FIGUEROA LOOKS BEHIND TURMOIL IN PARLIAMENT

(The following article is from the March 16-31, 2008 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, c/o PV Business Manager, 133 Herkimer St. Unit 502, Hamilton, ON, L8P 2H3).

People's Voice interview with Miguel Figueroa, leader of the Communist Party of Canada

People's Voice: The federal scene has been quite tumultuous in recent months. How do you read the manoeuvrings of the Harper government and the opposition parties?

Miguel Figueroa: It is no surprise that many Canadians find the bobbing and weaving on Parliament Hill more than a bit bewildering. Fundamentally, the volatility is being driven by the desperate attempts of the federal Conservatives to create the necessary conditions to win a clear majority in the next election, whenever it comes. The problem they face is that the majority of the peoples of Canada continue to oppose the main policy lines of their right-wing agenda. The latest polls show that the Tories are still far short of the 40% or so to gain their coveted majority. Therefore, they have been forced to bide their time, introducing as many populist measures as possible even in a minority situation.

PV: Such as we witnessed in the recent budget?

MF: Yes, of course. On the surface, it was hardly the fiscally conservative budget one would normally expect from these neo-Cons -- some short-term relief for the struggling auto industry; some token funding for rapid transit, seniors, post-secondary students, and Aboriginal peoples, etc.

     It was a skilfully crafted but deceitful budget. First, because the allocations don't come remotely close to what is objectively needed to preserve jobs in the critical manufacturing sector, to reverse the degradation of the environment, or to defend (much less improve) vital social programs such as healthcare, education or childcare. This is inexcusable and irresponsible, especially as the U.S. economic recession begins to impact on the employment and real income of working people in this country, particularly the most under-paid and vulnerable. And second, because the budget transfers even more wealth - in the form of tax cuts, credits and the new tax-free savings account program - to big business and the wealthy. This allows finance capital, in the first place, the banks and resource-based monopolies, to continue to amass obscene levels of profit at the expense of the working class and of our environment.

PV: The Liberals under Stéphane Dion had an opportunity to block the budget but instead decided to give it their grudging support.

MF: They blinked at a crucial moment when they could have defeated the Tories and precipitated an election which might have driven Harper and his wrecking crew from office. The pundits in the mainstream corporate press have explained this retreat in narrow electoral terms, on the basis that the Liberals were unprepared to go to the polls, and that "election-weary" Canadians would punish them for bringing down the government, and so on.

     But there is much more at work here. The Liberal Party establishment and its coterie of backroom advisors understand full well that "Bay Street" considers the Tories as their preferred political tool at the moment. Any move to jeopardize Conservative control in Ottawa would be harshly judged by those dominant sections of the ruling class, the class which after all drives the political course of the Liberals as well as the Tories. This is the principal reason why the response of Dion and his caucus has been so tepid and uncertain on critical issues like tax policy, social programs, the war in Afghanistan, among others. Naturally they pursue their partisan interests as a political party, but at the end of the day, they are not prepared to offend their masters in the dominant circles of capital.

PV: This presumably applies to the negotiated deal between Harper and Dion over extending the Afghan mission to 2011 as well?

MF: Without doubt, the Liberals' retreat on Afghanistan is shameful and indefensible. But we need to bear the following in mind. As on other vital questions, the inner circle of the Liberal Party is deeply divided, with people like Bob Rae, Michael Ignatieff and John Manley among the most ardent boosters of this illegal and immoral imperialist war and occupation.

     Nor should we forget that Harper and the Tories - together with General Hillier and the military-industrial complex in Canada and the U.S. - are the main political force driving this militarist course. What we have said previously continues to apply: the Harper Tories represent the most aggressive pro-war interests in Canada, and constitute the greatest danger to peace, Canadian sovereignty and independence, democratic rights, and the social and economic rights and interests of working people. So while we are sharply critical of the Liberal retreats, we should never lose sight of the fact that the Conservative Party is the main enemy of the working class.

     Finally, we should recall the opportunist decision of Jack Layton and the federal NDP last April, when they decided to vote with the Tories to defeat a Liberal motion which would have set a February 2009 final date for the withdrawal of Canadian combat forces from Afghanistan. This untied the Liberals from that firm commitment and set the stage for the current retreat.

PV: The Tories remain quite vulnerable however because of various scandals in their ranks...

MF: For sure. A number of scandals and missteps, like the Karlheinz Schreiber affair and the sacking of Linda Keen, head of the Nuclear Safety Commission, among others have helped to expose the autocratic and vindictive character of Harper and the Prime Minister's Office (PMO). But the Chuck Cadman affair will likely prove to be the most serious of all, not only because it involves a criminal act of bribery which implicates PM Harper, but because it reveals the depths to which this gang is willing to go to gain and hold onto power. Canadians have every right to be furious about these revelations, and to demand a full and independent investigation into this crime, and Harper's resignation. If this incredible story had surfaced in the middle of a spring election campaign, the Tories would most certainly have been swept from power.

PV: What then are the prospects for defeating the Harper Tories?

MF: Ever since the election of the Harper minority in January 2006, we have cautioned against passivity, or the pinning of hopes on the opposition parties in Parliament to bring about their defeat. The experience of the last two months confirms that it is precisely the extra-parliamentary forces - the labour movement, together with Aboriginal peoples, women, youth, and other people's movements - which will be the decisive factor in driving the Tories from office. But to achieve that goal will require building the unity and mobilization of these broad social forces and the millions of Canadians they represent.

     The organized trade union movement has a determining role to play in this respect, arising from its size, its resources, and most of all because of the central place of labour in the very process of production in society. The upcoming Convention of the Canadian Labour Congress in May will need to confront this challenge. Militant and progressive trade unionists need to intensify efforts to ensure that the CLC shed its lethargy and undertake the kind of fighting plan of action the times call for. For our part, the CPC and its members will do everything possible to encourage and help build that fightback.