re, whose editor, Arthur Young, was still imprisoned,
came out October 23 with a full scale attack on the war measures law and
an appeal for the struggle for democratic rights.
"Immediate withdrawal of federal troops," the front-page headline read.
"Revoke the war measures law. Free the detained. End police repression.
End this situation which is making a farce of the civic elections. End
terrorism by giving Québécois their democratic rights. Vote against the
repression—vote FRAP and Léger!"
Ten thousand copies of the special issue have been distributed on
campuses, at meetings, in the streets.
The next day, soldiers on guard outside the "Black Watch" barracks at
Bleury and Ontario streets were surprised to find the armories being
picketed by LSO members carrying signs demanding the withdrawal of federal
troops, and an end to police repression. They were distributing La
Lutte Ouvrière and Léger election literature to passers-by.
After about an hour the police arrived and ordered seven Léger
supporters off to the station. But they were not held under the War
Measures Act—another important precedent established by the campaign.
After two hours detention, they were informed they were to be charged only
under an obscure by-law forbidding the wearing of partisan ribbons, colors
or banners within a week of the election.
Manon Léger’s vote of 7,180 attracted considerable notice—it was a
quarter of the total distributed among five opposition mayoralty
candidates, one of whom was a fairly well-known bourgeois politician. "It
was a real farce," Léger commented election night. "Mayor Drapeau won by
conducting a campaign of terror. He can’t claim these elections give him
any democratic mandate.
"As for our campaign? We got the socialist alternative better known
to workers and students of this city.
"We made our campaign against the War Measures Act the focus of my
candidacy, explaining the crisis, voicing the call for repeal of the
act, and helping to reestablish in action our democratic rights. This is
why our campaign was so vital, and so successful."
U.S. Protests Hit Repression
by Harry Kopyto
Protest demonstrations throughout the United States followed rapidly on
the Canadian government’s invocation of the War Measures Act and military
occupation of Québec.
Just as demonstrators throughout the world call for the withdrawal of
U.S. troops from Vietnam, so also the U.S. radical and antiwar movements
marched for the withdrawal of federal troops from Québec and the repeal of
the War Measures Act.
Initiated by the Trotskyist movement organized in the Young Socialist
Alliance and the Socialist Workers Party, committees involving independent
radicals, antiwar and trade union activists held marches, rallies and
demonstrations in such little heard-of places as Worcester, Massachusetts
and Tampa, Florida as well as in key cities such as New York, Los Angeles,
Philadelphia and Minneapolis.
A leaflet issued by the Minneapolis-based Committee Against Repression
in Canada expressed the feelings of the American demonstrators: "If
democratic rights are allowed to be suppressed in Canada, it will be a
signal that the government can do the same in the U.S. Nixon-Agnew’s
violent attacks on dissenters and the Kent grand jury indictments of
students may be forerunners of a Canadian-type repression.
"The defense of democratic rights in the U.S. is tied closely to the
struggle of Canadian workers students and intellectuals against the
repression." Four hundred students attended the protest rally held in
Minneapolis.
Andrew Pulley, Socialist Workers Party candidate for Congress in
California, and a leading Black nationalist spokesman, expressed the
internationalist consciousness of Black Americans with their sister
oppressed nation in Québec, "The Québec separatist movement is a revolt of
the oppressed French-speaking people against the English-speaking Ottawa
government and business interests which dominate Québec. This movement
expresses the desire of millions of Québec people to have their own state.
It deserves the support of all Americans who support democratic rights.
"The mass arrests in Québec establish precedents which threaten the
civil liberties of all North Americans. We protest the encouragement the
Nixon administration has given to Trudeau’s witchhunt."
A Blow At the Left:
Why the War Measures?
by Arthur Young
MONTREAL—What moved the Trudeau government to invoke the dictatorial
War Measures Act?
It was not humanitarian considerations. Ottawa’s abrupt intervention
virtually ensured the death of Pierre Laporte.
In proclaiming the Act, the government declared that Canada was on the
verge of an insurrection. Trudeau and others have argued this in
parliament. Jean Marchand, one of his leading ministers, went even
further, claiming that the Front de Liberation du Québec "is able ... to
make life impossible in the province of Québec." He alluded to its
presence in "every place where important decisions are taken" in Québec.
In Vancouver, he charged that the Front d’Action Politique (FRAP), the
labor-backed opposition to Mayor Drapeau in the Montreal election, was but
a front for the FLQ.
