The Prime Minister announces changes in the senior ranks of the Public Service
Ottawa, Ontario
The Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, today announced the following changes in the senior ranks of the Public Service:
Nathalie G. Drouin, currently Deputy Minister of Justice and Deputy Attorney General of Canada, becomes Deputy Clerk of the Privy Council and Associate Secretary to the Cabinet, effective August 23, 2021.
François Daigle, currently Associate Deputy Minister of Justice, becomes Deputy Minister of Justice and Deputy Attorney General of Canada, effective August 23, 2021.
Christyne Tremblay, currently Deputy Clerk of the Privy Council, Associate Secretary to the Cabinet, and Deputy Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, becomes Senior Official at the Privy Council Office, effective August 23, 2021.
Trudeau announces major shakeup in senior ranks of public service, also appoints new deputy clerk of the Privy Council Office before Sunday’s election call
Former deputy clerk of the Privy Council Christyne Tremblay will remain in the PCO as a senior official.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced a major shakeup in the senior echelons of the public service nine days before calling the election, including the appointment of a new deputy clerk of the Privy Council Office.
To keep reading, subscribe and become a political insider.
Only $7.67 / week for one year.
Enjoy unlimited website access and the digital newspaper.
Cancel anytime.
The Twitter dudes fixed some of their recent malice (However they have yet to fix original account so that I can post there again) and Google has stopped disabling my gmail accounts for now the even began to restore my blogs bbefore changing their minds again immediately after I published this blog. Hence I made it private after it had been viewed 13 times as soon as I posted it and elected to email the text of some of it in instead and create backups elsewhere
https://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2021/08/the-prime-minister-announces-changes-in.html
Sunday, 22 August 2021
Methinks
Trudeau and his cohorts must be well aware that anyone can check my
work and theirs on the World Wide Web before the election of the 44th
Parliament is History N'esy Pas?
---------- Original message ----------
From: Google <no-reply@accounts.google.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2021 05:06:24 GMT
Subject: Your Google Account is disabled
To: david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
 | david.raymond.amos333@gmail. |
The Google Account david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
We understand your account is important to you. So if you think this was a mistake, sign in to the disabled account
and submit a request to restore it. You'll need to do this soon,
because disabled accounts are eventually deleted, along with your
emails, contacts, photos, and other data stored with Google. Learn more about Google policies.
https://myaccount.google.com/
| david.raymond.amos333@gmail. |
This post was unpublished because it violates Blogger Community Guidelines. To republish, please update the content to adhere to guidelines.
---------- Original message ----------
From: Blogger <no-reply@google.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2021 03:44:54 +0000
Subject: Your post titled "Cumberland North pits high-profile
Independent vs. former 7-term MP" has been reinstated
To: david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Hello,
We have re-evaluated the post titled "Cumberland North pits
high-profile Independent vs. former 7-term MP" against Community Guidelines
https://blogger.com/go/
reinstated. You may access the post at
http://davidraymondamos3.
Sincerely,
The Blogger Team
This post was unpublished because it violates Blogger
Community Guidelines. To republish, please update the content to adhere to guidelines.
---------- Original message ----------
From: Blogger <no-reply@google.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2021 04:12:58 +0000
Subject: Your post titled "Yo Premier Iain Rankin tell your buddy Big
Bad Billy Casey to check out my old Chevy in the photo hereto attached
Trust that it is is still registered in Nova Scotia along with my
Harleys etc" has been reinstated
To: david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Hello,
We have re-evaluated the post titled "Yo Premier Iain Rankin tell your
buddy Big Bad Billy Casey to check out my old Chevy in the photo hereto
attached Trust that it is is still registered in Nova Scotia along with my
Harleys etc" against Community Guidelines
https://blogger.com/go/
reinstated. You may access the post at
http://davidraymondamos3.
Sincerely,
The Blogger Team
---------- Original message ----------
From: Twitter Support <support@twitter.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2021 21:00:47 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: Re: Re: @DavidRayAmos YO Jack Deja Vu???
[ref:00DA0000000K0A8.5004w00002CyInt:ref]
To: "david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Hello,
We appreciate you reaching out, but we don’t monitor emails sent to
this Support address.
Your original case has been closed and archived. If you need help,
please submit a new request to our support team using our online form.
If you have questions about using Twitter, we also have lots of
resources available on our Help Center.
Thanks,
Twitter
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2021 15:07:22 -0300
Subject: Methinks Jack should READ my emails Nesy Pas David Lametti?
To: Twitter Support <support@twitter.com>, press <press@twitter.com>,
jack@twitter.com, sedgett@twitter.com, alan.denenberg@davispolk.com,
sbochner@wsgr.com, kmartin@wsgr.com, rpavri@wsgr.com, "David.Lametti"
<David.Lametti@parl.gc.ca>, pm <pm@pm.gc.ca>, "Katie.Telford"
<Katie.Telford@pmo-cpm.gc.ca>, "Ian.Shugart"
<Ian.Shugart@pco-bcp.gc.ca>, info <info@gg.ca>
Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>, mcu <mcu@justice.gc.ca>,
Newsroom <Newsroom@globeandmail.com>, "steve.murphy"
<steve.murphy@ctv.ca>, "Robert. Jones" <Robert.Jones@cbc.ca>,
John.Williamson@parl.gc.ca, "Ross.Wetmore" <Ross.Wetmore@gnb.ca>,
stefanos.karatopis@gmail.com
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Twitter Support <support@twitter.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2021 17:53:51 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: Case# 0219118725: Appealing a locked account -
@DavidRaymondAm1 [ref:00DA0000000K0A8.5004w00002BSavG:ref]
To: "david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Hello,
You tried to update a case that has been closed. Please submit a new
case at http://support.twitter.com/
center at http://support.twitter.com for self-help solutions to common
problems.
Thank you!
Twitter Support
http://support.twitter.com
@Support
On 7/7/21, David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
> Yea Right
>
> What about my old faithful Twitter Account that you disabled before
> your people took down Trumps???
>
> https://twitter.com/
>
> David Raymond Amos
> @DavidRayAmos
> Go Figure
> East checktheevidence.com/pdf/
> Joined February 2010
> 823 Following
> 305 Followers
> Followed by Roger Richard
> David Raymond Amos’s Tweets
> This Tweet is no longer available. Learn more
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: Twitter Support <support@twitter.com>
> Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2021 17:35:37 +0000 (GMT)
> Subject: We’ve unlocked your account 0219118725 [
> ref:_00DA0K0A8._5004w2BSavG:ref ]
> To: "david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> Hello,
>
> We’re writing to let you know that your account is now unlocked. We’re
> sorry for the inconvenience.
>
> A little background: We have systems that find and remove automated
> spam Twitter accounts, and it looks like yours was flagged as spam by
> mistake. This can happen if an account exhibits automated behavior in
> violation of our rules.
>
> We apologize for the mixup, and hope to see back on Twitter soon.
>
> If you need to get in touch with us again, please file a report
> through your Twitter app or our forms page, as this account isn’t
> monitored for replies.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Twitter
>
> Help | Privacy
> Twitter, Inc. 1355 Market Street, Suite 900 San Francisco, CA 94103
> ref:_00DA0K0A8._5004w2BSavG:ref
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Newsroom <newsroom@globeandmail.com>
> Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2021 17:31:18 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: About your Twitter account 0219118725
> [ref:00DA0000000K0A8.5004w00002BSavG:ref]
> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> Thank you for contacting The Globe and Mail.
>
> If your matter pertains to newspaper delivery or you require technical
> support, please contact our Customer Service department at
> 1-800-387-5400 or send an email to customerservice@globeandmail.
>
> If you are reporting a factual error please forward your email to
> publiceditor@globeandmail.com<mailto:publiceditor@
>
> Letters to the Editor can be sent to letters@globeandmail.com
>
> This is the correct email address for requests for news coverage and
> press releases.
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Ministerial Correspondence Unit - Justice Canada <mcu@justice.gc.ca>
> Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2021 17:30:18 +0000
> Subject: Automatic Reply
> To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> Thank you for writing to the Honourable David Lametti, Minister of
> Justice and Attorney General of Canada.
>
> Due to the volume of correspondence addressed to the Minister, please
> note that there may be a delay in processing your email. Rest assured
> that your message will be carefully reviewed.
>
> We do not respond to correspondence that contains offensive language.
>
> -------------------
>
> Merci d'avoir écrit à l'honorable David Lametti, ministre de la
> Justice et procureur général du Canada.
>
> En raison du volume de correspondance adressée au ministre, veuillez
> prendre note qu'il pourrait y avoir un retard dans le traitement de
> votre courriel. Nous tenons à vous assurer que votre message sera lu
> avec soin.
>
> Nous ne répondons pas à la correspondance contenant un langage offensant.
>
>
> On 7/7/21, David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>> Trust that I am calling the FEDS your lawyer friends AGAIN
>>
>> https://content.edgar-online.
>>
>> Copies to:
>>
>> Steven E. Bochner, Esq.
>> sbochner@wsgr.com,
>> 650-354-4110
>> Katharine A. Martin, Esq.
>> Partner, Chair of the Board
>> kmartin@wsgr.com
>> 650-565-3522
>> Rezwan D. Pavri, Esq.
>> rpavri@wsgr.com
>> 650-565-3574
>> Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C.
>> 650 Page Mill Road
>> Palo Alto, California 94304
>> (650) 493-9300
>>
>>
>>
>> Vijaya Gadde, Esq.
>> Sean Edgett, Esq.
>> Twitter, Inc.
>> 1355 Market Street, Suite 900
>> San Francisco, California 94103
>> (415) 222-9670 ext 1363
>>
>> https://conferences.law.
>>
>> VP & General Counsel, Twitter
>>
>> Sean Edgett is Vice President & General Counsel at Twitter. Sean
>> joined Twitter in August 2012 and became its General Counsel in
>> February 2018. Prior to that he held various roles at Twitter, most
>> recently as its Vice President & Deputy General Counsel, leading the
>> teams responsible for mergers and acquisitions, securities offerings
>> (including its IPO), securities law compliance, corporate governance,
>> strategic transactions, international entity structuring, real estate
>> transactions, employment law and intellectual property. Prior to
>> joining Twitter, Sean was Director, Legal – Corporate & Securities at
>> NetApp, Inc. and a corporate securities attorney at Latham & Watkins
>> LLP.
>>
>> Sean earned a J.D. from Pepperdine University School of Law and a B.A.
>> in Cognitive Science and a B.A. in Psychology from U.C. San Diego.
>>
>>
>> Alan F. Denenberg, Esq.
>> Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP
>> 1600 El Camino Real
>> Menlo Park, California 94025
>> (650) 752-2003
>> alan.denenberg@davispolk.com
>>
>> February 20, 2015
>> Sean Edgett
>> Twitter, Inc.
>> sedgett@twitter.com
>> Re: Twitter, Inc.
>> Dear Mr. Edgett:
>> This is in regard to your letter dated February 20, 2015 concerning the
>> shareholder proposal submitted by James McRitchie for inclusion in
>> Twitter’s proxy
>> materials for its upcoming annual meeting of security holders. Your
>> letter indicates that
>> the proponent has withdrawn the proposal and that Twitter therefore
>> withdraws its
>> request for a no-action letter from the Division received January 16,
>> 2015. Because the
>> matter is now moot, we will have no further comment.
>> Copies of all of the correspondence related to this matter will be
>> made available
>> on our website at
>> http://www.sec.gov/divisions/
>> your reference, a brief discussion of the Division’s informal
>> procedures regarding
>> shareholder proposals is also available at the same website address.
>> Sincerely,
>> Matt S. McNair
>> Special Counsel
>> cc: John Chevedden
>> *** FISMA & OMB Memorandum M-07-16 ***
>>
>>
>>
>> Open Meeting Agenda
>> Wednesday, September 23, 2020
>> Item 1: Amendments to the Commission's Whistleblower Program Rules
>> Offices: Division of Enforcement, Office of General Counsel
>> Staff: Stephanie Avakian, Jane Norberg, Emily Pasquinelli, Jonathan
>> Carr, Robert Stebbins, Michael Conley, Laura Jarsulic, Nicole Kelly,
>> William (Brooks) Shirey, Stephen Yoder, Thomas Karr
>>
>> The Commission will consider whether to adopt amendments to the
>> Commission's rules implementing its whistleblower program that would
>> enhance claim processing efficiency, and clarify and bring greater
>> transparency to the framework used by the Commission in exercising its
>> discretion in determining award amounts, as well as otherwise address
>> specific issues that have developed during the whistleblower program's
>> history. The amendments reflect the Commission's experience
>> administering the program over the past decade. The Commission will
>> also consider whether to adopt interpretive guidance concerning the
>> term "independent analysis" in the Commission's rules implementing its
>> whistleblower program.
>>
>> For further information, please contact Emily Pasquinelli in the
>> Division of Enforcement (Office of the Whistleblower) at 202-551-5973
>> and Nicole Kelly (Office of General Counsel) at (202) 551-4408.
>> Item 2: Procedural Requirements and Resubmission Thresholds under
>> Exchange Act Rule 14a-8
>> Office: Division of Corporation Finance
>> Staff: William Hinman, David Fredrickson, Tamara Brightwell, Matt McNair
>>
>> The Commission will consider whether to modernize and enhance the
>> efficiency of the shareholder-proposal process for the benefit of all
>> shareholders by adopting amendments to certain procedural requirements
>> for the submission of shareholder proposals and the provision relating
>> to resubmitted proposals under Rule 14a-8. The amendments being
>> considered seek to modernize the system for the first time in over 35
>> years and reflect many years of engagement by Commission staff with
>> investors, issuers and other market participants.
>>
>> For further information, please contact Matt McNair in the Division of
>> Corporation Finance at (202) 551-3500.
>>
>> SEC Awards More Than $23 Million to Whistleblowers
>>
>> FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
>> 2021-91
>>
>> Washington D.C., June 2, 2021 —
>>
>> The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced awards of
>> approximately $13 million and $10 million to two whistleblowers whose
>> information and assistance led to successful SEC and related actions.
>>
>> The whistleblowers’ substantial assistance, provided to the SEC and
>> another federal agency, included submitting information and documents,
>> participating in interviews, and identifying key individuals who
>> engaged in the misconduct at issue.
>>
>> “The whistleblowers’ information and assistance led to multiple
>> successful enforcement actions related to a complex and fraudulent
>> scheme involving multiple individuals and tens of millions of dollars
>> in ill-gotten gains,” said Emily Pasquinelli, Acting Chief of the
>> SEC’s Office of the Whistleblower. “Today’s awards demonstrate the
>> SEC’s continuing commitment to making awards to individuals who
>> provide high-quality information that assists the SEC and other
>> government agencies in bringing successful enforcement actions.”
>>
>> The SEC has awarded more than $928 million to 166 individuals since
>> issuing its first award in 2012. All payments are made out of an
>> investor protection fund established by Congress that is financed
>> entirely through monetary sanctions paid to the SEC by securities law
>> violators. No money has been taken or withheld from harmed investors
>> to pay whistleblower awards. Whistleblowers may be eligible for an
>> award when they voluntarily provide the SEC with original, timely, and
>> credible information that leads to a successful enforcement action.
>> Whistleblower awards can range from 10 percent to 30 percent of the
>> money collected when the monetary sanctions exceed $1 million.
>>
>> As set forth in the Dodd-Frank Act, the SEC protects the
>> confidentiality of whistleblowers and does not disclose any
>> information that could reveal a whistleblower's identity.
>>
>> For more information about the whistleblower program and how to report
>> a tip, visit www.sec.gov/whistleblower.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 7/7/21, Twitter Support <support@twitter.com> wrote:
>>> We’re writing to let you know that your account has been flagged for
>>> unusual
>>> behavior that violates the Twitter Rules, and has been locked until you
>>> take
>>> the following steps:
>>> Log into your account, or open your Twitter app on iOS or Android.
>>> You’ll
>>> see a message about your account, and a prompt to click “Start.”Select
>>> your
>>> country/region, and then enter your phone number. Click “Send
>>> code.”You’ll
>>> receive a message from Twitter with a confirmation code. Enter the code
>>> you
>>> receive on the prompt screen. You’ll receive a confirmation. Please
>>> note,
>>> it
>>> may take a few minutes for your account to be completely unlocked. If
>>> you’re
>>> still experiencing a problem after confirming your identity, respond to
>>> this
>>> message and provide us with more details about what’s happening.
