Agenda of the Harper Government

Parliament Opens Revealing Deceitful, Corrupt and Abusive Nature of Harper Government

Parliament opened on September 19 with a tribute from each of the parties in the House of Commons to former leader of the NDP Jack Layton who passed away on August 22, 2011 from cancer. In his tribute to Layton, Prime Minister Stephen Harper invoked values of "civility" and referred to the House of Commons as a place to "take stock of all potential solutions and decide which path to take." The deceitful nature of his government was promptly revealed when its first order of business was to give notice that it would be tabling back-to-work legislation against the Air Canada flight attendants should they go on strike to defend their demands for wages and working conditions commensurate with the service they provide.

Debate then took place on the government's Bill C-4 Preventing Human Smugglers from Abusing Canada's Immigration System Act and the newly tabled omnibus crime bill, C-10, the Safe Streets and Communities Act. The government also tabled a new piece of legislation from the Senate, Bill S-204 An Act to establish a national strategy for chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency (CCSVI).

During debate on Bill C-4 it became clear that the legislation has nothing to do with stopping human smugglers. It's aim is to provide new arbitrary powers to the Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism, presently Jason Kenney, permitting him to designate refugees of his choosing as "irregular arrivals" leading to their incarceration for up to one year. It was also revealed that the legislation will apply retroactively so that the Minister can designate "irregular arrivals" from March 31, 2009.

On September 21 the heinous nature of the omnibus crime bill was overshadowed by the explosive revelation that the Harper government has spent $19.8 million -- what amounts to $90,000 a day -- to hire consulting firm Deloitte Inc. to advise it on how to direct its cuts to government spending. The revelation led to questions as to why the Harper government is not relying on the government's own civil servants to do their jobs and instead is wasting vast sums of money paying consultants to direct government decisions.

The fact that the Harper government is quite prepared to pay such funds from the state treasury to pander to its own self-serving agenda and present it with a justification reveals just how corrupt it is and that the values it claims to represent are nothing but justifications for rampant corruption. This has already been seen with the vast sums spent on the G8 meetings under the hoax of showcasing Canada and providing security. In that case, $50 million of public funds went straight into the hands of the man overseeing the cuts to government spending -- current Treasury Board President Tony Clement and his buddies in his riding -- by-passing all proper accounting procedures. This is to say nothing about the Harper government's notions of accountability and transparency which are in shambles. Meanwhile internationally it demands accountability and transparency from other governments as pretexts to not only interfere in their internal affairs but launch wars of aggression and occupation.

Actions of the Harper Government in Foreign Affairs

While Canada continues its aggression against Libya, the UN General Assembly opened its 66th session on September 20 and met under the theme: "the role of mediation in the settlement of disputes by peaceful means." It is reported that Foreign Minister John Baird, notorious for signing a Canadian bomb dropped on Libyans, addressed the Assembly on the theme.

Meanwhile, also on September 20, Prime Minister Harper attended a high-level UN meeting on Libya, following which he announced Canada's support for a new UN "reconstruction" mission in Libya. Despite his government being increasingly exposed as corrupt with a self-declared "mandate" for its anti-democratic, anti-social, war-mongering agenda, Harper shamelessly declared that "Canada will continue to support the people of Libya, standing ready to promote effective governance and institutions, a secure environment founded on the rule of law, economic development and prosperity, and respect for human rights."

Just a day later, Harper was busy furthering his drive to annex Canada into a United States of the North American Monopolies. Harper held meetings in New York with U.S. monopoly finance capitalists regarding the importance of "strengthening commercial relations" between Canada and the U.S.

In related news, the Harper government has also been actively pursuing its agenda of supporting Zionist reaction by criminalizing any criticism of the Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands, in Canada or abroad. It also opposed a high-level UN meeting held on September 22 commemorating the 10th anniversary of the Durban World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia. Just prior to this meeting, Canada launched the Ottawa Protocol on "Combating Anti-Semitism" on September 19, where Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism Minister Jason Kenney and Foreign Affairs Minister Baird were present. "Signing the Ottawa Protocol signals our continued commitment to leading a coordinated global effort to fight anti-Semitism. Just as Canada is moving ahead to develop and build a National Holocaust Monument in the National Capital Region, we also plan to take our commitment to parliamentarians around the world and suggest that they join us in signing the Protocol," Baird stated.

