CANADIAN LABOUR:

AVERAGE CEO MAKES 155 TIMES MORE THAN AVERAGE CANADIAN WORKER:

It now the evening of Monday, January 3, and the average Canadian annual wage has already fallen well below that of an average of the 100 top CEOs in this country. In actual fact this happened at 2:30 pm earlier today. As the following press release from the Canadian Centre For Policy Alternatives points out the average top CEO makes 155 more money than the average Canadian.

Does this means, as the myth often says, that they "work harder" than the average Canadian ? For this to be true there would have to be 760 hours in each day, and the CEOs would have to work every second of them. Do they magically "create value" by their cunning business decisions ? If that was true then their remuneration should drop when the company they are in charge of drops in value or income, a thing that rarely happens. As the title of the following makes plain CEO pay is "recession proof". Bonuses come whether the company does well or poorly.

Leaving aside the question of the recent massive bailouts of business by government and the mostly invisible day to day subsidies provided by government I would challenge anyone to prove that any CEO has made a cunning non-obvious decision in any company that increased its value to anywhere near the amount these people are paid. In actual fact most companies "run themselves" despite management decisions. Management, of which CEOs are the "big fish" are better pictured as some sort of tube worm existing parasitically on the body of the company fish. They are hardly ever "propellers" that drive the firm forward.

Is this sort of inequality justified in any society ? What are its costs, and I don't mean merely monetary ones ? Things to ponder. Here's the press release. You can read the full17 page report at the Policy Alternatives website.

CEOCEOCEOCEO

Canada’s best-paid CEOs ‘recession-proof’: study
January 3, 2011
TORONTO – Canada’s best-paid 100 CEOs breezed through the worst of the recession with earnings 155 times higher than the average Canadian income earner, says a new study by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA).
The study, Recession-Proof, looks at 2009 compensation levels for Canada’s best paid 100 CEOs and finds they pocketed an average of $6.6 million during the darkest period of the recession – a stark contrast from the total average Canadian income of $42,988.

“At this rate of reward, this handful of elite CEOs pocket the equivalent of the average Canadian wage by 2:30 pm on January 3 – the first working day of the year,” says the study’s author and CCPA Research Associate Hugh Mackenzie.

The study shows executive compensation in Canada wasn’t always this rich. In 1998, the best paid 100 CEOs pocketed an average of 104 times more than the average Canadian wage earner, compared to 155 times more in 2009.

“Even that extraordinary number understates the real story,” says Mackenzie. “Thanks to a change in corporate reporting introduced in 2008, we only have a conservative statistical estimate of the stock options that make up about one third of CEOs’ 2009 pay. The public will never know how much most of these CEOs actually got paid in 2009.

“And that’s only half the story. These CEOs are sitting on $1.3 billion of stock options they haven’t yet cashed in. That’s about $2 in future income for every $1 they declared in 2009.”

When the CEOs decide to exercise those stock options, the study reveals Canadians will subsidize that bonus with an estimated average of $360 million in foregone taxes, since stock options are taxed at a lower rate, as if they are capital gains. Among Mackenzie’s recommendations: getting rid of that expensive and unfair loophole.

The study highlights the role that soaring executive compensation plays in the dramatic growth in income inequality in Canada identified in a recent CCPA study by Senior Economist Armine Yalnizyan. Yalnizyan found that fully one third of all income growth in Canada in the past 20 years went to the richest 1% of Canadians.

–30–

For more information please contact: Trish Hennessy at (416) 551-2059 or Kerri-Anne Finn at (613) 563-1341 x306.

CANADIAN LABOUR GATINEAU QUÉBEC:

SECOND ORGANIZED WAL-MART IN NORTH AMERICA:

A recent Labour Board decision has certified a Wal-Mart in Gatineau Québec as the second unionized Wal-Mart on the North American continent. The only other location now represented by a union is also in Québec in St. Hyacinthe. Previous attempts to unionize Wal-Mart in Québec and in locations as far afield as Texas and Weyburn Saskatchewan have been beaten back either legally or by the expedient of simply closing the outlet affected.

The latter is both a favoured threat and a favoured action on the part of Wal-Mart management. The largest example of this was when Wal-Mart decided to withdraw from the whole German market rather than tolerate unions in its stores in that country. The only country where Wal-Mart is happy to coexist with a unionized workforce is...China. In China's case the "union" is, of course, the official government controlled federation which takes its marching orders from the Communist Party. Nothing could be plainer in pointing out the ideological affinity of neo-conservative managerialism and it communist counterpart. Two sides of one coin.

This Board decision may benefit the workers involved only marginally as the wage increases stipulated were only minimal, and the biggest issue, the use and abuse of the part time system, remained outside the Board's decision. Still it shows that even the Wal-Mart colossus is not invulnerable. It is a shame that the unions involved in Wal-Mart organizing are not imbued with at least a minimum of the internationalism and industrial unionism of the anarcho-syndicalist unions or revolutionary syndicalist unions such as the IWW. Things would go much better then.

Be that as it may if you want to follow the misdeeds of Wal-Mart in more detail Molly can suggest the following sites: Wake Up Wal-Mart and Wal-Mart Watch. It`s almost a classic 'Perils of Pauline' series complete with evil top-hatted capitalist. A refreshing old fashioned morality play in an age when the corporate rulers more often than not adopt fuzzy "progressive" and "new age" public personae. Here`s the story from the CBC.

WMWMWMWMWM
Quebec Wal-Mart workers get rare union deal
Only one other North American Wal-Mart has a collective agreement

CBC News
The contract covers more than 150 employees at the store on Boulevard du Plateau in Gatineau. (CBC) Workers at a Wal-Mart store in Gatineau, Que., have won a new collective agreement, only the second at any Wal-Mart store in North America — but not everyone is celebrating.

A government arbitrator imposed the agreement, after negotiations between the union and retailer were judged to be going nowhere.

The contract covers more than 150 employees at the store on Boulevard du Plateau. It took three years for the United Food and Commercial Workers to unionize the store, and another two years to get the contract.

"We had a first assembly last night to present the first collective agreement that was imposed by the Labour Board of Quebec," said union member Matthieu Allard.

He said the collective agreement gives employees a grievance process, recognizes statutory holidays and considers seniority in determining working hours.

Wages will go up 30 cents an hour this year, and another 30 cents next year. None of the employees, however, would say how much an hour they make now.

The arbitrator modeled it on the contract at the Wal-Mart in St-Hyacinthe, Que., the only other store with such an agreement.