>>> Please note, repeat violations of the Twitter Rules can lead to a
>>> permanent
>>> suspension of your account.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Twitter
>>
>
The Prime Minister announces new chair of the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency
Ottawa, Ontario
The Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, today announced the following appointment:
The Honourable Marie Deschamps, C.C., currently a member of the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency (NSIRA), becomes the chair of the NSIRA, effective August 11, 2021.
With full and independent authority, the NSIRA works to ensure that Canada’s national security agencies are complying with the law and that their actions are reasonable and necessary.
Biographical Notes
The Honourable Marie Deschamps, C.C.
Ottawa, Ontario
The Honourable Marie Deschamps received a Licentiate in Laws from the University of Montréal in 1974 and an LL.M. from McGill University in 1983. She has been an adjunct professor at the law schools of the University of Sherbrooke since 2006 and of McGill University since 2012.
The University of Montréal and the University of Sherbrooke each awarded her an honorary doctorate, respectively in 2008 and 2014. She received the F. R. Scott Award for Distinguished Service from the Faculty of Law at McGill University in 2013. She was appointed Companion of the Order of Canada in 2013 and received the distinction Lawyer Emeritus from the Quebec Bar in 2014.
Madame Deschamps was called to the Quebec Bar in 1975. She practised as a litigator at Martineau Walker and Sylvestre et Matte in family, civil, and commercial law, at Rouleau, Rumanek and Sirois in criminal law, and finally at Byers Casgrain in civil and commercial law. She was appointed judge to the Quebec Superior Court in 1990, to the Quebec Court of Appeal in 1992, and to the Supreme Court of Canada in 2002. She retired from the judiciary in August 2012 and rejoined the Quebec Bar in 2013.
In 2014, Madame Deschamps was appointed to conduct the External Review into Sexual Misconduct and Sexual Harassment in the Canadian Armed Forces. In 2015, she was named Chair of the United Nations External Independent Review Panel on Sexual Exploitation and Abuse by International Peacekeeping Forces in the Central African Republic. In 2016, she served as Member of the Review Committee on Quebec Provincial Judges Remuneration. In 2017, she was appointed Chair of the Council of Canadian Academies Expert Panel on Medical Assistance in Dying. In 2018, she was designated as Assessor in the LGBT Purge Class Action Settlement. She became a member of the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency in 2019.
Madame Deschamps served as a member of the Boards of Directors of Educaloi, from 2013 to 2019, and of Energir, from 2014 to 2019, and she acts as Trustee of Pro Bono Canada since 2013.
National Security and Intelligence Review Agency
| Office de surveillance des activités en matière de sécurité nationale et de renseignement | |
| Agency overview | |
|---|---|
| Formed | July 19, 2019 |
| Preceding agencies |
|
| Jurisdiction | Government of Canada |
| Headquarters | Ottawa, Ontario, Canada |
| Employees | 29 |
| Annual budget | $5 million (2019)[1] |
| Agency executive |
|
| Website | nsira-ossnr.gc.ca |
The National Security and Intelligence Review Agency (NSIRA; French: Office de surveillance des activités en matière de sécurité nationale et de renseignement) is an independent government agency organized to review all national security and intelligence activities carried out by the Government of Canada. NSIRA was established in June 2019 to replace the now-defunct Security Intelligence Review Committee, which was limited to reviewing the activities of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service.
Mandate and history
NSIRA ensures that Canada's national security agencies are complying with the law and that their actions are reasonable and necessary.[2] It has full and independent authority to determine what government activities it reviews, includes ongoing national security and intelligence activities.[2]
The National Security and Intelligence Review Agency (NSIRA) Act was introduced to House of Commons in June 2017 as part of an omnibus national security bill, the National Security Act, 2017 and received Royal Assent on June 21, 2019.[3] The NSIRA Act closed gaps in the national security accountability framework first identified by Justice O'Connor in the 2006 report of the Commission of Inquiry into the Actions of Canadian Officials in Relation to Maher Arar, and subsequently by many others.[4] Prior to NSIRA, only specific agencies had independent expert review bodies, and these bodies could not collaborate or share classified information. NSIRA, by contrast, is mandated to review all Government of Canada national security and intelligence activities in an integrated manner, without regard for the department or agency the activities fall under.[4] This model recognizes the increasingly interconnected nature of the government's national security and intelligence activities.[2] This includes, but is not limited to, the activities of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) and the Communications Security Establishment (CSE), the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA), the Department of National Defence (DND), Global Affairs Canada (GAC), the Department of Justice, and others.
To fulfill its review mandate, NSIRA is entitled to receive all information held by federal entities that NSIRA deems relevant to its reviews, no matter how classified or sensitive. This includes information subject to a legal privilege.[4] NSIRA also hears public complaints regarding the activities of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) and the Communications Security Establishment (CSE), and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), as well as complaints regarding the Government of Canada security clearance process.[4]
NSIRA replaced the Security Intelligence Review Committee, which was limited to the review of CSIS. NSIRA also replaced the former Office of the CSE Commissioner (OCSEC), which reviewed the activities of the CSE.[4] In addition, NSIRA assumed responsibility for reviewing the national security and intelligence activities of the RCMP from the Civilian Review and Complaints Commission for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.[4]
NSIRA provides its findings and recommendations to relevant Ministers through classified reports. It also produces an unclassified annual report to the Prime Minister who must table that report in Parliament.[2] NSIRA's first annual public report is to be tabled in Parliament in 2020.[4] The NSIRA may also report to Parliament more frequently should urgent or important matters arise.[4]
Collaboration with NSICOP
The National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians (NSICOP) has a mandate to review the legislative, regulatory, policy, administrative and financial framework for national security and intelligence in Canada, as well as departmental activities related to national security and intelligence.[4] NSICOP reviews will tend to be more strategic than those of NSIRA, which undertakes detailed reviews of specific activities with a strong emphasis on legal compliance. In practice, the two review bodies will complement each other and provide Canadians with comprehensive and multi-faceted scrutiny of the Government's secret activities.[4] NSIRA and the NSICOP may exchange classified information, and are required by statute to cooperate in order to avoid unnecessary duplication of effort.[4]
Composition
NSIRA is led by a Chair and between three and six other Committee Members, appointed by the Prime Minister in consultation with Parliamentary leaders.[2] Each member of NSIRA is appointed to hold office for a term not exceeding five years and is eligible for reappointment to a second term. NSIRA is supported by a secretariat of approximately 100 national security and legal experts.[4]
On July 24, 2019, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced that former NDP MP Murray Rankin would be NSIRA's first Chair.[5] University of Ottawa law professor Craig Forcese and all four members of the defunct Security Intelligence Review Committee were also announced as Committee Members.[6]
| Member | Date Appointed | Term Expiry |
|---|---|---|
| Marie Deschamps, Chair | September 30, 2019[6] | September 30, 2024[7] |
| Craig Stephen Forcese | July 24, 2019[6] | July 24, 2024[8] |
| Ian Carl Holloway | July 24, 2019[6] | March 31, 2023[9] |
| Faisal Mirza | October 9, 2020 | October 8, 2025[10] |
| Marie-Lucie Morin | October 9, 2020 | October 8, 2023[11] |
| Member | Date Appointed | Term Expiry |
|---|---|---|
| Murray Rankin | July 24, 2019[6] | September 17, 2020[12] |
| Intelligence Commissioner of Canada
Commissaire au renseignement du Canada | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
 | ||||
Incumbent Jean-Pierre Plouffe since July 12, 2019 | ||||
| Office of the Intelligence Commissioner | ||||
| Reports to | Prime minister of Canada | |||
| Appointer | Governor in Council; on the advice of the prime minister | |||
| Term length | At Her Majesty's pleasure | |||
| Constituting instrument | Intelligence Commissioner Act National Security Act, 2017 | |||
| Formation | July 12, 2019 | |||
| Website | www | |||
The intelligence commissioner of Canada (French: commissaire au renseignement du Canada) is an independent officer of the Government of Canada charged with quasi-judicial review of the intelligence services of Canada – which include the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS), the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) and the Communications Security Establishment (CSE) – before the agencies engage in certain espionage activities.[2]
The intelligence commissioner heads the Office of the Intelligence Commissioner of Canada (French: Bureau du commissaire au renseignement), the agency which supports the work of the commissioner.[3] The position is a Governor in Council appointment made on the advice of the prime minister of Canada. The commissioner is accountable to the Parliament of Canada through the prime minister, who receives an annual report from the commissioner and tables it in the House of Commons.[2]
The inaugural and present intelligence commissioner of Canada is Jean-Pierre Plouffe, who took office on July 12, 2019.[4]
Background
The office was established as part of the National Security Act, 2017, an omnibus bill introduced by the Trudeau government which reworked many of the existing mechanisms within the intelligence community in Canada, including oversight of intelligence gathering and any actions taken by intelligence agencies on behalf of the Government of Canada.[5][6]
Accountability
The intelligence commissioner issues a report on their activity to the prime minister annually who must table it in Parliament after removing confidential and classified information. The commissioner is entitled to receive all reports which are compiled by the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency (NSIRA).[7]
List of intelligence commissioners of Canada
| No. | Name | Took office | Left office | Appointed by |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Jean-Pierre Plouffe | July 12, 2019 | Incumbent | Justin Trudeau |
| Comité des parlementaires sur la sécurité nationale et le renseignement | ||
| Agency overview | ||
|---|---|---|
| Formed | 2018 | |
| Jurisdiction | Oversight of intelligence services in Canada | |
| Headquarters | Ottawa, Ontario | |
| Employees | 10[1] | |
| Annual budget | $3.5 million CAD[1] | |
| Minister responsible | ||
| Agency executives |
| |
| Key document |
| |
| Website | www | |
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_and_Intelligence_Committee_of_Parliamentarians
The National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians (NSICOP) is an independent government agency responsible for overseeing the activities of Canada's national security and intelligence agencies.
Unlike similar bodies in other Five Eyes countries – such as the Senate Intelligence Committee and House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence in the United States, the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament in the United Kingdom or the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security in Australia – NSICOP is neither a standing committee nor a special committee of the Parliament of Canada. Rather, it is an agency of the executive branch, itself overseen by the Prime Minister's Office, whose membership is made up of parliamentarians.
Members of NSICOP are appointed from both houses of the Parliament of Canada, the House of Commons and the Senate, by the Governor-in-Council on the advice of the Prime Minister of Canada.[3] The Committee also performs strategic and systemic reviews of the legislative, regulatory, policy, expenditure and administrative frameworks under which national security activities are conducted.[4]
Mandate
The NSICOP has a broad government-wide mandate to scrutinize any national security matter. The Committee is empowered to perform reviews of national security and intelligence activities including ongoing operations, and strategic and systemic reviews of the legislative, regulatory, policy, expenditure and administrative frameworks under which these activities are conducted. It also conducts reviews of matters referred by a minister.[5] The Committee provides oversight to at least 17 federal agencies involved in security issues, including: Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS), Communications Security Establishment (CSE), Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), Global Affairs Canada (GAC), Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA), Finance Canada, Justice Canada, Canadian Air Transport Security Authority (CATSA), and Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada (FINTRAC).[6]
Composition
The Committee is a statutory committee made up of parliamentarians, but it is an independent agency whose members are appointed by and administratively housed within the executive branch rather than within the structures of Parliament. This structure is designed to give the committee a high-degree of independence and access to classified government information, while providing for necessary controls on the use and disclosure of this information.[5]
The Committee consists of a Chair and ten other members, three from the Senate and seven from the House of Commons (with a maximum of five members from the House of Commons from the governing party). Members are appointed by the Governor-in-Council on the recommendation of the prime minister.[5]
Committee members are required to obtain a Top-Secret security clearance and swear an oath of secrecy before assuming their position on the committee, and they also must maintain the confidentiality of information they receive for the rest of their lives.[5] Any breach will open the door to criminal prosecution under the Criminal Code of Canada. Nominally, members would not be able to claim parliamentary immunity if they unlawfully disclosed classified information to third parties.[5] However, it is legally unclear whether a member who discloses classified information on the floor of the House or Senate would be prosecutable, given Canada's strict doctrine of parliamentary privilege, which is protected under the Canadian Constitution without any exception.
Collaboration with NSIRA
Established in 2019, the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency (NSIRA) is an independent agency mandated to review all national security and intelligence activities carried out by the Government of Canada. The NSICOP has a mandate to review the legislative, regulatory, policy, administrative and financial framework for national security and intelligence in Canada, as well as departmental activities related to national security and intelligence.[7] NSICOP reviews tend to be more strategic than those of NSIRA, which undertakes detailed reviews of specific activities with a strong emphasis on legal compliance. In practice, the two review bodies complement each other and provide Canadians with comprehensive and multi-faceted scrutiny of the Government's secret activities.[7] NSIRA and the NSICOP may exchange classified information, and are required by statute to cooperate in order to avoid unnecessary duplication of effort.[7]
Members
- House of Commons
|
|
Member | Affiliation | Date Appointed |
|---|---|---|---|
| David McGuinty, Chair | Liberal | November 6, 2017 | |
| Brenda Shanahan | Liberal | November 6, 2017 | |
| Iqra Khalid | Liberal | June 15, 2021 | |
| Peter Fragiskatos | Liberal | June 15, 2021 | |
| Don Davies | New Democratic | February 5, 2020 | |
| Leona Alleslev | Conservative | June 15, 2021 | |
| Rob Morrison | Conservative | June 15, 2021 | |
| Stéphane Bergeron | Bloc Québécois | June 15, 2021 |
- Senate
|
|
Member | Affiliation | Date Appointed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Frances Lankin | Independent Senators Group | November 6, 2017 | |
| Vernon White | Canadian Senators Group | November 6, 2017 | |
| Dennis Dawson | Progressive Senate Group | February 5, 2020 |
Former Members
| Member | Affiliation | Date Appointed | Date Left Position | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gord Brown | Conservative | November 6, 2017 | May 2, 2018 [8] | Died in office |
| Tony Clement | Conservative | November 6, 2017 | November 7, 2018 [9][10] | Resigned after scandal |
| Murray Rankin | New Democratic | November 6, 2017 | September 1, 2019 | Resigned from the House of Commons |
| Hedy Fry | Liberal | November 6, 2017 | September 11, 2019 | Parliament was dissolved for the 2019 Canadian federal election |
| Percy Downe | Senate Liberal | November 6, 2017 | September 11, 2019 | Parliament was dissolved for the 2019 Canadian federal election |
| Emmanuel Dubourg | Liberal | November 6, 2017 | September 11, 2019 | Parliament was dissolved for the 2019 Canadian federal election |
| Gudie Hutchings | Liberal | November 6, 2017 | September 11, 2019 | Parliament was dissolved for the 2019 Canadian federal election |
| Rob Nicholson | Conservative | February 5, 2019 | September 11, 2019 | Parliament was dissolved for the 2019 Canadian federal election, did not run for reelection |
| Diane Finley | Conservative | March 7, 2019 | September 11, 2019 | Parliament was dissolved for the 2019 Canadian federal election |
| Christine Normandin | Bloc Québécois | February 5, 2020 | February 18, 2020[11] | Unclear |
| Jennifer O'Connell | Liberal | February 5, 2020 | June 14, 2021 | Not re-appointed |
| Ted Falk | Conservative | February 5, 2020 | June 14, 2021 | Not re-appointed |
| Glen Motz | Conservative | February 5, 2020 | June 14, 2021 | Not re-appointed |
Secretariat
The Committee is supported by a dedicated secretariat with an executive director, who has the rank of a departmental deputy minister.[5]
History
Until 2017, Canada was the only member of “Five Eyes” without a permanent mechanism for parliamentarians to review national security activities.[5] Parliamentary scrutiny of intelligence functions had been raised as an issue with every evolution of the intelligence community since the 1979 Royal Commission of Inquiry into Certain Activities of the RCMP, known as the MacDonald Commission.[12] Since that time, the landscape has shifted considerably both domestically and internationally.[13] Since the events of September 11, 2001, there has been a substantial expansion in the breadth and intensity of Canada’s counter-terrorism efforts.[14] The Special Senate Committee on Anti-terrorism concluded, “Canada now lags significantly behind its allies on the issue of parliamentary oversight as the only country that lacks a parliamentary committee with substantial powers of review over matters of national security.”
