BC Labour backs NDP; will it be mutual?

By Sam Hammond, Chair, Communist Party of Canada Central Labour Commission

On Nov. 29, the 48th Convention of the British Columbia Federation of Labour was opened with an upbeat and aggressive speech by its president, Jim Sinclair. He started with, "You bet we're big labour," and continued "we make no apologies for standing up to bullies who masquerade as politicians."

     Sinclair went on to compare corporate CEO salaries to the attacks on working people. He talked about the size of the convention, the membership growth of the federation, new delegates and youth, the fight to keep the province in public hands, and the militant strikes in the past year.

     Under the issue of solidarity he introduced the HEU strike of last May, stating that the federation staff had put together an escalating plan of job action which he tallied up day by day. "We were turning up the heat on this government and they knew it," he said. "You're not getting away with this, go tell your government, enough is enough." And more: "That's what was necessary to push back this government and that's what happened."

     What happened? In Sinclair's words, "thousands of jobs were saved, $25 million was won for those already displaced, and there was no retroactivity or retribution against health care workers."

     Wow! With fifteen percent wage cuts, contracting out, thousands of jobs lost and no membership vote allowed on the deal, this is probably the most militant defeat in history or the kind of victory that no one can afford to repeat.

     On Dec. 1, the convention was addressed by Carole James, leader of the British Columbia NDP. She used the recent by‑election victory of Jagrup Brar (Surrey‑Panorama Ridge) to launch into a speech geared to the looming May 2005 provincial elections.

     Amazingly, James referred to "business" or "business community" about seven times in her speech, but not once to labour, or the policies of BC labour. She talked at length about the need for a balanced budget without mentioning tax reform or revenue sources, but rather consultation and compromise. Sort of like letting the condemned choose their own rope.

     Her "inclusiveness" is to be achieved through compromise and consensus between some broad social strata called "ordinary people", or "working people" and the "business community". She said, "In the spirit of cooperation and goodwill I invited the business community to the NDP table." That is in the past tense, but the reference to "working people will always have a seat at the table" is apparently a future event.

     The BC NDP image of the future is of a dynamic society, inclusive and just, achieved through co‑operation and consensus. Gordon Campbell's government is "mean‑spirited policies", "extreme", "old and tired" and "secretive." There was absolutely no reference to what or who the Campbell government represents, the corporate agenda, or free trade. There was no reference to the attack on organized labour, the rollback of wages and exporting of jobs of health workers. Carole James got an enthusiastic welcome from the delegates, but by the time her message of appeasement had been delivered, the applause was becoming much more careful and polite.

     The speech by Jack Layton was so different one must wonder if he and Carole James are in the same party. Layton made the speech that should logically be made. He hit hard on Missile Defence, "free Trade," the export of jobs, the corporate agenda, Canadian sovereignty, ship-building, and agriculture. He brought delegates to their feet several times and caught the mood of the convention. Perhaps the differences in these two speeches are a reflection of being close to forming government and being some distance from that goal.

     These paradoxes were repeated throughout the convention. Sober militant analyses and rah‑rah flag waving, loud shallow rhetoric and the bitter taste of defeat, thunder without rain, hopes and dreams.

     Guest speakers included Thulas Nxesi from the South African Democratic Teachers Union and a representative from the Central Labour Unions of Venezuela, who both seemed to know exactly who their opposition is and how to fight against it. Their message was solidarity, internationalism and struggle. Hassan Yussuff brought greetings from the Canadian Labour Congress and managed to rail at the "son‑of bitches" and "bastards" of the Campbell Liberals without much other substance.

     This was a convention of paradox. There was pride and strength here aplenty, there was militancy and determination, there was support for leadership here as well as criticism.

     There was also rippling under the surface during the entire convention the memory of a lost battle, the HEU strike. The memory of an imposed deal without vote, the bitter bile of a 15% rollback in wages and the knowledge that the truth of what leadership acquiesced and who resisted, of who was consulted and who was ignored, will remain a question. When the anger showed itself and criticism of the leadership was put, it was done with control and discipline. The words sellout and betrayal were not used. The delegates who were critical, some passionately so, accused failure. "You failed us." Whenever this criticism was levelled, it received applause and on some occasions standing ovation.

     The HEU strike and its militancy, its transition into province-wide defiance, its growing support and its tragic end, lurked behind every resolution and surfaced sometimes in unlikely places.

