John and Yoko Lennon’s Plastic Ono Band will release their first album this week on the Apple label. The LP, “The Plastic Ono Band — Live Peace in Toronto 1969“ features live tracks recorded at the Toronto Rock V Roll Revival earlier this year. The revival touched off a series of similar events throughout the United States and has heightened interest in many of the old rock V roll greats. The Plastic Ono was formed in Toronto at the time of the revival and includes the blues guitar of Eric Clapton.

Cuts include “Blue Suede Shoes”, “Money”, “Give Peace a Chance” and “Cold Turkey” which has been somewhat of a disappointment for the Plastic Ono with its failure on the charts. The Lennon’s plan to be in Toronto this week to launch a campaign of “peace persuasion”. In Toronto; billboards, posters, newspaper ads and handbills form part of the campaign for peace.

The Lennons will not perform while in Toronto, but are expected to announce plans for a massive peace festival to be held next year.

Don’t look now, but Manitoba’s generation gap is showing.

Premier Ed. Schrever’s invitation to Beatle John Lennon and his wife Yoko Ono to atterul Manitoba’s 1970 centennial celebrations has drawn reaction that ranges from ecstatic to downright hostile.

Metro Chairman Jack Willis said. “I think it is absolutely ridiculous.’’

The ecstasy is apparently confined to the young and the would-be young. Radio talk shows have been brimming with hostility.

Many adults over 30 years old say they oppose the invitation. But others indicate they think it’s a good way to involve r young people and that not every idea can please evervone.

One Winnipeg businessman h asked “Why do we play up to these hairy mongrels” He said the government and the press should play down this “creepy type.” The man said Premier Schreyer is “dead wrong” inviting the Beatle and that he’s “cut himself down in such a i manner that he’ll never get over it.”

Eric Bays, minister of All Saints Anglican Church, said the Beatlc’s “appearance doesn’t bother me.” He seems to have his peace movement going “and I think he’s got a message that everyone would do well to listen to,” said the minister. “The invitation sounds like a good idea and, besides, the kids will enjoy it.”

Maitland B. Steinkopf, of the Manitoba centennial corporation, said “his coming during the centennial year is more by accident than by design or planning.”

Mr. Steinkopf said Mr. Lennon’s preparation of a program of peace in 1970 is something people can think about. He said ’ when he looks on the front page of newspapers and sees only stories of war and potential war, he wonders if the time hasn’t come to listen to someone different, who has a new approach to the problem that has plagued mankind since time began.

“Maybe we should listen to John and Yoko until we’re shown different.”

Mr. Steinkopf said he backs the invitation because “any way we can attain peace will be worth it.”

L Anthony Harwood-Jones of Ail Saints said he is intrigued by the invitation. “I didn’t think there would be a premier who would extend an invitation to the famed Beatle.” He said he thinks Mr. Lennon is sincere and that “he wants to be peaceful in his usual unusual ways.”

OTTAWA — If Prime Minister Trudeau were consistent, which he certainly is not, he would have been camping o<ut in front of the Parliament Buildings with the anti-war protesters, instead of permitting his police to herd the demonstrators oft the front lawn of all the people.

Mr. Trudeau boasts of being a pragmatist, which means he takes them as they come, and plays them as he sees them.

When John Lennon and Yoko Ono came to cal! on Tuesday, the PM gave them the green light and 50 minutes of his time, which is more than he has given to most visiting heads of state or ministers of foreign cabinets.

The message brought bv John and_Xfik£Uwas peace, and since that happens to be Mr. Trudeau’s bag too, they made sweet music together and the tidings and photographs of this encounter flowed across the land and around the world, doing Mr. rudeau’s peace image no end of good in certain circles. It didn’t hurt his youth image anv. either.

So. okay. But how do you reconcile the Lennon caper with heaving the peace marchers off the hill on Christmas Eve?

