https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/fundy-albert-prayer-council-1.6744488

Fundy Albert to reconsider adding prayer to municipal meetings

Mayor and two councillors opposed the motion, which passed at a recent general council meeting

Vanessa Moreau · CBC News · Posted: Feb 13, 2023 6:00 AM AST

A group of seven individuals stand in front of a stage with a bright red curtain in the background.

The municipal council of Fundy Albert, with Mayor Bob Roshon, second from the left, and Jeff Jonah, third from the right, will have another look at whether to include a prayer at meetings. (Robert Rochon/Facebook)

Some residents of Fundy Albert, in southeastern New Brunswick, have asked the municipality to reconsider a recent decision to include a prayer before each council meeting.

Mayor Bob Roshon said the municipal council will look at the matter at the next general council meeting on March 7.

Jeff Jonah, councillor for Ward 4 of Fundy Albert, put forward the motion to include a prayer at last week's meeting.

He had been involved with one of the communities that combined to form Fundy Albert and they always said the Serenity Prayer, he told Information Morning Moncton.

"After the amalgamation, leading up to the amalgamation, I've been asked by many people, you know, if this was going to be a practice taken to Fundy Albert," said Jonah. "And yeah, I definitely wanted to see that in Fundy Albert."

Roshon voted against the motion, bringing up a 2015 Supreme Court of Canada decision that ruled that a prayer at the beginning of city council meetings in Saguenay, Que., violated the charter right to freedom of religion, but the motion passed anyway.

Supreme Court rules against prayer at city council meetings

Jane Chrysostom, a resident of Fundy Albert, said she's grateful there were opposing voices to the motion.

"I agree that there is no place in council chambers for religion and should be a place of neutrality," said Chrysostom in an email. "I wrote a letter asking for the motion to be rescinded, which was acknowledged."

A woman wearing a black sweater and white puffy vest with a patterned hat faces the camera. She is outside and there are quilts hanging in the background, in front of a house with white siding and dark shutters. Jane Chrysostom said she is opposed to a prayer being said during municipal council meetings. (Pierre Fournier/CBC News )

The Fundy Albert decision is in contrast to some other municipalities in New Brunswick that have moved away from prayer as a part of council meetings or never had one.

Derek Pleadwell is the mayor of Arcadia, which includes the former villages of Gagetown and Cambridge Narrows. He said he was involved with the Gagetown municipal council for around 12 years.

In an email, Pleadwell said that prayer has not come up at their current council meetings, nor was it a practice with the former Gagetown council.

Mireille LeBlanc is a staff member with the Town of Beaurivage. She said Richibucto, one of the communities that merged to form Beaurivage, used to have a general prayer before council meetings around five years ago.

However, it was eliminated "due to the general public having so many different views and religions."

Saint John council drops prayer at meetings after court ruling

N.B. legislature says no to one-time recital of Hindu prayer

The Town of Salisbury also does not conduct a prayer before council meetings according to Austin Henderson, chief administrative officer, but the Village of Salisbury used to do it.

Henderson said that a prayer had been a procedural by-law of the former village, but it was not included in the town's by-laws, which came into effect Jan. 1.

Jonah said he remains in favour of saying a prayer before council meetings and knows of people who are planning to send letters in support of the practice. He doesn't plan to change his vote at the next meeting in March.

The mayor said he doesn't think his vote will change either.

"Well, diversity is important and I think we need to be inclusive as a council," said Rochon. "We also need to reflect the interests and needs of the entire community."

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Vanessa Moreau

Reporter

Vanessa Moreau is a journalist with CBC New Brunswick in Moncton. You can send story tips to vanessa.moreau@cbc.ca.

With files from Information Morning Moncton and Jacques Poitras

CBC's Journalistic Standards and Practices

66 Comments

David Amos

Methinks issues such as this are par for the course in Fundy Royal for rather obvious reasons N'esy Pas?

David Amos

Reply to David Amos

Fundy Royal's MP answered these question before I ran against him again in 2019

SEVEN QUESTIONS FOR ROB MOORE: Living at the intersection of faith and politics

Q1: Your father was a pastor and a church planter. When did your faith become your own, and not just something your parents did?

Q2: What is your role as Atlantic Critic for the official Opposition?

Q3: You were a lawyer and then chose politics. What led you to make those career choices?

Q4: What are some of the struggles you’ve faced as a Christian in politics, and what is the biggest lesson you’ve learned through that experience?

Q5: How can we pray more effectively for those in government, and what should we be praying for?

Q6: You’ve seen many changes over nearly 15 years in politics. Even positive change can be difficult. What’s your best advice for weathering change?

Q7: With a role of influence comes public scrutiny. What advice do you give others about integrity and accountability?

Need I say the lawyer's answer to the last question gave me an idea for our last debate?

Robert Losier

Hard to believe that in the 21st century there are still people who live their lives with guidance from a fairy tale.

SocietyHasBecomePosessesByDemons YesItHas

Reply to Robert Losier

F you!

Robert Losier

Reply to SocietyHasBecomePosessesByDemons YesItHas

That’s what you think, but there’s no victory for you!

David Amos

Reply to SocietyHasBecomePosessesByDemons YesItHas

Deja Vu???

To encourage thoughtful and respectful conversations, first and last names will appear with each submission to CBC/Radio-Canada's online communities (except in children and youth-oriented communities). Pseudonyms will no longer be permitted.

