|
|
| Theoretical and Discussion Bulletin of the
Communist Party of Canada |
|
The Spark!
The
latest issue of The Spark! theoretical journal, is now on sale for $5 at Communist Party offices (see p. 8) or People’s Co-op Books, 1391 Commercial Drive, Vancouver.
Articles
include
- “Introduction to a General Theory of Culture” (Barry Lord);
- “Political & Economic Realities Behind Colombian Labour Relations” (Sacouman, Moore & Brittain);
- “Treaty Process & Indian Nationalism” (Ray Bobb);
- “Lenin: Heritage of the Socialist Market Economy” (C.J. Atkins);
- “Nature of the State Under Bush & Harper” (Stephen Von Sychowski);
- plus reviews, editorials, and more.
|
People's
Voice deadlines:
JANUARY 1-15
Thursday, December 10
JANUARY 16-31
Thursday, January 7
Send submissions
to PV
Editorial
Office,
706 Clark Drive, Vancouver,
V5L 3J1, pvoice@telus.net
|
People's
Voice finds many "Global Class Struggle" reports at the "Labour Start"
website, http://www.labourstart.org. We urge our readers to
check it out!
|
*
* * * *
People's Voice
Canadian
Publications Mail Sales Product Agreement #205214
ISSN number
1198-8657
People's Voice is
published by
New Labour Press
Ltd
PV Editorial Office
706 Clark Drive,
VANCOUVER, B.C.
V5L 3J1
Phone:604-255-2041
Fax:604-254-9803
email: pvoice@telus.net
Editor:
Kimball Cariou
Editorial
Board: Kimball
Cariou, Miguel Figueroa,
Doug
Meggison, Naomi Rankin, Liz Rowley, Jim Sacouman
* * *
* * *
Letters
People's
Voice welcomes your letters
on
any subject covered in our pages.
We
reserve the right to edit for length and clarity,
and
to refuse to print letters which may be libellous
or
which contain unnecessary personal attacks.
Send
your views to:
"Letters
to the Editor",
796
Clark Dr., Vancouver, BC V5L 3J1,
or pvoice@telus.net
People's
Voice articles may be reprinted without permission,
provided
the source is
credited.
* * * * * *
The
Communist Party of
Canada, formed in 1921,
has a proud history of fighting for jobs, equality, peace,
Canadian independence, and socialism.
The CPC does much more than run candidates in elections.
We think the fight against big business and its parties
is a year-round job,
so our members are active across the country,
to build our party and to help strengthen people's movements
on a wide range of issues.
All
our policies and
leadership
are set democratically by our members.
To find out more about Canada's party of Socialism,
give us a call at the nearest CPC office.
*
*
* * * *
Central Committee CPC
290A Danforth Ave Toronto, Ont. M4K 1N6
Ph: (416) 469-2446
fax: (416) 469-4063 E-mail
info@cpc-pcc.ca
Parti Communiste du
Quebec (section du
Parti communiste
du Canada)
5430, av.
Trans-Island, Montréal, QC,
H3W 3A5
Tel:
(514)737-7817 Cel: (514)212-3857
E-mail:
pueblo@sympatico.ca
B.C.Committee CPC
706 Clark Drive, Vancouver, V5L 3J1
Tel: (604) 254-9836
Fax: (604) 254-9803
Edmonton
CPC
Box 68112, 70 Bonnie Doon P.O.
Edmonton, AB, T6C 4N6
Tel: (780) 465-7893
Fax: (780)463-0209
Calgary
CPC
Unit #1 - 19 Radcliffe Close SE
Calgary AB, T2A 6B2
Tel: (403) 248-6489
Saskatchewan
CPC
mail@communist-party-sk.ca
Ottawa
CPC
Tel: (613) 232-7108
Manitoba
Committee
387 Selkirk Ave., Winnipeg, R2W 2M3
Tel/fax: (204) 586-7824
Ontario
Ctee. CPC
290A Danforth Ave., Toronto, M4K 1N6
Tel: (416) 469-2446
Hamilton
Ctee. CPC
265 Melvin Ave., Apt. 815
Hamilton, ON.
Tel: (905) 548-9586
Atlantic
Region CPC
Box 70 Grand Pré, NS, B0P 1M0
Tel/fax: (902) 542-7981
http://www.communist-party.ca/
* *
* * * *
News
for People, Not for Profits!
Every
issue of People's Voice
gives
you the latest
on the
fightback from coast to coast.
Whether
it's the struggle for jobs or peace, resistance to social
cuts,
solidarity
with Cuba, or workers' struggles around the world,
we've
got the news the corporate media won't print.
And
we do more than that
- we report and analyze events
from a revolutionary perspective,
helping to build the movements for justice and equality,
and eventually for a socialist Canada.
Read
the paper that fights
for working people
- on
every page, in every issue!
People's
Voice
$30
for 1 year
$50
for 2 years
Low-income
special rate: $15 for 1-year
Outside
Canada $50 for 1
year
Send
to: People's Voice, 133 Herkimer St..,
Unit 502, Hamilton, ON, L8P 2H3
REDS
ON THE WEB
http://www.communist-party.ca
http://www.ycl-ljc.ca
http://www.solidnet.org
(Contents)
(Home)
1) SUDBURY STRIKERS DIG
IN FOR LONG WINTER
(The following
article is from the December 1-31, 2009, issue of People's Voice,
Canada's
leading communist
newspaper. Articles can be reprinted free if the source is credited.
Subscription rates in Canada: $30/year, or $15 low income rate; for
U.S. readers - $45 US per year; other overseas readers - $45 US or $50
CDN per year. Send to:
People's Voice, c/o PV Business Manager, 133
Herkimer St., Unit 502, Hamilton, ON, L8P 2H3.)
By Liz Rowley
The word on
the picket lines at
Vale Inco's Sudbury mines is that it will be a long winter. But however
long it takes, striking miners, mill workers and smelter workers will
be there one day longer.
About 3,000
members of Local
6500 USWA, plus another 1,000 from Port Colborne, Ontario and Voisey's
Bay, are entering their fifth month on strike against Vale Inco, the
second largest producer of nickel in the world, with operations in
Mongolia, China, India, Chile, Peru, Angola, South Africa, Indonesia,
and Canada.
Vale is
demanding a privatized
pension scheme for new hires, and changes to seniority rights that will
make it difficult if not impossible for union members to bid on jobs.
It also wants a cap on the nickel bonus - a profit sharing scheme
worked out by INCO and the Steelworkers years ago - that Vale says it
can't afford.
But as USWA
President Leo Gerard
points out, Vale has made enormous profits during the worst downturn in
70 years - $4.1 billion profit in the last two years alone, more than
double the profit INCO made in the last ten years when nickel prices
were very high. INCO is on record stating it could still make a profit
with nickel selling at $4; the price was $7.35 in late November.
"These mines
don't belong to
Vale. They belong to Canadians," says Gerard, a sentiment shared by
many on the picket lines and in the community who call for the
nationalization of Vale Inco.
The
Communist Party is also
calling for public ownership, under democratic controls, arguing
natural resources belong to the people of Canada, and the profits
generated should be used to benefit the people, to diversify Sudbury's
economy with secondary industries and manufacturing, and to guarantee
the wages, pensions, benefits and health and safety of mine, mill and
smelter workers in Canada.
Vale, a
Brazilian company that
was publicly owned until it was privatized in 1997, bought out the
Canadian-owned International Nickel Company in 2006 for $19 billion,
after giving certain undertakings respecting Canada's national
interests in the rich natural resources in the Sudbury basin. These are
undertakings that the Harper government and Industry Minister "Two-Tier
Tony" Clement, now refuse to enforce, or even disclose. This is why
Clement's photo features prominently on the outhouses on many picket
lines.
The sale is
the cause of the
strike, there's no doubt. Stephen Ball, Vale's Manager of Corporate
Affairs in Ontario, said it all in this Sudbury media interview:
"Mining is a capital intensive operation and to attract global capital,
Canadian workers will have to get more competitive with workers in less
developed countries."
The less
developed country he
has in mind is Brazil. The competition is with Brazil's 40,000
unionized miners, who made $600 a month until November when a militant
strike, and support from Brazil's President Lula, won them an
additional 14% over 2 years. The new wage, and the new bar for
Vale is
$642 a month.
"(Vale) just
wants to break the
union. They want to completely hit the rest button on the entire labour
situation and the agreements that have been put in place in the past,"
a former INCO Executive told local media.
Vale is
scabbing the strike with
unionized office workers, members of USWA Local 2020 and 6600. These
office workers don't work in the mines, mills, or smelters, but the
company has ordered them to cross picket lines and get on-the-job
training from managers to start up furnaces and smelters - some of the
most dangerous jobs in Canada that could result in deadly explosions if
a mistake is made.
Mining has
also resumed with the
inherent danger of rock falls and gas, and the added danger of
unskilled and untrained scabs working in a dangerous environment.
Vale has
built bunkhouses at the
North Mine that will house 200 scabs, who will be helicoptered in and
out every five days. They will work days and nights, 100 at a time, if
the company has its way. On November 19, Vale invited union members to
cross the lines in yet another provocation.
But scabs
don't last long in the
regular work force after a strike is over, said Peter Wade.
"Historically these guys don't survive after they cross the picket
line. Just going by the experience after the Falconbridge strike, a
year after, they're not working there."
Scabs don't
survive well
anywhere. Not only strikers, but the whole community - families,
relatives, neighbourhoods - remember who crossed and who didn't. After
all, the future of the whole community is at stake today. The wages of
unionized miners at Vale Inco and Xstrata (Falconbridge) keep the
community, including small businesses, afloat.
