By GEORGE HEWISON
ince the Nov. 21
election, big busi-
ness has been busy
on at least two
fronts: first, restruc-
turing the economy
through mergers,
: layoffs and plant
closures; and second, undertaking a massive
campaign to silence the debate from the
election campaign in which thousands of
people became active in opposing the
Tories’ agenda.

The Tories now find themselves in a con-
tradictory situation: they may have won the
majority of the seats in Parliament, but they
did not win popular support for their neo-
conservative program. In fact, in the dying
moments of the campaign, they were com-
pelled to make significant pledges that are
going to be difficult to keep.

The focal point for this round of their
attack on the people appears to be the
forthcoming budget slated for the next sit-
ting of the House of Commons. It will be a
major tool in implementing free trade.

The Canadian Manufacturers
Association, the Business Council of
National Issues, the National
Citizens Coalition, the Canadian
Chamber of Commerce and others
have been active advising the
federal Tories on various ways to
address these questions, all under
the guise of addressing the deficit
and the debt crisis.

pT
Tory, big business sights are aimed at
attacking social programs, particularly uni-
versality, and at bringing in a regressive tax
policy which will take another big bite out
of the people’s wallets.

The Canadian Manufacturers Associa-
tion, the Business Council on National
Issues, the National Citizens Coalition, the
Canadian Chamber of Commerce and oth-
ers have been active advising the federal
Tories on various ways to address those
questions, all under the guise of addressing
the deficit and the debt crisis.

This sets the stage for a very sharp strug-
gle emerging in the next period.

There is reason to be concerned about the
economy. Recession lurks around the
corner, encouraged by rising interest rates.
The national debt has been escalating
dramatically. It is now in excess of $300
billion, and interest payments, which are
growing, take up almost a quarter of the
total federal government revenue.

Big business now cries crocodile tears
over the deficit. They blame social pro-
grams. But the federal debt has arisen
because the capitalist state plays a very spe-
cific function — to redistribute wealth
from working Canadians to the rich, the
financiers, banks and industry. Every year
the government, through its budget alloca-
tions, transfers approximately $20 billion in
the form of corporate handouts. Another
$25-30 billion goes into servicing the debt.
There are tax loopholes specifically written
in to heip out the largest of the large corpo-
rations. This adds another $20 billion or so.

Business then uses this money for
takeovers; for reinvestment abroad; for
making greater profits. To tackle the deficit
and the debt is to tackle the cause. A budget
that fights the deficit must be radically new
kind of budget — a people’s budget.

We need a budget that strengthens Can-
adian independence, that keeps plants open
as part of a developing industrial strategy to
process Canadian raw materials in Canada,
to overcome regional development prob-
lems and create jobs and opportunities for
our youth. We need a budget committed to
diversifying Canada’s trade.

Canada

the next

“The Wilson budget:

platform

against the Tories

GEORGE HEWISON... budget will focus two visions for Canada.

We need a budget that expands the home
market by improving services and pro-
grams for the people. We need a massive
low-cost, non-profit housing program.

We need a budget which scraps the White
Paper on Defence and the submarines. We
need a budget which addresses the growing
environmental problems, including the
matter of acid rain.

We need a budget for social justice deal-
ing with equality for women, a secure future
for our youth, dignity for our seniors, justice
for minorities, and which goes toward end-
ing poverty. The budget should address the
demands of Canada’s Native peoples. The
budget should be a budget committed to a
Canadian food policy by ensuring adequate
assistance to our farmers.

_ We need a budget that promotes Cana-
dian culture and amateur sports. We need a
budget for education and research and
development.

We need a budget with genuine tax
reform based on the ability to pay. We do
not need Michael Wilson’s scam which in
phase two hits the Canadian people with a
sales tax on virtually everything.

We do not need the kind of tax reform
called for by the junior Minister of Finance,
John McDermid, a one-shot tax to reduce
the deficit. Nor do we need the kind of tax
reform proposed by the International
Monetary Fund which has counselled Can-
ada to immediately wipe $9 billion off the
deficit.

We need a genuine tax policy that will tax
excess profits, and give Canadians control
over the vast wealth being created in Can-
ada, but currently in the hands of a select
few.