Identify AsRacoon

Prayer has made NB strong and Canada strong and it must be maintained. There’s a reason so many want to move here and it’s because we’re a society guided by the wisdom of the Lord’s Prayer.

JOhn D Bond

Reply to Identify AsRacoon

Complete and utter nonsense.

Identify AsRacoon

Reply to JOhn D Bond

Growing up in NB as it was up until a few decades ago, the nonsense would have been speaking evil publicly against God and expecting everyone to adhere to atheist values. My how things have changed!

Jean-Guy Rivard
I am of the belief that church and government shouldn't mix.

They can practice anything they want, but it should stay out of the office. I can agree that some exceptions to certain things can be done. Like prayers at certain times, etc but this should not be done
in an official capacity (in a meeting, you can schedule meetings around that time)

Gail Steeves

Content Deactivated
Reply to Jean-Guy Rivard
Agreed, I'm a Christian and respect that some others follow a different path. Government is supposed to represent all - and there is supposed to be a separation of church and state.

Harold Reagan
Reply to Gail Steeves
Tell that to the Anglican church. Our church. The church of the crown.

Clemson Tinne
Content Deactivated
Reply to Harold Reagan
Why are you anti Canada?

David Amos

Reply to Clemson Tinne
Are you?

David Amos
Reply to Harold Reagan
Good Point?

David Amos
Reply to Gail Steeves
Ditto

David Amos
Reply to Jean-Guy Rivard
I concur

Clemson Tinne
Content Deactivated
Reply to Gail Steeves
Wrong country. This is Canada not the USA. Canada was founded as a British Christian nation, not rebelling against the crown.

Clemson Tinne
Content Deactivated
Reply to Harold Reagan
Hardly anti-Canada. I was born here. The crown (not Canadian) has no right to insist we have the Anglican church as our church. Our rCMP cadets celebrate passing at an Anglican mass.

Clemson Tinne
Content Deactivated
Reply to David Amos
No. Anyone who thinks Canada is anything except the North American colonies who were loyal to the crown is deluded. That’s literally the entire reason for Canada. Anyone who doesn’t like that should move to the US and see if a republic suites then better.

David Amos
Content Deactivated
Reply to Clemson Tinne
I did

Clemson Tinne
Content Deactivated
Reply to David Amos
You sound American, must be all the American tv. Canada is founded on loyalty to the crown. It’s the literal reason Canada isn’t the USA

David Amos
Content Deactivated
Reply to Clemson Tinne
Born and raised here and am still here

Clemson Tinne
Content Deactivated
Reply to David Amos
So why did you come back if you don’t like Canada?

David Amos
Reply to Clemson Tinne
I didn't say that You did I am a Not So Proud Canadian

Clemson Tinne
Content Deactivated
Reply to David Amos
Obviously if you are against the crown, you are an anti Canadian and pro American infiltrator

David Amos
Content Deactivated
Reply to Clemson Tinne
Methinks desperate sheople post desperate things when they can't argue N'esy Pas?

Harold Reagan
Reply to Clemson Tinne
Loyalty to the crown should have stopped in 1867 when we became a country. Are you aware of that. The crown should only be part of our history. I suppose youre looking forward to Charlie pictures yet to
come and to be plastered over our money, stamps and court rooms. Whew!

David Amos
Reply to Harold Reagan
FYI New Brunswick still does not have a Constitution

David Amos
Reply to Harold Reagan
Until it does in my humble opinion we are in a Free State of Legal Limbo

Harold Reagan
Content Deactivated
Reply to David Amos
Ive been dropping to my knees in reverence to the crown for nothing all my life. Ow me gawd! Will Chuckles get things right here for us.

Clemson Tinne
Content Deactivated
Reply to Harold Reagan
You think loyalty to the crown should have stopped when 4 British colonies joined together at the behest of the crown in order to ensure a unified front for the crown in North America and to prevent colonies from joining the republic. Too funny!!

Yes I very much look forward to his majesty appearing on photos and money

Clemson Tinne
Content Deactivated
Reply to David Amos
I respect you greatly for being honest enough to admit you are not a proud Canadian. It’s intellectually dishonest for these people to pretend to be proud Canadians when they are against the very reason we
exist.

David Amos
Reply to Clemson Tinne
Thanks for that FYI I ran for public office 7 times with no false illusions of ever being elected How Is that for honest???

Clemson Tinne
Content Deactivated
Reply to David Amos
A Canadian can be for becoming a republic. That’s a new Canada though, that is nothing that exists or has existed and you can’t claim to love this country and be against everything that runs through it. This new Canada they want has nothing to do with Canada. It’s like taking a hamburger, removing the meat, the bun, the condiments, replacing it with a tomato and calling it a hamburger. They want a new Canada that isn’t Canada then fine, they’re entitled. But they need to stop pretending to love Canada or be proud Canadians.

Thank you for at least being intellectually honest!

David Amos
Content Deactivated
Reply to Clemson Tinne
FYI Before I ran for a Seat in the 38th Parliament in 2004 I promised that would do so within a statement of claim South of the 49th

Clemson Tinne
Content Deactivated
Reply to David Amos
That’s great. I have great respect for people who disagree and actually have congruent beliefs that are not distorting history of reality. We live under. Soviet system where the truth and reality seem to be whatever someone’s opinion wants it to be. To be pro Canada and admit the crown’s involvement in that or act like it wasn’t part of the reason we exist is just not honest or truthful.

