CPC(M-L) HOME TML Daily Archive Le Marxiste-Léniniste quotidien

October 30, 2013 - No. 123

Step up the Work to Oppose the Anti-Social Offensive

Harper Throne Speech a Sop to the Resource Monopolies and
Wrong Direction for the Country

Say No! to Harper Dictatorship
Conservative National Policy Convention
Calgary, October 31-November 2

CALENDAR OF EVENTS


Step up the Work to Oppose the Anti-Social Offensive
Harper Throne Speech a Sop to the Resource Monopolies and Wrong Direction for the Country - K.C. Adams
More Monopoly Blackmail by Cliffs Natural Resources - Jim Nugent
Continuing Court Action Against Saskatchewan Government Anti-Union Laws
Vigorous Demonstration in Support of Quebec City Municipal Workers
Determined Opposition to the Decision to Repatriate Dominicans of
Haitian Descent 
- Christine Dandenault
Stop Worker Deaths in Bangladesh - Pritilata Waddedar


Step up the Work to Oppose the Anti-Social Offensive

Harper Throne Speech a Sop to the Resource Monopolies and Wrong Direction for the Country

The Harper Throne Speech pushes resource extraction as Canada's strategy for prosperity. The government vows to do everything it can to assist the resource monopolies extract and ship as much resources as they can in the shortest possible time. It even generates panic on this issue suggesting, "The window for gaining access to new markets will not remain open indefinitely." The government wants Canadians to believe that our very lives and security depend on resource extraction and rapidly transporting it to the far ends of the earth. Any hindrance to this is considered against the national interests and even national security.

The government declares that any consideration, which slows down the march to extract and ship raw material will be criminalized including the following:

Considerations based on building an integrated all-round economy where resource extraction bolsters manufacturing and the creation of strong communities with social programs, public services and infrastructure;

Those where the rights of First Nations are upheld with full respect;

Those where equilibrium at the resource extraction worksite and in transportation is upheld based on recognition of the rights of workers and public safety;

Those where Mother Earth is treasured not just in an obvious short-term way but also through science examining the long-term consequences and the effects of the particular technology and methods employed.

The Harper government justifies its focus on the resource extraction sector with claims that 1.8 million workers are employed either directly or indirectly by the sector. Even if true, it leaves out other important considerations. First, workers in and serving the resource sector contribute significant wealth to the economy but they represent only 10 per cent of the entire workforce. By concentrating on this one sector, while ignoring or dismissing others, the government sidelines in importance the remaining 90 per cent of workers and their sectors. Such one-sided concentration also ignores those sectors that do not exist but should in a modern diverse economy. To be consistent, healthy and avoid crises, a modern economy must be all-sided with an internal dynamic of production, consumption, reproduction and interrelated realization and growth in all sectors.

Employment in the resource extraction and shipping sector as it stands in Canada is mostly lacking in the front end of manufacturing, otherwise the steel sector and industrial production, especially of heavy machinery would be humming along, which they are not. For example, Caterpillar recently closed its last manufacturing plant in Canada but still sells into Canada a tremendous volume of value in heavy machinery and parts, much of it destined for the resource sector. This importation of heavy machinery restricts production of Canadian added-value, the source of our collective wealth. This should not be allowed. If particular machinery is used in Canada on a regular basis for production, it should be manufactured in Canada from resource to finished product and replacement parts.

The greatest front end employment today in resource extraction is mostly in site construction and infrastructure. Provision of infrastructure is a scandal of pay-the-rich schemes providing the global resource monopolies with everything they need without forcing them to realize (buy) the value of the infrastructure at its price of production.

Operations and transportation, especially pipelines, provide little work and as a result return little added-value. The real bulk of added-value from resource extraction, mostly ignored n Canada, is its use downstream in the production process such as refining and in development of secondary and tertiary industries including for example a modern petrochemical sector or one using forest product in innovative new ways.

Within the resource sector, the government asserts no national interests, allowing monopolies full rights to do as they please including the right to reinvest their claim on added-value wherever they want. This ensures that resources and their added-value are not used according to a plan that serves the public interest to open up manufacturing of the equipment used in resource extraction, to expand diverse manufacturing using the available resources or the building of viable stable communities.

