May 21, 2013 - No. 62
Education
Is a Right! Unite to Affirm the Rights of All!
• Oppose
Bill
26,
the
Assurance
for Students Act - Kevan Hunter
• Unions
Take
a
Stand
Against
Bill 26
• Discussion
in
the
Legislature
on
Bill 26
• Provincial
Government
Blackmails
Post-Secondary
Educational
Institutions into
Harmful Cuts - Dougal MacDonald
Oppose Violation of First
Nations' Hereditary, Treaty and Constitutional Rights
• Bill
22,
Aboriginal
Consultation
Levy
Act Imposed on First Nations - Peggy Morton
• New
Bill
Assaults First Nations' Sovereignty
• Statement
of
Confederacy
of Treaty Six First Nations
Stop Paying the Rich! Increase
Investments in Social Programs!
• Harper
Pays
Canadian
Natural Resources Limited to Increase Its Profits and
Shine Its Image - George
Allen
Education Is a Right! Unite to
Affirm the Rights of All!
Oppose Bill 26, the Assurance for Students Act
- Kevan Hunter -
Bill 26, the Assurance for Students Act
was introduced in the Legislature on May 15 and passed third reading on
May 16. Bill 26 imposes a collective non-agreement on all 62 locals of
the Alberta Teachers' Association (ATA) and school boards in the
province. It was rammed through the Legislature in one day.
The Bill was introduced and closure used to force
it through three readings in the space of 24 hours. Teachers in Alberta
have been working without collective agreements since September 1,
2012. Suddenly on May 13, when the Progressive Conservative (PC)
government imposed deadline for
ratification of a framework agreement arrived, the government declared
that an emergency existed. There was absolutely no pretext available to
PCs for such unseemly haste in violating the rights of teachers and
running roughshod over elected school boards, which reveals the speed
with which all old arrangements are being destroyed. This has simply
become the way of doing business in the Alberta Legislature. With each
day the Legislature sits, the PCs throw over yet another accepted norm
of the functioning of the parliamentary system. It shows just how far
the use and abuse of the government's executive powers and abuse of its
majority have gone.
The bill says in essence that the government is
justified in imposing the agreement since both the ATA and the Alberta
School Boards Association agreed to recommend the agreement to their
members, and in spite of the fact that it was not ratified by all
locals and school boards. Education Minister Johnson and the Redford
government themselves set the terms for ratification of the framework
agreement. They required all locals and boards to endorse the agreement
by May 13 and decreed that if unanimous ratification did not take place
the agreement would be declared null and void. When these terms were
not met, the PC government simply declared that it would impose the
agreement through legislation. The legislation imposes the agreement on
all parties, and further states that if any part of the agreement
violates the Labour Code, the Act shall prevail over the
Labour Code.
Bill 26, which imposes a three year
wage freeze, is an assault on the right of teachers to wages
commensurate with their contribution to society. It will not be able to
resolve workload issues when budget cuts are leading to bigger classes
and fewer resources for students. It shows the complete failure of the
Redford government to do its duty and the danger it poses to the
working people.
Bill 26 was imposed in order to implement the
government's austerity agenda, stealing vast sums from education in
order to pay the rich and line the pockets of the energy monopolies. It
constitutes an assault on the right of teachers to decide. Despite the
fact only two locals -- St. Albert and Elk Island -- voted no, the fact
remains that this was not a freely negotiated agreement. Teachers voted
with a gun to their head and in an atmosphere of dire predictions that
failure to endorse the agreement would produce an even worse legislated
non-agreement. Even so, the "yes" vote was very weak and many teachers
voted to reject the agreement. Teachers voted with the understanding
that any local rejecting the agreement would be vetoing it for the
entire province, only to find out that the government had no intention
in honouring its own process for ratification. The imposition of a
non-agreement is a basic question of rights -- the right of teachers to
bargain collectively, as well as the right of St. Albert and Elk Island
teachers to say no.
While the government deliberately deprives the
education system of necessary funding and makes deep cuts to social
programs in the province, the government has the gall to declare that
it must implement the Framework Agreement to "ensure that the best
educational interests of students are met." A government that refuses
to recognize the need to reduce class sizes and increase supports for
students with special needs has no moral ground on which to speak about
the best interests of students. It is teachers and education workers
who every day articulate what is in the best interests of
students. How dare the government ram through legislation in this
fashion as though teachers and education workers constitute a threat to
society. Such shock
and awe tactics should alarm all workers and all Albertans.
