The political parties in the parliament and monopoly-owned media have unleashed a barrage of propaganda recently about how "the budget surplus" should be spent. The release of Federal Finance Minister Paul Martin's economic statement is an occasion to deafen us further with this talk which goes on under the guise of discussion. Typical of the coverage is how one newspaper wrote that Martin's statement will unleash "a public opinion war (with) public interest groups and political parties ... lining up on both sides of the ideological spectrum to battle it out over what Ottawa should do with the first federal budget surplus in more than 30 years." Central to this barrage of propaganda that goes on under the guise of discussion is talk about the so-called "left" position i.e. that of the NDP which is to now increase spending on social programs and "job creation," and the so-called "right" position i.e. that of the Reform Party and the Progressive Conservatives which is to cut taxes and pay down the debt. In all of this, the Liberals are portrayed as representing the "centre" of the political spectrum; walking a tight-rope, doing what is "sensible", seeking to please everyone, and so on. The position of the Liberals can be summed up by nineteenth century conceptions of "fair play" in which they are the representatives of the so-called golden age. Clearly, the federal Liberals are trying to use the "fiscal dividend" to accommodate the opposition on both sides of the bourgeoisie's political field. This concerns differences of opinion on how to best pay the rich and keep the opposition of the working class and people in check. In this, the government has established its policy of exacting tribute from the entire society, slashing social programs, reducing benefits to unemployed workers, handing over monies to various interests in the name of "job creation," jacking up CPP premiums, creating a Team Canada Inc. to absorb all the risks of the monopolies competing for foreign markets, and so on, in order to meet its obligations to the financiers and monopolies at home and abroad. It has presented its logic that in doing so, the people will "gain" in the end. There are differences of opinion between the political parties of the rich as to which of these measures to implement, but none deal with the direction of the economy as a whole and whom it should serve. The House of Commons Finance Committee Chairman Maurizio Bevilacqua told reporters that "the big question is how to use the levels of fiscal policy responsibly, but still give Canadians the tools to generate economic prosperity." "It's not an either/or issue," he added. The bottom line is that neither the Chretien Liberals nor any of the opposition on what is called the left or right of the political spectrum are planning on changing the direction of the economy to stop paying the rich and increase funding for social programs on that basis. If before they paid the rich in the name of "eliminating the deficit," now they will do it in the name of "paying down the debt," "creating jobs" and power sharing with the provinces, which will then use the funds to pay the rich as they are clamouring to do. The monopoly-owned media and political parties of the rich are calling on the Canadian working class and people to take sides between one or the other of them as if they have a stake in this discussion. Choosing sides is the role given to the Canadian working class and people in this equation. They have no role whatsoever in the decision-making as concerns the affairs of the polity, especially its most important component, the economy. They are marginalized totally, with their only role supposed to be to support one or the other party which represents alien class interests. Should they take sides in this affair, or should they affirm their own interests, which is to insist that their claims upon society, and especially the economy, be given first priority? The capitalist economy is in deep, all-sided crisis. The financial oligarchy is attempting to extricate itself from this crisis through the anti-social offensive. The Chretien Liberals and others want to keep the workers from coming to the warranted conclusion about the crisis of the system, and maintain the illusion that governments of the financial oligarchy spend the people's money with an aim that is different from the aim of the capitalist system, that is, the pursuit of maximum capitalist profit. The society is divided between rich and poor with a section in between being pushed into the poor. It is divided between haves and have-nots, with a section of small haves in between who are wiped out, eaten up, forced into bankruptcy. Politically, the haves have their representatives and compete for the votes of the have-nots. They wage a struggle between them which is carried out within the context of the right, left and centre of a political spectrum in which the working class and people are completely disempowered and have no representation. On the other side, stand the disempowered "electors" who are fighting to defend themselves against the anti-social offensive and advance a pro-social program which can take Canada into the twenty-first century on the road to progress. Politically, this program has been put forward by CPC(M-L). It is the program to Prepare for the Twenty-First Century by Stop Paying the Rich Increase Funding for Social Programs. The elaboration of this program has begun across the country. TML Daily calls on the workers, women, youth and students and all progressive forces to discuss and elaborate this program and not get fooled by the propaganda barrage that passes for discussion in the House of Commons and the media. TML DAILY, 10/97 Shawgi Tell Graduate School of Education University at Buffalo [EMAIL PROTECTED]