     The most militant delegates visibly struggled with the need to maintain unity and a common face towards the terrible threat of the Campbell Liberals, including the threat of their re‑election. Resolutions calling for firm commitment or guarantees from the NDP were largely lost in the composite bin, but the demand for accountability and commitment to labour's programs came through the microphones regardless. The delegates clearly cast their dice for an NDP victory next May as a solution to the Liberal agenda.

     "Not last May but next May", was the battle cry of the leadership and the NDP delegates. It's rather amazing, or perhaps dexterous machine handling that was able to push the previous sins of NDP governance into ancient history, composite resolutions into oblivion, introduce them before lunch breaks, re‑draw the heartbreak of last May as a victory, and focus on the elections in May of 2005.

     Several times, during discussion of several resolutions, delegates stated that the NDP must represent the policies of labour, and that labour should be prepared to shut the province down if necessary no matter who was in government. These were warnings that should not fall on deaf ears. When a Longshoremen's delegate, Dave Pritchett, spoke of how the working class could be enrolled in the defence of a government that fought on their behalf, he used Hugo Chavez and Venezuela as an example. He received a standing ovation.

     In the debate over CLAC (the Christian "trade union" in the building trades), delegates made it clear that they wanted action from a future NDP government to take away CLAC's legal status as a bonafide labour organization with the right to certification and bargaining rights. Although it was mentioned in the legislative report that the Harcourt government had tried to modify the effect of CLAC inroads into the building trades, it was not mentioned that a previous NDP government had amended the Labour Code to include CLAC.

     On the second day of the convention there was a peace demonstration held jointly with StopWar.ca to coincide with Bush's arrival in Ottawa. The delegates and about a thousand other Vancouver citizens held a spirited downtown rally with sharp militant speeches (kicked off by Sinclair), and pulling down a paper mache statue of Bush.

     In the executive elections, Sinclair was challenged by a candidate from the Solidarity Caucus. Gretchen Dulmage ran in a poorly organized challenge, and received 146 votes to 954 for Sinclair. Most delegates obviously were not looking for a change at this time with this candidate.

     The delegates to the British Columbia Federation of Labour Convention showed a militant front to their enemies, and expressed over and over again the need for even more solidarity. The overwhelming desire was for more militancy, more struggle, more victories and more representation. They made their criticisms, held their discipline, maintained their unity, re‑elected their leadership and sent a loud clear message to the NDP that they expected them to fight on their behalf.

     It's not necessary here to recite the failures of previous NDP governments, in other provinces as well as British Columbia. The contributions unfortunately have been soiled by compromise at crucial moments and the doubts of many workers are well founded.

     The BC Fed delegates rallied around a dream of a political movement that will go to the wall on their behalf, that will fight to the limit a partisan pro‑labour struggle for the welfare of all the working people. The dream is logical, the dream is necessary. In this paradoxical world it is reality that will ultimately create the dream. There are a million eyes watching.

     The trade union movement in BC has pledged support for the NDP. Will the NDP reciprocate?

World Peace Forum coming to Vancouver

By Kimball Cariou

PEACE ACTIVISTS and progressive organizations should mark an important date on their calendars: June 21-28, 2006. That's when people from across the planet will converge on Vancouver for the World Peace Forum, the largest and most diverse such gathering in Canadian history.

     The proposal for the WPF emerged from two simultaneous events: the huge mass movement against the US invasion of Iraq, and the historic election of a progressive majority to Vancouver City Council in November 2002. When the new COPE-led council immediately gave its support to the anti-war movement, the idea of reviving the city's former peace committee soon arose. That body was formed during the 1980s, when Vancouver's End the Arms Race coalition organized annual marches of 100,000 or more across the Burrard Street Bridge. Unfortunately, victories by the right-wing Non-Partisan Alliance during the early 1990s spelled the end of the city's official involvement.

     One of COPE's new city councillors, Ellen Woodsworth, moved quickly to initiate a new Peace and Justice Committee, including prominent local figures in the movement for peace and global social justice, such as StopWar co-chairs Jef Keighley and Irene MacInnes.   The Peace and Justice Committee's main project became the idea of a World Peace Forum, inspired by the World Social Forums held in many other cities. Vancouver City Council has adopted in principle the proposal for hosting the WPF, overlapping with the World Urban Forum also being held here from June 19-23, 2006.

     Plans for the WPF were extensively discussed at a Preparatory Conference held Nov. 26-27 at the University of British Columbia, on the city's western peninsula. Over 200 delegates took part, mainly from Canada, but including a wide range of speakers from anti-war movements in other countries. The weekend made it clear that the WPF will not be limited to "safe" platitudes; for example, there was virtually unanimous acceptance of the reality that justice for the Palestinian people is the key to achieving lasting peace in the Middle East, which is crucial for progress on wider international dangers.

