(The following
articles are from the Jan. 1-31/2004 issue of People's Voice, Canada's
leading communist newspaper. Articles can be reprinted free if the
source is credited. Subscription rates in Canada: $25/year, or $12 low
income rate; for U.S. readers - $25 US per year; other overseas readers
- $25 US or $35 CDN per year. Send to: People's Voice, 706 Clark Drive,
Vancouver, Canada, V5L 3J1.)
1) QUEBEC UNIONS WARN CHAREST TO
BACK DOWN
By Kimball Cariou,
with files from La Voix du Peuple
PUTTING ASIDE rivalries
and differences, trade unions across Quebec defied terrible weather and
pouring rain on Dec. 11 to put on a massive show of opposition to the
Charest Liberal government.
The historic protest was
the biggest by Quebec labour and its allies since the huge struggles of
the mid-1970s. Aimed directly at the big corporations which back
Charest, unions shut down the ports of Montréal, Trois Rivieres
and Québec City, and blocked key highways to the Saguenay and
north shore regions.
Trade unionists set up
early-morning information picket lines in front of thousands of
enterprises and government buildings across the province, organized
demonstrations in different parts of Montreal and other cities, and
slowed down traffic. About 500 different cross-picketing labour actions
took place in the Montreal area alone.
Public transit garages
were picketed in Montreal and Quebec City, drastically reducing the
number of buses on the roads for the morning rush hour, affecting
normal business in the two big cities; the subway and handi-bus systems
were not targeted, to limit impact on the general public. All public
transit operations meanwhile resumed normal operation for the late
afternoon rush hour.
Thousands of childare
workers, supported by many parents, jammed downtown Montreal for a huge
demonstration. Media estimates put the crowd at 40,000. Daycares were
shutdown throughout the day with the approval of most parents as a way
to protest Charest's plans to get rid of the $5 a day daycare system.
In order to avoid
potential repressive measures by the government, the well-organized
actions were taken by workers outside of their normal shifts. For
example, actions held in the morning were done by evening shift
workers, who were later replaced by dayshift workers at the end of
their normal work day. Many actions were also organized during the noon
lunch break.
Some 10,000 trade
unionists from CUPE, CAW, the Steelworkers, the International
Association of Machinists, and the Teamsters blocked Notre Dame street,
a major east-westroad across the island of Montreal. In a highly
visible way, they blocked the road using human chains, cars and trucks
for almost a day and a half, refusing to heed an injunction and
resisting police riot squads. The blockade slowed down access to
important industrial areas on the east side of Montreal, including the
port, refineries, and manufacturing plants. Since Notre Dame is also a
vital route for commuters from the suburbs to downtown, the blockade
had a major impact on the city's normal commercial operations.
The Notre Dame street
blockade was a powerful example of public/private sector unity. Just as
significant, it brought IAM workers from the Bombardier aircraft plant
together with members of the CAW, which have been accusing each other
of raiding for years in a nasty inter-union dispute. But on Dec. 11,
they were all working together to shut down the harbour and to resist
police goons.
These events marked a
big escalation of protests which began in November, including a rally
by 30,000 people at the National Assembly in Quebec City. That
demonstration was followed by a series of smaller militant actions,
including disruptions at every news conference organized by the
government or the Conseil du patronat, the main corporate lobby
organization in Quebec.
Meanwhile, over 150
unions, mainly from the private sector, are now calling their
respective leaderships within the QFL or the CNTU to launch a general
strike.
This widespread anger
has been building up across Quebec over Jean Charest's about-face
following last April's provincial election. During the campaign, the
Liberals promised to protect health and education, and condemned the
far-right policies of privatisation and government downsizing advocated
by the ADQ party. But immediately after taking office, Charest began to
implement the ADQ platform, leading many Quebecers to declare that his
government has no political mandate.
The accusation is
fuelled by awareness of similar developments in other provinces.
Working people in Quebec saw the Harris Tories run roughshod over
social programs, democracy and public ownership in Ontario, and then
watched BC Premier Gordon Campbell backtrack on his campaign pledges to
defend health and education.
