Lethbridge Herald (Newspaper) - March 22, 1971, Lethbridge, Alberta
4 - THE LETHBRIOOC HKAID - Monday, March 22, 1971. EDITORIALS Bruce Hutchison Alberta's three big cities One of Canada's problems is the concentration of industry. Parliament tried to do something about it by setting up the department of regional economic expansion and designating certain parts of the country as areas eligible for special grants for new industry. Southern Alberta, not including Calgary, was so designated. As a consequence several new industries have been established in Lethbridge and several more would come if the government continued to look favorably on this area. However there are strong indications that Ottawa feels it has done enough for Lethbridge. Meanwhile the economic disparities continue in Alberta. The northeast corner of the province, for instance, is more depressed than the southwest even before the start of the federal program. The federal program is not enough, so far as Alberta is concerned. So the provincial government is moving to fill the gap. Legislation has been introduced in Edmonton to set up a provincial program for regional economic expansion. And it will apply to the whole province except the federally - designated area and except cities of more than 40,000. Why the 40,000 figure? The purpose is to persuade new industry to go elsewhere than Calgary and Edmonton, of course, because they are already so big that they naturally have a great gravitational pull for any new industry. But they are nearly half a million in population. Again the question, why is the figure 40,000 mentioned in the legislation? There is only one conceivable answer: Lethbridge has just passed 40,-000. So Lethbridge is now, in the opinion of the Alberta government, a big city like Calgary and Edmonton. It has grown enough. It can stand on its own feet, like Calgary and Edmonton. Lethbridge is still in the area eligible for federal assistance, but such assistance is now being halted. There is a real prospect of Lethbridge being officially removed from the federal eligible area. So when that day comes Lethbridge will be like Calgary and Edmonton, strictly on her own. A blunt interpretation of the provincial legislation is that the Alberta government is saying to Lethbridge and only Lethbridge, "you have gone far enough." Disbanding the B and B Probably all Canadians will heave a sigh of relief at the wise decision of the officials of the Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism to shelve the sixth and final volume of this particular study. Davidson Dunton and Jean - Louis Gagnon, co - chairmen of the commission recommended to Prime Minister Trudeau that the commission be disbanded at the end of this month. To date, the commission, which was established in 1963 under the Pearson regime, has cost approximately $10 million. The final volume was to have dealt with the Supreme Court, Parliament, and other federal government organisms connected with Canadian culture. Mr. Trudeau agreed with the recommendation, stating that it was more important for the commission's researchers to concentrate all their efforts in the preparation and planning of preliminary projects which would be of great interest to the public. To date, what the commission has achieved has made all Canadians aware that the French language is a legal, inherent part of our culture and every effort to expand its use across the nation should be employ- ed. The recommendation that top bub-lic servants have a working knowledge of French has already been put into motion, with civil servants at all levels of the scale boning up on French. Western Canadians however, are still not convinced that French is essential to them in their workaday world, and perhaps at this time their convictions are justified. But in years to come the story might be completely different. Already political aspirants with an eye on Ottawa are'beginning to realize that they will have an added advantage to their credit if they can converse in our two national languages. And someone has said that probably we will never have another prime minister who is not completely bilingual. What the B and B commission did to educate Canadians on the issue it took so many years to investigate, is still a matter of conjecture. Some people feel the money was an utter waste and couldn't care less what the recommendations contained. Others have taken it to heart and are seriously concerned that much of what it contains will do a great deal to unite our fragmented French-English Canadianism, if properly implemented. ART BUCHWALD WASHINGTON - My friend S. J. Mich-elson, a registered ghost writer who works out of New York City, has just added a new terror to those that have been predicted for the 1980s. S. J. predicts that in 10 years from now there will be a famine in speakers the likes of which the United States has never seen. S. J. told me: "This country is using up rhetoric twice as fast as it can be reproduced, and if we keep wasting our speakers as we are doing now, we could find ourselves speechless by 1985." Citing scientific data S. J. said, "There were 11,198 prepared and extemporaneous speeches delivered last year in New York City not counting TV appearances by Mayor John Lindsay. "Ten years ago there were only 4,506. By 1980 the demand for speeches by Rotary clubs alone will be 23,897. Even with a new crop of politicians, radical students and Women's lib activists, it will be impossible to supply one