     As the Preparatory Conference progressed, the mood of delegates went from a mixture of interest and scepticism, towards eager anticipation of convening a massive, colourful global dialogue on the difficult issues confronting humanity.

     Vancouver Mayor Larry Campbell welcomed delegates, outlining his views on the WPF. Campbell is one of over 600 "Mayors for Peace," based in Hiroshima, Japan, which calls for an end to nuclear weapons. In fact, the overarching theme of the WPF will be "Cities and Communities: Working Together to Stop War, and Build a World of Peace and Justice." The strategy is to use the world's local governments, which are being robbed by the arms race of resources to provide vital services, as a base to help build unstoppable mass support from below to press national governments into action.

     Funding from progressive foundations and from Vancouver City Council will be used to help coordinate and publicize the World Peace Forum. Delegates to the Preparatory Conference discussed an astonishing range of ideas, from a huge peace rally during the event, to a multitude of workshops and panels, concerts, parades, art exhibits, and other actions. Accommodations for some 3,000 delegates will be available at UBC, with room for thousands more at a special International Youth Camp, private homes, and other places.

     The scope of the WPF is limited only by the imagination of participants. The planning bodies for the WPF will not have funds to pay directly for international speakers and travel, but the backing of local officials (including the School Board and Park Board) will ensure that venues can be found for virtually any size of workshop or event. Organizations are being encouraged to submit proposals as soon as possible, so that groups which come up with similar ideas can be placed in contact with each other to facilitate joint planning for workshops and events.

     The World Peace Forum can be reached at www.peace.ca/worldpeaceforumvancouver.htm on the Web, tel. 604-687-3223, fax 604-687-3277, or email admin@worldpeaceforum.ca. The official website is still very limited, but a range of information can be found by using Google to search for "World Peace Forum + Vancouver."

More tax cuts for capitalists in Manitoba

By Darrell Rankin

MANITOBA'S NDP GOVERNMENT is amending Winnipeg's charter to give it more power to determine business tax rates. This paves the way for Winnipeg Mayor Sam Katz to eliminate the business tax, which he pledged to do as part of his election campaign last June.

     Eliminating the business tax which comprises 9% of City revenues will shift the burden of maintaining municipal services to property taxes, paid mostly by working class home‑owners, fees, the annual provincial grant and a few other sources.

     The NDP has also passed a law to reduce education property taxes on farmland by 33 per cent. The two measures reduce taxes on two of the largest groups of business people in Manitoba, capitalists in Winnipeg and large-scale farmers.

     Neither of these tax cuts, which reduce government revenues by close to $170 million, will benefit wage workers. And the education property tax cut is not linked to replacing lost education revenue with provincial funding.

     The Manitoba NDP has also increased the property tax credit from $250 to $400, a measure that will do nothing to assist the many workers who do not own their own home. Those workers who do own homes may see their rebates eaten by property tax increases required to pay for dropping the business tax.

     The NDP is carrying out this elaborate shell game to cement its support among the wealthiest Manitobans, and retain its grip among higher‑paid workers who can afford their own homes.

     Premier Doer's NDP government is doing nothing to help the growing numbers of working poor. And to the extent that the tax cuts accelerate capitalist growth, this police promises only long-term ruin to the majority of farmers and small business.

"Enjoy life, prevent AIDS"; the Cuban example

By Susan Hurlich, Havana

THE WORLDWIDE FIGHT against AIDS will now focus on women and girls, including educational campaigns to fight sexual violence against women. This was the message presented by the Cuban Ministry of Public Health, in a scientific session marking World AIDS Day (December 1) in Havana. It's the same message presented several weeks earlier in Brussels by Peter Piot, director of the United Nations AIDS Program (UNAIDS).

     During the last two years, the number of women with HIV and AIDS has increased throughout the world. In its December 2004 AIDS Epidemic Update, UNAIDS and the World Health Organization estimate that of the 39.4 million people worldwide living with HIV/AIDS, just under 50% are women. Daily, some 5,500 women are infected with HIV, while another 3,000 die from AIDS. Over 57% of those affected in Southern Africa are women, while in the Caribbean and Latin America, women make up 50% and 36% respectively of those living with HIV/AIDS. These figures are increasingly linked with heterosexual relationships.