In 2004, the Interim Committee of Parliamentarians on National Security was established to recommend a national security oversight mechanism. The committee’s report, which was unanimously supported by the all-party membership, outlined the structure for a committee of parliamentarians. The committee found that "closer parliamentary scrutiny will better assure Canadians that a proper balance is being maintained between respect for their rights and freedoms, and the protection of national security."[14] The committee recommended that "to allow more effective parliamentary scrutiny of the intelligence community, Parliament will require that some of its number have complete access to such classified information as they consider appropriate."[14] The committee report recognized that "confidence between the intelligence community and the committee will be essential to the success of parliamentary scrutiny of intelligence functions"[14]
Bill C-22, the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Act was tabled by the Government on June 16, 2016 and received Royal Assent on June 22, 2017.[15] Trudeau announced the creation of the NSICOP on November 6, 2017.[16]
Criticism
Chair appointed by the prime minister
Under the NSICOP Act, the Committee chair is appointed directly by the Prime Minister.[17] Previous National Security Committee recommendations, such as the 2004 Interim Committee of Parliamentarians on National Security insisted that, "committee leadership positions should be elected by a secret ballot of its members to enhance the reality, and perception, of committee independence."[14]
In 2013, after public criticism, the British government significantly overhauled UK's Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament, strengthening its powers and its independence.[4] The committee emerged with an independently elected chair, operational oversight powers and a shift in appointment power from the prime minister to Parliament.[4]
Access to information
The 2004 Interim Committee of Parliamentarians on National Security recommended granting the Parliamentary National Security Committee complete access to information. However, under the NSICOP Act, government ministers are able to refuse to provide information to the Committee they decide “would be injurious to national security”.[4] Opposition parties have argued that this undefined clause is "disturbingly wide"[18] and allows the Government abuse to cover up sloppy management, or a scandal within a department.[4]
Vetting of reports
The committee’s annual and special reports are vetted by the government before they are released, which some argue constrains the Committee’s ability to raise red flags with the public.[19]
See also
- Intelligence Commissioner of Canada
- National Security and Intelligence Review Agency
- Other Five Eyes oversight bodies
Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Coordination of Activities
Backgrounder
The National Security and Intelligence Review Agency (NSIRA) and the Office of the Privacy Commissioner (OPC) recognize the benefits of coordinating their efforts to ensure efficient and effective review. As such, NSIRA and the Office of the Privacy Commissioner (OPC) have implemented a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), setting out the parameters for future coordination between them.
NSIRA has the legal authority to coordinate its activities with those of the Privacy Commissioner under s.15.1 of the NSIRA Act, and to this end, may provide the Privacy Commissioner with information concerning its reviews. The Privacy Commissioner has the corresponding legal authority to coordinate his activities with those of NSIRA under s. 37(5) of the Privacy Act and may provide information to NSIRA pursuant to subsection 64(3) of the Privacy Act.
The MOU clearly defines the objectives and procedures for ongoing coordination, defines roles and responsibilities for joint reviews and investigations, and sets out the parameters for information management, reporting and administration. Implementing this MOU will enable NSIRA and the OPC to benefit from each other’s expertise and provide transparency on their coordination efforts.NSIRA replaces the Security Intelligence Review Committee (SIRC), which was limited to only the review of activities of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) and complaints against them. NSIRA also replaces the former Office of the CSE Commissioner (OCSEC), which only reviewed the activities of the Communications Security Establishment (CSE) and complaints against them.
NSIRA is composed of Members and a Secretariat. NSIRA Members are eminent Canadians who have been appointed by the Governor-in-Council on the recommendation of the Prime Minister. Members are appointed for terms of five years, with the possibility of renewal for a second term. NSIRA Members approve NSIRA’s overarching review plan. They also examine and approve all NSIRA reviews, and serve as adjudicators for the quasi-judicial complaints process.
There can be up to seven NSIRA Members who are supported by a Secretariat with expertise in national security, policy, technology, law, civil liberties, and human rights. The Secretariat is led by an Executive Director who is appointed by the Governor-in-Council. It assists NSIRA Members in fulfilling the Agency’s mandate including the conduct of reviews as well as the quasi-judicial investigation of complaints.
All Government of Canada national security and intelligence activities now subject to independent expert review
Ottawa, Ontario – July 17, 2019
On July 12, Canada’s framework for national security accountability underwent a major transformation with the creation of the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency (NSIRA) and the coming into force of the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency Act (NSIRA Act) alongside other parts of the recently passed Bill C-59.
The NSIRA Act closes gaps in the national security accountability framework first identified by Justice O’Connor in the 2006 Arar report, and subsequently by many others. Prior to the NSIRA, only specific agencies had independent expert review bodies, and these bodies could not collaborate or share classified information. The NSIRA, by contrast, is mandated to review all Government of Canada national security and intelligence activities in an integrated manner, without regard for the department or agency the activities fall under.
To fulfill its review mandate, the NSIRA is entitled to receive all information held by federal entities that the NSIRA deems relevant to its reviews, no matter how classified or sensitive. This includes information subject to a legal privilege. The sole exception is information classed as a Cabinet confidence.
The NSIRA will be led by up to seven members, eminent Canadians appointed by the Government in consultation with the opposition. The NSIRA will be supported by a secretariat of national security and legal experts.
The NSIRA will also hear public complaints regarding the activities of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS), the Communications Security Establishment (CSE), and – when closely related to national security – the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), as well as complaints regarding the Government of Canada security clearance process.
The NSIRA replaces the Security Intelligence Review Committee (SIRC), which was limited to the review of CSIS. The NSIRA also replaces the former Office of the CSE Commissioner (OCSEC), which reviewed the activities of the CSE. In addition, the NSIRA assumes responsibility for reviewing the national security and intelligence activities of the RCMP from the Civilian Review and Complaints Commission (CRCC).
The NSIRA’s first annual public report will be tabled in Parliament in 2020.
Quotes
“For thirty five years, the Security Intelligence Review Committee helped protect the rights and freedoms of Canadians by ensuring the democratic accountability of CSIS. Its successor, the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency, looks forward to scrutinizing the full range of Government of Canada national security and intelligence activities to ensure that they are lawful, reasonable and necessary.”
The Honourable Pierre Blais, P.C. Member, National Security and Intelligence Review Agency
“Canada’s national security and intelligence agencies have been vested with extraordinary powers to help protect public safety and advance the national interest. Yet maintaining democratic accountability in the realm of national security, where secrecy is unavoidable, can be challenging. Independent institutions like the NSIRA play an important role in ensuring that parliamentarians and all Canadians remain appropriately informed of the important national security activities being carried out in their name.”
The Honourable L. Yves Fortier, P.C., C.C., O.Q., Q.C. Member, National Security and Intelligence Review Agency
“With its unfettered access to sensitive information, the NSIRA will act as a bridge between the Government and civil society, able to scrutinize emerging issues where there are public doubts or concerns. Through its reports and its day-to-day interactions with officials, the NSIRA can also bring public concerns to the attention of national security actors and policy-makers.”
The Honourable Dr. Ian Holloway, P.C., C.D., Q.C. Member, National Security and Intelligence Review Agency
“The NSIRA looks forward to working closely with the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians. Our complementary mandates will bolster the accountability of Canada’s national security and intelligence agencies.”
The Honourable Marie-Lucie Morin, P.C., C.M. Member, National Security and Intelligence Review Agency
Contacts
For more information, please contact:
Tahera Mufti
Manager, Communications and Stakeholder Engagement
National Security and Intelligence Review Agency
media-medias@nsira-ossnr.gc.ca
www.nsira-ossnr.gc.ca
@NSIRACanada
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfUq9b1XTa0&t=335s&ab_channel=CBC
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJw8m9KTeBI&ab_channel=StephenBulgerGallery
3 Comments
CBC Archives: Just Watch Me, 1970 | CBC
2,585 Comments
TO : Appeal Registry
FROM : Webb J.A.
DATE : July 7, 2017
RE : A-48-16: David Raymond Amos v. Her Majesty The Queen
_______________________________________________________________________
DIRECTION
Mr.
Amos’ summary received on June 26, 2017 in response to the direction of
the Court of June 8, 2017 is to be accepted for filing.
“WWW”
https://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2017/07/response-of-david-raymond-amos-to.html
Saturday, 15 July 2017
RESPONSE OF DAVID RAYMOND AMOS TO THE SUBMISSIONS OF HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN PURSUANT TO THE JUNE 8, 2017 DIRECTIONS OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
2017 submission to be filed thereby allowing this response to be filed in a timely fashion pursuant to the June
8, 2017 direction. After filing his brief the Plaintiff/Respondent became aware that two more lawyers whom
he has a conflict of interest with were appointed to sit on the bench of Federal Court on the very same day
he had been ordered to file his brief. They are William F. Pentney the very lawyer who has received all of
the filings in this matter until today. The other is John B. Laskin, a lawyer whom the Plaintiff/Respondent has
contacted and spoken to personally in the past about several different matters. The Plaintiff/Respondent
must Update the list of Judges he truly believes that he has a conflict of interest with.
Southcott, Glennys McVeigh, Alan Diner, Denis Gascon, Martine St-Louis, Cecily Strickland, Sylvie
Roussel, Anne Marie McDonald, George Locke, Simon Fothergill, Keith Boswell, Yvan Roy, Yves de
Montigny, Russel Zinn, Donald Rennie, André Scott, Richard Boivin, Patrick Gleeson, Mary Gleason, David
Near, Wyman Webb, and David Stratas
(CROWN) is well aware that the Plaintiff/Respondent's name is David Raymond Amos (AMOS). He is
proud to the namesake of RAYMOND his Uncle who was killed defending the CROWN on June 8th,
1944 in Normandy.
concerns about a conflict of interest he has with judges who were in private practice and all the others who
were employed in government service before being appointed to the Federal Court and the Federal Court
of Appeal. Justice David Near should recall that the AMOS addressed his concerns about a conflict with
him twice during the course of the hearing on May 24, 2017 and Justice Near did not respond. What the
CROWN claims within its submission is not true.
5.1(4) of the Federal Courts Act and did his best to inform the judges of a case management
teleconference of Federal Court on April 3, 2017 and strongly suggested that they confer with Justice
Leblanc before making any decision in this matter. The following information was copied from the
published record of Federal Court
DAVID
RAYMOND AMOS v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
|
Office
Halifax
|
Dated
filed 2017-04-04
|
CROWN to have this matter dismissed and to revoke its decision dismissing his appeal of Justice
Southcott's actions.
against the CROWN to go forward to trial to be judged on its merits and heard by Justices who do not
have a conflict of interest with him.
TO : APPEAL REGISTRY
FROM : WEBB J.A.
DATE : October 30, 2017
RE : DAVID RAYMOND AMOS v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Court File: A-48-16
_______________________________________________________________________
DIRECTION
The Registry is requested to advise the parties:
Upon notice that William F. Pentney, Q.C. is named as solicitor of record for the respondent;
Upon
notice June 23, 2017, of the appointment of William F. Pentney, Q.C.,
former Deputy Attorney General of Canada, as judge of the Federal Court,
and ex officio member of the Federal Court of Appeal;
And
upon considering that pursuant to Rule 126(b)(i), a party is deemed not
to be represented by a solicitor if that party does not appoint a new
solicitor after its solicitor of record ceases to act for the party
because of appointment to a public office incompatible with the
solicitor’s profession;
And upon concluding that by the effect of Rule 126(b)(i), the respondent is deemed not to be represented by a solicitor;
And upon notice that Nathalie G. Drouin became Deputy Attorney General of Canada, effective June 26, 2017;
And upon considering Rule 55 which permits the Court to vary a rule or dispense with compliance with a rule;
The Court considers the solicitor of record for the respondent to be Nathalie G. Drouin, Deputy Attorney General of Canada.
“Wyman W. Webb” JA
The Prime Minister announces changes in the senior ranks of the Public Service
Ottawa, Ontario
The Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, today announced the following changes in the senior ranks of the Public Service:
Nathalie G. Drouin, currently Deputy Minister of Justice and Deputy Attorney General of Canada, becomes Deputy Clerk of the Privy Council and Associate Secretary to the Cabinet, effective August 23, 2021.
François Daigle, currently Associate Deputy Minister of Justice, becomes Deputy Minister of Justice and Deputy Attorney General of Canada, effective August 23, 2021.
Christyne Tremblay, currently Deputy Clerk of the Privy Council, Associate Secretary to the Cabinet, and Deputy Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, becomes Senior Official at the Privy Council Office, effective August 23, 2021.
Michael Vandergrift, currently Associate Deputy Minister of Public Services and Procurement, becomes Deputy Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Privy Council Office, effective August 16, 2021.
Dylan Jones, currently Deputy Minister of Western Economic Diversification, becomes President of the Pacific Economic Development Agency of Canada and Interim President of Prairies Economic Development Canada, effective August 6, 2021.
Paul MacKinnon, currently Executive Vice-President of the Canada Border Services Agency, becomes Deputy Secretary to the Cabinet (Governance), Privy Council Office, effective August 30, 2021.
Paul Halucha, currently Assistant Secretary to the Cabinet, Economic and Regional Development Policy, Privy Council Office, becomes Associate Deputy Minister of Environment and Climate Change, effective August 16, 2021.
Arianne Reza, currently Assistant Deputy Minister, Procurement, Public Services and Procurement Canada, becomes Associate Deputy Minister of Public Services and Procurement, effective August 16, 2021.
Scott Jones, currently Deputy Chief, Canadian Centre for Cyber Security, Communications Security Establishment Canada, becomes Federal Lead, Proof of Vaccine Credentials, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, effective August 16, 2021.