What to Expect in the Coming Week

On Monday, September 26 the Parliament will vote on the following motion tabled by the Harper government to extend Canada's criminal aggression against Libya and to demand the unconditional allegiance of Parliament to Canada's military:

"That, standing in solidarity with those seeking freedom in Libya, the House adopted Government motions on March 21 and June 14, 2011, authorizing all necessary measures, including the use of the Canadian Armed Forces and military assets in accordance with United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973; that given the current military situation and the success of National Transitional Council (NTC) and anti-Gaddafi forces to date, the House supports an extension of up to three months of the involvement of the Canadian Armed Forces operating with NATO in accordance with the legal mandate from the UNSC Resolution 1973; that the House continues to support Canada's engagement in all spheres in the rebuilding of a new Libya, including human rights, democratic development and the rule of law; that the House deplores the violence committed by the previous regime against the Libyan people, including the alleged use of rape as a weapon of war; that the House of Commons Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development and the Standing Committee on National Defence shall remain seized of Canada's activities under UNSC Resolution 1973 and in the rebuilding of the new Libya; and that the House continues to offer its wholehearted and unconditional support to the brave men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces, who stand on guard for all of us, and continue to protect Libyan civilians from the risks still posed by the Gaddafi regime."

Showing what a fraud the Harper government's notion of democracy is, Prime Minister Harper announced the vote after declaring the mission will continue no matter what Parliament says: "we will participate in the mission until armed threats from Gadhafi forces are eliminated from the country. We will ask Parliament to extend the mission by three months, but I'm going to be frank with you in saying I'm pretty optimistic we'll achieve our objectives well before that timeline." Revealing the urgent necessity for the Workers' Opposition to oppose all conciliation with Harper's war-mongering, NDP Foreign Affairs Critic Paul Dewar essentially echoed Harper's stand about the need for the use of force to settle differences in international affairs and the need to now get on with bringing Canadian democracy to Libya: "We think the military contribution that we've made has been enough and we think that the next steps obviously is rebuilding Libya and helping them ... really get on with the next phase in terms of its development both democratically and also in terms of rebuilding the infrastructure."

Showing clearly the kind of democracy and human rights Harper wants for the workers of Libya, immediately after the vote on the NATO mission, debate will begin on the Harper government's back-to-work legislation against Air Canada flight attendants.

TML Weekly Information Project will continue to keep you abreast of these important developments and encourages you to contribute to this work by elaborating CPC(M-L)'s nation-building project as an alternative to the wrecking of the Harper government and the monopolies it represents.

Haut de page


In the Parliament

Bill C-4

Attempt to Criminalize Immigration,
Attack Rights and Divide the People

The Harper government's Bill C-4, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Balanced Refugee Reform Act and the Marine Transportation Security Act was one of the first pieces of legislation discussed when Parliament reconvened on September 19. Also known as the Preventing Human Smugglers from Abusing Canada's Immigration System Act, it was initially tabled by Minister of Public Safety Vic Toews as Bill C-49 in October 2010 at which time it faced widespread opposition by the people and parliamentary opposition. Armed with a majority government, the Harper government reintroduced this draft legislation as Bill C-4 with the aim of pushing through its overall retrogressive "law and order" agenda under the hoax of protecting "the safety and security of Canadians." It constitutes a serious racist setback to Canada's immigration system.

Speaking to the bill at second reading on September 19, Minister Toews justified these racist measures on the basis of the spurious "mandate" the Conservatives claim by virtue of a majority government. In this way, Bill C-4 and other measures are imposed in the most arbitrary and undemocratic fashion to serve a narrow anti-social agenda. What kind of government claims a mandate for carrying out criminal policies that violate human rights and international humanitarian law under any circumstance? It must not pass!

