A Lesson in Mutual Aid

"The war of each against all is not the law of nature. Mutual aid is as much a law of nature as mutual struggle"
Peter Kropotkin, Mutual Aid


STRAY DOG IN KENYA SAVES ABANDONED BABY
"She reckoned it was a young animal and possibly wanted to bring it up," Gilchrist said. "It is something to do with the canine-human bond." "Other dogs might have just left her there to die. ... She's obviously a very special dog," Gilchrist added. "She is a very street-wise dog, that is for sure. The other dogs in the compound did not look very well, but she is the fattest of them all — she obviously knows how to look after herself."

"The importance of the Mutual Aid factor -- "if its generality could only be demonstrated" -- did not escape the naturalist's genius so manifest in Goethe. When Eckermann told once to Goethe -- it was in 1827 -- that two little wren-fledglings, which had run away from him, were found by him next day in the nest of robin redbreasts (Rothkehlchen), which fed the little ones, together with their own youngsters, Goethe grew quite excited about this fact. He saw in it a confirmation of his pantheistic views, and said: -- "If it be true that this feeding of a stranger goes through all Nature as something having the character of a general law -- then many an enigma would be solved. "He returned to this matter on the next day, and most earnestly entreated Eckermann (who was, as is known, a zoologist) to make a special study of the subject, adding that he would surely come "to quite invaluable treasuries of results" (Gespräche, edition of 1848, vol. iii. pp. 219, 221). Unfortunately, this study was never made, although it is very possible that Brehm, who has accumulated in his works such rich materials relative to mutual aid among animals, might have been inspired by Goethe's remark. " Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution by Peter Kropotkin 1902


It's the feel good story of the day, of the week, of the month. It has gained world wide news coverage and resulted in the saving of both the dog and the baby. Both were abandoned, but thanks to the the natural instinct of soldiarity between species, which libertarian communists call Mutual Aid, a stray dog in Kenya saves a starving baby. It is not just a canine human bond, it is a bond between members of a speicies as well as an interspecies bond, which Peter Kropotkin shows in his ground breaking work on the sociology of evolution: Mutual Aid

This much overlooked work, which has won praise from such modern biologists as Stephen Jay Gould, immediately came to mind when I read this story about dog saves human.

Besides being a tale of morality that ellicits our sympathy and empathy, it is also a story about how the struggle of all against all, the survival of the fitist is not the morality of nature, but of capitalism as Kropotkin exposes in his work. He calls it a study of evolution and sociology, and it is a counter theory to the social Darwinism of the capitalist apologists such as Malthus and Spencer.

Kropotkin was not the originator of the idea of Mutual Aid, nor of its basic theory, he was its greatest defender and adaptor, but unfortunately like many Russian science theories it was not accepted in the West.

It still is not taught as an evolutionary theory or as part of the theories of evolution in schools or universities. You will probably come across references to Lamarck before you come across references to Mutual Aid.

"Consequently, when my attention was drawn, later on, to the relations between Darwinism and Sociology, I could agree with none of the works and pamphlets that had been written upon this important subject. They all endeavoured to prove that Man, owing to his higher intelligence and knowledge, may mitigate the harshness of the struggle for life between men; but they all recognized at the same time that the struggle for the means of existence, of every animal against all its congeners, and of every man against all other men, was "a law of Nature." This view, however, I could not accept, because I was persuaded that to admit a pitiless inner war for life within each species, and to see in that war a condition of progress, was to admit something which not only had not yet been proved, but also lacked confirmation from direct observation.

On the contrary, a lecture "On the Law of Mutual Aid," which was delivered at a Russian Congress of Naturalists, in January 1880, by the well-known zoologist, Professor Kessler, the then Dean of the St. Petersburg University, struck me as throwing a new light on the whole subject. Kessler's idea was, that besides the law of Mutual Struggle there is in Nature the law of Mutual Aid, which, for the success of the struggle for life, and especially for the progressive evolution of the species, is far more important than the law of mutual contest. This suggestion -- which was, in reality, nothing but a further development of the ideas expressed by Darwin himself in The Descent of Man -- seemed to me so correct and of so great an importance, that since I became acquainted with it (in 1883) I began to collect materials for further developing the idea, which Kessler had only cursorily sketched in his lecture, but had not lived to develop. He died in 1881.

In one point only I could not entirely endorse Kessler's views. Kessler alluded to "parental feeling" and care for progeny (see below, Chapter I) as to the source of mutual inclinations in animals. However, to determine how far these two feelings have really been at work in the evolution of sociable instincts, and how far other instincts have been at work in the same direction, seems to me a quite distinct and a very wide question, which we hardly can discuss yet. It will be only after we have well established the facts of mutual aid in different classes of animals, and their importance for evolution, that we shall be able to study what belongs in the evolution of sociable feelings, to parental feelings, and what to sociability proper -- the latter having evidently its origin at the earliest stages of the evolution of the animal world, perhaps even at the "colony-stages." I consequently directed my chief attention to establishing first of all, the importance of the Mutual Aid factor of evolution, leaving to ulterior research the task of discovering the origin of the Mutual Aid instinct in Nature."
Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution by Peter Kropotkin 1902

The tale of the dog and the baby in Kenya illustrates this point well. Kroptokin asserts that all species are social species, and that the individual is supported in their individuality through the socialism/social construction of the species. It is a radical idea, one that says evolution occurs through species cooperation not competition. And that such species Mutual Aid occurs also between species, including those such as herbavores and carnivores which may normally prey on each other.

And it applies to those species who are territorial in giving up territory to those who need it. It would be interesting to note how this may have occured recently in Indonesia where the Tsunami drove animals into the mountains not their usual territory.

Kropotkin contends Mutual Aid between species is evidence of social morality appearing in nature.


Moreover, it is evident that life in societies would be utterly impossible without a corresponding development of social feelings, and, especially, of a certain collective sense of justice growing to become a habit. If every individual were constantly abusing its personal advantages without the others interfering in favour of the wronged, no society -- life would be possible. And feelings of justice develop, more or less, with all gregarious animals. Whatever the distance from which the swallows or the cranes come, each one returns to the nest it has built or repaired last year. If a lazy sparrow intends appropriating the nest which a comrade is building, or even steals from it a few sprays of straw, the group interferes against the lazy comrade; and it is evident that without such interference being the rule, no nesting associations of birds could exist. Separate groups of penguins have separate resting-places and separate fishing abodes, and do not fight for them. The droves of cattle in Australia have particular spots to which each group repairs to rest, and from which it never deviates; and so on.(30*) We have any numbers of direct observations of the peace that prevails in the nesting associations of birds, the villages of the rodents, and the herds of grass-eaters; while, on the other side, we know of few sociable animals which so continually quarrel as the rats in our cellars do, or as the morses, which fight for the possession of a sunny place on the shore. Sociability thus puts a limit to physical struggle, and leaves room for the development of better moral feelings. The high development of parental love in all classes of animals, even with lions and tigers, is generally known. As to the young birds and mammals whom we continually see associating, sympathy -- not love -- attains a further development in their associations. Leaving aside the really touching facts of mutual attachment and compassion which have been recorded as regards domesticated animals and with animals kept in captivity, we have a number of well certified facts of compassion between wild animals at liberty. Max Perty and L. Büchner have given a number of such facts.(31*) J.C. Wood's narrative of a weasel which came to pick up and to carry away an injured comrade enjoys a well-merited popularity.(32*) So also the observation of Captain Stansbury on his journey to Utah which is quoted by Darwin; he saw a blind pelican which was fed, and well fed, by other pelicans upon fishes which had to be brought from a distance of thirty miles.(33*) And when a herd of vicunas was hotly pursued by hunters, H.A. Weddell saw more than once during his journey to Bolivia and Peru, the strong males covering the retreat of the herd and lagging behind in order to protect the retreat. As to facts of compassion with wounded comrades, they are continually mentioned by all field zoologists. Such facts are quite natural. Compassion is a necessary outcome of social life. But compassion also means a considerable advance in general intelligence and sensibility. It is the first step towards the development of higher moral sentiments. It is, in its turn, a powerful factor of further evolution.
Chapter 2 Mutual Aid Among Animals
Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution by Peter Kropotkin 1902


Such is the case with our stray bitch in Kenya who rescues an abandoned baby to suckle with her pups. She went to great efforts to save a puppy of a different species. But as the story says she was also suckling two other stray puppies. Unfortunately only the baby survived. Such effort to drag a baby back to her nest, and to feed and protect it is beyond the so called maternal instinct, or even the domestication bond between humans and dogs. If ever there was a clear cut case of evidence for Mutal Aid this is it.

