>of the big corporations. The Communist Party of Canada pledges to fight for
>solutions that meet the short and long term interests of working people,
>and that protect the environment and defend Canadian sovereignty.
>
>****************************
>
>5/ INDEPENDENT TRUCKERS HARD HIT BY RISING COSTS
>
>AMONG THOSE hardest-hit by the oil crisis are truckers, who remain a vital
>part of the transportation sector in most countries.
>
>While the rise in fuel prices is the immediate cause of truckers’ protests,
>their anger is based on intolerable working conditions. Trucking in North
>America has become a form of “sweatshop on wheels,” following the
>deregulation and de-unionization of the industry. Almost none of the “over
>the road” general carriers (which handle 90% of all truck freight in North
>America) are still unionized. Many drivers earn less money per mile than 15
>years ago.
>
>In fact, these drivers are more like indentured serfs than “independent”
>owner-operators. They are bound by lease agreements to the carrier
>companies, which set the rates, provide the trailers, own the license
>plates and permits, and often, hold the mortgage or lease contract on the
>truck itself. Drivers are responsible for truck payments, repairs,
>maintenance, insurance, and all other costs, including fuel. As
>“owner-operators,” they are forbidden from forming unions or bargaining
>collectively.
>
>No wonder that a drastic increase in their daily operating costs has
>sparked outrage among truckers! The best response to their critical
>problems lies in the campaign by progressive truckers to legally reclassify
>drivers as employees. Hopefully the rage and desperation caused by the fuel
>crisis can be channelled into a powerful movement to regain their rights as
>workers.
>
>*********************************
>
>6/ MOX: THE LATEST NUCLEAR THREAT
>
>By Bill Morris
>
>AN INTERNATIONAL COALITION of environmental, anti-nuclear and peace
>organizations held actions on Sept. 28 as part of their International Day
>to Nix MOX. But Canada is heading in the opposite direction, embracing the
>use of mixed oxide plutonium (MOX) in its reactors.
>
>Even the most cynical among us can still be shocked by our government’s
>cavalier attitude to the safety and health of Canadians. Since they took
>office, the Chrétien Liberals have vigorously pursued plans to test
>plutonium from Russian warheads as fuel for CANDU reactors, starting at the
>Chalk River nuclear facility. On Sept. 21, after an appallingly short
>“public consultation” heavily favouring the nuclear industry, the
>government announced approval of the shipment.
>
>That means a plane carrying the plutonium could soon arrive from Russia,
>landing in either CFB Trenton, Ontario, or CFB Bagotville, Quebec. From
>there, the plutonium would helicoptered to Chalk River, despite complaints
>in the courts by unions, citizens organizations and First Nations bands.
>
>Communist Party environment committee member Mick Panesar was outraged at
>the news. “We have dozens of people’s organizations opposing the plan.
>There is also a large body of scientific evidence showing that
>immobilization of the plutonium is the only safe method of dealing with the
>material. But what does our government do fly it over some of the most
>populated areas of the country. This shows a complete disregard for the
>public.”
>
>The feds argue that their decision is a step towards world peace. Recently
>the US and Russia announced that they would declare roughly 50 metric tons
>of plutonium as surplus to military needs. Many see this as a step towards
>disarmament, and support the stated goal of ensuring that this plutonium is
>not diverted, stolen, or reused in weapons, but disagree with the proposed
>plan to deal with the weapons grade plutonium.
>
>The plan is that the US and Russian governments will convert most of their
>plutonium into mixed oxide plutonium fuel for use in commercial nuclear
>power reactors (mainly light water reactors), in their own countries and
>possibly Canada. Russia also plans to use this MOX in their plutonium
>breeder reactors, which could produce more plutonium than is used (though
>the program pledges not to operate the reactors so as to produce more
>plutonium).