David Amos
Content Deactivated
Reply to Clemson Tinne
Are you being truthful about your name as per the rules of this forum???

Harold Reagan
Reply to Clemson Tinne
His majesty. Ow me gawd! Ever think about this guy personally. Ever think about what the crown represents. Ever read about the brutal history of the crown. Ever think about what democracy is. Real
democracy, not our toned-down version. Monarchy-democracy is an oxymoron.

David Amos
Content Deactivated
Reply to Harold Reagan

Methinks you should ask your gawd why I called some sheople who swore an oath to King Chucky, the Protector of the Faith of the Church of Not So Merry Old England while you were posting about oxymorons N'esy Pas?

Queen Consort Camilla tests positive for COVID-19

Camilla, King Charles' wife, also contracted the virus once in February last year

Thomson Reuters · Posted: Feb 13, 2023 1:53 PM AST

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/fundy-albert-council-prayer-update-1.6771585

Fundy Albert backtracks on council meeting prayer

Council votes 5-2 to change prayer to moment of reflection

Shane Magee · CBC News · Posted: Mar 08, 2023 11:48 AM AST

The municipal council of Fundy Albert includes, from left, Coun. John Ereaux, Mayor Bob Rochon, Coun. Loretta Elderkin, Coun. Jeff Land, Coun. Jeff Jonah, Coun. James Coates, and Coun. Heather Ward Russell. (Robert Rochon/Facebook)

A southeastern New Brunswick community has backtracked on an earlier vote to hold a prayer at the start of municipal council meetings and instead will offer a moment of reflection.

Fundy Albert council voted 5-2 on Tuesday in a meeting with standing room only and with 60 people watching online.

The original Feb. 6 vote prompted immediate calls to reconsider the decision in the newly formed community south of Moncton that includes Alma, Riverside-Albert and Hillsborough.

Coun. Loretta Elderkin moved to amend the original prayer motion by removing a reference to prayer, substituting the act with a moment of silent reflection.

It would be followed by a "commitment," that says:

"We, Fundy Albert, proudly promote a healthy, safe, vibrant and inclusive community. We are dedicated to delivering excellent services and engaging in meaningful public presentation. Please allow us the serenity to accept the things we cannot change, the courage to accept the things we can and the wisdom to know the difference."

Elderkin said the revision came from reflection over the past month on the "continuous outpour both for and against" the prayer.

"I understand it's not my personal preference necessarily, but I do understand that we represent everyone here in this community, and have to come to a common ground and I'm suggesting that this would be my common ground," Elderkin said.

'Generated significant controversy': mayor

Mayor Robert Rochon, who said he was raised a Roman Catholic, voted against the prayer motion last month and in favour of changing it Tuesday.

The mayor said the vote last month was "an issue that has generated significant controversy." He said there were many who contacted the community in support, and many against, a prayer.

Rochon read passages of the 2015 Supreme Court of Canada decision against a prayer at a Quebec council meeting. It's unclear whether the February vote happened with legal advice that accounted for the 2015 decision.

"My understanding of the Supreme Court decision is that the state - our local government - must adhere to principles of religious neutrality that is not favouring one belief over another," Rochon said.

Man in ball cap and camoflauge-coloured jacket. Fundy Albert Mayor Robert Rochon said the court ruling means the local government must maintain religious neutrality. (Shane Fowler/CBC)

He was one of two council members who spoke about the potential financial cost of appearing to act in defiance of the country's highest court.

Coun. James Coates supported the motion.

"I feel that by dragging this out as long as we have, it'll end up costing the taxpayers of Albert County, Fundy Albert, considerable money from going to the Supreme Court — if it goes there, and it probably will — if it's pushed by the folks who say 'no prayer,'" Coates said.

Jeff Jonah, who introduced the prayer motion in February and questioned the legitimacy of the 2015 court ruling in comments to CBC News last month, opposed the change Tuesday.

"I never thought this would take on this face," Jonah said.

Fundy Albert to reconsider adding prayer to municipal meetings

Coun. Jeff Land was the second vote against removing the prayer.

Coun. Heather Ward Russell voted in favour, saying she believes in prayer but doesn't believe in mixing church and state.

Three people spoke ahead of the vote in favour of the prayer, including Pastor Paul Steeves with the Hillsborough Baptist Church. Their comments in support of prayer were met with applause from the audience.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Shane Magee

Reporter

Shane Magee is a Moncton-based reporter for CBC. He can be reached at shane.magee@cbc.ca.

Follow Shane Magee on Twitter

CBC's Journalistic Standards and Practices

18 Comments

SarahRose Werner

"I know we look after a lot of different faiths, and people don't like church and state, but this small prayer I don't think causes any conflict going forward, and that's my personal view," - He's certainly entitled to his personal view, but I don't see why he would think a prayer that's already caused conflict wouldn't cause more conflict going forward.

Ric Shae

Don Corey

Reply to Ric Shae

Totally ridiculous. I come from many generations of Canadians, but have never personally pledged loyalty to any British monarch (and never will). The monarchy may have had a "special place in Canada" at one time, but it no longer does to the majority of Canadians who could care less about the royal family and all their scandals and other garbage.