After two years of negotiations, it has been
suggested that the ATA had no choice but to
recommend this agreement because "teachers don't want to fight."
Teachers want to teach, and want the conditions that will permit them
to do so and provide what students need. But this is precisely what the
government refuses to provide, and it has even withdrawn the inadequate
funding which was promised before the last provincial election.
Teachers must redouble their efforts. Organize discussion groups to
keep up with the speed of developments in education. Together, teachers
can work out how to resist the anti-social agenda and the attacks on
their rights, and defend the right to education.
Unions Take a Stand Against Bill 26
The Alberta Federation of Labour (AFL) denounced the
imposition of Bill 26. "By bringing forward this legislation, they're
basically saying that it didn't matter what any of those union locals
and school boards said or did," AFL President
Gil McGowan said. "Teachers basically didn't have a choice whether or
not to accept this contract -- either they accepted it, or they would
have it forced on them."
"This government is taking a top-down,
full-throttle, my-way-or-the-highway approach to their dealings with
workers," McGowan said. "This is the same bullying approach they've
taken with prison workers, and the same bullying approach they're
taking with post-secondary education."
"Legislating the contract shows that the Redford
government wasn't negotiating in good faith in the first place,"
McGowan said. "This decision has undermined their ability to be taken
seriously at the bargaining table. Who is going to trust that they
won't just resort to bargaining by fiat?"
Alberta Union of Provincial Employees President Guy
Smith also condemned the government's attack on the right of teachers
to freely negotiate their wages and working conditions. "It is
completely inappropriate for the government to remove teachers' legal
rights to collective bargaining in their school districts, and remove
Alberta families' right to have their school trustees perform the job
that they elected them to do."
"The government just wanted a contract done quickly
and on their own terms. There is no justification for legislating away
employees' and trustees' access to their bargaining rights and their
democratic right to vote for a contract," Smith said.
The United Nurses of Alberta (UNA) also spoke out
against the legislation stating, "All Albertans should be gravely
concerned by the Redford Government's plan to impose a legislatively
mandated contract settlement on school boards and teachers throughout
the province."
"Trying to reach the result you want through
collective bargaining, then resorting to public pressure and finally
using legislation when you can't get your way is really nothing more
than bargaining in bad faith," UNA secretary-treasurer Karen Craik
said.
Discussion in the Legislature on Bill 26.
Bill 26 was introduced on May 14, 2013 and passed
third reading the following day. The NDP caucus all voted against the
Bill, while the Liberals and Wildrose voted in favour of the Bill. TML
is reprinting excerpts from the speeches of two NDP MLAs.
***
Rachel Notley: [Bill
26] fundamentally
undermines the authority of locally elected bodies and the ability of
locally elected bodies to exercise their authority as contemplated
under their legislation and under the overall system of legislation
that governs K to 12 education. We have one school board, for instance
-- granted, it's only one school board, but it's a school board that
represents 20 per cent of students in the province -- that voted
against
this. We had the Edmonton public school board, which did in fact vote
in favour. By all means, you know, it was a close vote, but it did vote
in favour, so the government is certainly entitled to rely on that
vote. Nonetheless, they were very reluctant in that choice because they
were concerned about how this highlights a structural problem with
respect to the delivery of K to 12 education in this province, where
the school boards are asked to take the blame for everything that goes
wrong but are not given the authority to make decisions about their own
funding....
Of course, we know that once you take into account
inflation and you take into account the increase in the number of
students, effectively our school boards are being asked to wrestle with
cuts, so they're trying to wrestle with those at the same time that
they're having terms and conditions imposed upon them. It disrespects
their authority, and it also puts them into a rather untenable position.
The final reason, Mr. Speaker, that I will be
voting against this bill is because it fundamentally assaults the
principle of collective bargaining. Now, I appreciate that this
government doesn't have a tremendous amount of respect for that and
that we have labour legislation in this province that relates to many
public-sector workers, which flies in the face of the International
Labour Organization's conventions on basic human rights. Indeed, this
government and this province have been cited repeatedly by the
International Labour Organization, a subsidiary of the United Nations,
for their breach of the United Nations convention with respect to the
rights of working people by bringing in legislation that negates and
rejects the value of collective bargaining.
Obviously, when the government legislates an
agreement over the objections of a bargaining agent and in this case
two bargaining agents, it is disrespecting the fundamental principle
around the importance of collective bargaining.
