by SUSAN MANN
It has been almost two months since the Ontario Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Appeal Tribunal denied reaccreditation to the National Farmers Union in Ontario but the group still doesn’t know why it was turned down.
That’s because the tribunal released its decision denying the group reaccreditation under the Farm Registration and Farm Organizations Funding Act without reasons on Dec. 19, 2012, five days after the hearing was completed on Dec. 14, 2012. The decision, posted on the tribunal’s website, stated that full written reasons will be released as soon as they become available.
Tribunal chair Kirk Walstedt says by email a section of the tribunal’s rules of procedure states it is supposed to send notice of its decision and reasons, if any, to all parties in the appeal and the agriculture minister within 20 days after the hearing is completed. But another rule says the tribunal can “dispense with compliance with any rule at any time” to secure the most just, expeditious and cost-effective determination of any appeal.
The tribunal strives to release all decisions as soon as possible but many factors impact the timelines for releasing a decision, including “the nature of the issues before the tribunal,” he says.
“As I am sure you can appreciate, a denial of an accreditation application is a serious matter that is deserving of a full explanation,” he says.
NFU Ontario coordinator Ann Slater couldn’t be reached for comment. But in a Feb. 11 press release about a letter the group sent to Ontario Premier and Agriculture Minister Kathleen Wynne welcoming her to the agriculture position, Slater says she told Wynne their members “are extremely frustrated with the decisions of the tribunal in 2012. They feel the tribunal has taken away their voice and their option to choose the general farm organization which best represents their interests through the farm business registration program.”
She also noted that the “ongoing delay by the tribunal in releasing the reasons for the Dec. 19 decision is exacerbating this frustration and leading to further questions about the mandate and oversight of the tribunal.”
Walstedt says once the tribunal releases its reasons, they will be posted on its website. BF
General farm accreditation archive
Comments
I can't believe a tribunal like this is allowed to operate in Ontario in 2013. What kind of tribunal/government review agency has any credibility when it states it can dispense with compliance with any rule at any time, and then issue a ruling that says a group under it's jurisdiction didn't follow the rules?
This story sheds a new light as to how Gov. and their agencies work . It is clear now that it is not that Gov. , any other agency , arm of , or any one getting money because of legislation to have to follow the rules set out for them to abide by . It would seem that a new rule was written some where in Gov. that states " do as I say not as I do " trumps every thing . Sheds new light to things like how the Green Energy Act , ORNGE and E-HEALTH as a few have been so riddled with problems .
I can't see any one having a warm and fuzzy feeling about any thing Gov. .
It is too bad that NFU ended up being the sacrificial lamb in all of this but then when your main push is a niche market you are not looking to be very long lived . Thanks NFU for your service .
Legislation is designed firstly, to help people, and secondly, to protect people, often from themselves. I suggest the latter applies in this case, if for no other reason than to prevent gullible and paranoid farmers in Ontario from letting the NFU siphon their money out of Ontario, and then squander this money by undertaking bad research which does nothing but pander to the already well-established gullibility and paranoia of these Ontario farmers. In addition, the trickiest part of this tribunal's present job is to provide strong-enough reasons for its ruling, yet not so strong that it makes it look like previous tribunals weren't negligent by granting the NFU status in the first place, and/or renewing it up until now.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
I think we have many examples of where this logic that is supposed to be instilled in legislation has not been followed .
Further if what you have wrote as your last sentence is what you really believe then you are living in a dream . Gov. has many times done things for what ever reason , not good reasons , and many times to pad the pockets of their friends .
It would be better if we the people were protected from Gov. .
It seems really strange how rural municipalities are fighting to get more houses built in the country side for a bigger tax base to then only have the province come bullying through with the GEA and driving people out of the country side for their turbine friends . Must make sense to you but not to me . And all the while not protect the lease holder from himself with no set back regulations . Need I say more .
Absolutely, the bully GEA was set up to promote expensive, uneconomical, ineffective, not needed, intermittent power with increased Low frequency noise from ever increasing huge 400ft dia propeller turbines), with a backup source of power (mostly high pollution gas turbines).
We are currently off coal, not because of a few turbines but because of reduced demand and increased base load power. The boneheads have now set their sights on thinking they can somehow replace base load power with intermittent renewables (means mega Industrial WT. As a side effect, residential property values will be negatively impacted if saleable period. Perhaps the Liberals real agenda is to partially sterilize and bulldoze rural Ontario to make room for prairie style mega farms. Then again, perhaps that is giving them too much credit for planning ahead with common sense.
The solution is oh so simple. We are off coal, so the goal has been met. So back off Queens Park and return local control to the municipalities that want this bogus source of energy.
Save us from government Save us from Thompson
The title says it all - if you don't know what you are talking about, and have nothing to say, don't prove it by posting anonymously.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
Post new comment