Their mission was (he same as Lennon’s, except that they didn’t demand any of Mr. Trudeau’s time. He was off to Mexico to go skin diving, and all the marchers wanted was a bit of tent space in the snow, a prospect that might have fanwheven such determined demonstrators as John and Yoko. In his earlier days, Mr. Trudeau was a determined tenter, but he has little time for such things now that he’s a full-fledged member of the jet set, flying the people’s jet.

, Consistency, as we noted at the outset, has not been a mark of the Trudeau administration.

Just when the young people had him figured for a radical he would do something conservative — so much so that the John-Yoko caper was obviously designed to recover lost ground among the luz/y-faces.

And just when it appeared that he would emphasize the imaginative side of government, he would cut back on projects involving the urban action centres, or the more exciting aspects of education or research. Who ever would have figured him as a leader who would usher us into the ’70s with a message of austerity and playing it safe?

Doesn’t give a damn about anybody

The trouble with Trudeau is not so much that he seeks to please everybody, as that he doesn’t seem to give a damn for anybody.

He has firm ideas about what is right and what is wrong, but he seems not to care about attuning these ideas to the feelings of large segments of the Canadian people. He has abundant courage, based not upon emotion so much as a kind of cold logic that he applies to emolionai problems.

His attitude on the monarchy is as much a case in point as his involvement with John and Yoko.

The monarchy is not a subject that stands up to the kind of chilly scrutiny that Mr. Trudeau brings to it. The great religions of the worid w’ould not stand up to that kind of scrutiny, either, demanding as they do a measure of belief from their adherents, be they Roman Catholics. Jews. Hindus, Mohammedans, or Mao-style Communists.

in his press conierence this week, Mr. Trudeau said it isn’t the time just now to abolish the monarchy in Canada, hut added he didn’t know whether the time would come later- in the ’70s.

Coming from the man who is the Queen’s practical Canadian adviser, that isn’t much of a statement, especially since he went on to weigh the relative merits of the monarchy and a presidential system, and said there would be a great deal of change coming because of the new values of the younger generation.

There arc some, and I am among them, who would argue that it is paif of Mr. Trudeau’s job to tell the younger generation about the values of the monarchial system, especially ~ since nobody else in authority seems willing to put that case forward.

After allv it he was willing to put his seal of approval on John and Yoko Lennon, would it be so wrong for him to do tl)e >amc for the institution he is sworn to serve?

But instead, he comes out with mealy mouthed statements implying that while he isn’t prepared to do away with the Crown just yet, the time is not far distant when it should go. Though he doubts that he will be prime minister when the boom is lowered.

What ail this indicates, I suppose, is that we do not know this complex man any better today than we did when he became prime minister. Nobody knew him very well then, and nobody knows him very well now.

FOR ANYONE born in 1969 it was the most important year in history.

But, except for the moon-shaking event in July, when Neil Armstrong took that “giant step for mankind,” it has no other claim to go down in the books with 1066. 1492 or 1867.

However, it was a busy 12 months and every day of them was used for serious or silly, tragic or trivial purposes.

Sex, which has been with us since the first amoeba crawled ashore and divided itself in two, became more pervasive than the weather.

Maybe it was because, with their clothes on, it was getting harder and harder to tell the boys and girls apart that so many of them started taking them off, at least on the stage and in the movies. Whether or not this had artistic validity, it spun an enormous amount of publicity for such plays as Oh! Calcutta and the film, I Am Curious (Yellow).

The locally made picture, A Married Couple, also profited by apparently widespread, if latent, voyeurism. Instead of having to peek in the windows of Antoinette and Billy Edwards, the Stars of Alan King’s film, the curious (any color) go to the movie instead and gape at the intimacies of the Edwards’ home life without being arrested as Peeping Toms.

Exhibitionism reached into the fashion field with see-through lace pajamas (for party weap and coyly deployed chains intended to reveal more than they covered.

Mini-skirts, worn over panty-hose, began to seem almost demure by comparison.