This does actually relate back to the best
interests of our children, Mr. Speaker. If our kids are going to
thrive, the teachers who work with them day in and day out need to be
respected, and they have chosen to be part of a bargaining unit which
has the right to collectively bargain on the terms and conditions of
employment. Quite frankly, telling teachers that they need to go for
the next four years without a pay raise is, in my view, disrespectful
to them and to the work that they do.
***
Brian Mason: First and
foremost, this bill
is a complete and open attack on not just teachers in this province;
this is a bill that attacks all working people in Alberta. The fact
that you've got a deal that's being imposed via legislation on teachers
is an affront to the basic rights of unionized workers in Alberta and
their rights to collective bargaining. You know, I can appreciate that
the government has been trying to negotiate a deal for two years, but
this is not the answer, where if you don't get the result that you're
looking for, you turn around and just end up bullying the other side
into accepting your terms....
Mr. Speaker, I mean, it's
important to know that
this isn't just about teachers. I find it quite offensive, actually,
when the minister stands up and says: this is for students, and
students are first. To be honest, I think this bill is more like:
students first over the cliff. If the government respected students and
parents and families and wanted to ensure that they had the best
quality of education and access to that education, then they would put
their money where their mouth is....
Just the other day I was at one of my schools in
northeast Edmonton, and their special-needs teachers are losing their
positions as of June of this year, and they will not be back in the
fall. I can't tell you what a disadvantage that's going to place on not
only students with special needs; we're talking about students where
English may be their second language or third language. We're talking
about students who need additional help and supports, who are now going
to be thrown into a classroom with 25 to 35 other students and one
teacher trying to juggle everything that teachers have to do in a
classroom today. It's going to have far-reaching effects. That's
another issue that I have with this bill and with many government
decisions, their lack of long-term vision and planning. For example,
jamming too many students into a classroom with not enough supports is
going to have an impact on those students for the rest of their lives.
Again, to this government, in their mind, it's probably penny wise but
pound foolish as far as the long-term well-being of students, parents,
and families.
Provincial Government Blackmails Post-Secondary
Educational Institutions into Harmful Cuts
- Dougal MacDonald -
The Redford regime's March 7 budget made savage
funding cuts to Alberta's already-underfunded post-secondary education
(PSE) system. The cuts axed 7.3 per cent or $147 million from the PSE
budget after promising an inadequate increase of two per cent. The new
round of cuts is already negatively affecting post-secondary
educational institutions across Alberta, exposing the Minister of
Enterprise and Advanced Education's falsehoods about "duplication of
programs" and the "fat" that supposedly needs to be trimmed from the
PSE system.
The main brunt of the cuts has fallen on the PSE
workers and the programs offered by the institutions. Since it is the
workers who are the producers of all added-value in the PSE system
through their teaching, research, and support work, they can in no way
be considered "fat" or a cost of any kind. The programs also cannot be
considered "fat" because the very reason the post-secondary educational
institutions exist is to provide required programs. Complicating the
matter is that Alberta's Post-Secondary
Learning
Act mandates that the
PSE system must not run a deficit. This means that to deal with the
provincial cuts, most PSE upper administrations are being blackmailed
into concluding that the only way to balance their underfunded budgets
is though internal cuts.
In April, Edmonton's University of Alberta revealed
its plan to cut $25 million in 2013-14, which includes layoffs as well
as a 1.5 per cent cut across all faculties and units. Funding for
travel and expenditures will be cut 25 per cent. The U of A Faculty of
Arts has slashed its graduate student budget by 20 per cent, meaning
fewer teaching assistants and research assistants in undergraduate
classes. The lack of teaching assistants will prevent breaking up large
classes into smaller discussion groups, which greatly improve student
learning. At Edmonton's Northern Alberta Institute of Technology
(NAIT), staff in certain programs are being asked to consider leaving
the institution voluntarily. NAIT is also looking at cutting programs
and increasing class sizes. At MacEwan University, the president has
announced that hiring is frozen and that approximately 36 vacant staff
positions will not be filled and will "disappear." All departments are
being given budget targets and staff layoffs are being discussed.
