|
May 27, 2017 - No. 19 Liberals' Public
Relations Exercise on Another Attempt to
Escape Canadians'
Demand to Repeal Secret Police Powers
• Misrepresentation
of
Canadians'
Views
on
Security Liberals' Public Relations Exercise on Public Security and Bill C-51 Another Attempt to Escape Canadians' Demand to Repeal Secret Police Powers
On May 19, the Trudeau government released a report on "What We Learned" from its consultations on Canada's "national security framework" which were held from September 10 to December 1. The report was produced by New York-based public relations firm Hill + Knowlton Strategies (formerly Hill & Knowlton), described by the Ottawa Citizen as "the busiest lobbying firm in Ottawa for foreign takeovers."[1] Hill + Knowlton is infamous for its criminal role as the architect of a public relations campaign to destroy opposition to the first Iraq War in 1990, crafting and publicizing the later-disproved claims of Iraqi soldiers taking babies out of incubators and leaving them to die.[2] Using convoluted language, Minister of Public Safety Ralph Goodale shamelessly covered up the consequences to the polity of putting private interests such as Hill + Knowlton in command of "consultations." The report was "produced by an independent third party," Goodale declared, and it therefore provides "an impartial overview of what Canadians said"! Before the consultations on national security began, many were leery of whether the government would base it on information that would permit the polity to draw warranted conclusions. The Liberals' track record of phony consultations on other matters of concern and their defence of Bill C-51 and its police powers did not bode well. The consultation did not get off to a good start with the government's official Green Paper on National Security diverting the discussion that was required on the need to eliminate measures that violate rights to one on new proposed powers and the alleged threats posed by "radicalized" individuals.[3] But to put this consultation in the hands of one of the most disreputable, dirty international spin artists, whose only claim to fame is willingness to do anything as long as the price is right, adds insult to injury. The essence of the Liberals' and Hill + Knowlton's report is the cover up of Canadians' clearly and consistently-expressed opposition to the legislation passed in the post-9/11 period in the name of fighting terrorism. The Harper government fine-tuned this anti-terror legislation in 2015 in the form of Bill C-51. Its main feature was to further enshrine in law the use of police powers which by definition are above the law. The use of covert police powers has been a hallmark of the bourgeois state since Canada was founded in 1867 and before. Since the Cold War was launched following the Second World War, the use of covert police powers to undermine the people's movement for justice, peace and freedom has been a constant. This well-known opposition of Canadians to Bill C-51 and its legalization of black ops against Canadians is a likely explanation for why the Liberals did not hold consultations on Bill C-51 itself but on a "national security framework." The inescapable fact that the majority of those who participated in the national security consultations did so in order to demand the repeal of Bill C-51 is begrudgingly given a one sentence mention: "a majority of stakeholders and experts [not only opposed new powers but] called for existing [security measures] to be scaled back or repealed completely, particularly Bill C-51, the Anti-Terrorism Act, 2015..." On this basis, the Liberals and Hill + Knowlton have managed to produce a report that does not affirm loud and clear that Canadians continue to demand the repeal of Bill C-51, oppose strengthening police powers in the name of security, and call for rights to be defended. To disinform the public, the problem the government faces and for which it launched the consultations is presented as a "growing level of distrust in key institutions involved in national security and law enforcement." To deal with the "growing level of distrust," the serious matters of security and rights are reduced to objects of public relations. The Liberals' well-paid public relations firm also declares that the issue facing Canadians is a "delicate balance that must be struck between the secrecy and covertness in the fight against terrorism and the constitutionally protected rights and freedoms of individual Canadians." Talk about striking a "delicate balance" covers up the
fact
that the police powers contained in Bill C-51 are already outside
the rule of law and that they are exercised with impunity against
those defending their rights, including Indigenous peoples
affirming their right to decide on developments in their
territories, workers and progressive political forces.[4]
The secret police powers in Canada are further subordinate to the
nefarious interests of U.S. imperialist intelligence agencies and the
private interests contending for control over them, not a government of
laws over which the people can exercise control. The statement and entire report are irrational and take Canadians for fools. They are not, and this poses a real problems for the Liberals' public relations exercise aimed at "restoring trust." True to public relations form, the exercise ends up as one more example of paying the rich for their services which contribute nothing to resolving the serious problems rooted in the anachronistic political institutions in Canada. Whatever its price tag, the Liberals' and Hill + Knowlton's public relations exercise cannot cover up the fact that the Liberals' "national security framework" seeks to further enshrine increasing violations of the rule of law through the "legalization" of the use of arbitrary powers. The fact that the government wants to introduce amendments to make sure these powers in Bill C-51 are "constitutional" is ample evidence of their nefarious aims. Rights today are not a matter to be decided by the police powers and those who hire private firms to perform a delicate tightrope act to further their own interests. Rights belong to people by virtue of being human, and, for the vast majority by virtue of being the actual producers of society's wealth, those on