quarter of the requests for speakers in 10 years from now." I asked S. J. how he explained the escalating demand for speakers. "This is a country that thrives on meetings. Three Americans can't have breakfast, lunch or dinner together without booking a speaker to address them. We are holding more conventions, more protest meetings and more fund - raising events than any time in our history.' People have no solutions to any of the problems we face so they, demand supposed expert* to solve their problems for them. "Unfortunately the more complicated our problems become, the more meetings we hold and the less experts we have to go around. "For example, in any given night in this country there are 5,679 Republican fund-raising dinners going on. At the same tim� there is only one Spiro Agnew. Everyone knows you can spread Spiro Agnew just so far." "But surely there must be a lot of new speakers coming up to fill the needs of the country," I protested. "That's just the point. The younger generation which we were counting on to help out can't talk." "What do you mean they can't talk?" "The new generation can't verbalize. They've been listening to rock music since they were born and watching television since they were 3, and it's impossible for them to complete a sentence, much less deliver a speech. The reason so many of your radical students use four - letter words these days is that they don't know the correct word to use in expressing a thought." "But surely the government can supply speakers to prevent this catastrophe," I said. S. J. shook his head. "Unfortunately no one believes anything anyone in the government says these days. They won't even book someone from the government for prayer breakfasts any more." I told S. J., "You paint a bleak picture." "It's even worse than I have painted it," he said. "Because of the economic squeeze the networks are replacing more and more of their entertainment programs with talk shows. Every speaker in this country will soon be booked for television to plug his book and will be unable to take any speaking dates." "What can we do to stem the tide?" I asked. S. J. said, "The only answer is to send all able-bodied persons on welfare out on the lecture circuit. If they want to eat they should be able to sing for their supper." (Toronto Telegram News Service) The NDP enjoys the best of two worlds A NY fair - minded and phil-osophical Canadian, like the present reader for instance, must have been interested, a -few nights ago, to see the candidates for the leadership of the New Democratic Party on television and their best behavior. Among this hopeful group of men the oldest, wisest and ablest was David Lewis (whether you like him or not). But even he, with his long experience in the rough game of politics, seemed a little put out when^the interviewer described him as the candidate of the socialist "Establishment" - as if that were a handicap and a blemish. Here we encounter the tyranny of semantics which turns the English language into jargon and our political debate into smear. Suppose that Mr. Lewis represents the NDP Establishment. What of it? If he hadn't reached the upper level of the Establishment by this time he wouldn't be worth considering as a leader. He would be a flop. And if the NDP hadn't created an Establishment, a working apparatus, it wouldn't be in business at all. Yet that word has been steadily corrupted until it is taken to mean those sinister, right - wing forces that corrupt our society. Any man remotely associated with the so-called Establishment must be anti - social, wicked and rich. While Mr. Lewis is none of these things, he certainly is an Establishment man and so, in politics, is every man of consequence. Not only in politics but in all aspects of society. Unless a man withdraws from society altogether and becomes a hermit in a cave he belongs to an Establishment of some sort, whether it be a board of corporate directors, a conventicle of socialists or a group of bird watchers. As a social creature all of us are established, one way or another and none the worse for that. You might suppose, however, that the rebels who attack the existing organization of society, had, and wanted, no organization of their own. In fact, they are better organized in ascret than the great majority in public, and if they ever controlled the government we would soon find, as in all revo-1 u t i o n s, what organization, authority and obedience really mean. You might also suppose that the Establishment of business men alone had any power in Canada whereas the most pow- "How do you expect ME to do something about poverty when the government can't!" Letters To The Editor ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ What is the role of a democratic government? The recent letter of Mr. L. K. Walker posed a question, "Does the government have to control everything?" His letter raises a further question, important to all of us; "Just what IS the role of government in a democratic society?" Should the government take from those who "have" and give to those who "have not?" If they do, is this democratic government? Do they have the "right" to do this To answer such questions, let us examine the true role of government. We form government and delegate to it the power to do things which we have the right to do individually. If it were not for government, each person would have to protect his own life, and that of his family. He would protect his own property from those who