AFTER SOVIET DEAL WHAT?

Less tension ca

CANADIAN Communists see the recent $500 million Soviet Purchase of wheat trom Canada as Making it obvious that the well- being of our country is linked to €asing international tensions.

The wheat deal, they say, puts the government ‘‘under extra Pressure to begin to work for disarmament and not to do those things which run counter to this heed — such as accepting nu- Clear arms,”*

The views of the Communist Party were outlined by the party’s National organizer, Nelson Clarke,

While the wheat sale ‘‘certain- ly does not mean we've solved Our economic problems, or even the problem of our need to trade With socialist countries,” said Clarke, ‘it does create a better Situation in Canada.”

* * *

In the sense that Canadian trade with socialist countries has been expanded, and our trade has therefore become more di-

Versified, he explained, the wheat _

deal ‘helps to make Canada more Mdependent of the U.S.’’

, But Clarke also warned that

We cannot count on a perman- ent market for wheat in the Soviet Union or Ghina, since they are capable of great agri- Cultural production of their own Over a long-term period.

“What is needed is rounded Out trade, which should include the export of Canadian indus- trial and agricultural products.”

Ih this connection, he hoped:

that rumors about an increased Import of Soviet goods to Can- ada were also true, and empha-

Hal

‘

sized that ‘‘long-term trade with any socialist country must be based on mutual advantage.”’

The Communist Party spokes- man noted that the wheat sale is going to force the Canadian government to face up to some transportation problems.

* * *

A recent newspaper report that shipping companies in countries such as England, Norway, France and Belgium will likely benefit most from the shipping end ofthe deal, focuses attention on the need to re-establish a Canadi- an merchant fleet.

It also ’ calls into grave ques- tion the policy of closing down the branch railway lines on the prairies. This short- sighted pol- icy of the railway companies, condoned by the federal govern- ment, will deprive many farmers of the full benefits of the wheat sale because of the increased costs of hauling grain to more distant elevator points.”’

The Communist Party, said Clarke, has a long record of

struggle for the sale of grain to

the socialist countries.

‘<at one time we fought alone on this question. Then it was taken up widely by farm unions, farm co-ops, labor unions.”’

The grain deal, Clarke felt, was an expression both of the kind of independent policies ad- vocated for Canada by Commu-

nists, and the policy of peaceful:

coexistence.

The easing of international re- lations, reflected in the test-ban treaty, contributed to the achievement of this particular wheat sale. It would not have been possible, he underlined,

NO WHEAT GLUT ON THE PRAIRIES THIS YEAR. If Canada follows up this breakthrough

in trade with socialist countries it can lead to.

during the Cuban crisis last Oct- ober.

‘after all, the only other course is to deny the possibility of peaceful coexistence and its corollary of peaceful trade and to visualize world thermonuclear war as the only solution to the problems before the world. This course, we Communists com- pletely reject.”’

* * *

The wheat sale will put an es- timated $2,000 into the hands of the average prairie farmer, which will influence the wel- being of all Canadians.

‘It should be a great source of pride,’’ suggested Clarke, *¢that our farmers have develop- ed such a technologically ad- vanced agriculture in which less than 10 percent of the popula-

tion is able to supply the main food needs of all Canada.’’ Clarke noted that press reports

spoke of poor harvest in the Soviet Union and all Europe, and this was undoubedly why such a large purchase was made here. The agreement was an example of how trade can assist countries in times of climatic difficulties, inevitable in agriculture.

The $500 million sale to the Soviet Union, with part of the wheat going to Cuba, ‘‘ runs coun- ter to the opinions of the U.S. government as to what Canada should be doing.

This could be explained, Clarke felt, by the fact that *‘there are powerful economic factors in operation impelling the Canadian capitalist class to undertake new economic’ meas- ures leading in the direction of greater economic independ- ence.’’

Besides that there are divi- sions within the Canadian ruling

Ma gazine Section

N lead to more trade

vast expansion of- trade between our two countries.

circles between those who see their profit interests in being completely tied to economic subordination to the U.S. and those who feel the need of seek-' ing more independent policies.