"It might not have been as much as we could have gained in a normal negotiation process, but it's a definite step forward," Allard said.

Some employees at the store think otherwise.

In the parking lot outside the store, Denise Barre said she and her coworkers are disappointed with a 30-cent-an-hour raise, especially when it means paying union dues.

She said only 13 of the 150 employees went to Wednesday night's meeting with the union, which she says shows employees aren't interested.

Barre said she doesn't need this contract.

She said Wal-Mart treats her well and gives her benefits.

In a statement, the company also pointed out that the arbitrator found its wages competitive with other retailers, and adopted the wage scale Wal-Mart proposed.

The union said employees at the store were concerned by Wal-Mart's previous actions at unionized stores, but the Gatineau location is busy, and they hope Wal-Mart will not close it

In 2005, Wal-Mart closed a store in Jonquiere, Que., days before an arbitrator imposed a contract for its employees. The employees took Wal-Mart to court over the closure but lost their case.

In 2008, Wal-Mart also closed a tire shop on Maloney Boulevard in Gatineau after its employees received union certification.

The new agreement has a start date back in 2008, which means the union will be back to negotiating next year.


Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2010/10/08/ottawa-wal-mart-deal.html#ixzz11vWkUx1U

HUMOUR:

NEWSPEAK ON THE JOB:

HUMOUR:

FUNNIES FROM THE CORPORATIONS:

INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY:

THE BANDS ARE BANNED:

Sometimes there are items of stupidity over and above the call of foolishness that leave me gaping with wide eyed wonder. Now appreciate that I am an anarchist and as such am privy to the occasional screed from those who want to "abolish civilization" (a mercifully small part of modern anarchism) and who also- beggar the imagination- delude themselves into thinking they have a way to accomplish this goal. You'd think I'd be enured to craziness. No such thing. The so-called "mainstream society" contunues to produce examples of insanity that equal or surpass the idea of "abolishing civilization", and it does it on a routine basis. What follows is one such example.

SBSBSBSBSBSBSB
Apparently there is a new 'tweenie' fad called 'Silly Bandz'. I guess that I may have seen them on the arms of young kids in the homes that I visit but I never paid any attention whatsoever- which is perhaps exactly the level of attention they deserve. I'd be hard put to think of anything that deserves less attention. Basically they are cheap rubber bands in the shape of various things-animals, mythical figures, princess icons,etc. that kids strap across their wrists. There's a website for them, and a Wikipedia note on them as well.

Considering the low cost of this item (which is, of course at least about 50 times the cost of production) I'm considering ordering a bunch to amuse the yard apes and keep them off my back when I visit homes. OK. If you can think of anything more harmless (but I'm sure you can think of things more silly) I challenge you to present it. Maybe nose picking in private? This, however, is not the opinion of various schools who have "banned the silly bands". I became aware of this while reading this week's Time Magazine. They have a more extensive article online. What on God's Green earth could be the problem here ? The teachers and the principals who put their insanity into policy claim that it is "distracting".

Pupils may "play with their bands" rather than sitting with bated breath until the next utterance from the god at the front of the room. I suggest they strip the little buggers naked so they will have nothing to "play with" while they imbibe the great wisdom from the front of the room. But maybe then they would still have "something to play with". Ooops !

The teachers have also claimed that the kids engage in 'trades' of the bands and that sometimes the partners in these trades "regret" the deals that they have made. This leads to "hard feelings", and, of course, the abolition of any feeling beyond loyalty to an ideology is a primary goal of modern education.

Teachers today are, for instance, under the illusion that they can "abolish bullying" by ramping up the control of the students by institutional bullying to such a degree that the students will not engage in "bullying" - other than of course informing the great bully (the teachers and the school administration) of violations of the code ie informing just like any good member of the Hitler Youth would have done.

The inculcation of ideology, however, while a primary goal of our education system is not the primary goal. That goal is pretty simple...to keep the little bastards babysat so that both their parents can engage in the wage labour necessary to raise a family today. In the last few decades the ideas of "progressive eduction" have been gradually corrupted such that today the idea that there are objective standards of knowledge would be considered evidence that you were a right wing fanatic. At the same time the school system, while it has gradually abandoned the real function of teaching ie the passing on of knowledge (the conservatives are right here) has taken up a Hitler/Stalin pact whereby, as long as you have the little lizards trapped in kid jail for a few hours a day you might as well "teach them to behave properly". In this desire to exercise control leftists and right wingers are equally enthusiastic.

The desire to "ban the bands" has to be seen in this context. Of course it is silly and absurd, but it means a lot to that portion of the working class whose product is social control. It comes close to being their reason for being. It is also taken up with enthusiasm by their bosses who are part of the ruling class and are very much in agreement with the idea that children should be controlled whether the control is rational or not. After all control is the major reason for the institutions that they govern. The irrationality is not so irrational once you understand that, aside from warehousing kids, one of the major functions of the schools are to discipline kids to "fit in" to institutions where the word of the boss and his point of view is divine.

That's how I personally see this incredible attempt to impose bureaucratic will on young children. I don't know how long a period of "physical reality" without the ability to control others would be necessary to reform people who want to increase their power by such evil acts. Canada has a huge area on Ellsmere Island for their colonies where they would have no opportunity to direct the behavior of anyone else. A compassionate society would, of course, provide the necessary food and shelter for the bare physical comforts necessary to philosophical contemplation on the nature of good and evil. No "political commissars" would be provided. Figure it out yourselves guys, and maybe some day you could rejoin civilized society.

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR- FRANCE:

FRENCH WORKERS AGAINST PENSION THEFT:

Last Thursday, May 27, tens of thousands of workers struck and took to the street in response to a call from the major labour unions to oppose the proposed pension "reforms" that would raise the retirement age in France from 60 to 62 years. While large the demonstrations and the response of workers to the strike call was decidedly smaller than expected by the unions and perhaps suggests disillusionment with the endless rounds of "half-strikes" and street marches that the major unions have relied on in their continued disputes with the conservative Sarkozy government.

It might also suggest that efforts to convince the population of the "necessity" of reduction in government benefits are bearing fruit in the atmosphere of the fiscal crisis of much of southern Europe. The drive to reduce pension benefits, however, predates the present crisis and is an ongoing campaign by governments across the world to roll back pension benefits while maintaining or increasing give-aways to corporate business. With the demise of the pseudo-alternative of the state-communist countries the ruling managerial class has long seen its way open to "rationalize" the system of social support in various ways, and one of these is the reduction of pension benefits, especially by raising the age of retirement. they are aided in this by the fact that most social democratic parties worldwide have abandoned all but the slightest pretence to a "class perspective" in their policies. Either trendy leftism such as "greenishness" or self-promotion as "better managers" has become their raison d'etre. The present fiscal crisis is merely an opportunity for long term plans to be accelerated, not some unique crisis.

