Category: Human Rights

Posted on

Delay Prevents Action4Canada Case From Being Immediately Thrown Out

Action4Canada and other Plaintiffs were supposed to be in Court on February 3rd, in order to address 2 Applications (here and here) filed back in January. But due to an extremely convenient medical illness, this has been pushed back until April 5th. It’s unclear why Lawrence Wong didn’t simply step up, as he’s been a B.C. lawyer since 1987.

Private matters generally aren’t worth covering. However, their August 2021 lawsuit is a very public case, and has involved soliciting public donations since 2020. It’s fair that people know its true status: that it’s on the verge of being struck.

For all the money that was sunk into getting this lawsuit off the ground, it never stood a chance.

It feels odd to have a previous piece age so well. Back in August 2021, this site critiqued the 391 page lawsuit filed by Action4Canada in Vancouver. The basic premise was that the Notice of Civil Claim was drafted so poorly, it didn’t stand a chance in hell of making it to trial.

To be more specific, the Notice of Claim didn’t follow (at all) Rules 3-1, and 3-7 of BC Civil Procedure. These outline how pleadings are to be drafted. The logical remedy — from the Defendants’ position — would be to file a Motion or Application to strike based on Rule 9-5. This rule allows cases to be struck for a number of reasons, including for being “frivolous, vexatious, or an abuse of process”. Pleadings can also be struck if they don’t disclose a reasonable cause of action.

To make a distinction here: dismissing and striking are not the same thing. Dismissing a case usually means a Judge has made a determination about the merits of the case. By contrast, striking means attacking the pleadings themselves.

For those wondering what “struck without leave to amend” means, here’s an explanation. Sometimes, the Court will “give leave” or permission, to make changes to the pleadings (allowing content to be added or deleted). This is typically meant for very minor issues. For serious problems, such as with this lawsuit, the defects are so extensive that the Court won’t allow it.

Anyone with a rudimentary understanding of civil procedure would have looked at Action4Canada’s case and saw where this was going.

Now the other shoe has dropped, and at least 2 Applications have been filed. The first is from the various Provincial Defendants, and the other from Vancouver Island Health Authority and Providence Health Care. They are trying to strike the case for essentially the same reasons outlined on this site back in August, 2021.

To state the obvious: this doesn’t mean supporting or advocating for the medical martial law measures that have gone on in the last 2 years.

Nonetheless, it’s pretty difficult to argue with the premise of the Application. Specifically, Defendants are trying to get the case struck as being “frivolous, scandalous, vexatious, prolix, and an abuse of process”. This isn’t just written in a shoddy manner, but it’s over-the-top ridiculous.

The Claim contains many pages of completely irrelevant material, seeks remedies outside the Court’s jurisdiction, and makes allegations against people who aren’t parties (and presumably haven’t been subpoenaed). It’s also extremely disjointed and difficult to follow along with.

It’s hard to believe that 2 very senior, very experienced lawyers could draft this garbage. Combined, they have nearly 70 years of legal work completed. While the Claim does contain a fair amount of truthful information, it’s written so badly that no Judge will ever consider it.

By contrast, the Notices of Application were extremely well written, to the point, and raised many fatal defects in the Notice of Civil Claim. Again, this isn’t to defend the Horgan/Henry regime, but their lawyers make a compelling case as to why this should be thrown out. Although there are 2 Applications, the content is very similar.

3. The Claim is a prolix and convoluted document that is replete with groundless accusations against public officials, inflammatory language, and conspiracy theories.

6. The Plaintiffs’ Claim is deficient in form and substance. It is a scandalous, frivolous, and vexatious pleading that fails to meet the basic requirements for pleadings and is an abuse of the Court’s process. The Claim should be struck in accordance with Rule 9-5(1) of the Supreme Court Civil Rules, without leave to amend.

Pleadings Generally
7. Supreme Court Civil Rule (the “Rules”) 3-1 provides, in part:
Contents of notice of civil claim
(2) A notice of civil claim must do the following:
(a) set out a concise statement of the material facts giving rise to the claim;
(b) set out the relief sought by the Plaintiff against each named defendant;
(c) set out a concise summary of the legal basis for the relief sought;
…
(g) otherwise comply with Rule 3-7. [emphasis added]

8. Rule 3-7 provides, in part:
Pleading must not contain evidence
(1) A pleading must not contain the evidence by which the facts alleged in it are to be proved.
…
Pleading conclusions of law
(9) Conclusions of law must not be pleaded unless the material facts supporting them are pleaded.
…
General damages must not be pleaded
(14) If general damages are claimed, the amount of the general damages claimed must not be stated in any pleading. …

9. The function of pleadings is to clearly define the issues of fact and law to be determined by the court. The plaintiff must state, for each cause of action, the material facts. Material facts are those facts necessary for the purpose of formulating the cause of action. The defendant then sees the case to be met and may respond to the plaintiff’s allegations in such a way that the court will understand from the pleadings what issues of fact and law it will be called upon to decide.
.
Homalco Indian Band v. British Columbia, [1998] B.C.J. No. 2703 (S.C.), para. 5

10. As the Court of Appeal recently held in Mercantile Office Systems Private Ltd. v. Worldwide Warranty Life Services Inc., 2021 BCCA 362, para 44:
None of a notice of claim, a response to civil claim, and a counterclaim is a story. Each pleading contemplates and requires a reasonably disciplined exercise that is governed, in many instances in mandatory terms, by the Rules and the relevant authorities. Each requires the drafting party to “concisely” set out the “material facts” that give rise to the claim or that relate to the matters raised by the claim.
None of these pleadings are permitted to contain evidence or argument.

Application to Strike
11. Rule 9-5(1) provides:
Scandalous, frivolous or vexatious matters
(1) At any stage of a proceeding, the court may order to be struck out or amended the whole or any part of a pleading, petition or other document on the ground that
(a) it discloses no reasonable claim or defence, as the case may be,
(b) it is unnecessary, scandalous, frivolous or vexatious,
…
(d) it is otherwise an abuse of the process of the court …

12. A pleading may be struck under Rule 9-5(1) if it is plain and obvious that the pleading contravenes any of Rule 9-5(l)(a) through (d).
.
Knight V. Imperial Tobacco Canada Ltd, 2011 SCC 42 at para. 17

Rule – 9-5(l)(a)-The Notice of Civil Claim Discloses No Reasonable Claim
14. The Claim is premised upon non-justiciable questions and relies heavily upon international treaties, Criminal Code provisions, and unknown causes of action that are incapable of disclosing a reasonable cause of action for the purposes of Rule 9-5(1)(a).