Value from resource extraction is not used to realize value transferred from other sectors in particular the public health and education sectors. The transferred-value from social programs is not realized and returned to the social institutions that create the value. The resource monopolies, as do other monopolies, simply pocket the transferred-value as if it is theirs to claim. This is another way for them to bolster their rate of return on invested capital at the expense of the overall economy, the people and the country's social programs.

Resource projects themselves are also subject to stops and starts based on narrow private calculations and the global rivalries of the resource monopolies. This reflects both the people's lack of control over resource development and the denial of their right to decide and to apply a broad view that takes into consideration the public interest towards humanizing the social and natural environment and strengthening the entire socialized economy.

Not long ago with constant press releases and speeches, the government was hailing as the next colossal opportunity for Canada projects worth tens of billions of dollars in the Labrador iron ore fields, Ontario's Ring of Fire and Saskatchewan potash deposits. Recently, the talk has dried up as all of these projects have been stalled or rolled back because of inter-monopoly rivalry amongst global resource monopolies and squabbling over prices and control of the resource wholesale sector. Even oil and gas projects stop and start according to the narrow interests of the global monopolies and the needs of the U.S. war machine, which are detached and in opposition to Canada's national interests, the public interest and the seamless development of a productive diverse socialized economy.

The Harper sop to the resource monopolies is the wrong direction for the economy. The time is now for a new direction!

Return to top


More Monopoly Blackmail by Cliffs Natural Resources

Cliffs Natural Resources, one the largest global mining monopolies, is again blackmailing the Ontario government with threats to collapse development of the mineral resources it controls in the Ring of Fire unless its demands are met. Cliffs' latest demand is that the Ontario government expropriate property rights on a transportation corridor in the region owned by a rival mining company and hand them over to Cliffs.

This follows earlier threats by Cliffs to extract government concession regarding its development of chromite mineral deposits in north western Ontario. Cliffs is demanding commitment of hundreds of millions of dollars in public funding of transportation and electrical infrastructure and waivers on environmental assessments and First Nations consultation requirements. To back up these demands Cliffs announced its suspension of work on permitting processes in June and closed down its exploration camp at the Black Thor deposit, saying activities were suspended, "due to delays related to the environment assessment process, land surface rights, and stalled negotiations with the Province of Ontario."

Cliffs' latest demand follows from a decision in September by the Ontario Lands and Mining Commission. The decision recognized land use rights of KWG Resources along the only viable transportation route from the Ring of Fire mineralization area to markets. It rejected Cliffs' request for an easement through KWG claims so a 340 kilometre road to Cliffs' mining properties can be built. Cliffs wants immediate government intervention to void KWG's property rights. KWG, which also has chromite and other mineral claims in the area, is part of a group that wants to build a rail link along the corridor.

At the time of the Land and Mining Commission decision in September, Cliffs issued a press release which denounced the decision and said, "Without access to the surface lands to develop the needed infrastructure, there is no project...While we are open to possible solutions, without a pathway developing quickly to overcome this major setback, it is going to be difficult for us to justify continuing with the project at this point in time."

While Cliffs says it is open to possible solutions, company spokesperson Jason Agenes made it clear the solution the company was looking for is government intervention, "We feel that if the Ring of Fire is to precede this needs to be addressed by the government." Cliffs has initiated a court challenge of the Land and Mining Commission decision but complains that this could be in the courts for years and the outcome is uncertain. Other solutions available to Cliffs, such as a cash settlement with KWG for an easement or even buying out KWG, have been rejected as too expensive.

After it launched the court challenge of the Commission ruling in October, Cliffs launched a media blitz aimed at pressuring the government to intervene on its behalf. Bill Bloor, the head of Cliffs' ferroalloys division made the threat very bluntly in press interviews, calling the Commission ruling in favour of KWG, "a possible showstopper." He is quoted as saying Cliffs, "will consider pulling out if the Ontario government doesn't ensure the company has access to the chromite deposit...The only viable solution is for the government to step in. It could expropriate the surface rights or withhold a portion of the surface Crown land for the public interest."

The threats issued by Bloor on behalf of Cliffs were taken up October 22 in the Ontario Legislature and the MPPs of all the parties disgraced themselves. None of the MPPs took a stand against this aggressive U.S. monopoly for arrogantly holding the economy hostage to its private interests or for so blatantly attempting to blackmail the government.