It should also be noted that the raising of the age of eligible retirement is a worldwide phenomenon that happens whether a state is in a deficit position or not. In Europe Germany will bring in a retirement age of 67 next year. The trend to raising the age of retirement extends across Europe and way beyond. Retirement ages are increasing outside of Europe in places such as Australia, India, Singapore and South Korea amongst many others. It should also be noted that while a retirement age of 60 (in France) may seem generous by North American standards that there are countries such as China where the age is 60 for males and 55 for females. Appeals to "competitiveness" hardly hold water when you look at the numbers in an international context.

The attack on pension benefits in France has to be seen in the context of the worldwide tendency of government managers to shift income from the working and other lower classes to the ruling classes. They do this in the context of assurance that they have no serious consequences to face beyond possible disorder ie there is presently no widely accepted "alternative" to their rule outside of South America and its neo-caudillos. The so-called fiscal "crisis" that much of Europe faces today is, from the point of view of its managers more an "opportunity" than a crisis. Watch carefully. If France's retirement age goes from 60 to 62 it will become 65 a few years after.

Meanwhile Canada's age will creep up from 65 to 67 to 69 and finally to 70. If you are so unlucky as to have health problems come upon you before then, well tough shit. The hope of government managers is that you die before you can collect a penny.

It will be a long hard slog before a popular alternative to such policies will be built, but doubtless the anarchist movement - in more realistic aspects - will be a major force in the formulation of such a thing. Until then defensive struggles to fight back against the plans of the managers have their place, but perhaps the French are right in their lack of faith in the traditional ways of doing this.

Here's an item from the Globe and Mail about the recent "semi-strike" in France.

ILILILILILILILIL
French workers hit the streets
Paris — Reuters
Published on Thursday, May. 27, 2010 9:56AM EDT

Last updated on Thursday, May. 27, 2010 6:34PM EDT


Tens of thousands of workers took to the streets in cities across France on Thursday to protest against government plans to raise the minimum retirement age of 60 as part of a reform of the costly pension system.

Trade union leaders said the marches were the first step in a long struggle to defend the retirement age, a trademark reform of the late Socialist President Francois Mitterrand, against the current government which says it has no alternative.

Transport was working almost normally and between 10 and 20 per cent of public service workers went on strike in schools, the post office and France Telecom. A poll for the Le Parisien daily said 62 per cent of those responding were ready to demonstrate.

One of the earliest marches, in Marseille, drew a larger turnout than a previous protest day in March. Unions estimated the crowd at 80,000 while police gave a figure of 12,000.

Estimates for the Paris march were due later on Thursday.

“Only a show of force on the streets can defend the 60-year retirement age and the social achievements that [President] Nicolas Sarkozy is methodically attacking,” Bernard Thibault, secretary general of the powerful CGT union, said.

Labour Minister Eric Woerth said on Wednesday that the current retirement age was “not dogma” and Budget Minister Francois Baroin said on Thursday a pension reform bill would be debated in parliament after the summer break.

“There are basically no other measures on the table that are convincing,” Mr. Woerth told reporters.

Mr. Sarkozy added a partisan sting to the debate on Wednesday by saying, to loud protests from the opposition Socialists, that France would have “much fewer problems” if Mr. Mitterrand had not lowered the retirement age in 1983.

According to a report last month by the government-appointed Pensions Advisory Council, France’s pension system faces a funding gap of around €70-billion ($86-billion U.S.) in 2030 and that could balloon to more than €100-billion by 2050.

Like other countries in the euro zone, France is struggling to bring its swollen public deficit under control. It has announced a freeze on central government spending over the next three years but has ruled out tax increases.

According to French media reports, the government is considering increasing the retirement age to 62 or 63 years and extending the period during which contributions have to be paid to 42 years from the current level of 40.5 years by 2030.

However, President Nicolas Sarkozy’s office said that no decisions had been taken as yet.

Mr. Sarkozy has singled out an overhaul of the pension system as his government’s key reform project this year but his plans already have aroused strong opposition from unions.

The CGT’s Thibault said further protests could come before the summer break. CFDT union leader Francois Chereque said: “Things will happen over time. One protest will not suffice.”

There have been expectations for several months that a rise in the retirement age would be part of the planned reform but French media have focused closely on the issue in recent days.

The transport chaos that often accompanies strikes in France was mostly absent on Thursday, partly because the reform plan would not touch costly special pension schemes for transport workers, a powerful sector that brought an earlier conservative government to its knees in 1995 when it tried to reform them.

“The government’s plan is not the toughest that could be, despite what the banners will say,” the business daily Les Echos wrote in an editorial.

CANADIAN ECONOMICS/CANADIAN POLITICS:

ANOTHER CORPORATE RIP-OFF:

The following, from the Progressive Economics Forum, certainly is grist to the mill of my long held contention that we no longer live in a society that could be styled "capitalist" (whatever the title of the article). I have termed our present society as "managerial rule" for decades, and I have yet to see convincing evidence that the traditional use of the c-word gives any greater insight. Usually it obscures very important phenomena. In my view We live in a society far removed from the "free market" that should be a defining aspect of "capitalism". Yes, I know that there has been over a century of leftist modification to the crude theory that Marx first presented in the 1800s, but as the years drag on this seems more and more to be like the addition of epicycles to try and correct the failings of the Ptolemaic model of the universe.

Understanding that most of the economy is now and has been for years outside of the simple supply/demand situation that would define pure capitalism is essential to understanding things like what is described below. No doubt our economy still retains some elements of capitalism. Even the most tyrannical Stalinist command economy had to have such elements, even if only as in the black market, simply to survive and function. Yet, both the theoretical owners of corporations ie the stockholders and the public in general are obviously defrauded by practices like those described below. If the "state" is an institution that operates "on behalf of the ruling class" then what the problem described below shows is that the managers of the corporations are the ruling class.

But enough of my theorizing. Here's the article.