16. The Plaintiffs allege numerous violations (and non-violations) of the Criminal Code that are not properly raised in a civil action (Simon v. Canada, 2015 BCSC 924, para. 45); including:

17. The Plaintiffs allege numerous violations of international legal instruments, unwritten constitutional principles, and causes of action unknown to law that are not actionable in Canadian courts (Li v. British Columbia, 2021 BCCA 256, paras. 107-109; Toronto v. Ontario, 2021 SCC 34, para. 5), including the following:

19. The general rule that facts pleaded should be accepted as true for the purposes of a strike application does not apply in a “case like this where the notice of civil claim is replete with assumptions, speculation, and in some instances, outrageous allegations. The law is clear that allegations based on assumption and speculation need not be taken as true.”
.
Willow v. Chong, 2013 BCSC 1083, para. 19
See, also, Simon v. Canada, 2015 BCSC 924 [“Simon”], para. 54

20. The Plaintiffs have failed to plead the concise statement of material facts that is necessary to support any complete cause of action. The Charter claims are inextricably bound up in a prolix, argumentative, and wildly speculative narrative of grand conspiracy that is incapable of supporting a viable cause of action. It is impossible to separate the material from the immaterial, the fabric of one potential cause of action or claim from another, or conjecture and conspiracy from asserted facts.
.
Fowler v. Canada (Attorney General), 2012 BCSC 367, para. 54
Simon, supra, paras 54-59

9-5(l)(b) The Notice of Civil Claim is Scandalous, Frivolous and Vexatious
Scandalous and Embarrassing
22. A pleading is scandalous if it does not state the real issue in an intelligible form and would require the parties to undertake useless expense to litigate matters irrelevant to the claim.
.
Gill v. Canada, 2013 BCSC 1703 [“Gill”], para. 9

23. A claim is also scandalous or embarrassing if it is prolix, includes irrelevant facts, argument or evidence, such that it is nearly impossible for the defendant to reply to the pleading and know the case to meet. Pleadings that are so prolix and confusing that it is difficult, if not impossible, to understand the case to be met, should be struck.
.
Gill, supra para. 9
Strata Plan LMS3259 v. Sze Hang Holding Inc., 2009 BCSC 473, at para. 36
Kuhn v. American Credit Indemnity Co., [1992] B.C.J. No. 953 (S.C.)

24. The Claim is a scandalous pleading because it is prolix, confusing, and nearly impossible to respond to:
a. The 391 page Claim attempts to plead dozens of causes of action and Charter breaches and seeks over 200 declarations. It is, as a result, nearly impossible to know the case to be met.
b. The Claim contains extensive passages of completely irrelevant information, including:

Rule 9-5(l)(a) and (d) – The Claim is Vexatious and an Abuse of Process
28. Little distinction exists between a vexatious action and one that is an abuse of process as the two concepts have strikingly similar features.
.
Dixon v. Stork Craft Mamifacturing Inc., 2013 BCSC 1117

29. Abuse of process is not limited to cases where a claim or an issue has already been decided in other litigation, but is a flexible doctrine applied by the court to values fundamental to the court system. In Toronto (City) v. Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 79 (CUPE), [2003] 3 S.C.R. 77, the court stated at para. 37:
.
Canadian courts have applied the doctrine of abuse of process to preclude relitigation in circumstances where the strict requirements of issue estoppel (typically the privity/mutuality requirements) are not met, but where allowing the litigation to proceed would nonetheless violate such principles as judicial economy, consistency, finality and the integrity of the administration of justice.

30. Vexatious actions include those brought for an improper purpose, including the harassment and oppression of other parties by multifarious proceedings brought for purposes other than the assertion of legitimate rights. Where it is obvious that an action cannot succeed, or if the action would lead to no possible good, or if no reasonable person can reasonably expect to obtain relief, the action is vexatious.
.
Lang Michener Lash Johnston v. Fabian, [1987] O.J. No. 355 [“Lang Michener”], at para. 19

33. The Applicants submit the Claim has been brought for an improper purpose. The Plaintiffs and their counsel must know, or ought to know, that a 391 page Claim seeking over 200 declarations concerning alleged criminal conduct and the efficacy of public health measures “cannot succeed … [and] would lead to no possible good”: Lang Michener, supra.

34. The Claim is intended, at least in part, to intimidate and harass health authorities, public officials and politicians, including the Provincial Health Officer, by advancing spurious, public allegations of criminal conduct, conflicts of interest, and ulterior motives. This intention is further corroborated by the Plaintiff Action4Canada’s simultaneous campaign to encourage individuals to serve government officials and politicians with “Notices of Liability” for their actions in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic (Affidavit #1 of Rebecca Hill, Ex. G, I).

35. The Claim is also intended, at least in part, to consolidate, publicize, and amplify COVID-19 conspiracy theories and misinformation. The Claim is a book-length tirade against the entirety of British Columbia’s response to the pandemic, with dozens of quotes from, and hundreds of footnotes to, anti-mask, anti-lockdown, and anti-vaccine resources. Both Action4Canada and its counsel have promoted the Claim online and on social media
.
(Affidavit #1 of Rebecca Hill, Ex. D, K).

36. These are improper purposes to file and prosecute a civil action. There can be no question that the Claim is an abuse of process. Permitting this litigation to proceed would violate the principles of judicial economy and the integrity of the administration of justice.

The above quotes came from the January 17 Notice of Application. Re-read the original Notice of Civil Claim and ask: what are they wrong about?

The Applications get into allegations that Action4Canada is causing harassment of Government Officials as a result of their behaviour. This is where things get more interesting:

This Application also contains an Affidavit from Rebecca Hill. She apparently works for Mark Witten, the lawyer for the B.C Defendants. She’s alleging that the “Notices of Liability” that Action4Canada provides have led to the bombardment of Government Officials. From the information provided, it’s strongly implied that this is done in order to drive up the donations.