As strikers
hold up contractors
and scabs heading in and out of worksites, members of Locals 2020 and
6600 bring coffee and donuts to the strikers, along with news of what's
going on inside, and the promise that "we're working like
turtles!"
Workers who
refuse to cross the lines can be fired under Ontario's medieval labour
laws.
The company
has repeatedly taken
the union to court seeking injunctions to speed up traffic in and out
of the struck sites. The union has between 12 and 15 minutes to
let
the last truck in the line through, or face fines and restrictions on
picketing.
The union
has sent delegations
around the world to meet with trade unions where Vale refines its
products. The unions have responded with shows of solidarity including
offers to shut down production to increase pressure on Vale to return
to the bargaining table and bargain in good faith. A September rally in
Sudbury featured union representatives from around the globe, along
with USWA leaders from Canada and the US.
The pressure
is on to get the
company back to the bargaining table. The union is expected to announce
that it's ready to restart negotiations December 1, and invite the
company to join them to reach an agreement. Vale has refused to bargain
since negotiations broke off and the strike began on July 13.
Sault Ste.
Marie Mayor Rowswell
released a letter supporting Sudbury strikers in early November. The
Sault is another mining town in Northern Ontario that has also seen
workers and community victimized by hard times and vicious companies,
and right-wing governments. So far, Sudbury's NDP Mayor Rodriguez has
said nothing about the strike, while Sudbury Liberal MPP Bartolucci
told CBC Radio he can't support the strike because his constituents
don't support it. But in fact the community seems quite solidly behind
the strikers - no surprise given that Sudbury is all about mining.
Sudbury's NDP MPs have supported the strike, and are working with the
union. Sudbury Communists are also active on picket lines and in the
community.
In fact, the
CAW's Mine-Mill
Local 598 could very well be joining strikers in February if Xstrata
takes the same bargaining approach as Vale. Stay tuned.
(Rowley is the Ontario leader of the
Communist Party.)
2) YET ANOTHER
ACCUSATION OF RCMP TASER KILLING
(The following
article is from the December 1-31, 2009, issue of People's Voice,
Canada's
leading communist
newspaper. Articles can be reprinted free if the source is credited.
Subscription rates in Canada: $30/year, or $15 low income rate; for
U.S. readers - $45 US per year; other overseas readers - $45 US or $50
CDN per year. Send to:
People's Voice, c/o PV Business Manager, 133
Herkimer St., Unit 502, Hamilton, ON, L8P 2H3.)
PV Vancouver Bureau
Yet another fatality in which the
RCMP used a Taser has been brought to light. The case strengthens the
argument that police violence against Aboriginal prisoners in custody
is a frequent reality, not an isolated aberration.
The Union of
BC Indian Chiefs
(UBCIC) and BC Civil Liberties Association (BCCLA) held a news
conference on Nov. 16 to demand the release of security footage taken
in an RCMP lockup that shows the Taser-related death of Clayton Alvin
Willie, an Aboriginal man. Under increasing pressure, the RCMP finally
agreed a day later to release the footage. Until now, the force had
resisted this demand, citing "privacy concerns," despite receiving a
notarized release from Clayton Willie's family.
Willie was
arrested July 21,
2003 for creating a public disturbance in Prince George, British
Columbia. He died 16 hours later, with injuries including a skull
fracture, broken teeth, multiple broken ribs, and ruptured bowels.
Security
camera footage of the
incident was edited by the RCMP, which retains a copy of the edited
footage. Representatives of the UBCIC and BCCLA, along with forensic
pathologist Dr. John Butt and Leonard Cler-Cunningham, the independent
journalist who uncovered the existence of the video, have viewed the
edited footage.
"Even the
edited footage shows
Mr. Willie hog tied and being dragged around the Prince George RCMP
detachment and being Tasered while lying helpless on his stomach," said
UBCIC Grand Chief Stewart Phillip. "If you treated any animal the way
Mr. Willie was treated, there is little doubt that you would be facing
criminal cruelty charges. Astonishingly, the officers involved here are
still on active duty."
In January
2009, two of the RCMP
officers involved in the Willie case were found by Provincial Court
Judge Michael Brecknell to have taken deliberate steps to ensure the
loss of Prince George detachment videotape of another Taser abuse
allegation. The RCMP will not confirm whether those officers are still
on active duty, but media reports indicate that investigative action
was taken by the RCMP into that finding.
There are no
date or time codes
in the edited videotape of Clayton Willie. The video shows an RCMP SUV
arriving at the Prince George Detachment garage, then cuts away before
the hog-tied Willie is pulled from the back seat and allowed to drop,
full weight, on his chest and possibly on his face. He is then dragged
down a hallway, tethered and with hands bound behind his back, into an
elevator. His head hits the doorway on his way into the elevator and he
does not register any response.
In the
elevator, an RCMP officer
can be seen kneeling down and applying the Taser to Clayton Willie's
back. He is then dragged out into the booking area of the detachment. A
number of RCMP officers are seen observing while the two male officers
use the Taser at least twice more against Willie. He appears to lose
consciousness, and an ambulance arrives some 45 minutes after the
initial arrest.
At the
request of the ambulance
attendants, RCMP officers loosen Willie's handcuffs because his hands
are "black." Still hog tied, Willie is seen being loaded onto the
stretcher, wrapped in blankets, and taken to the local hospital. He has
a massive heart attack en route to the hospital and later dies, which
is not shown on the video.
Dr. John
Butt noted that the
"touch stun" used against Clayton Willie is a less debilitating Taser
mode, but it is not clear how many times it was deployed. He questioned
why police would Taser a man who was already tied up and face down, and
called it a "cruel and unnecessary act."
The RCMP
investigation found
that all interactions with Clayton Willie were "routine" and there was
no discipline as a result. A coroner's inquest concluded that Willie
died of a cocaine overdose, despite his severe injuries and Taser burns.
More
information on the case is
on this Facebook site: "Please help the Willey family put a stop to
Tazer deaths in our country."
3) QUEBEC SOVEREIGNTY: A
MEANS OR A GOAL?
(The following
article is from the December 1-31, 2009, issue of People's Voice,
Canada's
leading communist
newspaper. Articles can be reprinted free if the source is credited.
Subscription rates in Canada: $30/year, or $15 low income rate; for
U.S. readers - $45 US per year; other overseas readers - $45 US or $50
CDN per year. Send to:
People's Voice, c/o PV Business Manager, 133
Herkimer St., Unit 502, Hamilton, ON, L8P 2H3.)
PV Québec Bureau
"Enough of
defeatism and small
steps, re-mobilize Québecers around independence" has become the
final
slogan of Québec Solidaire's recent policy congress in Laval,
held in
late November after months of debate. The declaration marks a shift by
the new left political party on the national question towards a clear
pro-separation position.
Until this
congress, Québec
Solidaire was a united party of the left, incorporating different
perspectives on the question of Québec's relationship with
Canada.
"Before, they viewed the project of sovereignty as a secondary tool to
realize a social and environmental program," Pierre Fontaine, leader of
the Communist Party of Québec, told People's Voice. "From a means,
sovereignty has became a goal in itself."
Québec Solidaire was formed in
2006 from a fusion of Option Citoyenne and the Union des forces
progressistes (a federated party including the Communist Party). It has
come under increasing pressure to adopt a more nationalist position
since Amir Khadir's breakthrough victory as the QS candidate in the
Montreal riding of Mercier in the November 2008 provincial election.
"The door is
now open for
compromises with nationalist bourgeois forces - like the Parti
Québécois (PQ)," Fontaine said. Part of the discussion
proposed a
united front with groups like the Société
Saint-Jean-Baptiste, trade
unions, students, environmentalists, feminists, and "sovereigntist
parties" for national independence.
"Jacques
Parizeau discusses the
absolute necessity to renew the discourse on sovereignty. In
Québec
Solidaire, we totally agree. Over the years, the rhetoric of
independence has been rendered meaningless by some separatists who
wanted to make Quebec a country without a [social justice] project,"
president and spokesperson for Québec Solidaire, Francoise
David, said
in a statement to the media.
This
position, however, will
likely lose support among progressives who do not consider separation
the primary question today. The proposal was opposed by various
speakers from the floor. Arthur Sandborn, former leader of the
Confederation of National Trade Unions (Montreal Council) announced his
resignation after the final resolution passed.
"In fact,
the claim that
Canadian federalism can not be reformed presumes that the bourgeoisie
will forever be in power and the actual political conditions will never
change," Fontaine said. "Change is only possible because in
Québec
there exists a bourgeois movement for sovereignty. The question of
fundamental social transformation isn't asked."
"Those
responsible for national
oppression are the ruling class in Canada, and the capitalist system,"
Fontaine said. "Communists defend, within the working class, the right
of self-determination, including separation, to promote the unity of
the working people and their allies against their common enemy."
Fontaine
highlighted the
Communist Party's long-standing proposal that these rights be enshrined
in a new, democratic and equal constitution for all nations in Canada.
"This is necessarily linked to the fight for socialism."
Québec's grievances and
discontents are again under discussion following October's Supreme
Court ruling striking down Bill 104, on the contentious issue of the
choice of school where parents, especially immigrant parents, send
their children.
Given the
benefits of speaking
English in Quebec, including a higher salary and higher quality of
life, immigrant communities have long opted to send their children to
English-speaking schools, integrating into the English-Canadian
minority rather the French majority. In response to this pressure on
the French language, the PQ brought in legislation restricting access
to English-language schools.