CECECECECECECECE

Stock options, the buyback boondoggle and the crisis of capitalism
As if there weren’t already enough reasons to eliminate the egregious stock option tax loophole, a column by Eric Reguly in this month’s Report on Business magazine highlights yet another. This reason helps to explain why we had such a booming stock market up to 2008, but little growth in real investment and productivity. ( One of the chronic and perhaps growing problems of managerial society- Molly )

First of all, the stock option deduction, which allows those recipients of stock options to only pay half the statutory rate of income tax on their gains is:
#Expensive, costing Canada’s federal government an average of almost $1 billion a year in foregone tax revenues annually during the past five year, according to Finance Canada’s tax expenditure accounts.
#Unfair, with the benefits going overwhelming to those with the highest incomes, including CEOs, as Hugh Mackenzie has outlined in his annual CEO pay report for the CCPA. For example as I showed a few years ago, this tax loophole saved Robert Gratton, former CEO of Power Corp over $24 million in federal income taxes, just on one year’s income. This is a major reason why some of the highest paid people in our society pay tax at a lower rate than ordinary workers.
#Distortionary and destabilizing, creating the misaligned incentives and pay structures that reward short-term risk taking that Bank of Canada governor Mark Carney identified as one of the key reasons for turbulence in the financial markets in a speech he gave two years ago.

But there’s an even more devastating reason why the tax loophole for stock options should be eliminated: it has been very damaging for the economy.

Research by William Lazonick, director of the Centre for Industrial Competitiveness at the University of Massachusetts, shows that stock buybacks–using a company’s funds to buyback its own shares–has swallowed up an enormous amount of the income of major US companies. Canadian companies have also put increasing amounts of their income into stock buybacks and not into more productive investments, as I outlined a few years ago.

The stock buybacks have resulted in pretty blatant stock price manipulation, boosting stock price value for these companies, and paying off very handsomely for those who hold shares, which includes most CEOs and senior executives, especially since they only pay half the rate of tax on these gains. It’s been great for shareholders and other employees who also own shares, at least in the short-term. ( But they pay off most handsomely for those who can control and anticipate the movements ie management - Molly )

The problem is that in the long-term it has bled the economy of real investment in the economy. As Reguly writes:
Every dollar spent on buybacks means one less dollar spent elsewhere-on R&D, on training, on equipment, on creating employment, on innovation. Ultimately, competitiveness and economic growth suffer.

This issue is related to the broader discussion we’ve recently had on this blog about the ineffectiveness of corporate tax cuts.

Lazonick ties this to a broader crisis of US capitalism’s “New Economy business model”, says we should ban stock buybacks where they are used to manipulate prices, and writes that the:
The government also needs to enact legislation that drastically reins in top executive pay, which means placing restrictions on stock-based remuneration, especially stock options.

We will soon see in the federal Throne Speech and budget what Canada’s federal government has planned to revitalize Canada’s economy coming out of this recession.

But if it is just more faith in the same old simplistic laissez-faire Advantage Canada framework without fixing any of these problems, it will have very little success.

CANADIAN POLITICS:

AVOIDING A RECESSION-THE CEO WAY:

If you think you've had it bad the last year-you're probably right, but not if you are a member of Canada's management elite. According to a report from the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives this country's top ten CEOs had an average income of $7,352,895 in 2008, shortly before the recession began to "bite hard". This was 174 times the average Canadian wage. To put this in further perspective, from 1998 to 2008 the average Canadian wage packet dropped 6% when adjusted for inflation. During the same period the average compensation for top CEOs increased !!! by 70% !!!!. The Globe and Mail weighed in today with an editorial on this report. Not denying the facts of the study, as per usual, because they are pretty rock solid. What the Globe opined is that nobody should pay attention to the difference between the average wage and that of top CEOs, nor to the difference in increase versus decrease. According to the Globe the only matter of concern is that the average wage is declining, and it is all fine and good that corporate executives increase their income.

Well finagled I must say. A few little problems are, however, contained in this little excuse. one is that there just might be a connection between the two arms of this lever. It is entirely possible that corporate executive plunder is inversely correlated with employee compensation, and not just because this sort of thing is a zero sum game where money given to one class is unavailable to another. It is also more than likely that one of the things that corporate executives are rewarded for is their ability to "reduce labour costs and increase productivity". In plain language this means quite deliberately reducing the income of their employees. Quite deliberately. It is also a certain fact that this excessive executive compensation is in another zero sum game where the upper levels of management (and lower ones too to a lesser degree) bleed corporate entities at the expense of the stockholders. In a managerial society such as ours the term "stockholders" means, more often than not pension and other mutual funds held in dispersed ownership by the same employees whose wages are being reduced.

Then there is, of course, simple justice. Nobody in his right mind would try and claim that corporate executives work 174 times as long as the average Canadian does. Neither can one claim that their jobs are 174 times as disagreeable as the average job. Then we come to value. No doubt the value produced by a corporate executive may sometimes be high. Can it be, however, 174 times as valuable as that of the work of people such as nurses, firefighters, ambulance drivers, farmers, miners and to put it bluntly pretty well everyone else ? Think about it for awhile.



The following article from the National Union of Public and General Employees (NUPGE) gives a general summary of the report in question.
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPP

Canadian corporate CEOs average $7,352,895 each:
New CCPA study says top 100 Canadian CEOs pocketed 174 times each what average Canadian workers earn all year.





Ottawa (5 Jan. 2010) - Canada's highest-paid CEOs raked in an average of $7,352,895 in 2008, the latest year for which statistics are available. That's 174 times more than the average wage of the typical Canadian worker.





"To put that in perspective, Canadians will work full-time throughout the year to earn the national average of $42,305," says Hugh Mackenzie of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA), which has just released a new report on the subject.