The controversial moves
by the Charest government include forced amalgamation of unions in the
health care system, as part of mergers of hospitals and other
institutions. Another bill would change the Labour Code, to allow
companies to subcontract work and discard collective agreements. These
measures could devastate the Quebec labour movement, which represents
40% of the provincial workforce, much higher than the Canadian average.
Other unpopular Charest policies include higher transit fares and water
rates, elimination of the $5/day childcare system, and attacks on
pension rights. Such policies have brought a wide range of people's
movements into the streets beside the unions.
As we go to press, more
job actions are being planned for the upcoming days, since Charest
shows no signs of backing off and even says he will try to push through
the different bills before Christmas. If things continue in this
direction, Quebec may well be heading towards a major social
confrontation.
These events are the
latest stage of an important resurgence of labour militancy in Quebec.
Responding to discussions within labour and other progressive circles,
the next issue of the monthly La Voix du Peuple (the sister
newspaper of People's Voice) will call on all major labour
organizations to convene a special conference (known in Quebec as Les
états Généraux) to agree on specific strategies
and tactics to force the government to back off.
According to Andre
Parizeau La Voix du Peuple, the government needs to back off or labour
will have to force Charest , the Parti Comuniste du Québec (PCQ)
leader and editor of to step down and call for new elections.
"There is no other way
out," says Parizeau. "Charest says he has the support of the majority
of Quebecers. That is not true. There are a million Quebecers who
belong to unions. Add to that number the members of their families,
that's a lot more people than Charest can line up. Labour represents a
majority of people in Quebec. Charest's attitude represents a very
clear, all-out attack on democracy. It won't be an easy battle, so we
need to prepare and start building up the struggle towards a general
strike."
Many activists note
parallels with the long and difficult struggle during the 1970s to dump
the Bourassa Liberal government of that period.
Even though the Dec. 11
protests were not coordinated by the main labour bodies, these actions
were highly effective, according to Parizeau, who also notes that trade
unions paid for a massive publicity campaign directed at the Charest
government.
The job now, Parizeau
told People's Voice, will be
to build on the widespread sentiment that Quebecers must not suffer the
type of attacks carried through by right-wing governments in Ontario
and BC. "Look at the success of the Dec. 11 actions. This is a definite
sign of a resurgent struggle, on a scale we haven't seen in decades. We
can only guess how much more successful these protests can become with
stronger labour unity."
(Back)
(Home)
2) HAMILTON STEELWORKERS: UP AND FIGHTING
By Sam Hammond
FOUR TO FIVE THOUSAND
angry Steelworkers took their grievances to the streets of Hamilton on
December 4. They overflowed the Convention Centre and then snarled
traffic in the downtown core in response to rumours that Stelco (Steel
Company of Canada) would try to solve its financial woes by attacking
pensions, wages and work conditions.
Stelco has announced the departure of two directors and the
resignation of its chief financial officer. The company wants to regain
competitiveness by seeking wage and pension cuts, changing work rules
and cutting jobs.
Rolf Gerstenberger,
President of Steelworkers' Local 1005, said "Those ideas won't solve
the problems of a troubled company, but will hurt vulnerable workers
and their families. The message we're getting from the company is we
had better start giving them something or even our pensions are going
to be in jeopardy. We don't want to be boxed into their agenda and we
are saying categorically that we will not sacrifice the pensioners."
Stelco is demanding
workers give up pay and benefits won over nearly 60 years of hard work
and struggle going back to 1946. This latest attack on Hamilton workers
has been preceded by two decades of dramatic plant closures in this
city of heavy industry.
International Harvester
(farm equipment & trucks), Firestone Canada (tires), John Inglis
(appliances), Canada Porcelain, Otis Elevator, Bathurst Containers,
American Can Co., Dominion Glass, Allan Industies (automotive),
Canadian Westinghouse, Howell Lithographing, Appleford Papers, Reid
Press, and Proctor & Gamble have all closed and put tens of
thousands of workers on the street.
This year Canadian Drawn
Steel and Frost Fence & Wire closed. Levi Strauss and CAMCO
(Canadian Appliance Manufacturing Co.) will close by spring 2004.
Stelwire, Slaters Steel and Stelco are threatened.
