Yes, in the recent federal election that organization fielded a slate of candidates across Canada (to my knowledge didn't win many votes), but I rejected their literature when their campaign workers knocked on my door last week, just as I did the other Parties.

The point is that honest argument from any source ought to be heard. It is the intellectually dishonest arguments from traditionally respectable sources that ought to be rejected, or countered.

In any event, I wrote an article on Dec-18-05 that TML reprinted. Here is the TML comment.

---

Comment in response to article posted on Cara's blog:

Further to Stelco shenanigans, you say that the remaining issues are between the company and the shareholders. I imagine you base that remark upon the acceptance by the unsecured creditors of Stelco's proposal to them. It seems to me that vote was flawed for the following reason:

Stelco's proposal consists both of a settlement to the creditors and a parallel, but quite separate sale of equity in the "new" Stelco to just two (not all) of those creditors -- very large ones, the funds Appaloosa and Sunrise.

Now clearly this destroys the "community of interests" necessary for a class of creditors to be established and to vote. Appaloosa and Sunrise are provided a new interest in the vote that is potentially very much at odds with the remaining, particularly the small, creditors.

Quite apart from bankruptcy law I imagine such "special" treatment to large creditors must offend securities law too.

The Appaloosa and Sunrise sale is pitched as providing funds for a settlement, but that is immaterial to the conflict of interest.

Posted by ak December 19, 2005

(TML Ed. Note: Following the argument of "ak," Tricap is also in conflict of interest as it bought the affected credit of EDS and gained a vote on the restructuring plan that gives Tricap 34.5 per cent of the "new" Stelco equity and possibly even more.)

Bill Cara worked in the Canadian securities industry and now runs a "Capital Markets & Social Equity" website (www.billcara.com) offering advice on trading in the global capital markets.

---

As you can see from my recent articles, I did listen to TML. I also sat in Justice Farley's courtroom amidst a large group of steelworkers from USW Local 1005, and I listened to them too. Their arguments changed my mind on a few things.

There is a large "community of interests" that have been disadvantaged by the Stelco gang. This fight is much bigger than between the Stelco management and their shareholders. Much bigger.

And when it comes to the Court of Appeal, I hope that all stakeholders have their day in court.

My concern is that many groups are better organized than shareholders to deal with this type of shenanigans. That really is the trump card that the Stelco gang have been playing all along. But is it not the old story of "Might is right"?

In democracy's around the world, in the past century alone, tens of millions of people have laid down their lives to ensure that the interests of the Little People are protected. As a consequence, we have a capital market that has facilitated the building of wealth and a better way of life.

And in countries where the principle "Might is right" still exists, there are deplorable conditions and low standards of living for most people.

So we have to fight against that, and when organizations like TML Communist Party of Canada advance their honest argument in a case like this, they are in effect supporting democracy and the rule of law, and the Little People.

Thank you.