Marcello DiMarco

To: James Chatenay, Tom Jackson, Ken Ritter, Richard Strankman, Gerrid Gust, Ian McCreary, Paul Beingessner, Rod Flaman, Terry Hanson, Arthur Mainil, Ron Saal, Charles Fossay, Jack Froese, Eduard Hiebert, Bill Toews

Re: Affidavit of Marcello DiMarco

Dear CWB Director Candidate:

As a candidate in the Canadian Wheat Board election for director in your district, you should be informed of an Affidavit of Marcello Dimarco sworn in the Queen's Bench on May 13, 2004.

The affidavit on procedure of procuring an Export License as defined in Points 11 to 15, is a violation of the CWB Statutes and Regulations.  The Canadian Wheat Board has not only misled Western Farmers but also Parliament itself.

Documents obtained through the Information Act clearly show the CWB Officials and Government Deputy Ministers and Officials have filed 170 criminal charges against Western Grain Farmers while knowingly allowing millions of bushels of CWB grain to be exported through Ontario and Quebec into the US without Export Licenses.

It is your duty to inform Western Grain producers of this CWB and Government violation.  Failing to do so will also make you subject to a violation of the Public Administration Act, Section 337 of the Criminal Code of Canada.

Your incumbent director should have the complete Affidavit of Marcello DiMarco.

Sincerely,

Jake E. Hoeppner
Former MP for Portage Lisgar

Background:

Sworn May 13, 2004

The Queen's Bench
Winnipeg Centre

Between:

Ben-Ron Farms, Robert Hildebrand
Ken B. Lyne, Mervin J. Lyne,
David Manning,
Curtis R. McCannell, Ken G. McCannell,
George W. McKay, M-Jay Farm Enterprises Ltd.,
Harry Pauls, Myrtle Rae Rinn, Robert W. Rinn,
Sterling Brothers, Elizabeth Sterling,
John Sterling, and Stan Sterling,

plaintiffs

-and-

The Canadian Wheat Board,

defendant

Affidavit of Marcello DiMarco

I, Marcel DiMarco, of the City of Winnipeg in the Province of Manitoba, make oath and say that:

1. I am the Director, Country Accounting for the Canadian Wheat Board.  I have personal knowledge of the facts and matters hereafter referred to except where stated to be based upon information and belief, in which case I do believe them to be true.
    
2. The Canadian Wheat Board ("CWB") administers a pooled marketing system for wheat and barley produced by Canadian farmers.  With some exceptions that are not relevant to this case, Canadian farmers are required to sell the wheat and barley they produce to the CWB.

(Items 3 - 10 skipped)

11. The system requires the producer to sell its grain to CWB as set out above.  However, the grain company may repurchase the same grain from CWB, and sell it to the producer.  With the appropriate authorities, the producer may then export the grain itself.
     
12. If a producer locates a buyer in the United States of America to whom it wishes to sell, the producer will retain the services of a grain company to act as the "accredited exporter."
     
13. Each day the CWB calculates an "Export Price" for grain.  A producer who wishes to export will have a grain company enter into a "Country Local Sales Contract" with CWB pursuant to which the grain company acquires the grain from the CWB at the Export Price.
     
14. With the assistance of the grain company, the producer will apply for a licence to export the grain.
     
15. The producer will normally deliver the grain to a grain elevator.  The delivery will be recorded in the producer's Permit Book and a cash ticket (producer certificate) will be issued.  The producer will then buy back the grain from the grain company at a price it negotiates with the grain company (the "Buy Back Price") and ship it to the United States of America under the authority of the export licence.

(Remaining points omitted)

Obtained pursuant to the Access to Information Act

Confidential

November 03, 1995

"Draft Document"
"For Discussion"

Customs Enforcement Options
Exports of Wheat and Barley Products

BACKGROUND

In 1994, the Canadian Wheat Board requested that Revenue Canada customs help to ensure that everyone comply with the export regulations on wheat and barley products.  On August 30, 1994, the Minister signed an Administrative Order establishing the terms of release for export shipments of wheat and barley products that are seized or subject to ascertained forfeiture for failure to report to customs.

Since August 1994, 50 ascertained forfeitures were issued for shipments of wheat and barley product illegally exported.  As well, a number of trucks were seized at the border.  There will be 25 ascertained forfeitures issued next week as a result of the illegal exports during the last demonstration at the border.  21 of these actions have been appealed.  Adjudications has advised that they will be upholding the enforcement actions and are prepared to render a final decision.  The importer has the option to appeal the decision to the federal court.  It may be years before the federal court renders its decision.

Along with these ascertained forfeitures and physical seizures, criminal charges were laid under section 95 of the Customs Act against Messrs. Sawatzky, McMechan and Cairns.  Mr. Sawatzky is scheduled to appear in court on November 14, 1995 to answer to the charges.  Messrs. McMechan and Cairns are scheduled to appear in court on January 8, 1996.  It should be noted that the laying of criminal charges was a culmination of approximately one years worth of investigative work.  It is expected that it will be another four to six months before the criminal aspect of this matter is resolved, providing that the final verdict is not appealed to a higher level court.

CURRENT STATUS

(pages skipped)

Originally, the current penalties of $400 and $2,000 were found not be high enough to deter offenders in light of the profits earned on the illegal shipments.  The CFFJ  have publicly stated that the penalties are as severe as a parking ticket and of equal concern to them.  However, the subsequent physical seizure of vehicles inland, along with the progressing protest, has effectively stopped illegal grain exports in the Prairies for the time being.

One major area of concern, however, has been the allegations grain exported without the required permits in Northern Ontario by rail and by vessel out of Fort Frances and Thunder Bay respectively.  The amounts exported in these cases are significant, and the current penalty structure does not adequately address some of the factors of these cases which are unique to the area.  Consultations should take place in order to determine whether a different penalty structure should be applied to these scenarios.  An explanation of this situation along with a proposed plan of action is included within element (F) below.

(E)   Enhanced RCMP Commitment

Continued operational support from the RCMP is necessary both for the safety of our officers and to assist in enforcement operations.  In the past, the RCMP were unable to provide the necessary support due to resource and operational limitations.  Discussions with senior management of the RCMP have confirmed their commitment to provide the necessary support.

The RCMP in Saskatchewan and Alberta have also agreed to continue to provide support and assistance for inland and border seizure operations.  Detailed action plans have been discussed with them as per (A)(ii) above.

(F)    Exports of grain with permits in Northwestern Ontario

During the last year, several instances of non-compliance have been identified in Northwestern Ontario with regard to large quantities of grain being exported from the area without the required CWB export license.  Revenue Canada has expressed this concern to the Canadian Wheat Board who has in turn replied that by and large, the exporters are clients of the CWB and that the exported grain, despite not having a permit, was purchased through the "buy back" system, thereby causing no detriment to the pool accounts.  Although this may be true, the contravention is still one of not reporting the export and of not presenting the required permit.  The quantities of grain are enormous, and the options of the situation are such that questions may arise as to why a prairie farmer is being prosecuted for not presenting a license to export 10 tons of grain to the US while a large corporation can export tens of thousands of tons of grain from Canada without a license and without consequences.

(Remaining document omitted)

Obtained pursuant to the Access to Information Act

Wheat Meeting
Monday, June 23, 1997 - 2:00 - 5:00
2nd Floor Boardroom - Connaught Building
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0L5

Distribution List

Designed & Maintained by www.familyfarmers.com