Instead, opposition MPPs made partisan attacks on the government for scaring off international investors by not doing enough to uphold Cliffs' monopoly right. "The company is about to pull out of Ontario because of the mess this government has made of the Ring of Fire development plans" they said, and the Ring of Fire project is "being put in jeopardy by your bungling of this file."

The government response was to keep insisting it knows very well how to look after mining investors. It repeatedly cited as proof the 23 mining projects it has pushed through during its 10 years in power. It pledged to solve the road access problem raised by Cliffs.

By so blatantly trying to harness the power of government to serve its own interests at the expense of a rival, Cliffs has revealed the way dominant monopolies wield their economic power to achieve their aims. The willingness of self-serving politicians to accommodate themselves to the dictate of dominant monopolies is also revealed. The case at hand involves Cliffs politicizing its narrow interests to subordinate a rival, KWG Resources, but it subordinates broad public interests in the same way. Cliffs' economic power enables it to command government expropriation of KWG and in the same way uses its economic power to command public funds for infrastructure, to command waiving of environmental regulation and to trample on First Nations sovereignty.

Ontario needs politicians who will not accommodate themselves to the dictate of the dominant monopolies, who will restrict monopoly right and uphold public right.

Return to top


Continuing Court Action Against Saskatchewan Government Anti-Union Laws

On October 17, the Supreme Court of Canada announced that it would hear an appeal by the Saskatchewan Federation of Labour and other trade unions concerning two pieces of anti-union legislation of the Saskatchewan Party government of Brad Wall. In April the Saskatchewan Appeal Court ruled that the Public Service Essential Services Act, 2008 (PSESA) and the Trade Union Amendment Act, 2008 (TUA) are constitutionally valid. The trade unions in Saskatchewan are appealing these decisions in the Supreme Court

Immediately after being elected in November 2007, the Wall conservatives unleashed an anti-union, anti-worker offensive. Within six weeks of the election the government introduced two pieces of labour legislation. The PSESA declared a broad section of public sector workers to be essential service workers and stripped them of their right to strike. More than 30 per cent of workers in the broad public sector were declared "essential" and the government gave itself arbitrary power to add more workers to the list. Amendments to the TUA suppressed workers' right to join a trade union by creating barriers to union certification and sanctioning employer intimidation of workers. Unions challenged these laws in court on the basis that they violated freedom of association under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and have been pursuing these court actions for the past five years.

In February, 2012 the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench made a decision on the union legal challenge on both of these laws. It upheld the Wall government's law for suppressing union organizing but overturned the law stripping public sector workers of the right to strike. The unions appealed the decision regarding union certification and the government appealed the decision on essential services.

A year later the Saskatchewan Court of Appeals took the government side on both counts. In an April 2013 ruling it declared the new law increasing the obstacles to union organizing and the new law stripping workers of the right to strike were both permitted by the Charter. These decisions are the ones the Supreme Court has agreed to review.

The Wall government's changes to the union certification process eliminated automatic certification when 45 per cent of workers have signed union cards. The threshold for an automatic certification vote was raised from 25 per cent card signing to 50 per cent cards signing. They also eliminated previous restrictions on employer communications with workers during organizing campaigns. Both the lower court and the appeal court took the position that as long as the government stopped short of making joining a union impossible through "substantial impairment," the Charter allows the government to make union organizing as difficult as it likes.

According to the courts, workers right to associate is not a right at all, but only a function of government policy. As the Appeal Court said in support of the lower court ruling:

"Some governments will see unionization in positive terms and will emphasize its benefits. As a result, they will be inclined to structure The Trade Union Act so as to make certification easy, at least in relative terms. In the eyes of the Constitution, that is an entirely legitimate course of action. Other governments might take a less enthusiastic view of unionization, choose to stress the rights of employees as individuals and believe that, in order to maintain economic competitiveness, the hurdle for certification should be relatively high. In the eyes of the Constitution, that too is an entirely legitimate course of action. Thus, to repeat, the fact that the TUA Amendment Act has made it somewhat more difficult to obtain certification does not, in and of itself, mean that s. 2(d) of the Charter has been breached. As indicated, the real question is whether the changes in issue substantially impair the exercise of the s. 2(d) associational right."