Literature, too, continued to pander to the pornography fanciers. The year’s best sellers vere Philip Roth’s Portnoy’s Complaint and Jacqueline Susann’s The Love Machine, both of which contributed generously to the vicarious sex life of those who didn’t have enough of their own.

Socially, sex made a few breakthroughs too. Unwed mothers used to be turned from the door in snow storms on Christinas Eve, but this year two prominent actresses, Vanessa Redgrave and Mia Farrow, cheerfully and publicly announced their pregnancies by men whom, they said, they had no intention of marrying.

The sex symbol of the 20th century, Mae West, was making a comeback in the movie, Myra Breckinridge. Although in her seventies, she was said to be giving a lot of annoyance if not actual competition to Raquel Welch, the star of the picture and S.S. of the decade.

Two girls whose charms continued to pay off in diamonds during the year were Jacqueline Onassis and Elizabeth Burton, both of whose husbands gave them jewels valued in the millions.

If sex was one preoccupation this year, astrology was another and to indulge in this you didn’t have to have charm, go out at night or even read dirty books. You could enjoy it sitting home alone, working out what the stars have in store for you.

Aside from the daily, weekly or monthly horoscopes provided by many publications, the significance of your astrological sign can now be emphasized by buying jewelry, clothes and household decorations with the appropriate symbols on them. There are even recipes and means available to provide special yummies for each section of the Zodiac.

Those whose appetites are not influenced by whether they are Scorpios or Aquarius found a new star to follow — Graham Kerr, the Galloping Gourmet of TV.

This long-legged Australian who does his antic cooking in an Ottawa studio, this year became the idol of not only the hot stove ladies but of everyone who enjoys a good show as well as a tasty treat.

His only competition as TV personality of ’69 is Prince Charles, who turned up in July not only as Prince of Wales and future king, but also as a deft and delightful performer who could probably pinch-hit for David Frost if he finds his present profession doesn’t pay off.

His father. Prince Philip, indicated on his last visit over here in the fall that things are so bad at Buckingham Palace they may all be looking for work. Prince Philip’s choice of a job probably wouldn’t involve travelling, at least to Canada, he also said: “We don’t come over here for our health, you know.”

Whether or not Prince Philip comes back to see us, we have King Edward VII with us for ever, if only in effigy. A larger than life equestrian statue of him, cast off by the Republic of India, settled down in Queens Park early last summer to gaze eternally upon the traffic-clogged vista of Avenue Rd.

Among guests who did seem to enjoy Toronto in 1969 were John and Yoko, who came back for their second visit at Christmas time. They seem to have chosen this city as the dispensary of their peace drive in North America and sent thousands of our residents cards announcing: “The War is Over, if you want it.” Where’s that cease fire?

Another Beatle, Paul McCartney, was the victim or promoter of the year’s most macabre rumors. Despite his visibility, his death was proven in any number of ways, including de-coding pictures of him on album covers to running records backward. Despite this ingenuity on the part of the diligent, he seems to be alive and well and recently married.

And so is Tiny Tim — at least he’s married (we all saw it happen just last week) but nobody can be sure about the first two.

That was one of the surprises in 1969.

Another was that the biggest news Prime Minister Trudeau made at his first Commonwealth Conference last spring was taking a Miss Eva Ritting-Hausen (who?) out to lunch.

A former politician. Miss Judy LaMarsh, also hit the front pages and radio and TV programs by simply writing a book. It gave her candid and cantankerous opinions on everything from two prime ministers to how mean everyone is to women.

She isn’t the only woman who felt she was having a tough time in 1969. A whole lot of them got together, both in the States and up here, to demand equal rights and equal wages. They seemed to feel that if they didn’t use lipstick, fix their hair or wear bras and girdles it would help their cause.

Who knows? They may win. The Mets did.

A lot of other unexpected things happened this year. Think of all of those travellers who ended up, courtesy of skyjackers, in Cuba when they were only looking forward to Fort Lauderdale.