By extension, it wouldn’t take much to argue that the entire Notice of Claim was a stunt to get more people handing out money.

Remember those notices you downloaded, filled out, and submitted? Guess what? Many of them, and the emails, are now saved as evidence by the B.C. Government.

Author’s note: since the Vancouver Court has apparently not scanned the entire Affidavit, the attachments are not available. That may be for the best, as there is contact information.

It’s also worth pointing out: the Defendants are asking for costs as well. This is pretty much inevitable, once the case is thrown out. It seems unlikely that any Plaintiff has given this serious thought. For a reference point, Adam Skelly was hit with a $15,000 cost award, just for trying to open his restaurant. Given the size and vexatious nature of the Action4Canada case, it’s quite possible for everyone to be on the hook for several thousand dollars each. Keep in mind, court costs aren’t dischargeable in bankruptcy.

Once more, this isn’t an attempt to defend the B.C. Government. That said, the Claim was written in such a convoluted way, it never stood a chance. One has to ask why it really happened.

Back in October, Action4Canada posted a reply to the response they received from the B.C. Government. It’s amusing that they act indignant that Rule 9-5 was quoted verbatim. Spoiler: if you want a Court to toss a case, you have to cite the law that allows it.

Whether this case is decided on April 5, or is set back again, the ultimate result is the same. Once a Judge sits down with the lawsuit, it’s getting struck without leave to amend.

It’s not just the B.C. case that will be struck. The Ontario ones will be soon as well. Many will remember this filing from July 6, 2020. More than a year and a half later, there are still no defenses filed, no motions, no applications, no scheduled appearances.

In fact, under Rules 14 and 24 of civil procedure in Ontario, all of these idling cases could probably be dismissed at any time for unnecessary delay.

One other thing to consider is the Statute of Limitations. For most things in Ontario and B.C., a person has 2 years to commence legal action. Now, if a case is filed, but sits for years and is simply dismissed, it may be too late to start another. This doesn’t stop the clock. Something to think about.

Prediction: once the B.C. case is struck (for the reasons listed above), the Ford regime will then make similar Applications for the Ontario cases.

Other than wasting a lot of time and money, what has this actually accomplished?

COURT DOCUMENTS
(1) A4C Notice of Civil Claim
(2) A4C Response October 14
(3) A4C Legal Action Update, October 14th 2021 Action4Canada
(4) A4C Notice of Application January 12
(5) A4C Notice of Application January 17
(6) A4C Affidavit
(7) A4C Response VIH-Providence January 17
(8) A4C Response to Application BC Ferries January 19

Posted on

Canadian Trucking Alliance Raising Lots Of Questions Lately

Underway right now a very, VERY large group of truck drivers is heading to Ottawa to protest mandatory vaccinations and to demand that policy be rescinded. Now, do their associations have their backs? Not in the slightest.

The Canadian Trucking Alliance made waves recently when they condemned the planned “convoy to Ottawa”. From their own statement:

The vast majority of the Canadian trucking industry is vaccinated with the overall industry vaccination rate among truck drivers closely mirroring that of the general public. Accordingly, most of our nation’s hard-working truck drivers are continuing to move cross-border and domestic freight to ensure our economy continues to function.

The Canadian Trucking Alliance (CTA) does not support and strongly disapproves of any protests on public roadways, highways, and bridges. CTA believes such actions – especially those that interfere with public safety – are not how disagreements with government policies should be expressed. Members of the trucking industry who want to publicly express displeasure over government policies can choose to hold an organized, lawful event on Parliament Hill or contact their local MP. What is not acceptable is disrupting the motoring public on highways and commerce at the border.

“The Government of Canada and the United States have now made being vaccinated a requirement to cross the border. This regulation is not changing so, as an industry, we must adapt and comply with this mandate,” said CTA president Stephen Laskowski. “The only way to cross the border, in a commercial truck or any other vehicle, is to get vaccinated.”

Instead of supporting the people who pay their salaries, the C.T.A. makes the suggestion to “call your Member of Parliament”. That’s interesting, considering that all parties are pretty much on board with the same thing. Like so many unions and association groups before, the C.T.A. seems content to throw the workers under the bus. On the surface this is alarming.

The C.T.A does not exist in isolation. Provincial counterparts make up this group, giving it more political power, and ability to influence policy.

Another red flag is that several of the groups that make up the Canadian Trucking Alliance have been receiving CEWS, the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy. This includes British Columbia, Alberta, and the Atlantic Provinces. Right there, loyalty to the members is tested against the best interests of their employees.

Yes, this is beating a dead horse, but plenty of industries are taking the blood money. This includes: restaurants and hotels, political parties, law firms, more law firms, and churches, to name a few.

In November 2020, the Manitoba Trucking Association received a $125,000 grant from the Western Economic Diversification Program. The stated goal was helping companies adapt to the “pandemic” circumstances in their businesses. Previously, they had taken $268,000 back in 2014. The Atlantic Provinces Trucking Associaton received $37,500 back in 2013 from the Federal Government.

In a move that should surprise no one, the C.T.A. regularly lobbies the Federal Government on a number of issues. Readers of this site should expect this. One item to note is immigration:

“Immigration – related to temporary foreign worker program and support for demand driven immigration allowances specific to assisting shortage of qualified truck drivers.”

While the C.T.A. is putting the screws to its own people, and supporting vaccine mandates, they are also calling on Ottawa to make it easier to import a replacement workforce. Presumably, the people coming into the country will only be able to as a condition of taking the shots (2 or 3 so far). The Saskatchewan Trucking Association — a member group — is also pushing to have an increase in immigration to import more truck drivers. So did their Ontario counterpart in 2019. What sort of picture are we getting here?

[1] Force Canadians out, or to retire, with mandatory medical procedure.
[2] Import new truckers who would be willing to work for less, and take the shots.

Unfortunately, this is hardly the only industry where this is happening.