"When the dog picked up the baby in a dirty bag, it came and dropped her behind the wooden building where the dog has its puppies," Mwalimu told The Associated Press Monday.

The dog reportedly dragged the baby across a busy road and through some barbed wire to the shed in the poor Nairobi neighbourhood where puppies from two stray dogs were sheltering.

The infant was discovered after two children alerted elders that they heard the sound of a baby crying near their wooden and corrugated-iron shack. Residents found the baby lying next to the mixed-breed dog and a own pup.

Unwanted infants are often abandoned in Kenya, with poverty and failed relationships frequently to blame. Kenya's weak law enforcement and poor social security system mean most people who forsake their babies are never caught.

The stray dog that saved the child also was being cared for Tuesday, a day after its last surviving puppy died for unknown reasons, said Jean Gilchrist of the Kenya Society for the Protection and Care of Animals.

Animal welfare officials named the dog Mkombozi, or "Saviour," and gave the dog its first bath and de-worming.

"She looks a bit depressed, so we'd like to examine her to see if she has a temperature or any other problem," Gilchrist said. "She wasn't happy when we all poured into the compound. She decided to leave, but kids in the compound brought her back for the bath because she was full of ticks."



KENYANS ARE EAGER TO ADOPT BABY GIRL FOUND IN LITTER OF PUPPIES
Felix Omondi, an 11-year-old student with his dog now named Mkombozi (Saviour) in a compound on the outskirts of Nairobi, Tuesday, May 10, 2005, after She was treated and washed by medics from Kenya Society for the Protection and care for Animals. The nursing dog foraging for food retrieved an abandoned baby girl in a forest.

So much for the individualist ideology of Herbert Spencer, Ayn Rand and the egoists, that say its a dog eat dog world,that the individual only does what feels good for them. It is a fallacious theory, with little empirical evidence other than philosophical assurances that it is the way things are aka; "There is No Alternative", as Maggie Thatcher said.

Such is not anarchist morality, as Kropotkin takes pains to prove over an over again in Mutual Aid. A stray dog in Kenya shows more anarchist morality than one will ever find in the pages of Reason magazine or the novels of Ayn Rand. Now that's irony.

Anarchist morality is the cooperative communalism of humans as social beings which allows us to express our individuality through Anarchist Communism.

"Communism is capable of assuming all forms of freedom or of oppression which other institutions are unable to do. It may produce a monastery where all implicitly obey the orders of their superior, and it may produce an absolutely free organisation, leaving his full freedom to the individual, existing only as long as the associates wish to remain together, imposing nothing on anybody, being anxious rather to defend, enlarge, extend in all directions the liberty of the individual. Communism may be authoritarian (in which case the community will soon decay) or it may be Anarchist. The State, on the contrary, cannot be this. It is authoritarian or it ceases to be the State.

Communism guarantees economic freedom better than any other form of association, because it can guarantee wellbeing, even luxury, in return for a few hours of work instead of a day's work. Now, to give ten or eleven hours of leisure per day out of the sixteen during which we lead a conscious life (sleeping eight hours), means to enlarge individual liberty to a point which for thousands of years has been one of the ideals of humanity.

This can be done today in a Communist society man can dispose of at least ten hours of leisure. This means emancipation from one of the heaviest burdens of slavery on man. It is an increase of liberty.

To recognise all men as equal and to renounce government of man by man is another increase of individual liberty in a degree which no other form of association has ever admitted even as a dream. It becomes possible only after the first step has been taken: when man has his means of existence guaranteed and is not forced to sell his muscle and his brain to those who condescend to exploit him.

Lastly, to recognise a variety of occupations as the basis of all progress and to organise in such a way that man may be absolutely free during his leisure time, whilst he may also vary his work, a change for which his early education and instruction will have prepared him - this can easily be put in practice in a Communist society - this, again, means the emancipation of the individual, who will find doors open in every direction for his complete development.

As for the rest, all depends upon the ideas on which the community is founded. We know a religious community in which members who felt unhappy, and showed signs of this on their faces, used to be addressed by a "brother": "You are sad. Nevertheless, put on a happy look, otherwise you will afflict our brethren and sisters." And we know of communities of seven members, one of whom moved the nomination of four committees: gardening, ways and means, housekeeping, and exportation, with absolute rights for the chairman of each committee. There certainly existed communities founded or invaded by "criminals of authority" (a special type recommended to the attention of Mr. Lombrose) and quite a number of communities were founded by mad upholders of the absorption of the individual by society. But these men were not the product of Communism, but of Christianity (eminently authoritarian in its essence) and of Roman law, the State.

The fundamental idea of these men who hold that society cannot exist without police and judges, the idea of the State, is a permanent danger to all liberty, and not the fundamental idea of Communism - which consists in consuming and producing without calculating the exact share of each individual. This idea, on the contrary, is an idea of freedom, of emancipation."

Communism and Anarchy
by Peter Kropotkin

We Need a Living Wage

NEO LIBERALISM A FAILURE IN CANADA

Public Policy wonks, both from the left and right, the soul of capitalism; the TD Bank, and Stats Canada all agree that for twenty boom years of capitalism in North America, Canadian workers still have yet to benefit.

The famous trinkle down effect of tax cuts, (royalty rebates, outsourcing, privatization, acquisition and mergers, end of inheritence taxes,ETC.) all that stuff about allowing the market to determine its own future, ends up with that old cliche being true; the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

It is quite apparent from the empirical data that despite the bluff and bluster of the free market hacks like the Fraser Institute, the Atlantic Institute for Market Studies etc.to the contrary, the working class has suffered a drought waiting for the trinkle down effect for over twenty years.


MILLIONS OF CANADIAN WORKERS STILL WAITING FOR THEIR PAYDAY

Tax cuts have produced no measurable effect for the average Canadian family for twenty years. And in fact have contributed to the continuing immizeration of Canadian workers. When Jim Stanford of the Canadian Auto Workers (CAW) and the Chief Economist for the TD.Bank agree on this empirical fact, when will the Conservative right wing admit that their policies do nothing for us but lots for our bosses.

Directly tied to the rights Neo-liberal agenda has been its relentless class war against the working class as a whole and specifically against the weapon of the working class; unions. Cooresponding to the low pay regime of neo-liberalism is also the decline in unionization as another Stats Canada study for this same time period shows.

The battle field of class war has been the introduction of just in time production techniques, team management, flexible working conditions, into the social fabric of all workplaces, private and public. The result of this was an successful campaign to reduce wages even in the unionized sectors as Safeway workers can attest to. Capitalism created a new part time low waged workforce to replace its permanent workers with in the 1980's. Since then it has been full out class war.

This resulted in the broader right wing campaign of contracting out, outsourcing, privatization, as well as the layoff of thousands of public sector workers during the 1993-1996 deficit hysteria, have resulted in a low waged economy.

This combined with technological innovations and mass layoffs, the dumbing down of work and skills, has not resulted in the decline of the falling rate of profit.
It has only temporarily allowed for extensions of the boom in the boom and bust economy of the business cycle.

In order to maintain its high rates of profit the capitalist class war has been to keep wages low, reduce the workforce and create a new culture of piece work or contract work. The result has been that while profits are made, and obscene profits at that, and worker productivity has increased, wages have not.

When you have less workers you have increased productivity. When you have low wages you have increased productivity. If there is a productivity decline in Canada its not because of the low waged work force, it is because the capitalists have failed to re-invest their record profits in their business and in its technology, resulting in decline productivity.

There is lots of cash flowing, usually into someones pocket like Enron, Worldcom, Nortel, Hollinger, Tyco, etc. etc. ad nauseum, but of course not in wages and benefits for workers.

Stanford and the TD Bank are joined by the right wing business think tank the CD.Howe Institute in their criticism that the tax breaks and priming of the pump by the state in its money give aways to Corporate Canada have not resulted in investments in R&D, technology or even improving working conditions. Thus Corporate Canada is directly to blame, as are the various levels of simpering compradour governments provincial and federal, for Canada's lack of competitiveness in the marketplace.

WHOA. STOP THE PRESS!