Quebec's
Charter of the French
Language says that children should receive, without exception,
instruction in French. Article 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and
Freedoms, however, stipulates that citizens of Canada "who have
received their primary school instruction in Canada in English or
French ... have the right to have their children receive primary and
secondary school instruction in that language in that province."
"The problem
is that you have
formal equality in an unequal situation between the two languages,"
Fontaine said. "If it were up to the Canadian Constitution, French
would be condemned to steadily disappear."
Before Bill
104 was passed, many
parents sent their children to private English schools (unsubsidized by
the Ministry of Education) for a short time to claim the constitutional
right to education in English. Sisters, brothers and possible
descendants of a student who won the right to an education in English
could, in turn, legally attend an English school in Quebec.
This
loophole raised a public
outcry, since it allowed immigrants to circumvent the law. Bill 104
closed the loophole, the Supreme Court decision has opened it again.
The response from Québecers has been great concern. Several
hundred
nationalists and trade unionists organized a rally against the decision
a few days after it took place.
"The
Québec nation should have
the right to defend the French language," Fontaine said. "This is
another example of the failure of the Canadian constitution to
recognize Québec's right to self-determination."
4) EXPLOITATION SOARS,
UNEMPLOYMENT JUMPS!
(The following
article is from the December 1-31, 2009, issue of People's Voice,
Canada's
leading communist
newspaper. Articles can be reprinted free if the source is credited.
Subscription rates in Canada: $30/year, or $15 low income rate; for
U.S. readers - $45 US per year; other overseas readers - $45 US or $50
CDN per year. Send to:
People's Voice, c/o PV Business Manager, 133
Herkimer St., Unit 502, Hamilton, ON, L8P 2H3.)
By Zoltan Zigedy, from http://www.mltoday.com
This sure is some recovery! The first
week in November brought remarkable results for an economy widely held
to be on the mend. Earnings of corporations are on the rise, the stock
market is perking up, and the Administration is claiming credit for
pulling the economy back from the brink and setting it well on the
course to health.
But in the
other world, the
world outside of Wall Street, gated communities, and the political
elite, the news is catastrophic, pushing the misery index dramatically
higher.
The rate of
exploitation [of
U.S. workers], as measured by output per hour of labour has increased
by 9.6% in the third quarter of this year, more than four times its
average growth over the last 25 years. This increase comes on the heels
of a 6.9% rise in the second quarter.
Put simply,
these numbers mean
that for every worker engaged in some form of productive activity, on
average, he or she produced almost 10% more in the third quarter of
this year over the same quarter last year. Intuitively, this means that
the capitalist system has squeezed another dollar in value from workers
who produced ten dollars in value last year. Or, put another way, for
every hour of labour, workers were forced to do 10% more productive
work.
Some might
respond that it
doesn't follow that workers necessarily worked harder for these
productivity gains. That may well be true in some cases, but we have
other Labour Department data that bear on this matter. We also know
that total employment is on the decline. In addition, the Labour
Department reports that the hours worked were down again for the ninth
straight quarter. Combine that fact with a 4% rise in output, and it's
pretty clear that workers were squeezed harder.
Capitalist
apologists would be
quick to point out - and they always do - that other factors may
contribute to productivity increases besides worker effort such as
technological innovations and investment in more efficient equipment
and techniques. This response evaporates in the face of the dramatic
decline in investment brought on by the broad economic crisis.
Of course it
would be possible
that workers worked harder because they wanted to make more money,
producing more because they wanted to earn a commensurately larger
compensation. This, however, is belied by the fact that unit labour
costs were down 5.2% in the third quarter: every unit of value produced
earned the workers 5.2% less than it did in the third quarter of 2008.
We have then
a stubborn fact:
workers worked a lot harder most of this year than they did last year
with a smaller share of the value produced.
This
stubborn fact goes
unacknowledged and unexplained. It will not be discussed on the Sunday
morning talk shows. The media - from The New York Times to the organs
of the labour movement - will pass over this fact, often hailing it as
a harbinger of recovery. Academic and working economists assign it no
special place, no event of great consequence.
It is only
in the Marxist
tradition that this fact occupies a central role and is properly
explained. In fact, it is the fundamental notion in the political
economy of Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, exposing the primary
mechanism of profit generation in the capitalist mode of production. In
the end, they argued, increases in the rate of profit come from workers
getting a smaller portion of the product of their labour. They labelled
this measure the rate of exploitation. From the Marxist perspective,
the capitalist class intensifies exploitation - raises its rate - to
restore or increase the rate of profit. Indeed, this is axiomatic in
the Marxist system.
While
mainstream economists
strain to explain the rise in profits and the stock market in the face
of climbing unemployment and slack consumption, they refuse to attend
to the role of labour exploitation in this development.
In our time,
this sharp increase in labour exploitation signals two disturbing
truths:
1. The relative strength and
privilege of capital. Monopoly capital wields sufficient power,
unrestrained by the organs of popular sovereignty - the government, to
extract dramatically more effort from the working class.
2. The relative weakness of labour.
The labour movement lacks sufficient strength, determination, or
government influence to at the very least retain a proportionate share
of the product of its efforts.
Thus, the
burden of the capitalist recovery - profits and stock equity
values is borne squarely by the working class.
(In Part 2 of this article, to
appear in our next issue, the author examines the impact of rising
unemployment on U.S. working people.)
5) CLIMATE CHANGE -
A MATTER OF LIFE AND DEATH
(The following
article is from the December 1-31, 2009, issue of People's Voice,
Canada's
leading communist
newspaper. Articles can be reprinted free if the source is credited.
Subscription rates in Canada: $30/year, or $15 low income rate; for
U.S. readers - $45 US per year; other overseas readers - $45 US or $50
CDN per year. Send to:
People's Voice, c/o PV Business Manager, 133
Herkimer St., Unit 502, Hamilton, ON, L8P 2H3.)
By Anna Pha, Guardian (newspaper of the Communist Party of Australia),
Nov. 18, 2009
Five days of heavy negotiating in
Barcelona came to a disappointing close on November 6. The last
negotiating session before the Copenhagen conference on climate change
in December was undermined and obstructed at every turn by a group of
developed countries. The hopes and expectations of developing countries
and millions of people around the world were dashed as the rich
countries attempted to kill the Kyoto Protocol and dimmed the prospects
of success at Copenhagen.
"When we ask
why they are not
willing to put numbers on the table they said it is economically and
politically difficult. But for us it is a question of life and death,
due to the climate change impact brought about by the actions and the
lifestyles in the North." These comments from Grace Ukamu of Kenya, who
spoke on behalf of the Africa Group, sum up the great divide between
the North and South, the rich and the poor nations on the question of
arresting climate change.
Today we
speak about
disappearing animal species but tomorrow we may be speaking of
disappearing states, said the representative of Cape Verde. Developing
countries are the most vulnerable and have a right to expect convincing
actions and political will, the delegate said, expressing the
frustration and urgency felt by many other negotiators. Australia, the
US, Japan and New Zealand were amongst those developed nations that
ducked and dodged their obligations and failed to submit scientifically
based targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Their aim was a
political, non-legally binding, agreement outside of the Kyoto Protocol.
The key
issues before the
Barcelona conference were the future of the Kyoto Protocol; the setting
of new global and country-specific targets for emission reductions by
developed countries; the provision of finance and technology to enable
developing countries to take action; and attempts to shift the burden
onto developing countries contrary to the principles of the UN
Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
Kyoto Protocol
The Kyoto Protocol (KP) is
international law, a legally binding treaty under the UNFCCC which has
been ratified by 189 of the NFCCC's 197 Parties. The US is the only
major industrialised economy that is not a party to the KP. The KP
provides for a series of commitment periods to address climate change.
The first
commitment period of
2008-2012 set the global target of a 5.2 percent reduction in emissions
compared with 1990 (the base year) levels. The Copenhagen conference in
December was scheduled to finalise global targets and individual
country commitments for the second commitment period to commence in
2013.
Contrary to
claims by some
governments and media in developed countries, the KP does NOT expire in
2012. The year 2012 is the when the first commitment period ends.
One of the
most important
principles of the UNFCCC is "common but differentiated
responsibilities". This principle is based on the recognition that
developed countries are principally responsible for the current high
levels of greenhouse gas emissions in the atmosphere. It takes into
account that economic and social development and poverty eradication
are the first and overriding priorities of developing countries.
In
accordance with this
principle, 37 industrialised countries and the European Union (EU) have
legally binding targets under the KP, based on their specific
conditions, to reduce or limit emissions by 2012. Australia is one of
only two countries permitted to increase emissions over that period.
The
developing countries gave
commitments to collect and submit data and formulate and implement
mitigation and adaptation measures - this commitment is conditional on
receiving financial and technological assistance which the developed
nations are legally bound to provide. Needless to say they have failed
to provide the required assistance and this remains one of the big
issues still to be resolved, although some progress was made on
possible mechanisms.
A series of
negotiations on
second round KP commitments began almost four years ago. In 2007,
negotiations in Bali saw the industrialised countries forced into
accepting an Action Plan. The Bali Action Plan commits governments to
reaching agreement on the following issues at the Copenhagen meeting:
* mitigation - actions to avoid and
reduce emissions of heat-trapping greenhouse gases
* adaptation - actions to deal with
the effects of climate change (it is the poorest countries that are the
most vulnerable and have the least means to take adaptation measures)
* finance and technology - the means
by which developing countries are to be assisted by developed countries
to take action.
