Response to CFO's Motion to Dismiss

CFO filed a Motion to Dismiss our appeaL (see BlogPosting CFO's Motion to Dismiss Small Flocker's Appeal ), and we have now filed a response.  Our hearing on May 14th in Guelph will discuss this Motion and decide if our appeal will live another day, or die stillborn.

You can find our appeal in our Blog Posting  Tribunal Time  This is a guaranteed solution for all with insomnia or Sleep Apnea, or your money cheerfully refunded.

Here are the documents so you can read them, even before the CFO legal sharks get their fingers on them:

• Notice of Constitutional Question which was filed with the Deputy Attorney Generals for Canada and Ontario, alerting them of the constitutional questions that will be argued in the hearing.
• Our Response to Motion to Dismiss where we give the reasons to keep our appeal alive.  CFO threw every possible reason at us to shut us down, except they left out the alleged fact that my Mother wears army boot.  Perhaps I will be on the receiving end of that one during the oral arguments on May 14th.
• Our Submissions Brief is where copies of the applicable statutes, regulations, and case law is presented to all parties, so everybody concerned has the same starting point in the hearing.
• OFPMC's Response to Motion to Dismiss is just 2 pages long, agreeing with most of what CFO stated, offering a few clarifications.  It appears that CFO and OFPMC have a gentlemen's agreement that CFO will take the lead and do all the heavy lifting, and OFPMC stays out of the fray.  If that is true, that is consistent with OFPMC's prior actions:  let CFO do as it pleases.  No wonder Ontario is in the mess that we are today.
• Courier Receipts   You can watch and trace the progress of these critical courier pouches as they wind their way around the Great Lakes to arrive at their destination.  I received a major shock on pricing.  Apparently, Purolator Courier has recently designated us as a "remote region", understandable with how they are forced to use a dog sled in winter and ox cart in summer for their courier pickups.  (whoop! I forgot, we have an international audience who may not understand I was being sarcastic).  The standard envelope Puroletter is $49.69 multiplied by 2 packets, which has destroyed our budget.  We are out of money again, and I had to cash in a bunch of pop, beer, and wine bottle to afford the printing and courier bill.
• Petition Form   This is a handy form to collect signatures from your family, friends, neighbours, farm animal hoof prints, whatever, to support our cause at the Tribunal.  If you read the Response noted above, you will see that I included 7 letters/emails that support our cause.  We will have to get special permission from the Tribunal to enter on the record those that we receive between now and May 14th.  It's the best that we can do, so it will have to do.

While we wait for May 14th to arrive, we have much work to do, as follows:

1. Donations   Guess what, not only are we out of money, we are overdrawn by more than $50.00 from my personal piggy bank.
   
   I will have to drive 611 km x2 (ie. both ways)= 1,212 km. round trip, so I need gas money.  So that I'm not a bleary eyed Zombie at the hearing after getting up at 1:00 AM and driving for 6 hours, I need to come down the day before and stay overnight.  If none of you offer your tent in your backyard for a needy chicken farmer coming to Guelph, I will need to get a hotel room.
   
   Now's your chance to feel good, and help a good cause.  If you wish, I will post your name and amount of donation so all the world will know about your kind and cunning investment, or you can remain anonymous; your choice.
2. Petition Signatures   We need signatures on our petition.  Download (see above), print, and post the petition everywhere.  Take it to work, go door to door.  When filled, scan it and email it to me at cdn.small.flockers@gmail.com  I will print it off and bring them to the hearing on May 14th.
   
   Better yet, you can come running into the hearing room, out of breath, yelling,
   
   "Wait!   Wait!  I have a signed petition supporting our cause!
   I will have to disavow any knowledge of you and your dramatic yet silly stunt, but go for it if you dare.  Just leave peacefully once they handcuff you.

Thank-you for patiently checking back many times to see if I had posted something more.  I apologize for your frustration when another day went by without your Small Flocker fix.  Addiction is everywhere!  Unfortunately, I have been so busy researching and writing the response to CFO's zany motion, there was no time left to do postings.

Tribunal Time

It's off to the Tribunal we go!

Yesterday, I received the Tribunal's acknowledgement of receipt of our Notice of Appeal from the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food Appeal Tribunal. I agreed to all of their proposed dates, but somehow, the Tribunal scheduled us to different dates.  The Motion Hearing is scheduled at Tribunal's offices at 1 Stone Road West, Guelph, Ontario Canada (45 minutes from Toronto ON Canada), beginning at 9:30 a.m. on Wednesday May 14, 2014.

This motion is likely a preliminary ploy by Chicken Farmers of Ontario ("CFO") to stop the appeal before it gets started.