In the name of opposing "human smuggling," the bill attacks rights and violates international humanitarian law. Like security certificates, which are also part of immigration legislation, this legislation will undermine rights by singling out refugees and immigrants as potential criminals or terrorists. It continues the trend of putting more and more arbitrary power in the hands of the Immigration Minister or closed tribunals to deem certain people undesirable, with little or no recourse to appeal.

Immigration Minister Jason Kenney, in addressing the bill on September 19, piously stated that Parliament "needs to take action to put an end to the activities of human smugglers who have chosen Canada as a destination for their business, which is the dreadful exploitation of human beings." The truth is that the Harper government actually supports the exploitation of refugees and immigrants with its temporary foreign worker and live-in caregiver programs and by encouraging brain drain from less developed countries, as well as participating in wars of aggression and occupation that give rise to refugees to be used as cheap labour. Thus, the matter of "human smuggling" is a diversion from the fact that such a law will not accomplish its ostensible purpose and will be used to further undermine the rights of all.

Canada's immigration system already turns the social matter of immigration into a law and order problem on a racist basis. Bill C-49, the previous incarnation of Bill C-4, was introduced in the wake of the arrival of a total of 600 Tamil immigrants and refugees on two vessels, the MV Ocean Lady in October 2009 and MV Sun Sea in the summer of 2010. The arrival of this group of immigrants and refugees including children and elderly, was then used by the racist Canadian state, with the help of the monopoly media and other backward elements, to whip up racist hysteria and justify jailing these refugees and to split the political unity of the Canadian people and attack the rights of all.

The narrow political agenda of racist Bill C-4 is essentially no different than the Asian exclusion laws of the early 20th century at the time of the Komagata Maru incident in 1914, for which the Harper government grudgingly issued an apology in 2008.

For the Harper government to term certain immigration issues as a problem of "human smuggling" covers up that the government itself is involved in trafficking workers from overseas and facilitating immigration of a questionable nature, which undermines the rights and working conditions of all Canadian workers by circumventing labour practices and laws. The government brings in cheap labour to serve the monopolies through its temporary foreign worker program and takes advantage of countries that export their citizens as cheap labour, as in the case of the live-in caregiver program. Many of these workers are modern day slaves who are brought in as expendable indentured labour, forced to stay in dangerous working conditions and impoverished living conditions, without any rights worthy of the name.

The Harper government presents regulation of immigration as necessary to hold back invading hordes seeking to undermine Canadian values or who may even be terrorists. Minister Kenney, in his intervention in the Parliament concerning Bill C-4, had the gall to suggest that it is necessary to imprison and deny immigrants and refugees who come to Canada by unconventional means their rights in order to "discourage" them from arriving in Canada in this way. This is also to spread disinformation that Canadians want to keep out immigrants and refugees "who jump the queue" and that his government is to responding this demand by the Canadian people!

Nothing could be further from the truth. The Canadian people have always opposed the Canadian state for its racist immigration policy and have always stood for a just and humane immigration policy that recognizes the fundamental rights of immigrants and refugees.

Contrary to the government presenting itself as taking the moral high ground to exclude immigrants, Canada has in many cases a profound responsibility for the well-being of those forced into poverty and migration. Canadian mining firms are notorious the world over for their destruction of the social and natural environments that displace people by the tens of thousands. In 2004, Canada was an active participant in the coup in Haiti that disempowered the Haitian people, resulting in dire and deteriorating conditions from then to the present. Canada participated in the Korean War, the 78-day NATO bombing of Yugoslavia and is participating in the military occupation of Afghanistan. Most recently Canada has spawned a refugee crisis in Libya by its illegal war against and bombing of that country. Far from labelling those who take desperate measures to seek asylum in Canada as criminals and terrorists, it is the Harper government which carries out criminal and terrorist acts at home and abroad which lead to more and more people being displaced around the world.