If you think the trucking groups are only lobbying Federally, you would be very much mistaken. It continues on:

TIME GOVERNMENT BRANCH AMOUNT
2018 WorkSafeBC $1,826,134
2019 Employment and Social Development Canada $22,000
2019 Ministry of Transportation & Infrastructure $1,400,000
2019 Natural Resources Canada $20,000
2019 WorkSafeBC $1,393,716
2020-01-15 to 2021-12-31 WorkSafeBC $4,641,567
2020-03-31 to 2021-03-31 Transportation and Infrastructure $1,540,000

The British Columbia Trucking Association (which is part of C.T.A.) has regularly been receiving money both Provincial and Federal Governments. That may explain why there is no real opposition to forcing the truckers to take the experimental shots. In fact, C.T.A. put out a joint statement with Ottawa on the topic of vaccinating workers.

Why does the Canadian Trucking Alliance support mandatory vaccines, and object to the protests in Ottawa? Maybe, just maybe, their interests aren’t with the individual truckers. Perhaps, money does influence policy positions.

Taking a quick look through CEWS and other Federal grants, there are plenty of trucking companies who are receiving handouts as well. This would explain why so many are on board with vaccine mandates.

Instead of looking out for workers, the C.T.A. touts the advantage of a projected driver shortage claiming it will ultimately drive up wages. Sure, except for the people who were let go.

(1) https://cantruck.ca/canadian-trucking-alliance-statement-to-those-engaged-in-road-border-protests/
(2) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/hacc/srch/pub/advncdSrch
(3) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/habs/cews/srch/pub/dsplyBscSrch?request_locale=en
(4) https://search.open.canada.ca/en/gc/id/wd-deo,GC-WD-DEO-2020-2021-Q3-1103,current
(5) https://search.open.canada.ca/en/gc/id/wd-deo,GC-WD-DEO-2013-2014-Q4-00142,current
(6) https://search.open.canada.ca/en/gc/id/acoa-apeca,276-2013-2014-Q1-00004,current
(7) https://lobbycanada.gc.ca/app/secure/ocl/lrs/do/vwRg?cno=622&regId=916231#regStart
(8) https://www.lobbyistsregistrar.bc.ca/app/secure/orl/lrs/do/vwRg?cno=596&regId=56562530
(9) https://www.sasklobbyistregistry.ca/search-the-registry/registration-details/?id=a541fccd-1c72
(10) https://www.canada.ca/en/transport-canada/news/2022/01/declaration-commune-des-ministresalghabra-oregan-et-qualtrough-et-du-president-de-lalliance-canadienne-du-camionnage.html
(11) https://cantruck.ca/vaccine-mandate-leading-to-better-driver-pay-carrier/
(12) https://ctacanada.com/quality-service/

(A) https://canucklaw.ca/media-subsidies-and-govt-financing/
(B) https://canucklaw.ca/media-controlled-opposition/
(C) https://canucklaw.ca/groups-calling-for-vaccine-passports-heavily-subsidized-by-government/
(D) https://canucklaw.ca/trudeau-using-taxpayer-money-to-subsidize-opposition-parties-liberals-too/
(E) https://canucklaw.ca/law-firms-bar-associations-receiving-canada-emergency-wage-subsidy-cews/
(F) https://canucklaw.ca/conflicting-out-its-not-just-cews-that-the-lawyers-are-receiving/
(G) https://canucklaw.ca/following-the-money-why-are-churches-really-pushing-the-vaxx-agenda

Posted on

Compilation Video Of “Pandemic” Psychological Warfare Against Society (Extended Also Available)

A video of nearly 90 minutes has been put together for your viewing. Yes, it’s a bit glitchy in a few places, but this is the first attempt something this size. Nothing here should be all that surprising. A page will be going up soon with all of the supporting links for more information.

Given YouTube’s rather “questionable” (or non-existent) commitment to free speech, here it is posted on Odysee. Everyone who sees it is encouraged to save and/or mirror it. The censorship gods strike hard and fast.

The extended version is also posted, which contains material that was missing from the previous video. Here it is on Odysee.

Considering how easy most of this was to find, the only explanation for it not being reported in the mainstream press is that they have been bought off. This applies to “conservative” media and to the vast majority of self-described independents.

Thank you to a number of people who have helped out over the last year, and in particular, Fred and Andy. Christine and Shelly also deserve a shoutout for their work.

Happy New Year, everyone!

Take care of yourselves, and your families.

(1) https://odysee.com/@CanuckLaw:8/CV-Is-A-Real-Danger:f
(2) https://odysee.com/@CanuckLaw:8/CV-Hoax-Compilation-02:d
(3) https://www.bitchute.com/video/MmFDnULRHs1L/
(4) https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/fois-reveal-that-health-science-institutions-around-the-world-have-no-record-of-sars-cov-2-isolation-purification/
(5) https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCRBSHsj0RvI-IYO0qUmMbvA
(6) https://www.amazon.ca/dp/B095Y515XK
(7) https://www.amazon.ca/dp/B09BCNP48J

Posted on

Ottawa’s Bipartisan Love Of Giving Aga Khan Money

It’s all just an act.

Remember the times in recent years when Members of Parliament pretended to be outraged about Trudeau being so close to Aga Khan? Maybe they were just upset about not getting invited themselves.

One would think that there’d be more of a stink about the sheer amount of money the public was handing over without any sort of democratic mandate or referendum. This isn’t to defend Trudeau in any way, but this trip isn’t exactly the the worst of it.

Strange that the so-called “conservative” media would never write about what was really going on. Guess they need to prop up their side.

Note: there were 2 different search engines used to compile this article, which gave overlapping, albeit different results. One was from Open Search, and the other from the Federal Lobbying Registry. Both will be included to show all figures.