The Appeal Court sharply rebuked the lower court for overturning the Wall government's law stripping public sector workers of their right to strike. Part of the rebuke was on a legal technicality of precedent and jurisdiction which the appeal court judges said the lower court had not respected. It said that although recent Supreme Court rulings have undermined its earlier position, a 1987 Supreme Court decision that workers right to strike is not protected by the Charter still stands. The lower court was also rebuked for its reasoning.

The Court of Queen's Bench had agreed with the union side which had said that a right declared in the Charter must have an effect on people's lives in the real world or it was a meaningless declaration. The unions argued that for freedom of association to mean anything to working people it must include the right of employees to bargain collectively with their employer through that representative; the right of employees to speak with one voice through a recognized bargaining representative and the right of employees to strike. But the Appeal Court said no to this approach.

The appeal judges quoted from the Fraser decision in which the Supreme Court said the phony form of collective bargaining the Ontario government set up for farm workers was good enough.[1] The Charter, the decision said, only protects "associational activity" and not "a particular process or result." In other words, empty pro forma protection is all the Charter provides for workers' rights.

One final rebuke of the appeal judges on the Court of Queen's Bench decision was for its excessive reliance on international law. The Wall government labour legislation was reviewed by the International Labour Organization (ILO) and condemned by the ILO as a violation of UN conventions on labour rights which Canada is signatory to. The appeal judges dismissed violation of these conventions as a serious consideration by Canadian courts.

It is expected that the Supreme Court will hear the Saskatchewan Federation of Labour constitutional challenge in its spring sessions next year. By the time a decision is rendered, the court challenge will have been dragged out for almost 7 years. Throughout this period the Wall government has been implementing its anti-worker anti-union legislation and cooking up more, such as its proposals for Saskatchewan version of "right to work" slave labour laws.

Note

1. The Fraser decision ruled as constitutional the Ontario Agricultural Employees’ Protection Act which stated that farm workers had the right to form or join an employee association, the right to assemble, and to "make representation to their employers, through an employees association"  but did not require their employers to bargain a collective agreement with them.

Return to top


Vigorous Demonstration in Support of
Quebec City Municipal Workers

As part of the National Congress of the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) held in Quebec City from October 21 to 25, the more than 2,000 delegates and observers to the CUPE Congress held a demonstration outside the National Assembly to support the struggle of the Quebec City municipal blue-collar workers for an acceptable collective agreement.

The collective agreement for approximately 1,100 Quebec City blue-collar workers expired in December 2010. In September, Mayor Régis Labeaume brutally broke off negotiations between the city and the blue-collar workers' union to conduct his campaign for mayor of Quebec City at the expense of blue-collar workers and other municipal employees in an effort to smash their unions and have free rein to destroy the working conditions of the municipal employees. Not only did the Quebec City mayor demand major concessions on wages (contrary to wage agreements already concluded at the negotiating table), the work week and pension plans, but he is also demanding that the Quebec provincial government adopt legislative changes to give him even more power to attack the Quebec City municipal workers and the public services they provide and to pave the way for the all-out privatization of services. He calls on the Quebec government to give municipalities the right to lock out employees and to change the laws governing pensions for municipal employees to force them to increase their contributions to the plan. The crusade by the Mayor of Quebec City against municipal employees has become the spearhead of the anti-social offensive against municipal employees across the entire province.


At the event, workers carried placards demanding respect for the city's blue-collar workers with slogans including: "We Support Quebec Blue-Collar Workers;" "No to Mayor Labeaume's Demagogy;" "Mayor Labeaume Is Misleading the People;" "Negotiate, Don't Legislate!"

CUPE-Quebec President Lucie Levasseur welcomed the demonstrators and explained that the purpose of the demonstration was to express support for the struggle of the Quebec City blue-collar workers for a collective agreement that respects their work to provide public services. She denounced Mayor Labeaume for waging his campaign at the expense of blue-collar workers instead of negotiating a collective agreement that is acceptable to them.

CUPE National Secretary-Treasurer Charles Fleury called on all members of the National Assembly to reject requests for legislative changes aimed at attacking municipal employees and reminded them of their duty to defend the right of municipal employees to negotiate their working conditions.