Yet as of 1:01 p.m. on their first working day of this year (Jan. 4) the top 100 CEOs in the country had already pocketed as much as the average Canadian worker will in all of 2010.
The CCPA study says average compensation for the top CEOs has outpaced inflation by 70% between 1998 and 2008. During the same period, Canadians earning the average income lost 6% to inflation.
Here are the top 10 hogs at the corporate trough:
Thomas Glocer, Thomson Reuters Corp. - $36,595,233.
Ted Rogers, Rogers Communications Inc. - $21,484,708.
J. M. Lipton, Nova Chemicals Corp. - $19,753,245.
George Cope, BCE Inc. - $19,551,345.
Robert Brown, CAE Inc. FY end March 08 - $17,293,144.
William Doyle, Potash Corp. of Saskatchewan - $17,026,317.
Hunter Harrison, Canadian National Railway Co. - $13,350,048.
Dominic D’Alessandro, Manulife Financial Corp. - $13,251,274.
Stephen Wetmore, Bell Aliant Regional Com. Income Fund - $11,563,250.
For the entire 100 names please go to the link below and read as much as you can stand. Caution: Not for those with weak stomachs.
NUPGE
The National Union of Public and General Employees (NUPGE) is one of Canada's largest labour organizations with over 340,000 members. Our mission is to improve the lives of working families and to build a stronger Canada by ensuring our common wealth is used for the common good. NUPGE
More information:Full Report: A Soft Landing - Recession and Canada's 100 Highest Paid CEOs
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
A MOLLY PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT:
I've tried the link to the publication by the CCPA in the report above, and it doesn't seem to work. Here is A LINK that does work, at least for Molly. The report is actually a great report, and it deserves far more publicity than it has been given in the mainstream press. As to the "why" of the astronomical executive compensation, much of the standard justification has been dealt with in my introduction to this post. The real "why" is a totally different matter.




Where I have to part company with the CCPA is not in what they have reported. It's obviously true. Neither, unlike the Globe and Mail, do I disagree with them that this sort of inequality is a "bad thing" and totally unjustified. I do, however, have to disagree about the realism of the remedy that they, as good left wing social democrats, have proposed. The simplistic way of summed up their solution (see the report) is "tax the bastards heavily". I wish them well in this enterprise, though it makes me a bit queasy knowing that social democrats rarely find a tax that they cannot love. The CCPA is under the impression that they can find a realistic way to tax such things as "stock options" (whereby management steals from the shareholders- as I said above usually ordinary citizens with dispersed portfolios). Maybe yes. Maybe no. What they will be unable to do , however, is find some magical formula in the byzantine tax regulations that will prevent upper management from switching their compensation to non-taxable benefits. That's the way that tax law has operated in the past, and that probably the way that it will operate in the future despite the best laid schemes of social democrats.




For what it is worth Molly has her own proposals that can be summed up in the brief bon mot of "abolish management". No doubt there will be tax law changes in such a process-mostly involving exceptions for ordinary people rather than attempts to penalize the ruling class. The main steps, however, depend more upon the easing of the legal burden of the state that prevents actual democratization of the workplace. It does not depend upon the failed illusion (demonstrated by the failure of over a century of attempts to build a more egalitarian society by taxation policy that the ruling class evades) of government largess rather than citizen action. That's why I am an anarchist, what I consider a "realistic socialist" and not a left social democrat.




Just in closing, here is the press release of the CCPA about their report, something that will probably never be quoted in anything but brief excerpts in the mainstream press.
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
Soft landing for Canada’s CEOs:
January 4, 2010
TORONTO—Canadians may have been hit hard by a worldwide economic recession, but it appears Canada’s 100 highest paid CEOs are enjoying a soft landing.





A report on executive compensation by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA), a progressive think tank, reveals Canada’s 100 highest paid CEOs pocketed an average $7.3 million in 2008, the year recession broadsided the nation.





“Canada’s top 100 CEOs earned 174 times more than the average Canadian wage,” says economist Hugh Mackenzie, CCPA Research Associate.





“To put that in perspective, Canadians will work full-time throughout the year to earn the national average of $42,305. The top 100 CEOs pocket that amount by 1:01 p.m. on January 4 – the first working day of the year.”





Soft Landing: Recession and Canada’s 100 Highest Paid CEOs shows executive compensation remains as resilient to worldwide economic forces as ever.





“Between 1998 and 2008, Canada’s top 100 CEOs’ average compensation outpaced inflation by 70 per cent,” says Mackenzie. “In contrast, Canadians earning the average income lost six per cent to inflation over that period.”
–30–
Soft Landing: Recession and Canada’s 100 Highest Paid CEOs is available at www.policyalternatives.ca
For more information please contact: Kerri-Anne Finn, CCPA Senior Communications Officer, at 613-563-1341 x306.
Related Reports & Studies
A Soft Landing
Recession and Canada’s 100 Highest Paid CEOs
Canadians may have been hit hard by a worldwide economic recession, but it appears Canada’s 100 highest paid CEOs are enjoying a soft landing. The total average compensation for Canada's 100 highest paid CEOs was $7,352,895 in 2008—a stark contrast from the total average Canadian income of $42,305. They pocketed what takes Canadians earning an average income an entire year to make by 1:01 pm January 4—the first working day of the year. During the worst of economic years, the...January 4, 2010 National Office
Read the full Report

CANADIAN LABOUR:
NORTEL MANAGEMENT SNEAKS AWAY WITH BONUSES:
The arrogance and dishonesty is almost unbelievable. Bonuses paid for driving a company into bankruptcy. Unless, of course, you believe, like Molly does, that managers are a parasitic class who contribute nothing to the production of goods and services and who have replaced the nominal owners of most companies (the shareholders represented by diversified stock in RRSPs and pension funds) as the real "ruling class". If you believe as Molly does then looting a bankrupt corporation is pretty well much par for the course, and thus I am not surprised by the following. Merely disgusted. First, from the Toronto Star is the mainsteam media report on what has happened.
↔↔↔↔↔↔↔↔↔
Ex-Nortel staff slam executive bonuses
Payment in leaked file to keep bosses on board:
Iain Marlow Business Reporter
Nortel Networks Corp. pensioners reacted with disgust on Friday to reports of new lavish bonuses for the company's top executives.





It was yet another blow to Nortel's distressed pensioners, retirees and long-term disabled former employees, who have dealt with financial uncertainty since the former Canadian tech darling declared bankruptcy in January.





"It seems so aberrant, in terms of the executive of the company awarding themselves really, really rich pay raises for doing the job of taking the company apart," said Tony Marsh, who retired from Nortel in 2000 after 30 years.





"Those of us who built the company up, into arguably the world's No. 1 telecom company, could never have dreamed of such riches," Marsh added.





An internal Nortel file "outlines a new compensation scheme for 72 Nortel executives that will see them get a total of $7.5 million U.S. on top of their current salaries in 2009," according to CBC News.





The company has argued that bonuses are necessary to keep executives aboard what is essentially a sinking ship following Nortel's filing for bankruptcy protection and the subsequent selling off of the company's assets. ( Molly would suggest the least educated, experienced and effective accountants in the whole country of Canada as better people "on board" than the past Nortel executives. Wanna argue ? )





Nortel would not comment on details of the plan. It issued a statement saying: "As Nortel works through the highly complex tasks of this restructuring, it is critical to have the right specialist resources in place ... Any steps taken around these individuals has been within the context of a previously approved compensation plan, taken in consultation with the creditor committees, external legal counsel and the Canadian Monitor."