Ric Shae

Marcel Belanger

Reply to Ric Shae

British commonwealth, that dubious last ditch attempt by the failed empire to try and keep itself viable, is that the one you mean. Sorry Shad, but it’s almost gone, won’t be too long now. Funny thing is that they did it to themselves.

Don Corey

Reply to Ric Shae

Well, my roots in North America probably go back further than yours. My Canadian ancestors were Loyalists. My father fought in WW2. I'm about as Canadian as they come, but have no use for your tainted and self-righteous monarchy. Most French folks never did, and who could blame them? And our indigenous people were led down some very dark roads thanks to those with your mentality. Wake up; it's the 21st century!

Don Corey

Reply to Marcel Belanger

I think the guy's a nutcase; thinks he's still in the 1700's.

Don Corey

Reply to Ric Shae

You are very wrong on what it takes to be a Canadian. I have British and Loyalist roots, but also realize that we're not living in the 18th century. My father fought in WW2.....for Canada, not the British monarchy. You should be much more careful in your accusations.....

Ric Shae

Don Corey

Reply to Ric Shae

We're not a "project"; we're a country. I have every right to speak my mind, just as you do. But you need to stop living in the 18th (or 17th) century. The world is changing......so is Canada.....we don't need the scandal riddled British monarchy.

Don Corey

Reply to Ric Shae

No, he was in North Africa before the Americans were in the war. He and the other Canadians were fighting against the Nazis, not for the monarchy.

Don Corey

Reply to Ric Shae

I'm very well aware of our history; probably better than you.

Yes, we're still in the Commonwealth. All I'm saying is that the time has arrived to pull out and be on our own (and actually, that's pretty much the way we've been since WW2). You need to respect the fact that there are many who disagree with your opinions, just as there are those who disagree with me. If you don't, then you're the one lacking in true Canadian values.

Ric Shae

James Vander

Reply to Ric Shae

No concept of "real" history? Perhaps you can explain why there is the following written (in stone) over the entrance doors to our Parliament building in Ottawa: "He shall have dominion from sea to sea".Gee, I wonder who "He" is?.......

It's always important to not only know our history but to understand the concept of it.

Kyle Woodman

Reply to James Vander

Maybe it's referring to the creator.

Ric Shae

Kyle Woodman

Reply to Ric Shae

But what version of Christianity is acceptable to you. Under your ideals are we to be controlled by the Church of England? Should Catholics be persecuted?

Ric Shae

Kyle Woodman

Reply to Ric Shae

It is not my business to inquire here into the original of the power or dignity of the clergy. This only I say, that, whencesoever their authority be sprung, since it is ecclesiastical, it ought to be confined within the bounds of the Church, nor can it in any manner be extended to civil affairs, because the Church itself is a thing absolutely separate and distinct from the commonwealth.

- John Locke

Ric Shae

Kyle Woodman

Reply to Ric Shae

OK bud. Keep living in the past.

Marcel Belanger

Reply to Ric Shae

This is Canada, those that want to lick royals are welcome to it. I don't and the majority of Canadians dont either.

claude bourgeois

I pray that all prayers on government time (municipal, federal, provincial) are scrapped.

SarahRose Werner

That makes good sense. Reflection and commitment are qualities one wants to see in a governing body.

Ric Shae

SarahRose Werner

Reply to Ric Shae

The "Lord's Prayer" reflects the freedom of one religion and only one.

Greg Miller

What exactly is the purpose of a "moment of reflection"?

Marcel Belanger

The government at all levels has to be religion neutral.

Ric Shae

SarahRose Werner

Reply to Ric Shae

I did indeed. I swore allegiance to the queen, not to her religion. If I'd been required to swear allegiance to a specific religion, I would not have applied for Canadian citizenship. So would many others who are now Canadian citizens.

Ric Shae

Kyle Woodman

Reply to Ric Shae

That's why my family moved away from Northern Ireland

https://fundyalbert.ca/

Mayor Robert (Bob) Rochon

r.rochon@fundyalbert.ca

506 875 9883

Ward 1
Councillor John Ereaux

j.ereaux@fundyalbert.ca

Ward 2
Councillor Loretta Elderkin

l.elderkin@fundyalbert.ca

Ward 3
Deputy Mayor Jeff Land

j.land@fundyalbert.ca

Ward 4
Councillor Jeff Jonah

j.jonah@fundyalbert.ca

Ward 5
Councillor James (Jim) Coates

j.coates@fundyalbert.ca

Ward 6
Councillor Heather Ward Russell

h.russell@fundyalbert.ca

Municipal Offices in Fundy Albert:

Clerk’s Office:
2849 Main Street, Unit 1
Hillsborough, NB E4H 2X7
(506) 734-3733 or (506) 887-6123
cao@fundyalbert.ca

Alternate Clerk Office:
8 School Street
Alma NB E4H 1L2
(506) 887-6123

Finance Department:
5823 King Street
Riverside-Albert NB
E4H 4B4
(506) 882-3022

Fundy Albert

À: 2022-12-9, 6h51

Fundy Albert
Poste à combler	Nb de postes à combler	Nb de candidat(e)s	État
Maire	1	3	(Élection)
Conseiller(ère) Quartier 1	1	3	(Élection)
Conseiller(ère) Quartier 2	1	6	(Élection)
Conseiller(ère) Quartier 3	1	2	(Élection)
Conseiller(ère) Quartier 4	1	2	(Élection)
Conseiller(ère) Quartier 5	1	2	(Élection)
Conseiller(ère) Quartier 6	1	2	(Élection)