There are also divisions within ~

the ruling circles in Canada, as in the United States, bétween those who regard war as inevi- table, and those who are begin- ning to see the necessity for peaceful coexistence.

These divisions also cut across both the old capitalist parties. The various factors operate, ‘‘no matter what party is in power ‘in Ottawa.”’

The fact that Pearson’s gov- ernment compels it totake public opinion into account in a way it might not have done, concluded Clarke, if Pearson had obtained in.April the majority he sought.

Exodus

By KENNETH YOUNGER

hew crop of inteliigent and aspiring young Canadians is now enrolling in our universi- les for their final year of studies They are bidding farewell to their Parents as they settle into a last big effort in academic training But many of them will be orphans a year from now fol- Owing graduation next spring They will still have their parents but they will have lost their Country It’s the United States that is Making the best use of the thou- Sands of trained professionals Sur higher educational system Produces each year. Canada reeds children who emerge as 4dvanced people in their fields M the US, What a conglomeration. of talent we have lost. _There are now over 3.25 mil- ‘on people in the U.S. who came there from Canada. This figure 'S being augmented daily by a Continuous flow across our south- €rn border. But what is doubly damaging is that an ever higher Proportion of Canadian emigrants ts Composed of precisely those People we can least afford to lose

* * *

The drain of our brainpower Will skim off close to 7,000 pro- €Ssionals — scientists, doctors, “ngineers, economists, manag- Ts, businessmen — if current

Rather it

of brains and talent to

trends continue next year. And in this category, it isnt the

laggards and dullards who go is those with some

gumption and spirit, those who are best qualified in their re- spective fields, who are forced

_to decide that a greater outlet

Are our scientists, doctors, engineers, teachers to be trained in Canada for the U.S. to use? Creation of manufacturing industries

fro

m our raw materials can create new opportunities to keep them

working in Canada and for Canada.

for their talents and a greater challenge to tackle will be theirs if they apply themselves in the United States. —

From high up this problem might seem to be statistical. From the heart of a conscient- ious student completing his course it must be turmoil and a tearing at loyalties—to his professional knowledge on the one hand, and to his national con- science on the other.

W. Stewart Geddes, writing in The Independent Business- man, puts the question this way:

* * *

**To someone who has just gra- duated from one of our universi- ties and who is on the threshold of their professional career, what single factor is probably more important than any other? Is it not that of extending the fron- tiers and working onthe develop- ment of new ideas in their field? Surveying the prospects, what climate or environment exists to- day in Canada for work of this nature?

*T would suggest it is rather similar to that of the Yukon for growing orchids — it is chilling and soul-destroying. There is on the part of both government and industry a complete lack of in- terest in research and develop- ment.’’

The urge to flee from our stifl- ing atmosphere is quite strong. And many do quite well for them- selves personally. A Pulitzer prize this year anda recent Nobel

U.S.

prize were captured in the U.S, by Canadians. The medical fac- ulty of John Hopkins University has over 50 ex-Canadians en it and 20 more work at the Mayo Clinic in important research and teaching positions. * * *

Every area of intellectual act- ivity in the U.S. has been stim- ulated by the presence of skilled professionals who have found no outlet for their skills in this country and were forced to leave. One of them said recently, ‘I didn’t abandon Canada; Canada abandoned me’’.

It would be naive to think they will ever return after becoming established in their chosen field. We have, in the main, lost them. We will continue to lose them as long as government policy does nothing to provide for creative outlets and stimulate opportuni- ties in Canada.

Take two simple facts where government action has been wanting—nothing is spent in this country for research in the fron- tier fields in science; U.S. subsi- diaries in Canada spend $20 mil- lion each year on research at their parent plants in the U.S.

A little adjustment here would

go a long way towards laying a base for facilities for our skilled people at home. . More challenge to creative and imaginative minds and better re- turns for their efforts would soon follow. The process of border osmosis would stop.

October 4, 1963—PACIFIC TRIBUNE—Page 5