CWB Election Tabulation Postponed

[webmaster]

Brandon, December 10, 2004 -- Meyers Norris Penny LLP, the Election Coordinator for the 2004 CWB Director Elections, today announced that the tabulation of ballots for the directors elections currently underway will not take place as scheduled. The tabulation was to have occurred December 11 and 12, 2004.

Peter Eckersley, a partner with MNP advised that on December 8, 2004, District 8 candidate Art mainil filed a Statement of Claim and Notice of Motion with the Federal Court - Trial Division seeking an injunction to prevent the tabulation from taking place, and an order that a new election be held. MNP, as election coordinator, on the advice of legal counsel, and with the concurrence of the CWB and Mr. Mainil, agreed to postpone the tabulation, in order to allow the judicial process to proceed in an orderly and objective fashion. The delay is necessary because of the late filing of the motion for the injunction by Mr. Mainil and his procedural error of failing to serve the other candidates in the election.

"Our intent has always been to conduct the election in an open, fair and objective manner," said Eckersley. Eckersley said MNP will be responding to the motion for the injunction maintaining that election regulations and procedures were followed and that the election was conducted fairly.

Eckersley advisesd that the parties have agreed that the injunction application will be heard the week of December 20, subject to the Court's availability, which will leave sufficient time to tabulate the votes by the end of December.

"We will be seeking speedy resolution of this matter and hope to be able to announce the results before the end of the month." Eckersley said.

MNP is a chartered accounting and business advisory firm with 42 full time and 32 part time offices across the Western provinces. MNP provides a complete range of financial taxation, business and agriculture advisory services to meet its clients' personal and corporate needs. Service to agriculture and agribusiness has been a focal point of MNP's business philosophy since they opened their doors in 1945.

[freenorth]

What is Mr. Mainil's claim is it just regarding a number of eligible voters not receiving ballots or is there more to it.

[webmaster]

I'm not sure what the whole statement of claim is about - I've been watching different news sites, forums, etc. but other than the original news release I haven't found any information yet.

Perhaps someone here is in the know?

[TOM4CWB]

Webmaster;

I have not seen the Federal Court T2191-04 yet myself.

What I do know is that many people have not had the opportunity to vote in this 2004 election yet... that are 03-04 or 04-05 CWB valid permit holders.

Other Farmers have recieved their ballot packages after the Dec. 03rd 04 deadline. THis happened to my brother as well in the 2002 CWB election.

All candidates want to know who has not had the opportunity to participate in the 2004; free, fair, and democratic CWB election.

Call your local candidate, or myself toll free at 1-866-866-4292 for more info about the 2004 election problems.

Our phone #'s and e-mails are all on the cwbelection.com web site.

Don't hesitate to call your local MP's office and report irregulatities as well.

[les]

Tom when I didnt get a ballot in the mail I called and they said I didnt get one because I hadnt filled out a permit book.I didnt fill out one because I hadnt grown any crops I was going to sell on the board that year. They said they would send me one and it came as promised, but what concerned me was across the envelope it was stamped replacement ballot.I dont agree with this because it was not a replacement ballot.It should have been the original one I was entitled too.

[TOM4CWB]

Les;

I agree there are too many unanswered questions.

Les I would appreciate it if you would inform your MP about this issue... it is important.

THis election is not preceived to be fair by many farmers today.

Unfortunately this breaks down the whole democratic system in Canada... not just the CWB elections. This is why it is so important that we challenge the CWB Minister to get this system impartially... and have a free and fair election... with a voters list that is credible.

1. Why do valid 04-05 permit holders need to fill out stat dec.s, when a simple check with the CWB could confirm a valid voter is requesting their valid ballot?

2. Why did so many valid 03-04 permit holders never get a ballot?

3. Why did the election coordinator confuse so many people by putting them in district 10, then sending another ballot from the proper district the second time around. Everyone knows they by law are supposed to only vote once.

So the second ballot goes in the garbage.

4. Sending out ballots under 14 days from the election close deadline does not allow fair clear time to vote. FOr those who missed the forums because of the lack of notification... another improper stacking of the vote towards the directors in office today.

5. No notice in Grain Matters which is mailed to every permit holder in the designated area, free at no cost as it was already going out...

was very unfair to those producers who were placed by the CWB in the wrong district (where they produce no kernels of grain) in the first place.

E.G. Producers in District 1,3,5,and 7 all could be only entitled to vote as District 4 voters... but had no official notification about where they were supposed to vote and how to participate.




6. Many producers never question when MNP sends out the notification of district... they just accept that they are in the district MNP says they are in... even when it is a district they are not entitled to vote in.

7. Candidate Rick Strankman is still not on the published public voters list... his farm name Strankman Farms.

Now the CWB and MNP can blame Art Mainil... Tom Jackson... or even the man in the moon about CWB election problems...

Unfortunately... it was their own fault... not the fault of those who are seeking a free, impartial, and fair democratic election.

I hope CWB Minister Alcock has the wisdom today to call for another vote... before justice and democracy are brought into disrepute in Canada.

I want to publically thank Peter Peter.Eckersley@mnp.ca for putting the tabulation on hold... for this was the right thing to do.