This should be screaming tombstone 72 pt headlines across the nations print media, it should be featured as the lead newsstory on the electronic media. And it isn't. Here is empirical evidence that the twenty year campaign of neo-liberalism has failed Canadians and benefited the wealthy few. Despite all the rhetoric and propaganda to the contrary. The facts show that the business boom in Canada is a direct result of a low wage policy. That tax cuts have increased profit but not productivity. That this is a NATIONAL SCANDAL of Adscam proportions.

But no, the story is buried in the business and back pages of the papers. And no direct link is drawn by the reporters to how these stories all say the same thing; the Neo Conservatives are Wrong! Wrong! Wrong!

They were wrong when Von Mises was in charge of the Post WWI Austrian Economy. They were wrong when Milton Friedman inflated the Pinochet Chilean Economy. They have been wrong since theier policies were applied by Thatcher, Reagan and Mulroney. They have been wrong when applied by Klein, Harris and now Campbell.

And yet the right wing has not abandoned its predicatable cry for more and more tax breaks as the CD Howe Institute article shows. Never let the facts get in the way of ideology. The CD Howe report shows that investment is the problem not corporate incentives. But they still fall back to the old neo-con mantra; tax cuts.

We don't need tax cuts for corporations we need a Social Wage for all Canadians!

One of the social democratic reforms called for forty years ago was the Guaranteed National Income, which has been recently revived by European Socialists like Andre Gorz and other reformists as the Social Wage.

With the boom in profits that has occured over the past twenty years such a social wage should come directly out of businesses before tax profit. And it could easily be done when you consider most workers in Canada produce at least twice their total salary and benefits in profit.

We need a social wage in Canada of a minimum $10 an hour with a full benefits, and a portable pension plan for all workers. Whether part time, full time and those employed hourly, those on social assistance and EI, and those doing unwaged work.

Corporate Taxes Already Cut, With Few Benefits

According to the TD Bank report, which was released on April 28, Canadian corporations are showing record profits, which they aren't reinvesting. The report attributed the lack of reinvestment to uncertainty due to a volatile global political situation, but warned that “corporations cannot simply build up savings in perpetuity,” but need to invest to “maintain competitiveness”.

"Corporations cannot simply build up savings in perpetuity," the report said, warning that businesses need to invest to maintain their competitiveness.

"In all probability, merger and acquisition will remain a top priority for many Canadian companies in 2005," it said. "But we may also begin to see more in the way of dividend payouts and productivity-enhancing investment initiatives, which, so far, have underperformed profit growth."

Mr. Drummond cautioned, however, that profits will not continue to grow at the unprecedented pace they have been in recent years.

"We're certainly not going to sustain that pace of profit growth through 2005 and 2006, never mind out as far as 2008 when the tax cuts were to have kicked in," Mr. Drummond said.

In fact, a slowdown in profit growth has already started.

Canadian Labour Congress economist Andrew Jackson said that the report shows that past corporate tax cuts are responsible for the profits that aren’t being reinvested. “One is struck by the discrepancy between extremely solid corporate profitability... and the fact that real investment by corporate Canada... has not increased by anywhere near as much,” Jackson was quoted as saying.

CANADIANS LACK TOOLS TO BOOST PRODUCTIVITY, THINK-TANK SAYS

Eric Beauchesne
The Ottawa Citizen
Friday, May 06, 2005

Canada invests less than its competitors, particularly the United States, in ensuring its workers have the latest tools to make them productive, the C.D. Howe Institute said yesterday.

This year, it appears the amount invested in productivity-enhancing machinery and equipment in Canada will be about $1,150 less than the average in all industrial countries, and $2,690, or 23 per cent, less than the U.S.

The report from the business-backed think-tank was issued the same day the United States reported another surge in business productivity in the first quarter, bringing output per hour worked up 2.4 per cent from a year earlier. The U.S. news wasn't all good: labour costs also soared.

Still, the latest figures for Canada suggest there has been virtually no productivity growth here for the past two years. The institute argues increased investment is the key to higher productivity.

In Central Canada, however, capital investment per worker is low and declining, it said, projecting that this year the level in Ontario will be 39 per cent less per worker than in the U.S., while Quebec will 44 per cent less, and Manitoba 36 per cent less.

Pasta Paycheques
- The service industry in Alberta is becoming more competitive in this hot economy. Witness the wage list published on Joey Tomato's website, and listed in an ad for a recent job fair: line cook, $7 to $10 an hour; dishwasher, $7 to $9 an hour; hostess, $7 to $14 an hour. The real payoff is in being a manager, or shift leader: $30,000 to $150,000 a year. Aspiring restaurateurs, note: your eatery needs to dish up a lot of pasta to earn that top figure.

PERCENTAGE OF LOW-PAID WORKERS NOT DECLINING

Proportion of low-paid workers unchanged since 1981
Those earning under $10 an hour make up one of every six full-time workers: study

Norma Greenaway, CanWest News Service

May 6, 2005


The share of Canadian jobs paying low wages has not shrunk since 1981, leaving one in every six full-time workers earning less than $10 an hour, says a new study by Canadian Policy Research Networks Inc. "Does a Rising Tide Lift All Boats? Low-paid Workers in Canada "

The study, being released today, also says that contrary to popular opinion, many low-paid workers -- defined as earning less than $10 an hour -- do not graduate to higher-paid jobs over time.

"There is a tendency to say we know people earn $7 or $8 an hour, but these are teenagers flipping hamburgers, or selling jackets or jeans, and in a few years they will be out earning decent wages and we don't need to worry about them," said Ron Saunders, author of the report.

"What the data show is that -- although teenagers are very disproportionately low-paid -- the rate of low pay is actually high among all age groups."

Saunders said he's surprised the proportion of low-paid workers, about 16 per cent, has not changed since 1981, considering the economic and job gains the Canadian economy has experienced. On top of that, he said, there has been a significant increase in the proportion of the workforce with post-secondary education.

The study says that of the 1.7 million full-time workers being paid under $10 an hour, 30 per cent -- or more than 500,000 -- live in households where the collective income falls below the Statistics Canada low-income cutoff.

"These are full-time workers," Saunders said. "So we're not meeting a very basic societal objective (that) if you're working full time, you ought not to be poor."

Saunders traced the problem to the competitive pressures of globalization, which he says has prompted employers to scramble to cut costs by doing such things as hiring temporary help and outsourcing jobs, the decline in unionization in the private sector and an erosion in social support systems.

Among the study's findings:

- Of those working for low pay of less than $10 an hour, half will not graduate to better wages within five years. Most of them are women and have low education.

- Low pay is four times as prevalent among those who did not complete high school. Among university graduates, about one in 17 earns less than $10 an hour.

- One-quarter of recent immigrants were low-paid in 2000, compared with one-sixth of Canadian-born workers.

- Visible minorities are the most vulnerable among recent immigrants, with almost one-third getting low pay, compared to their counterparts who were not visible minorities.

- At least one in five lone parents, unattached individuals under the age of 40, and persons with a disability also fell into the low-pay category.

Growth in workers' wages dismal since '81, TD Bank says

CP May 5, 2005

OTTAWA -- The wage growth of Canadian workers over the past two decades has been even more dismal than suspected, the TD Bank says.

All that prevented inflation-adjusted, after-tax earnings from actually falling was that today's workforce is better educated, more experienced and includes more women, it said in an analysis Wednesday.

"Having a better-educated workforce with more experienced workers, more women, and a narrower male-female earnings gap are all achievements to be applauded," it says. "These are the only factors that prevented an outright and substantial real decline in Canadian hourly wages between 1981 and 2004."

In a report earlier this year, the bank estimated that the real after-tax incomes of workers rose by only 3.6 per cent over the last 15 years, markedly less than the 25.5 per cent growth in the economy over that time.

Further, it noted that Statistics Canada has reported that median wages in Canada have changed little over the last two decades despite the growing experience and educational attainment of the workforce.

However, if one takes into account that wages normally rise with experience and education, the bank now says: "The result is an even more pessimistic picture of Canadian wage growth than past estimations."

The real hourly wages of men did fall more than two per cent between 1981 and 2004, it says. However, those of women, who now account for a greater share of the workforce, rose by more than eight per cent over that time, although their wages remain lower than men's, it says.

Meanwhile, the average age of workers has increased over the two decades to 39 years from 34 years, it says, adding that because older workers tend to be more experienced, they tend to earn more.