Emission cuts
The
Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change found that aggregate emission reduction by
industrialised countries of between 25% and 40% over 1990 levels would
be required by 2020, and that global emissions would need to be reduced
by at least 50% by 2050, in order to stave off the worst effects of
climate change. These targets, which aim at limiting the temperature
increase to 2 degrees Celsius, are now being questioned by scientists
as more findings on climate change come to light.
Those
countries already
experiencing loss of life, extreme weather conditions or slipping into
the ocean want to do more than "stave off the worst effects of climate
change".
At Barcelona
developing
countries were calling for an aggregate reduction of 40% by 2020
compared with 1990. According to estimates by the Alliance of Small
Island States the offers being made (including the US) amount to an
11-17% reduction in emission levels that falls alarmingly below what is
required by scientific assessments.
Many of the
most vulnerable
countries are calling for an increase in temperature of less than 1.5
degrees. The Alliance of Small Island States pointed out that the
temperature increase is already at 0.8 degrees and the impacts are
being felt.
Which ever
way you look at it,
Australia's proposal for 5-15% by 2020 (based on a slight-of-hand year
2000 base, not 1990) or 25% conditional on certain outcomes, is
offensive, morally reprehensible and totally inadequate for a rich
country.
Japan and
the EU were amongst
other treaty partners who also played the game of making targets
conditional upon what others were prepared to do. Shyam Saran,
representing India, made the point that they were going around in
circles to the refrain of: "I will show you my targets, when you show
me yours." What was required were responsible commitments based on
science.
Some
proposals had built into
them requirements that developing countries make substantial cuts in
emissions, contrary to the principle of "common but differentiated
responsibilities". Needless to say, these were not even accompanied by
offers to provide the necessary financial and technological assistance.
There were
strong differences
over the use of offsets where developed countries could through
emissions trading and other mechanisms substantially reduce the actual
domestic reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. The African Group
directly questioned how much domestic effort was being made by the
industrialised countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions as against
relying on offsets from carbon credits generated by developing
countries. This amounted to shifting the burden onto developing
countries.
Estimations
by developing
countries on the level of financial commitment required from the
industrialised nations to assist them with mitigation and adaptation
ranged from 1-5% of gross national product. Most of the developed
countries failed to respond with offers, although the EU did make one
considered far short of what is required. There were also strong
differences over how the funds would be managed, and the role of
markets and the private sector.
Technology transfer was another area
where developed countries were reluctant to meet their obligations, the
high cost of privately patented technology adding to their difficulties.
Future of Kyoto
It was clear
from the Barcelona
conference that most of the industrialised nations have no intention of
reaching agreement at Copenhagen for a second round under the KP. This
is evident in their failure to submit serious, scientifically based
targets for greenhouse gas reductions. The political will was not
there, a fact noted by a number of other countries. In sharp contrast,
developing countries were strongly committed to retaining the KP and
advancing it to the next round.
The
Australian government
prefers to work outside of the democratic UNFCCC framework. This was
seen most recently at the G20 - its favoured body for international
decision-making - and again this week at APEC, with calls for a
political agreement on emission reductions. There are strong parallels
here with its snubbing of the UN's conference on the global economic
crisis and promotion of the G20 as the world's leading body on economic
policy.
The Labor
government has
previously claimed that the KP expires in 2012 but appears to have
backed off explicitly repeating this lie. The real danger is that the
KP might be killed in 2012 by the actions of developed nations and
their corporate patrons who have also played a role in climate change
negotiations.
Japan spoke
in terms of a new
single legal framework retaining a number of elements and useful
mechanisms of the KP. Australia also talked in terms of a "single
outcome", ratifiable under the UNFCCC. The single outcome refers to
attempts to dissolve the KP and retain a weakened UNFCCC, with new
arrangements that reflect mitigation "ambitions" and clear rules for
the carbon market.
One of the
most positive
developments at Barcelona and other climate change negotiations in
recent years is the refusal of the third world nations to be bullied
and trampled over. The G77 and China, the African Group, the Least
Developed Countries, the Alliance of Small Island States as well as
individual countries including some of the smallest nations stood firm
- for them it was a matter of life and death, not GDPs and corporate
profits.
India
strongly made the point
that it was not prepared to give up or declare failure at Barcelona or
lower its expectations at Copenhagen. While developed countries fail to
take the lead, India would not slacken off. In many ways the poorer
nations were doing much more on climate change than their rich partners
despite severe limitations of modest resources, India noted.
China & India
At the
closing session, Su Wei,
head of China's delegation, delivered a strong warning: "To those
developed countries who are standing there waiting for developing
countries to act, please look ahead... We, the developing countries,
have already left you behind; you cannot use developing countries as an
excuse for your inaction any more. Please wake up and see that
Copenhagen is just miles away, you have to get running in order to
catch up. Otherwise, you will fail in the race to Copenhagen and
beyond."
The
developing countries will be
approaching Copenhagen with determination in sharp contrast to the
short-sighted, narrow attitude of the profit-driven capitalist
countries. Capitalism is proving incapable of saving the planet.
The
leadership given by China,
India and the other developing nations, alongside the struggles on the
ground of the millions of people around the world who are fighting for
the planet and life on earth are the only hope that remains.
Acknowledgements to Third World
Network, http://www.twnside.org.au,
whose reportage has provided much of the
information in this article.
6) CANADA IN BARCELONA
- NO BOY SCOUT
(The following
article is from the December 1-31, 2009, issue of People's Voice,
Canada's
leading communist
newspaper. Articles can be reprinted free if the source is credited.
Subscription rates in Canada: $30/year, or $15 low income rate; for
U.S. readers - $45 US per year; other overseas readers - $45 US or $50
CDN per year. Send to:
People's Voice, c/o PV Business Manager, 133
Herkimer St., Unit 502, Hamilton, ON, L8P 2H3.)
By Kimball Cariou
Canada joined with the United States
in telling other countries at the UN climate talks in Barcelona in
early November that it wants a less binding, less ambitious, and less
fair global climate deal.
"Canada's
government has
switched from promising repeatedly to get tough on polluters to instead
saying it will get tough on the poorest people in the world in watering
down a climate deal," said Steven Guilbeault of Equiterre. "If this is
what Minister Prentice means by not being a `boy scout,' then it means
that the life support systems of the planet are in deep trouble."
"The
Canadian government is
clearly doing the bidding of Alberta and the tar sands," said Graham
Saul of Climate Action Network Canada. "They just keep trying to throw
wrenches into the works."
The Climate
Action Network says
it remains optimistic that the elements of a strong deal are still on
the table, that a fair, ambitious, and legally binding agreement can be
reached at the UN climate summit in Copenhagen in December. The Network
stresses that science says that any agreement must limit global
temperature increase well below 2 degrees C, and emissions must peak by
the year 2015, as indicated by the International Panel on Climate
Change's last assessment report.
Environmental groups also warn
that the deal to be reached in December must also provide adequate
financing from rich, polluting countries for adaptation and mitigation
in developing countries as well as a fair contribution of mitigation
action from large developing countries.
"The
Canadian Government needs
to live up to the promises it has been making for years," said Dale
Marshall of the David Suzuki Foundation. "That means finally producing
regulations to tackle global warming pollution that are based on the
best climate science and that are worthy of being brought to this
crucial global summit."
"The
Canadian Government has
proven that it will not give up its laggard role in these critical
negotiations. This government knows perfectly well what needs to happen
to make Copenhagen a success and they need to get their act together
and come up with a plan," said Virginie Lambert Ferry of Greenpeace
Canada.
Shortly
after the Barcelona
meeting, a coalition of leading non-governmental organizations called
on Prime Minister Stephen Harper to join over 40 world leaders who have
already accepted an invitation to attend the United Nations climate
summit this month in Copenhagen.
"This is a
time for
statesmanship. World leaders are gathering in Copenhagen to find common
cause on the most urgent issue of our time. Mr. Harper must go and
represent Canada," said John Bennett, Executive Director of Sierra Club
of Canada.
"Canadians
expect Mr. Harper to
be there and to bring home a successful agreement," said Mark Fried,
policy coordinator at Oxfam Canada. "We have a chance to be leaders -
particularly on adaptation funding for developing countries. Perhaps
international pressure will influence him in a way that Canadians
haven't yet been able to."
At present,
Canada's emissions
target falls far short of what the science demands, and Canada has made
no meaningful commitments to provide financial support to poorer
countries to tackle climate change.
"On the
world stage, Canada is
being seen as an obstacle to success at these negotiations. Attending
the climate summit would prove that the Stephen Harper government isn't
only looking out for the interests of the Alberta tar sands and is
serious about responding to this crisis," said Graham Saul, Executive
Director of Climate Action Network Canada. "The current government
needs to realize the opportunity in front of us. The U.S. is already
outspending Canada 14 to 1, per capita, on investments in renewable
energy, and Europe has been ahead of the game on this for years. Harper
needs to commit to Copenhagen today so we can get Canada back in the
game."
But evidence
continues to mount
that the Harper government is more concerned about energy industry
profits than the environment or public health. In the latest
development, a new Greenpeace report says the government plans to short
change Canadian victims of nuclear accidents by allowing reactor
operators to provide billions less in industry compensation than other
western countries in the event of a reactor accident.
"By capping
the nuclear
industry's liability for accident clean up and damage to health at an
unrealistic level the Harper government shows it thinks Canadians
deserve less industry compensation than nuclear victims in other
countries," said Shawn-Patrick Stensil, Greenpeace's energy campaigner.
"Why should nuclear operators get subsidies while victims pay?"