>
>In 1999, raising serious questions about this plan, more than 239
>organizations signed a statement opposing the use of MOX fuel and declared
>Sept. 28 as International NIX MOX day. Their main concerns are:
>a) the plan does not really address the proliferation threat, since while
>the MOX is being transported or stored, the fresh MOX fuel can be separated
>and used for weapons purposes;
>b) it will eventually encourage the reprocessing of plutonium-bearing spent
>fuel, generating vast amounts of liquid radioactive waste and increasing
>stockpiles of separated plutonium, both in the US and Russia;
>c) many technical and safety questions are left unanswered, as
>weapons-grade plutonium has never been used as a fuel in commercial reactors;
>d) it will probably take longer and cost more to dispose of plutonium using
>MOX than the current alternative, immobilization.
>e) plutonium incorporated into high-level radioactive waste could re-enter
>the environment; and finally,
>f) by blurring the distinction between civil and military nuclear
>activities, the program may undermine nonproliferation efforts.
>As the “Statement by World Nongovernmental Organizations Opposing the Use
>of Plutonium (MOX) Fuel” states: “We pledge to expand a united
>international movement that will challenge every effort to develop,
>encourage, or use MOX fuel as a means of plutonium disposition, will work
>toward the goal of having all plutonium declared surplus, and vow to
>continue our efforts to ensure the isolation of plutonium from the
>environment.”
>
>For more information contact the Campaign for Nuclear Phaseout, email
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, web site: www.cnp.ca.
>
>***********************************
>
>7/ WOMEN’S MARCH HEADS TO OTTAWA
>
>A message from the Central Women’s Commission,
>Communist Party of Canada
>
>IN AN unprecedented campaign against neoliberal globalization, women from
>the Canadian East to West to North are joining millions of their sisters
>from over 157 countries and 5000 groups to demand that governments respect
>and promote women’s human rights. Canadian women will march onto Parliament
>Hill on Oct. 15, to call for immediate and effective measures to end
>poverty and violence against women.
>
>Today’s statistics are starkly revealing: One out of every six women is
>poor. Women still earn an average of two-thirds of the male wage. Along
>with women with disabilities, Aboriginal women (33%), women of colour (28%)
>and immigrant women (21%) face the highest levels of poverty. Women living
>alone, who are over 65 years of age, face a poverty rate of 49%! With the
>increase in women’s poverty, one in five Canadian children are poor; in
>fact, 56% of single parent families headed by women are poor.
>
>Insecurity and fear caused by the attacks on our social safety net push
>many women into staying in abusive relationships. In the last twenty years,
>close to 1500 women have been killed by their spouses.
>
>These realities make the Women’s March 2000 highly relevant. Marches,
>rallies, forums, festivals, conferences and many other activities are
>taking place to focus attention on the issues of poverty and violence
>against women. During September, “Take Back the Night” marches protested
>male violence in communities in every province and territory.
>
>Many other World March activities took place last month. To name just a
>few: the dramatic “Journey for Justice” by Aboriginal women rafting down
>the Fraser River; “Speak Outs” held by Black women in Toronto to discuss
>issues of racism, immigration, poverty and violence; a march by community
>coalitions in Brandon, organized to coincide with the Manitoba Federation
>of Labour convention.
>
>Throughout October, communities across the country will hold events leading
>up to the Québec-wide rally in Montréal on October 14, and the October 15
>rally on Parliament Hill.
>
>The Ottawa rally will present the federal government with a “Feminist
>Dozen” of thirteen immediate demands for action (see box on this page). The
>full and detailed list of 68 demands can be found in “It’s Time for
>Change,” the document developed and produced by the Canadian Women’s March
>Committee.
>
>Initiated by the Fédération des femmes du Québec, the World March of Women
>in the Year 2000 was inspired by the 4th World Conference on Women in
>Beijing in 1995, the 1995 Québec Women’s March, and the 1996 Women’s March
>Against Poverty organized by the National Action Committee on the Status of
>Women (NAC) and Canadian Labour Congress.
>
>This year, the Canadian Women’s March Committee includes, in addition to
>NAC, the CLC and the FFQ, other equality-seeking organizations such as the
>National Anti-Poverty Organization, the Canadian Abortion Rights Action
>League, the Canadian Federation of Students, the Child Care Advocacy
>Association, the Congress of Black Women, the Disabled Women’s Network, the
>Native Women’s Association of Canada, and the National Organization of
>Immigrant and Visible Minority Women of Canada.