Biographical Notes
Nathalie G. Drouin
Education
Graduate Diploma, Business Administration, Laval University
Bachelor of Laws, Laval University
Professional Experience
Since June 2017
Deputy Minister of Justice and Deputy Attorney General of Canada
2016 - 2017
Senior Associate Deputy Minister of Justice
2012 - 2016
Deputy Minister of Justice and Deputy Attorney General, gouvernement du Québec
2012
Superintendent of Solvency Supervision and Director General of Legal Affairs, Autorité des marchés financiers
2004 - 2012
Director General of Market Supervision and Legal Affairs, Autorité des marchés financiers
2003 - 2004
Governance Associate, Bureau de transition de l'encadrement du secteur financier
1999 - 2003
Director of Legal Affairs, Bureau des services financiers
François Daigle
Education
Bachelor of Arts, Economics, McGill University
Bachelor of Laws, University of Moncton
Professional Experience
Since July 2017
Associate Deputy Minister of Justice
2015 - 2017
Assistant Secretary to the Cabinet, Social Development Policy, Privy Council Office
2009 - 2015
Deputy Assistant Deputy Minister, then Assistant Deputy Minister,
Business and Regulatory Law Portfolio, Department of Justice Canada
2005 - 2009
Executive Director and Senior General Counsel, Fisheries and Oceans Legal Services, Department of Justice Canada
1998 - 2005
General Counsel, Health Canada Legal Services, Department of Justice Canada
Christyne Tremblay
Education
Graduate Diploma, International Administration, National School of Public Administration
Bachelor of Political Science, University of Ottawa
Bachelor of Economics, University of Ottawa
Professional Experience
Since September 2020
Deputy Clerk of the Privy Council, Associate Secretary to the Cabinet, and Deputy Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs
2016 - 2020
Deputy Minister of Natural Resources
2015 - 2016
Deputy Minister, ministère du Développement durable, de l’Environnement
et de la Lutte contre les changements climatiques, gouvernement du
Québec
2014 - 2015
Deputy Minister, ministère de l’Énergie et des Ressources naturelles, gouvernement du Québec
2013 - 2014
Deputy Minister, ministère des Ressources naturelles, gouvernement du Québec
2012 - 2013
Deputy Minister, ministère de l’Enseignement supérieur, de la Recherche,
de la Science et de la Technologie, gouvernement du Québec
2010 - 2012
Deputy Minister, ministère du Développement économique, de l’Innovation et de l’Exportation, gouvernement du Québec
2007 - 2010
Acting Assistant Deputy Minister, and then Assistant Deputy Minister,
Direction générale des politiques et des sociétés d’État, ministère du
Développement économique, de l’Innovation et de l’Exportation,
gouvernement du Québec
2005 - 2007
Corporate Secretary, ministère des Finances, gouvernement du Québec
2003 - 2005
Director, Coordination and Planning, ministère des Finances, gouvernement du Québec
2001 - 2003
Director, Strategic Planning, ministère de l’Industrie et du Commerce, gouvernement du Québec
1999 - 2001
Director, Strategic Planning, ministère des Relations internationales, gouvernement du Québec
Michael Vandergrift
Education
Master of Science, Social Policy and Planning, London School of Economics
Bachelor of Arts, Political Science, University of Alberta
Professional Experience
Since November 2017
Associate Deputy Minister of Public Services and Procurement
2015 - 2017
Assistant Secretary, International Affairs, Security and Justice Sector, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat
2014 - 2015
Assistant Secretary, Regulatory Affairs, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat
2010 - 2014
Director of Operations, Priorities and Planning, Privy Council Office
2007 - 2010
Director General, Policy, Planning and International Affairs, Health Canada
2006 - 2007
Director, Health Care System Division, Health Canada
2003 - 2006
Director, Health Sciences Policy Division, Health Canada
Dylan Jones
Education
Master of Laws, University of Oxford
Bachelor of Laws, University of British Columbia
Bachelor of Arts and Science, McMaster University
Professional Experience
Since June 2016
Deputy Minister of Western Economic Diversification
2012 - 2016
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canada West Foundation
2012
Deputy Minister, Intergovernmental Relations, Government of Saskatchewan
2010 - 2012
Associate Deputy Minister, Intergovernmental Relations, Government of Saskatchewan
2007 - 2010
Assistant Deputy Minister, Intergovernmental Relations, Government of Saskatchewan
2006 - 2007
Executive Director, Intergovernmental Relations, Government of Saskatchewan
2003 - 2006
Executive Director, Strategic Policy, Recreation and Youth, Department
of Culture, Youth, and Recreation, Government of Saskatchewan
Paul MacKinnon
Education
Bachelor of Arts, University of Prince Edward Island
Professional Experience
Since August 2019
Executive Vice-President of the Canada Border Services Agency
2016 - 2019
Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic and Program Policy, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada
2011 - 2016
Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic Policy Branch, Public Safety Canada
2008 - 2011
Director General, National Security Policy, Public Safety Canada
2006 - 2008
Chief of Staff to the Deputy Minister, Public Safety Canada
2005 - 2006
Director, Intergovernmental Affairs, Public Safety Canada
1998 - 2005
Various positions at Solicitor General of Canada and Public Safety Canada
Paul Halucha
Education
Master of Arts, Economics, Norman Paterson School of International Affairs, Carleton University
Bachelor of Arts, English Literature and Political Science, Laurentian University
Professional Experience
Since November 2018
Assistant Secretary to the Cabinet, Economic and Regional Development Policy, Privy Council Office
2016 - 2018
Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Industry Sector, Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada
2015 - 2016
Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic Policy Sector, Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada
2012 - 2015
Senior Director General, Marketplace Framework Policy Branch, and Deputy Director, Investments, Industry Canada
2009 - 2012
Chief of Staff, Office of the Deputy Minister, Industry Canada
2007 - 2009
Departmental Advisor, Office of the Minister of Industry, Industry Canada
Arianne Reza
Education
Bachelor of Arts, Psychology, Carleton University
Advancing Women in Leadership Program, Sprott School of Business, Carleton University
Professional Experience
Since December 2016
Assistant Deputy Minister, Procurement, Public Services and Procurement Canada
2014 - 2016
Director General, Traveller Programs, Canada Border Services Agency
2012 - 2014
Regional Director General, Northern Ontario Region, Canada Border Services Agency
2010 - 2012
Director General, International Operations, Canada Border Services Agency
2008 - 2010
Director General, Major Projects, Commercial, Canada Border Services Agency
2007 - 2008
Director, Major Projects, Commercial, Canada Border Services Agency
2005 - 2007
Special Advisor to the President, Canada School of Public Service
2004 - 2005
Special Advisor to the Associate Secretary, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat
Scott Jones
Education
Master of Business Administration, University of Ottawa
Bachelor of Science, Computer Science, University of Regina
Bachelor of Applied Science, Electronic Systems Engineering, University of Regina
Professional Experience
Since October 2018
Deputy Chief, Canadian Centre for Cyber Security, Communications Security Establishment Canada
2016 - 2018
Deputy Chief, IT Security, Communications Security Establishment Canada
2015 - 2016
Deputy Chief, Corporate Services, Communications Security Establishment Canada
2011 - 2015
Director General, Cyber Defence, Communications Security Establishment Canada
2011
Director, Cyber Defence Operations and Capability Development, Communications Security Establishment Canada
2008 - 2011
Director, Signals Intelligence Systems Development, Communications Security Establishment Canada
High commissioner to the U.K. will serve as interim Clerk of the Privy Council
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau made the announcement Monday.
Trudeau thanked Shugart for his “exceptional leadership over the past year in mobilizing the public service to quickly deliver support to Canadians during the global COVID-19 pandemic,” according to a statement from the Prime Minister’s Office.
“We are all pulling for him as he faces these health challenges.”
Shugart, who became the country’s top public servant in 2019, told colleagues in an email last month that he would be taking leave to seek treatment following a cancer diagnosis.
Charette is “well positioned” to take on the role given her “exceptional” career in the public service — including serving as Clerk of the Privy Council from October 2014 to January 2016, according to the statement.
The Clerk of the Privy Council is the principal public service adviser to the prime minister and head of the public service.
Charette, a graduate of Carleton University, was previously deputy Clerk of the Privy Council and associate secretary to the cabinet as well as deputy minister of intergovernmental affairs.
She has held leadership positions in eight departments with files including skills development, labour markets, immigration, citizenship, social security, health and justice, the Prime Minister’s Office said.
A former principal at consulting firm Ernst & Young, Charette was director of the transition team that set up the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board. She chaired the public service’s United Way campaign in 2008.
---------- Original message ----------
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2021 12:50:10 -0300
Subject: YO Clint Richardson Re Straw Men Why did you never get back
to me? Now that I am deeply involved in another election and your
buddy Chris Weinert moved to Maine before his pal Fetzer got sick I am
tired of all the bullshit
To: clint@strawmanstory.info, liveneedtoknow@gmail.com,
James@jamesfetzer.com, traversy.n@gmail.com, kingpatrick278
<kingpatrick278@gmail.com>, "freedomreport.ca"
<freedomreport.ca@gmail.com>, "blaine.higgs" <blaine.higgs@gnb.ca>,
paul <paul@paulfromm.com>, "Paul.Lynch"
<Paul.Lynch@edmontonpolice.ca>, "Mark.Blakely"
<Mark.Blakely@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "martin.gaudet"
<martin.gaudet@fredericton.ca>, "Katie.Telford"
<Katie.Telford@pmo-cpm.gc.ca>, nobyrne@unb.ca, irwincotler@rwchr.org,
jeromecorsi6554@gmail.com, pm <pm@pm.gc.ca>, premier
<premier@ontario.ca>, "Kaycee.Madu" <Kaycee.Madu@gov.ab.ca>,
"Ian.Shugart" <Ian.Shugart@pco-bcp.gc.ca>, "barbara.massey"
<barbara.massey@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, washington field
<washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>
Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>, jfetzer
<jfetzer@d.umn.edu>, jcarpay <jcarpay@jccf.ca>, jbosnitch
<jbosnitch@gmail.com>, sheilagunnreid <sheilagunnreid@gmail.com>
http://www.strawmanstory.info/
https://shows.acast.com/
Your words Correct??
https://www.bitchute.com/
Need to Know News (20 August 2021) with Chris Weinert
First published at 13:13 UTC on August 21st, 2021.
Jim Fetzer
7133 subscribers
The calamity unfolding in Afghanistan comes as no surprise to those
who have followed his career, where Barack Obama has repeatedly
commented on Joe's ability to "f--- things us!" By that standard, the
fiasco in Kabul is simply part for the course. Pelosi tries to palm
off a $3.5 trillion bill over and beyond the $1.3 trillion, but nine
(9) moderate Democrats are not playing ball and it has yet to be seen
whether she can succeed. CA Dems are rigging the ballots for Gavin
Newsom, in blatant violation of the principles of fair play and
democracy, which no longer appear to matter to them. The unvaxxed
appear to be largely immune from the problems affecting the vaxxed,
where the US medical profession has sold out to Big Pharma and
abandoned the Nuremberg Code.
https://www.bitchute.com/
When an unorganized truth meets an organized lie...
First published at 13:18 UTC on November 1st, 2020.
Chris Weinert
Brutal Honesty
https://www.saidit.net/s/
Chris Weinert was banned on YouTube a few times. He's got a BitChute
channel now.
submitted 1 year ago by JasonCarswell from self.ZoonPolitikon
Chris Weinert is father of Holly Seeliger's baby. (I don't know if
they're married or not as they don't talk about themselves much).
They're often on her Zoon Politikon channel together. Sadly I don't
bother sharing her much her anymore. No one was upvoting her terrific
content, likely due to the weak production value. His epic rants are
good to listen to but feature lousy amateur production value. Much of
his great content you may already know if you're a proper
truth-seeker, but every once in a while he'll throw in a golden nugget
or a new perspective that blows your mind.
https://www.bitchute.com/
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 2021 01:09:31 -0400
Subject: YO Clint After I read your email I happened to watch a free
in YouTube movie about Beantown
To: clint@strawmanstory.info, info@lionelmedia.com,
liveneedtoknow@gmail.com, tips@steeltruth.com, media@steeltruth.com,
press@deepcapture.com, washington field <washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>,
bbachrach <bbachrach@bachrachlaw.net>, "Bill.Blair"
<Bill.Blair@parl.gc.ca>, "barbara.massey"
<barbara.massey@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, Newsroom <Newsroom@globeandmail.com>,
Norman Traversy <traversy.n@gmail.com>, news <news@dailygleaner.com>,
nobyrne <nobyrne@unb.ca>, Nathalie Sturgeon
<sturgeon.nathalie@
tracy@uncoverdc.com, James@jamesfetzer.com,
editor@americanthinker.com, jeromecorsi6554
<jeromecorsi6554@gmail.com>
Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>, Boston.Mail@ic.fbi.gov,
Fred.Wyshak@usdoj.gov, "Mark.Blakely" <Mark.Blakely@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>,
irwinlampert@gmail.com, irwincotler <irwincotler@rwchr.org>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Clint <clint@strawmanstory.info>
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2021 23:50:09 +0000
Subject: Re: YO Clint Trust that the FBI and Premier Higgy his buddy
Prime Minister Trudeau The Younger and their minions in the RCMP will
affirm that My cell number is 506 434 8433 so what is yours???
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Hey David... your emails went to my spam folder, sorry.
Will read and get back to you,
-Clint
Go Figure why I got pissed off when I recognized FBI Special Agent
Richard Deslauriers name
Anyone can forward to the 2 hour 1 minute mark then scroll down Correct???
https://www.youtube.com/watch?
Patriots Day
Sep 1, 2020
YouTube Movies
130M subscribers
Based upon the dramatic real-life manhunt for the Boston Marathon
bombers, this powerful action-thriller follows Police Sergeant Tommy
Saunders (Mark Wahlberg) as he joins brave survivors, first
responders, and investigators in a race against time to find the
bombers before they strike again. Directed by Peter Berg (LONE
SURVIVOR) and featuring a stellar cast, PATRIOTS DAY is a stirring
tribute to the Boston community’s strength and courage in the face of
adversity.
http://davidraymondamos3.
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: David Amos
> Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2013 02:40:18 -0300
> Subject: YO FBI Special Agent Richard Deslauriers I just called your
> office and the nasty Yankee played dumb as usual
> To: boston@ic.fbi.gov, washington.field@ic.fbi.gov, "bob.paulson"
> , "Kevin.leahy"
> , Brian.Kelly@usdoj.gov,
> us.marshals@usdoj.gov, Fred.Wyshak@usdoj.gov, jcarney
> , bbachrach@bachrachlaw.net
> Cc: David Amos , birgittaj
> , shmurphy@globe.com, Red Ice Creations
>
>
> Clearly I am not joking
>
> Just Dave
> By Location Visit Detail
> Visit 19,571
> Domain Name (Unknown)
> IP Address 153.31.113.# (FBI Criminal Justice Information Systems)
> ISP FBI Criminal Justice Information Systems
> Location Continent : North America
> Country : United States (Facts)
> State : West Virginia
> City : Clarksburg
> Lat/Long : 39.2664, -80.3097 (Map)
> Language English (U.S.) en-us
> Operating System Microsoft WinXP
> Browser Internet Explorer 8.0
> Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 5.1; Trident/4.0; .NET
> CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.04506.648; .NET CLR 3.5.21022; InfoPath.2;
> .NET CLR 3.0.4506.2152; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; MS-RTC
> LM 8; .NET4.0C; .NET4.0E)
> Javascript version 1.3
> Monitor Resolution : 800 x 600
> Color Depth : 32 bits
> Time of Visit Jun 12 2013 5:00:01 pm
> Last Page View Jun 12 2013 5:00:01 pm
> Visit Length 0 seconds
> Page Views 1
> Referring URL http://www.google.co...YIZDuTIWsfuPUhflswCk
> Search Engine google.com
> Search Words jp morgan and "andrew kosloff"
> Visit Entry Page http://davidamos.blo...-stewart-and-me.html
> Visit Exit Page http://davidamos.blo...-stewart-and-me.html
> Out Click
> Time Zone UTC-5:00
> Visitor's Time Jun 12 2013 4:00:01 pm
> Visit Number 19,571
>
>
> On 6/15/13, David Amos wrote:
>> FBI Boston
>> One Center Plaza
>> Suite 600
>> Boston, MA 02108
>> Phone: (617) 742-5533
>> Fax: (617) 223-6327
>> E-mail: Boston@ic.fbi.gov
>>
>> Hours
>> Although we operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week, our normal
>> "walk-in" business hours are from 8:15 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday
>> through Friday. If you need to speak with a FBI representative at any
>> time other than during normal business hours, please telephone our
>> office at (617) 742-5533.
>>
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: David Amos
>> Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 01:20:20 -0300
>> Subject: Yo Fred Wyshak and Brian Kelly your buddy Whitey's trial is
>> finally underway now correct? What the hell do I do with the wiretap
>> tapes Sell them on Ebay?
>> To: Brian.Kelly@usdoj.gov, us.marshals@usdoj.gov,
>> Fred.Wyshak@usdoj.gov, jcarney ,
>> bbachrach@bachrachlaw.net, michael wolfheart
>> , jonathan.albano@bingham.com,
>> shmurphy@globe.com, mvalencia@globe.com
>> Cc: David Amos , oldmaison
>> , PATRICK.MURPHY@dhs.gov, rounappletree@aol.com
>>
>> http://www.bostonglobe.com/
>>
>> http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/
>>
>> As the CBC etc yap about Yankee wiretaps and whistleblowers I must ask
>> them the obvious question AIN'T THEY FORGETTING SOMETHING????
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?
>>
>> What the hell does the media think my Yankee lawyer served upon the
>> USDOJ right after I ran for and seat in the 39th Parliament baseball
>> cards?
>>
>> http://archive.org/details/
>>
>> http://davidamos.blogspot.ca/
>>
>> http://www.archive.org/
>>
>> http://archive.org/details/
>>
>> FEDERAL EXPRES February 7, 2006
>> Senator Arlen Specter
>> United States Senate
>> Committee on the Judiciary
>> 224 Dirksen Senate Office Building
>> Washington, DC 20510
>>
>> Dear Mr. Specter:
>>
>> I have been asked to forward the enclosed tapes to you from a man
>> named, David Amos, a Canadian citizen, in connection with the matters
>> raised in the attached letter.
>>
>> Mr. Amos has represented to me that these are illegal FBI wire tap tapes.
>>
>> I believe Mr. Amos has been in contact with you about this previously.