Stelco is the largest steel maker in Canada, and Dofasco,
the second largest, is also in Hamilton. Without steel there is no
economic base left for Hamilton as it now exists. You can strip a tree,
one leaf at a time, but when you sever the main trunk, the tree is
dead. During these same two decades the Canadian control over basic
transportation, energy, communications and mining has been taken by
multinationals with their global agenda.
The steel industry could
pass into multinational hands without sale or negotiation, simply by
running up the debt until the lenders become the owners. The first act
of the U.S. bankers will be to attack the pensions, wages and
conditions of work that it took generations to win and that form part
of the culture of this city.
This complex fight will
require cool heads at the helm. Local 1005 has an excellent position of
"No Concessions". The United Steelworkers International Union in the
United States has already negotiated concessions in pensions and wages,
and the U.S. government has given bankruptcy protection. These hang
over the heads of Hamilton Steelworkers and increase the pressure on
Local Union leadership. Local 1005 is united around its existing
pensioners and its pension fund. Hands Off! is the demand.
Members of the Canadian
Autoworkers and other Hamilton unions were solid with Steelworkers at
the demonstration. The leaders of Local 1005 have generations of the
Hamilton tradition of struggle and unity to call upon. As long as they
stand firm, they can organize the entire local labour movement and most
of the community to back their demands.
We need protection for workers pensions, we need protection
for jobs and conditions of work. We need a made-in-Canada industrial
policy that will roll back Free Trade, develop manufacturing, and
strengthen our sovereignty. This demands some kind of public control
and ultimately public ownership.
The Hamilton
Steelworkers have rolled up their sleeves for a fight, and there is
only one corner to be in.
(The author is a
long-time Hamilton labour activist.)
(Back)
(Home)
3) THE OTHER WAR CRIMINALS
People's Voice Editorial, Jan. 1-31, 2004
FEW TEARS will be shed
in the anti-war movement for the fate of Saddam Hussein, captured by US
occupation forces just before this issue went to press. Contrary to
ignorant claims in the corporate media, opponents of the war against
Iraq are well aware of the Iraqi leader's long record of brutality.
But in response to the
frenzied speculation about putting Saddam Hussein on trial, we also
ask: what about the other war criminals? What about George W. Bush,
whose attacks against Afghanistan and Iraq have resulted in the deaths
of tens of thousands of civilians? What about Tony Blair, Bush's main
accomplice on the world stage?
As many international
legal experts have pointed out, the new doctrine of "pre-emptive war"
adopted by the US and Britain is a gross violation of the United
Nations Charter. The fact that not a shred of evidence has been found
in Iraq to back the pre-invasion claims from Bush and Blair about
"weapons of mass destruction" shows precisely why this doctrine is so
profoundly impermissible in relations between states. Recall, for
example, that many leading figures in Hitler's regime were tried and
convicted for similar criminal actions just half a century ago.
Yes, let Saddam Hussein
face the verdict of the Iraqi people. But in the name of justice, the
far more powerful aggressors in Washington and London must also be put
on trial for war crimes.
(Back)
(Home)
4)
THE TRUTH BREAKS THROUGH...
By Aaron Ekman
DECEMBER 10: DAY ONE of
the BC Ferries and Marine Workers strike, and the mainstream media
outlets, (multi-billion dollar corporations with pesky unionized
workers of their own), are climbing over each other to cast strikers in
the darkest light.
Left without any good
forest fires, floods, or credible viral outbreaks to scare us all into
remaining glued to our televisions, snappy-dressed TV and radio
reporters have sensationalized the strike into a natural disaster in
its own right.
Sparking fires further,
handlers of the provincial minister of Union-Busting, Graham Bruce,
have architected his initial speeches in such as way as to subliminally
equate Ferry workers with terrorists and criminals.
"There's no reason BC
residents should be held hostage in this situation," says Bruce on
camera from Victoria.
The next day, strikers
and the many community supporters showing up to the ferry terminals in
solidarity cringe as they witness reporters descend on what amounts to
no more than ten hopeful passengers.
"Is anyone in this
lineup outraged at the workers striking here today?" one reporter
pleads. Finding none, she asks. "Do any of you feel like you've been
put in a hostage situation?"
What makes it on TV?