In order for Canada to provide justice for those harmed by these actions, it must end these relations based on exploitation and aggression. Only by all nations and peoples having the right to be without outside interference in their domestic social, economic and political affairs can the social problem of the international refugee crisis be addressed. Furthermore, Canada has an obligation to provide for the well-being of those harmed either through reparations to allow people to remain in their home countries or to facilitate their immigration to Canada where they should be accorded full rights.

Canadians come from all nations of the world and the country itself was founded on the ongoing dispossession of the First Nations. A modern discussion on the question of immigration must be based on these considerations and others while ensuring that rights, which belong to people by virtue of their being human, are provided with a guarantee. Laws such as Bill C-4, which are an abomination of these principles, are only meant to stir the pot, incite racism and division of the polity and undermine the rights of all. Bill C-4 must be vigorously opposed and withdrawn!

Haut de page


Overview of Immigration Bill

Bill C-4, with the short name Preventing Human Smugglers from Abusing Canada's Immigration System Act, is an Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Balanced Refugee Reform Act and the Marine Transportation Security Act (with the short name ) was tabled in the House of Commons on June 16, 2011. Speaking to the bill on June 21, Minister of Public Safety Vic Toews stated in part:

"Bill C-4 would, first and foremost, crack down on those criminals who would abuse our generous immigration system and endanger the safety and security of our Canadian communities. We are providing a strong deterrent to those who are organizing human smuggling operations to jump the queue into Canada and we are ensuring the integrity and fairness of Canada's immigration system for years to come."

According to government information, Bill C-4 among other things:

"Authorizes the Minister, in certain circumstances, to designate as an irregular arrival, the arrival in Canada of a group of persons, the result of which is that some of the foreign nationals in the group become designated foreign nationals;

"Authorizes an officer or the Minister to refuse to consider an application for permanent residence;

"Provides that a person may not become a permanent resident as long as an application by the Minister for cessation of that person's refugee protection is pending;

"And as grounds for detention [for up to 12 months or more] of a permanent resident or foreign national, the existence of reasonable grounds to suspect that the person concerned is inadmissible on grounds of serious criminality, criminality or organized criminality;

"Provide that certain designated foreign nationals may not apply to become permanent residents until the expiry of a certain period and that the processing of any pending applications for permanent residence is suspended for a certain period;

"Extend the time for instituting proceeding by way of summary conviction from six months to five years;

"Authorize the Governor in Council to make regulations respecting the reporting requirements imposed on certain designated foreign nationals;

"...amends the Balanced Refugee Reform Act to provide that a refugee protection claimant who claim is rejected is not prevented from applying for protection earlier than 12 months after the day on which the claim was rejected;

"...amends the Marine Transportation Security Act to increase the penalties for persons who fail to provide information required to be reported before a vessel enters Canadian waters or to comply with ministerial directions and for persons who provide false or misleading information. It creates a new offence for vessels that fail to comply with ministerial directions."

Despite the ostensible aim of Bill C-4 to target "human smugglers" the proposed legislation creates a new category of refugee claimants -- "designated foreign nationals" -- which is defined broadly enough to justify criminalizing most people who come to Canada as refugees. It also violates a fundamental provision of the UN Refugee Convention (Article 31) which says that governments must not impose penalties on refugees for unconventional entry. Bill C-4, not only imprisons "designated foreign nationals,"  it also deprives them of their legal and social rights.

Those "designated foreign nations" as defined by the Minister of Public Safety or his or her officials, are automatically jailed and cannot appeal their detention for twelve months, and every six months after that, pending a review of their application, except under what is termed "special circumstances." What these "special circumstances" are is not defined, but left for the Minister or his or her officials to decide. This condition of jailing "designated foreign nationals" a minimum of 12 months without review is a retrogressive step. Currently, refugees who are detained are required to have a review within 48 hours, then after a week and then every month.

Bill C-4 also violates the rights of refugees in that even after being granted refugee status, they cannot apply to be landed-immigrants nor will they be allowed to sponsor their families, nor be permitted to travel outside Canada. These are all arbitrary measures that humiliate people.