The report, The Nuclear
Liability and Compensation Act: Is it Appropriate for the 21st
Century?, was released on Nov. 16 to coincide with federal
hearings on
the proposed Nuclear Liability and Compensation Act. The report warns
that the legislation's artificial cap of $650 million on reactor
operator liability doesn't meet international standards and would hurt
the growth of green power by relieving the nuclear industry of the
responsibility of paying sufficient insurance costs. The report
estimates the legislation would effectively subsidize nuclear operators
from $4.8 billion to 9.7 billion annually.
"Unlike
other energy sources the
nuclear industry has this special law to relieve it of paying its own
insurance costs," said Stensil. "This creates an unfair playing field
for green energy and would force Canadians to pay for the nuclear
industry's pollution." A massive taxpayer liability has
been created
by shifting responsibility for nuclear accidents from the nuclear
industry to the federal taxpayer. The report recommends legislation to
require the nuclear industry to pay its own clean up and damage costs
and publicly report any taxpayer liabilities.
The nuclear
industry needs this
special legal protection, the report says, because insurers and even
nuclear vendors consider reactor accidents a realistic possibility that
would bankrupt them. Instead of addressing the fundamental design flaws
that make all current and proposed reactors vulnerable to
Chernobyl-style accidents or terrorist attacks, the industry and its
regulators have downplayed accident risks with the public by failing to
examine or publicly release information on nuclear accidents. The
report calls for disclosure of such information.
At present,
Canadian victims of
a nuclear accident would receive $650 million in industry-insured
compensation, Americans over $10 billion and victims in Western Europe
and Japan $1.2 billion. Germany has no limit on the liability of
nuclear operators.
The nuclear
industry's own
studies contradict the Harper government's proposal that $650 million
is sufficient and show that a small-scale foreseeable accident at the
Pickering B nuclear station would cause $1.2 billion in health damages
alone. The health costs of a Chernobyl-style accident would top $50
billion.
The impact
of avoided insurance
premiums permitted by the current legislation is equivalent to a 5.4 to
11 cents a kilowatt hour subsidy to nuclear operators and deters green
power development.
Greenpeace
says the legislation
is more proof the nuclear industry has failed to innovate and build
safer and cheaper reactors despite billions in public subsidies. In
May, Ontario demanded the Harper government dole out billions in
subsidies to build the untested prototype Advanced CANDU from Atomic
Energy of Canada Limited.
"A few years
ago the nuclear
industry claimed it could build reactors without public subsidy, but
today it wants massive public bailouts and protection from nuclear
accidents. Harper's accident legislation shows nuclear power is neither
cheap nor safe," said Stensil.
7) HANDCUFFS FOR HARPER
AND HILLIER?
(The following
article is from the December 1-31, 2009, issue of People's Voice,
Canada's
leading communist
newspaper. Articles can be reprinted free if the source is credited.
Subscription rates in Canada: $30/year, or $15 low income rate; for
U.S. readers - $45 US per year; other overseas readers - $45 US or $50
CDN per year. Send to:
People's Voice, c/o PV Business Manager, 133
Herkimer St., Unit 502, Hamilton, ON, L8P 2H3.)
People's Voice Editorial
Wiser heads among the ruling class
want PM Stephen Harper to call a judicial enquiry into the latest
accusations of Canada's role in the torture of prisoners in
Afghanistan, in hopes of taking the issue off the front burner. But it
appears so far that the Tories aim to brazen their way out by hurling
slanders and abuse at diplomat Richard Colvin and the opposition
parties.
On the
substance of the matter,
there is no room for confusion. During his tenure at the Canadian
embassy in Kabul, Colvin repeatedly warned about torture of local
residents turned over to Afghan police and military units by Canadian
troops. Colvin was thorough in his documentation, and careful to follow
regular diplomatic procedures. His allegations are widely backed by all
knowledgeable observers of the situation in Afghanistan. Rather than
Taliban fighters, most of the Afghans who had the misfortune to be
picked up by "our brave troops" were innocent taxi drivers or farmers,
who then faced the "standard operating procedure" of Afghan authorities
- from electrical shock torture to other forms of physical and sexual
abuse.
The actions
of the Canadian
Armed Forces are a blatant violation of international law. In short,
Canada - and the Harper Tories who carried out a blundering cover-up -
have committed grave war crimes.
A judicial
enquiry into this
disaster would no doubt unearth more appalling details, making it more
difficult for future governments to send the CAF abroad to help
slaughter other peoples who become targets of U.S. imperialism and its
allies. But more to the point, the politicians and generals at the top
of the chain of command should face charges for their criminal actions.
Stephen Harper, Peter MacKay, Rick Hillier: time to face the music.
8) TIME TO PAY "CLIMATE DEBT"
(The following
article is from the December 1-31, 2009, issue of People's Voice,
Canada's
leading communist
newspaper. Articles can be reprinted free if the source is credited.
Subscription rates in Canada: $30/year, or $15 low income rate; for
U.S. readers - $45 US per year; other overseas readers - $45 US or $50
CDN per year. Send to:
People's Voice, c/o PV Business Manager, 133
Herkimer St., Unit 502, Hamilton, ON, L8P 2H3.)
People's Voice Editorial
After the disappointment of
Barcelona, some world leaders are spinning optimistic scenarios for a
positive outcome of the Conference on Climate Change. But developing
countries have sharply criticized the downgrading of expectations for
Copenhagen.
Speaking at
the UN General
Assembly, Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon, rejected gloomy projections,
countering with examples of individual countries' pledges to cut
greenhouse gas emissions. But Sudan, speaking for G77 countries which
it chairs, and China, have expressed a very different view. The G77
stresses that Copenhagen must adopt the second commitment period of the
Kyoto Protocol, which implements the legal commitment of industrialised
countries to reduce emissions. Instead, the developed countries want to
drop this Protocol, creating the present impasse. Without a Kyoto
Protocol decision, Copenhagen cannot succeed, despite claims that the
conference can somehow "lay the foundation" for a legally-binding
agreement.
Many climate
activists now see
Copenhagen as an chance to expose business-friendly half-measures, such
as carbon offsets and emissions trading, and to step up the fight for
non-market policies to help keep coal and oil in the ground. For
example, "climate debt" is the idea that rich countries should pay
reparations to poor countries for the climate crisis. Such a concept
identifies the contrast between the developed capitalist countries
which caused the crisis, and the developing world which suffers its
worst effects. Even the World Bank explains it this way: over 75% of
the damages caused by global warming will be suffered by developing
countries, which emit only one-third of greenhouse gases.
In other
words, the imperialist
system which has ravaged the planet for over two centuries in pursuit
of private profit must now pay the bill. This is the bottom line of the
emerging struggle for the future of planet earth.
9) HAMMOND ELECTED NEW
B.C. COMMUNIST LEADER
(The following
article is from the December 1-31, 2009, issue of People's Voice,
Canada's
leading communist
newspaper. Articles can be reprinted free if the source is credited.
Subscription rates in Canada: $30/year, or $15 low income rate; for
U.S. readers - $45 US per year; other overseas readers - $45 US or $50
CDN per year. Send to:
People's Voice, c/o PV Business Manager, 133
Herkimer St., Unit 502, Hamilton, ON, L8P 2H3.)
Meeting on Nov. 15, delegates to the
38th B.C. convention of the Communist Party elected Sam Hammond as the
party's new provincial leader. Outgoing leader George Gidora, who had
served in that position for the past fifteen years, was among 15
members elected to the new BC Provincial Committee of the CPC.
The
convention heard reports on
growth of the party in the province this year, with members joining in
several areas. Among the most recent is in Trail, where a new club will
soon be organized. Many of the new members are active in the
progressive South Asian and Latino communities.
A report
from the outgoing
Provincial Executive, presented by Sam Hammond, analyzed recent
political and social developments in the province, especially since the
May 2009 provincial election. That campaign, the report notes, "did not
develop into a massive fight back to dump the Liberals mainly because
the NDP decided to move to the right and compete with the Liberals. The
Liberals softened their rhetoric, hid their main agenda, claimed that
BC was unaffected by the recession, promised a balanced budget with
only a small possible deficit, lauded the economic wealth to arrive
with the 2010 Olympics and schmoozed their way with a compliant media
to a narrow majority.
"The NDP
failed to grasp the
opportunity to win working class and popular support, expose the
recession or launch a political offensive that could have brought out
the anti-corporate vote; in fact in a pre-election interview Carol
James said that the NDP would also cut corporate taxes if elected. They
played down the problems with the Olympics, the threat to civil rights,
the use of First Nations Land and the repressive measures and by-laws
being enacted. They did not scream very loud about the closing mills,
the softwood lumber deal, NAFTA or the scandalous privatization of BC
Rail and the ongoing sellout of Hydro and energy resources.
"The NDP
also did not exploit
the effects and the looming danger to BC of the world wide economic
crisis which the Liberals chose to ignore during the election period.
In short the NDP did not concentrate on the working class issues but
opted to compete with the Liberals on their own ground in a parallel
campaign. The result was the lowest voter turnout in BC history and a
bland election that saw the Liberals and the NDP fighting over the same
bone while significant numbers of people became spectators of a contest
where they did not see their interests represented."
As the
report outlines, the
global financial crisis has had a heavy impact on the B.C. economy, for
example by slashing resource revenues. At the same time, the Liberals
have moved to shift $1.9 billion from working people and small business
to the corporations with the imposition of a Harmonized Sales Tax. The
HST, the largest transfer of wealth in the history of British Columbia,
has sparked a tremendous public backlash, which has been taken
advantage of by former Social Credit Premier Vander Zalm and other
right wingers. But rather than dissuading the left from joining the
anti-HST fight, as some have done, the Communists have helped build
this struggle, taking to the streets in Surrey, Abbotsford and
Vancouver as part of the "People's Forum" movement.