whom its well-being depends. The Indigenous peoples whose land and resources are taken over by force by private interests and their state, and who with their defence of their rights and well-being and the natural environment protect all working people, also have rights by virtue of their being. This includes the affirmation of their sovereignty against which police powers must not be used. Human beings have rights by virtue of being human and these rights must be recognized and affirmed. In this regard, the most important human right is the right to conscience. The fact that human beings have conscience and can abstract absence -- see what is lacking and grasp what must be done to fulfill a need -- is what distinguishes them from all other animal species. The highest expression of the right to conscience today is the right of the people to take all decisions which affect their lives as individuals and collectives, and the natural and social environments. Without defending these rights and the rights of all, the "security" promised in the "national security framework" is not the security of the people and their well-being and that of their society, but a self-serving defence of secret police powers for the private gain of those who wield them. TML Weekly calls on Canadians to persist in upholding their clear and consistent demands for the repeal of Bill C-51 and opposition to impunity.
Repeal Bill C-51!
Notes
1. Hill + Knowlton Strategies is owned by WPP plc (Wire and Plastic Products), a deceptively-named British advertising and public relations firm which owns various other huge public relations firms including IMRB, Millward Brown, Grey, Burson-Masteller, Hill & Knowlton, JWT, Ogilvy & Mather, TNS, Young & Rubicam and Cohn & Wolfe. Its annual revenue is more than $18 billion. 2. Hill + Knowlton organized for Nayirah al-Sabah, daughter of the then-Kuwaiti ambassador to the U.S., to testify before the U.S. Congressional Human Rights Caucus to this effect when they were hired to orchestrate a "Citizens for a Free Kuwait" campaign. Al-Sabah did not reveal her identity, giving only her first name, and falsely testified that she had witnessed soldiers removing babies from incubators. This testimony was repeatedly cited by U.S. President George H.W. Bush and others as justification for the war. 3. The BC Civil Liberties Association said on November 28 that the Green Paper "reads like it was drafted by a public relations firm tasked with selling the current state of extraordinary, unaccountable powers," which, if this latest report is any indication, it was. 4. For one example, see material from TML Weekly on the activities of CSIS, the RCMP, the federal government and energy monopolies coordinating the use of Bill C-51 at Carleton University. Misrepresentation of Canadians' Views on Security
The aim of the "modernization" of Canada's national security laws since the first Anti-Terrorism Act following September 11, 2001 and before has been to eliminate legal restrictions on what the intelligence agencies can do -- all obstacles that exist in the law. To do so has been a consistent call of the biggest private concerns, their political representatives and the agencies themselves to strengthen the police powers at the heart of the state to serve their interests. Despite this, the report is forced to acknowledge Canadians' opposition to existing "security measures" as well as new ones. To blunt this opposition it establishes various themes and presents the issue as a debate over various ways that the powers could be maintained or amended and presents Canadians as "divided on whether [measures] should be repealed, modified or retained (albeit with modifications)." The various measures in Bill C-51, rather than being treated as a whole based on Canadians' rejection of the use of police powers, are dealt with piecemeal. To create confusion, the responses to spurious survey questions are presented which conclude that Canadians are divided and suggest that the government is justified in not repealing Bill C-51. About survey results on Bill C-51's Criminal Code offence which criminalizes speech that allegedly "promotes terrorism," the report states, "While almost half (47 per cent) of online responses say the advocacy offence should be clarified so that it more clearly resembles the existing offence of counselling [an individual to commit terrorism], almost one-quarter (23 per cent) disagree and one in five (21 per cent) think the Anti-Terrorism Act, 2015 should be repealed in its entirety or that sections of the Criminal Code regarding advocating and promoting the commission of terrorism should be repealed." On Bill C-51's far-reaching CSIS "disruption" powers and ability to use force, among the most widely-opposed aspects of the bill, the report claims respondents were "essentially divided between the need to decrease CSIS's powers and the need to maintain or increase them..." The use of the consultations to diffuse opposition to Bill C-51 is made more clear by the fact that questions were introduced about how to improve the "efficiency" of the dubious "terrorist watch list." Again Canadians were declared to be divided on this aspect even though they have expressed their opposition to the abuse of power the government is condoning with such arbitrary lists. However, this issue, presented as a matter of how to improve something illegitimate, "tended to generate less feedback, with the responses that were received suggesting a certain amount of collective ambivalence," the report said. At the same time, governments, "think-tanks" and university bodies are introducing retrogressive definitions of rights which claim that the collective actions of the people in defence of rights are a violation of individual rights, and must be criminalized on that basis. All of this is proof positive that the police powers continue to operate with impunity no matter what laws are passed. Canadians must ensure they build their own public opinion as a defensive wall which continuously increases in strength and cannot be breached. This can be done by uniting in action in defence of the rights of all and building collective self-defence on this basis. General Strike of Quebec Construction Workers All Out to Support Quebec Construction Workers!