Drapeau, for his part, spoke of a "provisional government" that was to
seize power from Québec premier Bourassa, thereby paving the way for a
revolutionary regime. Trudeau buttressed his statement.
However, no evidence has been produced to support these wild
allegations. This is not surprising, for no evidence exists. The
governments are thrashing about for excuses, while covering up their real
motives for invoking the War Measures Act.
A firm determination moved Trudeau the federal cabinet. They would not
yield to the FLQ, whatever the price. To do so would be to weaken the
political authority of the central government.
Freeing the political prisoners as demanded by the FLQ would be a
victory for the FLQ and invite further terrorist actions of this
character. Even more important for Ottawa was the fact that revolutionary
terrorism is spreading on a world scale. The Canadian ruling class,
conscious of its international responsibilities, agreed with its
imperialist partners that no deals could be made. Québec was to provide
the example for the world of this new hard-line approach.
The uppermost consideration in the strategy of Trudeau and Bourassa
alike throughout the crisis was to refuse to grant the FLQ demands, to
stall for time, and to step up police raids and arrests, hoping to
discover the FLQ hideouts.
But this strategy reckoned without the impact in Québec of public
reaction to the kidnappings. Profound nationalist feeling was inclined to
regard the crisis as a Québec problem, to be dealt with by the Québécois,
not the federal government. Moreover, the FLQ Manifesto, which articulated
many popular grievances against the Anglo-Canadian Establishment, met a
favorable response from many Québécois. Instead of showing hostility to
the FLQ, they seized the occasion to express their disgust with the status
quo.
The FRAP, the Montreal Central Council of the Confederation of National
Trade Unions, substantial labor organizations representing thousands of
working people, pronounced themselves in favor of the political aims of
the FLQ—national liberation, workers power. Meetings protesting the
government’s "no-concessions" stand were held in many schools and
colleges. It is said that over half the callers to the "hot-line" radio
shows in this period blasted the government’s stand.
A mass disquiet was beginning.
The authorities, recalling the massive demonstrations against Bill 63
last year, wondered how they could crush the militant nationalist movement
if it took to the streets and at the same time deal with the FLQ.
The dramatic second kidnapping, of Pierre Laporte, enormously increased
the onus on the Québec government to act in the crisis, and placed it
under intolerable pressure to yield to the FLQ demands. All three trade
union federations, leading professors, Parti Québécois leader René
Lévesque, newspaper publisher Claude Ryan and numerous other influential
figures all came out in favor of negotiating with the FLQ.
There can be no doubt that their demands expressed the sentiment of the
overwhelming majority of Québécois. The Québec government was becoming
thoroughly isolated and discredited among the Québec population. The
Bourassa cabinet was split, with perhaps the majority wishing to negotiate
Laporte’s release. Ryan, who was in a position to know, says he thought
the Bourassa government might disintegrate. He and his friends wanted to
save it.
Trudeau decided to strike decisively. By deliberately escalating the
crisis, he could force the Bourassa cabinet back into line and retake
complete hold of the situation.
A secondary consideration in Ottawa’s thinking was that quick action in
the crisis could be used to strike a blow at the entire Québec nationalist
and left movement. Trudeau was encouraged in this by Mayor Drapeau, who
was seriously worried by the challenge he was facing from the FRAP in the
civic election campaign. Bourassa and the Liberals, too, had every reason
to welcome a hard blow at FRAP and the independentists.
And so, the atmosphere having been carefully prepared by the entry of
troops into Ottawa on October 12 (two days after Laporte’s kidnapping),
and into Montreal on October 15, an "apprehended insurrection" was
discovered simultaneously by the Montreal and Québec City authorities
early in the morning of October 16.
No doubt they hoped, through the massive police-military repression, to
find and liquidate the FLQ. They also hoped, through the jailing of the
left and the de facto censorship of all the news media, to end any
possibility of a mass nationalist movement taking to the streets during
the crisis, and to lay the basis for more enduring legislation which could
be used in future to harass, intimidate and repress the independentists.
But, despite the massive manhunt, the police have yet to find James
Cross. They have yet to break up any of the FLQ cells. The government’s
credibility has been damaged.
In the process, the Québec government has been decisively weakened. In
time of crisis, its impotence as an independent force was bared for all to
see; the decisive moves came from the federal government and its army
which now occupied the nation. What better expression of Québec’s
oppression.
However, the crisis has weakened the left, certainly in the short term.
Drapeau succeeded in preventing FRAP from gaining even a single seat on
the Montreal council; many radicals are still jailed. The adventurism of
the FLQ has given the government a perfect excuse to enact its new
repressive legislation.