DATE BODY ISSUING AMOUNT
Oct. 29, 2014 Global Affairs Canada $12,000,000
Mar. 18, 2015 Global Affairs Canada $293,892
Mar. 30, 2015 Global Affairs Canada $1,500,000
Apr. 21, 2015 Global Affairs Canada $10,625,000
Nov. 30, 2015 Global Affairs Canada $71,914
Dec. 22, 2015 International Development Assistance Program $55,000,000
Feb. 22, 2016 Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada $125,985
Mar. 31, 2016 Global Affairs Canada $10,533,873
Mar. 31, 2016 International Development Assistance Program $24,964,678
Mar. 31, 2016 Global Affairs Canada $1,250,000
Mar. 31, 2016 Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada $312,838
Oct. 27, 2016 Canadian Heritage $12,837
Jan. 11, 2017 Global Affairs Canada $7,000,000
Jan. 12, 2017 Global Affairs Canada $12,000,000
Oct. 1, 2018 Global Affairs Canada $19,380,037
Apr. 1, 2019 Canadian Heritage $60,052
Jun. 29, 2019 Canadian Heritage $8,790
Dec. 6, 2019 Global Affairs Canada $59,792
Feb. 21, 2020 Global Affairs Canada $47,000,000
Apr. 1, 2020 Canadian Heritage $40,000
Jun. 30, 2020 Canadian Heritage $6,590
Nov. 18, 2020 Global Affairs Canada $2,000,000
Nov. 20, 2020 Global Affairs Canada $27,785
Mar. 29, 2021 Employment and Social Development Canada $100,000
Apr. 1, 2021 Canada Arts Presentation Fund $25,000

Next, we come to the Federal Lobbying Registry. It outlines amounts handed out annually, and where they came from, but doesn’t specify the specific assignment of project involved.

YEAR BODY ISSUING AMOUNT
2010 Canadian International Development Agency $19,838,431
2011 Canadian International Development Agency $16,912,457
2011 Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada $180,949
2012 Canadian International Development Agency $21,997,201
2012 Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada $1,575,197
2013 Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Canada $410,481
2013 International Development Research Centre $169,000
2014 Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Canada $50,513,370
2014 International Development Research Centre $594,190
2015 Global Affairs Canada $46,796,700
2015 International Development Research Centre $578,585
2016 Global Affairs Canada $48,966,065
2016 International Development Research Centre $396,299
2017 Global Affairs Canada $36,737,220
2017 International Development Research Centre $1,425,000
2018 Global Affairs Canada $31,354,539
2018 International Development Research Centre $560,972
2020 Global Affairs Canada $22,735,954
2020 International Development Research Centre $363,718

The Lobbying Registry, likely through a gap in registration records, doesn’t list anything for 2019. And information for 2021 isn’t yet available. However, it does still show $200 million since 2010. And it doesn’t stop there.

According to the Canada Revenue Agency, the grants go back to 2003, although it doesn’t specify how much. What has this group gotten in total? It’s over $200 million, but unclear how much more. Strange, it’s not like Canadians could have used that or anything.

Wild idea: but maybe politicians in Ottawa feign outrage over a $200,000 trip so that the public won’t notice that they’ve handed out some $200 million to a foreign NGO. Just putting it out there.

(1) https://search.open.canada.ca/en/gc/
(2) https://search.open.canada.ca/en/gc/?sort=score%20desc&page=1&search_text=aga%20khan#
(3) https://lobbycanada.gc.ca/app/secure/ocl/lrs/do/advSrch
(4) https://lobbycanada.gc.ca/app/secure/ocl/lrs/do/advSrch?V_SEARCH.command=refineCategory&V_TOKEN=1234567890&V_SEARCH.scopeCategory=solr.facetName.documentType%3D
(5) https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/charities-giving/other-organizations-that-issue-donation-receipts-qualified-donees/other-qualified-donees-listings/list-foreign-charities-that-have-received-a-gift-majesty-right-canada.html
(6) https://twitter.com/erinotoole/status/1470506345455628290
(7) https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/justin-trudeau-vacation-to-aga-khans-island-broke-ethics-rules-1790408

FOR SOME EXTRA READING
(A) https://www.civilianintelligencenetwork.ca/2020/04/23/the-united-nations-aga-khans-throne-part-i-money-laundering/
(B) https://www.civilianintelligencenetwork.ca/2019/04/12/the-aga-khans-stranglehold-on-alberta/
(C) https://www.civilianintelligencenetwork.ca/2020/05/22/the-united-nations-aga-khans-throne-part-2-pluralism-and-banking/

Posted on

Conflicting Out? It’s Not Just CEWS That The Lawyers Are Receiving….

Apparently, Canada doesn’t have nearly enough lawyers, and their employment has to be subsidized via the CSJ Program. This stands for “Canada Summer Jobs“, and results in taxpayers covering part of the wages. While there are legitimate sectors where this could help, most would agree that law firms shouldn’t be getting handouts to prop up their summer hires. The grants made in April 2021 and Summer 2020 related to CSJ.

Description:
Through the application of national and local priorities, the CSJ program seeks to provide youth, particularly those who face barriers to employment with access to work opportunities. Funded employers must demonstrate that they are providing quality work experiences for youth that provide opportunities to develop and improve their skills.

Note: this is separate from CEWS, which hundreds of law firms are also getting.

Something that has come up many times is the question: “Where are the lawyers?” Given this fake pandemic has eroded basic liberties and resulted in martial law, that’s a fair question. Do none of them have any interest in looking out for their own interests, or those of their families?

Others have complained they can’t find a lawyer willing to take their case, such as for challenging vaccine passports in their employment. Again, this seems very odd.

A previous article outlined how hundreds of lawyers and their firms were receiving the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy, or CEWS. A reader commented that it’s quite possible that many firms were “conflicted out”, or retained in some fashion, something mused about here. This would prevent them from acting against their donors — the Federal Government — in other areas.

As it turns out, there may be something to the speculation that Ottawa has all the law firms on their payroll. At least, that’s how it looks.

If we search “law corporation”, or “law firm”, or “barrister”, or related headings, we can see that the Federal Government has been giving out small contributions as of late. In other words, these firms have an ongoing or at least recent business relationship with Ottawa, and likely wouldn’t be able to pursue cases against them. A serious question: would handing out grants in this manner be enough to establish a relationship, at least for this purpose?