Protesters vigorously applauded Daniel Simard, acting president of the Union of the Quebec blue-collar workers, when he spoke. He denounced the smear campaign, demagoguery and false representation by the mayor of Quebec City in the media: "We were seated at the negotiating table," he declared. "Things were going well. Then Mr. Labeaume terminated negotiations to go out and smear us in the street. We were sitting at the table with a conciliator. Several issues had been resolved. We had signed agreements. We have offers for wage increases of 6 percent for the next four years while he goes on the radio to talk about wage cuts."

He added that blue-collar workers want a negotiated settlement and not an imposed or legislated settlement. "We hope that negotiations will resume after the election. Our union is willing to talk, willing to sign agreements, ready to work under all conditions to successfully find solutions for all our members and to ensure the same thing happens right across the country. We want to be able to sign a collective agreement that is respected by all our members, an agreement signed by both parties with respect for Quebec City workers, people who are proud to work for this city," he said.

CUPE National President Paul Moist pledged to mobilize the union across the country to support the battle of the Quebec City blue-collar workers and emphasized that CUPE represents municipal employees right across Canada who are facing similar attacks.

Return to top


Determined Opposition to the Decision to Repatriate Dominicans of Haitian Descent


On October 23 in Montreal, over 200 people gathered in front of the Dominican Republic's consulate to denounce the decision of the Dominican Constitutional Court to revoke the citizenship of over 250,000 Dominicans of Haitian descent, threatening them with deportation. From 4:00 to 7:00 p.m., the demonstrators chanted slogans such as "No to Denationalization in the Dominican Republic! I Remember the 1937 Massacre! Avoid Another Genocide in the Dominican Republic! Democrats Around the World - Solidarity! Solidarity - Quebecers and Canadians!" Haitian music played throughout the action.

On September 23, the Dominican Constitutional Court ruled that people born to foreign parents could no longer claim Dominican citizenship. This provision would affect more than 250,000 descendants of Haitians. The highest Dominican court decided that "children born in the country of foreign parents" since 1929 would be deprived of Dominican citizenship. According to media reports, the Dominican court based its decision on the immigration status of the parents when reporting the birth of their children, arguing that if the parents were in "transit" at the time or did not have a legal residence document, they did not have the right to register their children as Dominicans.

Immediately after the September 23 decision, the Haitian community in Montreal began organizing to oppose the decision, calling on all peace and justice-loving people to denounce it. Their statement declared that, "Together, we demand the immediate withdrawal of the September 23, 2013 Dominican Republic Constitutional Court ruling 168/13, which has denationalized hundreds of thousands of Dominicans of Haitian descent. This xenophobic and racist decision reminds all humanity of that, which was taken by Hitler against the Jews and which led to the Holocaust during the Second World War. For the sake of history and our memories, let us recall that in 1937 the Dictator General Rafael Leonidas Trujillo y Molina of the Dominican Republic massacred more than 30,000 Haitians in a genocide is known as the Parsley Massacre. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Article 15. 1 - states: 'Everyone has the right to a nationality and 15.2 - nobody can be arbitrarily deprived of their nationality.' In 2013, in the 21st century civilized men and women can not allow any repetition of this barbaric act ."

(Translated from the original French by TMLD)

Return to top


Stop Worker Deaths in Bangladesh

There has been another horrific factory fire in Bangladesh causing mass workplace deaths among workers producing clothing for international retailing companies. The fire broke out on October 8 in the Aswad garment factory in Gazipur, near the capital Dhaka. Ten workers are known to have died in the fire. Fire officials though say the final number of deaths may be as high as 20 and that there are many workers with injuries. The fire started in the Aswad building and spread to two others.

All three building were owned by the Palmal Group. Palmal is a supplier of clothing for Wal-Mart and other global retailing monopolies. A report in the Globe and Mail said records for the Aswad factory showed that it also produces clothing for Canadian retailers Joe Fresh (Loblaws) and the Hudson's Bay Company.

In April when people throughout the world were horrified by the deaths of 1,129 garment workers in the collapse of the Rana garment factory in Savar, representatives of the global retail monopolies put on a great show of pledging to make the workplaces producing their goods safe. Similar declarations had also been made five months earlier following the Tarzeen factory fire in which 117 workers were killed. But reports from Bangladesh say that nothing has changed in the way production for the global retailers are organized. The latest tragedy in Gazipur confirms this.