At midnight on May 24, 175,000 construction workers in
Quebec launched a general strike against unacceptable
concessionary demands from organizations representing
construction employers. Workers in all construction sectors are on
strike:
industrial, institutional, commercial, civil engineering, highway
maintenance and residential sectors. The five construction unions
grouped for negotiating purposes within the Construction Union
Alliance are FTQ-Construction, the Quebec Building Trades Council
(International), CSN-Construction, CSD-Construction and the Quebec
Construction Union.
The main issue that forced construction workers to go
on strike is the employers' unacceptable demand to disrupt existing
work schedules. They want workers available on a loose schedule without
strict and universal rules, a demand already rejected in 2013, when
construction workers also went on strike in defence of their rights. Employers' organizations want workers available from 5
am to
8 pm five days a week. In the event of working days lost due to
bad weather, they want workers to work on Saturday at straight
time to replace the lost days. With workers made available on demand in
such a loose timeframe, employers would be able to set shifts as they
please, greatly disrupting workers' lives.
Workers immediately denounced this backward step in scheduling. They pointed out that construction work has to have strict rules for work time, including overtime, as anything less is a fraud. Construction workers do not have job security and can be dismissed, not called back or refused work on the next site if they do not "behave" and work at assigned times even if the time is voluntary such as Saturday work to replace lost time. Workers strongly reject this unacceptable arbitrary demand from employers' organizations that disrupts rest and their lives away from the worksite. They argue that construction workers need to be rested and alert at all times to combat the already-high accident and mortality rates in their sector. Workers view loose and voluntary rules around work time as an irresponsible provocation by the employers' organizations, which should be denounced as retrogressive and an attack on their dignity and rights. Construction workers know full well that concessions on basic issues such as wages and work time just whet the appetite of the oligarchs who immediately come back for more. Construction workers said No! in 2013 to disrupting their lives and work schedules. No! still means No! in 2017! All workers must stand firmly with construction workers
and provide them with all possible support!
(Chantier politique, online newspaper of the Marxist-Leninist Party of Quebec. Photos: CP, CSN.) Oppose Back-to-Work Legislation
The government of Philippe Couillard has declared its intention to criminalize construction workers and force them to end their strike. The working class and its allies throughout Quebec and Canada soundly denounce the Liberal government as a flunkey of the construction oligarchs that is unfit to govern. Such an unjust action would be a repeat of 2013, when the Quebec government criminalized the right of construction workers to strike in defence of their working and living conditions. The Couillard government and its servile accomplices in the mass media stand opposed to the right of workers to negotiate their terms of employment and withhold their capacity to work until an equilibrium acceptable to themselves can be found. This is a basic right of workers who are compelled by the current relations of production to negotiate the terms of the sale of their capacity to work to employers. The fact that a strike disrupts the economy and the creation of value is testament to the essential nature of the modern working class and its position as the actual producer of the value the people and society need for their existence. Instead of upholding the rights of the working class and giving it the respect it deserves, the government, construction oligarchs and monopoly media are on a warpath to criminalize construction workers and attack them. They are using the fact that the construction workers and their industry are central to Quebec's economy to attack the strike and order workers back to work or face state-sanctioned penalties. The working class and its allies across Quebec and Canada denounce this state-organized assault on rights.
Denounce the Liberal Government for
Attacking the
Right to Strike!