Do you even remember what EVERYONE said was going to happen last spring? That California was going to fall into the sea. that’s what. Well, with even a quick glance, you can prove it’s still there.

And, happily so are we, so 1969 must have been a pretty good year at that.

IT WAS CHOICE, not necessity, which had me reading and puzzling on Christmas Day over Patrick Watson’s recent book, Conspirators In Silence. Two happenings of recent days make Patrick topical.

Firstly, there was the warm meeting of John and Yoko Lennon with Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau. I remembered that Patrick once asserted that the Beatles would have more influence on Canada than the Prime Minister of the time. And few who saw and heard it will forget the rapport of Patrick and Pierre in the telecast from CJOH-TV, Ottawa, which. entranced the Liberal delegates the night before the majority of them chose the new Prime Minister.

Secondly, on Wednesday the CRTC ruled that an old rule made by the BBG was dead. No longer is common ownership of stations in the CTV network forbidden. This removes any bar to the approval by the CRTC of the purchase by Bushnell TV (CJOH-Ottawa) of the CTV station in Montreal (Marconi’s CFCF). Patrick Watson is vice-president for programming of Bushnell TV.

Mr. Watson as author is not so clear and assured as author Trudeau, at least in prescriptions for the future, although he does present a more emotional and bitter criticism of Canadian society than the Prime Minister did in his collected essays.

The conspiracy Mr. Watson writes about “ . . . ought to be a central issue of our time.” What is it?

“. . . A conspiracy to turn us off, us people, to make us well-programmed, responsive robots. It is a conspiracy that works particularly well because the conspirators do not know there is a conspiracy and believe their actions to be good … our schools, our mass media and our politics co-operate to silence the human voice. But so successfully do they sham the opposite role that they convince themselves.”

There’s too much in the book for one day and one column. This is most apparent on the media, the field Mr. Watson knows best and where he is most interesting and suggestive. His fiercest stories and most apocalyptic views come out in his attack on the schools.

He hates the present system as much as Richard Needham does and he’s even more confident about the essential purity and worth of the child and his imagination than is the columnist. Fortunately. I think he is more optimistic about the chances of education reform.

For the past few months Mr. Watson has been carrying on an experiment in the inter-weaving of news and public affairs commentary at CJOrf. It has had some similarities to the programming CBC has been doing on Saturday and Sunday night.

The reaction among Ottawa viewers has been strong. Few seem indifferent. Both the pros and cons have been debating the merits of the Watson-Lapierre conception of TV as it ought to be.

Most reviews of Conspirators In Silence have been scathing. The reviewers seem put off by the absence of any linear development, the mixing of anecdote with lofty, potted sermons and nudging, intimate, personal convictions.

I struggled as a reader between embarrassment at the un-historical, unstructured blend of didacticism with assurance and admiration for the author’s rank confidence that he is a revolutionary with a message.

Another day I can return to Watson, the TV executive, with ideas which he believes are revolutionary. Let’s close with Watson on Trudeau. He sees the PM as John and Yoko found him last Tuesday, one of the truly beautiful people. “Custom stales. . . .” as Shakespeare wrote, and many of us in the political business are seeing the warts, perhaps too many of them, because we’re so accustomed to him now.

“Each morning, when we see his picture on the front page, and read beneath that Prime Minister Trudeau said something, visited somewhere, kissed someone, we feel uneasy; he does not wear a Prime Minister’s mask. Those who love him, or what he appears to be, mistrust their judgment sometimes. ”

Why did the Liberals choose Trudeau? “. . . the overriding reason for his election was the conviction that his popularity would keep the party in power

“He himself appeared threatening to the traditional party structures, as he was, in fact. But many of the Old Guard, knowing it had been done before, would comfort themselves with the knowledge that once they had him trapped, which is to say elected, they could serenely proceed with the business of smoothing off his corners and turning his mask into a party mask after all.