Poste; Nom; sortant(e); Élu(e); Genre; Téléphone; Courriel; Site Web

Maire; Andrew Casey; ; ; M; 506-874-0676; andrewcasey@parklandvillageinn.com ;
Maire; Peter Jubb; ; ; M; 1-506-864-2880; peter.F.Jubb@gmail.com ;
https://www.facebook.com/peter.f.jubb
Maire; Robert Rochon; ; ; M; 506-875-9883; rochonb@gmail.com ;
https://www.facebook.com/CandidateforMayorofFundyAlbert
Conseiller(ère) Quartier 1; Clark Butland; ; ; M; 1-506-887-2409; butlands@live.com ;
Conseiller(ère) Quartier 1; Kelly Edgett; ; ; F; 506-381-0153; kellykde1977@hotmail.com ;
Conseiller(ère) Quartier 1; John S. Ereaux; ; ; M; 506-380-3051; ereauxj@gmail.com ;
Conseiller(ère) Quartier 2; Margaret Bogle-Hicks; ; ; F; 506-860-0333; margaretdanahy@gmail.com ;
Conseiller(ère) Quartier 2; Mathew Dick; ; ; M; 506-380-7210; mathewdick0@gmail.com ;
Conseiller(ère) Quartier 2; Loretta Elderkin; ; ; F; 506-381-5864; lorettae123@gmail.com ;
Conseiller(ère) Quartier 2; Jason V. Horsman; ; ; M; 1-506-866-0271; jason.horsman@hotmail.com ;
Conseiller(ère) Quartier 2; Hartley O'Connor; ; ; M; 506-734-2084; hartleyo@xplornet.ca ;
Conseiller(ère) Quartier 2; Jared Allen Parsons; ; ; M; ; ;
Conseiller(ère) Quartier 3; Jeff Land; ; ; M; ; jland7842@gmail.com ;
Conseiller(ère) Quartier 3; James Wilson; ; ; M; ; jmwilson@mta.ca ;
https://www.facebook.com/james4albert
Conseiller(ère) Quartier 4; Don Bowman; ; ; M; 506-229-7195; rhvacspecialist@gmail.com ;
Conseiller(ère) Quartier 4; Jeffrey A. Jonah; ; ; M; 1-506-866-4000; jeffjonah@gmail.com ;
Conseiller(ère) Quartier 5; James (Jim) Coates; ; ; M; 5067342736; jim.t.coates@gmail.com ;
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100012900673148
Conseiller(ère) Quartier 5; Fred Irving; ; ; M; 1-506-381-0314; ;
Conseiller(ère) Quartier 6; Harry Doyle; ; ; M; 506-387-7086; htdoyle@rogers.com ;
Conseiller(ère) Quartier 6; Heather Ward Russell; ; ; F; 1-506-380-9663; heather.russell2@gnb.ca ;

Meet the Council of the Village of Hillsborough

Hillsborough Village Council consists of one Mayor and four Councillors. The Village government operates under the New Brunswick Municipalities Act, and holds public Council Meetings monthly. Regular Council Meetings are held in Council Chambers at 2849 Main Street, on the first Monday of each month with a 6:30 pm start time unless it is a holiday, whereas the meeting is then held the following week, unless otherwise posted. The public is welcome to attend the Regular Monthly Council Meetings, with the option to watch it live streamed – accessible via the Village of Hillsborough’s Facebook page.

Mayor Robert (Bob) Rochon
rochonb@gmail.com / (506) 875-9883

Deputy Mayor Jeff Jonah
jeffjonah@gmail.com / (506) 866-4000

Councillor Melody Land
land.melody@gmail.com / (506) 381-8747
facebook.com/MelodyforHillsborough

Councillor Jeff Land
jland7842@gmail.com

Councillor Trent Steeves
trentsteeves1766@gmail.com

Kim Beers, Village Clerk/Administrator – villageoffice@villageofhillsborough.ca
2849 Main Street, Unit 1 | Hillsborough | NB | E4H 2X7
Office 506-734-3733 | Fax 506-734-3711

https://www.connectingalbertcounty.org/news/category/floor-cloth

This day-long workshop, with mid-day break, is set in Molly Kool's childhood home (at the East gate of Fundy National Park) overlooking the beautiful Bay of Fundy. Molly's home was originally built in an era when floor cloths were common floor coverings -- they're the precursor to modern day linoleum and vinyl flooring! Created on special canvas sail-cloth and prepared with quality paints, your unique floorcloth will become a treasured, useful heirloom.

Pre-paid $95.00 registration is required for this limited seating 10 a.m.- 4 p.m. event by calling 506-887-2213. (Do let us know if you were shut out last year for sold-out seating, we'll try to get you in this year, though it is first call, first seated.) Morning snacks and all day beverages included; brown bag your lunch. The Molly Kool Centre is an accessible building with off-site/nearby toilet facilities. Registration deadline is September 6. Questions/Contact Jane Chrysostom 887-2213

If you have a little extra time, at the town of Riverside Albert, take Route 915 instead. It's a very scenic (mainly ocean-side) drive, takes only a few minutes longer, and meets up with 114 South just inside Alma.