(Chantier politique) State-Organized Attacks on Construction WorkersThe construction sector accounts for 12 per cent of Quebec's GDP and 255,600 direct jobs -- one out of every 20 -- as well as thousands more in related sectors. The government and monopolized media do not use those facts to show respect for workers who produce such immense value for society. In the manner that best serves themselves and favours the construction oligarchs, they are using the essential nature of construction workers to modern life as a reason to attack their right to defend themselves and to negotiate working conditions and a claim on the value they produce that is acceptable to themselves.
The government and monopolized media are using the importance of the construction sector to generate hysteria and an urgency to end the strike not on terms acceptable to workers but on terms the construction oligarchs demand. This must not pass! Already, construction workers face special conditions regarding Quebec's labour laws that trample on their rights. For example, they are not entitled to wage increases retroactive to the date the collective agreement expired. Their collective agreement expired on April 30, and any wage increase they receive will not apply until the new collective agreement comes into force. The "anti-scab" law does not apply to construction workers, which means employers' organizations have free rein to keep work sites open during the strike using scab replacement workers. When workers intervene to close any sites that use scabs, they can be charged with "intimidation" and even violence if they resist organized attacks on them by hired security guards and mercenaries. The special clause in the law prohibiting construction workers from engaging in "intimidation" is very broad. The clause applies only to them and not to the employers and any actions on their part. The charge of intimidation can be used to attack workers who encourage fellow construction workers to refuse dangerous work or deal with other problems at the workplace or to take action to defend their strike. The use of the charge of "intimidation" against workers is an attack on their right to conscience and their right to organize fellow workers in collective actions with analysis. The monopolized media often use the broad charge of intimidation to portray workers as criminals when they organize themselves to defend their rights. These state-organized attacks must stop!
(Chantier politique) Alberta Workers Oppose Current Anti-Worker, Union-Busting Labour Law Step Up the Fight to Unstack the Deck!
|
On behalf of the Trudeau
government and the Canadian
and U.S.
intelligence agencies which operate with impunity, this private
PR monopoly is undertaking the same work. This time the target is
Canadians' opposition to Bill C-51, the Anti-Terrorism Act,
2015 which codified new but often already-practised secret
police powers used to violate rights and criminalize
conscience.
The fact that more than
300,000 Canadians signed
petitions
calling for the repeal of Bill C-51 -- roughly four times as many
people as participated in the consultations -- is not mentioned
in the report. Virtually every sector of society -- workers,
Indigenous peoples, experts in the fields of rights, law and
security, journalists, young people and many others -- denounced
the powers in Bill C-51 as a violation of the rule of law and
demanded that it be scrapped. In Vancouver, weekly pickets have been
held without let-up since March 2, 2015 demanding the repeal of Bill
C-51 and continue to receive overwhelming support from the people.
In Canada, the 1867
Constitution,
whose 150th anniversary is
being
celebrated this year with so much hoopla, enshrines
privileges not rights. At every phase of Canada's development,
these privileges and to whom they are accorded have been made a
matter of definition decided by police powers, not the citizens
of the country. This Constitution, including its Charter of
Rights and Freedoms, does not provide rights with a
guarantee or vest sovereignty and decision-making power in the
citizenry. It is indeed anachronistic and requires renewal.
In particular, for the
security agencies, there are
demands
to legalize practices that are already in effect. This was the
case with Bill C-51 and its granting powers of "disruption" to
CSIS when that agency has been known to harass Canadians and
engage in nefarious activities including organizing "terror
plots" for decades. The government's recent report on its consultations
on national security notes that at this time, "Government and
police agencies want greater collaboration and information
sharing..."
Despite the fact that most
of those consulted called for Bill C-51 to be repealed --
overwhelmingly
so for those who took part in public meetings -- questions were
presented separately on
whether specific aspects of Bill C-51, such as the Security of
Canada Information Sharing Act, should be subject to greater
oversight. The support for oversight is then presented to lend
credibility to the idea that rather than repealing the bill,
"oversight... should be strengthened to protect personal privacy
and... institutions... should only use that information lawfully
and in accordance with the rules..."
Far from providing any
coherence or expression of
Canadians'
collective consciousness, the national security consultations and
report distract attention from ongoing state-organized attacks
against the rights of all. Besides phony consultations, this
includes the ongoing criminalization and disruption of workers'
struggles, surveillance and harassment directed against those
opposing war and defending the natural environment and violence
against Indigenous peoples affirming their right to a say over
what takes place on their territories. 