>>
>> Very truly yours,
>> Barry A. Bachrach
>> Direct telephone: (508) 926-3403
>> Direct facsimile: (508) 929-3003
>> Email: bbachrach@bowditch.com
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "David Amos"
>> To: "Fred.Wyshak" ; "jcarney"
>> ; ;
>>
>> Cc: ; "maritime_malaise" ;
>> "Wayne.Lang"
>> Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 11:50 AM
>> Subject: So Fred Wyshak has Brian Kelly and the rest of the corrupt
>> Feds practiced the spirit of fill disclosure with Jay Carney??
>>
>>
>> If so then why didn't Mr Carney return my phone calls last July???
>>
>> http://www.boston.com/news/
>>
>> http://www.abajournal.com/
>>
>> http://bostonherald.com/news/
>>
>> http://articles.boston.com/
>>
>> http://carneybassil.com/team/
>>
>> Truth is stranger than fiction. Perhaps Ben Affleck and Matt Damon a
>> couple of boyz from Beantown who done good will pay attention to mean
>> old me someday EH?
>>
>> http://www.hollywoodreporter.
>>
>> Veritas Vincit
>> David Raymond Amos
>> 902 800 0369
>>
>> SOMEBODY SHOULD ASK THE CBC AND THE COPS A VERY SIMPLE QUESTION.
>>
>> WHY was Byron Prior and I banned from parliamentry properties while I
>> running for a seat in parliament in 2004 2 whole YEARS before the
>> mindless nasty French Bastard Chucky Leblanc was barred in NB and yet
>> the CBC, the Fat Fred City Finest and the RCMP still deny anything
>> ever happened to this very day even though Chucky and his pals have
>> blogged about it???
>>
>> http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/
>>
>> http://qslspolitics.blogspot.
>>
>> http://qslspolitics.blogspot.
>>
>> http://qslspolitics.blogspot.
>>
>> Did anybody bother to listen to me explain things to the Police
>> Commissioners in 2004?
>>
>> http://archive.org/details/
>>
>> Veritas Vincit
>> David Raymond Amos
>> 902 800 0369
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: David Amos
>> Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2013 21:56:57 -0300
>> Subject: Re Yankee Feds Please allow me to be brief with the crooks in
>> Wikileaks and the Guardian EH Birgitta and Ed Pilkington?
>> To: "Fred.Wyshak" , "john.warr"
>> , redicecreations@gmail.com, birgittaj
>> , Piratar ,
>> "ed.pilkington" , janice.smith@cbc.ca,
>> camilla.inderberg@cbc.ca, "david.akin" ,
>> Alan.Dark@cbc.ca, newsonline , "John.Williamson"
>>
>> Cc: David Amos , aih ,
>> news-tips , "bob.paulson"
>> , "Gilles.Blinn"
>>
>>
>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/
>>
>> "Snowden will go down in history as one of America's most
>> consequential whistleblowers, alongside Daniel Ellsberg and Bradley
>> Manning. He is responsible for handing over material from one of the
>> world's most secretive organisations – the NSA."
>>
On 1/10/21, David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
> https://www.bitchute.com/
>
> SlowBurnSpecials
>
> Slow Burn 678
>
> 1503 subscribers
>
> After the short intro/monologue Chris Weinert is joined by his guests
> Giuseppe Vafanculo and David Scorpio and the main guest Clint
> Richardson.
>
> Originally hosted by Brutal Honesty Radio at Freedomslips.com:
> http://freedomslips.com/ | http://www.
> https://www.bitchute.com/
>
> ***Lethal Injection 2: A Corruption of Blood (Part 1) now released.
> Watch here:***
>
> - https://www.bitchute.com/
>
> - https://www.brighteon.com/
>
> - 1080p (8.5GB):
> https://www.mediafire.com/
>
> - 720p (4.2GB):
> https://www.mediafire.com/
>
> - 480p (1.3GB):
> https://www.mediafire.com/
>
> - Source quality 1080p (33GB):
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/
>
> ***Watch this prelude to Lethal Injection 2 if you are unfamiliar with
> COVID-19's origins as the product of government-funded
> gain-of-function research:***
>
> Wagging the Dog: The Story Behind the Story of COVID-19
>
> - https://www.bitchute.com/
>
> - https://www.brighteon.com/
>
> - https://www.youtube.com/watch?
>
> -
> https://www.mediafire.com/
>
> Find me at:
> - http://www.strawmanstory.info/
> - https://realitybloger.
> - https://www.youtube.com/
>
>
> https://davidraymondamos3.
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
> Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 16:27:43 -0400
> Subject: Fwd: ATTN Sidney Powell et al I just called your office in
> Texas and many of your associates within the Dec 11th filings
> To: sidney@federalappeals.com, howard@kleinhendler.com,
> lwood@fightback.law, attorneystefanielambert@gmail.
> eldridge@millercanfield.com, dshare@bsdd.com,
> erosenberg@lawyerscommittee.
> grille@michigan.gov, dbressack@finkbressack.com, aap43@hotmail.com,
> megurewitz@gmail.com, James@jamesfetzer.com, info@lionelmedia.com,
> liveneedtoknow@gmail.com, tips@steeltruth.com, media@steeltruth.com,
> press@deepcapture.com, bbachrach <bbachrach@bachrachlaw.net>, Norman
> Traversy <traversy.n@gmail.com>
> Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>, "ron.klain"
> <ron.klain@revolution.com>, bgaier@finance-commerce.com,
> fin.financepublic-
> info@thomasmoresociety.org, info@rleighfrostlaw.com,
> cferrara@thomasmoresociety.org, kaardal@mklaw.com,
> mjnew@nationalreview.com, info@aul.org, pr@cato.org, "robert.frater"
> <robert.frater@justice.gc.ca>, keith.ward@justice.gc.ca, "jan.jensen"
> <jan.jensen@justice.gc.ca>, cxiong@startribune.com
>
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: Ministerial Correspondence Unit - Justice Canada <mcu@justice.gc.ca>
> Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 19:07:58 +0000
> Subject: Automatic Reply
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
> Thank you for writing to the Honourable David Lametti, Minister of
> Justice and Attorney General of Canada.
>
> Due to the volume of correspondence addressed to the Minister, please
> note that there may be a delay in processing your email. Rest assured
> that your message will be carefully reviewed.
>
> We do not respond to correspondence that contains offensive language.
>
> -------------------
>
> Merci d'avoir écrit à l'honorable David Lametti, ministre de la
> Justice et procureur général du Canada.
>
> En raison du volume de correspondance adressée au ministre, veuillez
> prendre note qu'il pourrait y avoir un retard dans le traitement de
> votre courriel. Nous tenons à vous assurer que votre message sera lu
> avec soin.
>
> Nous ne répondons pas à la correspondance contenant un langage offensant.
>
>
> https://www.bitchute.com/
>
> Need to Know:The Fetzer Report Episode 105 - 08 January 2021
>
> Jim Fetzer
>
> Jim Fetzer
>
> 2713 subscribers
>
> Need to Know Episode Episode 105 (08 January 2021) with Michael Ivey
> and Chris Weinert. Lin Wood: Trump did not concede! Capitol shoot a
> false flag? Facebook bans Capitol protest images. Social Media
> parasites ban Trump. Faceberg deletes 1.7 million member group Groper
> Joe is not my president. Traitor Pence straddles the fence. DNI report
> FINALLY delivered to Congress. Foreign election interference confirmed
> by Italian who performed the hack. Traitor Schumer compares Capitol
> Hill false flag to Pearl Harbor. Gaslighting lies by Globalist media
> about
>
> David Amos
> YO FETZER I talked to you personally on the 24th then sent you the
> same email everybody else got CORRECT???
>
> On 12/13/20, Pam Stavropoulos <pstavropoulos@iprimus.com.au> wrote:
>> Thank you David!
>>
>> Really appreciate wide dissemination of these concerns as you clearly
>> recognise.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Pam S.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: David Raymond Amos <pstavropoulos@iprimus.com.au>
>> Sent: Monday, 14 December 2020 2:16 PM
>> To: pstavropoulos@iprimus.com.au
>> Subject: Contact Form submission from
>> http://pamstavropoulos.com.au/
>>
---------- Original message ----------
From: Pam Stavropoulos <pstavropoulos@iprimus.com.au>
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 14:45:09 +1100
Subject: RE: Contact Form submission from http://pamstavropoulos.com.au/
To: David.Raymond.Amos333@gmail.
Thank you David!
Really appreciate wide dissemination of these concerns as you clearly recognise.
Regards,
Pam S.
-----Original Message-----
From: David Raymond Amos <pstavropoulos@iprimus.com.au>
Sent: Monday, 14 December 2020 2:16 PM
To: pstavropoulos@iprimus.com.au
Subject: Contact Form submission from http://pamstavropoulos.com.au/
Sender's name: David Raymond Amos
E-mail: David.Raymond.Amos333@gmail.
Phone: 506 434 1379
Message: ---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: David Amos
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2020 23:14:01 -0400
Subject: ATTN Yanis Varoufakis and Pam Stavropoulos I just tweeted
about your concerns about Julian Assange and global economy etc
To: y.varoufakis@parliament.gr
Cc: motomaniac333
Yanis Varoufakis
Web Site:
https://www.yanisvaroufakis.eu
Email:
y.varoufakis@parliament.gr
Address:
Parliament Mansion (Megaro Voulis), GR10021
Athens / Tel. +30 2103707568 / Fax +30 2103707570.
Check out the attachment for USA litigation over 18 years ago
Please notice that the webcasts and transcripts of this hearing went
missing not long before the economy crashed in 2008 Find the letter
fom Spitzer to me on page 12 within the document I offer as
"Integrity-Yea-Right" and ask yourself why Assaage has never metioned
me In fact I bet that you folks won't either
https://www.banking.senate.
Review of Current Investigations and Regulatory Actions Regarding the
Mutual Fund Industry
Date: Thursday, November 20, 2003
Witness Panel 1
Mr. Stephen M. Cutler
Director - Division of Enforcement
Securities and Exchange Commission
Cutler - November 20, 2003
Mr. Robert Glauber
Chairman and CEO
National Association of Securities Dealers
Glauber - November 20, 2003
Eliot Spitzer
Attorney General
State of New York
Spitzer - November 20, 2003
Yanis Varoufakis
@yanisvaroufakis
·
Law and Disorder: The case of Julian Assange - DiEM25
The conviction of Julian Assange would signify a new dystopian
landscape in which all investigative journalism risks prosecution.
diem25.org
David Raymond Amos
@DavidRaymondAm1
·
1h
Perhaps you and I should have a long talk ASAP?
FYI this old pdf file is the tip of the iceberg of things that Bolton
and Assange have known about yours truly for many years
https://www.scribd.com/doc/
David Raymond Amos
@DavidRaymondAm1
·
41m
The first link I offer in the blog Greece is among the many that
received hundreds of documents byway of registered US Mail as I
returned home to run for public office 6 more times while suing the
Queen
http://davidraymondamos3.
Notice Assange and Trumps lawyer's email before they became famous?
http://thedavidamosrant.
From: Birgitta Jonsdottir
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2010 07:14:02 +0000
Subject: Re: Bon Soir Birgitta according to my records this is the
first email I ever sent you
To: David Amos
dear Dave
i have got your email and will read through the links as soon as i
find some time keep up the good fight in the meantime
thank you for bearing with me
i am literary drowning in requests to look into all sorts of matters
and at the same time working 150% work at the parliament and
the creation of a political movement and being a responsible parent:)
plus all the matters in relation to immi
with oceans of joy
birgitta
Better to be hated for what you are than to be loved for what you are
not.
Andre Gide
Birgitta Jonsdottir
Birkimelur 8, 107 Reykjavik, Iceland, tel: 354 692 8884
http://this.is/birgitta – http://joyb.blogspot.com -
http://www.facebook.com/
>>> From: "Julian Assange)" editor@wikileaks.org
>>> To: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
>>> Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2010 3:15 PM
>>> Subject: Al Jazeera on Iceland's plan for a press safe haven
>>>
>>> FYI: Al-Jazeera's take on Iceland's proposed media safe haven
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?
>>>
>>> More info http://immi.is/
>>>
>>> Julian Assange Editor WikiLeaks http://wikileaks.org/
>>>
>>> From: "David Amos" david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
>>> To: "Julian Assange)" editor@wikileaks.org
>>> Cc: "Dan Fitzgerald" danf@danf.net; "Byrne. G" Byrne.G@parl.gc.ca
>>> Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2010 8:35 PM
>>> Subject: Re: Al Jazeera on Iceland's new plan Thanx Here is
>>> something
>>> about Iceland and Banksters Al Jazeera would enjoy
>>>
>>> Checkout this old pdf file from 2005 at about page two or three
>>>
>>> http://www.scribd.com/doc/
>>>
>>> Then read on and chuckle
>>>
>>> From: postur@fjr.stjr.is
>>> Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009
>>> Subject: Re: RE: Iceland and Bankers etc I must ask the obvious
>>> question. Why have you people ignored me for three years?
>>> To: David Amos david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
>>>
>>> Dear David Amos
>>>
>>> Unfortunately there has been a considerable delay in responding to
>>> incoming letters due to heavy workload and many inquiries to our
>>> office.
>>>
>>> We appreciate the issue raised in your letter. We have set up a web
>>> site www.iceland.org where we have gathered various practical
>>> information regarding the economic crisis in Iceland.
>>>
>>> Greetings from the Ministry of Finance.
>>>
>>> Tilvísun í mál: FJR08100024
>>>
>>> From: postur@for.stjr.is
>>> Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2008
>>> Subject: Regarding your enquiry to the Prime Ministry of Iceland
>>> To: David Amos david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
>>>
>>> David Raymond Amos
>>>
>>> Your enquiry has been received by the Prime Ministry of Iceland and
>>> waits attendance.
>>>
>>> Thank you.
>>>
>>> From: David Amos david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
>>> Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2008
>>> Subject: I just called to remind the Speaker, the Bankers and the
>>> Icelanders that I still exist EH Mrs Mrechant, Bob Rae and Iggy?
>>> To: Milliken.P@parl.gc.ca, sjs@althingi.is, emb.ottawa@mfa.is,
>>> rmellish@pattersonlaw.ca, irisbirgisdottir@yahoo.ca,
>>> marie@mariemorneau.com, dfranklin@franklinlegal.com,
>>> egilla@althingi.is, william.turner@exsultate.ca
>>> Cc: Rae.B@parl.gc.ca, Ignatieff.M@parl.gc.ca, lebrem@sen.parl.gc.ca,
>>> merchp@sen.parl.gc.ca, coolsa@sen.parl.gc.ca, olived@sen.parl.gc.ca
>>>
>>> All of you should review the documents and CD that came with this
>>> letter ASAP EH?
>>>
>>> http://www.scribd.com/doc/
>>>
>>> http://www.scribd.com/doc/
>>>
>>> http://www.scribd.com/doc/
>>>
>>> Perhaps Geir Haarde and Steingrimur Sigfusson should call me back
>>>
>>> Veritas Vincit
>>> David Raymond Amos
>>>
>>> The Reykjavík Grapevine
>>> Hafnarstræti 15
>>> 101 Reykjavík
>>> Iceland
>>> grapevine@grapevine.is
>>> +354-540-3600
http://davidraymondamos3.
Wednesday, 2 August 2017
Attn Andrey Dvornikov, tel. (+7) 499 244 32 54 RE Nikki Haley meeting
with Vasily Nebeznya.Russia's new ambassador to the United Nations,
This was the pdf file attached to the email found below
https://www.scribd.com/
---------- Original message ----------
From: "MAY, Theresa" theresa.may.mp@parliament.uk
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2017 12:12:24 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Attn Andrey Dvornikov, tel. (+7) 499 244 32
54 RE Nikki Haley meeting with Vasily Nebeznya.Russia's new ambassador
to the United Nations,
To: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
If your email is to the Prime Minister, please re-send to the No 10
website: www.gov.uk/government/
http://www.gov.uk/government/
If you are a constituent of the Prime Minister, please re-send to:
sharkeyj@parliament.uk
UK Parliament Disclaimer: This e-mail is confidential to the intended
recipient. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender
and delete it from your system. Any unauthorised use, disclosure, or
copying is not permitted. This e-mail has been checked for viruses,
but no liability is accepted for any damage caused by any virus
transmitted by this e-mail. This e-mail address is not secure, is not
encrypted and should not be used for sensitive data.