     Why are women so vulnerable? Dr. Maria Isela Lantero, director of Cuba's National Program on HIV/AIDS, notes two main factors: the biological and the social. The vaginal environment is large and mucosa, and semen remain there for a comparatively long time. Add to this violence against women, lack of access to education and means of protection in many countries, and fewer work opportunities, and the reasons for the increase become clear.

     In the Caribbean, UNAIDS estimates that some 440,000 people are living with HIV. Among adults 15 to 44 years old, average HIV prevalence is 2.3%, and AIDS is now the leading cause of death. Unlike in Latin America, almost two‑thirds of HIV transmission is through heterosexual intercourse.

     Where does Cuba fit into this picture?

     Between 1986 ‑ when the first known case of HIV appeared in Cuba and blood screening began ‑ and November 2004, Cuba has had a total of 5,906 people affected with HIV, of whom 2,474 developed AIDS. Among those with AIDS, 1,194 have died. According to Dr. Jose Joanes Fiol, an epidemiologist with the National AIDS Program, the total number of women affected with HIV is 1,178 (just under 20%). Among the 4,728 affected men, a total of 4,065 (85.9%) are homosexual or bisexual. Overall, Cuba's HIV prevalence is 0.007% among adults between 15‑49 years of age.

     These statistics show that Cuba is an exception in the Caribbean. Not only does it have a very low HIV prevalence ‑ possibly one of the lowest in the world ‑ but the incidence of HIV/AIDS among women is less than half of what it is elsewhere in the region. However, like Latin America, sex between men is a major factor in the spread of HIV/AIDS in Cuba. This might be explained by Cuba's closer cultural history with Latin America than with most other countries in the Caribbean.

     To date, only 20 Cuban children have been affected by a mother with HIV (abortion is NOT obligatory), and only 18 individuals have contacted HIV through blood or hemoderivative products. Although Cuba has an extensive national blood screening program, Dr. Joanes Fiol explains that there have been some rare cases of contaminated blood being donated during the brief "window" before the contagion can be detected.

     That Cuba has a low rate of HIV/AIDS is not an accident, but the result of comprehensive and effective testing and prevention programs. Cuba's HIV/AIDS treatment program is also very dynamic. During the 1980s, a policy of quarantining HIV‑infected individuals, as a preventive measure as well as to guarantee treatment (dietary, medicinal, psychological and educational, all at no cost to the patient), was in place. In 1993, this was replaced with an ambulatory care system which allows patients to live at home or in the sanitariums. Universal free access to antiretroviral therapy is guaranteed to all.

     There are also key reasons that the incidence of HIV/AIDS is low among women in Cuba, as well as the fact that mother‑to‑child transmission is under 10%. In 1987, HIV‑surveillance of pregnant women was incorporated into Cuba's prenatal care program. Dr. Myrna Villalon, a gynaecologist at the National Centre for Prevention of Sexually‑Transmitted Diseases and HIV/AIDS, explains that women are further protected by the fact that 99% of births occur in hospitals, institutional facilities are readily available for abortions, and ‑ most important ‑ the political will exists at official levels to provide the necessary resources for combatting AIDS.

     Cuba also gives a high priority to educating the population about HIV/AIDS, using every means possible: sexual education in the junior high schools, radio and TV messages, posters promoting "safe sex", prevention and information centres in all major cities, etc. Along with specialists, volunteers and activists living with HIV/AIDS collaborate with these centres. For the public at large, community education programs exist on a wide range of health themes related to AIDS prevention, and there is a phone line ‑ anonymous and confidential ‑ that people can call for more information.

     A gender perspective, as well as sociocultural studies on local traditions, beliefs and value systems, are all part of Cuba's health educational programs. And there are different educational campaigns for different target groups. Mariela Castro Espin, director of Cuba's National Centre of Sexual Education (CENESEX), explains that homosexuals have requested that CENESEX prepare educational programs targetted for men who have sex with men. There are also specific programs for women, and the theme for this year's AIDS campaign aimed at youth is "Disfruta la vida, evita el SIDA" ("Enjoy life, prevent AIDS").

     That Cuba's AIDS prevention program is working can be seen by the results. The state treats AIDS seriously and is committed to providing a comprehensive program for both prevention and care. And it does this with limited resources. The key is the principles which guide Cuba's health program. They are really quite simple: medical care is a right rather than a business; prevention is the best and most cost‑effective way to maintain good health; and an educated population is the best protection against illness.