The organized workers'
movement has demanded major
changes to
the 
Even before the legislation
was introduced, the
government
had indicated in response to the "unstack the deck" campaign that
banning double-breasting would "destabilize" the construction
industry. These monopolies make a killing in boom times from the
wealth the workers create, and use low oil prices and recession
to launch vicious attacks on the workers and seize an even
greater share of the wealth the working class produces.
"Stability" cannot be achieved by attacking the rights of
workers.
Building trades workers
organized mass demonstrations at the Legislature and carried out
actions on construction sites. They were known as a force which stood
as one with workers of every sector fighting for their rights. For
example, in 1986 hundreds of unemployed construction workers came day
after day to play their part in the historic "Battle of 66th Street" to
defend the strike at the Gainer meat-packing plant and stop the scab
replacement workers from entering the plant. Bill 10 was passed, but
in the face of the massive resistance of the workers and their unions,
it was never proclaimed into law.
The ruling elite bellow
that the service public workers
provide is essential, yet in the same breath declare that the
essential workers have no right to defend or negotiate their
wages, pensions and working conditions free from state coercion
and dictate, even thoughtheir working conditions are the necessary
conditions to provide the essential services the public deserves
and the economy needs to function.
|
|
Many of the affected residents have criticized governments for taking too long before becoming involved, claiming that the flooding could have been avoided.
Amongst others, they point fingers at state-owned Hydro-Québec, which could have released large quantities of water trapped in its Gouin and Baskatong reservoirs that flow into the St. Maurice and Ottawa rivers, simply on the basis of existing scientific data pointing to the need to do so, including:
- significant on-the-ground snow accumulation during the winter of 2016-2017;
- reduced snow evaporation from the sun's radiation due to heavy cloud cover during February and March, which normally accelerates the melting of snow on the ground, and helps to distribute water runoff over a more protracted period of time;
- temperatures in March at least 4 degrees Celsius below normal further delayed the melting of accumulated snow.
All of the above helped to create the conditions for abnormally high spring river runoffs, even before the record April rains.
A simple review of rainfall data for the Montreal area from 2011 to 2017 compared with the average over the last 20 years shows the general trend of increased precipitation in February and March, as well as an increased total accumulation of liquid and solid precipitation between January to April.
Total monthly precipitation in the Montreal area in
millimetres, 1980-2010
(* historical average). (Environment
Canada)
Total monthly
precipitation (liquid and solid) in the Montreal Area
between January
and April, from 1980 to 2017.
What the data seems to indicate is that during the period 1980 to 2017, total precipitation during the winter months has tended to increase over the years.
That trend is confirmed by researchers involved in studying global warming of the Earth's atmosphere phenomena. Philippe Gachon, Chair of Strategic Research on Hydrometeorological Risks Linked to Climate Change at the University of Quebec in Montreal, recently gave an explanation in an interview during the annual conference of the Association francophone pour le développement des sciences (ACFAS). He said that any average increase of one degree Celsius of the Earth's atmosphere necessarily results in an average increase of seven per cent in air moisture, thus resulting in more precipitation. In the case of southern Quebec, that increase can vary from five to nine per cent, according to Gachon. He bases his findings on the laws of thermodynamics, in particular the Clausius-Clapeyron relation, named after a 19th-century German physicist and mathematician and French engineer and physicist respectively, who established the equation governing the transition between different phases of a body of matter -- solid, liquid and gaseous -- according to the pressure and the temperature applied to that body. In this case, the body in question is the moisture content of the Earth's atmosphere. Because the density of liquid water is greater than that of its solid phase (ice), water has important and unique properties that play a special role as a thermal regulator in Nature.
Gachon pointed out that his research group
does
not receive any funding from the Quebec and federal
governments. He also noted that the Canadian Foundation for
Climate and Atmospheric Sciences (CFCAS) was established in 2000
by the federal government to address the issue of analyzing
climate change to better predict its accompanying
weather phenomena. The foundation's activities were greatly
reduced by the Harper government in 2011 when it made
significant cuts. According to Gachon, no new funding
was allocated to the CFCAS in the Trudeau government's latest
budget.[1]
Canada is also a leader in remote sensing. Researchers employed by Canadian government agencies contributed to the design and construction of the RADARSAT satellite, which provides quick and accurate mapping through the use of radar imagery that resolves details down to one metre in size to delineate flood-prone areas around waterways. This has all been privatized by the federal government and is now marketed to serve private interests. Instead of using this state-of-the-art remote sensing technology to assist government agencies involved in managing Quebec's territory to minimize flooding risk by monitoring the evolution of land-use planning, it becomes one more mapping tool amongst others whose merits are promoted and commercialized by the private sector throughout the Americas.
