- S PUBLIC OWNERSHIP — NOT FOREIGN CONTROL! Make Canada's wealth work for Canadians The scandalous degree which Canada’s economy is be- ing taken over by foreign inter- ests was exposed in a submis- sion by the Communist Party last week to the Standing Com- mittee on Finance, Trade and Economic Affairs. Both in the submission and in his summary to the Commit- tee, Communist Party leader William Kashtan stressed that, “Rather than diminishing, for- eign investment, ownership and control, is growing. It has been growing not only through direct investments but increasingly through the use of Canadian capital through profits accumu- lated in Canada out of the hides of Canada’s working people. ‘Foreign Direct Investment,’ published by the Government of Canada, states that ‘over 60% of the financing for the expan- sion of foreign controlled firms in the 1960-1967 period came from sources in Canada.’ The fact is that 94% of investment by U.S. subsidiaries in Canada is carried out by using profits, dividends, retained earnings and tax reserves, all acquired in Canada. Foreign investment myth “We have been told time and again, that without. foreign in- vestments the economy would collapse, unemployment would rise, living standards would de- cline. Behind these myths fore- ign investments, in particular U.S. investments, have grown to fantastic proportions. Sixty-one percent or more of Canadian in- dustry is foreign owned, and in some sectors of the economy, there is 80 to 100% foreign in- vestment and ownership. Not satisfied with achieving control over decisive sectors of - the “anadian economy, U.S. inter- ests, and others too, are now en- croaching more and more on Canadian land. Foreign invest- ment and ownership has never prevented unemployment and stagnancy in the economy. “The implications are self evi- dent. The foreign controlled sec- tors of the Canadian. economy will continue to grow even if new outside capital is cut off or End comes to an end. It exposes the false claims of those who say foreign investment is_ essential for Canada’s economic growth and employment. Canadian capi- tal is being used to strengthen foreign ownership and control. What growth there is, is growth of foreign ownership and profits. “A second feature which should be noted is that foreign investments have led not to gains but to losses for Canada. “In the period of 1960 to 1969 new U.S. investment in Canada totalled $5 billion. But the cor- porations received $6.25 billion back in the form of interest and dividends, plus $1.75 billion in royalties and fees. This resulted in a net loss to Canada of $2.5 billion. Not in Canada's interests “Moreover, foreign investment has brought with it interference in Canada’s trade with other countries, a decline in technolo- gical development, cultural do- mination, and infringements on Canada’s sovereignty. The struc- ture of our economy and the priorities of our industrial de- velopment are in large part de- termined by corporate decisions taken in another country which reflect the needs and interests of these trans-national corpora- tions and the economic, political and foreign policy positions of the particular foreign govern- ment. Canadian economic devel- opment is determined, not by what is good for Canada, but by foreign investors... “That the issue of foreign in- vestment, and of foreign owner- ship, is thus of crucial import- ance for the Canadian people is further emphasized in light of the growing pressures by the U.S. Administration on Canada’s energy reserves, the proposed James Bay development and Mackenzie River Valley Pipeline, and Canada-U.S. trade negotia- tions. The U.S. Government not only wants Canadian oil and gas, uranium, coal and water and power resources. It wants Cana- dians to give up their sovere- ignty and to subordinate Can- ada and its resources to the in- terests of the giant U.S. corpora- tions and U.S. foreign policy.” Act is inadequate Describing the need for Cana- dian sovereignty and true eco- nomic independence as “the over-riding issue,” the Commun- ist Party sharply criticized the proposed Foreign Investment Review Act for not coming to grips with this question, despite - that “under the pressure of pub- lic opinion the Act has been ex- tended to include not only the “...we emphasize that the Communist Party’s long term aim is public ownership of the key indus- tries, banks and credit system, communications and transportation system, which taken together pro- vide the economic basis upon which to achieve a fully independent Canada.” oh ¥ ih MN wy. ne aT lh I I Hl screening of foreign takeovers of Canadian firms but also the review of new foreign enter- prises in Canada, and the expan- sion of existing foreign com- panies into ‘unrelated fields’. “However, on the essential question of foreign ownership and control and its implications for Canada, the Act is totally inadequate. The screening de- vice will do absolutely nothing to end U.S. control or that of other trans-national corpora- tions over the Canadian econo- my. Indeed, the Act fails to come to grips with foreign cont- rol. There is nothing in the proposed legislation which re- lates to foreign control over