[les]

Tom I am still getting Grain Matters in the mail so wonder why I didnt get a ballot? Tom the whole CWB voting system is criminal I think.

[Vader]

If Mr. Mainil is unsuccessful with his request for an injunction will he be paying costs or will the farmers be hung for it?

[Vader]

Court File No.


FEDERAL COURT – TRIAL DIVISION

BETWEEN:

ARTHUR MAINIL;

PLAINTIFF

- and -

THE CANADIAN WHEAT BOARD and
MEYERS NORRIS PENNEY;

DEFENDANTS
STATEMENT OF CLAIM


TO THE DEFENDANTS:

A LEGAL PROCEEDING HAS BEEN COMMENCED AGAINST YOU by the Plaintiff. The claim made against you is set out in the following pages.

IF YOU WISH TO DEFEND THIS PROCEEDING, you or a solicitor acting for you are required to prepare a statement of defence in Form 171B prescribed by the Federal Court Rules, 1998, serve it on the plaintiff's solicitor or, where the plaintiff does not have a solicitor, serve it on the plaintiff, and file it, with proof of service, at a local office of this Court, WITHIN 30 DAYS after this statement of claim is served on you, if you are served within Canada.

If you are served in the United States of America, the period for serving and filing your statement of defence is forty days. If you are served outside Canada and the United States of America, the period for serving and filing your statement of defence is sixty days.

Copies of the Federal Court Rules, 1998, information concerning the local offices of the Court and other necessary information may be obtained on request to the Administrator of this Court at Ottawa (telephone 613-992-4238) or at any local office.

IF YOU FAIL TO DEFEND THIS PROCEEDING, judgment may be given against you in your absence and without further notice to you.

Dated at __________________, ___________________ this _____ day of December, 2004.


Issued by: _______________________

Address of Local Office:



To: The Canadian Wheat Board
Meyers Norris Penney
CLAIM

(1) The Plaintiff is an individual who resides in the district of Weyburn in the Province of Saskatchewan.

(2) The Defendant The Canadian Wheat Board is a body Corporate created by The Canadian Wheat Board Act.

(3) The Defendant Meyers Norris Penney is a partnership of chartered accountants carrying on business in the Province of Saskatchewan and they also run in Canada.

(4) Pursuant to the regulations under The Canadian Wheat Board Act an election of directors was called for districts 2,4,6,8 and 10. The director for district 2 was elected by acclamation and an election was scheduled for the remaining districts with a closing date of December 3, 2004. The Defendant The Canadian Wheat Board nominated, pursuant to the regulations under The Canadian Wheat Board Act, Peter Eckersley as the election coordinator. Peter Eckersley is a partner in the partnership Meyers Norris Penney, one of the Defendants herein.

(5) The Plaintiff was nominated and is a candidate for the position of Director in District 8 for the election closing December 3, 2004.

(6) The Defendant, The Canadian Wheat Board, provided to the Election Coordinator a list of voters on or about November 1, 2004 but such list excluded eligible producers entitled to vote and who held permit books on the day the list was sent or in the previous crop year but who delivered no board grains during such years. This list was not in compliance with the requirement of Regulation 7(1) of the Regulations respecting the Election of Directors of The Canadian Wheat Board.

(7) The list of producers provided by the Defendant, The Canadian Wheat Board, was provided to candidates by the Election Coordinator but such list did not comply with the requirement of Regulation 7(2) of the Regulations respecting the Election of Directors of The Canadian Wheat Board.

(8) The Defendant, Meyers Norris Penney, failed to comply with Regulation 17 of the Regulations respecting the Election of Directors of The Canadian Wheat Board, in that the ballot was not provided to each voter not later than 25 days before the last day of the election period.

(9) The Defendant, The Canadian Wheat Pool, provided an updated list of producers to the Defendant, Meyers Norris Penney, on or about November 26, 2004, which list purported to include the names which should have been included in the original producers list and the Defendant forwarded to the producers on such date a ballot package but such did not comply with the Regulations respecting the Election of Directors of The Canadian Wheat Board. The updated list still did not contain producers who should have been included. Some of the ballots forwarded at this date were not received by the producers prior to the close of voting and the candidates were not given the opportunity to contact such producers in their campaigns.

(10) The breach of the Defendant, The Canadian Wheat Board, was prejudicial to candidates who oppose the current administration of the Defendant, The Canadian Wheat Board, in that the excluded producers who had chosen in the past two years to produce non-board grains rather than grains sold through The Canadian Wheat Board.

(11) The Defendant, Meyers Norris Penney, breached their duty as Election Coordinator by causing to be aired advertisements which encouraged voters to support more experienced candidates, which would reflect a bias in favour of incumbent candidates.

(12) The handling of the incoming ballot letters by the Defendant, Meyers Norris Penney, by sorting and scanning the same as they arrive, in the absence of the scrutineers, is contrary to the requirements of Regulation 20(2) of Regulations respecting the Election of Directors of The Canadian Wheat Board.