In northern Alberta, Grand Prairie Regional College
will lay off 18 workers in order to balance its budget, which has a $4
million shortfall due to the provincial cuts. Forty-five workers in
total will be let go through all job-related measures, including
layoffs. Northern Lakes College, based in Slave Lake, serves over
twenty-five smaller nearby communities that are mainly Aboriginal and
rural. It will be greatly affected by a $100 million provincial cut to
adult education because high schools do not exist in some of the remote
communities, making Northern Lakes' upgrading programs critical for
getting students into the trades. Athabasca University, Alberta's
online university also located in the north, is cutting 44 jobs and is
trying to shift the way tutors are paid from a partial salary and
partial piecework to total piecework.
In eastern Alberta, Lakeland College has announced
that more than 40 permanent positions will be eliminated at its
Lloydminster and Vermilion campuses and several programs will stop
accepting new students. Portage College in Lac la Biche has eliminated
fifteen full-time staff positions, closed its Vegreville campus and
reduced the size of its Bonnyville campus by more than one half.
In central Alberta, Red Deer College (RDC) is
preparing for layoffs and program cuts as the administration is trying
to find $6 million to balance its budget. The president has stated that
32 workers will lose their jobs. RDC is cutting its virtual assistance
distance certificate starting September 2013 and also ending its
hospitality and tourism programs. The early learning and child care
diploma program will be suspended in September 2014.
In Calgary, the University of Calgary continues to
make budget cuts, as it deals with a $40 million cut in provincial
government funding. U of C has announced that 200 student positions
will be eliminated by September 2013. This is in addition to the
elimination of 30 student positions in nursing and 15 in medicine. U of
C still has not decided how the cuts will be made but it expects to get
rid of fifty faculty positions and may also eliminate certain programs.
Calgary's Mount Royal University has put three diploma programs, four
certificate programs and an engineering transfer program on the
chopping block due to a $14 million budget shortfall. The three diploma
programs on the block are disability studies, music performance, and
theatre arts. The four certificate programs are aging studies,
forensics, journalism and perinatal care. The disability studies
program cut accompanies millions of dollars in cuts to funding and the
closure of the province's Michener Centre, a major care centre for
people with disabilities.
In southern Alberta, the University of Lethbridge
faces a $11.8 million shortfall due to budget cuts. Various departments
are leaving positions vacant and eliminating term positions, sessional
lecturer positions, casual positions and some student positions. Twelve
full-time workers will be laid off, mainly due to the closure of two
rural campuses. Other workers will receive a zero per cent cost of
living increase. Intake will be suspended to the Office Administration,
Fashion Design and Marketing diploma programs. Travel budgets are
being cut. Other measures being considered are raising student fees,
reducing the number of computer labs and cutting the library budget.
It is clear that the March 7 provincial funding
cuts have placed each of Alberta's twenty-six PSE institutions in an
even more difficult position. The provincial government is cynically
using its control over PSE funding and its backward Post-Secondary
Learning Act to blackmail the PSE system into cutting workers
and
programs. Those active within the PSE system, their allies and others
concerned for the future of education must resist this blackmail. The
neo-liberal mantra is that there is no alternative to what the ruling
circles dictate and that everyone should just shut up and do what they
are told. But this must not pass because there is an
alternative for education. Already, students, faculty, support staff,
and their allies have been vigorously expressing their opposition to
the government attacks on the PSE system through a number of effective
actions across the province. Now is the time for all the PSE
institutions to join this opposition en
masse and to demand with one
loud voice that the provincial government must increase investments in
post-secondary education and must guarantee the right to education for
everyone. The people of Alberta must decide the direction of education
in Alberta, not the private energy monopolies and their fawning agents
in the Redford dictatorship.
Oppose Violation of First Nations'
Hereditary, Treaty and Constitutional Rights
Bill 22, Aboriginal Consultation Levy Act
Imposed on First
Nations
- Peggy Morton -
Bill 22, the Aboriginal Consultation Levy Act
was introduced in the Legislature on May 8 and passed third reading on
May 15. Robin Campbell, Minister of Aboriginal Relations, described
Bill 22 as "innovative, groundbreaking legislation that puts Alberta at
the forefront of First Nations consultation in Canada." The Minister
went on to claim that he had consulted extensively with First Nations.
Apparently the Minister thinks he can organize a dinner meeting, mouth
some platitudes and put a tick beside the "consultation" box. This
shows that the Redford dictatorship is in total contempt of its duty to
consult and accommodate First Nations.
First Nations expressed their shock at the blatant
colonial outlook, false claims about consultation, brazen violations of
aboriginal rights and significant expansion of executive or
prerogative powers through use of "regulations." First Nations leaders
filled the visitor's gallery as the legislation was debated to show
their firm opposition.
