Lesson #3: Absolute Marketing Power

Today, we roll back into history to look at the lobbying and government's response to pacify the agriculture sector.  Previous postings:   Lesson #1, Lesson #2

Today, we will learn that:

"You can avoid reality,
but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality."

Ayn Rand (1905 - 1982), Author, Playright, Screenwriter, and Philosopher

 

"The Splintered Market", a book published in 1980, relates that the first marketing co-op in Canada was the Okanagan tree fruit growers in 1913, which was of limited success, as they couldn't control the marketing done by members, and they had no control whatsoever over non-members.

As typical with government, if any action is a disaster, they assume doing lots more of the disastrous action will be an effective solution to the initial disaster.  In other words, if throwing gasoline on a fire fails to extinguish the fire, the reason for the resulting disaster is assumed to be insufficient gasoline was used in the first attempt.

Lets see what Mr. A.G. Wilson had to say in 1971 about the draft SM Bill in Parliament:

“The Produce Marketing Act passed in 1927 by the British Columbia legislature gave exclusive powers to a board to control and regulate the marketing of specific farm commodities. When tested in the courts in 1931, the legislation was declared ultra vires since it interfered with inter-provincial trade.

The Splintered Market also notes that the courts also struck the law down as the levy charged farmers was an indirect tax, which was not permitted by the Canadian Constitution.

Lets continue:

"The onset of the depression sharpened the desire of producers to obtain market control since they observed that industrial firms were able to maintain prices by curtailing output. Continued agitation resulted in the passage of the federal Natural Products Marketing Act in 1934. Several marketing schemes were approved under this Act before it was declared ultra vires by the courts in 1937 on the grounds that the marketing of a product within a province was a matter under provincial jurisdiction.

Strike 2, but not to be deterred, the Provinces join in to the fight:

The respective provinces, to circumvent this difficulty, have each passed their own Natural Products Marketing Acts. Well over 100 provincial marketing boards have now been established.

So now we have a piling on, of both Federal and Provincial governments, to restrict trade and freedom.

Provincial marketing boards found themselves limited in their ability to regulate marketing since their control was restricted to the product produced within the confines of their respective provinces. This limitation was particularly onerous for those products which were produced in several provinces. Some means of coordinating the activities of provincial boards handling the same product was considered necessary if effective market control was to be achieved.”

One of the reasons for having both provincial and federal governments is to prevent absolute powers, to have counter-balancing, to prevent extremes and excesses.  If something requires both the Provinces and the Federal government to act in unison, the first assumption should be "This is something that should not be done!".

Unfortunately, they lobbyists were bound and determined to have their way, so they pressed on, and called for united action by both levels of government.

So the next idea was to create an independent third party, and both the Federal and Provincial governments would delegate their respective powers to this third party, thereby making it more powerful than either government alone.

Does this not give anybody pause or caution?

"Power tends to corrupt, and
absolute power corrupts absolutely."

John Emerich Edward Dalberg Acton, First Baron Acton (1834–1902)
English historian, politician, and writer

Next part:   Lesson #4:   Freedom to Choose & Constitutionality

Enough is Enough! The Supreme Court has Ruled.

Is the Supreme Court of Canada on the side of Small Flockers, and against the Supply Management monopoly system?

In the recent Supreme Court decision the judgement referred to a hypothetical example of bad law.  Suppose that riding your bike is a legal activity, but for some strange reason the government passes a law  for the purpose of protecting you, which prohibits you from wearing a bicycle helmet.

The Supreme Court states that under Section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, this bicycle helmet law would be unconstitutional, as it could be easily shown that it puts bicycle riders at greater risk, cannot be supported or justified on an objective, scientific evidence basis, and is therefore arbitrary, and therefore violates fundamental justice.

Canadian Charter of Rights & Freedoms, Section 7

7. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.

In Canada (Attorney General) v. Bedford, 2013 SCC 72, the Supreme Court has said that "fundamental justice" means:

"This case concerns [fundamental justice,] the basic values against arbitrariness (where there is no connection between the effect and the object of the law), overbreadth (where the law goes too far and interferes with some conduct that bears no connection to its objective), and gross disproportionality (where the effect of the law is grossly disproportionate to the state’s objective)." 

Makes sense to me.

Now look at the Small Flockers vs. #ChickenMafia case for the Ontario Meat Regulations.

CFIA, University of Guelph, and OMAF have consistently found that 30% to 80% of Canadian chicken is contaminated with lethal bacteria (eg. E. Coli, Salmonella, Campylobacter, Listeria, and/or other human pathogen)Contaminated Chicken and here.
, including superbugs ( for example, see Blog Posting

The Provincial and Federal government have passed regulations that restrict the slaughter of meat to only occur at their approved abattoirs.  These "approved" abattoirs usually entails long distance shipping of the poultry, causing and spreading contamination from some birds to all birds.  Next, mechanized high speed, high volume slaughter systems spread that contamination everywhere, up and down the production line.  Even when done exactly according to the approved procedure, this will usually result in multiple birds being significantly contaminated. This contaminated meat puts consumers at significant risk, up to and including death.

Secondly, the nutritional content of a chicken factory bird is worse than small flock birds that are pasture or free-range raised.

Thirdly, many of the Supply Management chicken factories use a witches' brew of drugs and chemicals to maximize their the #ChickenMafia's profits, regardless of the downstream impact on those who unknowingly buy or consume the resulting meat.

Alternatively, on-farm slaughter done one bird at a time in a correct manner, prevents or mitigates the potential contamination of the meat.  Unfortunately, this is prohibited by Ontario law, by a penalty on first offense of 2 years in jail and a $25,000 fine.