“The reason for his popularity in the country, of course, had to do with style, a style that was personal, not institutional. Governments, like advertisers, have learned to lie with such facility that they have scarified their right to the people’s faith. But the Trudeau style was believable, and to the young of mind, impatient with all the old political platitudes, it was even more important to believe him than to agree with him.

“In Trudeau, the scholar’s commitment to unqualified truth dances attendance upon a willingness to compromise, without denying that there is a difference between compromise and the ideal.

“ . . . We find him a man who has come to terms with change and who clearly sees that, in the current of human social and political events, entrenchment and rigidity of systems and institutions are likely to threaten that which really matters: The liberty and fulfilment of the individual.

Mr. Watson puzzles about what has happened to Mr. Trudeau since June. To him “he seemed unwilling to accept either the magical mantle he had been given by the country, or the electric personal connection he had forged with its people. He retreated. He refused again and again, to appear on television and keep alive the contact … the naturally fickle immediately sensed they had been wrong and chalked up another foiled love affair. The faithful sensed the rightness of their faith, but waited for a sign.

“ . . . Trudeau acts more like a teacher than any prime minister ever acted before — he has puzzled the country. … If we are uncertain about Trudeau, it has to be recalled that he himself has made uncertainty almost a principle of government. If he really means that, there is a gleam of hope because the uncertainties can be dealt with only by loosening the traditional iron grasp on power, positive or negative, and acknowledging a new kind of democratic relationship.”

Mr. Watson is much more one of “the faithful” than “naturally fickle.” He, too, seeks a new kind of democratic relationship, with a stress on participation, on youth, on a destruction of the myth that Ottawa can solve problems.

OTTAWA  (CP) —John and Yoko Lennon extended their approval of Canadian politicians to Health Minister John Munro before leaving for England Tuesday.

Both Mr. Munro and Prime Minister Trudeau gave them hope, the shaggiest Beatle said. after separate interviews with the men.

We’ve got to transmit to the young people that we’ve met some human people in The Establishment, and convince them we didn’t sell out in the process.”

The Lennon judgment of Mr. Munro was based on a 1/2 hour chat in which the couple let the minister in on a Zen Buddhist diet and promised to be on call if he ever needed assistance in the war on hard drugs.

Another factor may have been the minister’s speech to the council on drug abuse in which he quoted Beatle lyrics, claimed to believe what young peoole say about marijuana’ and decried “giving criminal records to several thousand curious kids” for smoking pot.

John approved of the speech after reading it, adding that “like the whole generation, we’ve mistrusted politicians.”

Lennon also offered Mr. Munro some advice on how to get through to hostile young people. When confronted by sign-waving students, for example. he should carry his own placard proclaiming his humanity.

What else would be effective? the minister wanted to know.

“Be truthful and honest with them.” John and Yoko advised.

They added that Mr. Munro’s political struggle was at the same stage as their own peace campaign. If he kept at it he would get through, just as in the pop music world.

“You build up a catalogue of records, Mr. Minister. When your third or fourth record is a hit they’ll go back and buy your first ones.”

Invited to take part in tiie ? province’s centennial activities, j the Beatle lead singer and guitarist accepted the invitation during a live television conver-j sation with MLA Russ Doern (NDP-Elmwood).

His acceptance of the invita-l tion follows a recent rejection by the Beatles of a $4.5 million contract to appear in several major United States cities.

Mr. Doern said in an interview Monday he extended the verbal invitation to the famed Beatle on behalf of the premier An official telegram and letter have also been sent, he said.

Mr. Doern said he appeared Saturday on the CBC national show Weekend and conversed with the Beatle on a live hook-1 up from Toronto. Mr. Doern was in Winnipeg.

“I extended the invitation to him to come here in 1970 … he very emphatically said he would come. I think be said ‘Sure I’ll be there .. .’ or words to that effect.”