In the Legislature, NDP MLA Deron Bilous expressed
the essence of the matter when he stated, "Secondly, aboriginal
relations, Mr. Speaker, involve government-to-government relations.
First Nations are not subordinate to the Minister nor to any
government. They are equal partners and should be treated in that
fashion. By failing to consult with First Nation chiefs and councils,
the Minister has really violated the protocol agreement and imperilled
the relationship between the government of Alberta and First Nations."
Members of the opposition tried to send the
legislation back to Committee, and then proposed what is known as a
"hoist" motion, which would have delayed the bill for six months. When
those motions failed they introduced many amendments in consultation
with the First Nations, but these were all summarily rejected by the
PCs, who were clearly intent on ramming the bill through the
Legislature at break-neck speed.
The preamble to Bill 22 states, "Alberta has the
constitutional right to manage and develop provincial Crown lands and
natural resources in the province to benefit all Albertans and to take
up land for such purposes." What does this actually mean? First it is a
claim that First Nations surrendered their traditional lands when in
fact they signed treaties of peace and friendship to share the land.
Second it is based on the outlook that the "right to manage and
develop" means turning over lands to private monopoly interests. Third,
as was made clear in Bill 2 when all reference to the public interest
was disappeared, the phrase "to benefit all Albertans" has the meaning
of whatever is good for the oil and gas monopolies.
The irony of a bill about consultation
which was introduced with no consultation with First Nations was not
lost on anyone but the PC government itself. The government is so
thoroughly and unreservedly captive to and in the service of private
monopoly interests that it seems blind to any other considerations. In
the Legislature, Wildrose leader Danielle Smith and some other
legislators stated that the bill was well-intentioned but at some point
went off the rails. But Bill 22 is entirely consistent with the
government's
agenda. The Harper, Redford, Clark and other governments are putting
new arrangements in place to strengthen the global resource extraction
corporations' unrestricted monopoly right to plunder the natural
resources and export them for a quick profit.
The PCs railroaded Bill 2, the Responsible
Energy Development Act through the Legislature in the fall
session. Bill 2 established a new regulatory regime to guarantee that
whatever the monopolies decide will be rubber-stamped with lightning
speed. The founding president of the Canadian Association of Petroleum
Producers and former executive officer of EnCana Corporation and its
predecessor company has been appointed chair of the new regulator. Bill
2 eliminated all vestiges of the concept of public interest and
strengthened the arbitrary powers of the executive to act on behalf of
the most powerful private interests, the oil and gas cartels.
The workers and all people of Alberta should stand
with the First Nations to fight together for a new direction for the
economy and an end to monopoly "right" violating the rights of all.
The development of natural resources should be a
decision of the body politic including First Nations and the wealth
generated should go directly into the public treasury to benefit all
the people including First Nations and the general interests of
society.
New Bill Assaults First Nations' Sovereignty
Specific provisions of Bill 22 that are not
acceptable to First Nations include:
1. The bill is being imposed without consultation with
First Nations. First Nations have their own protocols and processes on
consultation, which the government has ignored. Further, several of the
treaty confederations have put forward consultation papers that the
government has also ignored.
2. It fails to recognize the true spirit and intent
of Treaties. Treaties 6, 7 and 8 were not land cessation treaties but
treaties of peace and friendship where the First Nations agreed to
share the land provided their rights were not infringed. The Act
violates the Crown's obligations deriving from the nation-to-nation
relationship which exists, and First Nations inherent or hereditary,
Treaty and Constitutional rights.
3. The Alberta government illegally claims the
"right" to define who constitutes an aboriginal group.
4. First Nations are required to provide
information to government on all agreements made with industry, while
such disclosure is not required of any non-aboriginal landowners. This
constitutes a discriminatory requirement.
5. The bill establishes an industry levy to fund
aboriginal consultation. Initial information is that funding for First
Nations consultation will be reduced from the current $150 million to
$70 million a year. The amount of the levy and other matters covered in
the regulations can be arbitrarily imposed, giving more executive
powers to the Minister in the form of a royal prerogative.
6. There is no enforcement mechanism if industry
fails to pay the levy.