Importance of a Nation-Building Project That Defends the Rights of All
Gatineau
What emerges from the events surrounding the 2017 floods in Quebec and Ontario is that despite the Quebec Premier's statements that his government "did everything" to minimize the impact of the floods, the various levels of government have no interest in defending the rights of the people.
For example, those who manage Quebec's rivers within the Ministry of the Environment, Sustainable Development and the Fight against Climate Change, as well as state-owned corporations such as Hydro-Québec, must be able to predict trends as accurately as possible. However Hydro-Québec's spokespersons are silent when it comes to explaining why it did not begin opening the floodgates of its reservoirs this winter, even though all facts pointed to exceptional spring floods. Was it because Hydro-Québec was concerned that by lowering the level of its reservoirs too soon, it would not be able to supply the water that flows downstream to its hydro-electric power plants during the summer season? At the same time, it is well known that each year, Hydro-Québec is required to hand over to the Government of Quebec a significant portion of the profits it makes from its power generating operations. Those same profits are re-routed to the moneylenders of Wall Street and elsewhere for so-called debt repayment.
The Quebec Ministry of the Environment, Sustainable
Development and the Fight against Climate Change did not take the
necessary measures to prepare the people living close to major
rivers for the spring floods, a predictable natural phenomenon
well known to all and now worsened by climate change. It could
have requested that Hydro-Québec open the floodgates of
its reservoirs located upstream from the Gatineau, Ottawa and
St-Maurice Rivers as early as March. Before spring arrived, it
could have called on a local business located in Victoriaville,
Quebec that designs and manufactures a system of pontoons called
"Water-Gate" that
transforms into dikes within minutes to stop the
flow of water. The effectiveness of the pontoons is recognized
worldwide, even by the U.S. Army, which certified them for its
own use. Instead, the Couillard government waited for the floods
to occur and then declared that it was "forced" to call in the
Canadian army for sandbagging and transportation, a slow and
costly operation which, for many, was "too little too late."
Note
1. For the Radio-Canada interview with Gachon in French, click here.
BC Election Results
BC Election and the Right to Conscience
The first casualty in the BC election was the voters' right to conscience. The ideological offensive of the electoral machines of the big parties and the media during and now in the aftermath of the election is aimed at browbeating the people into voting and thinking in a particular way for a particular aim. The aim is to maintain the status quo, entrench the anti-social offensive, and divide the people on a sectarian basis. The ideological offensive is meant to ensure the polity cannot even think and instead will succumb to waiting and seeing what others will do "on their behalf." A climate is created to overwhelm the people into believing that there is no alternative.
During the election, the tools in the hands of the electoral machines, in addition to mountains of money to throw into advertising, included cheap shots to coerce a vote for either the Liberals or NDP or another party presented as an alternative. All the arguments of the electoral machines of these parties and the mass media are aimed at depriving the people of an outlook where they can find their own bearings, fight for their own interests and unite with others within the situation.
The overwhelming electoral noise diverts the people from deciding how to occupy the space for change which has presented itself in BC at this time. This is why everything is geared to making sure no discussion takes place on either the problems that have beset the working people since the onset of the anti-social offensive and before, or the possible solutions to these problems. Everything is geared against discussing a program that will actually end the anti-social offensive and empower the working class and people. This is done by targeting the conscience of each member of the polity.
One way this was done during the election was by making believe that the aim of the election was to defeat the Liberals. But a program to defeat the Liberals does not present the people with a strategic consideration or alternative. It therefore reduces itself to devising tactics to defeat the Liberals and not to further the working people's own cause. By contrast, defeating the anti-social offensive is a strategic consideration and tactics to achieve that aim become an important concern. In other words, to participate in an election based on the demand that everyone should vote for the narrow aim to elect this or that party goes against dealing with the burning political issue of the day, in this case: how to bring an end to the anti-social offensive. The same is the case following the announcement of the final results. The people are expected to wait and see what the horse-trading between the cartel parties will give rise to.
Current speculation over which cartel party can guarantee itself enough seats for a majority in the Legislature leads to crass opportunism. Regardless of the outcome, it will not turn things around in the workers' favour. The party that sees itself as the king-maker and is pleased to be at the negotiating table does not oppose the fact that this system is based on providing the rulers with positions of privilege and that this is very much part of the overall corruption. That party's stand on choosing whom it will support and when is not based on principle. A stand based on principle recognizes that this electoral system constitutes an attack and block to the right of the people to decide all those matters that affect their lives.
