by BETTER FARMING STAFF
The Association of Ontario Chicken Processors will pay legal costs of more than $202,000 incurred by a group of group of Francophone farmers in eastern Ontario during their legal action with the marketing board Chicken Farmers of Ontario that concluded earlier this year.
In a Superior Court of Justice decision rendered Dec. 20 and posted on a legal website Monday, the Honourable Justice Michel Z. Charbonneau ordered the processors’ association to pay $170,000, “plus disbursements of $32,221.02,” to a group of 24 farmers led by André Lamoureux of St. Isodore.
In the published decision, Justice Charbonneau wrote: “There is no issue as to the applicants’ entitlement to costs. The only issue is the quantum of the award.” Lawyer Herman Turkstra, Hamilton, who represented the processors says, “We initiated the settlement and we agreed to pay the cost.
“They (the farmers) asked for $365,000 and they got the figure that you have.”
The processors group had joined the original lawsuit as an intervener. The upshot of the court action was that Chicken Farmers of Ontario changed its regulations that had forced eastern Ontario producers to sell their chicken to western Ontario processors.
“Eastern Ontario growers are continuing to do what they have done for more than 30 years, to sell to Quebec processors in French. This was a language issue,” Turkstra says.
Asked about the “unanswered questions” referred to in the justice’s Dec. 20 decision, Turkstra said “The unanswered questions referred to are division of powers questions. Are these rules to be put in place by the provincial marketing board or the federal marketing board. These questions were raised by the Lamoureux group and it was never decided in that case.”
“We cross examined the growers over two weeks in Ottawa and we reached the conclusion that a reasonable accommodation was required for their language rights,” Turkstra says. "It had been going on, as you know, since 1960.”
Chicken Farmers of Ontario chairman Henry Zantingh, Smithville, was not aware of the Dec. 20 decision on costs until contacted by Better Farming Tuesday morning. Zantingh says he was spending time with his family and directed questions to staff at the CFO office in Burlington. “I have nothing to comment at the present time. I’m not ‘in the know.’”
Michael Edmonds, director of communications and government relations did not immediately return phone calls this morning. BF
Comments
Sometime when someone from CFO is able to respond you should ask who paid for CFO costs? Did those CFO costs equal or exceed the $365,000 that the Francophones claimed?
The in fighting gets very expensive which of course scares anyone who wants to fight from the outside
When someone is paid the same for a product no matter who buys it why would that same person go to court risking what I can only figure is between 8 to 15 grand to fight where that product goes. The language issue doesn't hold water there has to be bonuses that the average consumer doesn't know about and in a free and open society these issues should be just that free and open
I don't understand. According to the story the chicken producers chairman doesn't know and won't answer questions during a working day. Their communications person isn't available during working hours either?
What are we missing?
No matter how hard you look no one looks good here except the processor's lawyer. I can't agree with the small farm guy's use of inflammatory language and his accuracy has been suspect. This harms his cause. Will he and the PFO guy reveal how many producers they each represent?
The CFO guys need to do their jobs. The media need to get things right. Farmers in one commodity need to stop bashing those in others.
10:21 AM 13-12-30
You state that the small flock guy has suspect accuracy. On our Blog, we have taken great efforts to fully document, explain, and justify with objective facts.
If you have a specific example of something that you suspect, please present your suspicions or facts so we can all examine it together, and correct the record if necessary.
If you have no specifics of inaccuracies, then this is an attempt by you to cloud the issues and cast wild unsupported accusations.
As to the inflammatory language, we believe that the Supply Management system in Canada is morally wrong, based on bad science or no science, cannot be justified in its current configuration, and is causing Canadians significant negative effects in prosperity, health, and well being.
Witness that Canadians are charged 2 to 3 times more for chicken meat, and 52.6% more for eggs than what is available in the US and internationally.
Meanwhile Health Canada reports that 7.6% of Canadian families can't afford the food they need to feed their families, 8.2% in Ontario, and as high as 28% in Nunavut. Food banks report 40% to 75% higher needs over the last 3 to 5 years in the communities they serve.
Witness the epidemics of superbugs, food poisoning, obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, rheumatoid arthritis, Alzheimer's Disease, and cancer in Canada. Some of these health effects are caused or contributed to by the mis-guided methods employed by Canada's Supply Management system.