As such, the aging of the workforce should have boosted wages, it says. Adjusting the changes in wages to take that into account, the bank calculates that men's real hourly wages have fallen by more than 10 per cent, while women's wages have increased by only 4.1 per cent.

"Just as changes in gender and age composition can skew the true rate of wage growth, so too can changes in education," it adds.

The proportion of adult Canadians with a university education has increased to more than 25 per cent from 16 per cent in 1981, it notes.

"This means that part of the reason personal income rose at all over the past few decades was that more people were graduating with university degrees, and as a result, getting better-paid jobs," it says.

However, the increase in workers' wages over that time was less than the increase in education would suggest it should have been, it adds.

"In fact, holding age and education constant, Canadians of both genders saw outright declines in their wages," it said. "Astonishingly, for all levels of education and for both sexes, workers earned less in 2004 than in 1981."

© The Vancouver Sun 2005

WORKERS SMARTER BUT NO BETTER PAID THAN 20 YEARS AGO

SURVEY POKES HOLE IN THEORY THAT BETTER-EDUCATED EMPLOYEES EARN MORE MONEY QUICKER

Sutton Eaves
Ottawa Citizen; CanWest News Service

Tuesday, April 26, 2005

OTTAWA - Despite popular theory, statistics show that getting an education is no guarantee a well-paying job will follow.

A Statistics Canada study-Escaping low earnings- of low-paid labour trends indicates that while adult workers are better educated than ever, they are no better paid than they were 20 years ago.

"You have two movements: on one hand, a better-educated workforce, but on the other hand, for some groups, you have falling pay rates," said government researcher Rene Morissette.

Typically, a well-educated employee will earn more money quicker than those with lower education levels, especially as they gain experience and aspire towards higher-paid positions.

The new study pops a hole in this theory, showing that despite rising levels of education among adult workers, many still toil in low-paying jobs.

The proportion of adult workers with a university degree rose about 10 per cent between 1981 and 2004, making them better educated than their predecessors.

Still, the number of adult employees earning less than $10 an hour dropped just one per cent in that time.

All prices have been adjusted to reflect changing inflation rates.

For young, less-educated males, the findings were more stark. Comparing workers whose level of education -- a high school diploma -- did not change since 1981, Morissette found their wages have actually declined by 20 per cent since then. This category is dominated by men aged 25-34.

Morissette offered a couple of theories for the slide backwards. One correlates to the decline of wages across the globe, which forces firms to stay competitive by reducing labour costs.

"Another explanation is that the technological changes we have witnessed over the past 20 years, like the computer-based revolution, may have tended to reduce the demand for low-educated workers," he said.

Overall, wages for workers aged 16-74 rose modestly since 1981 by about six per cent.

For part-time workers, the trend was reversed so the average wage fell 14 per cent from $14.53 an hour to $12.47.

Despite the decline or plateau in worker's wages, the number of employees living in low-income households has not changed since 1981.

This is attributed to the growing number of dual-income families that, with the help of two or more employed members, keep the income level above the low-income cutoff line.

The study says the most economically vulnerable groups are people living alone, single female parents, individuals with only a high school education and recent immigrants to Canada. Twenty-five per cent of working females under the age of 40 were employed in low paying jobs in 2000. For men, that number is 17 per cent.
© The Edmonton Journal 2005

Canada's Lenin

Comrade Gilles Duceppe

The role of a Communist in parliament was outlined in a set of theses adopted by the Communist International in 1920. In essence, that role was to expose the limitations of parliament as a path to improved living conditions for working people. Communists in parliament did not aim to gain “amendments” to reactionary legislation, but to denounce the legislation, and use their resources as an MP to help organize mass campaigns to defeat it. Their role was also to use the parliamentary platform for general socialist agitation. Communist parties were too openly state their political positions, and parliamentarians were bound to support these policies.

A Communist in parliament: the story of Fred Paterson By John Nebauer

The discussion of the tactics of the Bolsheviks reveals quite clearly that the Bolsheviks used the tactic of standing for election to address the masses in periods of working class retreat and demoralization, when mass struggles were not the norm. A struggle that involved re-elaborating again the tactics of the Bolsheviks in the various Russian Dumas (toothless fake parliaments, convened by the tsarist regime to provide a fig-leaf of popular representation). The Bolsheviks used the opportunity of elections to this powerless body as an opportunity to engage in mass agitation and propaganda for the overthrow of the tsarist regime, and as a tribune for the struggles of the working class and the peasantry. Bolshevik deputies were under the strict control of their party, and were not in the Duma to engage in parliamentary careers, but rather to act as revolutionary leaders of the masses.

Weekly Worker 324 Thursday February 24 2000 review

The creation of the Bloc Quebecois was an amalgamation of left and right forces in Quebec after the fall of the Mulroney Tory government to the Liberals, the Grand Old Party of Canadian politics. The centre left Liberals, who wear the mantle of Trudeau Statist Federalism, swept the Tories off the map. The resulting collapse of the Mulroney Tories into the Bloc and the Reform parties was the result of Mulroney’s unholy alliance of Quebec Nationalist politicians and western right wing regionalists and populists.

If Reform was the right rump of Mulroney’s Tories, his left wing was Lucien Bouchard and other Quebec ‘Sovereigntists’ who formed the Bloc Quebecois. While the Sovereigntists were a mixed bunch of both right centre social democrats and left social democrats, the Bloc Quebecois did not ally itself with any of the parliamentary parties in the house, having become the official opposition to the Liberals.

The NDP as a Federalist Left opposition party was weakened but could have strengthened the left opposition to the Liberals. But they did not, given their federalist leadership which continued to ignore the rank and file who had passed pro Quebec resolutions at their national conventions. Any alliance even a tactical one with the Bloc was out of the question to these quisling Canadian nationalists who cared more for their parliamentary careers than offering the Rest of Canada (ROC) and Quebec a left alternative to the Liberals Statist Federalism.

Enter Comrade Gilles Duceppe who replaced right wing privateer and management lawyer Lucien Bouchard(1) as the BQ leader. Duceppe was and remains a communist in the Leninist tradition; his protests to the contrary, belie the fact that the entire Bloc campaign is the classic Leninist Parliamentary strategy of being the Opposition in parliament.

Unlike all the other Federal parties, the BQ has no intention of ever being government. They enter the house as the official opposition from Quebec.

As Sovereigntists they propose a two state solution in Canada, and that is the principled position they fight from.

As Internationalists they believe any gains made for the Quebec working class are gains for the Canadian working class. Such was the claim made by the BQ when they ran for election last summer.

And when they launched their election campaign the key issues the most important issues for them were class struggle issues around Employment Insurance, Job Security, funding for the industrial infrastructure in Quebec.

Unlike the NDP whose program was aimed not at Canadian workers but Canadian Citizens over broad-based issues such as health care, the environment, etc.

It has been the BQ in the house that has lobbied for Anti-Scab legislation this year. That legislation just missed passing in the house. It was squashed by the Conservatives and Liberals.

Under the leadership of Comrade Duceppe, the BQ has adopted a working class program as a left social democratic party, much more so than the mushy social democrats in the NDP. While sovereignty is their goal, it is the sovereignty of the CSN, which was the union Duceppe, was an organizer for and which has been one of the strongest supporters of Quebec nationalism.

During and after last summer’s election Duceppe took the position that the BQ would not give a blanket approval of the minority government nor go into a coalition government but rather in traditional Leninist fashion, they would judge each bill on its own accord.

While the BQ has led the campaign of exposing the Chrétien Liberals and their AdScam scandal in Quebec, it has been the working class issue of the use of the EI funds to shore up the Liberals surpluses, that they have made their cause celebre. This theft, as Duceppe calls it, began under Paul Martin when he was Finance Minister. It has been EI and the need to end it being used as a government slush fund that has given the BQ the voice of the working class in the house.

It is not the NDP, but the BQ that has spoken out loudly and ceaselessly not only for Quebec workers but workers across Canada on this crucial issue. EI’s impact on seasonal and precarious workers is problematic, as the Liberals gutted it they also changed it making it harder for workers to access and limiting the time one can get it. This has negatively impacted on seasonal and part time workers in Quebec and the Rest of Canada (ROC). And it is this issue that has seen the BQ speak out for workers across the country.

The chorus line has been the NDP, who still refuse to recognize the BQ as fellow social democrats. Ever opportunist, they will use the separatist canard when it suits them to appear more federalist than the Liberals or Conservatives. Instead of creating a common front with the BQ the NDP, whose status within Quebec is next to nothing, continues to try and pose itself as a federalist social democratic alternative to the BQ.