"While thousands of
passengers have been left stranded as union boss Jackie Miller orders a
ferry service shutdown, some British Columbians express anger at being
held hostage by strikers." Cut to clip of Joe-Schmoe, union-despising
Nanaimo business owner, who remarks insightfully... "uhh... I feel like
I'm being held hostage."
Meanwhile, back on the
picket line, a spirit reminiscent of times I'm too young to remember
dominates the ranks. Strikers, many on their first picket line, mouth
the words of Solidarity Forever as older, more seasoned workers lead
them through the verses. Members in attendance from the Seniors'
Coalition undoubtedly feel pangs of nostalgia at the hand-holding,
labour-tune singing, boss-defying antics developing organically around
them. Even the oft-shunned "Prepare the General Strike" Committee is
greeted with wild roars of applause as they arrive - launching into a
deafening chant lasting for minutes.
"Gen-rul Strike! Gen-rul
Strike! Gen-rul Strike!"
Turns are taken on car
batteries to amplify radio reports. Radio anchors continually ask
business owners and Liberal supporters why they think the Union, "has
the right to hold British Columbians hostage?" To which they inevitably
reply, "um, yeah... it feels like me and my business are being held
hostage."
Disgusted, workers turn
the dial, searching for reports on sentiment from other working British
Columbians. Eventually, they come upon CBC, whose anchors try in vain
to illicit the same response as their private media competitors. Their
mistake, however, is that they've already promised to allow callers to
voice their opinions on the air for the majority of the day.
The un-moderated result:
caller after caller after caller voices absolute support for the ferry
workers, and contempt for their American boss, and our
market-fundamentalist government.
"I'm stranded here on
the island... and it's a real inconvenience. But I'm willing to bear it
if it means the hard-working women and men who get me across every day
get a better shake," says one woman.
"I'm not a union
supporter... but I applaud the ferry workers for standing up to this
government," says the next.
"This is the last
straw," begins another. "We can't back down on this one. The ferry
workers are fighting for all of us. They're heroes, and I'll go through
whatever hardship is necessary to give this province back to British
Columbians."
The uncensored response
from the public is so positive, that sometime shortly after three pm,
even the radio announcer is forced to concede that: "public opinion
seems to have shifted sharply in favour of the ferry workers."
The truth of course, is
that public opinion never shifted. It had just been inadvertently
reported without the meddlings of anti-union media corporation
management.
(Back)
(Home)
5) MURDER RAISES BIG QUESTIONS FOR VANCOUVER
SCHOOLS
Special
to PV
THE SHOCKING MURDER of a
Vancouver high school student has raised important questions about
racism and youth violence - and about unity in the struggle to defend
public education.
In recent months,
several unconnected student-on-student attacks have occurred in the
Lower Mainland. It remains unclear whether such violence is on the
rise, but each incident has received enormous media coverage.
The latest tragedy
unfolded on the night of Friday, November 28, near Tupper Secondary
school in east Vancouver. According to police, as 17-year-old Jomar
Lanot and several of his Filipino-Canadian friends walked past a group
of Indo-Canadian youths, a confrontation erupted, including racial
epithets. Jomar was caught and beaten to death; two students from
Killarney Secondary were arrested a week later, and more suspects are
being sought.
The murder took place in
the wider context of racist agitation about the changing ethnic
composition of the region. Right-wing media outlets highlight
demographic studies showing that almost half the population in the
Vancouver area were born outside of Canada. The implication is that
crime and urban congestion are the fault of immigrants. Through this
lens, the Lanot murder is seen as "proof" that "Asian youth gangs" are
a menace to public safety.
Blatant racism has a
long history in British Columbia, starting with the seizure of lands
unceded by First Nations people, who face stunning levels of
unemployment and poverty. Aboriginal students have the highest dropout
rates in the school system.
Starting in the 1800s,
violent racism was directed at immigrant labourers from China, and
later at Japanese and Indo-Canadians, among others.
While some immigrant
communities have made progress in the economic and political spheres,
racist tensions still simmer. The facade of "equality" obscures the
reality that most Filipino-Canadians, Latinos, and other immigrants are
stuck in low-paid, marginal jobs, subject to the whims of employers.