Given all of the above, we asked nicely for changes. All of the governments and Supply Management bosses ignored, refused, and stonewalled for more than a year while we pleaded for relief.
Asking nicely didn't work. I believe it will never work.
Please name me any historical case where an all-powerful tyrannical dictator eased up and reformed their evil ways when they were asked nicely to do so.
So now, we call a spade a spade. We fight for our rights, for all small flockers and all Canadians who are oppressed by the Supply Management dictators.
Glenn Black
Small Flock Poultry Farmers of Canada
Could you give us an accurate number of members in your group?
You don't agree with Mr. Black.
So rather than dispute his points you ask a question like this?
If that's the best you can do then you have just given more credence to the points he has made....thank you for that contribution.
Most (if not all) Small Flock Poultry Farmers of Canada (SFPFC) have significant concerns with vindictive attacks from the CFO's Chicken Police. That is why they have requested, and I have agreed, to their anonymous membership. If a SFPFC member wishes to disclose that they are a member, then that is their private decision.
As to our membership numbers, it is growing exponentially. However, the exact number will remain confidential. SFPFC has a few who sign up as they read our Blog, but membership growth is mainly due to membership drives that I have conducted when I was at a public event.
I have spent, and continue to spend most of my time researching the bad behaviour and shortcomings of the chicken Supply Management system, in preparation of filing our complaint against CFO to OMAF's Tribunal.
Membership numbers are irrelevant as far as I am concerned.
Violating one person's rights, or being unjust to one person diminishes the rights and justice for everyone. That's what the Supreme Court of Canada has said, and I support it too.
We don't need to violate the majority of Canadians to make it a priority.
If you'd like to pay your $1.00 per year membership fee, we'd be glad to have you as a member of SFPFC.
Glenn Black
Small Flock Poultry Farmers of Canada
If you insist on keeping the numbers secret then I hope you won't mind if I assume that you speak only for yourself or that you want people to assume that you represent a larger number than you actually do. That's what I call a credibility problem! If you admit that you only speak for yourself or for a specific number of producers I would applaud you for standing up for your beliefs.
As for your worry about being by raided by authorities, don't break the law and you should be fine.
What is the law hemp was legal then wasn't opuim was as well but both of these have a bad side growing food being on the bad side of the law I don't think anyone would disagree that would be a bad law .what was the premier doing handing out food baskets and food cards she said this won't make up for your loss but she knows darn well that supply management takes a heck of lot more out of their pockets
When I post on SFPFC's Blog, or post with inclusion of SFPFC's name, then I am speaking on behalf of SFPFC.
You are free to assume as you please. However, assumptions don't change the facts.
On Feb. 28 2013 there was only 1 member of SFPFC; me. Today, we have more members. We are still very small, but growing.
You state that this confidentiality of membership numbers creates a credibility problem. Most dictionaries define credibility by trustworthiness, expertise,and integrity.
You wanted disclosure of our membership numbers. I declined your request because it is confidential. I fail to see how the respecting of a confidentiality makes a person un-worthy of trust. If someone violates a confidentiality, have they not violated a trust? If you are correct, how can violating a confidentiality and protecting a confidentiality both be signs of untrustworthiness?
Expertise does not seem to be an issue in this case.
Integrity is consistency and honesty. I make no claims about our membership except we accept all persons who wish to join us, provided they support SFPFC's Mission, Vision, and Principles.
I claim no majority. However SFPFC defends the rights of both our members and non-members, as well as justice and truth for all. SFPFC is against privilege and power.
As I said elsewhere, injustice to one person is injustice to all. Action against injustice does not become a priority only after 50% +1 persons have been oppressed and abused.
Glenn Black
Small Flock Poultry Farmers of Canada
Any one who attends our annual meeting would have that information made available to them or any one who reads any farm paper would know that the PFO has around 200 members across Ontario.
please check out our web site .... for ongoing updated info
Sean McGivern
PFO
There may be 200 PFO members but not all of them are farmers .
How many of them are farmers ?
l think that's about the same number of members the local Library has !
The number of people affected by supply management is 30 million
Can you prove your statement?
Vegans are not affected in the least.
No it is 36 million according to Glenn and the little flockers .
I guess he is avoiding your question .
I am surprised you missed Aids,STDS and the common cold that you could also blame on Supply management.
Ironically you preach about Supply Management being morally wrong but at the same time your proposed increase to 2,000 chickens brings you into the domain of the CFO, the very organization you think should be done away with,in other words you want to abolish SM but keep the prices CFO have fought hard for over the years.