Winning such a budget, though difficult,
is possible. Moreover, it is necessary. Can-
ada has two choices.

One is to be drawn ever closer into the
U.S. economy and all that this means. It
means more job losses. It means the loss of
trade union rights. It means the loss of
social programs. It means the loss of sover-
eignty.

The other is the path of struggle for a new
direction and a new vision for Canada — an
independent Canada.

There is widespread and growing support
for such an alternative. First of all, the
working people who have the most to lose
by the sellout of Canada can be won for
such an alternative. So can the poor, the
environmentalists, the peace and other peo-
ple’s movements, even those sections of
Canadian capital whose interests are not
served by this neo-conservative process.
Canadians are not ready to give up on the
promise of their country borne out of strug-
gle over many decades.

In the next period, two factors need to be
noted: the Canadian people went through a
crash course in political education during
the last election campaign, which denied the
Tories a mandate for free trade or neo-
conservatism; second, the path to the full
implementation of the FTA is along a
rocky, contradictory road.

The ability of the Tories to see the FTA
and the rest of their agenda through
depends in large measure on the opposition
forces. Will they remain united and grow in
size and influence? Are they going to be able
to develop an alternative that was sorely
lacking in the debate around free trade? Can
a better idea be put forward, and can Cana-
dians be mobilized around it?

The Tories are not insensitive to this kind
of pressure. They haven’t been expending
all the efforts trying to change the ideologi-
cal groundwork flowing from the election, if
they were unconcerned. They wouldn’t be
getting the contradictory advice from big
business which they are receiving. All this
reflects the tremendous pressure from the
people and their movements.

The biggest danger for pro-Canada for-
ces is they will be divided; the second
danger, related to the first, is that they will
sell their movement short, overestimate the
Tories and big business, and limit their
demands to the framework set by big busi-
ness and the Tories. Adjustment programs,
while an important component of any stra-
tegy for the modern world, must be tailored
to an overall strategy — either a strategy of
surrender, or a strategy of struggle.

There can’t be a future for the people’s
movements tailored to living with the trade
deal and the neo-conservative agenda. The
very nature of the Tory agenda is to under-
mine the trade union and people’s move-
ments.

Trade unionists from across Canada who
took part in the Canadian Labour Congress
ranking officers meeting Feb. | struck a
very militant tone. We put a very high esti-
mation on the meeting, but the question is:
will there be a move from generalities to
concrete actions?

For example, will the trade union move-
ment offer the Canadian people labour’s
version of a budget? The struggle on the
budgetary front is the logical extension of
the free trade fight because this will be a free
trade budget.

To articulate, and mobilize Canadians
around, such an alternative budget would
goa long way in winning people away from
the Tories and make Mulroney pay a tre-
mendous political price for each neo-
conservative step he takes.

This would be particularly so if the strug-
gle for a people’s budget was coupled with
UREA ea ae Le ae i aerate

We need a budget for social justice
dealing with equality for women, a
secure future for our youth, dignity
for our seniors, justice for minorities,
and which goes toward ending
poverty. The budget should address
the demands of Canada’s Native
peoples. The budget should be a
budget committed to a Canadian
food policy by ensuring adequate
assistance to our farmers.

eee a a a er eames ee

mobilization around the Social Solidarity
statement which begins to look at a new
vision for Canada based on justice and
equality. This could transform the political
landscape of our country from coast to
coast.

The Communist Party is elaborating
more fully the elements we think are impor-
tant toa people’s budgetary alternative. We
will be offering it as our contribution to
budget discussions taking place. The most
important thing we’re asking our members
to do is to get involved in the coalitions, or
to help build coalitions where there are
none, to make sure they reach to every _
corner of this country.

We see these coalitions as a key compo-
nent to this stage of the struggle in rolling
back reaction, neo-conservatism and milit-
arism. They are also a crucial link in the
chain of future stages of the struggle.

We are also in the process of opening a
dialogue with those forces ready to examine
longer term, more fundamental solutions.

We believe that neo-conservatism is a
response to the growing crisis of capitalism.
As such, we believe that an in-depth dia-
logue with social activists should include a
discussion on the path to fundamental
social change in our country.

George Hewison is general secretary of the
Communist Party of Canada.

Pacific Tribune, March 20, 1989 « 5