For the bourgeoisie, Québec is a giant powder keg. Only the massive,
profound contradictions flowing from the national oppression of the
Québécois, could explain how an incident as bizarre as these two
kidnappings could blow up into a crisis of such immense proportions.
Editor Jailed for Week, Queried on Views
by Arthur Young
"What do you think of our society?" "What does socialism mean?"
"You can’t change human nature; there’ll always be criminals and lazy
people who don’t want to work."
"If you’re a socialist, then do you support the FLQ?"
I was in a small room talking to two well-dressed men. It was the kind
of political discussion every socialist has had with hundreds of people.
With one exception.
My two interlocutors were cops, and they’d started the conversation by
telling me if they weren’t satisfied with my answers, I could stay in jail
for three months. "The Bill of Rights no longer exists," one of them had
loudly proclaimed.
I had already been in jail several days before this discussion. And I
was to spend several more days behind bars—a week in all, supposedly on
suspicion of supporting the FLQ.
But in this, the only time the police took the trouble to question me,
they asked only a few perfunctory questions about the FLQ. Like what did I
think of the terrorists. They did not even bother to ask what I was doing
when the kidnappings took place.
It was hardly necessary for the cops to throw me in jail for a week and
seize my personal papers to find out what my political views are. They
could have bought, for one dollar, a year’s subscription to La Lutte
Ouvri
è, the newspaper which I edit, to find out that I am a
revolutionary socialist opposed to individual terrorism.
There were some four hundred of us, political prisoners, and we
compared notes. Did the police really think that Michel Chartrand, head of
the Montreal CNTU labor council (65,000 affiliate members) was an FLQ
terrorist? Gaston Miron, one of Québec’s leading poets? Pauline Julien,
internationally-known chansonnière? They were all behind bars like me. So
were numerous journalists, antiwar Vietnamese, Parti Québécois leaders and
candidates, and two FRAP candidates.
It was Friday morning, October 16, that Penny Simpson and I were woken
by the door buzzer, ringing imperiously at 5 a.m. We opened the door, and
four cops barged in, searching every corner of our room.
They soon filled their car trunk with mounds of papers and books. One
unfortunate, lowest in rank, got assigned to inspecting my large library,
looking at every page of every book—searching for machine guns, no doubt.
An incredible hubbub at the police station. In the basement, hundreds
of people are being booked, fingerprinted, photographed and shipped
upstairs. Penny and I recognize many. My protests against being
fingerprinted gain me the threat of having my fingers broken. But even
this short protest holds up the assembly-line processing of the political
prisoners.
Upstairs, in a common cell with dozens of others, we begin to get the
picture. Almost everybody was arrested at the same time. The cops had
prepared the operation for days. Several reported they awoke with a
flashlight shining in their eyes and a gun pointed at their head.
I was to pass a week behind bars, in a tiny cell which was only large
enough to let me take four steps. Only rarely was I let out for a
"recreation" period—a half hour walk with other prisoners in the corridor
outside my cell.
The spirit of solidarity rapidly grew among the 24 prisoners in my cell
block. Sharing everything was the norm. The brief "recreation" periods
became the moment for intense political discussions among all of us:
socialists, students, independentists, unionists, and non-politicals
picked up by mistake.
As political prisoners, we got special treatment—worse than convicted
criminals. No newspapers. For days no showers, no shaves, no cigarettes,
no pen or paper. The radio played during every waking hour—but was turned
off promptly just before every news broadcast. Guards were forbidden to
give us any news. And on the outside, no one could find out who was in
jail.
After a few days, conditions began to improve. They finally even
offered to contact a friend for us to tell them where we were. No change
of heart by Bourassa or Trudeau, but a response to the growing protests
against our arbitrary and unjustified imprisonment.
Did the government hope to break our spirit? It certainly failed. The
mood among my prison comrades was one of increased determination, of a new
solidarity between radicals of differing views, and a new insight for many
into the fraud of Canadian "democracy."
I was freed as quickly and secretly as I was arrested. A guard crept
silently into my cell in the middle of the night, woke me and spirited me
away. I was stripped and searched. My prison diary and a list of names of
prison comrades were confiscated.
Within half an hour, I was free again. I had been jailed for a week, in
which neither I nor any of the 400 others had seen a judge or lawyer, and
was released without charge, without explanation.
Thirteen floors down, I perused the deserted street. It looked more
lovely than I had ever seen it before. The young soldier with the machine
gun guarding the prison told me to beat it, fast. I did.