---------- Original message ----------
From: "Finance Public / Finance Publique (FIN)"
fin.financepublic-
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2017 12:12:16 +0000
Subject: RE: Attn Andrey Dvornikov, tel. (+7) 499 244 32 54 RE Nikki
Haley meeting with Vasily Nebeznya.Russia's new ambassador to the
United Nations,
To: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
The Department of Finance acknowledges receipt of your electronic
correspondence. Please be assured that we appreciate receiving your
comments.
Le ministère des Finances accuse réception de votre correspondance
électronique. Soyez assuré(e) que nous apprécions recevoir vos
commentaires.
---------- Original message ----------
From: David Amos
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 10:51:14 -0400
Subject: RE FATCA, NAFTA & TPP etc ATTN President Donald J. Trump I
just got off the phone with your lawyer Mr Cohen (646-853-0114) Why
does he lie to me after all this time???
To: president , mdcohen212@gmail.com, pm ,
Pierre-Luc.Dusseault@parl.gc.
B.English@ministers.govt.nz, Malcolm.Turnbull.MP@aph.gov.au
pminvites@pmc.gov.au, mayt@parliament.uk, press , "Andrew.Bailey" ,
fin.financepublic-
"CNN.Viewer.Communications.
Cc: David Amos , elizabeth.thompson@cbc.ca, "justin.ling@vice.com,
elizabeththompson" , djtjr , "Bill.Morneau" , postur ,
stephen.kimber@ukings.ca, "steve.murphy" , "Jacques.Poitras" ,
oldmaison , andre
---------- Original message ----------
From: Michael Cohen
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 14:15:14 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: RE FATCA ATTN Pierre-Luc.Dusseault I just
called and left a message for you
To: David Amos
Effective January 20, 2017, I have accepted the role as personal
counsel to President Donald J. Trump. All future emails should be
directed to mdcohen212@gmail.com and all future calls should be
directed to 646-853-0114.
______________________________
This communication is from The Trump Organization or an affiliate
thereof and is not sent on behalf of any other individual or entity.
This email may contain information that is confidential and/or
proprietary. Such information may not be read, disclosed, used,
copied, distributed or disseminated except (1) for use by the intended
recipient or (2) as expressly authorized by the sender. If you have
received this communication in error, please immediately delete it and
promptly notify the sender. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed
to be received, secure or error-free as emails could be intercepted,
corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late, incomplete, contain viruses
or otherwise. The Trump Organization and its affiliates do not
guarantee that all emails will be read and do not accept liability for
any errors or omissions in emails. Any views or opinions presented in
any email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily
represent those of The Trump Organization or any of its
affiliates.Nothing in this communication is intended to operate as an
electronic signature under applicable law.
---------- Original message ----------
From: "Finance Public / Finance Publique (FIN)"
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 22:05:00 +0000
Subject: RE: Yo President Trump RE the Federal Court of Canada File No
T-1557-15 lets see how the media people do with news that is NOT FAKE
To: David Amos
The Department of Finance acknowledges receipt of your electronic
correspondence. Please be assured that we appreciate receiving your
comments.
Le ministère des Finances accuse réception de votre correspondance
électronique. Soyez assuré(e) que nous apprécions recevoir vos
commentaires.
---------- Original message ----------
From: Kevin Leahy
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 12:38:43 -0400
Subject: Re: RE The call from the Boston cop Robert Ridge (857 259
9083) on behalf of the VERY corrupt Yankee DA Rachael Rollins
To: David Amos
French will follow
Thank you for your email.
For inquiries regarding EMRO’s Office, please address your email to
acting EMRO Sebastien Brillon at sebastien.brillon@rcmp-grc.gc.
For inquiries regarding CO NHQ Office, please address your email to
acting CO Farquharson, David at David.Farquharson@rcmp-grc.gc.
All PPS related correspondence should be sent to my PPS account at
kevin.leahy@pps-spp@parl.gc.ca
------------------------------
Merci pour votre courriel.
Pour toute question concernant le Bureau de l'EMRO, veuillez adresser
vos courriels à l’Officier responsable des Relations
employeur-employés par intérim Sébastien Brillon à l'adresse suivante
sebastien.brillon@rcmp-grc.gc.
Pour toute question concernant le bureau du Commandant de la
Direction générale, veuillez adresser vos courriels au Commandant de
la Direction générale par intérim Farquharson, David à l'adresse
suivante David.Farquharson@rcmp-grc.gc.
Toute correspondance relative au Service De Protection Parlementaire
doit être envoyée à mon compte de PPS à l'adresse suivante
kevin.leahy@pps-spp@parl.gc.ca
Kevin Leahy
Chief Superintendent/Surintendant principal
Director, Parliamentary Protective Service
Directeur , Service de protection parlementaire
T 613-996-5048
Kevin.leahy@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any attachments are
confidential and may contain protected information. It is intended
only for the individual or entity named in the message. If you are not
the intended recipient, or the agent responsible to deliver the
message that this email contains to the intended recipient, you should
not disseminate, distribute or copy this email, nor disclose or use in
any manner the information that it contains. Please notify the sender
immediately if you have received this email by mistake and delete it.
AVIS DE CONFIDENTIALITÉ: Le présent courriel et tout fichier qui y est
joint sont confidentiels et peuvent contenir des renseignements
protégés. Il est strictement réservé à l’usage du destinataire prévu.
Si vous n’êtes pas le destinataire prévu, ou le mandataire chargé de
lui transmettre le message que ce courriel contient, vous ne devez ni
le diffuser, le distribuer ou le copier, ni divulguer ou utiliser à
quelque fin que ce soit les renseignements qu’il contient. Veuillez
aviser immédiatement l’expéditeur si vous avez reçu ce courriel par
erreur et supprimez-le.
---------- Original message ----------
From: Premier of Ontario | Premier ministre de l’Ontario
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 16:38:41 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: RE The call from the Boston cop Robert Ridge
(857 259 9083) on behalf of the VERY corrupt Yankee DA Rachael Rollins
To: David Amos
Thank you for your email. Your thoughts, comments and input are greatly valued.
You can be assured that all emails and letters are carefully read,
reviewed and taken into consideration.
There may be occasions when, given the issues you have raised and the
need to address them effectively, we will forward a copy of your
correspondence to the appropriate government official. Accordingly, a
response may take several business days.
Thanks again for your email.
______
Merci pour votre courriel. Nous vous sommes très reconnaissants de
nous avoir fait part de vos idées, commentaires et observations.
Nous tenons à vous assurer que nous lisons attentivement et prenons en
considération tous les courriels et lettres que nous recevons.
Dans certains cas, nous transmettrons votre message au ministère
responsable afin que les questions soulevées puissent être traitées de
la manière la plus efficace possible. En conséquence, plusieurs jours
ouvrables pourraient s’écouler avant que nous puissions vous répondre.
Merci encore pour votre courriel.
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: David Amos
> Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2019 16:15:59 -0400
> Subject: Hey Ralph Goodale perhaps you and the RCMP should call the
> Yankees Governor Charlie Baker, his lawyer Bob Ross, Rachael Rollins
> and this cop Robert Ridge (857 259 9083) ASAP EH Mr Primme Minister
> Trudeau the Younger and Donald Trump Jr?
> To: pm@pm.gc.ca, Katie.Telford@pmo-cpm.gc.ca,
> Ian.Shugart@pco-bcp.gc.ca, djtjr@trumporg.com,
> Donald.J.Trump@donaldtrump.com
> Frank.McKenna@td.com, barbara.massey@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
> Douglas.Johnson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
> washington.field@ic.fbi.gov, Brenda.Lucki@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
> gov.press@state.ma.us, bob.ross@state.ma.us, jfurey@nbpower.com,
> jfetzer@d.umn.edu, Newsroom@globeandmail.com, sfine@globeandmail.com,
> .Poitras@cbc.ca, steve.murphy@ctv.ca, David.Akin@globalnews.ca,
> Dale.Morgan@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, news@kingscorecord.com,
> news@dailygleaner.com, oldmaison@yahoo.com, jbosnitch@gmail.com,
> andre@jafaust.com>
> Cc: david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
> wharrison@nbpower.com, David.Lametti@parl.gc.ca, mcu@justice.gc.ca,
> Jody.Wilson-Raybould@parl.gc.
>
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: "Murray, Charles (Ombud)"
>> Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2019 18:16:15 +0000
>> Subject: You wished to speak with me
>> To: "motomaniac333@gmail.com"
>>
>> I have the advantage, sir, of having read many of your emails over the
>> years.
>>
>>
>> As such, I do not think a phone conversation between us, and
>> specifically one which you might mistakenly assume was in response to
>> your threat of legal action against me, is likely to prove a
>> productive use of either of our time.
>>
>>
>> If there is some specific matter about which you wish to communicate
>> with me, feel free to email me with the full details and it will be
>> given due consideration.
>>
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>>
>> Charles Murray
>>
>> Ombud NB
>>
>> Acting Integrity Commissioner
>>
>>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
> Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 09:32:09 -0400
> Subject: Attn Integrity Commissioner Alexandre Deschênes, Q.C.,
> To: coi@gnb.ca
> Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
>
> Good Day Sir
>
> After I heard you speak on CBC I called your office again and managed
> to speak to one of your staff for the first time
>
> Please find attached the documents I promised to send to the lady who
> answered the phone this morning. Please notice that not after the Sgt
> at Arms took the documents destined to your office his pal Tanker
> Malley barred me in writing with an "English" only document.
>
> These are the hearings and the dockets in Federal Court that I
> suggested that you study closely.
>
> This is the docket in Federal Court
>
> http://cas-cdc-www02.cas-satj.
>
> These are digital recordings of the last three hearings
>
> Dec 14th https://archive.org/details/
>
> January 11th, 2016 https://archive.org/details/
>
> April 3rd, 2017
>
> https://archive.org/details/
>
>
> This is the docket in the Federal Court of Appeal
>
> http://cas-cdc-www02.cas-satj.
>
>
> The only hearing thus far
>
> May 24th, 2017
>
> https://archive.org/details/
>
>
> This Judge understnds the meaning of the word Integrity
>
> Date: 20151223
>
> Docket: T-1557-15
>
> Fredericton, New Brunswick, December 23, 2015
>
> PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Bell
>
> BETWEEN:
>
> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS
>
> Plaintiff
>
> and
>
> HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
>
> Defendant
>
> ORDER
>
> (Delivered orally from the Bench in Fredericton, New Brunswick, on
> December 14, 2015)
>
> The Plaintiff seeks an appeal de novo, by way of motion pursuant to
> the Federal Courts Rules (SOR/98-106), from an Order made on November
> 12, 2015, in which Prothonotary Morneau struck the Statement of Claim
> in its entirety.
>
> At the outset of the hearing, the Plaintiff brought to my attention a
> letter dated September 10, 2004, which he sent to me, in my then
> capacity as Past President of the New Brunswick Branch of the Canadian
> Bar Association, and the then President of the Branch, Kathleen Quigg,
> (now a Justice of the New Brunswick Court of Appeal). In that letter
> he stated:
>
> As for your past President, Mr. Bell, may I suggest that you check the
> work of Frank McKenna before I sue your entire law firm including you.
> You are your brother’s keeper.
>
> Frank McKenna is the former Premier of New Brunswick and a former
> colleague of mine at the law firm of McInnes Cooper. In addition to
> expressing an intention to sue me, the Plaintiff refers to a number of
> people in his Motion Record who he appears to contend may be witnesses
> or potential parties to be added. Those individuals who are known to
> me personally, include, but are not limited to the former Prime
> Minister of Canada, The Right Honourable Stephen Harper; former
> Attorney General of Canada and now a Justice of the Manitoba Court of
> Queen’s Bench, Vic Toews; former member of Parliament Rob Moore;
> former Director of Policing Services, the late Grant Garneau; former
> Chief of the Fredericton Police Force, Barry McKnight; former Staff
> Sergeant Danny Copp; my former colleagues on the New Brunswick Court
> of Appeal, Justices Bradley V. Green and Kathleen Quigg, and, retired
> Assistant Commissioner Wayne Lang of the Royal Canadian Mounted
> Police.
>
> In the circumstances, given the threat in 2004 to sue me in my
> personal capacity and my past and present relationship with many
> potential witnesses and/or potential parties to the litigation, I am
> of the view there would be a reasonable apprehension of bias should I
> hear this motion. See Justice de Grandpré’s dissenting judgment in
> Committee for Justice and Liberty et al v National Energy Board et al,
> [1978] 1 SCR 369 at p 394 for the applicable test regarding
> allegations of bias. In the circumstances, although neither party has
> requested I recuse myself, I consider it appropriate that I do so.
>
>
> AS A RESULT OF MY RECUSAL, THIS COURT ORDERS that the Administrator of
> the Court schedule another date for the hearing of the motion. There
> is no order as to costs.
>
> “B. Richard Bell”
> Judge
>
>
> Below after the CBC article about your concerns (I made one comment
> already) you will find the text of just two of many emails I had sent
> to your office over the years since I first visited it in 2006.
>
> I noticed that on July 30, 2009, he was appointed to the the Court
> Martial Appeal Court of Canada Perhaps you should scroll to the
> bottom of this email ASAP and read the entire Paragraph 83 of my
> lawsuit now before the Federal Court of Canada?
>
> "FYI This is the text of the lawsuit that should interest Trudeau the most
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: justin.trudeau.a1@parl.gc.ca
> Date: Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 8:18 PM
> Subject: Réponse automatique : RE My complaint against the CROWN in
> Federal Court Attn David Hansen and Peter MacKay If you planning to
> submit a motion for a publication ban on my complaint trust that you
> dudes are way past too late
> To: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
>
> Veuillez noter que j'ai changé de courriel. Vous pouvez me rejoindre à
> lalanthier@hotmail.com
>
> Pour rejoindre le bureau de M. Trudeau veuillez envoyer un courriel à
> tommy.desfosses@parl.gc.ca
>
> Please note that I changed email address, you can reach me at
> lalanthier@hotmail.com
>
> To reach the office of Mr. Trudeau please send an email to
> tommy.desfosses@parl.gc.ca
>
> Thank you,
>
> Merci ,
>
>
> http://davidraymondamos3.
>
>
> 83. The Plaintiff states that now that Canada is involved in more war
> in Iraq again it did not serve Canadian interests and reputation to
> allow Barry Winters to publish the following words three times over
> five years after he began his bragging:
>
> January 13, 2015
> This Is Just AS Relevant Now As When I wrote It During The Debate
>
> December 8, 2014
> Why Canada Stood Tall!
>
> Friday, October 3, 2014
> Little David Amos’ “True History Of War” Canadian Airstrikes And
> Stupid Justin Trudeau
>
> Canada’s and Canadians free ride is over. Canada can no longer hide
> behind Amerka’s and NATO’s skirts.
>
> When I was still in Canadian Forces then Prime Minister Jean Chretien
> actually committed the Canadian Army to deploy in the second campaign
> in Iraq, the Coalition of the Willing. This was against or contrary to
> the wisdom or advice of those of us Canadian officers that were
> involved in the initial planning phases of that operation. There were
> significant concern in our planning cell, and NDHQ about of the dearth
> of concern for operational guidance, direction, and forces for
> operations after the initial occupation of Iraq. At the “last minute”
> Prime Minister Chretien and the Liberal government changed its mind.
> The Canadian government told our amerkan cousins that we would not
> deploy combat troops for the Iraq campaign, but would deploy a
> Canadian Battle Group to Afghanistan, enabling our amerkan cousins to
> redeploy troops from there to Iraq. The PMO’s thinking that it was
> less costly to deploy Canadian Forces to Afghanistan than Iraq. But
> alas no one seems to remind the Liberals of Prime Minister Chretien’s
> then grossly incorrect assumption. Notwithstanding Jean Chretien’s
> incompetence and stupidity, the Canadian Army was heroic,
> professional, punched well above it’s weight, and the PPCLI Battle
> Group, is credited with “saving Afghanistan” during the Panjway
> campaign of 2006.
>
> What Justin Trudeau and the Liberals don’t tell you now, is that then
> Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chretien committed, and deployed the
> Canadian army to Canada’s longest “war” without the advice, consent,
> support, or vote of the Canadian Parliament.