Bill C-4 also requires that children deemed "designated foreign nationals" be taken into custody in violation of the UN Convention on the Rights of A Child which states under Article 3: "The best interests of children must be the primary concern in making decisions that may affect them. All adults should do what is best for children. When adults make decisions, they should think about how their decisions will affect children. This particularly applies to budget, policy and law makers." Under the provisions of Bill C-4, children who are "designated foreign nationals" can be deported from Canada without consideration of their best interests. Furthermore, children as well as adults who are "designated foreign nationals" are unable to apply for status on "humanitarian and compassionate grounds" until five years have lapsed, keeping them in a state of anguish and turmoil.

Bill C-4 imposes mandatory reporting provisions on all "designated" refugee claimants who have been accepted as refugees -- they have to report to an immigration officer as required by regulations, answer all questions and be vulnerable to exploitation as informants by immigration officials or face not being granted permanent status.

Bill-C 4 is also in contempt of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and international laws such as the UN Refugee Convention and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Haut de page


Bill C-10

Omnibus Crime Bill Fails to
Identify the Real Criminals

On September 20, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Rob Nicholson introduced into Parliament Bill C-10, The Safe Streets and Communities Act. The bill combines nine separate bills that the Conservatives could not pass while a minority government. During the federal election Harper promised to pass an omnibus crime bill within 100 days of being elected. What would be in that bill and its significance was not discussed. Now, armed with a majority, Harper claims his government has a mandate to ram the bill through Parliament without discussion to bring out its significance.

Tabling the bill, Justice Minister and Attorney General Nicholson stated: "The bill [...] fulfils the commitment in the June 2011 Speech from the Throne to quickly reintroduce law and order legislation to combat crime and terrorism. This commitment, in turn, reflects the strong mandate that Canadians have given us to protect society and to hold criminals accountable. We have bundled together crime bills that died on the Order Paper in the last Parliament into a comprehensive piece of legislation and it is our plan to pass it within the first 100 sitting days of Parliament."

Addressing concerns about the use of an omnibus bill, rather than dealing with each bill individually, Nicholson added: "Some may say that this comprehensive bill makes it difficult to understand. In response I would note that these reforms should be very familiar to members of Parliament, indeed all Canadians, given that these reforms were before the previous Parliament when they died on the Order Paper with the dissolution of that Parliament. Many of these reforms have been previously debated, studied and even passed by at least one of the two chambers of Parliament. For the most part, the comprehensive legislation reintroduces these reforms in the same form they were in previously, with technical changes that were needed to be able to reintroduce them in this Parliament in one bill."

Both the NDP and the Liberals raised opposition to the bill from the standpoint that: 1) the tougher sentencing rules would increase the number of people in prisons; 2) that this would impose burdensome costs onto the government, and that these costs should be made public; and 3) that statistics show the rate of crime is falling, which shows there is no need for this approach to fighting crime. It is reported that the Liberals have also tabled a "reasoned amendment" to try to delay passage of the bill. Liberal MP Sean Casey has proposed an amendment that would delete every page in the bill and replace it with a vow not to pass it on to the next stage in Parliament. This measure would mean that the debate on the amendment will continue until no more MPs want to debate it.

Responding to criticism about the costs of the bill, Justice Minister Nicholson stated: "it is a priority for the Conservative Party that 83% of that cost is borne by the victims of crime. They are the ones who pay the price. I would hope that at some point in time those members will stand up and say that they are worried about costs and have become fiscal conservatives and they are worried about spending every dime, but they realize that most of the cost continues to be borne by victims in this country, who are the ones we have to stand up for." Addressing statistics which show a trend of dropping crime rates he is reported to have stated: "We're not governing on the basis of the latest statistics; we're governing on the basis of what's right to better protect victims and law-abiding Canadians."