The Lanot murder cannot
be easily explained as a direct racist act. But many students suffer
from the systemic racist and homophobic attitudes prevalent within
society at large, and inevitably reflected to some degree in schools.
Forced to address this
reality, the Vancouver School Board has long implemented a wide range
of programs, ranging from English as a Second Language classes, to
multi-cultural home/school liaison workers, and specific programs aimed
at reducing racism, homophobia, and bullying.
Those crucial programs
are highly vulnerable to fluctuating education budgets. Over the past
decade, Vancouver schools have lost over $100 million in funding as
provincial grants failed to keep pace with inflation. During that
period, the VSB was controlled by a right-wing NPA majority which
largely ignored the problems faced by immigrant and Aboriginal students.
When the Coalition of
Progressive Electors (COPE) swept into office in November 2002, this
pattern shifted. Despite a $4.4 million budget shortfall, the new COPE
majority kept its promise to "keep the cuts out of the classroom" by
reducing administration costs and other measures. The number of
multi-cultural liaison workers (slashed by the NPA in 2002-03) was
actually increased in COPE's 2003-04 budget. At recent meetings,
trustees and other partners in the school system have been working to
update the VSB's anti-racism policies and social responsibility
programs.
One of the new board's
main focuses has been initiatives for Aboriginal students, with some
positive results already. The VSB is currently working out Aboriginal
education enhancement agreements with First Nations in Vancouver.
COPE trustees have also
won praise for acting to make schools safer for LGBT and questioning
youth, who often face harassment and gay-bashing.
But this welcome approach runs headfirst into massive
social cutbacks by federal and provincial governments. Education
budgets are shrinking even while schools have to feed more and more
hungry children, and more families require emergency help and ESL and
literacy programs. Teachers faced with diminishing resources are
expected to teach social responsibility as well as the academic
curriculum. At some point the question arises: why not place a higher
priority on the rights and needs of children, instead of simply blaming
our schools for social problems?
Despite their commitment
to human rights issues, the COPE trustees found themselves under fire
in the wake of the Lanot tragedy. A coalition of left-wing groups in
the Filipino community has issued a series of statements blaming the
VSB for allegedly refusing to tackle racism in schools.
On one level, this
dispute reflects bitterness over the reluctance by some authority
figures (sometimes including school principals) to admit that racism is
present in the system. Overall, teachers and staff in Vancouver schools
have a tremendous record of fostering attitudes of equality and social
justice. But for many visible minority students and parents, cases of
racist name-calling and other incidents remain deeply painful.
Combined with the wider
prevalence of cynicism about elected officials, this situation was ripe
for accusations that "nothing has changed." Organizations which are
sufficiently engaged in the school system to see the progressive
dynamics being set in motion by the COPE trustees disagree with this
view, including many groups representing ethnic communities.
But the fact is that
grassroots participation in Parent Advisory Committees (PACs) or school
board processes is limited. Working class families with children often
have little time for the school system. The lack of translation at most
PAC meetings is another barrier to non-English speaking parents who
might want to get involved. Hopefully, this will change as the COPE
trustees continue to build community and staff participation in
developing budgets and policies.
In the meantime, attacks
from the "left" can only help the Liberal agenda. Education minister
Christy Clark regularly launches vitriolic tirades against the COPE
trustees - the most vocal defenders of public education. Yet the media
statements from the Filipino-Canadian groups never mention the
province's role in undermining the school system, or the staggering $11
million shortfall which faces the VSB next year.
The election of a school
board so strongly committed to progressive change and broad public
participation is a rare victory. At this point, it remains unclear
whether those now attacking the VSB will instead join with the wider
movement of teachers, staff, parents, students and trustees who are
fighting to prevent the Liberals from tearing the guts out of BC
schools.
(Back)
(Home)
6) COMMUNISTS
CHALLENGE NAME OF "MERGED" RIGHT-WING PARTY
On Dec. 5, the Communist
Party of Canada released the following letter sent to Jean-Pierre
Kingsley, Chief Electoral Officer of Canada, contesting the proposed
name of the new "Conservative Party."
(We) raise a serious
concern with you regarding the proposed merger of the Canadian Alliance
and Progressive Conservative Parties.