Mr. Doern admitted he was surprised by the Beatle singer’s] quick acceptance. “I thought he would just say thanks for the invitation and I’ll let you know.

“But it was crystal-clear that he accepted. He will be here I’m sure.”

Mr. Doern who is also a member of the Manitoba centennial corporation’s board of directors, said the premier’s letter suggested Mr. Lennon bring his peace movement to the province ‘‘and we will help you with it.”

The Beatle and his wtf# have been heading a movement to ‘‘stop all wars.”

During the television conversation, Mr. Doern said he explained Manitoba is a “progressive” province and that Mr Lennon would enjoy Winnipeg.

“Then I simply told him that we would hold him to his promise to appear. He replied that we shouldn’t worry that he •would be here.

“He will probably want to hit the mass media to convey his ideas … will also likely have a big meeting outdoors, maybe in Birds Hill Park, as part of his peace movement.’’

Mr. Doern said he doubted Mr. Lennon would feature his repertoire of Beatle favorites, but instead would play songs preferred by his Plastic Ono Band.

The members are Mr Lennon and his wife as well as two or three other musicians.

Mr. Doeim agreed the “older about the Beatle’s appearance here.

“They will probably say he is immoral in many ways. But he isn’t really. After all, he advised kids to keep off drugs when he appeared on television.”

The MLA said Mr. Lennon has also praised Canadians for treating him and his wife “like human beings.”

Mr. Doern said he expected Manitoba youth would be “ecstatic” about the appearance.

“After all, there just isn’t anyone who is bigger than the Beatles. They will be walking on cloud nine. This will probably be the best thing in Centennial for the kids.”

Mr. Doern said a committee has been established to prepare an itinerary for the couple’s visit as well as organize “communications, dates, alternative plans and conditions.”

He said, however, the committee wimiM be carefnL not to have the appearance during the j Royal visit here July 5 to 15.

“We would not want to detract from her visit and I don’t believe having the two here at the same time would be very appropriate somehow.”

Mr. Doern said he expected the singer’s appearance here would be next

This is a most appropriate time of the year to think of peace and none think more fervently in the cause of peace than the mothers, wives and other members of the families of those in jeopardy in Vietnam, Nigeria, the Middle East and Korea.

A great many other people are much concerned about the concept of peace. Most of us want world peace, some are more willing than others to go out and become activists for a permanent end to war and violence. Extremists are even willing to fight for peace.

The movement for peace has now attained such proportions that it has not only its middle-of-the-road activists but also its left wing and its conservative right wing.

Naturally the extremists at both ends of the peace spectrum have to be extroverts and eccentrics in their ways or they would hardly attract the attention they need.

Beatle John Lennon is far out in left field for the peaceniks, and he is as different as day from night alongside rightist Stan Burke, the crusader for Biafran peace.

John Lennon, never photographed without his Japanese wife Yoko Ono at his side, is an acknowldged headline hound, and some critics complain that his worldwide campaign promotes Lennon, his writings and his records as much as the cause of peace.

But his unquenchable thirst for public exposure reveals a nutty flavour to the man. Who else would call Pierre Trudeau “beautiful’’? Somebody sourly asked him the other day if he was so interested in promoting peace why wasn’t he doing his thing somewhere where there was fighting going on. like in Vietnam, Biafra or the Middle East. Lennon peered mildly through his gold-rimmed glasses and admitted he is too much of a coward to be anywhere near anywhere bombs or bullets were flying about. Then he was asked about the newspaper ads and the billboards that are appearing with pictures of him and his wife advocating peace, the current cost of which runs to around $72,000. He says he is not at all worried about the investment, since he intends to send the bills to President Nixon.

Burke, the frustrated newsman television made into a pundit by proxy, is as odd as Lennon but in a different way. Convinced that his sporadic conducted tours behind the Biafran lines have made him the only authority on that civil war. he has shown some peevishness that Foreign Affairs Minister Mitchell Sharpe has not flown to Toronto on the Burke bidding to take part in a television news conference arranged by Burke. He says that Canada and the Commonwealth are responsible for the Biafran misery and that Canada’s government lies about our country’s alleged efforts to stop the fighting or get food to the hungry there.