The BQ under Canada’s version of Lenin has moved fully to the left, and here is where Duceppe faced criticism of his style. He purged many of the old right that had remained in the party, by refusing to accept their positions as he pushed his left nationalist position within the party. He made it no longer home and they left, usually for the provincial PQ, which has moved to the right as happens when parties gain state power.

The Liberal minority government faces an intransigent Leninist opposition in the BQ and this is what has made their hold on power perilous for the past twelve months. The BQ saw the gains they had made in Quebec at the Liberals expense and knowing more of the AdScam scandal was to come out in public prepared to bring down the government from day one in order to make electoral gains. As polls show those gains will be substantial whenever an election is called.

Unlike the Conservatives who waited till they had polling numbers ahead of the Liberals, the BQ knows that after achieving record seats last summer, that they had not seen since they had been the official opposition, they are in to gain more.

As history has shown once again the NDP will prop up a Liberal government, at their own expense, pushing the Liberals left as they move right. The pitch by Martin and Layton that the Conservatives are in bed with the Separatists shows how right wing the NDP will go to get their consumer social democratic platform implemented.

The BQ will of course remain the good Bolsheviks and support those bills such as the Anti-Scab one, or those around EI or workers rights, that benefit workers. They will support direct no strings funding to Quebec. And they will support free trade. One of the few left wing parties to do so.

This is what makes Quebec’s position unique, its left wing supports a totally autonomous nation, and free trade in that case allows Quebec economic autonomy.

Unfortunately that also puts the BQ on the side of other free traders such as Ralph Klein, and Stephen Harper. What makes their version of free trade different than the right wings is they see the (Quebec) state as crucial to propping up and making their industries competitive.

It is this reason that the BQ will defend huge Federal Government handouts to Bombardier, and other Quebec industries, in order to keep them solvent. It is also because unlike other areas of Canada, these businesses are unionized. And those unions are the backbone of Quebec nationalism while the corporate bosses are convinenant Federalists, the compradour class in Quebec. During the referendum a telling picture was published across the press. On a tour of the Bombadier factory the President and PM were confronted by a massive sign hand painted and unfurled by the factory workers, it had one word on it; OUI.

The union culture in Quebec is a crucial part of the popular culture in that nation, and the nationalism of Quebec culture. It is a left wing nationalism, and it reflects the Social Democratic politics of Quebec unions and their political allies. It is a nationalism that calls for So So Solidaritie.

It was shown this spring when post secondary students across the province went on a month long general strike against the Charest government in Quebec.

Quebec labour and students have effectively used the General Strike and the Wild Cat strike since the seventies. In fact it has been so effective that the English Canadian Labour movement in Quebec continuously tries to undermine it whenever it happens.This occurred last year when the QFL, aligned to the CLC, got cold feet over a call from the CSN and other Quebec unions for a general strike against privatization plans of the Charest government.

There may be two solitudes in Canada, Quebec and the ROC, but there could be two Solidarities if the Canadian left got over its parliamentary fetish for Trudeau federalism.

The BQ under Duceppe offers the NDP and the CLC that challenge, to build a new federalism in Canada with Quebec as a partner rather than a conquered people. It is this principled position that makes Duceppe the Lenin of Canada. His refusal to consider gaining power in the Federal government, when the goal is Sovereignty, is a page out of Lenin’s work on Nationalism. The Quebec left has matured enough to produce its own Lenin.

So far So-So-Solidaritie has been missing from the Canadian labour movement and its party the NDP.The NDP's failure and outright refusal to form coalitions with the BQ for the last decade.The embrace of Canadian nationalism by the Canadian Labour movement during the Quebec referendum. These politifcal decisions shows the Canadian left is still haunted by the ghost of the David Lewis.

"When he was asked as to who is the main "enemy", he responded definitely "the communists".

Today, Jack Laytons NDP would answer; 'the seperatists in the BQ'.

Bloc Québécois

---

QUEBEC... ON THE ROAD TO NATIONHOOD

Dear Friends,

Québec's march towards nationhood is nearing its goal, as the results of the most recent referendum so clearly showed. In a vote held October 30, 1995, close to half the population of Québec opted for sovereignty. For very many Quebecers, this is the only choice for taking their own destiny in hand.

Québec is a tolerant and diverse pluralistic society, and will remain so after it becomes sovereign. The sovereigntist project, which is founded on democratic principles, reflects this reality. It proposes a new openness toward the rest of the world as well as a new economic and monetary union with Canada. It seeks to end over thirty years of constitutional deadlock that have prevented Canada's two founding peoples from moving forward.

Québec aspires to possess all the tools necessary for its economic, social and cultural development. And like for many other peoples before us, this desire to control our future is contingent on the creation of our own country, Québec.

The members of Parliament of the Bloc Québécois would like share their project and their motivations with you. This document is a first step. We hope that the enclosed information will help you understand why so many Quebecers are committed to building a country of their own.

Gilles Duceppe, Leader of the Bloc Québécois

Meech Lake, or Breaking the Faith Anew

In 1984, Brian Mulroney, the leader of the Progressive Conservative Party, was elected Prime Minister of Canada. During his election campaign, he promised to bring Québec back into "the Canadian constitutional fold with honor and enthusiasm." In response to this openness, Québec premier and Liberal Party leader Robert Bourassa, who had been elected in 1985, presented the rest of Canada with five minimum conditions that Québec deemed essential for it to recognize the 1982 Canadian Constitution. These conditions were the following:

1. Recognition of Québec as a distinct society

2. Veto over any change to the Constitution

3. Guarantees concerning the appointment of Québec judges to the Supreme Court of Canada

4. The right of provinces to opt out of federal programs with full financial compensation

5. Increased powers for Québec over immigration duties within its borders

In 1987, these five conditions were incorporated into the Meech Lake Accord1, an agreement in principle signed by the Prime Minister of Canada and the premiers of the ten provinces, including Québec's premier. The premiers committed to having the agreement ratified by their respec-tive legislatures by June 23, 1990.

The Accord sparked strong opposition, particularly in the English-speaking provinces where the concept of "distinct society" as a means of designating Québec was poorly received. To salvage the agreement and win the support of Manitoba and Newfoundland two provinces that had gone back on their signatures the federal government sought to limit the scope of the "distinct society" clause, the concept that was the source of the disaffection. Its efforts, however, were in vain. Under assault from these two provinces, this first attempt to reconcile the demands of Québec with the expectations of the other provinces met with failure. In Québec, this unfortunate outcome was perceived as a refusal by the rest of Canada to recognize its uniqueness.

The fallout from the Meech Lake episode was serious for the federal government. On May 22, 1990, one month before the death of the Meech Lake Accord, Lucien Bouchard, the Member of Parliament for Lac-Saint-Jean and federal Minister of the Environment, resigned from the Progressive Conservative Party to protest his government's attempts to limit the scope of the distinct society clause. Several Conservative MPs from Québec did likewise. They realized that Québec's only remaining option was sovereignty and, together, they formed the Bloc Québécois.

On August 13, 1990, Gilles Duceppe, the current leader of the Bloc Québécois, was elected as MP for the federal district of Laurier/Sainte-Marie in a by-election. He was the first-ever sovereignist member elected to the federal parliament.

In July 1992 following several months of discussions, the provinces and the federal government reached a new constitutional agreement the Charlottetown Accord2. The agreement addressed very few of Québec's demands and delivered far less than the five minimum conditions set out by Robert Bourassa at the time of the Meech Lake Accord. The new agreement weakened the concept of distinct society and got a very skeptical reception in Québec. Once again, a majority in Québec saw it as an attempt to negate their uniqueness.

On October 26, 1992, a referendum was held to give Canadians the opportunity to vote on the Charlottetown Accord. The results of this pan-Canadian exercise were telling: 57% of Québec voters felt that the agree-ment did not address Québec's traditional demands and rejected it; else-where in Canada, voters felt that the agreement gave too much away to Québec and also rejected it by 54% margin. The pact was broken for good.

"We entered the federation on the faith of a promise of equality in a shared undertaking and of respect for our authority in certain matters that to us are vital. "But what was to follow did not live up to those early hopes. The Canadian State contravened the federative pact, by invading in a thousand ways areas in which we are autonomous, and by serving notice that our secular belief in the equality of the partners* was an illusion.