Chile: In search of truth and justice

By Alfonso Alvarez (translation from Spanish by Ardis Harriman)

IT HAS BEEN just over 30 years since General Augusto Pinochet and his military junta overthrew the constitutional government of Salvador Allende in a coup d'etat. The painful consequences of the bloody repression of the Chilean people still have not healed, and the truth about what happened in Chile during 17 years of military government remains an urgent need not only for the victims' families but for society as a whole.

     It is a shameful fact that decades have passed and the fate of thousands of these victims is still unknown. Truth and justice has been denied, as has a complete and adequate redress for their families and for thousands of other Chileans, some foreigners, torture victims, prisoners and those forced out of work and into exile.

     President Ricardo Lagos recently received the National Commission's Report on Political Imprisonment and Torture, and after reading it addressed the Chilean nation.

     Guillermo Teillier, General Secretary of the Communist Party of Chile, responded to the President. In an open letter, Teillier said, "it is with indignation disappointment and discouragement that we have received President Lagos' message in which he only refers to the Report on Political Imprisonment and Torture applied in Chile as a method of extermination and state terrorism practised during the dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet. His words, in the face of these facts, do not address the magnitude of these crimes against humanity, recognized as such by international law and incorporated in our legislation. Nor do they address the harm caused, the length of time that has elapsed nor the existence of military doctrines that fail to guarantee that these events will not be repeated in the future. In fact, this recognition, although partial and insufficient, is the fruit of the untiring struggle of the human rights movement and constitutes an incentive so that the struggle for truth and full justice, fundamental pillars of a truly democratic society will continue."

     The letter also states that "fundamental changes in the armed forces are required, and this begins with the recognition of their institutional responsibility for what happened. Assuming this responsibility could help resolve the problem of the location of the bodies of the detained and disappeared political prisoners that have yet to be turned over to their family members, and in knowing the complete truth about what happened, the types of crimes committed and who was responsible for them."

     The total clarification of the illegal exhumations of bodies which took place during the dictatorship is vital. A full investigation of these facts is an obligation of the military authorities, and to do so would be proof of their willingness to repudiate the methods used by the dictatorship.

     Recent statements by General Emilio Cheyre, Commander in Chief of the Chilean Army, in which he said "never again," must be more concrete, especially in one key point: never again may an army act against the popular and democratic will of the people. That fact is not guaranteed through declarations but through radical changes in doctrine and in the relations that society has with all levels of the Armed Forces.

     General Secretary Teillier opposed the Lagos government decision not to put the Report on Political Imprisonment and Torture into the hands of the courts of justice. He said that "in a country where torture has taken place, the torturers must be brought to justice."

     The word justice was notably absent from the President Lagos' speech. Nonetheless the report is still a significant document, valuable for future generations, along with the announcement of the creation of the Institute for Human Rights, where ex-political prisoners must surely have a place in its creation.

     (Editor's note: Just as this issue went to press, the news broke that the Chilean courts have found Pinochet fit to stand trial for murder. We will report on further develoments in coming issues.)

Missile Defence critics slam Bush plan

PV Vancouver Bureau, with files from Darrell Rankin

THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE rallied against George Bush during his recent visit to Canada, including an estimated 4,000 in Halifax.  At virtually every demonstration, there was condemnation of the US missile defence plan and the illegal occupation of Iraq. Loud cheers greeted every call by speakres demanding the arrest of Bush as a war criminal.

     A Dec. 2 Canadian Press report on the gala dinner in Halifax for U.S. president George Bush shows that even some of the more far-sighted elite in Canada have chills about U.S. imperialism's lurch towards war to maintain its global positions. An excerpt:

     "(Prime Minister Paul Martin's) cautious feelings toward Bush's policies were evident yesterday at a gathering of Halifax's business, legal, and political elite. The warm standing ovation that greeted Bush on his way into what had been billed as a feel-good event turned to stony silence once the president began talking about actual policy.

     "Bush exhorted Canada to fan out with him in the fight against terror, exporting it abroad and punishing terrorist‑friendly states, blocking regimes seeking weapons of mass destruction while also joining his missile shield. Most of his applause lines landed with a thud, nobody clapping.

     "`There's only one way to deal with enemies who plot in secret and set out to murder the innocent and the unsuspecting. We must take the fight to them,' he said, pausing. `We must be relentless and we must be steadfast in our duty to protect our people.'"

     This incident is worth quoting in some detail, since it reveals the extent of opposition to Bush's dangerous foreign policies at all levels of Canadian society.

     Another interesting example came just two days later, when the Quebec wing of the Liberal Party of Canada overwhelmingly adopted a resolution against participating in Bush's ballistic missile defence plan.