(13) The Defendant, Meyers Norris Penney, breached their duty as Election Coordinator by failing to allow producers who were not included on the initial or subsequent lists to register later than 14 days prior to the final day of the election period when the subsequent list was not completed prior to such date while they continued to make additions to the list and send out ballots to individuals.

(14) The Defendant, Meyers Norris Penney, breached their duty as Election Coordinator by providing instructions to voters which failed to clarify the voting procedure and failed to indicate that the voter did not have to complete a ranking for all candidates.

(15) As a result of the said breaches of the Regulations respecting the Election of Directors of The Canadian Wheat Board and of the duties of the Election Coordinator under the same, the election process which has been conducted has not been in compliance with the requirements of law and any results are invalid. Continuing with the process of counting and publicizing the results will result in irreparable harm to some of the candidates and to the producers whom the directors of The Canadian Wheat Board represent.

(16) The Plaintiff therefore claims:

(a) An Injuction restraining the Defendant, Meyers Norris Penney, from counting or publicizing results of the election process conducted;
(b) An Order declaring the results of the election of Directors closing December 3, 2004 invalid;
(c) An Order directing the Defendant, The Canadian Wheat Board, to repeat the election of Directors in compliance with The Canadian Wheat Board Act and the Regulations respecting the Election of Directors of The Canadian Wheat Board;
(d) Costs of the within action;
(e) Such further and other relief as Counsel may advise and this Court may allow.

(17) The Plaintiff proposes that the within action be tried at Regina, Saskatchewan.

DATED at the City of Estevan, in the Province of Saskatchewan, this ______ day of December, A.D. 2004.
ORLOWSKI LAW OFFICE
Per: _______________________________
Solicitors for the Plaintiff
This Claim was Delivered by:

ORLOWSKI LAW OFFICE
Barristers & Solicitors
1215 5th Street
Estevan, Saskatchewan
S4A 0Z4

and whose address for service is the same.

Lawyer in charge of file: STEPHEN J. ORLOWSKI

Telephone: (306) 634-3353
Facsimile: (306) 634-7714

File: 69043895

[Vader]

Court File No.

FEDERAL COURT - TRIAL DIVISION


BETWEEN:

ARTHUR MAINIL;

PLAINTIFF

- and -

THE CANADIAN WHEAT BOARD and
MEYERS NORRIS PENNEY;

DEFENDANTS


AFFIDAVIT OF TOM JACKSON

I TOM JACKSON, of Edmonton, in the Province of Alberta, MAKE OATH AND
SAY THAT:

1. I am a candidate for the position of director of The Canadian Wheat Board in district 4.
2. That on November 24, 2004 I received an email from Peter Eckersley, the election coordinator, stating that there were approximately 175-200 voters being added to the voters list for each district. He advised that these voters were producers who have valid permits but who have not delivered grain against the permit in the previous two years. The email indicated that The Canadian Wheat Board disqualified them because they had no transactions with the board and was only adding them at that point because it was determined that they were in fact entitled to vote. A copy of this email is attached as Exhibit AA@ to this my Affidavit. This email confirms that these producers were intentionally excluded from the initial voters list by The Canadian Wheat Board.
3. That I had contacted Meyers Norris Penney on November 30, 2004 and spoke to Gwen Ginter who was the individual I was directed to speak to with respect to these matters. I was at that time advised by her that she had been receiving some phone calls from producers telling her that they did not yet have their ballot but that her records showed that the ballot had already been returned and was in her possession. She did not advise who these individuals were however it caused me great concern that either the ballots were being redirected or were being voted by the wrong individual or that the records being kept by the election co-coordinator were deficient.
4. That I have expressed concerns to the election co-coordinator with respect to the voters lists as I have documented, and informed the election coordinator that of the twenty-nine nominators who supported my nomination three were designated to the wrong district. Three were not provided with their ballot packages in the normal course of the election. Of these three two did receive their ballots during the week of December 1, 2004 and the third was not aware that she was not going to be included in the revised list until December 2, 2004. That individual was not allowed to vote even though she did have a valid permit and was considered a valid nominator in my candidacy.
5. I make this Affidavit in support of the application by Arthur Mainil for an injunction against The Canadian Wheat Board and the election co-coordinator and in support of his application that the election process be repeated.


Sworn before me at the City )
of Edmonton in the Province )
of Alberta, this ___ day of )
December, 2004. )
) ) _______________________
) TOM JACKSON
_______________________ )
A Notary Public in and for
The Province of Alberta

[JACKFLASH]

Vader:
How, or where did you access these last two threads? Which website were they published on?

[Vader]

I had them emailed to me by a candidate. No idea where he got them from.

[Vader]

I find that this candidate contacted Art Mainil's lawyer and the lawyer provided the electronic versions of these documents.

Case goes to court Monday Dec. 20, 2004 in Federal Court in Ottawa.

Note that the court is being asked to provide Mainil with an injunction to prevent the counting of the ballots. The election co-ordinator Meyers Norris Penny chose to halt the ballot counting process without the court having granted the injunction. This being their sense of "fair play".

[webmaster]

Farmers for Justice has information (including court documents) posted on their website now:

http://www.farmersforjustice.com

[webmaster]

The decision has now been posted on www.farmersforjustice.com