Earlier, former CEO Mike Zafirovski claimed $12.3 million (U.S.) for back pay and bonuses. In March, some 100 executives were awarded $45 million in retention bonuses.





The company's divisions are being auctioned off in a process dragged out by bankruptcy court approvals. Retirees are worried that when Nortel's various global divisions are entirely sold off, they will be stuck with even less than they are now, which is not much, Marsh said.
↔↔↔↔↔↔↔↔↔
Here's what the Canadian Auto Workers (CAW) who have the misfortune of representing the Nortel workers and the pensioners/disabled workers have to say about the subject.

↔↔↔↔↔↔↔↔↔
CAW Condemns Corporate Bonuses at Nortel, while Retirees and Former Workers Left for Broke:
November 27, 2009, 10:55 AM EST
CAW President Ken Lewenza is denouncing the news of more corporate bonuses and salary increases at Nortel Networks Corp, while workers are still fighting to get their due severance, termination pay and pensions.





"This is the worst kind of abuse of corporate power - laying off workers and leaving them with nothing while the executives who drove the company into the ground fill their pockets," said CAW President Ken Lewenza. "This is deplorable and must be stopped."





Lewenza criticized yesterday's Ontario court ruling that Nortel retirees and former employees will not receive the severance or termination pay as set out in their separation packages.





"This is another example of why we need urgent changes to the bankruptcy laws in this country," said Lewenza. "Companies like Nortel can go into bankruptcy protection and eliminate their financial responsibilities towards former workers. In the case of Nortel, it is even more offensive since they are still paying out huge corporate bonuses, while completely ripping off retired or laid-off workers."





"It is exactly this kind of manipulation of the system that plunged the world economy into crisis last fall - it's truly repugnant that we've learned nothing from this experience."





Lewenza said that the union will continue to fight on behalf of the current and former Nortel workers. The union will be ramping up pressure on government to bring about necessary changes to the bankruptcy legislation, which currently sees workers bumped to the end of the line when companies go into bankruptcy. The union is also pressing for a national guaranteed pension fund which would help cover the pensions of workers whose employers go into bankruptcy protection or bankrupt.





In the company's heyday in the mid 1980s, the CAW represented approximately 5,000 Nortel workers in five locations.





The story of a new round of corporate bonuses at Nortel surfaced yesterday through a report by the CBC, who obtained the internal corporate document.

AMERICAN POLITICS/ECONOMICS:

THE MANAGERS GAIN;THE WORKERS PAY:

America is a land of myth, and one of its most enduring myths is that of equal opportunity, of rags to riches. Even in the distant past this was true only in an infinitesimal number of cases, as America had no less a class system than other countries. Today it is even less true as the vast majority of the GDP of the US is channeled through either government or corporations with dispersed stock ownership. Ah, but there are other ways to class power other than the antique image of the top hatted capitalist. The 'way of the manager' has come to replace that of the private owner throughout most of the world, and the USA is no exception. As the following item from the AFL-CIO Blog shows the managers have been quite successful during the past decade in advancing their position- at the expense of ordinary workers.

APAPAPAPAPAPAP

CEOs Get One-Third of All Pay;

Bank of America Uses Taxpayer $$ for Lobbying

Two news items out today highlight how far the nation needs to go in re-balancing the economy toward working people.

First, Think Progress points to a Wall Street Journal analysis that shows more than one-third of all pay in the U.S. now goes to executives and other highly-paid employees.

Highly paid employees received nearly $2.1 trillion of the $6.4 trillion in total U.S. pay in 2007, the latest figures available. The compensation numbers don’t include incentive stock options, unexercised stock options, unvested restricted stock units and certain benefits(which would show even more dramatic inequality-Molly).

The Wall Street Journal based its analysis on Social Security Administration data, which doesn’t count billions of dollars more in pay that remain off federal radar screens that measure wages and salaries.

Next, it turns out that Bank of America, which received $45 billion in taxpayer-funded bailout support, has spent more than $1.5 million lobbying on Capitol Hill.

The Charlotte, N.C., company wants flexibility on spending the bailout funds and also wants to fend off restrictions on executive compensation, home mortgage lending and credit card fees. The bank also is lobbying on a consumer rights bill, on student lending issues, on a bill that would’ve allowed bankruptcy judges to alter mortgages and on a proposed federal regulatory oversight agency.

And none of its positions on any of these bills would help working families.

As we noted in April when we released the AFL-CIO Executive PayWatch data, the Bank of America lost nearly $2.4 billion in the fourth quarter of 2008 due to deeper than expected trading and loan losses. Even after receiving billions of dollars in taxpayer money, the bank plans to eliminate up to 35,000 jobs over the next three years—but CEO Kenneth Lewis collected nearly $10 million in 2008, more than 400 times the average amount a bank teller is paid each year. Since becoming CEO in April 2001, Lewis received $134 million in pay, bonuses, stock awards and pension accruals.

As Think Progress notes, between 1979 and 2006, the inflation-adjusted after-tax income of the richest 1 percent of households increased by 256 percent, compared with 21 percent for families in the middle income quintile.

While U.S. worker productivity has skyrocketed over the past 30 years, wages have not kept pace.

America’s working middle class made it clear last November that they wanted change—and reshaping the nation’s economic framework to strengthen the middle class and close the wage disparity between the very top and the rest of us, is fundamental to that change.

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR-VIETNAM:

WORKERS' STRUGGLES IN A 'WORKERS' PARADISE':



The days of state socialism are pretty well over and done. About the only adherent to the full blown Marxist dream left in power these days is the increasingly bizarre and vicious ruling class of North Korea. Many countries, such as those of the ex-Soviet bloc, have abolished the old system of class rule lock, stock and barrel. Others have abolished the economic reality of managerial control without any way of gauging prices but have kept the old dictatorial political systems. Even the darling of leftists worldwide, the Castro dictatorship, has advanced very far along this road.




Vietnam is one such country, and like China it has managed to combine what is possibly the worst of both old style Communist managerialism and the so-called 'capitalist' managerial system. Looking at the ocean of debris left floating after the storm that wrecked the SS Marxism, one is generally struck by the extraordinary nastiness that the new ruling class (usually very much the old one with only an exchange of the tools of power) exhibits. So far only the countries of eastern Europe that the EU has been able to bribe into at least a moderate semblance of civilized political behavior have been able to escape this general trend. The old communist corruption, however, has been less touched by this bribery than the political facade has been.