Bangladeshi workers hold militant action in Dhaka, April 26, 2013, to denounce the deaths of garment workers in the
recent factory collapse and the brutal exploitation of workers by local employers and foreign monopolies.

At the time of the mass deaths in Savar, the global monopolies also pledged to compensate the families of the workers killed on the job and those injured in the Rana building collapse and also at the Tarzeen factory fire. This also turned out to be empty public relations spin. There are 3,300 victims and families still waiting for compensation from the Rana collapse and thousands of more injured workers and grieving families from the Tarzeen fire and other recent disasters left with no means of survival.

A conference was organized by international trade union organizations under the auspices of the UN International Labour Organization (ILO) in September with the aim of ensuring that the international retailers producing garments in Bangladesh took responsibility for compensating victims of workplace tragedies. But the aggressive monopolies exploiting the low wages and lax worker safety regime in Bangladesh refused to step up and take responsibility, despite their previous pledges to do so.

A system of compensation had been worked out for creating a compensation fund of $75 million for those killed in injured in the Savar collapse and $6 million for victims of the Tarzeen fire, with the global retailers putting up 45 per cent of the funding. This would have provided about $33,000 for survivors who had lost a family member in the Rana and Tarzeen incidents.

Of the 28 global retailers who were requested to attend, only nine sent representatives. The boycott of the conference was led by U.S. based Wal-Mart, the dominant global retail monopoly and joined by several other of the largest retails, including Benetton and other European-based companies. These companies arrogantly proclaimed that the activities of their sub-contractors are none of their business. Of the nine who did attend, only one made a commitment and that was only for three months of emergency relief. The monopolies all agree to vague and flexible arrangements for "improving safety" but refuse to take responsibility when harm is done to workers producing their wealth. Their main excuse is that contributing compensation funds might make set a precedent of liability for worker safety throughout their supply chains. In the conditions of a globalized production and distribution system totally under the control of a few dominant monopolies, this is a ridiculous and unacceptable excuse.

The dangerous workplaces in Bangladesh and other countries exist in part because they enable the international moneybags to escape one of their most pressing problems, the trend of the falling rate of return on capital. Garment production is organized as labour intensive production in low wage countries and by organizing production in overcrowded, substandard buildings with poorly maintained equipment fixed capital costs are also kept very low. Each garment produced under these conditions has a very small amount of value transferred into it from the fixed capital of the buildings compared to production carried out in a proper, dignified and safe workplace. Monopoly pricing by the global retail chains enables them to reap benefit by monetizing goods produced using not only low priced labour but also utilizing cheap fixed capital.

Some of the most exuberant public relations spin about workplace deaths in Bangladesh has come from representatives of a global food and retailing empire based in Canada, the George Weston Group (Loblaws). Weston was identified as one of the employers of workers killed in the Rana building collapse and has been on a public relations campaign to save its brand image since then. It is the Weston Group that made the commitment of three months of emergency relief at the Geneva conference and following the conference issued statements complaining that other retailers weren't doing enough. Yet, a few days after the conference ended, more workers died in a Bangladeshi factory connected to the Weston Group.

This has been the pattern of the Weston moneybags for many years, in Canada and abroad, and it will not pass. Weston ruthlessly exploits labour and steals resources around the world and combines this with a sprinkling around of philanthropic crumbs to create "good will" for its low-priced monopoly brands. Safe workplaces and just compensation for workplace harm is a basic human right and a non-negotiable claim of workers on the wealth they create. These rights cannot be treated as a whim of marketing strategy in the Weston style.

The failure of the ILO-led compensation conference and the continuing mass deaths and disasters in Bangladeshi workplaces show that the global monopolies and their accomplices among the elite of Bangladesh cannot be relied on to stop their criminal violation of the human dignity of workers and are not really interested in doing so. The government of Canada and other countries where the international operators retail their goods must ensure that these goods are produced in safe workplaces and that just workers' compensation systems are in place.

Return to top


Read The Marxist-Leninist Daily
Website:  www.cpcml.ca   Email:  editor@cpcml.ca