The people cannot permit themselves to be put in a passive "wait-and-see" position watching those who claim to be elected to rule make unprincipled alliances. All three of those parties are opposed to building the political unity of the people based on a modern political vision of a society that serves the people and guarantees their well-being and rights, in particular their basic right to conscience.
Step Up the Fight for the Rights of All!
The results of the 41st BC General Election held on May 9, reflect the crisis in which the ruling elite are mired. No cartel party was able to secure a majority of 44 seats, with the ruling BC Liberal Party winning 43 seats down from 47 going into the election. The NDP increased its seats from 35 to 41 and the Green Party went from one to three seats, all on Vancouver Island. Voter turnout increased from 57.1 per cent in 2013 to about 60 per cent, according to Elections BC.
Results were very close in many ridings. Elections BC granted two of six requests for recounts. Recounts took place in the ridings of Courtenay-Comox and Vancouver-False Creek. The Final Voting Results, including the recounts and the counting of absentee ballots, were announced after the counting was completed on May 24. Elections BC published the Final Voting Results with no change in the number of seats held by the Liberals, NDP and Green Party, 43, 41, and three respectively. The published results show that the Liberals received 40.36 per cent (796,672 votes), the NDP 40.28 per cent (795,106 votes) and the Green Party 16.84 per cent (332,387 votes). These results reflect the completion of counting of absentee ballots and two recounts. A judicial recount under certain circumstances can still be requested within six days of the declaration of final election results by each district electoral officer but it is unlikely that there will be any such requests. The recounts resulted in the NDP increasing its margin in Courtenay-Comox from nine votes in the initial count to 189 in the final count. In the other riding where there was a recount, Vancouver-False Creek, the Liberals won by 415 votes, down from the original margin of 560 votes.
As 44 seats are required for a majority, for the Liberals to remain in government they need the support of the Green Party which would give that coalition 46 seats. Should the NDP succeed in wooing the Greens that coalition would govern with only the barest of majorities, 44 seats. Both the Liberals and the NDP are "negotiating" with the Green Party whose leader, Andrew Weaver, said on May 24 that he will make a decision by May 31 or possibly sooner. The Globe and Mail reported that Weaver said "he's working in good faith to hear out both the Liberals and the New Democrats, saying 'it's all on the table.'" The same report says that Weaver has set out three "deal-breakers" -- official party status for the Greens despite only having three seats (current legislation requires four seats for official party status), campaign finance reform and proportional representation, and that there are other issues that are likely factoring into the negotiations that are ongoing.
NDP leader John Horgan told reporters that negotiations with the Greens continue and "I'm optimistic we'll be able to put forward a framework that has a majority of the support in the Legislature." A sticking point in the negotiations between the two parties is apparently a disagreement on electoral reform, with the Greens wanting legislated electoral reform without a referendum and the NDP wanting a referendum. Neither party has spelled out its proposal beyond "some form of proportional representation."
Liberal Premier Christy Clark met with BC Lieutenant Governor Judith Guichon on May 10, who granted Clark permission to continue to act as Premier pending the outcome of the final count and the horse-trading amongst the cartel parties to determine which one will govern for the moment. For the time being, the Liberals continue to form the government and Premier Christy Clark issued a statement following the final results that "with 43 BC Liberal candidates elected as MLAs, and a plurality in the Legislature, we have a responsibility to move forward and form a government." In response, Weaver threatened, "Actually, the Premier erred in that statement. The Premier has a responsibility to ensure she gains the confidence of the house to form government... I would suggest that was a bit premature. We have not tested the confidence of the House yet."
During the election, the Liberals and NDP concentrated their electoral efforts in the Lower Mainland plus a few select ridings on Vancouver Island and in the BC Interior. Altogether, eight ridings changed from Liberal to NDP; all but one are in the Greater Vancouver area. The lone exception was the Courtenay-Comox riding on Vancouver Island won by the NDP.
Opposition to the Current Direction of the Province
Momentum has been building
against the anti-social
offensive
amongst workers in sectors from forestry to education, truck
drivers and those in health care. They are against the neo-liberal
agenda
of putting all the human and natural resources of the province at
the disposal of the financial oligarchy. Workers from many
sectors took up the call to defeat the governing Liberals in this
election, as did Indigenous nations and environmental activists
and others fighting against the Kinder Morgan pipeline expansion
project and the Site C dam. To defeat the Liberals was presented
as a "faint hope" that something positive would come from one of
the other cartel parties. At the very least, a vote against the
Liberals expressed the opposition of the people to the
anti-social offensive and the desire for an alternative but much
more can and must be done to organize the workers'
opposition.
