Full inquiry needed Editorial The cabinet has yet to make the final decision, but it now appears that the provincial government will accede to the demand of Burnaby municipal council and convene a public inquiry into the collapse of the rooftop parking lot at the new Save-On Foods store in the Metrotown Centre April 23. But that is only the first step in preventing a repeat of the disaster. There will undoubtedly be pressure from inside and outside the government to limit the scope of the inquiry to narrow questions relating to the specific incident under investigation. But that would fall far short of what trade unionists, engineers, municipal governments and many others see as the need in the wake of Saturday’s events. What happened at Metrotown throws into perspective the whole system of profit- driven, cost-cutting competition in construction that has been the byword of the non-union sector and which has been so eagerly promoted by the government with its “low bidder’’ policies. : As a result of those policies, the norm in the industry is that construction contracts are broken up in dozens of small components and then subcontractors and small companies are invited to scrap for the pieces. Costs are driven down, corners are cut and no one takes responsibility for anything more than his own narrow work. The only Ones who benefit are the general contractors such as J.C. Kerkhoff who take the extra profits generated by the reduced costs. But as UBC civil engineering professor Dr. Noel Nathan warned this week, driving costs down has created a system in which no one is responsible for the overall project. Flaws like that which led to the Metrotown collapse can “fall between the cracks” of responsibility. Maintaining the competitive system ‘“‘makes it more difficult to prevent things like this from happening,” he said. The danger has been evident before, pointed to repeatedly by trade unionists and others who know from first-hand experience that low bidder policies lead directly to inferior construction. But the disaster at Metrotown should demonstrate clearly that the low bidder policy and the competitive bidding system has created a threat to public safety. The public inquiry that is convened should be given a mandate, not only to investigate who and what was responsible for the Save-On Foods collapse, but also to probe all the practices in the industry, the contract tendering, the sub-contracting, the engineering and inspection, and even the government’s low bidder policies. Anything less will only continue to cover up the real problem. Air Ganada sell-off The campaign by the Canadian Labour Congress and the unions involved with Air Canada to stop the sell-off of our national airline deserves the support of all Canadians. Labour correctly sees the move as part of a broader corporate strategy not only to depress wages, benefits and working conditions, but to destroy the concept that Canadians in fact do have a right to expect their governments to provide quality services. This sellout and the tawdry privatizations that have gone before, are part of the Tories’ efforts to prove to us that public ownership is inefficient and unprofitable. But Air Canada was making money. It is a world leader in the transportation industry, renowned for its quality service and safety record. Analysts say it is two-to-three times more efficient than its competi- tion. CLC president Shirley Carr has said that no government has the right to sell off our country’s heritage and its future and we agree. It is indeed tampering with the framework of this country and Brian Mulroney’s government should indeed put this shameful sellout before the people to decide in a general election. " When labour asks you to come out for Air Canada, be there. CAPTAIN, SIR [VE Spottep THE THREAT OP ARSE G Secale eh BY; So HAVE t MR BEATry PREPARE TH REN ons 560" oom j 7 er Ac. = a Se — _ ete eras a pe es et Ss, & FIRIBUNE ; EDITOR Published weekly at Sea ace 2681 East Hastings Street n Griffin Vancouver, B.C. ASSISTANT EDITOR V5K 1Z5 Dan Keeton Phone (604) 251-1186 N MANAG Subscription rate: ae? ‘Mike Pronivic Canada: ®@ $20 one year @ $35 two years @ Foreign $32 one year - GRAPHICS Second class mail Angela Kenyon registration number 1560 By BOB ABRAHAMS At a recent meeting of the Toronto Association for Peace, I noticed a button reading “Out of NORAD, No to Star Wars.” What is happening to Canada’s role in NORAD to make Canadians want to get out of a treaty which was designedto —_U.S. intentions to act in good faith under defend Canada against an attack? The NORAD agreement signed in 1968 would “not involve in any way a Canadian commitment to participate in active ballis- tic missile defence.” This clause was retained in the renewals of 1973, 1975 and 1980, but was dropped in 1981. At that time the U.S. was pressing Can- ada to stop its efforts to ban the ABM system in the new NORAD agreement. The U.S. didn’t want Canada to demand the change because, as reported in the Toronto Star, “it would appear to other nations that Canada did not expect the U.S. to live up to its commitments under the ABM Treaty.” Washington felt ‘““Can- ada was implicitly calling into question the the ABM Treaty.” The U.S. has since invited Canada to participate in Phases I and II of Strategic Defence Architecture 2000. Phase I updated NORAD’s plan of defence against an incoming bomber attack. Phase _ ILis the planning of defence against future space and ballistic missiles attacks. In short, Canada is becoming involved in an aggressive military posture which could conceivably bring nuclear weapons on our soil. The U.S. army has developed the Bra- duskill rock, which can intercept missiles in mid-course and will likely have to be based in Canada. Pressure will come from the U.S. for Canada to accept eight Commentary AWAC planes, capable of commanding missile deployment and running an entire war from the air. : Maclean’s magazine reports 12 secret “arrangements” between the U.S. and Canada. One of these says Canadian air- fields may be used by the U.S. Strategic Air Command as dispersal and refueling points in the event of crisis. U.S. bombers and tanker aircraft may fly without restric- tions through Canadian airspace on their way to the USSR. At least five existing northern airships will be upgraded to han- dle interceptor aircraft. With the deployment of Star Wars, Canada’s present role around existing NORAD radar installations and satellite surveillance will change to guide the oper- NORAD forcing Canada into offensive role ation of those weapons. . The military makes no secret of this. General Robert Herres, Commander-in- Chief of NORAD, told the press “top military strategists in both countries would like to see Canada participate in Star Wars planning for ballistic defences.” Nor is it quiet about NORAD’s Star Wars role. Captain M. Laurence of the Canadian Armed forces told Canadian Defence quarterly: “The actual NORAD Air Defence system would serve effectively its purpose in one situation: a successful first-strike by the United states against the Soviet Union.” a : The closer integration of Canadian and American defence schemes with the likeli- hood of American nuclear missiles being stationed in Canada creates a drastic change in Canada’s military policy from defence to an actively aggressive role. By acquiring nuclear weapons on our soil, both Canada and the U.S. are violating the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. 14 e Pacific Tribune, April 27, 1988