>
> What David Amos and the rest of the ignorant, uneducated, and babbling
> chattering classes are too addled to understand is the deployment of
> less than 75 special operations troops, and what is known by planners
> as a “six pac cell” of fighter aircraft is NOT the same as a
> deployment of a Battle Group, nor a “war” make.
>
> The Canadian Government or The Crown unlike our amerkan cousins have
> the “constitutional authority” to commit the Canadian nation to war.
> That has been recently clearly articulated to the Canadian public by
> constitutional scholar Phillippe Legasse. What Parliament can do is
> remove “confidence” in The Crown’s Government in a “vote of
> non-confidence.” That could not happen to the Chretien Government
> regarding deployment to Afghanistan, and it won’t happen in this
> instance with the conservative majority in The Commons regarding a
> limited Canadian deployment to the Middle East.
>
> President George Bush was quite correct after 911 and the terror
> attacks in New York; that the Taliban “occupied” and “failed state”
> Afghanistan was the source of logistical support, command and control,
> and training for the Al Quaeda war of terror against the world. The
> initial defeat, and removal from control of Afghanistan was vital and
>
> P.S. Whereas this CBC article is about your opinion of the actions of
> the latest Minister Of Health trust that Mr Boudreau and the CBC have
> had my files for many years and the last thing they are is ethical.
> Ask his friends Mr Murphy and the RCMP if you don't believe me.
>
> Subject:
> Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 12:02:35 -0400
> From: "Murphy, Michael B. \(DH/MS\)" MichaelB.Murphy@gnb.ca
> To: motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com
>
> January 30, 2007
>
> WITHOUT PREJUDICE
>
> Mr. David Amos
>
> Dear Mr. Amos:
>
> This will acknowledge receipt of a copy of your e-mail of December 29,
> 2006 to Corporal Warren McBeath of the RCMP.
>
> Because of the nature of the allegations made in your message, I have
> taken the measure of forwarding a copy to Assistant Commissioner Steve
> Graham of the RCMP “J” Division in Fredericton.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Honourable Michael B. Murphy
> Minister of Health
>
> CM/cb
>
>
> Warren McBeath warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca wrote:
>
> Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 17:34:53 -0500
> From: "Warren McBeath" warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
> To: kilgoursite@ca.inter.net, MichaelB.Murphy@gnb.ca,
> nada.sarkis@gnb.ca, wally.stiles@gnb.ca, dwatch@web.net,
> motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com
> CC: ottawa@chuckstrahl.com, riding@chuckstrahl.com,John.
> Oda.B@parl.gc.ca,"Bev BUSSON" bev.busson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
> "Paul Dube" PAUL.DUBE@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
> Subject: Re: Remember me Kilgour? Landslide Annie McLellan has
> forgotten me but the crooks within the RCMP have not
>
> Dear Mr. Amos,
>
> Thank you for your follow up e-mail to me today. I was on days off
> over the holidays and returned to work this evening. Rest assured I
> was not ignoring or procrastinating to respond to your concerns.
>
> As your attachment sent today refers from Premier Graham, our position
> is clear on your dead calf issue: Our forensic labs do not process
> testing on animals in cases such as yours, they are referred to the
> Atlantic Veterinary College in Charlottetown who can provide these
> services. If you do not choose to utilize their expertise in this
> instance, then that is your decision and nothing more can be done.
>
> As for your other concerns regarding the US Government, false
> imprisonment and Federal Court Dates in the US, etc... it is clear
> that Federal authorities are aware of your concerns both in Canada
> the US. These issues do not fall into the purvue of Detachment
> and policing in Petitcodiac, NB.
>
> It was indeed an interesting and informative conversation we had on
> December 23rd, and I wish you well in all of your future endeavors.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Warren McBeath, Cpl.
> GRC Caledonia RCMP
> Traffic Services NCO
> Ph: (506) 387-2222
> Fax: (506) 387-4622
> E-mail warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>
>
>
> Alexandre Deschênes, Q.C.,
> Office of the Integrity Commissioner
> Edgecombe House, 736 King Street
> Fredericton, N.B. CANADA E3B 5H1
> tel.: 506-457-7890
> fax: 506-444-5224
> e-mail:coi@gnb.ca
>
>
>
> If want you something very serious to download and laugh at as well Please
> Enjoy and share real wiretap tapes of the mob
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.archive.org/
>>
>> http://archive.org/details/
>>
>> FEDERAL EXPRES February 7, 2006
>> Senator Arlen Specter
>> United States Senate
>> Committee on the Judiciary
>> 224 Dirksen Senate Office Building
>> Washington, DC 20510
>>
>> Dear Mr. Specter:
>>
>> I have been asked to forward the enclosed tapes to you from a man
>> named, David Amos, a Canadian citizen, in connection with the matters
>> raised in the attached letter.
>>
>> Mr. Amos has represented to me that these are illegal FBI wire tap tapes.
>>
>> I believe Mr. Amos has been in contact with you about this previously.
>>
>> Very truly yours,
>> Barry A. Bachrach
>> Direct telephone: (508) 926-3403
>> Direct facsimile: (508) 929-3003
>> Email: bbachrach@bowditch.com
>>
>> http://davidamos.blogspot.ca/
http://davidraymondamos3.
Sunday, 19 November 2017
Federal Court of Appeal Finally Makes The BIG Decision And Publishes
It Now The Crooks Cannot Take Back Ticket To Try Put My Matter Before
The Supreme Court
https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
Amos v. Canada
Court (s) Database
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
Date
2017-10-30
Neutral citation
2017 FCA 213
File numbers
A-48-16
Date: 20171030
Docket: A-48-16
Citation: 2017 FCA 213
CORAM:
WEBB J.A.
NEAR J.A.
GLEASON J.A.
BETWEEN:
DAVID RAYMOND AMOS
Respondent on the cross-appeal
(and formally Appellant)
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Appellant on the cross-appeal
(and formerly Respondent)
Heard at Fredericton, New Brunswick, on May 24, 2017.
Judgment delivered at Ottawa, Ontario, on October 30, 2017.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY:
THE COURT
Date: 20171030
Docket: A-48-16
Citation: 2017 FCA 213
CORAM:
WEBB J.A.
NEAR J.A.
GLEASON J.A.
BETWEEN:
DAVID RAYMOND AMOS
Respondent on the cross-appeal
(and formally Appellant)
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Appellant on the cross-appeal
(and formerly Respondent)
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY THE COURT
I. Introduction
[1] On September 16, 2015, David Raymond Amos (Mr. Amos)
filed a 53-page Statement of Claim (the Claim) in Federal Court
against Her Majesty the Queen (the Crown). Mr. Amos claims $11 million
in damages and a public apology from the Prime Minister and Provincial
Premiers for being illegally barred from accessing parliamentary
properties and seeks a declaration from the Minister of Public Safety
that the Canadian Government will no longer allow the Royal Canadian
Mounted Police (RCMP) and Canadian Forces to harass him and his clan
(Claim at para. 96).
[2] On November 12, 2015 (Docket T-1557-15), by way of a
motion brought by the Crown, a prothonotary of the Federal Court (the
Prothonotary) struck the Claim in its entirety, without leave to
amend, on the basis that it was plain and obvious that the Claim
disclosed no reasonable claim, the Claim was fundamentally vexatious,
and the Claim could not be salvaged by way of further amendment (the
Prothontary’s Order).
[3] On January 25, 2016 (2016 FC 93), by way of Mr.
Amos’ appeal from the Prothonotary’s Order, a judge of the Federal
Court (the Judge), reviewing the matter de novo, struck all of Mr.
Amos’ claims for relief with the exception of the claim for damages
for being barred by the RCMP from the New Brunswick legislature in
2004 (the Federal Court Judgment).
[4] Mr. Amos appealed and the Crown cross-appealed the
Federal Court Judgment. Further to the issuance of a Notice of Status
Review, Mr. Amos’ appeal was dismissed for delay on December 19, 2016.
As such, the only matter before this Court is the Crown’s
cross-appeal.
II. Preliminary Matter
[5] Mr. Amos, in his memorandum of fact and law in
relation to the cross-appeal that was filed with this Court on March
6, 2017, indicated that several judges of this Court, including two of
the judges of this panel, had a conflict of interest in this appeal.
This was the first time that he identified the judges whom he believed
had a conflict of interest in a document that was filed with this
Court. In his notice of appeal he had alluded to a conflict with
several judges but did not name those judges.
[6] Mr. Amos was of the view that he did not have to
identify the judges in any document filed with this Court because he
had identified the judges in various documents that had been filed
with the Federal Court. In his view the Federal Court and the Federal
Court of Appeal are the same court and therefore any document filed in
the Federal Court would be filed in this Court. This view is based on
subsections 5(4) and 5.1(4) of the Federal Courts Act, R.S.C., 1985,
c. F-7:
5(4) Every judge of the Federal Court is, by virtue of his or her
office, a judge of the Federal Court of Appeal and has all the
jurisdiction, power and authority of a judge of the Federal Court of
Appeal.
[…]
5(4) Les juges de la Cour fédérale sont d’office juges de la Cour
d’appel fédérale et ont la même compétence et les mêmes pouvoirs que
les juges de la Cour d’appel fédérale.
[…]
5.1(4) Every judge of the Federal Court of Appeal is, by virtue of
that office, a judge of the Federal Court and has all the
jurisdiction, power and authority of a judge of the Federal Court.
5.1(4) Les juges de la Cour d’appel fédérale sont d’office juges de la
Cour fédérale et ont la même compétence et les mêmes pouvoirs que les
juges de la Cour fédérale.
[7] However, these subsections only provide that the
judges of the Federal Court are also judges of this Court (and vice
versa). It does not mean that there is only one court. If the Federal
Court and this Court were one Court, there would be no need for this
section.
[8] Sections 3 and 4 of the Federal Courts Act provide that:
3 The division of the Federal Court of Canada called the Federal Court
— Appeal Division is continued under the name “Federal Court of
Appeal” in English and “Cour d’appel fédérale” in French. It is
continued as an additional court of law, equity and admiralty in and
for Canada, for the better administration of the laws of Canada and as
a superior court of record having civil and criminal jurisdiction.
3 La Section d’appel, aussi appelée la Cour d’appel ou la Cour d’appel
fédérale, est maintenue et dénommée « Cour d’appel fédérale » en
français et « Federal Court of Appeal » en anglais. Elle est maintenue
à titre de tribunal additionnel de droit, d’equity et d’amirauté du
Canada, propre à améliorer l’application du droit canadien, et
continue d’être une cour supérieure d’archives ayant compétence en
matière civile et pénale.
4 The division of the Federal Court of Canada called the Federal Court
— Trial Division is continued under the name “Federal Court” in
English and “Cour fédérale” in French. It is continued as an
additional court of law, equity and admiralty in and for Canada, for
the better administration of the laws of Canada and as a superior
court of record having civil and criminal jurisdiction.
4 La section de la Cour fédérale du Canada, appelée la Section de
première instance de la Cour fédérale, est maintenue et dénommée «
Cour fédérale » en français et « Federal Court » en anglais. Elle est
maintenue à titre de tribunal additionnel de droit, d’equity et
d’amirauté du Canada, propre à améliorer l’application du droit
canadien, et continue d’être une cour supérieure d’archives ayant
compétence en matière civile et pénale.
[9] Sections 3 and 4 of the Federal Courts Act create
two separate courts – this Court (section 3) and the Federal Court
(section 4). If, as Mr. Amos suggests, documents filed in the Federal
Court were automatically also filed in this Court, then there would no
need for the parties to prepare and file appeal books as required by
Rules 343 to 345 of the Federal Courts Rules, SOR/98-106 in relation
to any appeal from a decision of the Federal Court. The requirement to
file an appeal book with this Court in relation to an appeal from a
decision of the Federal Court makes it clear that the only documents
that will be before this Court are the documents that are part of that
appeal book.
[10] Therefore, the memorandum of fact and law filed on
March 6, 2017 is the first document, filed with this Court, in which
Mr. Amos identified the particular judges that he submits have a
conflict in any matter related to him.
[11] On April 3, 2017, Mr. Amos attempted to bring a motion
before the Federal Court seeking an order “affirming or denying the
conflict of interest he has” with a number of judges of the Federal
Court. A judge of the Federal Court issued a direction noting that if
Mr. Amos was seeking this order in relation to judges of the Federal
Court of Appeal, it was beyond the jurisdiction of the Federal Court.
Mr. Amos raised the Federal Court motion at the hearing of this
cross-appeal. The Federal Court motion is not a motion before this
Court and, as such, the submissions filed before the Federal Court
will not be entertained. As well, since this was a motion brought
before the Federal Court (and not this Court), any documents filed in
relation to that motion are not part of the record of this Court.
[12] During the hearing of the appeal Mr. Amos alleged that
the third member of this panel also had a conflict of interest and
submitted some documents that, in his view, supported his claim of a
conflict. Mr. Amos, following the hearing of his appeal, was also
afforded the opportunity to provide a brief summary of the conflict
that he was alleging and to file additional documents that, in his
view, supported his allegations. Mr. Amos submitted several pages of
documents in relation to the alleged conflicts. He organized the
documents by submitting a copy of the biography of the particular
judge and then, immediately following that biography, by including
copies of the documents that, in his view, supported his claim that
such judge had a conflict.
[13] The nature of the alleged conflict of Justice Webb is
that before he was appointed as a Judge of the Tax Court of Canada in
2006, he was a partner with the law firm Patterson Law, and before
that with Patterson Palmer in Nova Scotia. Mr. Amos submitted that he
had a number of disputes with Patterson Palmer and Patterson Law and
therefore Justice Webb has a conflict simply because he was a partner
of these firms. Mr. Amos is not alleging that Justice Webb was
personally involved in or had any knowledge of any matter in which Mr.
Amos was involved with Justice Webb’s former law firm – only that he
was a member of such firm.
[14] During his oral submissions at the hearing of his
appeal Mr. Amos, in relation to the alleged conflict for Justice Webb,
focused on dealings between himself and a particular lawyer at
Patterson Law. However, none of the documents submitted by Mr. Amos at
the hearing or subsequently related to any dealings with this
particular lawyer nor is it clear when Mr. Amos was dealing with this
lawyer. In particular, it is far from clear whether such dealings were
after the time that Justice Webb was appointed as a Judge of the Tax
Court of Canada over 10 years ago.
[15] The documents that he submitted in relation to the
alleged conflict for Justice Webb largely relate to dealings between
Byron Prior and the St. John’s Newfoundland and Labrador office of
Patterson Palmer, which is not in the same province where Justice Webb
practiced law. The only document that indicates any dealing between
Mr. Amos and Patterson Palmer is a copy of an affidavit of Stephen May
who was a partner in the St. John’s NL office of Patterson Palmer. The
affidavit is dated January 24, 2005 and refers to a number of e-mails
that were sent by Mr. Amos to Stephen May. Mr. Amos also included a
letter that is addressed to four individuals, one of whom is John
Crosbie who was counsel to the St. John’s NL office of Patterson
Palmer. The letter is dated September 2, 2004 and is addressed to
“John Crosbie, c/o Greg G. Byrne, Suite 502, 570 Queen Street,
Fredericton, NB E3B 5E3”. In this letter Mr. Amos alludes to a
possible lawsuit against Patterson Palmer.
[16] Mr. Amos’ position is that simply because Justice Webb
was a lawyer with Patterson Palmer, he now has a conflict. In Wewaykum
Indian Band v. Her Majesty the Queen, 2003 SCC 45, [2003] 2 S.C.R.
259, the Supreme Court of Canada noted that disqualification of a
judge is to be determined based on whether there is a reasonable
apprehension of bias:
60 In Canadian law, one standard has now emerged as the
criterion for disqualification. The criterion, as expressed by de
Grandpré J. in Committee for Justice and Liberty v. National Energy
Board, …[[1978] 1 S.C.R. 369, 68 D.L.R. (3d) 716], at p. 394, is the
reasonable apprehension of bias:
… the apprehension of bias must be a reasonable one, held by
reasonable and right minded persons, applying themselves to the
question and obtaining thereon the required information. In the words
of the Court of Appeal, that test is "what would an informed person,
viewing the matter realistically and practically -- and having thought
the matter through -- conclude. Would he think that it is more likely
than not that [the decision-maker], whether consciously or
unconsciously, would not decide fairly."