Conservative Leader Robert Stanfield Tuesday blasted the government for its alleged lack of leadership in the Nigerian-Biafra conflict and for its “deliberate creation of unemployment” in the war on inflation.

Mr. Stanfield issued two separate, and highly critical statements prior to calling a press conference in which he accused Prime Minister Trudeau of being “pretty cold-blooded” in talking of increased unemployment, and External Affairs Minister Mitchell Sharp in being “cold and callous” in talking about the destruction of a Can- airelief plane in Biafra.

The Conservative leader also covered other areas, ranging from the current Canadian visit to Beatle John Lennon to the state of national unity.

He said in a statement that it is “incredible” for a government concerned with a “just society” to rely on one of the oldest, crudest and cruelest economic policies—“the deliberate creation of unemployment to prevent increases in wages and prices.”

And it was “feeble” of the prime minister to blame the Ontario government for not doing enough in the war on inflation.

NOT SPECIFIC ENOUGH 

“We can expect him to return to this theme of blaming Ontario during the winter, as unemployment across the country continues to increase.”

It was meaningless of Mr. Trudeau to talk about voluntary restraint when he refused to say what the restraints would be.

Mr. Stanfield called on the government to give “clear and unmistakeable” guidance.

“The government must stop fobbing this business off on the prices and incomes commission and tell the country where it stands. Threatening us all vaguely with sterner measures is simply irresponsible.”

The government should also “develop and announce an adequate set of compensating measures to encourage the employment of those thrown out of work unnecessarily by this government’s clumsy and inhumane measures.”

Total reliance on broad fiscal and monetary measures is bound to produce inhumane results, he said.

LEADERSHIP LACKING

On the Nigeria-Biafra conflict, Mr. Stanfield said it is “painfully clear” that the government is not giving leadership.

“Mr. Sharp’s cold and callous response to the destruction of a Can-airelief plane the other day is but another indication of the government’s dedication to detachment.” Mr. Stanfield said he was told the Canadian government did not protest the destruction of the Canadian plane.

He said Mr. Sharp’s comments almost suggests that the Canadian government feels that no flights are better than night flights of relief supplies into Biafra.

“A nice regard for precise protocol is not a sufficient response to one of the great tragedies of our day and age.”

On other questions, Mr. Star field says he believes the sense of unity in the country has deteriorated over the last year. But while he is concerned, he is not alarmed.

“We have to get away from this policy of confrontation and must think in terms of reconciliation.”

About conversations earlier in the day between John Lennon and the prime minister, Mr. Stanfield said he thought it was “excellent” that Mr. Trudeau should try to understand various points of view. While the Conservative leader didn’t think Mr. Lennon “has all the answers at his fingertips in regard to world peace,” he said he would be glad to meet with the Beatle.

WINNIPEG — Premier Ed Schreyer’s invitation to Beatle John Lennon and his wife Yoko Ono visit Manitoba’s 100th birthday parly next year has produced a controversy more vocal than anything else so far initiated by Manitoba’s New Democratic government.

Open-line radio shows yesterday were filled with complaints phoned in by citizens who say they want no part of Lennon’s visit.

The invitation itself was extended by New Democratic legislature member Russ Doern on a national television show Sunday Lennon agreed to attend. Doern said he was extending the invitation on behalf of Premier Schreyer.

Yesterday Doern appeared on one radio hot-line show, and attempted to calm irate phoners by telling them that Manitoba could handle the estimated 50,000 to 75,000 people he expected to turn out to meet Lennon.

Doern said he didn’t agree with callers who suggested that Manitoba would provide a haven for hippies during the Lennon visit, and said there would be ample provision for crowd control.

Doern’s statements had little effect on the callers, who continued to register their complaints.