The cartel parties are now, and were throughout the election, focussed on winning and/or holding onto power. The new situation where no cartel party won a firm majority of seats was pushed as a lull and a time to "wait and see." The final results still indicate that neither the Liberals nor NDP can claim a "mandate."
For the working people and others concerned with the direction of the province, the situation is seen as a time to step up the fight for a new direction for the economy and for solutions to problems that favour the people and not the oligopolies in control. Now is the time to step up demands to break the stranglehold of the financial oligarchy over the economy, which is especially obvious in the big projects of Site C, Kinder Morgan, liquefied natural gas and the Metro Vancouver public transit authority TransLink, and in the housing, transportation, and forestry sectors. The people demand that the rights of all to health care, education and a livelihood be provided with a guarantee.
The ruling elite are doing everything to ensure that the people remain passive in the face of the crisis and rely on the rulers to find a solution. This should not be the case. Only when the solutions to problems are in the hands of the working class and its allies will society's path to progress be freed from the self-serving obstruction of the financial oligarchy that presently puts its social wealth and political power towards depriving the working people of having any control over the political, economic and social affairs that affect their lives.
Voters in Greater Vancouver Area Turn Away from Liberals
Voters in the Greater Vancouver Area turned away from the ruling Liberal Party. Working people in the GVA are increasingly faced with an impossible situation. The housing crisis alone is forcing many, especially younger workers, to pay over 50 per cent of their wages for a place to live, usually far from work, or if possible, live with their parents. The serious housing situation is coupled with constant traffic gridlock, especially in the Massey Tunnel and on the bridges, of which two of the busiest have expensive tolls. The wholly inadequate and anti-people mass transit system is more and more viewed not as a reliable, efficient and comfortable public service but as a source of infighting amongst the ruling elite and a means to pay the rich.
The Liberal government's assault on public education has also resulted in great anger amongst the polity, in particular in Surrey and Vancouver East. People in the Lower Mainland are also faced with the Trudeau and Clark Liberal governments' proposal to expand the Kinder Morgan pipeline along with a tripling of oil tanker traffic in Vancouver's Burrard Inlet, which have aroused enormous passions and opposition. These issues became the focus of both the Liberal Party and the NDP's election promises and policy objectives for the GVA, along with the constant attack ads denigrating the two leaders as self-serving and corrupt.
Four GVA cabinet ministers lost their seats in the Legislature: Attorney General Suzanne Anton; Minister Responsible for TransLink (mass transit) Peter Fassbender (who was previously Minister of Education); Minister of State for Emergency Preparedness Naomi Yamamoto; and Minister of Technology, Innovation and Citizens' Services Amrik Virk. Premier Clark lost her seat in the Vancouver Point Grey riding in the last election and has since found refuge far away in the Okanagan Valley in the so-called safe Westside-Kelowna riding.
Actions Against NATO Meeting in Brussels
Militant Opposition to NATO Expressed in Brussels
On May 24 and 25, the streets of Brussels were filled
with people from all walks of life, from across Europe and around the
world, expressing the opposition of the world's people to the
warmongering alliance NATO during its Leaders Summit held in that city.
They also opposed U.S. and European state-organized campaigns which
target sections of the people based on their race and religion. Actions
throughout the two days took place under the call to invest in peace
and not in war and to dismantle NATO. People also made it clear that
U.S. President Donald Trump was not welcome in Brussels, a city he
labelled a "hellhole" to stoke anti-Muslim sentiment during his
presidential election campaign. Belgians opposed this characterization
of their capital city and rejected his presence in the country with
many signs indicating that it is NATO, warmongers like Trump and those
who collude with him who are the real threats to peace and security.
On May 24, the day NATO heads of state and government
arrived, 10,000 people participated in a #TrumpNotWelcome rally and
march called by Belgian college students. Thousands more marched on May
25 while the NATO meeting was underway.
May 24
May 25
(Photos: Vrede, CND, No G20 International, N. Eggermont, The Journalie, Friends of the Earth, Agir pour la Paix, TTIP Game Over, PPICS.)
Website: www.cpcml.ca Email: editor@cpcml.ca