Comments on: Taking the Minister to court, personally

By: DSS

DSS — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 15:30:04 +0000

Yes, I agree that they are protected. See http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/lawn…

By: DSS

DSS — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 00:05:11 +0000

We have the same system of accountability for all statutes - Parliamentary democracy, subject to the Constitution.
I often disagree with what government does, but that does not justify putting anyone on a \"hit list\".

Dianne

By: Guest

Guest — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 18:28:09 +0000

Dianne, you mention that you believe Mr. Lowes has misunderstood the PCP Act… in what way? Also can the Province's Attorney General stay a federal prosecution? I would have imagined that the Minister and the provincial staff would have been protected from legal action if they were acting in good faith in carrying out the responsibilities of their job.

By: DSS

DSS — Sun, 24 Jan 2010 04:00:01 +0000

Thank you, Mr. Lowes, as mentioned in my post, your charges were laid under a federal statute, the Pest Control Products Act. Why are you still fighting this issue, when the major pesticide distributors have moved on?

By: info

info — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 12:36:04 +0000

The industry has taken issue with the false claims in medical reports held by activists.

There is a misconception – created by activists, politicos, and the media – that the industry will be compliant and allow accusations and public statements to go unchallenged. The industry will provide the venue (a court room) for individuals and organizations to try to prove their beliefs minus the hearsay and conjecture. We will be dealing with all the false claims and questionable medical reports in a civil court in the not to distant future.

By: info

info — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 12:35:39 +0000

The lawn care industry has a foundation, four pillars in which to provide their goods and services. One: the product has been registered with Health Canada. Two: the product has to work. Three: the product and methods need to be cost effective. Four: Their use should not increase our environmental footprint. We are indifferent on if the products are organic or synthetic. Now we have been asked to lower our professional standards to accommodate a personal belief system. Through questionable methods it got traction with the McGuinty government.

We do not represent any of the companies that manufacture the products. We represent only the professional applicators that have been told to use un-registered products or products that do not work.

By: Dianne Saxe

Dianne Saxe — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 02:54:26 +0000

Yes, thank you, I believe our post is clear- you have laid your charges under a federal law, the Pest Control Products Act.
Please explain why you are continuing to attack the cosmetic pesticides law, when the major pesticide distributors have accepted it?

By: info

info — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 22:20:38 +0000

These are Federal Charges I believe you are misguided in your arguments.

Some suggested reading:

http://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/stat/rso-1990-c-…

http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/C-50/index.html