Cleveland Place is on your right in the middle of Alma village.

Contact us:

Phone: 1 (506) 887-2213

E-Mail: janechrysostom@hotmail.com

Submitted by Jane Chrysostom. Jane has continuous roots in New Brunswick that go back to the early 1800's. She and her husband Steve run a Bookshop, Bed & Breakfast, and the Artisan's Shop on Main Street in Alma at Cleveland Place. Now that their four children have independent lives, Jane spends her time running Cleveland Place, volunteering in the community, and creating in her studio where much inspiration comes from Albert County.

Attn Fred Shuman, Bruce Holland and Richard Zurawski Re Federal Court File No T-1557-15 I called correct?

David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>	Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 6:17 PM
To: fredshumanforhalifaxwest@gmail.com, bruce@discoverspryfield.ca, "geoff.regan" <geoff.regan@parl.gc.ca>, "Andy.Fillmore" <Andy.Fillmore@parl.gc.ca>, richard.zurawski@halifax.ca
Cc: "David.Raymond.Amos" <David.Raymond.Amos@gmail.com>


http://gregan.liberal.ca/wp-content/uploads/sites/1447/2017/05/Spring-2018-Newsletter.pdf "Nova Scofia, speaks at Let's Talk #138. Geoff listens to a quesfion from Fred Shuman" Fred Shuman ext 5 (902) 835-4333 fredshumanforhalifaxwest@gmail.com Bruce Holland 902 452-7472 bruce@discoverspryfield.ca Richard Zurawski Call: 902-579-7453 richard.zurawski@halifax.ca ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 15:07:06 -0300 Subject: Re Federal Court File No T-1557-15 I called David Wells in order to explain my concerns about the lawyer Rob Moore boasting about his Integrity To: testimony@paoc.org, "Alaina.Lockhart" <Alaina.Lockhart@parl.gc.ca>, pwhite@nbnet.nb.ca, "blaine.higgs" <blaine.higgs@gnb.ca>, "bruce.northrup" <bruce.northrup@gnb.ca>, "Bill.Oliver" <Bill.Oliver@gnb.ca>, "Wayne.Long" <Wayne.Long@parl.gc.ca>, "Karen.Ludwig" <Karen.Ludwig@parl.gc.ca>, "Gerald.Butts" <Gerald.Butts@pmo-cpm.gc.ca>, "Katie.Telford" <Katie.Telford@pmo-cpm.gc.ca> Cc: "David.Raymond.Amos" <David.Raymond.Amos@gmail.com>, "andrew.scheer" <andrew.scheer@parl.gc.ca>, "andrea.anderson-mason" <andrea.anderson-mason@gnb.ca>, andre <andre@jafaust.com>, "robert.mckee" <robert.mckee@gnb.ca>, "Robert. Jones" <Robert.Jones@cbc.ca>, news <news@kingscorecord.com>, Newsroom <Newsroom@globeandmail.com>, "Jody.Wilson-Raybould" <Jody.Wilson-Raybould@parl.gc.ca>, "Jane.Philpott" <Jane.Philpott@parl.gc.ca>, "greg.byrne" <greg.byrne@gnb.ca>, "Jack.Keir" <Jack.Keir@gnb.ca>, "steve.murphy" <steve.murphy@ctv.ca>, "David.Akin" <David.Akin@globalnews.ca>, "kris.austin" <kris.austin@gnb.ca>, "David.Coon" <David.Coon@gnb.ca> https://www.robmoore.ca/ White, Peter J. C., Law Office 936 Main St. PO Box 1098, Stn. Main Hampton, New Brunswick E5N 8H1 Phone: 506-832-3403 Fax: 506-832-3640 Email: pwhite@nbnet.nb.ca https://paoc.org/family/who-we-are/general-executive David Wells 2450 Milltower Court, Mississauga, ON L5N 5Z6 testimony@paoc.org 905-542-7400

https://testimony.paoc.org/articles/seven-questions-for-rob-moore

Seven Questions

SEVEN QUESTIONS FOR ROB MOORE: Living at the intersection of faith and politics

Lisa Hall-Wilson

Rob Moore is the son of a PAOC pastor and church planter. He served as a member of Parliament for the Conservative Party of Canada from 2004 to 2015. After his defeat in the 2015 election, he was asked to fill the role of Atlantic Critic for the official Opposition. Last May, Rob was elected to the General Executive of the PAOC. Moore lives in Quispamsis, N.B., with his wife and three children.

Q1: Your father was a pastor and a church planter. When did your faith become your own, and not just something your parents did?

I accepted Christ into my heart at an early age. During the preteen and early teen years, when you think things through a little more, [that’s] when my faith became my own and directed the path I would take. We did move around when I was younger. My dad was from Saint John, N.B., so when he planted a new PAOC church in the Saint John area, that was where my family had its roots. I am very pleased to have had those experiences and to have settled in New Brunswick.

Q2: What is your role as Atlantic Critic for the official Opposition?

When you’re in government, you have ministerial positions. When you’re in opposition, you have critic positions. We don’t have [Conservative] representation in the House of Commons from the Atlantic region, so I am a voice on Atlantic issues. I provide advice to the Leader of the Opposition and inform the leader on issues in Atlantic Canada, and on the impact of government policies on Atlantic Canada. Having a good Opposition [in parliament] is important. It’s a foundation of our system to have debate on issues that are important. It’s a role I value and enjoy.