The 2,000 chicken threshold can not be seen as even close to the 300 farm gate number that is now in existence for the truly small flock farmers.
Your interest in the low-income families of this country should be looked at with suspicion since you don't mention any formula for a proposed drop in retail chicken prices, you only seem concerned with a you own slice of the pie and a quota-free piece at that!
The AIDS, STDS, and common cold seems like sarcasm and rhetoric, so I won't respond.
The others health problems that Small Flock Poultry Farmers of Canada ("SFPFC") have mentioned above do have statistical correlations based on objective scientific evidence, and those scientific studies have been referenced on SFPFC's Blog, indicating that the actions and inactions of Canada's Supply Management System have caused or contributed to significant health issues for Canadians.
The 300 bird limit in Ontario is imposed by CFO as the quota-exempt limit. SFPFC seeks to have that limit changed from 300 to 2,000 birds per year, on the understanding that it would still be quota exempt, and therefore still outside of the Supply Management system.
When CFO acts contrary to provincial regulation and illegally denies Small Flockers a voice or membership or eligibility to run for office in CFO, yet CFO imposes bylaws and rules that cause the oppression and disenfranchised of Small Flockers, that is when we complain. Canada is a free and democratic country, but CFO is run as an aristocratic dictatorship. Why is that permitted?
CFO can stay or go, as its members please. The quota-bearing chicken farmers who have a say, vote, and eligible for being a CFO Board Member are the ones who should pay for CFO by the levys they pay. When those levys get charged back and forced to be reimbursed by Small Flockers and all Canadians; that is when we have a problem and complain. May I refer you to the ancient complaint "No taxation without representation!"
With the 2,000 bird exemption, we suspect that small flockers would be able to slowly grow from our 0.03% market share in Ontario, to as high as 10% market share. There may only be a handful of small flockers who eventually hit the 2,000 bird limit, but that is each individual's choice. The monopolist millionaire chicken farmers currently have 99.97% market share but want 100%, so our plea for relief is rejected without consideration. The millionaire monopolists slowly squeeze the small flockers till they bleed, slowly forcing them towards extinction. Have you noticed the growing concentration within Supply Management's ranks?
As for suspecting the motives of small flockers, on what reasonable and probable grounds do you suspect our motives? I think everything we have said and done from Day 1 has been consistent. On what basis do you suggest we should not be trusted?
Trust is typically defined and measured by 4 factors: 1) Benevolent best interest in the other party; 2) Open & honest communication; 3) Competency; and 4) Predictable behaviour.
Score both SFPFC and CFO on those 4 factors, and I think the historical record will be quite revealing of who to trust, and who to be wary about. For example, CFO doesn't share CFO Board Minutes with their own CFO members; a totally secret society, the "Inner Party" just like defined in George Orwell's novel "1984".
However, what are the motives of the chicken Supply management system? Is there anybody who believes they act in the best interest of Canada and the greater good of all Canadians?
In fact, the record clearly indicates that the millionaire Supply Management owners look out for themselves first and foremost. Isn't that how they became millionaires?
If the Canadian government is duty bound to always act in the best interest of Canadians, what is the constitutional justification for a law that allows and encourages the Supply Management system to run roughshod on the backs of 36 million Canadians?
On our SFPFC Blog, we have given detailed, pragmatic plans for rapid relief for the oppressed small flockers and all Canadians.
For example, if the TRQ (tariff rate quota) and non-TRQ import tariffs were slowly dropped by the Federal Government, cheaper chicken will eventually occur in Canada. All of the clanking, fossilized bureaucracies of Supply Management can stay in place if that is what their millionaire quota-bearing stakeholders want. As the import tariffs drop, we suspect retail prices will do the same, likely on a 6 to 12 month time lag. Eventually, Canadians will no longer be forced to pay 200% to 300% more for chicken, as they are forced to do today because of the Supply Management Systems' violation of the public trust they were given.
Small flockers don't control market pricing, never have, and never will. Small Flockers are ready, willing, and able to compete at whatever prices occur in an open market with a reasonably level playing field.
Supply Management chicken millionaires control pricing, taking the maximum they can legally get, then taking even more by underhanded methods.