Obviously, this is in reference to the medical martial law measures enacted upon the citizens over the last 2 years. Where are the lawyers? How strange that none of these honourable members have any interest in flexing their muscles. Take a look:

LAWYER/LAW FIRM DATE AMOUNT
Abi Singam Law Professional Corporation Jun. 8, 2020 $23,520
Agozzino Law Professional Corporation Apr. 26, 2021 $2,138
Alison Lester, Barrister & Solicitor May 10, 2021 $2,994
Andrea Parliament Law Professional Corporation Jun. 22, 2020 $7,840
Axess Law Professional Corporation Jun. 1, 2020 $175,000
Ben-zvi Barrister & Solicitor P.C. Apr. 26, 2021 $2,994
Bradley Law Professional Corporation Apr. 26, 2021 $2,994
Brenda Leigh Bell Law Offices Professional Corporation Apr. 26, 2021 $5,987
Chris Carta Law Corporation Jul. 27, 2020 $57,000
Chugh Law Professional Corporation Jun. 22, 2020 $7,840
Chugh Law Professional Corporation Apr. 26, 2021 $7,483
Cobbett & Cotton Law Corporation Apr. 26, 2021 $3,192
Cody Reedman Law Corporation Jun. 11, 2020 $60,000
Conron Law Professional Corporation Apr. 26, 2021 $3,742
Corporation of the County of Middlesex Apr. 26, 2021 $2,994
Costa Law Firm Professional Corporation Apr. 26, 2021 $4,490
David Gorman,Barrister & Solicitor Apr. 26, 2021 $2,994
Denise Badley, Barrister & Solicitor Apr. 26, 2021 $6,842
Devadas Law Professional Corporation Jul. 13, 2020 $3,920
Devadas Law Professional Corporation Apr. 26, 2021 $3,742
DH Professional Corporation, Barristers & Solicitors May 19, 2020 $3,920
DH Professional Corporation, Barristers & Solicitors Apr. 26, 2021 $2,994
Elliott Law Professional Corporation Apr. 26, 2021 $2,887
Gobran Law Firm Professional Corporation Apr. 26, 2021 $8,980
Grinhaus law firm professional corporation Apr. 26, 2021 $2,994
Harmony Collaborative Law Corporation Nov. 18, 2020 $32,368
Henry Business Law Professional Corporation Apr. 26, 2021 $2,940
Holder Professional Law Corporation Dec. 2, 2020 $34,157
Hugh G Mclean Mclean & Associates Barrister Apr. 26, 2021 $2,994
John McLellan Jun. 22, 2020 $3,920
Keystone Law Group Law Corporation Jun. 12, 2020 $4,088
Keystone Law Group Law Corporation Apr. 26, 2021 $6,840
Keyvan Shojania Law Corporation Aug. 11, 2020 $60,000
KN Law Professional Corporation Apr. 26, 2021 $2,887
Lakin Afolabi Law Professional Corporation May 19, 2020 $3,920
Lavigueur Law Professional Corporation Apr. 26, 2021 $2,994
Law Office of Washim Ahmed, Barristers & Solicitors Apr. 26, 2021 $7,483
Lazin Professional Law Corporation Jun. 14, 2020 $60,000
LeBlond, Barrister & Solicitor Jun. 12, 2020 $4,088
McLean Law Professional Corporation Jul. 13, 2020 $3,920
Melanson Barrister & Solicitor Inc. Apr. 26, 2021 $2,719
Momentum Business Law Professional Corporation Jun. 22, 2020 $3,920
Momentum Business Law Professional Corporation Apr. 26, 2021 $11,973
Open Door (Granville) Law Corporation Jul. 3, 2020 $12,264
Pabani Law Corporation Jun. 10, 2020 $60,000
Pearson Law Professional Corporation Jun. 12, 2020 $3,170
Penner Law Corporation Apr. 26, 2021 $3,591
Primeau Law Professional Corporation May 25, 2020 $3,920
Primeau Law Professional Corporation Apr. 26, 2021 $2,994
Rabideau Law Professional Corporation May 19, 2020 $7,840
Rabideau Law Professional Corporation Apr. 26, 2021 $2,994
Racine Law Professional Corporation May 10, 2021 $2,994
Ramachandran Law Professional Corporation Apr. 26, 2021 $22,449
Ramsay Law Office Professional Corporation May 19, 2020 $3,920
Ramsay Law Office Professional Corporation Apr. 26, 2021 $2,807
Rupinder Garcha Barrister & Solicitor May 25, 2020 $3,920
Ryan Green Law Office Professional Corporation Apr. 26, 2021 $3,742
Sari Rose Law Professional Corporation Apr. 26, 2021 $5,987
Saroha Law Professional Corporation Apr. 26, 2021 $5,987
Shawan Das Law Corporation Jun. 21, 2021 $40,000
Simoes Law Corporation Apr. 26, 2021 $3,192
Sukh Law Professional Corporation Apr. 26, 2021 $7,483
Sullivan Law Professional Corporation May 19, 2020 $7,840
Sullivan Law Professional Corporation Apr. 26, 2021 $17,960
Tomi Olutunfese Law Office, Professional Corporation Apr. 26, 2021 $2,346
Walker Law Professional Corporation Jun. 6, 2021 $16,500
Winright Law Corporation Apr. 26, 2021 $9,576

A lot of these grants are for very small amounts, such as a few thousand dollars. Still, it appears that it would establish a connection and at least prevent these parties from moving against the Government. The above list is not exhaustive, and only covers some Federal grants. Any from the Provinces wouldn’t be included here.

Even if it doesn’t prohibit firms from taking such cases, how many lawyers are going to bite the hands that feed them?

The Summer Jobs Program is supposed to provide work for youth with barriers to employment. It seems bizarre that law firms would be accepting a pittance to help people out. Not that there’s anything wrong with helping people get work, but why them?

To add the disclaimer: yes, these grants could be completely legitimate. It could be that it changes nothing in the big picture. That being said, it seems absurd to hand out such small amounts to so many firms for a program that doesn’t seem to require them. Moving on….

