• TURMEL: Complaint to Rogers-TV about exclusion, news

    From John KingofthePaupers Turmel@1:229/2 to All on Mon Feb 11 06:15:14 2019
    From: johnturmel@gmail.com

    TURMEL: Complaint to Rogers-TV about exclusion, news

    JCT: In the old days, free-time political broadcasts had to
    be shared on an equitable basis, qualitatively and
    quantitatively, for all rival candidates. Then, in the
    Vezina decision, the Ontario Court of Appeal ruled that Big
    Brother could exclude candidates from election debates.

    The problem is that there are no election debates. They are
    Question and Answer sessions with an opening and closing
    statement and debate between candidates is actually
    deterred.

    So the reason used to exclude me from the Q&A:

    Feb. 4 at 9:03 a.m.
    Good Morning John,
    Thank-you for reaching out to us.
    Unfortunately, given the short notice we are unable to
    include you as part of the debate. As it is televised, the
    script, questions and timing have already been planned for
    six candidates. We will make sure your name is mentioned
    during the event.
    Thank-you and best of luck,
    Jennifer Anderson
    Executive Director
    Georgina Chamber of Commerce
    http://georginachamber.com

    So I didn't get my share of free time because
    the script, questions and timing have already been
    planned for six candidates.

    So I wrote a letter to Rogers informing them I'd be
    complaining to the CRTC about not getting an equitable share
    of the time because of their incompetence.

    John C. Turmel, B.Eng.,
    50 Brant Ave.,
    Brantford, N3T 3G7,
    Tel/Fax: 519-753-5122,

    Feb 11 2019

    James Anderson

    Dear Mr. Anderson

    After the close of nominations last Monday Feb 4 2019,
    Rogers and the Georgina Chamber of Commerce hosted a live
    televised Question and Answer session that did not include
    all the candidates.

    I was excluded and when I tried to participate, you had me
    arrested and removed and the whole 2 hours was allocated to
    only 6 candidates. The reason given for the undemocratic
    event was:
    "the script, questions and timing have already been planned
    for six candidates."

    Incompetence at handling a 7th candidate is not quite a
    valid reason.

    I want my equitable share of time and would request 20
    minutes to Answer the Questions posed to the other
    candidates and broadcast on your channel.

    If I don't get my share of free-time political broadcast, I
    will complain to the CRTC about your undemocratic broadcast.

    I need your answer before Wednesday night's meeting in
    Bradford with all the candidates so I can tell the voters
    what you've done.

    Yours truly,

    JCT: What's interesting is that not giving equitable time is
    for debates. And I'm going to argue that a Q&A is not a
    debate. So I want my share.

    The last complaint to the CRTC was taken to the Supreme
    Court who ruled that political debates don't have to be
    fair. Crooked judges should be ashamed. https://www.scc-csc.ca/case-dossier/info/sum-som-eng.aspx?

    cas=33319
    Summary
    Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the
    Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch).
    Please note that summaries are not provided to the
    Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file
    and website for information purposes only.

    Communications law - Broadcasting - Debate program -
    Allocation of time - Programming of a partisan political
    character - Whether the election candidate's removal
    from the election debate amounted to denying him an
    equitable share of free-time partisan political
    broadcasting during an election period as required by s.
    27(4) of the BroadcastingDistribution Regulations,
    S.O.R./97-555.

    The Applicant, Mr. Turmel, was a candidate in a 2007
    Ontario provincial election. He participated in an
    elections debate program hosted by Rogers Cable
    Communications Inc. At some point during or shortly
    after he made his opening statement, he was removed from
    the set and not allowed to participate further in the
    debate. According to Rogers, Mr. Turmel was removed
    because he used his opening statement to take issue with
    the moderator and the debate format, he refused to
    remove a badge despite the fact that debate rules
    prohibited him from wearing promotional material, and he
    interrupted the opening remarks of a fellow candidate.

    Mr. Turmel filed a complaint with the Canadian Radio-
    Television and Telecommunications Commission ("CRTC")
    alleging his removal amounted to denying him an
    equitable share of free-time partisan political
    broadcast during an election period as required by s.
    27(4) of the Broadcasting Distribution Regulations.

    The CRTC dismissed the complaint. It noted that Mr.
    Turmel's request to compel Rogers to provide him with an
    equitable share of time in the debate was moot given
    that the election had already taken place. In any event,
    relying on the Ontario Court of Appeal decision in
    Vezina v. Canada Broadcasting Corporation (1993), 51
    C.P.R. (3d) 192 (Ont. C.A.), the CRTC found that Rogers
    did not breach the broadcasting requirements set out in
    s. 27(4) of the Regulations because the provision does
    not apply to debate programs. Therefore, it was within
    Rogers' discretion to exclude participants from the
    debate who did not comply with the rules and format set
    for the program.