7. By omission, the Act permits the levy
fund to be used for purposes other than First Nations consultation, and
the exclusive benefit of all First Nations and aboriginal groups. The
bill specifically prohibits the creating of a trust in favour of a
First Nation. The government can arbitrarily exempt any corporation or
any class of proponents from paying a levy. There is no certainty that
levy funds will not be considered accommodation or compensation for
infringements upon treaty rights.
8. While First Nations are required to make
discriminatory disclosures, there is no requirement that the government
report on disbursements from levies in its annual reports.
9. The bill not only lacks an appeal mechanism but
also specifically states that there is no appeal of decisions made by
ministerial prerogative and all decisions are final.
Statement of Confederacy of Treaty Six First Nations
- May 10, 2013 -
On Wednesday May 8, 2013 the Honorable Minister of
Aboriginal Relations for Alberta presented Bill 22: Aboriginal
Consultation Levy Act to the Legislature. This presentation came
as a shock to most First Nations in Alberta, and especially within
Treaty 6 as recent indications were that the Minister was unready to
present any type of legislation dealing with Consultation. At a meeting
with the Chiefs of Treaty Six on May 3, 2013 there was zero indication
that any levy would be placed into law, nor was it mentioned that the
law would arrive five days later. In this respect, the Chiefs of Treaty
Six feel that the Alberta Government is once again moving forward with
their own agenda and ignoring the recommendations and terms of First
Nations leaders.
Since the recognition of the Crown's duty to
consult, the relationship between First Nations, government and
industry have been slowly improving, but now this progress has been
placed in jeopardy. For some time, and with each reiteration of
Alberta's Consultation Policy, First Nations have stated that the terms
of Consultation cannot be unilaterally imposed. Consultation, the terms
and fees associated are largely governed through individual First
Nations Impact Benefit Agreements (IABs). The benefits and provisions
of these agreements have always been determined by the affected First
Nation, and each agreement is unique. This recognition of sovereignty
is now being threatened by the imposition of Alberta legislation.
With its legislative approach, it appears as
though
the Government of Alberta is moving forward with the notion that, as
stated in their Consultation Policy Paper (2013);
Alberta has the
constitutional right to manage and develop provincial Crown lands and
natural resources in the province to benefit all Albertans and to take
up land for such purposes.
This statement alone has been widely
contested and continues to be questioned to this date as many First
Nations view the Natural Resource
Transfer Agreement (NRTA 1930)
as
illegal
and invalid. First Nations have repeatedly stated that the true
spirit and intent of the Treaty relationship was an equal sharing of
the lands and resources. To this date, this relationship has not been
achieved and Bill 22 is not a step towards this realization. Any terms
of sharing resource revenue must be negotiated together with First
Nations, not simply imposed in a unilateral and colonial fashion
through a minuscule levy.
Continuing with the colonial approach, the Aboriginal Consultation
Levy Act grants the power of determining who is
an Aboriginal to the Minister of Aboriginal Relations. Not since the
Constitutional Repatriation has the definition of Aboriginal been
approached, a definition that was largely contested, yet Alberta feels
obligated to grant themselves the ability to create their own
definition. First Nations have prior to contact defined themselves
through their inherent right to self-determination, and continue to
express this right through the enactment of First Nations laws. Alberta
does not have the right or ability to define Aboriginal groups, nor
were they transferred this ability.
The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of
Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP 2007) states that;
[First Nations] have the
right to own, use, develop and control the lands, territories and
resources that they possess by reason of traditional ownership or other
traditional occupation or use, as well as those which they have
otherwise acquired. (Article 26(2))
In this respect, First Nations
have the inherent right to determine how and why their traditional
lands are to be developed, and the right to be actively involved in any
decision making. The Consultation Policy and levy ignore these rights,
and Alberta is attempting to determine when First Nations should be
consulted and the subsequent fees associated. Then in true patriarchal
fashion, Alberta will divvy out the funds to First Nations in a
domineering fashion.
Lastly, in his May 9, 2013
statement in the House,
Minister Campbell stated;
...I can say that I met with the grand
chief
personally. We met about three weeks ago. He was made aware of this
bill. He agreed to this going forward.
This above statement is false
in all accounts. The
meeting that took place was a dinner meeting and the mention of a levy
was made as a casual statement, there was no indication of Bill 22 or
that the Alberta Government had any law drafted. Similarly, echoed in
statements at the April 16, 2013 meeting in Calgary by Grand Chief
Charles Weaselhead, notification is NOT Consultation. The Confederacy
and the Chiefs of Treaty Six have never agreed to a Levy being placed
on industry, and many Chiefs have stated that this is an individual
First Nation matter and often covered in IABs. The Confederacy of
Treaty Six First Nations, as stated in a letter on May 9, 2013, reject Bill 22: Aboriginal
Consultation Levy Act and call for immediate action
by the Alberta Government to rescind its unilateral approach and adhere
to First Nations concerns.