I take offense to the government prohibiting the safer route, subjecting me and all others to significant risks.

If a law significantly impacts somebody's life, liberty, or security, and this law violates fundamental justice, then the Supreme Court of Canada says this is bad law, and cannot be justified in the free and democratic country of Canada.

I have repeatedly asked the Ontario government to share with me the objective evidence upon which they based these oppressive meat regulations.  They have stonewalled and refused to do so.

I asked the government where is there risk assessment and sound science upon which these regulations are based.  They have none.

Justice Haines in his 2004 Meat Report strongly recommended that the government base all meat regulations upon sound science.  The Liberal Government has ignored this comprehensive report on two separate occasions when they passed their Meat Regulations, and instead, they passed whimsical and arbitrary regulations that oppress small flockers and put all citizens at risk.

I previously Blogged (see Meat Regulations Gone Wild) about the over-reaching Regulations they passed in 2005, which they finally admitted in 2013 had gone way overboard, almost destroying half of the meat industry in Ontario.  While they admitted their mistake 6 years late, they then compounded their error by refusing to correct all their prior Meat Regulation mistakes when they re-did the regs in 2013 (see Blog posting Ignored by new Meat Regulations).

Why did the Ontario government ignore Justice Haines in 2005, and ignore Small Flockers plea for relief in 2012 and 2013?  Because they wanted to protect and serve their financial supporters, the millionaire #ChickenMafia and their friends.  Chicken Apartheid is alive and flourishing in Canada, where the 1,114 millionaire chicken factory owners oppress the 13.5 million people of Ontario, and persecute the 13,500 Smal Flockers in Ontario.

Enough is enough!

Cold Winter Wynne makes the Dec. 13, 2013
cover of Toronto Sun newspaper

Thanks to the Christmas gift from the Supreme Court of Canada, now is the time to end this #ChickenMafia insanity.

I will put the question to Premier and Agriculture Minister Wynne (a.k.a. Cold Winter Wynne), and if the government confirms their plans in writing to promptly adjust the Meat Regulations in response to Small Flockers plea for relief, whether in light of the recent Supreme Court ruling, or otherwise, then we will accept this and patiently wait.

If we get no answer, or we get foggy generalities with few commitments, then it appears it is time to go to Court to have the offending sections of the Meat Regulation declared ultra vires and/or unconstitutional.

If there are any lawyers out there (jailhouse or otherwise) who can assist with this plan, or advise a better strategy, or explain why this Supreme Court ruling doesn't in fact support the Small Flockers case, we would appreciate hearing from you.

Alternatively, it seems all three political parties in Ontario are spoiling for an election.  Perhaps we should wait for the calling of the election, then make sure these issues become the pivot point for the election.  After all, 8.2% of Ontario families can't afford the food they need to feed their families.  For 99.9% of Ontario citizens, they have to pay the chicken prices ranging between $4.98/kg to as high as $29.975/kg for chicken in Ontario grocery stores, 2 to 3 times the international price for chicken.

I'm no poly sci expert, but it seems that everybody will be reminded of these issues each week during the writ period as they do their weekly grocery shopping.  As bad as the Ornge, Gas Plants, Heinz, Kellogg's, wind turbines, Ontario North, and all other Liberal scandals are, all of these scandals are in the past, not likely to repeat, and none resonate with voters like the double & triple prices they pay for chicken every week at the grocery store, and will continue to be forced to pay until it becomes an issue that will win or lose elections.

An Oct. 2013 Nanos Research poll found that the Liberals had 36% support, PC's had 31%, and NDP had 26%; in other words, neck and neck (7% no preference).  All the NDP needs is an issue that steals 10% of the support away from the other two parties, and they would have 32.7% support; beating the other two parties.  For the PC's, they only have to win an additional 6% support from the other parties, and they would lead with 34.7% support.

A majority government will take a little bit more shifting, but I'm sure you, and all three political parties get the point.  Wynne's government is vulnerable.  Now is the chance for the other parties to shift policy and join the winning side.  Being first to switch will have its rewards.

Everybody seems to agree that Wynne is a smart and savvy lady.  If she shifts alliances soon, it just might cause a Christmas spirit of forgiveness in the hearts of all Ontarians when they gain hope of cheaper chicken and more jobs throughout Ontario in their near future.

Alternatively, perhaps Wynne is banking on continued poor nutrition for the populace, causing early onset of Alzheimer's among voters, so that all the past scandals of the Liberal government are prematurely forgotten.

In that same poll, Ontarians said healthcare was the #1 issue, identified by 22% of the citizens polled.  I suggest that healthcare is the top issue right now, only because they don't know how badly they are being screwed over for chicken, eggs, turkey, and dairy prices.  Small Flockers plan to change that.

Secondly, affordable nutritious food is a healthcare issue as I pointed out previously (see Blog posting Health Consequences of Food Monopolies).  Few people see a doctor every day, but everybody eats each day (or should).  That daily reminder may help bring these issues to the forefront soon enough.

Let the people understand, then they can vote for relief.

Now is the time for Small Flockers to prepare for the dropping of the Ontario writ (more on this soon).  Once the writ is dropped, we will need to hit all political parties, all town hall meetings, all political rallies, and all media outlets with an unending barrage of information and questions on these issues.

Therefore, if your are on the side of the Ontario citizens and Small Flockers:   Prepare!

If you are against Small Flockers and all citizens, and side with the #ChickenMafia:   Beware!