Meanwhile,
the Liberals have
used the economic crisis to push their right-wing agenda, by slashing
spending on social programs, health care, and education. They have kept
up their attacks on organized workers, youth, and First Nations.
"Most of the
province's public
sector unions will be in negotiations soon," the report notes, "and it
is apparent that the government will seek no major confrontations until
after the Olympics are over. When the spotlight of world coverage is
gone and the business community has slaked itself on the Olympics the
other shoe will surely drop. If labour, and especially the public
sector unions, do not properly prepare for the coming struggle there
could be a heavy price to pay," including a wage freeze which the
Liberals hope to impose on the public sector.
The BC
Communists are calling
for dramatic action to address the crisis, including major construction
of new social and low-income housing to reduce homelessness, improved
health care and education, an end to "public-private partnerships" and
other forms of privatization, and a big increase in the minimum wage,
which at $8/hour (and $6 for "first time workers") is now the lowest in
Canada.
10) "LORD OF THE FLIES
COLLEGIATE"?
(The following
article is from the December 1-31, 2009, issue of People's Voice,
Canada's
leading communist
newspaper. Articles can be reprinted free if the source is credited.
Subscription rates in Canada: $30/year, or $15 low income rate; for
U.S. readers - $45 US per year; other overseas readers - $45 US or $50
CDN per year. Send to:
People's Voice, c/o PV Business Manager, 133
Herkimer St., Unit 502, Hamilton, ON, L8P 2H3.)
Youth Fightback column, by Jamie
Burnett with Chuck Saunders
Google news search "boys schools"
today and you'll find major debate on a recent proposal coming out of
the Toronto District School Board. As TDSB Director of Education Dr.
Chris Spence has tweeted "in some instances single sex settings work."
His proposal is for an alternative school for boys, staffed mainly by
male teachers.
Dr. Spence's
"Male Leadership
Academy" responds to StatsCan numbers for 2006/7, showing that one out
of three boys don't graduate from high school, and one out of four
girls (often because of pregnancy). While receiving much debate on the
School Board, an Ottawa Citizen article quotes one male student as
saying "I don't want to read about princesses." Sadly, this is the
level of much of the debate. Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty (who
opposed afrocentric schools) vocally supports the idea.
We see two
general categories of
argument in support of "same sex schools". The first is the sexist
argument that "boys and girls are just different", often with
clarifications such as: girls like reading stories about princesses and
doing what they're told, while boys like running around, playing
baseball, making stuff out of wood, and learning about war, guns and
cool, tough things.
Hasn't
existing gendered
streaming (i.e. home economics vs. physics) and the TDSB putting armed
police into schools already done enough to make "Maxim High"?
But this
isn't simply to be
laughed off. It must be fiercely confronted as reactionary despite its
prominent and comfortable place in public discourse. The "learning
styles" (i.e. sexist gender roles) generally attributed to girls are
precisely those passive, subordinate positions imposed on both women
and students within our capitalist schools - which try to mould
students to be obedient, productive workers. The perceived "better
achievement" by girls responds to, and coincides with, their
subordinate role as students.
The second
argument is
considerably more sophisticated, but still problematic. It says boys
and girls are just uncomfortable together. Occasionally to this
argument is appended some vague reference to "hormones" - perhaps "the
uterus" and "hysteria"?
At worst
this reminds me of the
so-called "reformed KKK" argument: "I don't mind black people, we just
shouldn't mix." At best it supposes that young men, or women, or both,
just can't function in the presence of the opposite sex.
This
obscures the systemic
problems of sexism faced by women and girls, fostered by employers and
big business, government policies, the legal system, mass media,
schools, etc. (and too often reproduced by teachers and parents), by
claiming the problem is just their male peers. Any "disruptive effect"
is contingent on society. To think otherwise is to cede a terrain of
meaningful and necessary struggle.
What about
the comparison with afrocentric schools, another programme the TDSB
recently launched?
Unlike
afrocentric schools,
boys' schools would apparently not be open to all students nor exist
within a regular school. Unlike boys in general, black students face
sharp racism and discrimination. Ontario's curriculum arguably does
little to combat this and even perpetuates white supremacy (as well as
largely writing the working class out of history).
Are boys
somehow oppressed in
education? To be sure, like working class women, young working class
men will face exploitation and oppression their entire lives. (Out in
the daily grind women face gendered violence, and make less than men -
only 32% of unemployed women qualified for regular EI benefits compared
to 40% of unemployed men.) Which boys (and which girls) are most at
risk? But that is not what the supporters of a "Male leadership
academy" are asking.
Instead
their argument rests on
a fantastic misrepresentation about our education system being run by
anti-baseball, anti-war, pro-princess matriarchs. This is often couched
in a view that teachers, especially elementary school teachers, being
predominantly women, are poor role models or managers of boys -
analogous to the notion that boys can't be properly raised by single
mothers!
This too
needs to be confronted.
(And Dr. Spence does talk about youngsters facing a "fatherless
world.") On the one hand, his proposal goes against the "de-gendering"
of parenting and education as women's work. On the other hand, by
claiming the problem is women being teachers or parents, it attacks
women as workers and mothers. The implied idea that women actually run
and organize the education system, according to some dominating
feminine character, is ludicrous.
Despite
debate, all parties
agree that afrocentric schools are an attempt to ameliorate particular
conditions in an unhealthy society. There is no claim that gendering
schooling will somehow lead to greater equality. Combine all this with
the conception of boys as bossed around by big Mama, the idea that boys
and girls are just two solitudes, and their obedience to capitalist
schools is the key to success - and the whole project appears dangerous.
If poor male
performance in
schools is the consequence of both an underfunded and oppressive school
system and an oppressive gender system under capitalism, then the
solution can't be a retrenchment of the former to buttress the latter.
As one commentator recently said, "questions of sexuality, race,
ethnicity, social class, disability, and cultural background all need
to be taken into consideration when thinking about boys as individuals
and the pecking order that exists among them."
Solutions
have to challenge and
overcome both the condition and role of education in the gender system,
combating sexism and leading towards the full development of all youth
in society.
11) UN COMMITTEE
CONDEMNS RIGHTS ABUSES IN SOUTH KOREA
(The following
article is from the December 1-31, 2009, issue of People's Voice,
Canada's
leading communist
newspaper. Articles can be reprinted free if the source is credited.
Subscription rates in Canada: $30/year, or $15 low income rate; for
U.S. readers - $45 US per year; other overseas readers - $45 US or $50
CDN per year. Send to:
People's Voice, c/o PV Business Manager, 133
Herkimer St., Unit 502, Hamilton, ON, L8P 2H3.)
By Sean Burton
The UN Committee on Economic, Social,
and Cultural Rights (CESCR) has drawn a grim picture of human rights in
South Korea. According to a leading progressive newspaper, Hankyoreh,
the Committee has investigated several issues in South Korea, and
damningly so for the Lee Myung Bak regime.
The
investigation found that
South Korea's National Human Rights Commission has been downsized 30%,
its budget significantly reduced, and headed by a person not competent
on the issue of human rights. Similar downsizing seems to have occurred
in the Ministry of Gender Equality.
The CECSR
report came down hard
on the Lee government's privatization of healthcare, water, and
electricity, which put South Korea at the risk of not complying with
the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights. A
massive civil engineering project is also being railroaded through by
the administration; according to the report it is far too costly in
relation to its economic benefits, and some of the project's budget had
been taken from the welfare budget.
Also
mentioned was the February
2009 tragedy in Yongsan district of Seoul, in which the forced
evictions of forty people from an apartment complex resulted in the
deaths of five people and one police officer. Though Seoul's Central
Prosecution Office blamed the protesters, the report condemned the
police action as excessive use of force. That no alternative settlement
was offered to the evicted tenants is also being held against the
government.
Press
freedom also figured
prominently in the CECSR report. Numerous journalists have been
arrested or harassed for writing negatively about Lee Myung Bak and his
policies. Many progressive-minded historians and writers have also
faced persecution from the state and pro-government media for airing
South Korea's dirty laundry in new history textbooks. One conservative
newspaper claimed that such books were "corrupting the minds of the
youth."
Similarly,
the recent
publication of a three-volume, 2,800-page encyclopedia of Koreans who
collaborated with the Japanese by the Institute for Research in
Collaboration Activities (IRCA) has again stirred the ire of the
country's conservative elite. And no wonder; General Park Chung Hee,
dictator of South Korea from 1961-1979, is included for aiding the
Japanese in their brutal occupation of Manchuria. Park's political
vehicle, the Democratic Justice Party, is now the ruling Grand National
Party of Lee Myung Bak, and Park's daughter remains a leading figure of
the party and has been a presidential candidate. Also in the list are
the founders of two leading newspapers, the Chosun Ilbo and the Dong-A
Ilbo, Bang Eun Mo and Kim Seong Su respectively. Both papers
were
established in the 1920s and served as mouthpieces for the oppressive
Japanese administration. Not surprisingly, their role as mouthpieces of
the conservative and authoritarian elite continued into post-war South
Korea. A state organization that studies collaboration activities also
confirmed that Bang urged the Japanese invasions in East Asia during
radio broadcasts, and also owned a military supplies manufacturing
plant. Meanwhile, Kim was apparently urging the conscription of Koreans
for the war effort while working for the colonial administration.