Q3: You were a lawyer and then chose politics. What led you to make those career choices?

I did my undergrad in business. The decision whether to jump out into the business world or to continue in law was something that I, and my parents, prayed about and gave a lot of thought to. I decided that I wanted to continue with law. How laws are made and their impact on people are what interested me.

"One foundational aspect of our faith is the importance of family. I was told by a senior member of Parliament that if I could leave that place with my integrity and my family intact, I would do well."

I’m very grateful for my experience in law school. It has certainly helped me in the roles I’ve had, including being the parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Justice, where you’re involved in making law. My job was to take government legislation and work with our justice committee to move that legislation forward. My background helped me to achieve that. I wasn’t really looking at that career when I decided to go to law school. When I look back, some of those steps that didn’t make sense at the time have come into play to get me to where I am.

Q4: What are some of the struggles you’ve faced as a Christian in politics, and what is the biggest lesson you’ve learned through that experience?

One foundational aspect of our faith is the importance of family. I was told by a senior member of Parliament that if I could leave that place with my integrity and my family intact, I would do well. I didn’t appreciate how important that advice was until later.

Being a member of Parliament—as anyone who has served in that role will tell you—is a pressure cooker. It’s the first time many MPs have been out on the road and away from family, and it can put a tremendous strain on relationships. There are many people who have left that place with a lot of pain. My faith helped me through those years and some of those challenges. Those experiences reinforced how important family is.

Q5: How can we pray more effectively for those in government, and what should we be praying for?

Wisdom. That’s important. Look at [what happened in] 2016; look at the world; look at what’s happening in Syria, where people are dying for their faith. In the big scheme of things, we are very blessed to live in this country. In our Charter of Rights, we recognize the supremacy of God. That’s what people can pray for. Politicians are faced with significant decisions.…There are a lot of challenges [with this job], and having the support of people and prayer is important. No matter who is in government, we should work together because there are things bigger than politics.

Q6: You’ve seen many changes over nearly 15 years in politics. Even positive change can be difficult. What’s your best advice for weathering change?

You have to accept that things are going to change, but you don’t accept the inevitability of where change will bring you.… You need to be grounded in what’s important. It’s easy to put the blinders on and lose sight of the bigger picture. Which opportunities are you being presented with when one chapter is closing and a new chapter is opening? What are some things you couldn’t do before, but now you can? … Stay grounded in who you are.

Q7: With a role of influence comes public scrutiny. What advice do you give others about integrity and accountability?

The one piece of advice I was given, and tried to follow, is that there are always opportunities to let something slide or do something that maybe no one’s going to find out about. Ask yourself, as you make those decisions—whether it’s business or family or politics—if this is something you’d want to see on the front page of your local paper. It might not be wrong or against the law, but is it something I want everyone to be reading about? It’s never perfect and no one is, but I’ve tried to abide by that. I’ve tried to conduct myself in a way my family would be proud of.

Lisa Hall-Wilson is an award-winning journalist. She writes exclusively for the Canadian faith-based community. You can find her on Facebook or on her blog at www.lisahallwilson.com.

Photo: courtesy Rob Moore

This article appeared in the March/April 2017 issue of testimony, the bimonthly publication of The Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada.

---------- Original message ----------
From: Kevin Leahy <kevin.leahy@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>
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 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>

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.ca

For inquiries regarding CO NHQ Office, please address your email to
acting CO Farquharson, David at David.Farquharson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca

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.ca

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.ca

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 <Premier@ontario.ca>
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 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>

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 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 18 May 2017 11:55:57 -0400
Subject: Re the CBA, the RCMP, Federal Court File # T-1557-15 and the
Hearing before the Federal Court of Appeal on May 24th 2017
To: ray.adlington@mcinnescooper.com, mcu <mcu@justice.gc.ca>,
"bob.paulson" <bob.paulson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "hon.ralph.goodale"
<hon.ralph.goodale@canada.ca>, "Jody.Wilson-Raybould"
<Jody.Wilson-Raybould@parl.gc.ca>, "bill.pentney"
<bill.pentney@justice.gc.ca>, "jan.jensen" <jan.jensen@justice.gc.ca>
Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos@gmail.com>, Mordaith
<Mordaith@gmail.com>, "leanne.murray"
<leanne.murray@mcinnescooper.com>, gopublic <gopublic@cbc.ca>,
"Jacques.Poitras" <Jacques.Poitras@cbc.ca>, "nick.moore"
<nick.moore@bellmedia.ca>, "jeremy.keefe"
<jeremy.keefe@globalnews.ca>, "steve.murphy" <steve.murphy@ctv.ca>,
"Gilles.Blinn" <Gilles.Blinn@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "Gilles.Moreau"
<Gilles.Moreau@forces.gc.ca>, sallybrooks25 <sallybrooks25@yahoo.ca>,
oldmaison <oldmaison@yahoo.com>, andre <andre@jafaust.com>, jbosnitch
<jbosnitch@gmail.com>, "serge.rousselle" <serge.rousselle@gnb.ca>,
premier <premier@gnb.ca>, "brian.gallant" <brian.gallant@gnb.ca>,
"Larry.Tremblay" <Larry.Tremblay@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "luc.labonte"
<luc.labonte@gnb.ca>