Sincerely,
[signed]
Grand Chief Craig Makinaw
Confederacy of Treaty Six First Nations
Stop Paying the Rich! Increase
Investments in Social Programs!
Harper Pays Canadian Natural Resources Limited to
Increase Its Profits and Shine Its Image
- George Allen -
For years, the Redford regime and previous Tory
provincial governments have handed over billions of dollars to the
energy monopolies who run Alberta. The Harper dictatorship is also
getting in on the act. Recently, the Harperites have been directing
their pay-the-rich schemes toward not only increasing the profits of
the energy monopolies but also toward trying to shine up the tarnished
image of the oilsands on the environmental front. North American
activists have repeatedly called oilsands' oil "dirty" to support their
anti-pipeline campaigns. The European Union (EU) countries are
threatening to officially label the oil "dirty," which would make it
more expensive and hence harder to sell to European customers.
In keeping with Harper's program to further pay the
Alberta energy monopolies, Gary Goodyear, Canada's federal Minister of
State for Science and Technology, announced on May 10 that the National
Research Council was handing over $9.5 million in public money to
Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNRL) to build a $19-million plant
at CNRL's Primrose South oilsands project near Bonnyville, Alberta.
CNRL, one of Alberta's "big five" private oilsands monopolies, will
partner with Ontario-based Pond Biofuels in the project. CNRL will be
paid notwithstanding the fact that President Steve Laut stated on May 2
that the company had "an excellent start to the year" with "record
quarterly production." In the first quarter of 2013 (January-March),
CNRL
generated cash flow from operations of about $1.57 billion compared to
$1.28 billion in the same quarter in 2012. This once again
exposes the fraud of Redford's "bitumen bubble," as a reason for
decreased claims on resource revenues.
The proposed CNRL plant will use carbon dioxide
emissions from the oilsands to turn algae into products such as fuel,
fertilizer, and livestock feed. The technology feeds carbon dioxide
emissions from smokestacks to algae, and, as it blossoms, the algae
develops fat (oil) which can be blended with heavy bitumen to make it
flow more easily through pipelines or to be sold to refiners. The
leftover product after the oil is stripped out can be used as
fertilizer or animal feed. Goodyear claims that the project can both be
sold to the rest of the world and prove that Canada is a leader in
emissions reductions. The main goal of the NRC-funded project is to
test the algae technology on a large scale, which exposes it as a
classic case of the public sector taking the risks and the private
sector making the profits.
The payment to CNRL is the first project to receive
funding under a restructured National Research Council (NRC), which
announced on May 7 that it would henceforth focus exclusively on
technologies that directly serve the monopolies, rather than on more
general scientific endeavours. NRC President John McDougall stated on
May 7, "We want business-driven, industry-relevant research and
development." At the announcement of the payment to CNRL on May 10,
McDougall, who is a former CEO of the energy-focused Alberta Research
Council said, "I can confidently state that such a project would
rarely, if ever, have happened under the previous operating model at
NRC."
The people of Alberta demand to know why public
funding is used to enhance the private gain and claims of the energy
monopolies. Is that not corruption of public finances to benefit a
privileged minority? The feeble argument that the people benefit
collaterally when the monopolies and their owners benefit directly is
the neo-liberal "trickle-down theory," the core of Reagonomics, long
discredited by such facts as that in the U.S. between 1979 and 2005,
after-tax household income rose only six per cent for the bottom fifth
of income earners and over 13 times as much or 80 per cent for the top
fifth. Trickle down is the basis of the old saw that because the
monopolies provide the people with jobs, the public treasury should be
opened up to fund their projects. The monopolies then seize those
publicly-funded projects and developments as their own private property
and use them to enlarge their private fortunes. But if millions of
dollars of public money are going to be put into projects such as
CNRL's Primrose Lake plant, then it is the public that should benefit
directly from the investment and results, not the private owners. These
schemes to pay the rich and strengthen their private empires and class
privilege must stop. They are wrecking society.
Read The Marxist-Leninist
Daily
Website: www.cpcml.ca Email: editor@cpcml.ca