For example, who allows "spent fowl" to be imported into Canada at 0% tariff then sold at full retail price, so that it now supercedes 17% of the domestic chicken production? CFO has their Chicken Police and can audit at will all chicken growing, processing, and transportation systems; but they fail to take effective action against "spent fowl" imports. Is that because it's an inside job and extremely profitable for CFO members and their friends? If not this, then how do we explain this inaction by CFO and others?
For example, who allowed a bogus FCR, inflated by 16.3% at chicken factory farm gate (then inflated further as this bogus charge passed from farm to retail) for the last 10 years to be charged Canadians, until OMAF finally ordered CFO to correct it in Aug. 2013? The list goes on...
As mentioned above, there is a significant opportunity to export chicken once the obsolete and inefficient systems of Supply Management are swept away. Until then, Canadian chicken farmers must hide and be protected from the real world, similar to long suffering parents who have a 30-something child still living in their basement due to a "failure to launch".
It is high time for Canada's Supply Management system to grow up, get a real job, move out of Mommy & Daddy's protective basement, and stand on their own two feet in the real world.
Glenn Black
Small Flock Poultry Farmers of Canada
There must be another side to this story. On the surface this seems like arrogance, disregard for the the public, terrible communications. How about it mr. chairman and mr. communications person please tell us this is all a big mistake or at least follow the Rob Ford example and APOLOGISE!
I am not sure I understand... were these chickens french speaking chickens that ended up on English speaking plates? Or were they raised French in which case I can almost see a problem in that they would no know when they were getting last rights. St Isodore is in Ontario is it not? Why is this chicken case described as a language issue if the chickens were legally raised bilingual in Ontario?
This whole situation is funny. Right now another site is reporting CFO were stuck with the costs that this site says were picked up by processors. The guy actually put that in his headline. Somebody is wrong. But who?
Just don't believe what you read and you'll be fine
I think the real question is in 2013 why would this be a problem why would anyone have an issue selling a legal product to anyone in canada
Remember, anything these chicken millionaires spend gets added to the public's tab as higher $/kg for chicken.
They bellow and fight amongst themselves, just like thieves dividing up the booty amongst the co-conspirators, while their victim lays bleeding in the gutter.
It's the public that pays, nobody else.
Glenn Black
Small Flock Poultry Farmers of Canada
CFO is under farm products who reports to the ag minister Wynn, one and the same as the premier. If there was a miss appropriation of funds this was done under the watchful eye and fiduciary duty of the a-fore mentioned.
How will any regularly required audit, under an office of public trust be accepted as satisfactory, (without political meddling) outside of acceptable "within country trade"
This was not an error of the CFO "members" (of Ont) but an error foisted rightly or wrongly by those charged to represent and to follow the rules of accountability in accordance with the oath of office they swore to uphold as a public trust
So much for accountability from a premier/ag minister, farm products, or CFO board all under her charge.
Far too many decisions are tainted with political expediency and a complete void of common scene.
Just add this to long list of recent political and judicial blunders we are expected to accept without question and there is a recipe for the accelerated demise of democracy.
Your wrong mister black the money for things like this has already been taken from the consumer and put in a war chest to quell any rebellion be it producers or politicians or the public the price of chicken or any supply management commodity won't go up because of legal problems its already covered
I agree that the money for this legal battle may have been taken out of the hide of Canadians and collected into a war chest long ago. However, they will undoubtably soon decide that that same war chest needs to be replenished and increased in size yet again, so more levies will be charged CFO members, and those higher levies will be automatically re-imbursed by higher farm gate chicken prices, and each step downstream will add their markup on top of that increase until it becomes another unbearable increase in retail pricing.
Eventually, the Chicken millionaires will over-play their hand and there will be a consumer revolt.
We just have to be patient, or choose to push them off the throne they created for themselves.
Glenn Black
Small Flock Poultry Farmers of Canada
Why do you pick on one commodity? The auto unions protect their product with high tariffs on cars made in Ontario. And they have a huge war chest taken out the hides of all Canadians. Teachers have a huge war chest and thier jobs are protected too. Why do you always pick on a minority group? Why dont you be fair with all commodities.
This story has to take the cake as one of the most disgraceful in Canada in recent years and I would love to see a mockery of it done on 'this hour has 22 minutes'. A total waste of consumer and taxpayer money. How can our government claim to support free trade when we can not even show it within our Canadian borders? Raube Beuerman, Dublin, ON
Post new comment