Alarming Myths and Half Truths

How does one deal with myths and half-truths?

Recently there has been a lot of talk and speculation regarding the future of the NFU-O. Much of this has come about by the musings of a few who seem to like to whisper in others’ ears that we are on the ropes or who would like to see us there.

The Tribunal has seriously erred in law by delving into a very respectable organization that has acted on behalf of farmers for decades, both in this province and nationally. The Tribunal has gone far beyond its jurisdiction, subjecting the NFU-O to scrutiny outside the powers given to the Tribunal panelists. They did not follow modern legal approaches when they narrowly defined certain sections and words within the Act. All of this led the Tribunal to a faulty conclusion, one that the NFU-O is challenging.

Part of the error was in trying to dictate where or how the NFU-O uses its funds. That is a matter for NFU-O members to decide. There are many different thoughts as to how budgeting and funding agreements should be handled within the NFU-O, as there is any company. These decisions are never part of a finite process. Change happens, and ways of responding to that change are found so the corporation can remain in business. NFU-O members, NFU-O Council, NFU Board, or Local Boards can bring forward resolutions that are voted on by the membership at either the NFU-O AGM or the National Convention, depending on the area of responsibility. There is also a Memorandum of Understanding and a Service Agreement between the NFU-O and the NFU that dictates which services are provided by the NFU-O and which are provided by the NFU. These are reviewed annually.

Since its incorporation in 2002, the NFU-O has had a President; previously he or she was called Coordinator. Either way the responsibilities are to the Ontario members. Each council or board at any level of the organization is held responsible and accountable for monies received and spent by it. All annual financial statements are externally audited. NFU-O members have the right to nominate and elect members to the NFU-O Council and as well to the NFU Board. It is total malarkey to suggest that the NFU-O does not represent Ontario farmers. It has always has and always will.

The general confusion started for all 3 GFOs when the Tribunal questioned who and how a farmer became acknowledged as a member of a GFO. This was somewhat sorted out by having farmers sign a separate document stating that they wished to become a member of a given organization. Because of the snafu created by the Tribunal, NFU-O members had to go through 3 moves before becoming a member. A GFO does not need 2,000 members to become accredited.

As to the suggestion that the NFU-O be based in Ontario, where else are the members, locals and the administration office located? The NFU-O welcomes new members and is thankful for all its current members who have jumped through these extra hoops to continue working for an even better future.

All this reminds me of an event that happened to my wife and I just after the ice storm this winter. One week after the storm, a fire alarm went off. We checked all the alarms attached to the electrical system. Nothing! We turned off the hydro for the house and still could not find out where the noise was coming from. We were uncertain as to whether there was any cause for alarm and began to wonder if the noise actually came from inside the ductwork. Had someone, during renovations, dropped an old alarm in there? Others were called and were also mystified by the reverberations of the noise within the basement. Eventually the culprit was found hiding in a box full of odds and ends. It had become damp and decided to make a racket. No fire to report. It was just a nuisance to everyone caught in the situation at the moment.

Sound familiar?

John Sutherland
NFU-O President

For Immediate Release
May 3, 2013

National Farmers Union – Ontario Refutes Tribunal Decision

The National Farmers Union – Ontario (NFU-O) refutes the recently released reasons issued by the Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Appeal Tribunal. After waiting almost 120 days for the reasons, the NFU-O Council has spent the past few weeks consulting with members and leadership involved at all levels of the organization.

Tony McQuail, Huron County farmer, NFU-O member, and Local President asserts, “It is completely inappropriate for three unelected appointees to tell our members how they should run this organization. The Tribunal has completely misunderstood the relationship between the NFU and the NFU-O, and we are not going to change this to please an unreasonable Tribunal.

McQuail who was the executive assistant to Elmer Buchanan, Minister of Agriculture, when the stable funding legislation was created recalls, “The original intent when developing the legislation was to have the NFU grandfathered in so that farmers could have a choice. The minister intended to have three organizations so that farmers could choose who best represents them.” In the ten years since accreditation was achieved, NFU-O membership has increased from 250 up to 2400 FBR members in 2012.

In its reasons, the Tribunal implies that the NFU-O is using nefarious means to access stable funding. “This is patently false,” declares John Sutherland, NFU-O president. “In Canadian government, there is a federal level with national and international jurisdiction, the provinces with their own legislatures and powers, and the municipalities, which look after the day-to-day work of making our lives better. There is cooperation between all three levels, and funding for the various projects is often shared for the betterment of all. The same is true of the NFU, NFU-O and Locals. The Tribunal has missed the point that we are all working for the betterment of Ontario farmers at every level.”

NFU-O Council also rejects the Tribunal’s representation of the relationship between the NFU and NFU-O as being top-down. “In fact, it’s exactly the opposite,” Sutherland says. “They have not understood that that the same people vote whether listed as Region 3 or NFU-O. Ontario members are the only people who can vote and direct Council by passing resolutions. Our commitment to women’s and youth participation in the organization mirrors their integral role in family farming.”