As CFO sees it, I have no rights whatsoever, and they are the mighty and powerful CFO, and don't appreciate me questioning their actions and authority.

If you don't mark this date on your calendar and show up at the appointed time, I will likely be there all by myself, staring into the hungry, snarling, foaming mouths of CFO's lawyers; from 1 to 6 Toronto lawyers who will attempt to rip me apart and feed me to their young; all while being paid $500 per hour for each of these legal wolf-mercenaries.

Bring popcorn and your smart phone for live video opportunities.  This will likely be interesting.

This hearing, and if we ever get to the Tribunal, could cost up to $3,000 per hour that CFO has to pay their lawyers.  Of course, CFO will fund the protection of their monopoly by raising CFO chicken levies that are charged to quota-based chicken farmers.  Ontario's factory chicken farmers who pay those levies will, in turn, be reimbursed by raising the farm gate chicken prices that the farmers enjoy.  Chicken processors will be forced to pay these higher farm gate chicken prices, so the retail price of chicken will eventually be raised accordingly.

So again, the consumer gets shafted by trying to seek an end to the previous and ongoing shafting of consumers.

My apologies to all Canadians for increasing your pain through higher chicken prices in the short term.  Hopefully, there is a rainbow and pot of gold that will eventually be found through this appeal process.

What will we be discussing at this motion hearing?  CFO likely feels I have no right to appeal, the Tribunal has no authority to hear my complaints, and I have been scandalous, frivolous, vexatious, trivial, my appeal has no merit, it's an abuse of the judicial process, moot, bad faith, have an improper purpose, or discloses no reasonable cause of action, and therefore I lose any right to appeal.

As to the Tribunal appeal itself, there is a short and long version available.  Take your pick:

The Long Version:  The Gory Details of my Appeal

Notice of Appeal   272 pages, Adobe Acrobat pdf, 5.63 MB

The Short Version:   7 Questions

Suggested Questions for the OMAF Tribunal to Answer

Glenn Black
vs.
Chicken Farmers of Ontario (“CFO”) &
Ontario’s Farm Products Marketing Commission (“OFPMC”)

1. Currently, small flock (ie. non-quota) chicken farmers are subject to government authority and powers that have been delegated to, or vested in Chicken Farmers of Ontario (“CFO”). Since these delegated and vested powers imposed on Small Flockers originated from the governments of a free and democratic country, does the Appellant and other Small Flockers have the legal right to membership in CFO, to attend CFO meetings, to receive CFO information, to run for a CFO elected office, and vote in CFO elections so as to have democratic representation at the CFO Board?


2. If the answer to Q #1 is no, then should Small Flockers be exempt from the By-laws, rules, policies, procedures, powers, authority, rulings, invasion of privacy, and threat of enforcement currently planned and practiced by CFO?


3. Are there other responsibilities, duties, and constraints owed by the Defendants (ie. both CFO and OFPMC) for the benefit of the Appellant or others, that irrevocably flow with the government powers that are delegated and vested in the Defendants, above and beyond those expressly enumerated in the Farm Products Marketing Act and Regulations?


4. Under Section 1.01 of the Federal-Provincial Agreement-Chicken 2001, all members of the chicken Supply Management system agreed “to work in the balanced interest of producers, industry stakeholders and consumers”. Have the Defendants breached these duties under this agreement? If yes, does the Appellant, Small Flockers, the consumer, and/or the general public have vested third party rights, either under this agreement or otherwise, that they can use to seek legal redress from the Defendants?


5. Do the Defendants have a duty to be open, transparent, accountable, prudent, and reasonable; and to consider, accommodate, and be responsive to the rights, needs, expectations, complaints, and suggestions from:   (a) the Defendant’s respective stakeholders?   (b) The Appellant?   (c) Small Flockers?   (d) the consumer? and (e) the general public?


6. Is there sufficient objective, unbiased evidence to conclude that the Defendants have fully, faithfully, consistently, effectively, and efficiently:   (a) developed plans;   (b) avoided risks;   (c) implemented their express and implied duties in a timely and good faith manner for the greater good of the consumer, the general public and the Defendant’s respective stakeholders;   (d) periodically assessed their own performance, promptly took corrective action as needed, and continuously improved their performance?


7. If the answer to Q #6 is no, what duties do the Defendants have to assess their past performance, identify the cause of their inadequate past performance, determine the optimum solutions, take immediate corrective actions, verify and validate that their remedial actions are fully implemented and effective, and ensure their prior poor conduct (as well as all similar potentials) are avoided forevermore?