What is the problem here ? Molly submits that the systematic use of the Marxist "propaganda model" failed in its ostensible goals, but "succeeded" in producing some unexpected side effects. Some of the failures are glaringly obvious. Despite decades of propaganda about "internationalism", once the lid was opened on the pot various nationalisms exploded in many such places. The "proletarian brothers" were not just unsympathetic to those in far distant corners of the world. No, they began to slaughter their neighbours. Decades of the propaganda had precisely the opposite effect than that intended. Because the class rule of the managers was built on such obvious lies about the economy, and because it was enforced by state terror, generations grew up believing that all of what the ruling class said was a lie, including their pious proclamations of "brotherhood".




Vietnam is one of those countries that has opened its doors to western management while retaining the anachronistic old political regime. The ruling class retains all of the viciousness that it once had, but this is becoming less and less effective. The working class of Vietnam, just like that of China, is turning its anger to what will hopefully be a more productive end than racial pogroms (though that may be a far shot in China), the defence of its own interests against that of the ruling class. Here's a story from the LibCom site about some of the latest labour unrest in Vietnam.
Vietnamese workers stage walkout over management bullying:
Over 300 workers at a Taiwanese company, Hwata Vina, in Ho Chi Minh City went on strike July 3 after complaining about managers’ draconian rules.





They said that the company, which produces water tanks and Inox appliances for kitchens, had made unreasonable stipulations. For example, workers were permitted to go to the toilet just three times a day for five minutes each. Workers would not get paid for periods when electricity was cut.





They were also asked to be present at the company 20 minutes before work started. Failure to do so, resulted in a deduction of VND100,000 each time a worker is late.





The stipulations were made worse by the bullying and abusive language from managers.





Director of the company, Ly Cheng Yeng said that the company did not have such rules, and it was the managers who set the regulations themselves. He apologized to workers for the bad treatment and pledged to correct the situation.





The managers were also asked by relevant authorities to produce work licenses, they could not.





Although Mr Yeng promised that the company would register the managers, the representative of the management board of industrial zones and export processing zones did not agree. He has asked authorities not to permit the managers to work at the company.





In the early afternoon, workers agreed to return to work.





Ho Chi Minh City authorities recently announced that top executives of two more foreign companies fled the country leaving behind debts, taking the number of such firms in Ho Chi Minh City so far to five. Four of them are Korean and the other Malaysian and the companies have all shut down as a result, leaving 1,246 workers in the lurch.





The companies owe the workers VND2.2 billion (US$129 million) in salaries. Vina Haeng Woon Co.,Ltd tops, with wages owed of VND1.3 billion, followed by Quang Sung Vina with VND553 million.





The companies also owe their customers and the social insurance agency another VND4.8 billion.

INTERNATIONAL ANARCHIST MOVEMENT-KRAKOW POLAND:

TWENTY YEARS LATER-POLISH ANARCHIST SPOIL RULING CLASS PARTY:

It has been 20 years since 1989, the year that pretty well wrote 'finis' on the Marxist-Leninist version of managerial society, as opposed to the other corporate model. That was the year of the Tienanmen Square massacre in Beijing where the Chinese Communist Party bared its teeth and demonstrated beyond all doubt that it still had the power to control the transition of China from the failed state socialist model to a more modern form of managerial rule. On another continent it was also the year of the obituary for the Soviet Empire. The new ruling class(borrowing heavily from the personnel of the old one) in Eastern Europe came to power generally without great violence, aside from Romania, but, at the same time, it betrayed the aspirations of freedom and equality that so many oppositionists in that part of the world had held.

Nowadays the aspirations and dreams of 1989 are relegated to the 'memory hole', aside, of course, from the anarchists who strive to keep them alive. In Poland, especially, where the opposition trade union Solidarnosc advanced a semi-syndicalist program and, in exile, actually cooperated with the AIT and other anarchists, the contrast between the dream and the present reality is especially acute. Today Solidarnosc is nothing more than one more centre right social democratic party. The present Polish ruling class are, of course, celebrating their rise to power, but they have opposition that proves that the old ideals are not dead. Poland is not a large country. Its population of about 38 1/2 million is barely above that of Canada (33 million), but it hosts a vibrant and growing anarchist movement that has a wide influence far outside of its numbers. Here is one story from the English language section of the Polish anarchist news site Centrum Informacji Anarchistcznej about recent actions in the city of Krakow that put the lie to the mutual admiration society of the new ruling class.

@@@@@@@@@@

Anarchist Demonstrate in Krakow on 20th Anniversary of 1989 Elections:

On June 4 1989, Poland held elections which marked the end of the era of the People's Republic of Poland. Grand ceremonies were held in many cities. Prime Minister Donald Tusk had wanted to hold a large international event in Gdansk but was afraid of massive (and perhaps violent) demonstrations by shipyard workers who lost their job due to an EU decision. They had demonstration recently in Warsaw and there were violent clashes with the police. Tusk decided instead to hold the event, attended by many foreign heads of state, in Wawel Palace in Krakow. Anarchists went there to show him that he could run, but he can't hide.

Besides the anarchists, a group of tenants showed up. They have been protesting and organizing in Krakow for more than a year now. The night before, they had a picket at the Sheraton hotel where VIP guests were staying. They also picketed on the main square in Krakow before the demo.

Anarchists had slogans like "Without Us There is No Democracy" and "Enough Compromises - the Class War Continues". They marched though the city to Wawel where there were some speeches. In newspapers given out, anarchists called for a boycott of elections and for direct democracy.

Some photos are below. There are also nice ones here and here.

The mainstream paper published some short films (not too good) here. (You have to scroll down a bit.)

ECONOMIC CRISIS:

BLAME THE MANAGERS:

Here's a choice one from the AFL-CIO Blog, one to remember the next time you read some screed that tries to blame "overpaid workers" for the decline of certain sectors of the economy. This, of course, is in reference to the problems of the US economy, but one of the points made-overpayment of managers- has reference to many other countries as well.

..........................

Managers, Not Workers, Overpaid in Manufacturing Jobs:
by James Parks, Feb 17, 2009



Some pundits and lawmakers—Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) comes to mind—falsely claim that union workers are overpaid and are to blame for the decline of U.S. manufacturing. But a new report, released last week by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI), busts that myth and shows the convenient conventional wisdom to be wrong.