>
>On October 17, a delegation of Canadian women will join their sisters from
>around the world in New York City for the World Rally at the United Nations.
>
>So join us in Ottawa if you can, or be sure to join in the activities in
>your own communities, as we go marching, riding, jogging, wheeling,
>walking, dancing and fighting to end poverty and violence against women.
>The time for change is now!
>
>*******************************
>
>8/ US PRESENCE GROWING IN COLOMBIA
>
>Highlights of a Sept. 21 People’s Voice interview with a representative of
>the International Commission of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of
>Colombia-People’s Army (FARC-EP):
>
>Question: What is the extent of US military and political presence in
>Colombia at the moment?
>
>Reply: Colombia is a country that is dependent on and dominated by the
>economic and political designs of the United States. The U.S. has been
>increasing its military presence through the instalment of so-called
>military advisors and instructors of military battalions, financed by Plan
>Colombia. We estimate the number of these advisors at about one thousand,
>although they officially acknowledge only around 300, without taking into
>account all the members of foreign intelligence and security organizations
>that move around in Colombia as if in their own home.
>
>Q: When will this increasing U.S. presence spark some kind of military
>confrontation?
>
>Reply: The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia-People’s Army (FARC-EP)
>have pointed out that Plan Colombia is a plan for war. When it begins to be
>implemented at the end of this month or the beginning of October, so too
>will begin the popular response to the aggression that it signifies, and
>this will increase the level of the war.
>
>Q: What is the present status of the peace talks between the Pastrana
>government and FARC-EP?
>
>Reply: The dialogue process, which is designed to find alternatives other
>than war to resolve the Colombian conflict, maintains its course amid
>ever-increasing difficulties caused by the obvious lack of will and
>political capacity on the part of the Colombian government to take it
>further. At this time, the Public Hearings are continuing to take place in
>the New Colombia, San Vicente del Caguan. Furthermore, still on the table
>at our request, is the proposal for a cease fire and suspension of
>hostilities, which will soon be dealt with by the National Table of Dialogues.
>
>Regardless of what is done by class enemies in respect to their policies
>for peace, the FARC-EP maintains without reservation, the will to
>contribute to the search for political solutions through dialogues to
>obtain peace with social justice, dignity, independence and sovereignty.
>
>Q: Tell us a little bit about the situation in the liberated zones
>controlled by FARC-EP.
>
>Reply: Because we are a guerrilla army, we continue with the tactic of
>absolute mobility, thus we don’t control exactly defined zones. Our sixty
>fronts cover the entire national geography, and each of them has their
>zones of influence, areas in which we exercise state functions.
>
>A different thing is the zone which was demilitarized for the dialogues,
>the focal centre of which is San Vicente del Caguan, which exists precisely
>to develop the process for building peace. This is the location of the
>National Table of Dialogues, and the Public Hearings, which have become a
>centre of discussion and debate in Colombia over how to construct the New
>Colombia.
>
>Q: What are the key actions which can be taken by supporters of the peace
>process and opponents of U.S. intervention, in Canada and other countries?
>
>Reply: The actions we request are those which will repudiate and denounce
>Plan Colombia as a plan of war, as a plan of U.S. intervention in the
>internal matters of our country. We also ask for support for the peace
>process being developed in the demilitarized zone. Any action that will
>result in increased awareness of these issues is important, whether
>projected through the press, radio, television, magazines, public
>assemblies, protest marches, rallies and conferences; or any other type of
>action with this purpose. Letters to this effect can be sent to the
>embassies of Colombia and the United States, and also to the Canadian
>government, with which we are prepared to talk in order to present our
>version, whether they visit us in the demilitarized zone, or receive us in
>Canada.
>
>********************************
>
>9/ IMPORTANT VICTORY IN UNIV. OF TORONTO ANTI-RACISM STRUGGLE
>
>By Danny Goldstick
>
>EMBATTLED RESEARCHER Kin-Yip Chun has finally won his long fight against
>discrimination at the University of Toronto, which has now hired him back
>with compensation. This is a significant victory for the student movement,
>Chinese-Canadians, and all supporters of academic integrity.