Repressive Law Looms
Under Cover of WMA
by Ross Dowson
The Trudeau government is now replacing the War Measures Act, with
which it arrogated to itself sweeping totalitarian powers allegedly to
cope with the "apprehended insurrection" posed by the FLQ, at the same
time as it is fuelling a smoke screen of rumours about a sinister plot by
prominent Québec figures alleged to have aimed to usurp the authority of
Premier Bourassa’s Liberal government with a provisional regime.
Thus at one and the same time it attempts to assure the Canadian
people, profoundly disturbed by the destruction with one blow of every
basic human right and liberty, that there was for a period no other
recourse open to it and that now it is coming through on its promise that
the enforcement of the act was only temporary and something approaching
normalcy will shortly again prevail.
But the legislation now being introduced by Minister of Justice Turner
clearly reveals that the government intends to write into the statute
books some of the most repressive aspects of the War Measures Act (search
and arrest without warrant, detention without charge, etc.) while leaving
the act itself in reserve—even if it is no longer to be applied at this
time.
All this clearly answers the question that has continued to plague
ever-widening circles. Why did the Trudeau government resort to such
totalitarian powers, to such an ultimate weapon as the War Measures Act?
Why didn’t it utilize the crushing powers already available to it in the
Criminal Code and elsewhere?
The picture is clearing up. The Trudeau government sought to take
advantage of the crisis thrust on it by the kidnappings and murder, first
and foremost to strike a body blow against Québec nationalism which
continues to grow and develop an increasingly independentist and
revolutionary character.
It seeks new and added powers to use against the Québécois.
At the same time it seeks to create a climate whereby it can turn back
the campus revolt—the ongoing radicalization of the youth in the
universities and the high schools. And simultaneously it is trying to
prepare the conditions that would enable it to move in against the
organized labor movement and render it less able to defend its interests.
With the enactment of the War Measures Act the Minister of Justice
cautioned against the settling of old scores, against excesses.
The B.C. Socred government has passed an order to council barring from
employment in institutions dispensing state funds anyone alleged to
support the aims of the FLQ and to advocate the overthrow of government by
force and violence. This has already resulted in the firing of teacher
Arthur Olson. The echo of this is found in the Toronto Board of Education.
Are these excesses?
The address of W. H. Kelly, former deputy commissioner of the RCMP, to
the Ottawa Canadian club has received widespread publicity over the mass
media. He demanded stiffer immigration procedures to keep out or to deport
foreign radicals already in the country—particularly those on the
campuses.
He called for greater power for the police including the formal right
to grill suspects, and freer use of wiretapping. Is that an excess?
The harassment of the cross-Canada university student press, the
seizure of Maoist publications, the taking into custody of seven of the
Vancouver Liberation Front, the persecution by the Toronto police of a
draft evader to the point where he finally fled and placed himself at the
mercy of U.S. authorities—are these excesses?
The self-imposed banning by CTV of a TV program because it touched on
the Québec situation. CBC’s banning of a documentary on Lenin. CBC
president George Davidson’s order to news service employees to impose
self-censorship on coverage of the Québec crisis. Are these excesses?
Far from being excesses they are exactly what persons in high
government office, spokesmen for capitalist class interest in various
areas, have been advocating all along.
And they are the inevitable result of the enactment of the War Measures
Act which at one blow imposed all the legal conditions for a police state:
the authorization by law of the police arrest and detention without
warrant of anyone suspected of being a member of an unlawful organization,
entry and search without warrant, detention without charge for seven days
and up to 21 days on authority of an attorney general, incarceration in
jail up to 90 days before a trial date need be set.
Under this act Québec was invaded and occupied by a federal army of
7,500 men. Police raids resulted in the arrest so far of 405 persons all
of whom were held incommunicado and without charge for days.
The enactment of the War Measures Act revealed in a blinding light that
the much vaunted civil rights and democratic processes that are supposed
to be woven into the very fabric of present day society are to all intents
and purposes nonexistent.
When it was made to appear that the power of the state itself was being
infringed upon, all the institutions of parliamentary democracy—Bill of
Rights, Senate, House of Commons—all were cynically swept aside.
The army and the police took over on the authorization of a handful of
men. With the receipt of a letter from Mr. Bourassa and another from
Montreal’s Mayor Drapeau drawn up two or three days earlier but dispatched
to Ottawa at an agreed time, four cabinet ministers worked on documents
for about an hour and dispatched them to Governor General Roland Michener
who signed them.