    Leave to appeal the decision to the Federal Court of
    Appeal pursuant to s. 31(2) of the Broadcasting Act,
    R.S.C. 1985, c. B-9, was refused. No reasons were given.

    JCT: Get that?
    the CRTC found that Rogers did not breach the
    broadcasting requirements set out in s. 27(4) of the
    Regulations because the provision does not apply to
    debate programs. Therefore, it was within Rogers'
    discretion to exclude participants from the debate who
    did not comply with the rules and format set for the
    program.

    JCT: So because they call their Q&A a "debate," they don't
    have to share out the free time equitably. But this time,
    I'm going to challenge that their Q&A was not a debate.

    Bradford Today did a story on me though they didn't mention
    my being arrested earlier in the week. Maybe they didn't
    attend the "all candidates" meeting:

    Meet the candidate: Independent John Turmel has run (and
    lost) in nearly 100 by-elections https://www.bradfordtoday.ca/local-news/meet-the-candidate-

    independent-john-turmel-has-run-and-lost-in-nearly-100-

    byelections-1230757

    John Turmel, who is running in the Feb. 25 byelection in
    York-Simcoe, describes himself as 'bank-fighter
    extraordinaire,' has tried starting his own political party
    three times, and faced gambling charges a day ago
    by: Miriam King

    Candidate John Turmel during a byelection debate in Sault
    Ste. Marie in 2017. File photo

    JCT: Had to use a picture from another election because I
    was excluded from theirs in York-Simcoe.

    Ask John Turmel, who resides in Brantford, why he is running
    in the York-Simcoe byelection as an Independent, and he has
    a simple answer: "I run in every byelection."

    It's true. In the past 40 years, Turmel has entered the
    political fray on the municipal, provincial and federal
    levels 97 times - earning him Guinness World Records for
    Most Elections Contested, and Most Elections Lost.

    The York-Simcoe byelection will make number 98.

    He doesn't do it to set records - although he did say if he
    could enter two more byelections within the next two months,
    that would make it an even 100 in 40 years - but as a way of
    getting his ideas out to a wider audience.

    "I have some great ideas," said Turmel. "Like paying kids
    with bus tickets to shovel our snow."

    Or the LETS (Local Employment Trading System) Time Bank,
    which would let participants use their time and labour as
    equity, to trade for what they need through a system of
    barter, and abolish interest rates.

    "I got invited to the United Nations Assembly in 2000, to
    present my proposal for a time-based currency," Turmel said,
    adding that he received support, through a U.N. resolution,
    for his proposed interest-free, time-based currency.

    He has described himself as a "bank-fighter extraordinaire"
    on his website.

    "I found a way to run a better banking system," said Turmel,
    who said he has a degree in systems engineering from
    Carleton University. "Call me the debt-fighting engineer."

    As for the LETS Time Bank, he said, "it's actually the same
    bank as Jesus' debt-fighting commune."

    Turmel, now 68, ran his first election in 1979, as an
    Independent. He has been a "Libertarian Socred," made a run
    for the leadership of the fledgling Green Party of Ontario,
    and started his own political party not once, but three
    times - the Christian Credit Party in the 1980s, The
    Abolitionist Party of Canada in the 1990s, and the Pauper
    Party in 2011.

    Over his career, he has launched protests, been arrested,
    fought against banks and interest, and fought for the
    legalization of marijuana and gambling - not surprising,
    since he described himself as a professional gambler.

    "I was a TA (teaching assistant) at Canada's only
    Mathematics of Gambling course," Turmel said. "I was 'The
    Professor,' at the Trump Taj Mahal in Atlantic City."

    JCT: Google for Great Canadian Gambler and I come up.

    He has made no secret of his past efforts, promoting
    blackjack or running a casino in the Ottawa area - or of
    police charges, for keeping a common gaming house, keeping a
    common betting house, and unlawfully controlling monies for
    gambling.

    Turmel has called himself the "King of the Paupers" and the
    "Poverty-fighting Super Engineer." He usually wears a white
    hard hat labelled "The Engineer" at public protests and
    events. He has also registered the web domain,
    http://SmartestManOnEarth.ca

    Turmel was interviewed by this reporter on Feb. 4, the date
    of the York-Simcoe all-candidates' meeting in Sutton.
    "I've been excluded from tonight's debate, but I'll be there
    - handing out pamphlets," he promised.

    He doesn't expect to win the byelection. The only time
    Turmel didn't lose was in 2008, when an election was called
    before a byelection could be held.

    For more information see http://johnturmel.com

    JCT: Pretty good report that should help with the candidates
    meeting to which I am invited on Wednesday night in
    Bradford.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)