"We were hoodwinked in 1982 when the governments of Canada and the English-speaking provinces made changes to the Constitution, in depth and to our detriment, in defiance of the categorical opposition of our National Assembly. "Twice since then attempts were made to right that wrong. The failure of the Meech Lake Accord in 1990 confirmed a refusal to recognize even our distinct character. And in 1992 the rejection of the Charlottetown Accord by both Canadians and Quebecers confirmed the conclusion that no redress was possible."

Québec will remain a strong proponent of free trade. It will continue to support the movement toward integration that emerged from the Summit of the Americas and that should lead to the creation of an continental free trade zone by 2005 at the latest. Once sovereign, it will also continue to adhere to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and other similar agreements while seeking to liberalize its own economy further and promote the globalization of trade.

Gilles Duceppe: The Bloc enters a second decade

By ALLISON DUNFIELD
Globe and Mail Update

A former Communist, hospital orderly and son of a famous actor, Gilles Duceppe, 53, is still pursuing elusive Quebec sovereignty at the centre of Canadian federalism.

When Mr. Duceppe arrived in Ottawa 10 years ago as the first Bloc Québécois member, after winning a 1990 by-election, the intense, blue-eyed leader said he didn't expect the Bloc to be on Parliament Hill for a decade without achieving its goal of Quebec sovereignty.

“I would have liked our presence in Ottawa to have been over by now because it would have meant we'd reached our goal,'' Mr. Duceppe told The Globe and Mail in August on the anniversary of the creation of the party. The party says it will have no reason to exist if it achieves sovereignty for Quebec.

The party was founded by Lucien Bouchard, who is now Quebec Premier, when a group of disgruntled Tory MPs left their party to work in the Commons for an independent Quebec. In 1990, Mr. Duceppe was propelled into politics after winning in the riding of in Laurier-Ste-Marie, Que. The son of well-known Montreal actor Jean Duceppe, Mr. Duceppe was chosen by Mr. Bouchard to run after two former Parti Québécois cabinet ministers said no.

Born on July 22, 1947 in Montreal, he received a bachelor of arts from College Mont-Saint-Louis and studied political science at the University of Montreal. He became a separatist in 1967, the same year as René Lévesque. Soon after, he joined in the labour movement and communism. He belonged to the Communist Workers party for three years.

Before his political life, Mr. Duceppe was a union organizer for the Confederation des Syndicats Nationaux, and in his first election, he had the support of many community leaders and activists. One New Democratic Party leader actually withdrew from the by-election so she wouldn't harm Mr. Duceppe's chances of winning in 1990.

Mr. Duceppe has always had a strong sense of justice for francophones and has been known for his articulate manner in the House of Commons. He has been attempting to prove that the Bloc is not just a one-issue party - including issues such as the environment and foreign affairs in his campaign kickoff. Fighting organized crime is another major theme for a party, as Quebec has been beset by biker gang violence.

A day before the election was called, Mr. Duceppe predicted that the Bloc would win more than the 44 seats it has going into the race, but would not be drawn into detailed predictions. Some party officials have predicted more than 50 seats. On the eve of the election campaign, he also said the Bloc would be open to co-operating with other parties if a minority government is elected, although he would not agree to a coalition government.

A sore spot for the Bloc is the fact that two former MPs, Nic LeBlanc and Richard Bélisle, decided to join the Alliance and run for the party in Quebec. Mr. Duceppe and Mr. Bouchard have said the Alliance's views are too right-wing and too extreme to appeal to Quebeckers - especially on abortion and crime issues.

“We're also the best-placed to fight this right-wing current which is surging across Canada,” the leader said in August.

Mr. Duceppe has a record of supporting women. On Oct. 12, the Bloc proposed a $45-billion expansion of Canada's social-safety net over five years as a means of dealing with women's issues. Mr. Duceppe said the plan, including a $25-billion expansion of employment insurance and $4.2-billion to forgive debt of developing countries and expand foreign aid, would respond to the demands of the World March of Women.

As party leader, he is known for having a strong grip on members and has reprimanded those who miss meetings. And his leadership has not been without controversy. Mr. Duceppe's new book, book, Gilles Duceppe Par Lui Meme, was coincidentally released Friday, two days before the election call.

Duceppe ready to ride Bloc's wave of popularity

Angela Mulholland, CTV.ca News Staff
April 21, 2004 1:53 PM ET

Just a few short months ago, Bloc Leader Gilles Duceppe seemed doomed.

His party was drifting into obscurity, his MPs were defecting in droves to provincial politics and a high profile former Bloc MP, Jean Lapierre, emerged from retirement to join the Liberals calling the Bloc irrelevant and obsolete.

But then, like a gift from heaven, came the sponsorship scandal.

Known as "les commandites" in Quebec, the scandal has deeply eroded support for the Liberals in Quebec and given the Bloc a much-needed boost. Quebec voters, furious with how the scandal has tainted their province's image, are promising revenge in the next election.

A recent Ipsos-Reid poll found support for the Bloc in Quebec has risen to 45 per cent - 15 points higher than support for the Liberals.

While Duceppe, 56, must be pleased with the Bloc's resurgence, he may suspect it likely has little to do with him. Sure, his party has been relentless in its attacks against the Liberals and has helped to expose much of the sponsorship scandal. But the Bloc's popularity rarely has anything to do with Duceppe, says Michael Behiels, a history professor at the University of Ottawa.

"When Quebecers vote for the Bloc, they are not voting for Duceppe. They are voting for the ideas the party represents," Behiels told CTV.ca. "If they vote for the Bloc, it's almost always a protest vote against the current federal government."

When it comes to whom voters would choose as their leader, polls in Quebec show that Prime Minister Paul Martin runs way ahead of Duceppe -- even with voters seething at the Liberals.

"Duceppe is not seen as someone who could ever be prime minister," Behiels says.

In recent years, Duceppe and the Bloc have been floundering. The party's goals have seemed less relevant for many Quebecers. The economy is doing well, and even the hard-core sovereigntists recognize that the support needed to win secession is gone. With two referendums behind them, most Quebecers are not interested in talking about separation - at least for now.

"This is typical of the kind of ebb and tide of Quebec secessionism," says Behiels.

"And the tide has gone out for the moment."

Duceppe is savvy enough to know not to push the secession issue. Instead, he will campaign on old-fashioned Quebec nationalism, pushing for Quebec's rights in Ottawa with the slogan "Because We're Different."

That's not to say that Duceppe himself has abandoned the secession cause. No matter what the federal government promises to Quebec in terms of transfer payments and acknowledgement of the Quebec culture, Duceppe is almost certainly never going to be dissuaded from secession.

Duceppe's ties to sovereignty can be traced back to his childhood in Montreal. The Bloc leader has said he often endured taunts from anglophones during his school years, and resented listening to "God Save the Queen" before hockey games at the Montreal Forum.

He studied political science at the University of Montreal before his dissatisfaction with the status quo led him to work with the Communist Workers' Party in the late 70s. Duceppe now says that working with the communist movement was "a mistake," but a mistake made in the quest for change.

In 1977, Duceppe became a union negotiator for Confederation des Syndicats Nationaux, the Confederation of National Trade Unions, and earned a reputation for his passion for hard work.

According to those who know him, Duceppe is intelligent, disciplined and utterly focused on his goals. He is renowned for his willingness to work hard -- perhaps too hard, say those who have accused him of sometimes being too intense and humourless.

In 1990, a Tory MP named Lucien Bouchard took notice of Duceppe. When the Meech Lake constitutional deal fell apart and Bouchard formed the Bloc Quebecois, he sought out Duceppe and urged him to run for his new party in a byelection.

Buoyed by his reputation as a labour leader and perhaps a little by the name of his father -- the well-known Montreal actor, Jean Duceppe -- Gilles Duceppe became the federal party's first elected MP.

Over the next three years, Duceppe helped Bouchard and the quickly-expanding Bloc to drum up enough support to run candidates in most Quebec ridings in the 1993 election. With anger at the then-governing Tories raging, the Bloc Quebecois won 54 seats and became a formidable force in federal politics.

Bouchard left the Bloc in 1995 after the failed Quebec referendum to become premier. Two years later, Duceppe became the new leader of the Bloc and was almost immediately forced into a federal election. Despite his inexperience, his party won a respectable 44 seats. But support slipped further in the 2000 election. His party won only 38 seats and Duceppe was criticized for ineffective campaigning

When Duceppe came to Ottawa almost 15 years ago, he didn't expect the Bloc be around long before it would achieve its goal of Quebec sovereignty.