Our Party realizes that
no formal application for the merger of these two parties has yet been
submitted; however we believe it only fair and reasonable to bring our
concerns to your attention - and to the attention of those parties - at
this time.
According to the "unity"
agreement which is to provide the basis for the merger, the name of the
new formation shall be the "Conservative Party of Canada / Parti
conservateur du Canada." Furthermore, the abbreviation or acronym for
the new party shall be "CPC/PCC," which is identical to the acronym of
our Party, the full name of which, as you know, is: "Communist Party of
Canada / Parti communiste du Canada (CPC/PCC)."
Article 368(a)(i) of the
Canada Elections Act states: "A political party whose leader has made
an application under subsection 366(1) becomes eligible for
registration if: (a) its name, short-form name, abbreviation or logo
does not: (i) so resemble the name, short-form name, abbreviation or
logo of a registered party or an eligible party that it would, in the
Chief Electoral Officer's opinion, likely be confused with it..."
In our view, the
registration of this new party under the proposed name would create
conditions that would inevitably lead to substantial confusion among
members of the electorate, with respect to properly identifying our two
respective parties in the future.
As you are well aware,
acronyms are widely used in public life - especially in the press and
media - to identify political parties (e.g., NDP, PCs, etc.). Our Party
is often referred to as the "CP."
Unless this situation is averted, the possibility for
substantial confusion looms large. Imagine how horrified and outraged
our members and supporters would be to see the following headline in
their morning paper: "CP to Make Homosexuality a Criminal Act"; nor,
presumably, would supporters of the Conservative Party welcome a story
which read: "CP Calls on Canada to Quit NATO, NORAD!"
But the biggest issue is
how such a circumstance might affect Canadians in general, impairing
their ability to clearly differentiate between the federally-registered
political parties in this instance.
We therefore urge you to
intervene with the responsible officers of the Canadian Alliance and
Progressive Conservative parties to bring to their attention our
concerns with respect to their proposed name for the merged party.
I also wish to inform
you that, should an application for registration under the current
proposed party name proceed, our Party will have no other option but to
launch a formal challenge to any such application, under Article
368(a)(i).
Miguel
Figueroa, Leader, Communist Party of Canada
(Back)
(Home)
7) "PHARMA POWER" - THE DRUG INDUSTRY SCANDAL
"Let
Them Eat Prozac," by David Healy. Toronto:
James
Lorimer & Co., ISBN 1-55028-783-4, $29.95 Can.
Book
Review by Steve Gilbert
Dr. David Healy is one
of the world's leading experts on the uses of medication in the
treatment of mental illness. He is the author of some 120 peer reviewed
articles and a dozen books, including The Antidepressant Era and The
Creation of Psychopharmacology (Harvard University Press).
In his most recent book,
Let Them Eat Prozac, Healy claims that pharmaceutical companies have
tried to conceal the fact that antidepressants can cause suicidal
behaviour in some patients. He also claims that academic freedom is
threatened by companies which fund and influence medical research.
These claims played a
crucial role in the scandal of Healy's being hired, fired, and rehired
by the University of Toronto. The facts of the case are well known, but
what went on behind the scenes is not.
In February 2000 Healy
was appointed Professor of Psychiatry at Toronto's Centre for Addiction
and Mental Health. In November 2000, he was invited to speak at a
meeting sponsored by the U of T's Department of Psychiatry. In this
speech, he "touched peripherally" on the claim that Prozac and related
antidepressants "can make people suicidal, and that since the problem
arose there had been no research to map its dimensions and decide how
best to minimize the risks posed by these drugs."
A few days later, an
e-mail from Dr. David Goldbloom, Physician in Chief at the Centre for
Addiction and Mental Health, told Healy that he had been fired. In
Goldbloom's words: "We do not feel that your approach is compatible
with the goals for the development of the academic and clinical
resources that we have. This view was solidified by your recent
appearance at the Centre in the context of an academic lecture."
What was the real reason
for this unexpected dismissal? In an effort to find out, Healy
contacted numerous senior figures at the university. They either
stonewalled or evaded his questions. Some journalists speculated that
Eli Lilly Co., manufacturers of Prozac and the largest outside money
source for the Department of Psychiatry, had threatened to withdraw
funding.