Canadians should keep in mind the following points as the debate on the Harper government's omnibus crime bill begins in the Parliament and monopoly-owned media:

1. The crime bills do not identify the real criminals in this country -- the parasites who suck the blood of the working people and leave their lives a shambles of insecurity, both during their working lives and in retirement. These criminals are selling out the country's resources, destroying its manufacturing, taking away pensions and benefits and leaving all members of the polity to fend for themselves, including workers injured on the job who created the wealth these parasites are using to pay themselves handsome bonuses. A good example was the back-to-work legislation imposed on postal workers, which CPC(M-L) pointed out: "is clearly intended to impose Canada Post's 'Modern Post' which will not only destroy the public Post Office but imposes unacceptable working conditions on postal workers. These working conditions are unacceptable precisely because they are unsustainable. The level of injuries the postal workers are sustaining is a blatant abuse of power on the part of Canada Post and must be deemed a criminal offence. It is a real degeneration of the role of government to impose such plans of the monopolies on the workers."

The crime bills do not address these crimes.

2. Two- and three-tiered justice is no justice at all. The same government that claims to be so interested in protecting society from criminals refuses to right historical wrongs against the First Nations, and does not even sort out the problem of the "missing women," or provide adequate housing and health care for Canada's First Nations. It also fails to provide all families with adequate affordable housing, child care, health care, education and jobs and suitable recreation for Canada's youth or jobs. A society that is not based on prevention and rehabilitation, but crime and punishment can be called anything, but not modern.

3. Finally, beware of omnibus bills. They are Harper's great discovery of the American way of hiding things in between one sentence and another so as to railroad decisions through by accusations of betrayal, treason and moral turpitude thrown at opponents so that nobody can think. In this light, the omnibus bill introduces very significant precedents to criminalize Canadians' right to conscience and put in place measures to strip Canadians of their rights, all in the name of "fighting terrorism." The bill establishes a Canadian list of "terrorist states" or "states that support terrorism" -- something which is currently in place in the United States but not in Canada. Canada currently has a list of terrorist entities, not states. The U.S. lists Cuba, Iran, Sudan and Syria as state sponsors of terrorism. The new Canadian list is supposedly part of provisions to permit Canadian courts to hear lawsuits from "victims of terrorism" against "listed states."

The bill also includes changes to laws relating to the International Transfer of Offenders Act that give the Minister of Public Safety new arbitrary powers to deny a Canadian charged with a crime in another country repatriaton. This is likely related to an arrangement between the Canadian and U.S. government made in 2010 which is set to see Canadian Omar Khadr, currently being held by the U.S. at its torture camp in Guantanamo Bay, transferred to Canada on November 1, 2011 as part of his plea agreement with U.S. authorities. Is the Harper government now planning to block the transfer using this measure?

Haut de page


Overview of Crime Bill

Bill C-10, the omnibus crime bill is divided into 5 parts:

Part 1: Justice for Victims of Terrorism
Part 2: Sentencing
Part 3: Post-Sentencing
Part 4: Youth Criminal Justice
Part 5: Immigration and Refugee Protection Act

Part 1: Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act

This part brings forward Bill S-7 from the last Parliament and would establish a new act that "creates a cause of action that allows victims of terrorism to sue perpetrators of terrorism and their supporters." This new Act would have the Minister of Public Safety establish within six months of passage, a list of states which the Canadian government labelled terrorist which could be sued by so-called victims of terrorism in Canada. It would amend the State Immunity Act to lift immunity of those states that the government has listed "for support of terrorism." In addition, the new law would permit the Canadian government to take the assets in Canada of a listed state in the event a law suit brought against it was successful. This appears to be an attempt to make legal in Canadian law the theft of monies from states targeted by Canada and the U.S. as was done in the case of Libya by the Harper government as part of the sanctions it imposed. One difficulty the Harper government reportedly had with Libya was finding ways to legally "unfreeze" Libyan assets in Canada to hand over to the so-called rebels.

Part 2: Sentencing

This part brings forward four bills from the previous Parliament:

C-5: Gives the Minister of Public Safety arbitrary powers to deny the transfer of a Canadian citizen back to Canada to serve the remainder of a sentence.

C-16: Ends house arrest as an option for judges for "serious crimes," including sexual assault.

C-54: Imposes mandatory jail time for sexual offences against children.