would steal or take from him, and he would have every right to do so. He would protect his right to move, worship, love, play, and work and make a living for himself and family so long as he did not infringe on the same rights which would belong to others. It is most difficult for each individual to do these things entirely on his own, and so we associate, and together appoint some to protect our lives and property while we go peacefully about our business. Our government thus established has no right to take another's life on our behalf, or to take another's property for our self or personal use. If we allowed that, the same government could take from us to give to the other. Personally, we cannot take from another for our own use. We cannot therefore delegate to government the power to do that for us which we cannot do for ourselves. The proper role of government is therefore to protect our lives and property, not to take from us. Mr. Mitchell Sharp, External Affairs Minister, has just signed an agreement to loan $14 million to East African communities, interest free, for a fifty year term. What right does a government have to tax from its people to give to others? If you have two cars, or two houses, does the government have the right to take one of each and give to persons The values found in camping Camping experience is a recreational in the out - of-doors which provides special opportunity for education and for social adjustment through group living. Today there is so much pressure put on youth that sometimes camping is the only way he can escape from it, even though it is for only a limited time. In group camping one of the greatest values he can get out of it is day-to-day living with other people. He can expand his ideas on what others say, the way they feel and why they act the way they do. Camp exposes a person to so many things that because of it he is taught to respect other people's point of view. A camp experience can help a camper to understand himself as a person. He can learn to live comfortably and co - operatively with the other campers, thus it can help him make a better adjustment in his family, neighborhood, school and community groups when he returns home. Camp allows a child to really live with a group his own age and experience a warm feeling of belonging. There is no better place to learn to get along with people than at camp. Camping should be simple living in the out-of-doors where a camper can have the opportunity to feel free. Over the last few years civilization has crept into it. The simple camp life has turned into summer resorts. Healthy, happy and safe living in the out-of-doors demands the learning of new skills and responsibilities to meet the needs of food, shelter and fun in the open. This becomes the Enjoys paper's writers We're heard through several reliable sources, that articles written in papers by newspaper men and women, are too often taken as an everyday thing and nobody says much about them. The only exception is when the readers violently disagree, then they are quick to phone or write in their objections. When they think the piece is along their way of thought, or interesting and nice to read, they just go on to the next one and that's the end of it. We know editors must sometimes think their efforts go unread and never-even noticed. We know we are among the readers that do not write letters to the editor and agree with their work, or disagree with it either. We must be among the "Silent majority." So, right here we must tell you what you may already know, 99 per cent of us do enjoy your writing, even if we don't always let you know nearly often enough. Please rem ember those that don't write in are with you, and the few others don't matter. As long as circulation holds up people must be reading your work. FRASER and ISABELLA HODGSON Lethbridge. program of the campers involved. There are many types of camps that a child can attend. These are operated by government, private individuals and organized groups. No matter which type of camp it is there is a basic philosophy and value which is important for good camping. The out - of - doors with all the good, clean, fresh air provides a healthy environment for any person who is camping. For the first time many children are away from the protection of their parents. It may be an unpleasant experience for some but it is a necessary part of growing up. Memories of movies, milkshakes and chocolate sundaes may enter their mind, but the campers find new pleasure and adventure in a hike in unfamiliar territory, the smell of fresh - caught trout over the campfire, or hearing the cry of the loon over the still waters and seeing the stars through the branches at night. Camping is coming to be accepted as the right of every child as well as adults. Because of this it is important that we preserve the things that are needed for a good camp environment, such as our forests, waters and wildlife. This summer when your child approaches you for camp money or wants to go to camp do not refuse him, for you will be depriving your child of one of the greatest moments of his life. GARRY NELSON, Lethbridge Community College. who have none? If I have no house, can I expect the government to take one from you and give to me? The government tells a person he is entitled to a subsidy, and proceeds to take from all of us to pay it. If you are entitled by government decree to a $1,000 subsidy, but instead of taxing it they gave you a list