THE OTHER PRESS

OTH ER-OPINION

a a

NOVEMBER 2ND 1983"

 

What the Socred Budget is all About

Since the announcement by
our provincial government
of the budget on July 7,
British Columbia has been
by George Porges

History Dept.

Douglas College .

in continuous and increasing
turmoil. The declared aim of
the budget is ‘‘fiscal re-
straint,’’ but, when examin-
ed more closely, it is some-
thingTadically different. It is
an all-out attack on the
rights of the less affluent
and fortunate citizens of this
province through the abol-
ition of the Human Rights
Commission, the end of the
protection of tenants throu-
gh the phasing out of the
office of Rentalsman and
termination of rent control,
the end of the protection of
the workers from unjust
dismissal by both the under-
mining of the process of
collective bargaining
through official wage rest-
raints and the wiping out of
job security by allowing
employers to dismiss em-
ployees without cause by the
newly established arbitrary
right of declaring them
‘“‘redundant.’’ At the same
time regional planning is
being abolished and the
path opened both for the
restricted creation of urban
sprawls for the benefit of
developers and the steady
diminution of the province’s
agricultural land for the
benefit of anti-social profit-
eers. Regional autonomy in
education gives way to com-
plete centralization in the
hands of the government
through the abolition of
elected School and College
Boards; at the same time the
Ministry of Education
assumes complete power to
determine the local curric-

 

ulum and change the charac-,

ter of the colleges. However,
the immediate target of
this government offensive is
the provincial public service
whose personnel is slated to
be reduced by a quarter, the
process to begin at the end
of this month. By making
the civil servants the prime
scapegoats for the world-
wide depression now grip-
ping the capitalist system,
the government arouses
painful memories of a sim-
ilar process-although with
different  scapegoats-that
‘began in Germany in 1933.
One of the immediate effects
will be the abolition of
mandatory vehicle inspec-
tion (although ‘‘free enter-
prise,’’ charging $50.00, will

probably later on provide
the same service whose cost
‘before July 7 was one-tenth
of that sum).
The cuts in the social
services represent a tragic
blow to the least fortunate
members. of B.C. society.
The abolition of child abuse
ams, of support workers
for families in crisis, of day
care centres for the elderly,
of the $50.00 monthly allow-
ances which enabled the
handicapped and income
assistance recipients to be-
come involved in voluntary
community services or job
training, the ending of plan-
ned parenthood support and
of alternative counselling for
teen-agers leave catastrop-
‘hic gaps in our social fabric.
They cannot be replaced, as
the government hopes, by
Churches and_ volunteer
agencies as if we still lived
in 18th century Europe. At
the same time, the govern-
ment’s plan to scale down
the cost of education with
the goal of spending less
money on it in 1985 than in
1982, unexampled  else-
where in Canada, will lead
to the dismissal of teachers,
large and unwieldy classes
and lesser opportunities for
students to enter colleges
and universities. Already
B.C. has the worst student
assistance program in Can-
ada. The future social costs
of these measures in terms
of provincial backwardness
are simply incalculable.
Finally, the government’s
intention of changing B.C.’s
Labour Code, the most pro-
gressive in North America,
in favour of the employers,
and the undisguised
attempts to diminish the
rights of trade unionists,
especially in the public sec-
tor through the ‘‘ability to
pay’’. which permits the
government to dictate pay
increases: or decreases de-
moralizes a whole section of
the population. It sets prec-
edents for similar treatment
of trade unionists working in
the private sector of the
economy. Also, the
unabashed intention of the
government to permit em-
ployers to break contracts
endangers the very basis of
civilized society.
Altogether, the govern-
ment’s program represents
an attack by the wealthier
and less scrupulous and
compassionate sections of
the population on _ those
members of society who are
less prosperous and more
vulnerable. It is literally

 

Graphic/ Ubyssey

class warfare at its worst:
the rich against the poor and
polarizes the  province’s
population into two camps.
The  government’s aim
appears to be the establish-
ment of a favourable climate
for foreign investment in
this province by restricting
the rights of the workers to
bargain collectively and thus
keeping wages low with the
excuse that more opportun-
ities of employment would
result. However, it appears

more likely that increased

friction on the labour scene
will, in the long run, be the
real outcome of such a policy
and discourage potential
investors. In the short run,

job insecurity will lead to

less consumer spending in
the province and_ even
bigger unemployment.
Generally speaking, the gov-
ernment’s program tends to
put the province’s social
climate back into the 1920s
and 1930s; history provides
ample proof that such
attempts, after having inflic-
ted untold misery and hard-
ship, are doomed to failure.,
Not even Mussolini and
Hitler who abolished politic-
al opposition and free trade
unions were able to stop
mankind’s march towards
a more compassionate and

 

 

 

 

&
«
ay
i
humane society.

The most ironic aspect of
all this is that, although
“‘restraint’’ is the catch-
word of the government’s
program, both government
spending and deficit will
actually increase this year.
Furthermore, the Social
Credit government, during
the election campaign last
spring, did not clearly reveal
its intentions and did not
receive the kind of majority
which would justify any kind
of drastic departure from
previous conduct. Thus the
attempt of the New Dem-
ocratic opposition to stop or,
at least, to modify the
government’s proposed
legislation by parliamentary
means-for __ parliamentary
action distinguishes a dem-
ocracy from a dictatorship-is
our accepted way of con-
ducting political business.
Regrettably, the govern-
ment’s action of ending
debate through the misuse
of closure and the expulsion
of the Leader of the Oppos-
ition from the Legislature
makes a mockery of the
democratic process which,
ultimately, rests on the
enexpressed but generally
understood consensus that
the government governs and
the Opposition opposes. It is

  

WHAT ARE yOv

LYING AROUND FOR?
Get BACK UP AND
PUSH THAT THNG BACK

4

because of the government’s
insistence on ruthless con-
frontation that the British
Columbians opposed to the
government’s program and

conduct have formed the
broadly-based Solidarity
movement whose backbone
consists of the threatened
working population of the
province. With the govern-
ment’s refusal to permit the
Opposition its parliamentary
rights, Solidarity is compell-
ed to express popular dis-
gust by taking-peacefully-to
the streets. Mr. Bennett’s
public address, while not
alleviating distrust of his
intentions, has at least
shown that the march of
50,000-70,000 people past
the Social Credit Convention
in Hotel Vancouver has im-
pressed the government.
Support of Solidarity with
increasing vigour thus
seems the best way of
preventing B.C. from
becoming Canada’s banana
republic with - contrasting
grinding poverty and vast
wealth, a backward economy
and unconcerned exploiters,
run by a government some
of whose members seem to
be as suitable for conducting
democratic public business
as is a group of pyromaniacs
running a fire brigade.