S-10: Creates mandatory minimum sentences for drug crimes including labelling anyone in possession of as few as six marijuana plants as a trafficker and imposing a minimum 6-month jail sentence.

Part 3: Post-Sentencing

C-39: Imposes new regulations in the parole system that make it harder to obtain parole.

C-23B: Eliminates pardons for certain criminals and establishes a new, more difficult system for clearing one's criminal record entitled "record suspension." The name implies that it is only a temporary clearing of a person's record.

Part 4: Youth Criminal Justice

C-4: Establishes new principles for the Youth Criminal Justice Act emphasizing punishment rather than prevention of youth crime. It allows judges to publicly identify young offenders, adds new definitions and categories of "serious offences" and "violent offences" in line with new principles, which include making it a violent offence to "threaten to commit" a violent offence. It also makes changes regarding how and when an adult sentence will be imposed on a young offender.

Part 5: Immigration and Refugee Protection Act

Bill C-56: Amends the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to authorize immigration officers to refuse work permits to immigrant or migrant workers if: "they are at risk of humiliating or degrading treatment, including sexual exploitation or human trafficking." In other words, instead of dealing with employers who violate labour laws and the rights of immigrant or migrant workers, the victims are made the problem and new powers are given to immigration officials to refuse entry to certain people at their discretion, all in the name of "protecting them." The Minister of Justice put it this way: [the provisions of the bill] "include immigration reforms to better protect vulnerable foreign workers against abuse and exploitation, including through human trafficking."

Bills from Previous Parliament Not Included

C-50 and C-51: Both bills would make it easier for law enforcement to monitor telephone and electronic communications to "prevent crime and terrorist acts."

C-17: Would change Canada's terrorism laws to bring back some clauses of the 2001 Anti-Terror Act that expired in 2007 and would allow for preventive arrest and investigative hearings that force someone to disclose information related to possible terrorism. Prime Minister Harper recently indicated that this legislation would be brought forward.

Haut de page


Canadian Wheat Board

Understanding Freedom: When the Liberal Conception of Freedom Turns into a Self-Serving Justification for a Fascist Regime

A September 14 editorial in the private monopoly newspaper the National Post declares that the key issue regarding Harper's plan to forcibly destroy the Canadian Wheat Board, no matter what the farmers, workers and others say, is "freedom of choice." The editorial states that a public monopoly like the CWB, which is run by the grain farmers and which uses its marketing power to operate in the best interests of the farmers and the Canadian people instead of filling the pockets of the owners of private grain monopolies, is "incompatible with democratic rights." The editorial goes on to mouth empty phrases like "It's a free country," "there is no moral and ethical justification," and "the only authority to impose a (public) grain (marketing) monopoly is ‘brute force'." The editorial ends with the "ringing" conclusion that "no matter how many farmers had voted for the monopoly, as Agriculture Minister (Gerry) Ritz said, there is no democratic authority that can trump the individual right of farmers to market their own grain."

The first thing to note is that the editorial launches its attack by trying to turn into an abstraction the very practical question of how to market our farmers' grain at the best possible price to the farmers, while maintaining control of our own food supply. The practical solution of the farmers for decades has been to overwhelmingly support the public monopoly of the CWB. The old Progressive Conservative party first passed the Canadian Wheat Board Act in 1935, with overwhelming support from the Western provinces. The Act contained the single desk provision which was proclaimed in 1942, and the single desk was voted on every five years until it was made permanent in 1967. With the exception of seven eastern MPs in 1947, all those votes were unanimous. The single desk means that as the sole marketer of the high quality wheat and barley grown in western Canada, the CWB is able to provide marketing clout to individual farmers who benefit from higher returns. By selling together, western Canadian farmers are able to exert more power in the global marketplace than they could if they were competing against each other. Such a situation is obviously in the interests of the farmers and of the rest of the Canadian people, which is why the farmers have continued to support it.