There’s also a small section on “Lawyers Without Borders”. Looking a bit more deeply into that, we come to this information:

DATE AMOUNT DESCRIPTION
May 22, 2015 $4,572,363 ?
Oct. 27, 2015 $857,003 ?
Mar. 31, 2017 $4,640,253 Peace In Columbia
Aug. 30, 2019 $2,231,269 Stabilization In Mali
Feb. 23, 2021 $1,104,110 Victims’ Rights In Columbia
Mar. 16, 2021 $2,500,000 Human Rights In Guatemala
Jun. 1, 2021 $15,895,955 Peace/Justice In Mali

This is interesting as it creates the possibilities of many more lawyers being entangled in conflicts of interest. There’s also little to no accounting for where the money goes.

Lawyers Without Borders has also partnered with Doctors of the World, in order to bring sexual weirdness and abortion to the 3rd World. What a great use of your tax dollars.

Complicating things even more, Catherine McKenna started “Canadian Lawyers Abroad“, before getting into office. This is an NGO designed to get new graduates international experience. This could create many more conflicts, depending on where members end up working later on. She’s also apparently buddies with Justice Jasmine Akbarali, who’s ruled on several lockdown cases already.

Dominic LeBlanc’s choices of judicial appointments come across as nepotism, but hey, who needs independence anyway? His support for free speech doesn’t seem all that strong either.

This isn’t a complete list, but it’s clear there are a lot of firms that have some connections or interests that would prevent them from challenging these anti-freedom dictates. It’s more than just the emergency wage subsidies, although those factor in. And one has to wonder how much of this was planned in advance.

There are also legitimate concerns about how fair hearings are on this subject.

Finally, it’s worth a reminder that there’s no real opposition in Ottawa because Trudeau’s “opponents” are subsidized by him, and support vaccine passports. Before getting into politics, Erin O’Toole worked at Heenan Blaikie, the law firm where Chretien and Trudeau Sr. were partners. Democracy is also non-existent in B.C.

As for an independent media…. check the links below.

(1) https://search.open.canada.ca/en/gc/
(2) https://www.canada.ca/en/employment-social-development/news/2021/12/canada-summer-jobs-2022.html
(3) https://search.open.canada.ca/en/gc/id/dfatd-maecd,064-2021-2022-Q2-040,current
(4) https://www.samaracanada.com/samarablog/blog-post/samara-main-blog/2015/07/23/2015-epcitizen-nominee-jasmine-akbarali
(5) https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/judicial-appointments-dominic-leblanc-family-friends-political-patronage-1.5191054
(6) https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/covid-misinformation-disinformation-law-1.5532325
(7) https://canucklaw.ca/law-firms-bar-associations-receiving-canada-emergency-wage-subsidy-cews/
(8) https://canucklaw.ca/catherine-mckenna-co-founder-of-ngo-canadian-lawyers-abroad/
(9) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/hacc/cews/srch/pub/bscSrch
(10) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/habs/cews/srch/pub/dsplyBscSrch?request_locale=en

RESOURCES FOR MEDIA ACTING AS COUNTER-INTELLIGENCE
(A) https://canucklaw.ca/media-subsidies-to-counter-online-misinformation-groups-led-by-political-operatives/
(B) https://canucklaw.ca/taxpayer-grants-to-fight-misinformation-in-media-including-more-pandemic-bucks/
(C) https://canucklaw.ca/counter-intelligence-firms-to-influence-elections-canada-and-abroad-registered-as-charities/
(D) https://canucklaw.ca/more-pandemic-bucks-for-disinformation-prevention-locally-and-abroad-civix/
(E) https://canucklaw.ca/disinfowatch-ties-to-atlas-network-connected-to-lpc-political-operatives/
(F) https://canucklaw.ca/phac-supporting-science-up-first-online-counter-misinformation-group/
(G) https://canucklaw.ca/rockefeller-spends-13-5-million-to-combat-misinformation-in-u-s-elsewhere/
(H) https://canucklaw.ca/poynter-self-claimed-factchecking-group-funded-by-media-giants/
(I) https://canucklaw.ca/journalism-trust-initiative-trusted-news-initiative-project-origin-the-trust-project/
(J) https://canucklaw.ca/coalition-for-content-provenance-and-authenticity-c2pa-project-origin-content-authenticity-initiative/
(K) https://canucklaw.ca/public-media-alliance-brussels-declaration-protecting-journalists-media-freedom/
(L) Institute For Strategic Dialogue: Partners, Funding

EVEN MORE MEDIA SUBSIDIES
(A) https://canucklaw.ca/media-1-unifor-denies-crawling-into-bed-with-government/
(B) https://canucklaw.ca/media-in-canada-obedient-to-govt-covid-narrative-largely-because-of-subsidies/
(C) https://canucklaw.ca/postmedia-subsidies-connections-may-explain-lack-of-interest-in-real-journalism/
(D) https://canucklaw.ca/postmedia-gets-next-round-of-pandemic-bucks-from-taxpayers-in-2021/
(E) https://canucklaw.ca/nordstar-capital-torstar-corp-metroland-media-group-more-subsidies-pandemic-bucks/
(F) https://canucklaw.ca/aberdeen-publishing-sells-out-takes-those-pandemic-bucks-to-push-narrative/
(G) https://canucklaw.ca/many-other-periodicals-receiving-the-pandemic-bucks-in-order-to-push-the-narrative/
(H) https://canucklaw.ca/cv-37i-tri-city-news-pulls-article-where-bonnie-henry-admits-false-positives-could-overwhelm-system/

Posted on

Ontario Divisional Court Rules Requirement For Teachers To Be Proficient In Math Is Unconstitutional

There is a group that’s asking for handouts in order to water down the standards required to teach in Ontario. Unfortunately, it seems that they’ve had success.

The Ontario Teacher Candidates’ Council is an NGO that claims to advocate on behalf of (potential) teachers looking to get certified in Ontario. The group states that it was created largely in response to the new requirement that new teachers have a certain level of proficiency prior to getting to teach students. The online begging started quickly.

Is this really in the best interests of students? Is eliminating a pretty reasonable requirement in the name of “diversity and equity” the way to go about this? It’s pretty alarming that (apparently) large numbers of people can obtain and undergraduate degree, and a bachelor of education, and have a limited grasp of mathematics.

This also highlights a serious flaw with the legal system in Canada. NGOs can commence lawsuits claiming they have a “public interest standing”, and try to get the laws changed to suit their political ideologies. Providing the papers are worded properly, this is routinely down. Courts often grant such standing.