Sutherland notes that in its reasons, the Tribunal clearly states, “This is not to say that a farm organization in Ontario cannot affiliate with a national farm organization. Such affiliations are common through the agriculture industry and can provide benefits to Ontario farmers on issues of national concern.” “Given this clear direction, the NFU-O does not understand how the Tribunal could deny it accreditation,” he wonders.

NFU-O Council has requested a meeting with the Honourable Premier Wynne to discuss the issue of accreditation. Council acknowledges the assistance of Premier Wynne and Ministry of Agriculture staff who have supported the NFU-O’s position before the Tribunal especially in interpreting specific sections of the act. Due to the Tribunal’s extended delay, the ministry also applied for a writ of mandamus against the Tribunal. It was after receiving notice of this application that the Tribunal released their reasons for dismissal. The NFU-O looks forward to continuing to work with the Ministry and the Conservative and NDP parties to achieve the NFU-O’s reaccreditation.

John Sutherland concludes, “The ministry wants support for a local food act. Consumers want local food grown by small family farmers. The NFU and NFU-O in various incarnations have been supporting small local farmers in Ontario since the 1960s. You need us.”

- 30 -

For more information:

John Sutherland, NFU-Ontario President: 519-855-4651 or jjsutherland@sympatico.ca

Tony McQuail, Huron County farmer, NFU-O member, and Local President: 519-528-2493 or mcqufarm@hurontel.on.ca

Download (PDF, 92KB)

January 9, 2013

Saskatoon, SK and Lakeside, ON – The NFU-O/NFU is extremely disappointed with the OMAFRA Appeals Tribunal decision to dismiss the NFU-O’s application under the Farm Registration and Farm Organizations Funding (FRFOF) Act, 1993. The Rules of Procedure of the Tribunal state that reasons for a decision will be sent to all parties within twenty calendar days of a hearing. As of January 9, 2013, the only information the NFU-O has received from the Tribunal following our December 14, 2012 hearing is the December 19 notice of the dismissal of our application. Without access to the reasons for the negative decision, the NFU cannot respond to the rationale for that decision and cannot make informed decisions on next steps for the organization.

A couple of points should be noted in regard to the dismissal of the NFU-O’s accreditation application. First, in November 2012, the minister amended the regulations under the FRFOF Act. This allowed the other two general farm organizations to move ahead with a new application under the amended regulation. Interim orders issued by the Tribunal in November, 2012 prevented the NFU-O from moving ahead in the same manner under the amended regulations. The Minister’s legal counsel supported the NFU-O’s accreditation application at the December 14 hearing.

Second, over 2,000 farmers in Ontario have chosen the NFU-O to represent their interests since 2002, when the NFU-O was first accredited under the FRFOF Act, 1993. These Ontario farmers have now lost the option to choose the general farm organization that best represents their interests through the Farm Business Registration (FBR) program, and must undertake a time-consuming process to join the NFU.

The National Farmers Union of Canada is truly a national organization. While its head office is in Saskatoon, all areas of Canada are reflected in its policies. We stand for farmers, whether they are in PEI, New Brunswick, Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta or BC, and whether they produce potatoes, grains, beef, milk cows, vegetables or other products. Again and always, the NFU speaks in the farmer’s interest. The NFU-O’s relationship to the national organization was accepted by several Tribunal panels since 2002. The relationship with the NFU allows the NFU-O to address the concerns of Ontario family farmers at local, provincial, national and international levels.

The problem for some, whether in government, in tribunals or outside of the NFU, is that the NFU unwaveringly speaks truth to power. And this appears to be our crime. Our analysis and effort to advance the interests of farm families across the country are second to none. The quality of our research, the thoroughness of our reading of trade agreements, legislation and regulation are unmatched. We understand completely the power imbalances that seek to exploit family farmers and ordinary citizens, and as such, we have many powerful and wealthy enemies. This has never bothered us, nor slowed us down in speaking the truth.

We stand toe-to-toe with multinational grain companies, seed and chemical companies and government, and have never been silenced. Others have erroneously collaborated with these same players, either directly or passively, to the ultimate harm of farmers. The NFU has never been in that position – where it could be accused of collaborating to the ultimate harm of farmers. In fact, the NFU’s policy analysis has been prescient and proven accurate with the passage of time on issues such as cattle production, UPOV ’91, the impact of trade deals on farmers and farm debt.

Farmers are better off because of the NFU, retaining the right to save, use, exchange and sell seed, stopping the release of GE wheat, and benefiting from our efforts to retain the single desk wheat board for decades. Had other organizations been as steadfast in protecting farmers’ rights, we would still have small abattoirs, the single desk CWB, a strong Canadian Grain Commission, and much less concentration and vertical integration in the beef and hog production and packing industries or among input suppliers.

The NFU will continue both to exist and to represent farmers in Ontario, as well as across the country. We are not going away.  Ontario farmers who want the National Farmers Union to continue to advocate on their behalf, will now need to go to the hassle of joining another farm organization to get their FBR number, requesting a refund from that organization and turning around to send their membership fee directly to the NFU-O. Resources that should be used to advocate for policies that support family farms will now be used to inform farmers about how they can continue to be members of their chosen general farm organization.