     Pablo Rodriguez, president of the party's Quebec wing, said the Dec. 4 vote wouldn't cause fissures between Martin and Liberals in Quebec. "We are against the missile shield but 100 per cent behind Mr. Martin," he said.

     "I feel there is always a time where we have to take a stand and the Liberals from Quebec took a stand today," Liberal MP Denis Coderre told reporters.

     But Foreign Affairs Minister Pierre Pettigrew cautioned that the resolution was just the beginning of the debate.

     "The dialogue continues," Pettigrew said. "We will continue to work on [this]."

     Missile defence will be debated at the party's convention in March, and Prime Minister Martin has promised to put the issue to a vote in the House of Commons.

     Meanwhile, a prominent U.S. physicist warned that southern Canadian cities could be littered with the debris of nuclear warheads if missiles fired at the U.S. from North Korea were shot down over Canada.

     Ted Postol, a physicist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, told the Winnipeg Free Press that even if a defensive strike were launched immediately, there would be only about five minutes to pinpoint and demolish a missile passing over Canada. A destroyed warhead would disperse the radioactive material over a large area.

     To respond, the Free Press interviewed a political scientist rather than a physicist. University of Manitoba professor George Maclean conjectured that most of the debris would "likely burn up in the atmosphere".

     More "establishment" figures leaped into the debate in early December, turning up the heat on pro-U.S. politicians like Paul Martin and Stephen Harper by warning that "even future, expanded versions of the system would be vulnerable to enemy countermeasures and therefore unable to provide a real defense."

     "Our analysis clearly shows that the missile defense system currently being fielded will not provide protection against long-range ballistic missile attacks," said a letter to Paul Martin from Jonathan Dean and David C. Wright. Dean is the former US representative to the NATO‑Warsaw Pact force reduction negotiations in Vienna. Wright is the co‑director and senior scientist of the Global Security Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists.

     "It seems to me that the trend in missile defence is inevitably into the space component and one will lead to another," Dean said at a Dec. 6 news conference. He was in Ottawa to meet with disarmament groups.

     Prime Minister Martin says he has received assurances from Bush that the system will not involve the weaponization of space. But Dean says Canada is entering a grey area on the issue of space weapons. He notes that the shield's interceptor rockets, launched from the ground, can easily destroy space‑based systems such as satellites, fuelling the argument they will contribute to the weaponization of space.

     "Canada is taking the reservation it will not participate in space‑based weapons," said Dean. "You could say that (Canada's) participation in even the ground‑based system will lead in that direction, unavoidably it seems to me."

     One of Dean's concerns is that the missile shield will spark an arms race as other nations develop similar weapons to protect their space systems. "By deploying the interceptors, you're getting into the anti‑satellite game," he explained. "Once that is done, then you're triggering a probable competition with many other countries, any of about 20 countries."

     He predicted that any nation capable of launching a satellite or developing intermediate‑range missiles could design anti-satellite weapons, also known as ASATs. "My fear is once you have a competition in ASATs then you have an extra motivation for trying to get even stronger weapons up there."

     A graduate of the U.S. National War College, Dean was an arms control negotiator with the State Department in the 1970s. He is now an adviser on global security issues for the Union of Concerned Scientists.

     Several months ago, the U.S. air force released its plan to fight a war in space, putting together a list of targets, which range from weather and communications satellites to spacecraft launch facilities of other nations. The document, Counterspace Operations, listed various means the U.S. can use to attack another nation's space systems, including firing missiles to blast apart satellites or sending in commando teams to blow up ground stations.

     Dean also noted the Pentagon is already spending millions of dollars on research for space weapons and has publicly stated its plan is to put a test weapon into orbit around 2010.

     Earlier this year, a panel of space experts warned the Department of Foreign Affairs that the missile defence shield carries the potential to spark a new arms race similar to that seen during the Cold War.

     Despite such powerful evidence that "Star Wars" is dangerous, the missile defence system has powerful supporters in the Liberal caucus. Paul Martin and Defence Minister Bill Graham advocate Canadian participation, along with Public Works Minister Scott Brison.

     Officials with the Department of National Defence, as well as Foreign Affairs, claim that Canada must take part in the shield to show it is "contributing to the security of the continent."

     A recent poll by the Centre for Research and Information on Canada (CRIC) found that 52% of Canadians oppose involvement in the U.S. missile defence system, while 46% are in favour. Opposition is strongest in Quebec, where 65% were opposed.