EPI economist Josh Bivens lays out the facts in Squandering the Blue-Collar Advantage, which show that U.S. manufacturing’s blue-collar workforce, far from destroying U.S. competitiveness, is actually one of the key elements making a positive contribution to competitiveness—a contribution being undermined by a variety of other factors. Click here to read the entire report.

Says Bivens:

If the story of U.S. manufacturing began and ended with its blue-collar
workers, the outcome would be far different from what we’re seeing today. In
hourly pay and productivity, U.S. manufacturing workers give their companies a
significant competitive edge—one that is being drained away by other negative
forces.

Bivens identifies three key factors undermining U.S. competitiveness:

*The overvalued U.S. dollar, which artificially drives up the price of U.S.
goods abroad and drives down the cost of foreign-produced goods here. Over the
past 10 years, this imbalance alone has created a 10 percent to 16 percent cost
disadvantage for U.S. goods, compared with the previous decade.
*The
high cost of U.S. health care is another significant factor. Reducing these
costs to the same level as our comparable trading partners could create a 4.6
percent cost advantage.
*U.S. managers—not workers—are overpaid. Bringing
white-collar wages in line with those in comparable countries could result in a
6.4 percent cost advantage for U.S. manufacturers.

Bivens adds:

If we want to restore the strength of U.S. manufacturing in our economy and in
the world, we have to address the real anti-competitive factors that are
dragging it down. In this effort, the wages and productivity of the unionized
blue-collar workforce are an important asset.

INTERNATIONAL POLITICS-ICELAND:

ANOTHER OPINION ON ICELAND:

The following is from the Act Up In Saskatchewan site. I reprint this here, note because I agree with the author's politics-I obviously don't- but because it gives a little more background on the events in Iceland than I have published here so far. As an ex-member of the NDP Molly has a certain lingering sympathy with left social democrats, of which the "greenie" version are one example. The sympathies of the author of the piece below are pretty obviously of that sort. All that I can say here and now is that the adherents of such politics are, in my view, childishly naive. That's all well and good. I can think of adherents to the anarchist name, especially in the USA, who are even more so and who add moral turpitude to their list of faults. As to the province of my birth-Saskatchewan- the best that I can say for their "greenies" (leaving aside the subcultural nature of their beliefs) is that they can maintain a certain "purity" because they, unlike other Green parties in other parts of the world, have not even advanced 1/10,000th of the way to any political influence. Let them advance 1/1000th of the way and you will see the same sort of retrograde motion that Green parties in Europe have performed. In actual fact the "greenies", based as they are on subcultural conviction (and a class basis of managers that they cannot admit) have far less sociological basis to prevent them from giving in to the temptation of "opportunism" than traditional class based social democratic parties have had."Ideas", after all, are much more subject to change than "interests". Anyways, enough ranting. Here's the article.

..........................

Protests Bring Down Iceland's Government:
Contributed by John W. Warnock
Sunday, 25 January 2009
The financial crisis has claimed its first victim. On Saturday Iceland’s government resigned and called elections for May 9, two years early. Protesters, who have been in the street since October 2008, began large rallies at the Parliament on Tuesday, demanding the resignation of the coalition government. On Saturday, Prime Minister Geir Haarde announced they were giving in to public opinion.

Large demonstration began the week when Parliament resumed from a long break. Commentators said they were the largest protests in the country since 1949, when people objected to the government’s decision to join NATO. Women shouted and banged on pans. Eggs, paint, firecrackers and yogurt were thrown at the Parliament building. A large bond fire was set in front of the door of Parliament. When the prime minister exiting the building, his car was surrounded, rocked and covered with paint. The police replied with pepper spray and batons.

In this small country of 320,000, thousands turned out for demonstrations during the week. They carried signs proclaiming “Yes We Can!” Banners stated: “USA is getting rid of Bush – We want to get rid of you!”
Financial deregulation

Following the policies of Tony Blair’s government in the UK and Bill Clinton’s in the United States, the government of Iceland deregulated the financial industry. This was part of a general move to embrace free market economics. The three major banks in Iceland put a high priority on expanding abroad, going deeply into the shaky derivatives market.

The bubble collapsed in October, with foreign debts rising astronomically to almost ten times Iceland’s gross domestic product. Following the pattern set by Labour Prime Minister George Brown in the UK, and the George Bush-Democratic Congress in the United States, the banks were bailed out by the government and the taxpayers.

Icelanders went to the banks to withdraw their money, and the banks said no. They went to the store to buy groceries and found that the shelves were bare. No one would ship anything to Iceland without being paid cash up front. Like a poor Third World country, the government went to the International Monetary Fund and begged for a bailout. It was granted with the usual free market free trade conditions.

Iceland’s coalition government

Since the election of 2007, Iceland has been ruled by a “grand coalition” government of the right wing Independence Party and the centre-left Social Democratic Alliance. In a public opinion poll taken on Saturday, support for the Independence Party has dropped from 37% to 22%. Support for their coalition partner, the Social Democratic Alliance, has fallen from 27% to 19%. The surprise has been the growth of the Left-Green Movement, which received 14% in the 2007 election but is now at 33% in the polls. The party has announced that it is willing to lead a coalition government after the May 2009 election. They are the only party which wants to renegotiate the agreement with the International Monetary Fund.

Rise of the Left-Green Movement

Political parties were re-aligned in Iceland in 1999. The Social Democratic Alliance was formed when the Social Democratic Party merged with parts of three smaller parties. They are described as a “centre-left” party and follow the general policy position of the Tony Blair/Gordon Brown “New Democrats” in Great Britain.

Because of their ideological support for the social democratic version of neoliberalism (well known in Saskatchewan), supporters from the Women’s Alliance and the National Movement broke with the new party. They joined with the Left Green Alliance to form the new Left-Green Movement.

The Left-Green Movement is a Green socialist party, with a strong feminist orientation. They are affiliated with the Nordic Green Left Alliance of similar parties. Their four basic principles are:

(1) Conservation and protection of the environment.

(2) Equality and social justice.

(3) Commitment to promoting labour and the labour movement.

(4) An independent foreign policy, with no military alliances. Their general policy position is similar to that of the New Green Alliance, the original Green Party in Saskatchewan.

This week the European Union warned governments that popular opposition to existing governments over the financial collapse and the onset of the deep recession is rising and there will be more social unrest and radical political activity. Mass protests are now taking place in Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Bulgaria and Greece.