Healy's unexplained
dismissal caused a storm of protest by prominent academics and
psychiatrists throughout the world. In a humiliating about-face, U of T
President Robert Birgenau rehired Healy, who now holds the post of
Visiting Professor of Medicine at the university.
Most of Let Them Eat
Prozac is devoted to detailed descriptions of court cases and clinical
trials of Prozac, Paxil, Zoloft and related antidepressants. Prozac was
approved by the FDA in 1987. The first reports of suicidal behaviour by
patients were published in 1990. In a typical case, a patient killed
himself after being on Prozac only a few days. He had not been suicidal
before taking Prozac. Friends and coworkers testified that he had never
expressed suicidal thoughts.
Eli Lilly was soon inundated by lawsuits complaining of
Prozac's side effects. Fifty-four cases were pending in 1990, rising to
almost 200 civil suits by 1995. But in almost all such cases, the
courts decided in favour of the pharmaceutical manufacturer. Lilly's
lawyers argued that because the patient was depressed before taking
Prozac, suicide was caused by mental illness, and not by the medication.
Epidemiological evidence
shows that patients on Prozac are more likely to commit suicide than
patients on a placebo. But it is virtually impossible to prove that
Prozac - rather than mental illness - has been the cause of suicide in
a specific individual. Healy's detailed treatment of the legal
machinations and complex scientific evidence is impressive and
illuminating.
Healy is scathingly in
his criticism of the influence of pharmaceutical companies on research.
He reports that many articles published in scientific journals are
ghost-written by medical writing agencies which are paid by
pharmaceutical companies to promote their products. These articles
often appear to be the work of prominent researchers who are paid for
the use of their names. Such articles do not contain the results of
original research, but are compilations of already published data
selected and tailored to promote a specific product.
Healy writes: "By the year 2000 around 50% of the
"scientific literature" in pharmacotherapeutics was ghost-written, or
originated within companies, or was published in non-peer-reviewed
supplements to journals."
A related phenomenon is
the growth of psychopharmacology trade fairs. These are conventions
sponsored by pharmaceutical companies, which pay travel costs and
accommodation in luxury hotels for psychiatrists who are willing to sit
through lectures and presentations which are thinly disguised
advertisements for pharmaceutical products.
The big name stars in
these "circuses" are well paid for their performance, reports Healy.
They receive "consultancy fees, fees for backing principal
investigators in trials, speaker's fees, chairman's fees, and other
fees." Such fees for one individual might total as much as $800,000 per
year.
Healy concludes: "The
majority of clinical trials are now marketing studies. Achieving
blockbuster status for drugs has become the priority for pharmaceutical
companies, rather than genuine medical breakthroughs."
As he points out, drug
company profits are higher than those of any other industry, and these
profits are channelled into executive perks. In the year 2000, for
instance, Pfizer Chairman William C. Steere "earned" over $40 million;
in the same year, the cost of the 50 most frequently prescribed drugs
for seniors increased by more than 100%. Drug companies prey on
seniors, the unemployed, single parents on welfare and the working
poor, who must either pay outrageous prices or go without medication.
The future looks good
for drug companies, but not for consumers. In the US, price controls
and legislation to legalize imports of low priced foreign drugs are
stalled in Congress. On Nov. 25, the New York Times reported that "the
drug industry appears on the cusp of an enormous victory, gained in
part by millions in political donations and an expensive lobbying
campaign."
In view of these
developments, Healy's book deserves to be widely read by both health
care professionals and the general public.
(Back)
(Home)
8) INDIAN ASSEMBLY VOTES: CONGRESS LOSES OUT TO BJP
By
B. Prasant, PV correspondent in India
A COMPLACENT CONGRESS
allowed the Hindu fundamentalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) to win
three of the four Assembly elections held Dec. 5. Incumbent Congress
governments were defeated in the Indian provinces of Madhya Pradesh,
Rajasthan, and Chhattisgarh, retaining only the province of Delhi.
Of the 230 seats in
Madhya Pradesh, the BJP won 171, the Congress 38, the CPI(M) one, with
37 seats going to independent and others. In Rajasthan, the BJP won 120
of the 200 Assembly seats, to 56 for the Congress, one for the CPI(M),
and 23 to smaller parties. In Chhattisgarh, the BJP won 51 of the 90
seats, leaving the Congress with 36 and three independents. In Delhi,
the Congress retained its grip on the Assembly by winning 47 of the 70
seats, to 20 for the BJP and three for smaller parties.