However, the state organization has mentioned far fewer names and not
included Park Chung Hee on the grounds that simply being pro-Japanese
does not make a person a collaborator.
IRCA's
director, Yim Hun Yeong,
would beg to differ. According to his organization's encyclopedia, Park
swore a blood-oath to join Japan's army, and even after being rejected
used a friend's help to enlist. Conservative opponents have accused
IRCA of being politically biased. Director Yim claimed in a recent
interview that IRCA is not a political think-tank and that the purpose
of the encyclopedia is simply to provide a record of historical people
who were pro-Japanese to support their personal advancement.
Nevertheless, Yim noted, IRCA's
research funding has been cut and the institution was even under
suspicion for its very name; only a 2004 citizens' donation campaign
saved the project financially. Some media outlets argued that the
project calls into the question the legitimacy of the republic, which
was founded largely against the wishes of the majority of Koreans. IRCA
would dare not go so far, but director still Yim criticized
conservative media editorials that spoke negatively of the project,
stating that if they truly represented the "nation's spirit" they would
work to rid Korea of the vestiges of Japanese imperialism.
Labour
rights were also
discussed in the CESCR. The committee was critical of a penal code
article aimed at preventing strikes and demonstrations for "obstructing
business". One expert stated that there was a disproportionate number
of police and military personnel at such demonstrations. Speaking of
strikes, tens of thousands of unionized workers rose in defiance of
Seoul's plans to cut union rep wages and revise the Irregular Worker
Law. Fifty thousand gathered in Seoul's Yeouido Plaza for a convention
hosted by the Korea Confederation of Trade Unions on November 8. The
KCTU has threatened Seoul with a general strike on November 22 if its
does not take positive action.
The rights
of part-time workers
have come up recently. New regulations stipulate that irregular workers
have to be moved into full-time positions after two years. In
particular, over 1200 lecturers at 112 universities have been
dismissed. If the remaining universities are counted, the number
amounts to several thousand. Because these part-time lecturers do not
have doctoral degrees, they are not considered "specialists" or even
"real" staff members, according to one professor. In other words, their
status as workers is not guaranteed and the new law is a deceptive
means of firing people. Meanwhile, twenty unionized employees at YTN
cable news were fired when they opposed the appointment of YTN's new
president on the grounds that he was Lee Myung Bak's campaign press
officer. Only six of the employees have been absolved by court.
Though Seoul
insists that the
Committee's "advice" will "serve as inspiration" for years to come, the
continued harassment of those critical of the status quo makes one
wonder. Many of these issues have been raised by the opposition, labour
organizations, and other progressive groups. Given the "lively" nature
of the South Korean legislature, the Grand National Party and Lee Myung
Bak are unlikely to give much, if any, ground in the weeks to come.
12) THE LONG RACE FOR
FULL EQUALITY
(The following
article is from the December 1-31, 2009, issue of People's Voice,
Canada's
leading communist
newspaper. Articles can be reprinted free if the source is credited.
Subscription rates in Canada: $30/year, or $15 low income rate; for
U.S. readers - $45 US per year; other overseas readers - $45 US or $50
CDN per year. Send to:
People's Voice, c/o PV Business Manager, 133
Herkimer St., Unit 502, Hamilton, ON, L8P 2H3.)
By Johan Boyden
Caster Semenya, South African runner,
will be able to keep her gold medal and prize money, the South African
department of sport has announced. At the world athletics championships
last August in Berlin, Semenya won gold in the women's 800 meter race
by an impressive margin - almost two and a half seconds - finishing in
1:55:45.
A fraction
of time; a volume of
media scrutiny - aimed not just at her, but all black women, all people
who do not quite fit dominant social gender categories.
Even before
her victory, the
attack had begun. Focusing on the young athlete's appearance, various
commentators somehow diagnosed Semenya offensively as an
"hermaphrodite" (the incorrect term for intersex). This gossip was
enough for the International Association of Athletics Federations
(IAAF) to launch an investigation into her gender.
That IAAF
public decision has
dragged Castor Semenya's name through the dirt. As the corporate media
types volumes on her what her genitalia may look like, it is difficult
to imagine the impact on the shy 18-year old runner, and all those
whose gender is similarly ambiguous.
In South
Africa the response has
been outrage. "[T]he purpose of these `gender-tests' are simply to
undermine her outstanding performance and ability to achieve beyond the
benchmark set for female athletes," Gugu Ndima, spokesperson for the
Young Communist League of South Africa told People's Voice in an email.
The YCL South Africa called the IAAF decision an "affirmation of the
Eurocentric stereotypes about African women in general," and demanded a
public apology.
"There are
stereotypes about
what is deemed to be feminine", Ndima added; "we strongly condemn
people that infiltrate such stereotypes."
Semenya's
story has provoked
widespread debate about gender. As one transgendered activist wrote at
Rebel Youth magazine's blog, "this isn't an issue of her biological sex
_ that is easy to tell and any steroid test would give away the
testosterone. The worry is the way she presents - i.e., short-hair,
muscular, athletic, natural eyebrows." Why?
After all,
she isn't the only
butch female runner nor the first person have to deal with IAAF's
archaic sex tests. Androgen insensitivity syndrome (AIS), for example,
means a woman can have male chromosomes - without any athletic
advantage. The woman might not know, like Indian 800m runner Santhi
Soundarajan, stripped of her silver medal after a very public gender
test "failure" due to AIS at the 2006 Asian games.
Perhaps we
could say all solid
gender binaries melt into air as little more than comforting illusions;
we are compelled to face our real conditions of life, including the
dignity of a person to choose their own gender identity.
As to
Semenya herself, her life
has changed tremendously. "It's not so easy. The university is OK
but
there is not many other places I can go. People want to stare at me
now. They want to touch me. I'm supposed to be famous but I don't think
I like it so much," Semenya told the Guardian
newspaper recently. She
is quoted in New Yorker
magazine saying "It sucks when I was running
and they were writing those things... Now I just have to walk away.
That's all I can do."
South
African youth are also
walking away from this degrading episode. Semenya is now a hero among
South African young athletes. She came from an impoverished rural
village, her track team often training without shoes. "The most
practical support [for Semenya] is to ensure that we build sporting
facilities... Why are there more shebeens (bars) than sports grounds in
our townships?" YCL-SA's National Secretary, Buti Manamela, recently
said.
This
sentiment echoes in Canada. How many sports facilities are in
Aboriginal communities?
Semenya's
partial victory - she
is still waiting to hear if she can keep competing as a woman - also
came around the same time as the Trans Day of Remembrance,
memorializing trans people killed by gender violence. According to the
British Trades Union Congress, by June of this year over eighty
official cases had been reported of transgender people murdered
world-wide for no other reason than they were different.
So Semenya
is running forward
for many people. Irregardless of her test results (which will remain
confidential) she is also running forward for the trans and intersex
community. She is also running for all those who cherish democracy and
dignity. Her race is another step in the long struggle for full
equality.
13) DIPLOMAT CONFIRMS
CANADA'S DIRTY ROLE IN AFGHANISTAN
(The following
article is from the December 1-31, 2009, issue of People's Voice,
Canada's
leading communist
newspaper. Articles can be reprinted free if the source is credited.
Subscription rates in Canada: $30/year, or $15 low income rate; for
U.S. readers - $45 US per year; other overseas readers - $45 US or $50
CDN per year. Send to:
People's Voice, c/o PV Business Manager, 133
Herkimer St., Unit 502, Hamilton, ON, L8P 2H3.)
One of Ottawa's top diplomats told a
Parliamentary committee on the Afghan mission that Canadian troops
transferred detainees to local authorities, despite knowing that all
would face torture. Richard Colvin, who is now a high-level
intelligence official in the Canadian embassy in Washington, said on
Nov. 18 that "Instead of winning hearts and minds, we caused Kandaharis
to fear the foreigners. Canada's detainee practices alienated us from
the population and strengthened the insurgency."
The Harper
Tories have
frantically denied Colvin's charges that they ignored his warnings of
"imminent and alarming" problems with the treatment of detainees as
early as May 2006, a time when Canada was taking far more prisoners
than other NATO allies. But his testimony bears the authenticity of a
whistle-blower who is risking his entire career to confirm what
opponents of the war have said for years - that Canada's military
mission has done nothing to advance democracy or social progress in
Afghanistan.
Asking MPs
"why should Canadians care if Afghan detainees were being tortured,"
Colvin gave several reasons.
First, he
said, "our detainees
were not what intelligence services would call `high-value targets,'
such as IED (improvised explosive device) bomb-makers, al-Qaeda
terrorists or Taliban commanders." The Afghans he refers to "were
picked up by conventional forces during routine military operations,
and on the basis typically not of intelligence but suspicion or
unproven denunciation."
These were
men with "little or
no value" from an intelligence point of view, said Colvin: "Some may
have been foot soldiers or day fighters. But many were just local
people - farmers, truck drivers, tailors, peasants; random human beings
in the wrong place at the wrong time; young men in their fields and
villages who were completely innocent but were nevertheless rounded up.
In other words, we detained, and handed over for severe torture, a lot
of innocent people."
Colvin
continued that "seizing
people and rendering them for torture is a very serious violation of
international and Canadian law. Complicity in torture is a war crime.
It is illegal and prosecutable."
Third, he
said, "Canada has
always been a powerful advocate of international law and human
rights... If we disregard our core principles and values, we also lose
our moral authority abroad."