The Ontario Teacher Candidates’ Council was founded in early October [2019] largely in response to the Math Proficiency test which was made a mandatory requirement for the qualification of new teachers. According to the OCT, “On August 20, 2019 two regulations were filed: Regulation 271/19, Proficiency in Mathematics, under the Ontario College of Teachers Act, and Regulation 272/19, Objects of the Office under the Education Quality and Accountability Office Act, 1996. As a result certification requirements were updated to ensure that Ontario teachers are prepared for the modern demands of a changing society and increasingly dynamic learning environment.”

We believe that this test is not equitable, fair, justified or backed by data. The EQAO office has been rushed into creating a massive test in just months. In the past, EQAO has taken 3 years to roll out new tests. There is no definitive evidence which suggests that new teachers will become more effective math instructors as a result of this test, nor that students will perform better in math as a result of this. The last government-implemented test for teachers cost taxpayers $22 million and the results were mostly abandoned. This new legislation is costing tens-of-millions of dollars for a test which decides the futures of thousands of Ontarians. This new legislation comes to teacher candidates who have spent tens of thousands of dollars on their education and carefully planned the steps they would need to take to reach their goals. These thousands of jobs deeply affect the economy and future of our great province. Read our Email Templates on the Newsletter page to see our questions and arguments regarding this test. Help us, the people, even if our government will not.

It’s interesting that this group claims there’s no evidence that such requirements help. From the looks of their members, most probably couldn’t pass an introductory statistics course.

In February 2020, there was a podcast for “Education Is A Right“. Apparently, the right to a QUALITY education isn’t that important. If this really was about the students, there would be efforts to attract, retain, and upgrade the best teachers available. Instead, this group takes the opposite approach.

This isn’t something that anyone should be proud of. The Ontario Divisional Court essentially says that pandering to the anti-white diversity crowd is more important than providing quality education. Quite simply, whites passing at too high a rate implies systemic racism.

Parents would be up in arms if they were made aware of this. That said, it seems doubtful that there has been any publicity within those circles. At least the College of Teachers had enough sense to reject this idiocy.

One would think that this group would want to do what they can to ensure people of all groups are able to pass basic proficiency testing in math. However, that’s not the way they go. Turning to the ruling:

Significant Disparities in Success Rates
[32] The EQAO collected demographic information about Field Test takers through the voluntary demographic questionnaire which revealed significant disparities in success rates based on test-takers’ race, language and disabilities.

[33] In particular, the Field Test demographic data showed that non-White candidates writing in French were only successful 55 percent of the time, whereas White candidates writing in French were successful 84 percent of the time. Candidates who identified as belonging to non-White ethno-racial groups (such as African, Indigenous, Latino and Middle Eastern) failed at a significantly higher rate than White candidates. Candidates who indicated they had a cognitive disability failed the Field Test at over twice the rate of candidates without a disability.

Apparently there are differences in the average cognitive abilities between groups. The solution is obviously to reduce (or eliminate) standards, to ensure there is no difference.

Also, let’s not mince words. This isn’t just an effort to dumb down the teaching profession. This is an attempt to reduce the number of whites, and replace them with non-whites.

What Is the Appropriate Remedy?
[161] A declaration will issue that the Mathematics Proficiency Test and the legislative provisions that create it infringe s. 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the infringement cannot be justified under s. 1. Specifically, the Proficiency in Mathematics regulation (O. Reg 271/19), as amended, and s. 18(1)(c) of the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996, S.O. 1996, c.12 are of no force or effect.

[162] A declaration will issue that the Ontario College of Teachers shall grant certification to teacher candidates who have not passed the Mathematics Proficiency Test (or shall grant full certification in the case of teacher candidates whose certification is conditional on passing the Mathematics Proficiency Test) but have otherwise met all other certification requirements.

Conclusion
[167] The application for judicial review is granted. The following relief is ordered:
(a) The Mathematics Proficiency Test violates s. 15(1) of the Charter, is not justified under s. 1, and is unconstitutional;
.
(b) O. Reg. 271/19, Proficiency in Mathematics, as amended, under the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996, S.O. 1996, c.12 is unconstitutional and of no force and effect;
.
(c) Paragraph s. 18(1)(c) of the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996, S.O. 1996, c.12 is unconstitutional and of no force or effect;
.
(d) The Ontario College of Teachers shall grant certification to teacher candidates who have not passed the Mathematics Proficiency Test (or shall grant full certification in the case of teacher candidates whose certification is conditional on passing the Mathematics Proficiency Test) but who have otherwise met all other certification requirements; and
.
(e) The Respondent shall pay the Applicants $90,000 in costs of the application.

Basically, the Ontario Divisional Court ruled that it was discriminatory in order to force all teachers to have a certain mathematical background.

And on top of it, a $90,000 costs award was also handed down. Now, will the donors get a refund for their contributions, or will the group owners just pocket it?

Bella Lewkowicz is a French teacher with Ottawa-Carleton District School Board. The group itself boasts some pretty impressive educational credentials. It’s baffling then why they would work like this to dumb down the teaching profession. Is it guilt? Self-hatred? Or is this some more destructive impulse?

(1) https://www.otcc.ca/
(2) https://www.otcc.ca/get-involved
(3) Home _ Ontario Teacher Candidates’ Council
(4) https://www.otffeo.on.ca/en/news/ontario-court-declares-that-the-ontario-math-proficiency-test-is-unconstitutional/
(5) https://twitter.com/OTCC19
(6) https://www.gofundme.com/f/otcc-legal-fund?utm_campaign=p_cp_url&utm_medium=os&utm_source=customer
(7) https://twitter.com/otffeo/status/1471940285210968070
(8) https://www.otffeo.on.ca/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2021/12/2021-12-16-OTCC-v-Ontario-FINAL-signed-by-all.pdf
(9) Court Ruling Divisional Court 2021.12.16 OTCC v Ontario FINAL signed by all
(10) http://edisaright.ca/episode-31-student-teachers-challenge-new-math-test-in-ontario
(11) https://www.linkedin.com/in/bella-lewkowicz-5232951/