He was wrong.

"Duceppe has certainly failed in his mission to withdraw Quebec from the federation," Behiels says. "That's likely been very depressing for him."

What may be even more depressing is that the Bloc under Duceppe's leadership has withered, particularly in the last year or two.

Many of the die-hard separatists within the party have defected to join the action democratique du Quebec. The ADQ is a provincial party of conditional federalists, or "soft separatists" who want to work with Ottawa to reopen the constitutional question. The Bloc no longer serves their purpose and they believe they can better work at the provincial election to achieve their goals.

Beheils says the defections are less a statement on Duceppe's leadership and more of an indication of the party's relevance.

"It's simply a reflection of the reality of the Quebec political climate at the moment. It's a reflection that the Bloc is beginning to come apart."

For the moment, the tide has now once again turned in Duceppe's favour. The sponsorship crisis has dropped into Duceppe's lap and sent voters over to the Bloc by default. The timing couldn't be better.

Duceppe is showing that sometimes the best way to get ahead is to do nothing.

What remains to be seen is whether Duceppe can hold onto his seats and even earn a few more. If he can, he'll have saved his leadership -- at least momentarily -- and put off the question of the relevance of a separatist party for another day.

GILLES DUCEPPE

The current Bloc leader, Gilles Duceppe, is also the son of Jean Duceppe, a famous Quebec actor who helped found the PQ and the NDP branch in Quebec. The later is separated from the federal NDP, declared itself to be in favour of sovereignty, and subsequently merged in the Union des Forces Progressistes.

A new branch of the New Democratic Party of Canada, called New Democratic Party of Canada (Quebec), was refounded in 1990, and is active only on the federal level in the province. In 1995, the NPDQ changed its name to Parti de la démocratie socialiste and contested the 1998 Quebec election under this new name.

In 2002, it joined with the Rassemblement pour l'alternative progressiste (Union for a progressive alternative) and the Parti communiste du Québec (Communist Party of Quebec) to form the Union des forces progressistes (UFP). It remains an organized tendency within the UFP under the name Québec socialiste.

UFP members share the view that the answer to the national question, and by extension social emancipation, is sovereignty for the Quebec people. The UFP believes that Quebec should become a country, free from the federalist yoke, and should acquire the essential tools it needs to develop as a nation.

Duceppe is a native of Montreal, Quebec. He studied political science at the University of Montreal. In his youth, he advocated communism, and was a card-carrying member of the Communist Worker's Party. Duceppe later said his three-year membership in the Communist Worker's Party was a mistake brought on by a search for fundamental change [1] (http://www.uni.ca/duceppe.html). He later became a trade union negotiator.

In 1990, Duceppe was elected to the Canadian House of Commons for the newly-formed Bloc Québécois in a by-election in Montreal's Laurier—Sainte-Marie riding. At the time, he was forced to run as an independent because the Bloc had not been registered by Elections Canada as a political party. All of the Bloc's other Members of Parliament had crossed the floor from either the Progressive Conservative Party or the Liberal Party earlier that year. Duceppe's victory in a by-election demonstrated, for the first time, that the party had electoral support in Quebec and was capable of winning elections. Previously, many pundits (and members of other parties) predicted that the Bloc would be able to gain the support of the voters.

In 1996, when Lucien Bouchard stepped down as Bloc leader to become leader of the Parti Québécois, Duceppe served as interim leader of the party until Michel Gauthier was elected later that year. However, Gauthier was forced out of the party leadership in 1997, and Duceppe became party leader and Leader of the Opposition.

Gilles Duceppe

Objective

To become the next Prime Minister of Canada

Experience

MP for Laurier—Sainte-Marie, Leader

1990-present, Bloc Québecois: Montreal, QC

• Became the first elected MP in 1990, worked with Lucien Bouchard
• Served as Party Whip from 1993-1996
• Served as Leader of the Official Opposition from 1996-1997
• Won the leadership of the party in 1997

Union Negotiator, Confederation of National Trade Unions

1977-1990, CNTU: Montreal, QC

• Promoted the interests of workers and the development of peace and democratic initiatives while working for the Quebec chapter of the CNTU
• Facilitated negotiations between organizations and workers

Activist: Member of Company of Young Canadians, Communist Workers’ Party, President of Quebec Students’ Union

1966-1977, CYC, QSU, CWP: Montreal, QC

• Worked as president of the Quebec Students’ Union (1968-69)
• Involved with the Communist Workers’ Party in the late 1970s
• Involved with the Company of Young Canadians, an federal agency devoted to social change in Canada
• Developed leadership and communication skills while gaining experience in community-based and political organizations

Education

B.A. from Collège Mont-Saint-Louis

Late 1960s-70s, Collège Mont-Saint-Louis: Montreal, QC

• Studies in political science, Université de Montréal
• Worked as president of the Quebec Students’ Union (1968-69) and with the Communist Workers’ Party

Interests

Childhood hockey heroes were Maurice Richard and Dickie Moore.

Languages

Bilingual (French/English)

Additional Information

• Became a separatist in 1967
• Spent five years as a nurse in the late 1970s
• On June 15, 2004, spoke in Montreal about youth voting: « Qui a dit que les jeunes ne s’intéressaient pas à la politique? Peut-être est-ce la politique qui ne s’intéresse pas assez aux jeunes? » (“Who said that young people aren’t interested in politics? Maybe ‘politics’ isn’t taking enough of an interest in youth?”)

Workers' Communist Party of Canada

Wikipedia

Workers' Communist Party of Canada

The Workers' Communist Party of Canada was a Canadian political party that nominated candidates in the 1972 and 1980 general elections. For several years it published a weekly newspaper "The Forge/La Forge". The WCP was strongest in Quebec, but alienated many young Quebec progressive people because it declined to support independence for Quebec, although it did support Quebec's right to self determination.

None of its candidates was elected to the Canadian House of Commons, nor did they receive many votes.

The party followed a Maoist political program, and was influenced by the New Left.

See also: List of political parties in Canada

Quebec's Union of Progressive Forces -- a new party of the left

by Richard Fidler

A new left-wing political party has formed in Quebec in recent months and is rapidly winning members throughout the French-language province. The Union des forces progressistes (UFP) describes itself as "a federated party that seeks to become a mass alternative to the parties of neoliberalism

GILLES DUCEPPE
Biography from Toronto Star

---

Former hospital orderly, former Communist and labor organizer. First ever elected MP for the separatist BQ.

And now - after winning the Bloc leadership with 52.8 per cent - leader of Her Majesty's loyal Opposition.

Largely unknown outside Quebec - except perhaps by fans of Canada AM's political panel, where he has frequently appeared - Duceppe is among the most popular federal politicians inside that province.

Duceppe is no Lucien Bouchard. He doesn't have the charisma or the spell-binding oratory.

But he has been by far one of the Bloc's most effective MPs, an intense man with searing blue eyes who can often drill the government in the daily Commons question period better than any other.

CALLED THOUGHTFUL

Liberal strategist Michael Robinson, a companion on the Canada AM panel, says Duceppe is thoughtful, engaging, has a good sense of humor, and is not cheap or mean-spirited.

"I quite like him, on a personal level," says Robinson.

On the political level, however, the 49-year-old Duceppe can be as tough as nails:

· In the Commons, he subtly but deliberately plays the race card, portraying the English-speaking rest of the country against French-speaking Quebec.

· He was once ejected from the House for calling Deputy Prime Minister Sheila Copps a liar.

· He contemptuously rejects warnings that there wouldn't be free trade between an independent Quebec and what would be left of Canada.

"Tell western farmers they will have to eat all their beef or watch the carcasses rot, instead of selling them to Quebec, (or) go to Oshawa and explain to workers in the automobile industry that they will have to go on unemployment insurance out of patriotism, because Canada cannot sell any more cars to those poor Quebecers," he once said.

Even some members of the Bloc consider him overbearing.

Duceppe probably could have been leader a year ago. After Bouchard left to become premier, he quickly emerged as the likely front runner among potential contenders.

But then he backed off when it appeared his candidacy might split the party.

In her 1995 book, The Bloc, author Manon Cornellier says Duceppe exercised unprecedented control over Bloc MPs as Bouchard's hand-picked party whip.

"At one point it went as far as surveillance of letters sent (by MPs) to party members," she wrote.

