Letter to Buzz Hargrove, Canadian Auto Workers' Union
this article amalgamates two columns.

Dear Mr. Hargrove,,

I ventured into Toronto a while back to listen to Ralph Nader speak. You were there along with a number of other curious and interested people. I now wonder what you personally thought of the performance.

Mr. Nader was mainly concerned with identifying the corruption in the US political system and the unholy influence of corporate power. This was the main focus of his whole campaign then, and later (during his Presidential campaign).

You were there, possibly, to see what he might say that could benefit the working man. I was there because of my concerns for the environment. (I am a retired corporate director and am now a capitalistic Green - if there is such a thing.) I never heard anything said about the environment by Mr. Nader, but that is beside the point for the moment. If we look at things with an open mind we might see something in this scenario that could work for all of us.

The political system is indeed corrupt (just as Nader says it is) and could be better served with a proportional representative system where the environmental interests of the people can be represented along with those of government, corporate interests, and labour.

The labour force in Europe has benefited immensely from the presence of environmentalists in the coalitions that have been necessary in this form of government. The environment has benefited a little from the environmentalists as well, but representative numbers are still small in comparison with those representing the corporate-influenced right.

The NDP were hard pressed to get seats in the last winner-take-all election. The Liberals needed 31,819 votes to elect an MP whereas it took 67,732 votes to elect each NDP representative.

I have always had a soft spot for labour, since I started on the assembly line myself. This did not enhance my career at the time, but 'what the h---'! Having said that, much as I support the working man, he is no more concerned for the state of the environment than his corporate adversary.

The Greens, in spite of my wavering support, will never get a seat in North America until the planet is corrupted beyond salvage. The 1-1/2 to 2% of the votes that they get is short of the potential 5 or 6% that they would get in a PR system. People know they are wasting their environmental vote just as they know they are often wasting their Labour vote.

So where does this leave us? Labour and Environmentalist against Government and Corporate power. -- Labour and Environmentalist need to combine their social programs, their environmental programs and their labour ideas into one force while they fight to get PR changes. If they get PR implemented the problem is resolved. Everyone gets a voice in government equal to the priorities of the individual electorate. No one should get or deserve more.

The public objection to PR is always the same. "Look at Italy", "Look at Israel - they are always having elections" They are right, in a way. Those who have PR have coalitions; simply because there are many more views being represented. Coalitions don't always last. Corporate interests are also not as paramount. I have little patience for those who object simply because they might have to vote more often. The planet deserves more consideration than the minor inconvenience that these people see as an obstacle.

One other thing I would like to mention is that under PR there is less dismantling of what has been implemented by the previous government. There is less of a dramatic swing after the election.

The Greens are often more concerned with social issues and confused (i.e. by the public) with the flamboyant Greenpeace activists. They have a tough time making inroads in spite of their sincerity.

So if the Greens can't get votes being green, can the NDP get votes being green? I think so. In a big way, I think so.

You (Labour) must show that the earth's resources are the only source of wealth and should not be exploited.

You must show that corporate influence is the enemy, not corporations themselves.

You must show that government is corrupted but can be salvaged.

You must show that you are there for those workers who pay no dues.

You must show that the white collar worker is also abused and deluded by propaganda. You must show that the environment is a major concern if you want to appeal to the women voter (1/2 of the voters). You must play up the social justice card -- every environmentalist has a strong desire to end injustice to fellow man.

It might be as simple as changing your NDP colours to include a little green. People will immediately understand the significance.

Sincerely,

Matt Foster

Response from Buzz Hargrove

Dear Matt,

I, as well, found it unusual that Ralph Nader didn't highlight environmental concerns more as he was the Green Party candidate. However, I liked his message on the failure of the two party system and the lack of support for trade unions by the other two candidates for president.

We are debating internally the issue of PR. I believe there is a lot of room for cooperation between environmentalists and labour. We are putting more resources into this area. National representative Nick DeCarlo works on these issues for the CAW.

There are many challenges that face us as workers are normally faced with a choice of ignoring the environmental impact of their work or show concern and risk losing their job.

We must continue to work to find solutions geared to sustainable development and joint transition. More dialogue is needed between the environmental movement and labour.

Sincerely,

Buzz Hargrove

Dialogue is indeed needed. It must come from those of you who are honestly concerned. The voices of a few people means very little whereas the voices of many people can persuade and influence.