiders, with links
in Canadian industry, finance and
stock exchange interests were Gor-
don’s “advisors.”

One clause, the 30 per cent
“takeover” tax on foreign invest-
ment, (directly affecting U.S. inter-
ests in Canada), and conceived as
an “‘aid”’ to help Canadians “buy
back Canada from the U.S.” was
was the gimmick which blew the
Gordon budget fuse.

In less time than it takes an un-
employed worker to collect his job-
less insurance, U.S.-Canadian big
business were up in arms, demand-
ing the immediate cancellation of
this ‘‘ruinous takeover tax.” U.S.
pressure was on full heat.

Gordon and his government

“Now they want drugs to stop people
thinking.”

Our budget Heals’

promptly complied, but before Par-
liament was made aware of this
fact, the cancellation was obviously

“leaked” to the Montreal Stock

Exchange, since the “market”
zoomed upwards from its earlier
doldrums occasioned by the offend-
ing budgetary clause?

Under sharp criticism in the
House (and out of it), Mr. Gordon
reluctantly admitted that he had
“consulted” with his outside “‘ad-

‘visors’ on the need to eliminate the

controversial clause. (Previously he
had told the House that “‘no one
had been consulted”.) Being “all
honourable men” his advisors had
readily agreed. Meantime Stock
Exchange manipulators made a
profitable killing from the budget
“leak.”

Asa result of this political dou-
ble-dealing in the presentation of
Pearson’s much-boasted “we'll bring
down a budget,” the budget debate
in Parliament has centred around
not how little if anything there is
in the budget for the people, but
the unprincipled dishonesty and
chicanery inherent in its origin, sub-
mission and ‘“‘amendment.”

It should be noted that there is
nothing basically wrong in a budget-
ary clause applying a stiff tax on
foreign control of Canadian indus-
try. What was basically wrong was
the “‘outside”’ aid in its drafting and
alterations, and the lying misrepre-
sentations made to Parliament on

these unethical and dangerous prac- ~

tices.

And last, but no means least, the
political blackmail, now standard
practice of the Pearson minority
government, to sustain its bumbl-
ing finance minister—and its tenure
of office.

At home and abroad, Canada’s
“jmage’” is not enhanced on this,
her 96th birthday, by the U.S.-
pressurized Gordon budget?

In power for a straight 28-years, -

Alberta’s Social Credit Party has
just topped off this record with
another landslide victory in the re-
cent elections, taking 60 of the 63-
seat legislature by what was report-
ed to be a “record vote.”

Short of attempting any search-
ing analysis of this political phen-
omenon which has seemingly latch-
ed itself upon Sunny Alberta like
gophers around qa wheat bin, some
thought-provoking questions persist
in breaking through. Clearly those
Albertans who were telling us not
so long ago that “Social Credit is
on the decline in Alberta” didn’t
have the answers?

Back in 1935, seven years before

the Social Credit ‘‘Messiah’” Wil- .

liam Aberhart swept Alberta with
his “$25 dividend’, the Vancouver
g5un (Oct 2, ’35) defined Social Cre-
dit thus;— “...In short, Social Cre-
dit aims to give us all the benefits
of Socialism without depriving the
Community of the benefits of priv-
ate enterprise. . . Capitalism has
deluged the world with goods. So-
cial Credit proposes to enable the
masses to use them.”

In the No. 1 publication of the

Social Credit League of B.C. des-
cribed as a “1936 Manifesto” this
lauditory blurb from the Sun is pro-
minently displayed. A sort of ‘‘so-
-cialist in content, free-enterprise in
“form” quack medicine for human-
ity’s ills?
Most political observers of today,
including some Social Creditors,
8 will readily agree that any. resem-
blance between the idealistic mish-
mash of Socred philosophy which
characterized its adolescent years
and its monopoly-dominated give-
away policies of today, are not
even remotely “coincidental’’.

It is probably in this area where
some of the answers to the pheno-
menal success of Social Credit in
Alberta (at the polls) may be found.
From his “Tabernacle” in Calgary
Alberta’s first Socred Premier Wil-
liam Aberhart ‘held forth” weekly
‘with a fine mixture of Sotred ‘“‘eco-
nomies”’ well larded with scripture.
“Blessed are the poor. . .” boomed
Abie, for they shall be rewarded
with a $25 - “‘dividend’’.

The Alberta people, of course,
never got this “dividend’’, but the
“sincerity” of Abie’s exhortations
against the “monied interests” had
almost the same effect (psycholog-
ically) as the real thing. In this fine
art Abie coached, nurtured and pre-
pared his “evangelistic’’ under-
study and successor, Premier E. C.
Manning.

Premier Manning however, when
not in the pulpit, is endowed with
a hard-headed business quality,
well illustrated by his years as a
fast-buck salesman of Alberta’s nat-
ural resources to U.S. oil trusts,

. Alberta. And, unlike his B.C. coun--

.

‘regime of fast-buck monopoly brok-

~ of the resources and heritage of the

and which in Abie’s day, of a mag-
nitude scarcely dreamed of. Under
Manning the fast-buck technique
has replaced the Socred “dividend”
-—for keeps.

Nevertheless a small trickle of
U.S. oil monopoly “royalties’’ and
other leasehold returns have seep-
ed down to the ‘“masses’’ in the
form of “socialist benefits”, (to use
the Sun‘s definition) cr Socred
“prosperity’’ on whatever. other
nomenclature may be used. But
one hard reality remains; foreign
“private enterprise’’ was never
more strongly entrenched than in

terpart, Premier Manning has man-
aged to keep his government col-
leagues tolerably immune to graft
and corruption temptations.

This then might be termed the |
“enigma” of Alberta; an unbroken

ers with a Socred label, disposing

people year after year, confirming
such sales and giveaways’ with
“scripture, meeting all critics with
the “logic” of a John Birch Society,
and winning a thumping recurrent
mandate in election after election
from the people for doing so?
That is the “enigma” of the Al-
berta elections. Perhaps some Als
bertan can fill in with some of the
“whys” and ‘twherefores’’?
Meantime Premier Bennett
“sees” in the Alberta election re-
turns a “good omen" for the con-
tinuity of his own give-away regime
in B.C. Perhaps he also ‘hears’ Pre-
mier Manning exhorting “‘go thou

and do likewise’’?

‘

wt