Fourth, such
actions were
counter to PM Stephen Harper's claim that Canadian military officials
don't send individuals off to be tortured. "Behind the military's wall
of secrecy," said Colvin, "that, unfortunately, is exactly what we were
doing."
"Even if all
the Afghans we
detained had been Taliban, it would still have been wrong to have them
tortured," concluded Colvin, quoting an authoritative military manual
on counter-insurgency which says "the abuse of detained persons is
immoral, illegal and unprofessional..."
14) THE "WOMAN AMONG WARLORDS" TOURS NORTH
AMERICA
(The following
article is from the December 1-31, 2009, issue of People's Voice,
Canada's
leading communist
newspaper. Articles can be reprinted free if the source is credited.
Subscription rates in Canada: $30/year, or $15 low income rate; for
U.S. readers - $45 US per year; other overseas readers - $45 US or $50
CDN per year. Send to:
People's Voice, c/o PV Business Manager, 133
Herkimer St., Unit 502, Hamilton, ON, L8P 2H3.)
Afghan MP Malalai Joya, an outspoken
critic of the NATO occupation of her country, has been touring North
America this fall to help build opposition to the war. She has just
published her autobiography, A Woman Among Warlords, co-written with
Derrick O'Keefe, longtime activist in Vancouver's StopWar coalition.
Joya was interviewed by Blake Sifton of the TheTyee.ca website shortly
before the Canadian leg of her tour began in Vancouver, where nearly
1,000 people packed a hall to hear her speak. Here are excerpts from
that interview.
On the Afghan
presidential election mess:
"An election held under occupation
and the influence of corruption and warlordism has no legitimacy at
all. It is impossible for there to be a democratic election in
Afghanistan right now. Hamid Karzai is a corrupt puppet who is
betraying our people and Abdullah Abdullah was the preferred candidate
of the warlords. Both of their policies are similar - they are both
called the Taliban `brothers.' They are both traitors."
On what most
Afghans think about the election:
"Ordinary Afghans don't have security
or even food to eat. They don't trust the candidates and often they
hate them. It's hard for true Afghan democrats because elections are
supposed to be a hallmark of democracy and we want to believe in them.
In the lead up to the election Afghans had a saying. They said that
whatever the result we would have, [it was] `the same donkey with a new
saddle.'"
On U.S. President
Obama's Afghan policies:
"I was hopeful when Obama was elected
but unfortunately when he came to power his message to my people was
that there will be more war. He increased troop levels and wants to
send even more soldiers to Afghanistan. This will only bring more
conflict. It is impossible to bring democracy through military
occupation and the barrel of a gun. His policies are quite similar to
that of the Bush administration. His drone attacks in the border area
with Pakistan are killing innocent civilians and they have killed
hundreds of Afghan civilians with cluster bombs and white phosphorous.
They even bomb our wedding parties. Despite all of this, somehow he
received the Nobel Peace Prize. I don't understand how they could give
it to a president who is pursuing wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and
Pakistan."
On what
would happen if NATO pulled out of Afghanistan:
"We are stuck between two enemies -
the occupation forces killing innocent civilians, and the Taliban and
warlords. Many people say that if the troops leave Afghanistan, civil
war will happen. But we have a civil war now. As long as the U.S. and
NATO are here, the civil war will continue because they are supporting
the government and the warlords. If they end the occupation of my
country then we, the true democrats of Afghanistan, will be fighting
one enemy instead of two."
On
the sacrifice of Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan:
"The United States, Canada and the
other NATO countries are wasting their taxpayers' money and the blood
of their soldiers to support a completely corrupt and illegitimate
system. I am sorry for the Canadian families who have lost their sons
in Afghanistan. The soldiers are themselves victims of their
government's policies, just as our civilians are. Their families should
raise their voices against the misguided policies of their
governments... they must turn their sorrow into strength."
On how she would define global
support for the people of Afghanistan:
"When I say that we don't want your
soldiers I don't mean that we don't want your help. We are honoured to
have the support and solidarity of democratic people in Canada and
around the world... Please put pressure on your governments to
change
their policies and demonstrate in your cities to help end our
occupation. No one's drones will bomb you and no one will shoot you.
"Moral support and humanitarian
support will help us in the difficult and long struggle against the
Taliban and the warlords. Support intellectuals and democratic-minded
people of my country and support education in Afghanistan. Education,
and especially women's education, is a key to democracy and our
emancipation."
On the failure to effectively combat
the Afghan opium trade and its impact on North American society:
"After eight years, the U.S. and NATO
have failed so badly that now Afghanistan exports 93 per cent of the
world's opium. In 2001, the Taliban almost destroyed the opium trade in
Afghanistan. The Taliban! These uneducated, ignorant misogynists. It's
unbelievable that a superpower along with 40 other countries cannot
stop the opium trade but a medieval organization like the Taliban
nearly succeeds.
"How many poor people do you have on
your own streets? Yet the U.S. and Canada send millions to help
warlords and drug dealers in Afghanistan. Support for corrupt warlords
not only affects the people of my country - it also allows more and
more drugs to make their way onto the streets of Vancouver and destroy
your youth as well."
On
Pakistani involvement in Afghanistan and the repercussions for
Pakistani civilians:
"Throughout our long years of war,
the Pakistanis have had puppets in Afghanistan and they still do. The
Pakistani intelligence supports the Afghan Taliban, and the madrasas
along the border are essentially 'Taliban factories' where people are
brainwashed to commit suicide bombings in Afghanistan. The U.S. works
with the ISI [Inter-Services Intelligence], and the ISI supports the
Afghan Taliban. They are playing cat-and-mouse with the terrorists.
"Now Obama fights a war with drones
in the Pakistani border areas. It is the civilians of Pakistan who
suffer. They are bombing the poorest and most backward cities of
Pakistan."
On going
into exile and fearing death:
"I am a woman and I refuse to stay
silent. I document the crimes of the warlords, so they want to kill me.
My life is always at risk. Even with bodyguards, I am not safe in the
country NATO occupies under the banner of women's rights and democracy.
My supporters abroad are worried, and many people tell me to leave
Afghanistan. But I'm not any better than the other democratic people in
my country who are dying. My blood is not more red then the blood of my
people. Faced with so many assassination attempts, I have to imagine
that one day they will succeed. But I do not fear death. I fear silence
in the face of injustice. That is my message to democratic people
around the world."
(The following
article is from the December 1-31, 2009, issue of
People's Voice,
Canada's
leading communist
newspaper. Articles can be reprinted free if the source is credited.
Subscription rates in Canada: $30/year, or $15 low income rate; for
U.S. readers and overseas readers - $50 per year. Send to:
People's Voice, c/o PV Business Manager, 133
Herkimer St., Unit 502, Hamilton, ON, L8P 2H3.)
KELOWNA, BC
Cuban Revolution Celebration Dinner - 8 pm, Sat,. Dec. 12, at Soul de Cuba Restaurant, 1180 Sunset Drive. Tickets $20, only 30 places available, call 250-860-6108.
VANCOUVER, BC
Left Film Night,
“The War on Democracy”, dir. by John Pilger - Sunday, Nov. 29, 7 pm, Centre for Socialist Education, 706 Clark Drive. For info, call 604-255-2041.
Civic
Electoral Reform, Think Democracy Forum featuring expert panelists and
interactive discussion - Friday, Dec. 4, 7 pm, Segal Centre, SFU Harbour Centre, 515 W. Hastings.
First
Festival of Latin American Song - 7 pm, Friday, Dec. 4, Cambrian Hall, 215 E. 17th Ave. (at Main), tickets $10, performers include Son Rebelde, Hugo Rojas, Pancho Y Sal, and others. For info, call Co-op Radio, 604-873-1987.
Stand up
for human rights, celebrate 61st anniversary of UN Declaration on Human
Rights - Sat., Dec. 5, 6-9:30 pm, Mount Pleasant Neighborhood House, 800 E. Broadway, for info call Beth at 604-320-0285.
WINNIPEG, MB
What
is the Communist Party?
Two meetings for people interested in joining, late November and early
December, dates when most people can attend. Pre-register at 586-7824
or cpcmb@mts.net.
TORONTO, ON
GAZA: Strength Under
Siege, evening of solidarity for the Gaza Freedom March - Friday, Dec. 4, 7 pm, Student Centre, Ryerson University, http://www.gazafreedommarch.ca,
tickets $40 (students $20), to purchase online: http://www.gazafreedommarch.ca/tickets.
Stars of
Ballet, featuring dancers from Ballet Nacional de Cuba, with Artistic
Director Alicia Alonso - Tue., Dec. 8, 7 pm, Living Arts Centre, 4141 Living Arts Drive, Mississauga. Tickets $25-90, contact 1-905-306-6000 or 1-888-805-8888.
New Year’s
Eve Celebration, with the United Jewish Peoples Order and
Canadian-Cuban Friendship Association, music by Pablo
Terry and Sol de Cuba - Winchevsky
Centre 585 Cranbrooke
(east of Bathurst, north of
Lawrence). Dinner (vegetarian
advance request only), cash
bar, entertainment, complimentary
wine toast at midnight!
Tickets $45 advance, $55 if
reserved to pay at door. For
info/tickets: Maxine at UJPO,
416-789-5502 (Visa or M/C),
or Sharon at CCFA, 905-951-8499.
Norman
Bethune Day social - Sat.,
Feb. 27, 2010, at the GCDO,
290 Danforth Ave. Tickets $5,
door prize one week
all-inclusive trip for two to
Cuba. For tickets or info, call
media sponsor People’s Voice,
416-469-2446.
Printer-
friendly article