of 100 of your neighbors, and told you to call on each of them and collect $10 would you do it? "No" you would say, "The ROLE of government is to protect the property of my neighbor and myself, NOT to permit someone to take it from either my neighbor or myself." We do not level the lawn by pulling the short blades up, but by cutting off the tall blades. So with socialism. Government, by deviating from its proper role and adopting socialistic policies, and taking from those who "have" will not in the last analysis raise the status of those who "have not." Rather we will be levelled down as the lawn, and eventually our nation will sink into oblivion as so many great civilizations have before us. Let us NOT follow hi their tragic footsteps. A. E. HANCOCK Raymond. erful Establishment by far is organized labor. No one can doubt that fact after the experience of recent years, the only question, being how wisely or unwisely labor will use its power which, as Lord Acton said, always tends to corrupt and, if absolute, corrupts absolutely. In a tree society like ours the public will finally judge the Establishment of government, business, labor and the rest. Meanwhile it is needlessly confused by cliches and catchwords, especially by the strange notion that everything old must be bad and anything new must be good, though some of the old are still the best and some of the new, like weapons, drugs and current female fashions, are obviously the worst. Nevertheless, In the semantics of revolution the Right is always strong, the Left always right. "When I use a word," said that eminent philosopher, Humpty Dumpty, "it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less." He is now the presiding genius of our age. s The leftist black - and-whito propositions, denied by all the -vague gray compromises of his-. tory, have become so well established that any man who questions them is denounced as a reactionary, a tool of the Big Interests and probably a malefactor of great wealth, though he may be as poor as a church mouse. Actually most of the men who questioned the prevailing notions of their day were poor. At the moment I cannot recall any man decisive in human thinking who was rich. For men concerned with great ideas have no time to make money. They are too busy making something more important. ' A man like Mr. Lewis, once he enters politics, cannot hope to make the money so easily available to him in business but he must try to make at least some ideas if he is to make votes. That, of course, is the trouble with the NDP. It has abandoned the naive ideas of the Regina Manifesto, it admits that public ownership of industry is no panacea after all, but it has produced no alternative idea which the public understands or accepts. And suddenly split by the old problem of Quebec independence, it finds itself burned on its own hot Waffle iron. The Liberal government may rejoice over the anguish of its left - wing critic (and the convenient absence of any ideas whatever in the limp Conservative right wing) but even if the NDP cannot make many votes and is still in search of a policy, no one can say it is a failure. On the contrary, it is a brilliant success, since most of its workable ideas already have been quietly pre - empted by Liberal governments and are now permanently woven into the fabric of society. If any workable ideas have been overlooked we may be sure that Liberalism will pre empt and enforce them, too, at leisure. The NDP should not complain. It has enjoyed the best of two worlds - power without responsibility, a superior Pecksniffian morality never tested in national government. Given these idyllic arrangements, I cannot imagine why Mr. Lewis and his competitors should wish to be prime minister. Most likely the wiser ones do not and in any case they need have no immediate anxiety on that score. Their Establishment is tight, safe and comfortable so long as it remains on the fringe of politics and attacks the Establishment. (Herald Special Service) Looking backward Through the Herald 1921 - Details of an entirely new type of seaplane, which can either fly or cruise, have been made public in London. The new craft is larger and stronger than any sea-going aircraft yet constructed and will carry a crew of seven with emplacements for five machine guns. 1931 - There has been a discovery of platinum at Obed, near Edson, Alta. It is understood it is a placer proposition running about $1,100 a ton. A large number of Edson citizens are rushing to stake claims. im - The British Broadcasting Corporation quoted an official German spokesman in Berlin as saying Germany does not feel bound to protect the conquered peoples of Europe against want and starvation. 1951 - Premier Manning announced that a bill to provide for the immediate export of natural gas to the United States will be introduced in the legislature. The gas will be taken from the Pakowki Lake gas field, 21 miles from the border. The Lethbridge Herald 504 7th St. S., Lethbridge, Alberta LETHBRIDGE HERALD CO. LTD., Proprietors and Publishers Published 1905-1954, by Hon. W. A. BUCHANAN Second Class Mall Registration No. 0012 Member of The Canadian Press and the Canadian Dally Newspaper Publishers' Association and the Audit Bureau at Circulations CLEO W. MOWERS, Editor and Publisher THOMAS H. ADAMS, General Manager JOE BALLA Managing Editor ROY F. MILES Advertising Manager WILLIAM HAY Associate Editor DOUGLAS K. WALKER Editorial Page Editor "THE HERALD SERVES THE SOUTH"