[17] The issue to be determined is whether an informed
person, viewing the matter realistically and practically, and having
thought the matter through, would conclude that Mr. Amos’ allegations
give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias. As this Court has
previously remarked, “there is a strong presumption that judges will
administer justice impartially” and this presumption will not be
rebutted in the absence of “convincing evidence” of bias (Collins v.
Canada, 2011 FCA 140 at para. 7, [2011] 4 C.T.C. 157 [Collins]. See
also R. v. S. (R.D.), [1997] 3 S.C.R. 484 at para. 32, 151 D.L.R.
(4th) 193).
[18] The Ontario Court of Appeal in Rando Drugs Ltd. v.
Scott, 2007 ONCA 553, 86 O.R. (3d) 653 (leave to appeal to the Supreme
Court of Canada refused, 32285 (August 1, 2007)), addressed the
particular issue of whether a judge is disqualified from hearing a
case simply because he had been a member of a law firm that was
involved in the litigation that was now before that judge. The Ontario
Court of Appeal determined that the judge was not disqualified if the
judge had no involvement with the person or the matter when he was a
lawyer. The Ontario Court of Appeal also explained that the rules for
determining whether a judge is disqualified are different from the
rules to determine whether a lawyer has a conflict:
27 Thus, disqualification is not the natural corollary to a
finding that a trial judge has had some involvement in a case over
which he or she is now presiding. Where the judge had no involvement,
as here, it cannot be said that the judge is disqualified.
28 The point can rightly be made that had Mr. Patterson been
asked to represent the appellant as counsel before his appointment to
the bench, the conflict rules would likely have prevented him from
taking the case because his firm had formerly represented one of the
defendants in the case. Thus, it is argued how is it that as a trial
judge Patterson J. can hear the case? This issue was considered by the
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) in Locabail (U.K.) Ltd. v. Bayfield
Properties Ltd., [2000] Q.B. 451. The court held, at para. 58, that
there is no inflexible rule governing the disqualification of a judge
and that, "[e]verything depends on the circumstances."
29 It seems to me that what appears at first sight to be an
inconsistency in application of rules can be explained by the
different contexts and in particular, the strong presumption of
judicial impartiality that applies in the context of disqualification
of a judge. There is no such presumption in cases of allegations of
conflict of interest against a lawyer because of a firm's previous
involvement in the case. To the contrary, as explained by Sopinka J.
in MacDonald Estate v. Martin (1990), 77 D.L.R. (4th) 249 (S.C.C.),
for sound policy reasons there is a presumption of a disqualifying
interest that can rarely be overcome. In particular, a conclusory
statement from the lawyer that he or she had no confidential
information about the case will never be sufficient. The case is the
opposite where the allegation of bias is made against a trial judge.
His or her statement that he or she knew nothing about the case and
had no involvement in it will ordinarily be accepted at face value
unless there is good reason to doubt it: see Locabail, at para. 19.
30 That brings me then to consider the particular circumstances
of this case and whether there are serious grounds to find a
disqualifying conflict of interest in this case. In my view, there are
two significant factors that justify the trial judge's decision not to
recuse himself. The first is his statement, which all parties accept,
that he knew nothing of the case when it was in his former firm and
that he had nothing to do with it. The second is the long passage of
time. As was said in Wewaykum, at para. 85:
To us, one significant factor stands out, and must inform
the perspective of the reasonable person assessing the impact of this
involvement on Binnie J.'s impartiality in the appeals. That factor is
the passage of time. Most arguments for disqualification rest on
circumstances that are either contemporaneous to the decision-making,
or that occurred within a short time prior to the decision-making.
31 There are other factors that inform the issue. The Wilson
Walker firm no longer acted for any of the parties by the time of
trial. More importantly, at the time of the motion, Patterson J. had
been a judge for six years and thus had not had a relationship with
his former firm for a considerable period of time.
32 In my view, a reasonable person, viewing the matter
realistically would conclude that the trial judge could deal fairly
and impartially with this case. I take this view principally because
of the long passage of time and the trial judge's lack of involvement
in or knowledge of the case when the Wilson Walker firm had carriage.
In these circumstances it cannot be reasonably contended that the
trial judge could not remain impartial in the case. The mere fact that
his name appears on the letterhead of some correspondence from over a
decade ago would not lead a reasonable person to believe that he would
either consciously or unconsciously favour his former firm's former
client. It is simply not realistic to think that a judge would throw
off his mantle of impartiality, ignore his oath of office and favour a
client - about whom he knew nothing - of a firm that he left six years
earlier and that no longer acts for the client, in a case involving
events from over a decade ago.
(emphasis added)
[19] Justice Webb had no involvement with any matter
involving Mr. Amos while he was a member of Patterson Palmer or
Patterson Law, nor does Mr. Amos suggest that he did. Mr. Amos made it
clear during the hearing of this matter that the only reason for the
alleged conflict for Justice Webb was that he was a member of
Patterson Law and Patterson Palmer. This is simply not enough for
Justice Webb to be disqualified. Any involvement of Mr. Amos with
Patterson Law while Justice Webb was a member of that firm would have
had to occur over 10 years ago and even longer for the time when he
was a member of Patterson Palmer. In addition to the lack of any
involvement on his part with any matter or dispute that Mr. Amos had
with Patterson Law or Patterson Palmer (which in and of itself is
sufficient to dispose of this matter), the length of time since
Justice Webb was a member of Patterson Law or Patterson Palmer would
also result in the same finding – that there is no conflict in Justice
Webb hearing this appeal.
[20] Similarly in R. v. Bagot, 2000 MBCA 30, 145 Man. R.
(2d) 260, the Manitoba Court of Appeal found that there was no
reasonable apprehension of bias when a judge, who had been a member of
the law firm that had been retained by the accused, had no involvement
with the accused while he was a lawyer with that firm.
[21] In Del Zotto v. Minister of National Revenue, [2000] 4
F.C. 321, 257 N.R. 96, this court did find that there would be a
reasonable apprehension of bias where a judge, who while he was a
lawyer, had recorded time on a matter involving the same person who
was before that judge. However, this case can be distinguished as
Justice Webb did not have any time recorded on any files involving Mr.
Amos while he was a lawyer with Patterson Palmer or Patterson Law.
[22] Mr. Amos also included with his submissions a CD. He
stated in his affidavit dated June 26, 2017 that there is a “true copy
of an American police surveillance wiretap entitled 139” on this CD.
He has also indicated that he has “provided a true copy of the CD
entitled 139 to many American and Canadian law enforcement authorities
and not one of the police forces or officers of the court are willing
to investigate it”. Since he has indicated that this is an “American
police surveillance wiretap”, this is a matter for the American law
enforcement authorities and cannot create, as Mr. Amos suggests, a
conflict of interest for any judge to whom he provides a copy.
[23] As a result, there is no conflict or reasonable
apprehension of bias for Justice Webb and therefore, no reason for him
to recuse himself.
[24] Mr. Amos alleged that Justice Near’s past professional
experience with the government created a “quasi-conflict” in deciding
the cross-appeal. Mr. Amos provided no details and Justice Near
confirmed that he had no prior knowledge of the matters alleged in the
Claim. Justice Near sees no reason to recuse himself.
[25] Insofar as it is possible to glean the basis for Mr.
Amos’ allegations against Justice Gleason, it appears that he alleges
that she is incapable of hearing this appeal because he says he wrote
a letter to Brian Mulroney and Jean Chrétien in 2004. At that time,
both Justice Gleason and Mr. Mulroney were partners in the law firm
Ogilvy Renault, LLP. The letter in question, which is rude and angry,
begins with “Hey you two Evil Old Smiling Bastards” and “Re: me suing
you and your little dogs too”. There is no indication that the letter
was ever responded to or that a law suit was ever commenced by Mr.
Amos against Mr. Mulroney. In the circumstances, there is no reason
for Justice Gleason to recuse herself as the letter in question does
not give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias.
III. Issue
[26] The issue on the cross-appeal is as follows: Did the
Judge err in setting aside the Prothonotary’s Order striking the Claim
in its entirety without leave to amend and in determining that Mr.
Amos’ allegation that the RCMP barred him from the New Brunswick
legislature in 2004 was capable of supporting a cause of action?
IV. Analysis
A. Standard of Review
[27] Following the Judge’s decision to set aside the
Prothonotary’s Order, this Court revisited the standard of review to
be applied to discretionary decisions of prothonotaries and decisions
made by judges on appeals of prothonotaries’ decisions in Hospira
Healthcare Corp. v. Kennedy Institute of Rheumatology, 2016 FCA 215,
402 D.L.R. (4th) 497 [Hospira]. In Hospira, a five-member panel of
this Court replaced the Aqua-Gem standard of review with that
articulated in Housen v. Nikolaisen, 2002 SCC 33, [2002] 2 S.C.R. 235
[Housen]. As a result, it is no longer appropriate for the Federal
Court to conduct a de novo review of a discretionary order made by a
prothonotary in regard to questions vital to the final issue of the
case. Rather, a Federal Court judge can only intervene on appeal if
the prothonotary made an error of law or a palpable and overriding
error in determining a question of fact or question of mixed fact and
law (Hospira at para. 79). Further, this Court can only interfere with
a Federal Court judge’s review of a prothonotary’s discretionary order
if the judge made an error of law or palpable and overriding error in
determining a question of fact or question of mixed fact and law
(Hospira at paras. 82-83).
[28] In the case at bar, the Judge substituted his own
assessment of Mr. Amos’ Claim for that of the Prothonotary. This Court
must look to the Prothonotary’s Order to determine whether the Judge
erred in law or made a palpable and overriding error in choosing to
interfere.
B. Did the Judge err in interfering with the
Prothonotary’s Order?
[29] The Prothontoary’s Order accepted the following
paragraphs from the Crown’s submissions as the basis for striking the
Claim in its entirety without leave to amend:
17. Within the 96 paragraph Statement of Claim, the Plaintiff
addresses his complaint in paragraphs 14-24, inclusive. All but four
of those paragraphs are dedicated to an incident that occurred in 2006
in and around the legislature in New Brunswick. The jurisdiction of
the Federal Court does not extend to Her Majesty the Queen in right of
the Provinces. In any event, the Plaintiff hasn’t named the Province
or provincial actors as parties to this action. The incident alleged
does not give rise to a justiciable cause of action in this Court.
(…)
21. The few paragraphs that directly address the Defendant
provide no details as to the individuals involved or the location of
the alleged incidents or other details sufficient to allow the
Defendant to respond. As a result, it is difficult or impossible to
determine the causes of action the Plaintiff is attempting to advance.
A generous reading of the Statement of Claim allows the Defendant to
only speculate as to the true and/or intended cause of action. At
best, the Plaintiff’s action may possibly be summarized as: he
suspects he is barred from the House of Commons.
[footnotes omitted].
[30] The Judge determined that he could not strike the Claim
on the same jurisdictional basis as the Prothonotary. The Judge noted
that the Federal Court has jurisdiction over claims based on the
liability of Federal Crown servants like the RCMP and that the actors
who barred Mr. Amos from the New Brunswick legislature in 2004
included the RCMP (Federal Court Judgment at para. 23). In considering
the viability of these allegations de novo, the Judge identified
paragraph 14 of the Claim as containing “some precision” as it
identifies the date of the event and a RCMP officer acting as
Aide-de-Camp to the Lieutenant Governor (Federal Court Judgment at
para. 27).
[31] The Judge noted that the 2004 event could support a
cause of action in the tort of misfeasance in public office and
identified the elements of the tort as excerpted from Meigs v. Canada,
2013 FC 389, 431 F.T.R. 111:
[13] As in both the cases of Odhavji Estate v Woodhouse, 2003 SCC
69 [Odhavji] and Lewis v Canada, 2012 FC 1514 [Lewis], I must
determine whether the plaintiffs’ statement of claim pleads each
element of the alleged tort of misfeasance in public office:
a) The public officer must have engaged in deliberate and unlawful
conduct in his or her capacity as public officer;
b) The public officer must have been aware both that his or her
conduct was unlawful and that it was likely to harm the plaintiff; and
c) There must be an element of bad faith or dishonesty by the public
officer and knowledge of harm alone is insufficient to conclude that a
public officer acted in bad faith or dishonestly.
Odhavji, above, at paras 23, 24 and 28
(Federal Court Judgment at para. 28).
[32] The Judge determined that Mr. Amos disclosed sufficient
material facts to meet the elements of the tort of misfeasance in
public office because the actors, who barred him from the New
Brunswick legislature in 2004, including the RCMP, did so for
“political reasons” (Federal Court Judgment at para. 29).
[33] This Court’s discussion of the sufficiency of pleadings
in Merchant Law Group v. Canada (Revenue Agency), 2010 FCA 184, 321
D.L.R (4th) 301 is particularly apt:
…When pleading bad faith or abuse of power, it is not enough to
assert, baldly, conclusory phrases such as “deliberately or
negligently,” “callous disregard,” or “by fraud and theft did steal”.
“The bare assertion of a conclusion upon which the court is called
upon to pronounce is not an allegation of material fact”. Making bald,
conclusory allegations without any evidentiary foundation is an abuse
of process…
To this, I would add that the tort of misfeasance in public office
requires a particular state of mind of a public officer in carrying
out the impunged action, i.e., deliberate conduct which the public
officer knows to be inconsistent with the obligations of his or her
office. For this tort, particularization of the allegations is
mandatory. Rule 181 specifically requires particularization of
allegations of “breach of trust,” “wilful default,” “state of mind of
a person,” “malice” or “fraudulent intention.”
(at paras. 34-35, citations omitted).
[34] Applying the Housen standard of review to the
Prothonotary’s Order, we are of the view that the Judge interfered
absent a legal or palpable and overriding error.
[35] The Prothonotary determined that Mr. Amos’ Claim
disclosed no reasonable claim and was fundamentally vexatious on the
basis of jurisdictional concerns and the absence of material facts to
ground a cause of action. Paragraph 14 of the Claim, which addresses
the 2004 event, pleads no material facts as to how the RCMP officer
engaged in deliberate and unlawful conduct, knew that his or her
conduct was unlawful and likely to harm Mr. Amos, and acted in bad
faith. While the Claim alleges elsewhere that Mr. Amos was barred from
the New Brunswick legislature for political and/or malicious reasons,
these allegations are not particularized and are directed against
non-federal actors, such as the Sergeant-at-Arms of the Legislative
Assembly of New Brunswick and the Fredericton Police Force. As such,
the Judge erred in determining that Mr. Amos’ allegation that the RCMP
barred him from the New Brunswick legislature in 2004 was capable of
supporting a cause of action.
[36] In our view, the Claim is made up entirely of bare
allegations, devoid of any detail, such that it discloses no
reasonable cause of action within the jurisdiction of the Federal
Courts. Therefore, the Judge erred in interfering to set aside the
Prothonotary’s Order striking the claim in its entirety. Further, we
find that the Prothonotary made no error in denying leave to amend.
The deficiencies in Mr. Amos’ pleadings are so extensive such that
amendment could not cure them (see Collins at para. 26).
V. Conclusion
[37] For the foregoing reasons, we would allow the Crown’s
cross-appeal, with costs, setting aside the Federal Court Judgment,
dated January 25, 2016 and restoring the Prothonotary’s Order, dated
November 12, 2015, which struck Mr. Amos’ Claim in its entirety
without leave to amend.
"Wyman W. Webb"
J.A.
"David G. Near"
J.A.
"Mary J.L. Gleason"
J.A.
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
A CROSS-APPEAL FROM AN ORDER OF THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE SOUTHCOTT DATED
JANUARY 25, 2016; DOCKET NUMBER T-1557-15.
DOCKET:
A-48-16
STYLE OF CAUSE:
DAVID RAYMOND AMOS v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
PLACE OF HEARING:
Fredericton,
New Brunswick
DATE OF HEARING:
May 24, 2017
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:
WEBB J.A.
NEAR J.A.
GLEASON J.A.
DATED:
October 30, 2017
APPEARANCES:
David Raymond Amos
For The Appellant / respondent on cross-appeal
(on his own behalf)
Jan Jensen
For The Respondent / appELLANT ON CROSS-APPEAL
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Nathalie G. Drouin
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
For The Respondent / APPELLANT ON CROSS-APPEAL
No comments:
Post a Comment