Canada awoke the next morning under the War Measures Act and several
hundred Québécois were in jail.
The custodians of our civil rights were revealed to be the collective
consciousness of the people of Canada and the specific instruments that
the working class above all has forged in struggle—the trade unions, the
New Democratic Party and the various other currents and tendencies of the
left.
After the first shock of confusion, the socialists, civil libertarians,
the NDP parliamentary caucus and the unions responded to the challenge. On
the broad scale the opposition of the overwhelming majority of the NDP
parliamentary caucus and the united Québec labor movement has been
instrumental in arousing the wide popular concern.
That is not to say that there has been no serious weakness in both
areas. The apparent agreement of the NDP MPs to go along now with the
codifying of certain aspects of the War Measures Act is particularly
dangerous.
The struggle must now go on. New layers must be awakened educated and
activated to win the release of all the Québécois now imprisoned under the
Act, to compel the withdrawal of the troops occupying Québec and the
abolition of the War Measures Act and to prevent the enactment of
repressive legislation of any type.
Quebec Defense Launched
at U of Montreal Teach-In
by Phil Courneyeur
MONTREAL, October 28—Two thousand students, faculty and workers rallied
at the University of Montreal tonight against the War Measures Act.
The teach-in, organized by the Comité Québécois pour la Défense des
Libertés (CQDL) showed the strength and breadth of the mounting protest.
The Parti Québécois, the three trade union federations, FRAP, most
CEGEPs and campuses around Montreal, the Ligue Socialiste Ouvrière, the
Ligue des Jeunes Socialistes and many other organizations either
participated or had representatives present.
The teach-in succeeded in focusing the massive opposition in Quebec in
support of actions—the building of a mass defense movement in the schools,
campuses and unions against the repression. Until the teach-in most of the
protests had been verbal.
The three main trade union federations had formed a Front Commun (joint
front) immediately after the army occupation. They held a large assembly
in Québec City October 21 which agreed to launch a publicity campaign
calling for the repeal of the War Measures Act and the release of the
prisoners detained under the Act.
The main voice for the mounting opposition has been the trade union
weekly Québec-Presse. For three weeks Québec-Presse campaigned
against the army invasion, exposed the repression, published lists of
those arrested, denounced the sham of the elections, and served as a voice
for the FRAP campaign. At the U of M teach-in Arthur Young, the editor of
La Lutte Ouvrière, imprisoned for a week under the law, called on
the labor movement to provide the means for Québec-Presse to become
a daily, if only for the duration of the crisis.
The audience repeatedly applauded Young when he appealed: "Such a
meeting as this would not have been possible a week ago. The situation is
changing. The government is on the defensive.
"But we have to act now. We can't protect ourselves by shutting up.
We've heard a lot of orators tonight, but all too few organizers. Tomorrow
and in the next few days we have to go out and organize defense committees
in all the schools and campuses."
The teach-in agreed to a recommendation from the CQDL organizers that
local units of the CQDL be built throughout the city. But the appeal for a
daily Québec-Presse was lost amidst reports by the Confederation of
National Trade Unions that it was buying T.V. and radio time, and ads in
the Establishment press calling for the repeal of the War Measures Act.
Over 100 people are still behind bars in Québec, despite Trudeau's
admission that almost all of them are innocent and will not be charged.
The defense of civil rights needs to be organized. The Comité Québécois
pour la Défense des Libertés can play an important role in turning the
tide against repression in Quebec.
Nov. 13 rallies to demand:
‘End repressive laws’
by Harry Kopyto
November 2—Rallies and demonstrations against the War Measures Act and
for an end to all legislation repressing, civil liberties will be held in
cities across Canada, November 13.
These demonstrations will coincide with a big assembly in Montreal
being called by the Comité Québécois pour la Défense des Libertés. The
assembly will be the culmination of a series of rallies and teach-ins that
are taking place on campuses and community colleges in Québec.
November 13 was first suggested as the focal point for protest by the
Committee for Defense of Democratic Rights, a Saskatoon-based united front
group which has enlisted support from the student and labor communities
and the NDP.
The Committee has sent out the call to make November 13 the day for
unified protest actions to campus organizations, student councils and
newspapers, antiwar committees, and other concerned groups.
Student leaders from universities across Canada meeting in Winnipeg
November 1 called for making November 13 a cross-country day of protest
against the War Measures Act.
Larry Brown, president of the Saskatoon Association of Students,
presented the motion to the gathering.