The BJP itself was
surprised with the results. Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayi said
that at best his party would win in two of the four crucial central
provinces. He appeared particularly puzzled at the poor show by the
Congress in Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan. The BJP leadership may
advance the next general elections to try and cash in on these
favourable conditions.
The failure of the
Congress-run state governments in Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and
Chhattisgarh to provide even a modicum of services to the people found
reflection in the poll results. Also, the line of "soft Hindutva"
adopted by the Congress to compete with the BJP and its affiliates
misfired badly. Wherever it has chosen to compete with the BJP on the
fundamentalist forum, the Congress has been badly beaten.
The polls in Gujarat
some months back, where the BJP came to office after being accused of
leading a genocide against the Muslim community, had signalled the
Congress that it should change its political line or else face the
consequences.
The Congress also chose
to rely heavily also on the caste factor as a kind of second line of
defence. In states like Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh, Congress lined
itself up with the upper castes like the priestly caste (Brahmins) and
the warrior caste (the Khshatriyas). The ministerial cabinets of the
Congress in Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, and Chhattisgarh were dominated
by men of higher caste echelons. This had never been accepted by the
toiling masses of those states, to whom the BJP presents Hindutva as
the "great equaliser."
The lack of
developmental work in these states was glaring. Central grants were
misused. Intense infighting amongst the Congress leadership at the
provincial level disrupted developmental work. Charges of corruption
were flung around recklessly in the run up to the polls. In all three
states, dissident elements put up hundreds of candidates, effectively
sealing off any chances for the Congress to put up a real fight.
The weakness of the
Congress leadership, at the central and provincial levels, was
manifest. The inarticulate and politically naive Sonia Gandhi,
dependent on a small coterie of the urban elites of Delhi, was unable
to rise to the role of an Opposition leader. She was never looked up to
by the middle-cadre Congress leadership as a person who could lead the
battle against Hindutva with any effectiveness. Concentrating on the
"prestigious" state of Delhi, Sonia Gandhi also failed miserably to
adhere to her announced speaking schedules in the three other provinces.
The BJP cashed on the
non-performance of the Congress-run governments and on the weak
leadership of Ms. Gandhi by adopting an aggressive line of Hindutva.
Its second-rung leaders were everywhere, addressing meetings,
organising the local Mafiosi to orchestrate poll rigging, pouring in
billions of Rupees to strengthen its election "machinery."
At thousands of
meetings, central leaders such as Vajpayi and L K Advani had but a
single theme to offer: Hindutva and a caste-free society. Wracked by
poverty and wounded at the insensitive nature of the elitist Congress,
the common people came out in millions to vote for the BJP. As a
shopkeeper in Madhya Pradesh told us, while coming out of a polling
booth, "Why should we not vote for the BJP which not only offers us
protection against the Muslims but also against caste prejudices?"
The final nail in the
coffin for the Congress was its arrogant rejection of any political
alliance, either with the Left or with the regional political outfits.
The BJP managed to win in at least 100 seats because of the vote-split
that took place. In a scenario where the Congress would not go it
alone, it would have won in Chhattisgarh and Rajasthan, and would have
given the BJP and its allies a run for their money in Madhya Pradesh.
The Congress debacle was
followed up by an embarrassing episode when the outgoing chief minister
of Chhattisgarh, Ajit Yogi, was caught on audio tape offering a large
amount of funds to some lower caste BJP members of the
newly-constituted Assembly to defect to the Congress and topple the BJP
government. This was a sting operation; the BJP legislators who were
approached by Yogi were wired to tape the entire sordid affair. The
BJP, which has refused to initiate proceedings against its Chhattisgarh
leader, Dilip Singh Judev, who was caught on camera accepting bribes
from a "businessman" to allow illegal mining rights, cashed in on the
Yogi episode to run down the Congress as a corrupt outfit.
But much more dangerous
is the tendency among a section of the all-India Congress leadership to
gradually lean towards the right as time goes by and early general
elections loom on the political horizon.
|