Swearing like a sailor, Duceppe also regularly reprimanded members who missed committee meetings or committed some other transgression, and irritated others by monopolizing contact with the press.

"He loves being at the microphone," one MP told Cornellier. "Even now he controls things completely."

Two years later, Duceppe may have mellowed somewhat. He was backed by more than 20 of the other 51 Bloc MPs and by the presidents of more than half of its 75 riding associations.

His rise has not been without controversy, however.

In 1994, he was briefly the centre of attention over a parliamentary mailing to his constituents in which he urged them to vote for a party for which his wife was a candidate in local school board elections.

And this year, he came under attack for his role in helping Bouchard's staff exploit House of Commons rules so that they could both collect their new salaries with him in Quebec city and get federal severance pay after being "fired" from their jobs here.

The son of the late and highly acclaimed actor Jean Duceppe, the new leader's roots in the separatist movement go back 30 years.

He hasn't done so lately, but in a 1991 interview with the Ottawa Citizen, Duceppe attributed his conversion to separatism to mean-spirited and colonial-minded anglophones.

Duceppe told the Citizen that when he and his friends went to hockey games in Montreal in the '60s, they would sing "O Canada" while the kids from English-speaking schools waved the Union Jack and sang "God Save the Queen."

Worse, when he tried to board a bus for students going to an English-speaking school one bitterly cold day, he and his friends were only allowed to stand in the aisles. When he complained, the story goes, an anglophone teacher slapped him.

"If you're talking about social justice, that event marked me," he told the Citizen.

Even so, Duceppe only became a separatist when René Lévesque did - in centennial year, 1967. And even then his attention quickly shifted to the labor movement and eventually to communism.

With the influence of the church sharply declining in those years, "we looked for another set of values, one that was all-enveloping, like the church," he told the Montreal Gazette.

For a lot of us it was communism. It was a rational explanation that had answers to all the questions. Like in the church, the answers were all there, written down. It gives you a sense of security."

Looking back now, he says his three-year membership in the Communist Workers party was a mistake brought on by a search for fundamental change.

PROPOSES UNION

Duceppe returned to separatism after the 1982 overhaul of the Constitution by Ottawa and the other nine provinces over the objections of Quebec.

But his plunge into federal politics only came in 1990 after the collapse of the Meech Lake accord, which was aimed at patching up the split of 1982.

Less than two months after Meech failed - helped in no small measure by Jean Chrétien, who by then was Liberal leader - Duceppe and the newly born Bloc led by Bouchard snatched a Liberal stronghold in east-end Montreal with a stunning 66 per cent of the vote.

The Bloc has never looked back.

From a rag-tag group of former Tories and Liberals under Bouchard in 1990, it has grown to a party of more than 100,000 members, helped defeat the Charlottetown accord in a 1992 referendum, swept 54 of the province's 75 federal seats in 1993, helped win the provincial election of 1994, and came within a whisker of winning the referendum on sovereignty in 1995.

Now, polls suggest, it is poised to sweep Quebec again in the federal election expected this year.

What sort of leader will he be?

History suggests he will be very much in the Bouchard mold.

Like Bouchard, he says the Bloc should act as a truly national opposition where necessary, speaking out on behalf of the poor or other Canadians regardless of where they live.

Like Bouchard - and unlike former premier Jacques Parizeau - he proposes a European-style union between an independent Quebec and what would be left of Canada.

GILLES DUCEPPE:


The sovereigntist

The Canadian Press

OTTAWA -- People who meet Gilles Duceppe for the first time are struck by his unwavering gaze. There's an intensity in those steely blue eyes that is almost disconcerting.

The Bloc Quebecois leader is utterly focused on his goals, say those who know him well.

His personal style is one of hard work and discipline.

"My assessment is that he is a very determined person," says Jean Lapierre, a former Bloc MP who used to sit beside Duceppe in the Commons.

"He's very serious. He's probably too intense, you know. He wouldn't laugh for a small joke. I think that's one of the points that he has to work on."

Duceppe, 49, rises early, and is known to call colleagues at 6 a.m. to discuss the day's news. For months before the leadership convention in March he averaged five hours' sleep a night.

Duceppe broke into politics as an organizer for the Communist Workers' Party (Marxist-Leninist). His left leanings continued later in life.

In the 1970s he spent five years working as a medical orderly on the night shift at Montreal's Royal Victoria Hospital to help organize a union there. "I didn't make money with that choice," he says wryly.

Although he regrets his involvement in the communist movement, he also sees a fundamental continuity in his career. "I was always involved, socially and politically. I didn't stop because I made an error."

His communist past has drawn some fierce criticism in the English-language media but it doesn't seem to be an issue in Quebec.

"There are so many former Marxists around in universities and all that, and most of them have become very quiet, moderate people," says Louis Balthazar, a political scientist at Laval University in Quebec City. "We're used to it."

QUICK HIT LEADER: Gilles Duceppe, replacing Michel Gauthier on March 15, 1997. GOAL: Wants to achieve sovereignty by the year 2000 ... Says it is not necessary for Quebec to eliminate its deficit before holding another referendum. BEGINNINGS: First paying job was with Company of Young Canadians, an organization set up by former PM Pierre Trudeau's government to tap youthful idealism ... In late 1970s joined Maoist group which later evolved into Communist Workers' Party (Marxist-Leninist) ... Did not vote in 1980 referendum since communists placed top priority on solidarity of Canadian workers ... Has described communist involvement as an error. FEDERAL EXPERIENCE: Was first MP to win election under the banner of the Bloc Quebecois ... Ran for leadership following resignation of Bloc founder Lucien Bouchard, but lost to Michel Gauthier.

Unlike some of his rivals in this year's contest for the separatist party's leadership, Duceppe insisted on a party program covering all major issues. He says the program is not limited to defending the interests of Quebec.

"When we're discussing family trusts, when we're discussing employment insurance, when we're discussing peace missions around the world, we're talking for Quebecers but not only Quebecers."

However, most of the questions raised by the Bloc in the House of Commons relate specifically to Quebec concerns. The overriding theme -- that Quebec is being shortchanged and suppressed -- is constant.

Duceppe insists that his commitment to Quebec sovereignty does not equate with hostility to the rest of Canada.

"We need Canadians to live a quiet revolution like we did in the '60s. Canadians need to discover themselves without Quebec."

The grandson of an Englishman, Duceppe says he has no grudge against English Canada.

He admits some unpleasant encounters with anglophones in childhood. In grade six, he once was slapped by an anglo teacher -- and promptly slapped her back.

He denies that the incident colored his thinking. He notes that when he entered his first formal debate in college, he argued for federalism -- and won.

"I had the wrong cause, but I was a good debater," says Duceppe, with a chuckle.

He insists Quebec sovereignty would not mean the destruction of Canada.

"We want a strong Canada beside us with a strong culture. We don't want Canadians to lose their culture to the United States."

He is a strong defender of the so-called partnership option, which foresees an independent Quebec working in harmony with the other provinces.

His personal friends include federalists such as New Democrat Svend Robinson. When Duceppe and his wife took a holiday in Vancouver some time ago, they stayed in Robinson's apartment.

"He (Duceppe) is a very progressive member of Parliament," says Robinson. "He's very solid on many of the issues that I and New Democrats are concerned about.

"Obviously we differ fundamentally on the issue of Quebec's place in Canada, though certainly not on the right of Quebecers to make that decisison."

Duceppe has been portrayed as a puppet of Bloc founder Lucien Bouchard, now Quebec's premier. He readily confirms that Bouchard is a friend, but strongly denies being a yes-man. He thinks Bouchard likes him for precisely that reason.

"Real friends can tell you when they disagree. There's many, many, many, many people around (who) always agree with you just to please you, and those are not friends."

In the weeks following the leadership convention in March, Duceppe's critics in the Bloc have fallen silent. Even runner-up Yves Duhaime, who initially refused to rally to Duceppe's leadership, has agreed to run on his slate against Prime Minister Jean Chretien in Saint-Maurice.

Balthazar of Laval University predicts that the Bloc will remain a potent force in the coming election, because many Quebecers see no other party they can count on to defend their interests.

"The Liberals are doing so bad with the French-speaking Quebec population that I guess any candidate would be better than the Liberals so far.

"Since the Conservatives are doing so little -- (Conservative Leader Jean) Charest is concentrating in Ontario -- I guess the Bloc will have an easy time."