>
>Before he was abruptly thrown off the campus after vocally raising
>equity-hiring issues in the U of T’s Physics Department, Chinese-Canadian
>geophysicist Chun had earned an international scientific reputation in the
>detection of earthquakes and underground nuclear explosions. He had
>represented Canada at technical conferences on monitoring observance of the
>Nuclear Test Ban treaty.
>
>The Chun case is about racism at the university. Not individual racism on
>anybody’s part so much as systemic racism. The U of T has long admitted it
>“exploited” Dr. Chun, but it denies any racism was involved. For ten years
>Chun worked for the U of T without receiving any pay from the university.
>He taught graduate and undergraduate courses, supervised grad students,
>“postdocs” and research associates, headed a lab, and served on Physics
>Department committees -- and for all that was paid nothing.
>
>“On the side,” he brought into the university $1.4 million of outside
>research grants (not awarded for teaching) and had to support his family
>out of a portion of that. Four times he applied for a regular teaching
>appointment with the possibility of eventual tenure, and four times he was
>passed over in favour of white males. “Unrelated” racial incidents somehow
>kept bubbling up in the Physics Department when hiring decisions were made.
>
>Chun first complained to the Ontario Human Rights Commission in 1992. Five
>OHRC Special Investigators assigned to the case came and went until number
>six, after a year of investigation, finally brought in a 25-page report
>last February which reviewed the evidence, noted the apparent workings of
>an “Old Boys’ network” favouring Anglo-Saxons in the Physics Department,
>and called for a public Board of Inquiry to nail down all the facts and
>determine any measures to be taken. The U of T declared it welcomed a Board
>of Inquiry, then reversed its position on the grounds of saving public expense.
>
>The university also claimed that each of the four job candidates favoured
>over Dr. Chun was better qualified. Its representatives produced lists of
>published research for these four at the time they were hired, with up to
>three times more entries than the lists of their publications provided to
>the U of T’s own internal investigation six years earlier. No mention was
>made of the fact that one of the four had to be subsequently let go by the
>U of T.
>
>The Human Rights Commission asked both sides to submit a response to the
>Special Investigator’s Report. Dr. Chun was warned, “Please take note that
>any appendices or attachments to your submission will not be placed before
>the Commission when it reaches its decision.” Chun abided by that but the
>university snowed the Commissioners with 200 pages of documentation. The 13
>Commissioners eventually decided by majority vote that a Board of Inquiry
>was unnecessary as there was no evidence suggesting any possibility of
>racism worth looking into further.
>
>The University of Toronto is a powerful institution. The 13 OHRC
>Commissioners are all appointees of the Harris government.
>
>It was possible, though, to counter that kind of politics with people’s
>politics. Many persons in Kin-Yip Chun’s place would have given up quietly
>and left town, but Chun resisted. In effect, a coalition in support of his
>case developed, which came to include the Canadian Federation of Students,
>the Canadian Association of University Teachers, the international research
>physics community, and key Chinese-Canadian organizations (as well as some
>significant private donors to the U of T).
>
>Eventually, in spite of its paper victory with the OHRC, the university
>acted to salvage what it could of its reputation.
>
>People’s Voice readers will not be surprised with what this shows around
>the status of human rights in Harris’s Ontario. As for the U of T, the
>majority of its students are now persons of colour, but since 1990 the
>proportion of white tenured and “tenure stream” professors has actually
>risen slightly, from 90% to 91.3%. The battle continues.
>
>(Danny Goldstick is a professor of philosophy at the U of T.)
>***************************************
>Communist Party of Canada
>290A Danforth Ave.,
>Toronto, Ont. M4K 1N6
>416-469-2446 (voice)
>416-469-4063 (fax)
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>http://www.communist-party.ca
_______________________________________________________
KOMINFORM
P.O. Box 66
00841 Helsinki - Finland
+358-40-7177941, fax +358-9-7591081
e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.kominf.pp.fi
_______________________________________________________
Kominform list for general information.
Subscribe/unsubscribe messages to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Anti-Imperialism list for anti-imperialist news.
Subscribe/unsubscribe messages:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________________