The wave of protests against the War Measures Act, which declined after
Laporte’s assassination, is re-emerging stronger and broader than ever.
Teach-ins and protest rallies are helping to cut across the Canadian
government’s hysterical campaign to build unanimity for its oppressive
policies in Québec and to justify the invocation of the War Measures Act.
The Waffle, the left current in the NDP, has moved out boldly against
the War Measures Act. In Toronto, a Waffle rally of over 200 on October 27
endorsed a call by Jim Laxer, a prominent Waffler, to campaign against the
War Measures Act and for the right of Québec to determine its own future.
A Waffle rally in Toronto today attracted about 700 to protest the Act
and any subsequent "deodorized" versions of it. Mel Watkins, well-known
Waffle leader, announced the November 13 day of protest to the
enthusiastic crowd and indicated that the Waffle would build protest
actions on that date.
In Vancouver, the New Democratic Party area council initiated a meeting
October 22 to oppose the War Measures Act. It established a Committee for
the Restoration of Civil Liberties, which is projecting a public rally at
the court house against all repressive legislation. Clair Culhane,
prominent antiwar activist, is chairwoman of the committee; Nic Shugalo is
organizer.
On Saturday October 31, the week-old committee mobilized over 700 to
protest the War Measures Act.
Speakers included an alderman, an NDP MLA, trade union, Métis, and
women’s liberation representatives. Art Olson, fired from his teaching job
for opposing a proWar Measures Act telegram circulated by his principal
amongst the students, called the Act racist, referring to its use against
Japanese-Canadians on the West Coast during World War Two.
The rally was described by its chairwoman Clair Culhane as "phase one"
of its campaign against the Act and any new repressive legislation.
In St. Catharines, Ont., the Peninsula Civil Rights Committee has
united prominent unionists, NDP supporters and civil libertarians to
oppose the War Measures Act.
In Toronto, the Law Union, an association of lawyers, law school
faculty and law students which had organized a rally of 500 to protest the
War Measures Act immediately after it was announced, has issued a
cross-country petition calling for the immediate revocation of the Act and
opposition to any new repressive legislation which might follow its
revocation. Already endorsed by a wide array of public figures such as
Andrew Brewin, Laurier LaPierre, Gad Horowitz and Gil Levine, the petition
also calls "on Canadians from all walks of life to protest this wholly
unwarranted abrogation of our democratic rights. Canadians must indicate
publicly and in massive numbers that their civil liberties cannot be
denied."
Other groups of civil liberties defenders including the Canadian Civil
Liberties Association, academics, artists, writers, political figures,
labor leaders and students have already gone on record against the Act.
With the government moving rapidly to pass its new repressive
legislation, the protests that are being called for November 13 can become
the focal point for broad and effective opposition to police state bills.
Victim of Act on Tour
Penny Simpson, one of the first Montrealers to be victimized by the
sweeping arrests under the War Measures Act, spoke to over 1,000 students
and faculty at Memorial University in St. John’s, Newfoundland yesterday.
Her talk was part of an extensive speaking tour against the Act in the
Maritimes and Central Canada. Following her speech, the meeting decided to
form a broad committee representative of the community to oppose the War
Measures Act.
Simpson’s tour has taken her to meetings and TV and radio appearances
in Halifax and St. John’s and will continue to Fredericton, Moncton,
Ottawa, Cornwall, Kingston, Peterborough, Sudbury and several Southwestern
Ontario centers.
Earlier, in Halifax, her meetings included a speech to 100 sponsored by
the Dalhousie University law society and a meeting of 50 organized by the
Dalhousie Young Socialists. At Kings College she spoke to over 100 and to
another 60 at St. Mary’s College.
Simpson was arrested in a pre-dawn raid of her apartment October 16 and
held incommunicado for six days. At the time of her arrest she was the
treasurer of the socialist campaign of Manon Léger for mayor of Montreal.
Simpson’s work as an activist for the Québec women’s liberation
movement received wide publicity during last April’s Québec national
elections after she confronted Premier Robert Bourassa, in a mass meeting,
on the issue of abortion.
Simpson is also known as a leader of the Montreal Ligue des Jeunes
Socialistes. She is the first of the over 400 arrested victims of the War
Measures Act to take the case of the Québécois nationalist movement and
the fight against the War Measures Act to English Canadian audiences.
Further details on her tour can be had from: War Measures Act Tour
coordinator, 198 Robert Street, Apt. 5, Toronto, Ontario.
[ Top ] [
Part 5 ] [
Documents Index ]