As I told the RCMP who called me last month the proper time and place
to discuss the CBA and your former partner Judge Richard Bell is the
Federal Court of Canada

Raymond G. Adlington Partner
McInnes Cooper
1300-1969 Upper Water St., Purdy's Wharf Tower II PO Box 730, Stn. Central
Halifax, Nova Scotia B3J 2V1
Phone: (902) 444-8470
Fax: (902) 425-6350
E: ray.adlington@mcinnescooper.com

http://www.mcinnescooper.com/news/ray-adlington-named-to-cba-board-of-directors/

Ray Adlington named to CBA Board of Directors

May 2, 2017

Halifax partner Ray Adlington was recently named to the CBA Board of Directors.

In their announcement yesterday the CBA advised that the board would
come into effect September 1st, 2017.

After collecting extensive input over the past two years, we know
that CBA members believe it’s important for the organization to have a
Board of Directors that reflects the diversity of the legal
profession, including a mix of practice types, experience, skills,
geography and more.
Our new Board of Directors exemplifies this principle.

The board is composed from one member from each province as well as
the CBA President.

Congratulations Ray on this well deserved appointment.

> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
> 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, JUSTWEB@novascotia.ca,
> Frank.McKenna@td.com, barbara.massey@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
> Douglas.Johnson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, sandra.lofaro@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.com, DJT@trumporg.com
> wharrison@nbpower.com, David.Lametti@parl.gc.ca, mcu@justice.gc.ca,
> Jody.Wilson-Raybould@parl.gc.ca, hon.ralph.goodale@canada.ca
>
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: "Murray, Charles (Ombud)" <Charles.Murray@gnb.ca>
>> Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2019 18:16:15 +0000
>> Subject: You wished to speak with me
>> To: "motomaniac333@gmail.com" <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
>>
>>
>>> From: Justice Website <JUSTWEB@novascotia.ca>
>>> Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 14:21:11 +0000
>>> Subject: Emails to Department of Justice and Province of Nova Scotia
>>> To: "motomaniac333@gmail.com" <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>>>
>>> Mr. Amos,
>>> We acknowledge receipt of your recent emails to the Deputy Minister of
>>> Justice and lawyers within the Legal Services Division of the
>>> Department of Justice respecting a possible claim against the Province
>>> of Nova Scotia. Service of any documents respecting a legal claim
>>> against the Province of Nova Scotia may be served on the Attorney
>>> General at 1690 Hollis Street, Halifax, NS. Please note that we will
>>> not be responding to further emails on this matter.
>>>
>>> Department of Justice
>>>
>>> On 8/3/17, David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> If want something very serious to download and laugh at as well Please
>>>> Enjoy and share real wiretap tapes of the mob
>>>>
>>>> http://thedavidamosrant.blogspot.ca/2013/10/re-glen-greenwald-and-braz
>>>> ilian.html
>>>>
>>>>> http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2013/06/09/nsa-leak-guardian.html
>>>>>
>>>>> 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?v=vugUalUO8YY
>>>>>
>>>>> 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/ITriedToExplainItToAllMaritimersInEarly200
>>>>> 6
>>>>>
>>>>> http://davidamos.blogspot.ca/2006/05/wiretap-tapes-impeach-bush.html
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.archive.org/details/PoliceSurveilanceWiretapTape139
>>>>>
>>>>> http://archive.org/details/Part1WiretapTape143
>>>>>
>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>> ---------- 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.gc.ca/IndexingQueries/infp_RE_info_e.php?court_no=T-1557-15&select_court=T
>>>>
>>>> These are digital recordings of the last three hearings
>>>>
>>>> Dec 14th https://archive.org/details/BahHumbug
>>>>
>>>> January 11th, 2016 https://archive.org/details/Jan11th2015
>>>>
>>>> April 3rd, 2017
>>>>
>>>> https://archive.org/details/April32017JusticeLeblancHearing
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This is the docket in the Federal Court of Appeal
>>>>
>>>> http://cas-cdc-www02.cas-satj.gc.ca/IndexingQueries/infp_RE_info_e.php?court_no=A-48-16&select_court=All
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The only hearing thus far
>>>>
>>>> May 24th, 2017
>>>>
>>>> https://archive.org/details/May24thHoedown
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 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.blogspot.ca/2015/09/v-behaviorurldefaultvmlo.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 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.Foran@gnb.ca,
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>
>>> http://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.ca/2017/11/federal-court-of-appeal-finally-makes.html
>>>
>>>
>>> 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.ca/fca-caf/decisions/en/item/236679/index.do
>>>
>>>
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>

Contact

	Phone:	905-542-7400
	Email:	testimony@paoc.org
	Address:	The Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada, c/o testimony/Enrich 2450 Milltower Court, Mississauga, ON L5N 5Z6

Staff

Executive Director: David Wells	Website Design: jonathanboerger.com
Communications Director: Natalie Rogge	Copy Editing: Hilda Schnell
Editor: Stacey McKenzie	Testimonymag.ca: Kevin M. Johnson
Communications Assistant: Kevin Brown	Circulation: Juli McDonald
Art Direction/Graphic Design: Kevin M. Johnson

David Raymond Amos Round 3

Monday, 13 February 2023