To state that the CWB should be wrecked because Canada is a "free country" fools no one because in Canada only the private monopolies are "free." To give just one example, the foreign private monopoly U.S. Steel is using its power to dictate to active members of USW Local 1005 in Hamilton to vote to change the agreed-upon pension arrangement for themselves, new hires, and those already retired. The Ontario and federal governments are fully aware of U.S. Steel's abuse of power to extort changes to the pension arrangements yet they have not intervened to restrict the use of monopoly right to crush the public right of Canadian workers. The actual experience of the farmers, steelworkers and others has long demonstrated to them that Canada is not a "free country" in terms of fostering the public right of the people to advance what is in their interests but it is a country where the monopolies, with the full support of the state, are free to do whatever they want to maximize their private profits, at the expense of everyone else. This is why Harper is clearing the ground for Viterra, Cargill, Richardson and other private monopolies to seize control of Canadian grain marketing.

The National Post editorial is crammed with disinformation. For example, neither the National Post nor the Harperites actually believe one iota in "freedom" of choice for anyone except the monopolies. (Harper, of course, freely chose long ago to be a slave to the monopolies!) As journalist Abbott Liebling famously remarked in 1960, "Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one," and this is why the monopoly National Post is able to spout its disinformation in support of Harper's plans. Similarly, freedom to market grain outside of a public monopoly belongs only to those who own a private grain marketing company, such as Viterra, Cargill and Richardson. Under any system where such private agri-monopolies control grain marketing, as was the case prior to the advent of the CWB and the single desk, the farmers clearly have no freedom of choice at all but must take whatever the private monopolies force on them, including bankruptcy. In contrast, a public monopoly is compatible with the democratic rights of the farmers because it works in the interests of individual farmers, in the collective interests of the farmers and in the collective interests of the Canadian people as a whole.

It is ludicrous that the National Post editorial states that "the only authority to impose a (public) grain (marketing) monopoly is ‘brute force'." In fact, the reality is that the only authority to impose a private grain marketing monopoly is brute force and this is exactly what Harper has to do because of the numerous militant actions of the farmers and their many supporters to defend the CWB single desk. The Harper government has already spent a great deal of the Canadian people's money trying to illegally influence the results of farmer votes regarding retention of the single desk. This includes giving three options on a ballot and then adding the results of two of the options together to get the answer the government wanted, issuing "gag orders" against CWB directors and staff, firing CWB president Adrian Measner, changing voting lists to eliminate pro-CWB voters, banning the secret ballot, not restricting third party spending on campaigns against the CWB and so on. But no matter what dirty tricks they have tried, the Harperites have failed because the Canadian farmers and people have time and again shown their democratic support for the CWB, which is why Harper now must resort to using brute force to destroy the CWB. Then his masters in Viterra, Cargill and Richardson can reimpose their private monopoly, as they have already done, for example, in Australia.

It is important to note that it is normal for arch-reactionaries such as the National Post and Harper to invoke the call of "freedom" to justify the most heinous crimes against the people. In such situations the liberal conception of freedom turns into a self-serving justification for a fascist regime. The U.S. imperialist aggression which killed over a million Vietnamese people was justified as a crusade to "free" the Vietnamese people. In 1987, the infamous U.S. President Ronald Reagan stated "The (Berlin) wall cannot withstand freedom," then "freely" fired 11,345 striking air traffic controllers, after having already drawn world-wide condemnation in 1985 when he honored the Nazi and SS troops buried in Berlin's Bitberg Cemetery. Similarly, Harper stated on March 18 that, "One either believes in freedom, or one just says one believes in freedom," when he argued for the participation of the Canadian military in the war crime of the illegal bombing of the Libyan people in support of U.S. imperialism. The Canadian people are not fooled by these self-serving declarations and are resolutely opposed to fascist maneuvers like destroying the CWB which merely constitute nation-wrecking to enrich the monopolies. As Hardial Bains has so aptly stated, "Freedom, in whose name so many dirty deeds have been committed, will take its revenge in the victory of those who are seeking the real solution to the real problems."[1]

Note

1. Bains, Hardial (1991). Communism 1989-91. Ideological Studies Centre.

Haut de page


September 24, 2011 Bulletin • Return to Index • Write to: editor@cpcml.ca